HomeMy WebLinkAbout101194 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER - 30875 RANCHO VISTA ROAD
OCTOBER 11, 1994- 7:00 PM
In coml~liance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special
assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk
(909l 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to
make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR
35. 102.35. I04ADA Title II]
:EXECUTIVE SESSION::5:30PM;:ClosedSession of~the City Council: pursuant to
Government Code §54956;9, Conference:with:Legal :Counsel -Existing Litigation (Old
~Vail Partners, Hill Rancho Regional Center and Dawes vs City of Temecula) and the
Claim of Harrison, Nichols vs. the City of Temecula, et. al.
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining
agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM and may
continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM.
CALL TO ORDER:
Invocation:
Flag Salute:
ROLL CALL:
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 94-29
Resolution: No. 94-98
Mayor Ron Roberrs presiding
Pastor Ken Coil, Neighborhood Church of the Nazarene
Councilmember Mu~oz
Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Stone, Roberts
Proclamation - Help Retarded Children Weekend
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on
items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited
to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item n01; listed on the
Agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out
and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
befQrq the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at
this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members
of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for
separate action.
1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in
the agenda.
2
Minute~
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994.
2.2 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994.
3
4
Resolution AoorovinQ List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94*
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Public Nuisance Abatement - 30301 Nicolas Road
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Approve the issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $58,600to
Environmental Control Systems, Inc. for the removal of all trash, debris, building
foundations and for the securing of all buildings.
4.2 Approve an appropriation of $58,600 for Account No. 001-162-999-5250,Other
Outside Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance.
Reiect the Bid for the Pala Road at Hwv 79S, RiQht Turn Lane Proiect (No. PW94-08)
RECOMMENDATION:
5,1 Reject the bid and direct staff to re-bid the Pala Road at Hwy 79S, Right Turn Lane
Project (PW94-08).
ReQuest to Caltrans for Freewav Guide SiQns Identifvine the Old Town Business District
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING
THE INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN
TEMECULA BUSINESS DISTRICT
10
11
Interim Director of Public Works Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve a contract with Kicak and Associates to provide Interim City
Engineer/Director of Public Works services.
Records Destruction ADDroyal
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of
Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
Vehicle Purchase for Fire Inspector
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Authorize the purchase of an extended cab pick-up truck from Paradise Chevrolet.
The purchase price is $12,791.71 ,excluding tax.
Authorize Reduction in Faithful Performance Bond Amounts in Tract No. 25004-1
(Property Located East of Seraphina Road, North of Nicolas Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
10. 1 Authorize a fifty (50) percent reduction in Faithful Performance Street, Water and
Sewer improvement Bond amounts;
10.2 Accept the Faithful Performance Improvement Bond Rider in the reduced amount in
Tract No. 25004-1;
10.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
Substitute Subdivision Improvement AGreement and Public Improvement Bonds in Tract
21067
(Property Located South of Highway 79-S and Northeast of Pala Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Accept Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Faithful Performance
and Labor and Material Bonds for Street, Water and Sewer Improvements, and
Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 21067;
11.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
12 Solicitation of Construction Bids and ApPrOval of the Plans and Specifications for the
Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements (Project No. PW94-03)
13
14
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of
Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW94-03,
Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements.
Walcott Corridor Imorovements, Proiect No. PW94-10. Rancho California Water District
Fundine ReQuest
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Deny the request by Rancho California Water District to use City funds to relocate
an existing waterline within existing street right-of-way.
Approval of Contract Services Aereements
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Approve contract service agreements for Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou
Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and
Associates, to provide building plan check services to the Building and Safety
Department.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
15
Second Readine of Ordinance 94-25
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-25
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MODIFYING
SECTION G(1 .) OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 475.73 ADOPTED BY
REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA IN ORDINANCE NO. 90-04. TO CHANGE
THE HOURS AND DAYS DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS ALLOWED
16
Second Readino of Ordinance No. 94-28
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-28
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING
CHAPTER 10.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE REGULATION OF
NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of
the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior
to, the public hearing.
17
Soecific Plan No. 263 (Reoional Center) and Chanoe of Zone No. 5589
(Continued from the meeting of 9/13/94)
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING
THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340
INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO
ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION
MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
18
17.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589,
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY
AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP {SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD
AND WINCHESTER ROAD
17.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING
LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 263 (REGIONAL
CENTER) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF
YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
17.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING
SPECIFIC PLAN 2634 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS
Plannina Al~131ication No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) - a Forty-One Foot, Six Inch Hioh (41 '6"),
One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Souare Foot Freestandino Freeway Oriented Sian for
Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side of Interstate 15
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063 (APPEAL), UPHOLDING PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063,
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH
(41 '6"), ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING
FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF TEMECULA VALLEY LOCATED ON
THE EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
911-150-005
19
Plannine Aoolication No. 94-0017, Develooment Aoreement for Tract 27827
(Located on the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA 94-0017.
19.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND COSCAN
HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES, FOR SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0017
20
Disaooroval of Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated Eeui~ment of
Inland Valley Cablevision, and Orderino a Refund for Excessive Rates
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DISAPPROVING THE CABLE TELEVISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND
ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION, AND ORDERING A
REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES
COUNCIL BUSINESS
21 RoriDauOh Ranch S~ecific Plan Density
(Continued from the meeting of 9/13/94)
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Review and provide direction to staff.
22
23
24
25
26
27
Award of A Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry to Prepare the Nicolas Valley
Soecial Study
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 Award a Professional Services contract to NBS Lowry in the amount of $24,673 to
I~repare the Nicolas Valley Special Study and authorize the Mayor to execute said
contract.
Prooosed Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street", Acknowledaement Sian Size
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1 Approve the Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street~ acknowledgement.
Community Services Commission A~oointments
RECOMMENDATION:
24.1 Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint two apl31icants to fill
full three-year terms.
Public\Traffic Safety Commission ADoointments
RECOMMENDATION:
25.1 Appoint one member to serve a full three-year term on the Public\Traffic Safety
Commission.
Reauest from SuDervisor Bob Buster for Determination of City of Temecula's Interest in
Pre-Fundina Assessment District 161
RECOMMENDATION:
26.1 Consider the suggestions set forth in the letter from Supervisor Bob Buster dated
September 19, 1994.
Desjan Services Contract - Parkview Fire Station Proiect
RECOMMENDATION:
27.1 Award contract of $174,313 to RJM Design Group for the preparation of the
master plan, schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project
administration for the Parkview Fire Station Project.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next meeting: October 18, 1994, 7:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista
Road, Temecula, California.
TEMECULA :COMMUNITY SERVICES:DISTRICT:MEETING *::(Toi!be::!held atB:00) :
CALL TO ORDER: President Jeffrey E. Stone
ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts, Stone
PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a
completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come
forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minute~
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994.
2 Utility Aoreements for Pala Community Park - Project No. PW93-O3CSD
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract for Extension of Electric Line
Underground with Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to provide for
installation of an underground line extension to Pala Community Park.
2.2 Authorize the payment of SCE application fees in the amount of $16,235.71.
2.3 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Water System Construction Agreement and the
Agency Agreement with Rancho California Water District (RCWD) to provide for
installation of domestic water service to Pala Community Park.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Bradley
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next meeting: October 18, 1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center,
30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California.
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT.AGENCY MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding
ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberrs, Stone, Parks
PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 MinUte8
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994.
1.2 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994.
AGENCY BUSINESS
2 Contract Amendment to Provide Visual Impact Analysis in the Old Town Redevelopment
Project
(Continued from the meeting of 9/27/94)
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve an amendment to the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to add a
visual analysis into the Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town
Redevelopment Project.
2.2 Increase the amount of the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates by $9,887.96.
2.3 Approve an amendment to the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo to
perform additional building design services needed to support the visual impact
analysis.
2.4 Increase the amount of the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo by
$13,000.
3
4
ADDrooriation and AuthOrization tO Release funds for Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sian
Lease
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Appropriate $20,000 from RedevelopmentAgency AccouRt No. 280-199-999-
5264.
3.2 Authorize payment of the Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease for two
billboards in an amount not to exceed $20,000.
Old Town RedeveloDment Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 That the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory committee retain the existing
committee structure of three appointed members and four elected members.
4.2 Direct staff to seek applications for the three appointments to the committee and to
prepare election procedures for the four elected representatives.
4.3 Appropriate $15,000to Account #280-199-999-5225RDA elections from
Unreserved Fund Balance.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next Meeting: October 18, 1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center,
30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California.
PROCLAMATIONS/
PRESENTATIONS
The City of Temecula
PROCLAMATION
Wlt~.REAS, the Knights of Columbus in the State of California have undertaken a
project of assistance for the treatment and care of mentally retarded children; and
Wn'EREAS, the nearly 60,000 members of the Knights of Columbus in California are
conducting their annual state-wide Candy Drive in the communities throughout California; and
W~EREAS, the local area Knights of Columbus No. 9964 will be mobilizing a "Tootsic
Roll Drive" and will be soliciting contributions at all of the major supermarkets in the area; and
WltEREAS, the the proceeds of this campaign will be distributed to not-for-profit
agencies and institutions dedicated to serving mentally retarded children,
NOW, TI-W~REFORE, I, Ron Roberts, on behalf of the City Council of the City of
Temecula, hereby proclaim the October 14, 15, and 16, 1994, to be
"TttE llELp RETARDED CltllJ'lRli~ WEEKF. ND"
in the City of Temecula, and urge all citizens to recognize and join in the spirit of this important
fund raising campaign.
IN W1TNESS WttEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this llth day of October, 1994.
Ron Robert.s, Mayor
ITEM 1
ITEM 2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:06 PM at the
Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron
Roberts presiding.
PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks,
Stone, Roberrs
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City
Clerk June S. Greek.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Tim Buttrey, Temecula Valley Christian Center Assembly
of God Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the flag salute by Mayor Pro Tern Stone.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
City Clerk June S. Greek administered the Oath of Office to new Planning Commissioners
Marcia Slaven and Andrew Webster.
Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney announced the City has received the Government
Finance Officers Association CAPR Award, Certificate of Achievement.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Merian E. Magree, 28801 Pujol St., expressed concern regarding crime at the Temecula Villas
on Pujol Street.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Birdsall requested that a pro and con discussion of Proposition 187 be placed
on a future agenda for public information.
Mayor Pro Tern Stone requested that the health care initiative also be placed on a future
agenda for discussion.
Minutes~9\l 3\94 -1 - 09/27/94
City Council Minutes Sel~ternber 13, 1994
Councilmember Parks requested tha~: a voice mail line be installed at City Hall to allow the
citizens to advise the council regarding their concerns on the Old Town Entertainment Project
as well as other concerns.
Councilmember Mu~oz suggested holding a second workshop on the Old Town Entertainment
Project to solicit additional input.
Mayor Roberts asked how soon the informational program would be put into place. City
Manager Bradley reported the first newsletter should be out within the next 30 days.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Pro Tem Stone requested the removal of Consent Calendar Items 4 and 6. He also
commented on Item 11, thanking Chief Building Official Tony Elmo for his efforts on this item.
Councilmember Parks requested the removal of Item No. 22.
Councilmember Mu~oz requested the removal of Item No. 8 and announced he would abstain
on Items 6 and 18 due to a possible future conflict of interest and items 12-16 due to an
existing conflict of interest. He also asked a question on Item No. 21, referring to the kinds
of inspection services Celttans would provide. Director of Public Works Tim Serlet explained
that Caltrans would maintain this signal and would be directly involved in all inspection
services.
Mayor Roberts announced Item No. 9 would be removed from the Consent Calendar since a
request to speak was received on that item.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-3, 5, 7, 9-21, with Councilmember Mu~oz abstaining on Items 6,
18 because of a possible future conflict of interest and Items 12-16 for an existing conflict.
The motion was unanimously carried.
1. Standard Ordinance Adootion 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 August 9, 1994.
Minutes~9\l 3\94 -2- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
Resolution ADorovina List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Record'$ Destruction APproval
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of
Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
Consideration of ReQulationS for Newsracks in Public RiQht-of-Wav
(Continued from the meeting of 8/23/94)
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Continue this item to the meeting of September 27, 1994.
10. Authorization to Execute Supplemental Aareement for the Use of 20th Year Community
Development Block Grant Funds
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for the 20th Year
Community Development Block Grant Funds.
11. Aooroval of Contract Award for Plan Review Services
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Approve an award of contract to Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates,
Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, to
provide building plan review services on an as needed basis, to the Building and
Safety Department.
Minutes\9\13\94 -3- 09/27/94
CitV Council Minutes
12.
September 13, 1994
Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-1
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty
Security for Tract No. 21675-1, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the
Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the
Surety.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz
13.
Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-2
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty
Security for Tract No. 21675-2, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the
Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the
Surety.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz
AYES: 4
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 1
Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs
Minutes\9~l 3\94 -4- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes
14.
Ser~tember 13, 1994
Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-3
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty
Security for Tract No. 21675-3, and Direct the City Clerk to so advise the
Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the
Surety.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
AYES: 4
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 1
Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts
15.
Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-4
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty
Security for Tract No. 21675-4, and Direct the City Clerk to so advise the
Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the
Surety.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
AYES: 4
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 1
Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts
Minutes\9\13\94 -5- 09127/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
16.
Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (Within Tracts No.
21675-1, -2, -3 and -4)
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-91
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-
MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACTS NO. 21675-1, -2, -3 AND -4)
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
17. Acknowledcle Completion of Certain Improvements in Tract No. 26861-2
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Acknowledge completion of certain improvements in Tract No. 26861-2,
authorize the reduction in Faithful Performance Bond amounts for the
improvement of private streets, accept the Faithful Perfcjrmance Warranty Bond
Rider in the reduced amount and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Developer
and surety.
Minutes~9\l 3\94 -6- 09~27~94
City Council Minutes
18.
19.
September 13. 1994
Final Parcel MaD No. 26232-1 (Located East of Winchester Road at Nicolas Road)
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Approve Final Parcel Map No. 26232-1, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
Solicitation of Bids for the Acquisition of Street StriDinq Contract (Proiect No. PW94-
17)
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the annual
street striping contract (Project No. PW94-17).
20.
Comoletion and Acceotance of the Solana Way Street Improvements, Project No.
PW93-12
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Accept the Solana Way Street Improvements, Project No. PW93-12, as
complete.
20.2
Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of completion, release the Performance
Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of
the contract.
20.3 Direct the City Clerk to release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months
after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed.
Minutes~9\13\94 -7- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13.1994
21.
Contract for the Construction of an Interim Traffic Signal at Winchester (Hwy. 79N)
and Nicolas Roads, Proiect No. PW93-11
RECOMMENDATION:
21.
Authorize payment to the State of California for an encroachment permit fee in
the amount of $6,720.
City Treasurer's Reoort as of July 31, 1994
Mayor Pro Tern Stone expressed concern regarding the investment portfolio. Finance
Officer Mary Jane McLarney reported that since interest rates are rising, staff has
requested proposals with other banking institutions and that information is forthcoming.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
staff recommendation as follows:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of July 31, 1994.
The motion was unanimously carried.
Memorandum of Understanding Concernina Plannine Area No. 7, Soecific Plan NO.
164, RoriDaueh, Model Home Aareement for Coscan Homes
Mayor Pro Tern Stone stated he originally had concerns with the Memorandum of
Understanding because of the absence of a hold harmless clause, however a revised
version has been distributed which contains this language.
City Attorney Thorson explained a revised MOU has been distributed and Section 3.6
provides that if the draft development agreement is not approved by the City Council,
the provision of the original development agreement will remain in effect.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
staff recommendation as follows:
6.1
Approve the Memorandum of Understanding concerning Planning Area No. 7 of
the Specific Plan No. 164, Roripaugh, authorizing the payment of development
fees at a specified level and directing the Mayor to execute the Agreement on
behalf of the City and the city Clerk to attest thereto.
Minutes\9\13~94 -8- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
Award of Vehicle Purchase Bid No. 94-20
Councilmember Mu~oz asked if this vehicle can be converted to propane. Finance
Officer Mary Jane McLarney answered that it will be converted.
It was moved by Councilmember Mu~oz, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
8.1
Award the purchase of the vehicle to Paradise Chevrolet. The purchase price
is $12,633.79, excluding tax.
The motion was unanimously carried.
Property Insurance Renewal
Robert L. Hemme, 43500 Ridge Park Drive, representing Strachota Insurance,
expressed concern that additional information is needed to make a decision. He
outlined the differences in the programs.
Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney explained because of the earthquake, staff was
directed to bring back proposals to the Council at mid-term. She introduced Luci
Romero, Financial Services Administrator, to give an overview of the process used.
Luci Romero reported that proposals were solicited from three companies, two of
which responded. She explained a matrix was prepared from the information that was
provided from these companies.
Councilmember Mu~oz asked why staff recommends changing coverage. Ms. Romero
explained that the coverage recommended by staff is a joint purchasing program which
specializes in municipalities. She stated that the City would generally cover small
losses and insure for big losses.
Mr. Hemme informed the Council that some of the carriers under the recommended
program are non-admitted carriers in the State of California. He indicated that this may
be a violation of the insurance code.
Minutes~9\l 3\94 -9- 09127/94
City Council Minutes SeJ~tember 13, 1994
22.
Ms. Romero explained that the program recommended has multiple carriers, two of
which are not admitted. She stated that these carriers, however, have an A + + rating,
which is higher than Aetna, the City's current carrier. She also explained she has a
letter from the insurance Commission, allowing use of this type of coverage.
Councilmember Birdsall stated she does not feel it is wise to change insurance
coverage mid-term, based on the costs involved.
Councilmember Parks asked Mr. Heroine if the premium would go down if the
deductible on the City's current policy was $5,000. Mr. Hemme answered the
difference would be approximately $1,800.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone stated he feels a miscommunication has occurred regarding
insurance coverage, and feels the City would prefer to have a high deductible and add
other needed coverages.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to
continue this item to the meeting of October 11, 1994 with direction to staff to re-
evaluate quotes from both companies under consideration at the higher coverage limits.
The motion was unanimously carried.
"No Parkincl" Zone on Diaz Road from Rancho California Road to 160 Feet North of
Avenida Alvaratio
Councilmember Parks expressed concern that striping a turn lane, would not allow
passing on Diaz Road.
Director of Public Works Tim Serlet explained this would be providing a safe turn
pocket and the business owners along Diaz have requested this action.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation as follows:
22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-92
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE ON DIAZ ROAD FROM RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD TO 160 FEET NORTH OF AVENIDA ALVARAD0
The motion was unanimously carried.
Minutes%9\13\94 - 1 O- O9/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
RECESS
Mayor Roberts called a recess at 8:38 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the
previously scheduled Community Services District and Redevelopment Agency Meetings, with
all members present at 9:25 PM.
23. Soecific Plan No. 263 (Reoional Center) and Chanae of Zone No. 5589
Mayor Roberrs opened the public hearing at 9:29 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to continue
the public hearing to the meeting of October 11, 1994.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
24.
Seecific Plan No. 1 (Cameos Verdes), Environmental Imoact RelDort 348, and Chanae
of Zone No. 5617
City Attorney Peter Thorson explained that three members of the Council have a
conflict of interest; Councilmember Mu~oz because of his work with Kemper, Mayor
Roberts, based on his residence in Meadowview and Councilmember Birdsall because
she also resides in Meadowview. Mr. Thorson explained that the "Rule of Necessity"
applies in this case and lots would be drawn to determine who would vote on this
issue.
City Clerk June Greek distributed lots, two of which had the word "no" printed on it
and one which had the word "yes". Councilmember Birdsall received the paper with
the "yes" on it. City Attorney Thorson declared Councilmember Mu~oz and Mayor
Roberts disqualified and Councilmember Birdsall requalified. He advised that
Councilmember Birdsall should not participate in discussion, but only vote on the issue.
Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report and stated that the
Meadowview Homeowners Association supports this project.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing at 9:50 PM.
Ed Mowles, 27595 Dandelion Court, spoke in opposition to the connecting of both
Starling or Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hils.
Minutes~9\l 3\94 -11 - 09127/94
City Council Minutes Seotember 13, 1994
Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, spoke in favor of the project, stating he feels
it will be of benefit to the community.
Councilmember Parks asked if a traffic analysis was done on the connecting roads.
Principal Engineer Ray Casey answered the issue is one of access rather than volume.
Jim Gremanis, 40212 Starling Street, spoke in opposition of connecting Starling and
Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hills.
Dave Gallagher, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, requested
the Council delay approval of this specific plan until a satisfactory mitigation plan
between the applicant and the school district is reached.
Councilmember Parks stated that the conditions of approval of the tentative map allow
this condition to be placed.
Eric Doring, Attorney for the Temecula Valley Unified School District, stated that
contradictory conditions exist and requested that time be given over the next two
weeks to address these concerns.
City Attorney Thorson stated that the Conditions of Approval clearly state there will
not be any development until a mitigation agreement is reached.
Donna Vedra, 40257 Mimulus Way, spoke in opposition of opening Starling Street and
Sanderling Way.
Aletha Herron, 27479 Senna Court, spoke in opposition to the opening of Starling
Street and Sanderling Way.
Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, stated it is a difficult decision regarding the
streets and he does not have a preference one way or the other. He said the City
Attorney has adequately addressed the school issue and stated Kernper has worked
with the school district and will continue to do so.
RECESS
Mayor Pro Tern Stone called a recess at 10:35 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 10:36 PM.
Mayor Pro Tern Stone suggested placing a fire gate at Sanderling and eliminating
connecting Starling into Roripaugh.
Councilmember Parks stated he would support closing the interconnect at Starling with
a fire gate and allowing for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, but would prefer to open
Sanderling Way.
Minutes%9\ 13\94 - 12- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation on 24.1 as follows.
24.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-93
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ADOPTING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION
AND APPROVING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND THE
ADDENDA TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ON
PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberrs
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.2 as follows:
24.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-26
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 1
(CAMPOS VERDES) LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberts
Minutes~9\13~94 -13- 09127/94
City Council MinuTes SepTember 13, 1994
It was moved by Councilmember Perks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.3 as follows:
24.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-27
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MA OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5617
CHANGING THE ZONING FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20
(HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) TO SP (SPECIFIC
PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST
OF MARGARITA ROAD
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberts
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve
staff recommendation 24.4, and approve an amendment to the Specific Plan to close
the interconnect at Starling with a fire gate and to allow for pedestrian and bicycle
traffic, and to open the connection at Sanderling Way.
24.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. I (CAMPOS VERDES} PROPOSING 308
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 19.8 ACRES OF
COMMERCIAL\OFFICE\CHURCH USES, A 5.8 ACRE DETENTION BASIN, A
10.9 ACRE PARK, A 10.7 ACRE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND 13.0 ACRES OF
ON-SITE ROADWAYS, LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST
OF MARGARITA ROAD
Minutes\9\13\94 -14- 09/27/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to continue Items
25, 26 and 30.
25.
26.
30.
Non-Profit Loan Proaram Policy
City Council Meetina Schedule - November and December 1994
Cable Television Rate Reaulation Procedures
The motion was unanimously carried.
27,
Consideration of Traffic Siqnalization - Pala Road, La Paz and Maroarita at Hiahwav 79
$otjth
Councilmember Birdsall announced she had a conflict of interest, due to the proximity
of her residence, and stepped down from the podlure.
Mayor Pro Tern Stone stated he placed this item on the agenda to discuss needed
traffic signals and the delays experienced, due to Assessment District 159, to widen
Highway 79. He suggested making these signals a priority in the Capital Improvement
Plan and suggested placing temporary signals at Pala Road, Ija Paz and Margarita at
Highway 79-South.
Councilmember Mu~oz said he is supportive of signals at Pala and La Paz, but not
Margarita at Highway 79 at this time.
Councilmember Parks stated he is supportive of anything to expedite these signals, but
expressed concern regarding the "throw-away" cost of interim signals.
Mayor Roberts stated he is supportive of signals at Pala Road and La Paz, but
understands that the signal at Margarita and Highway 79 South is already in design.
Councilmember Mu~oz asked what the "throw away" cost would be for these signals.
Director of Public Works Tim Serlet responded that 50% of the cost would be lost,
Minutes\9\13~94 -15- 09127/94
City Council Minutes September 13, 1994
approximately $150,000 to $250,000. He also informed the Council that other
projects would have to be delayed to place the signals as top priority.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to extend
the meeting until 11:30 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember
Birdsall absent.
Eric Brown, 45673 Clubhouse, read a letter into the record from AI Brogen, supporting
funding of signals at Highway 79 and Pala Road and La Paz and requesting
consideration of signal at 79 and Wabash and Rainbow Canyon. Mr. Brown voiced his
support of advanced funding for traffic signals.
Susan Becker, 44626 La Paz Road, spoke in support of a signal at Highway 79 and La
Paz Road.
Jim Coleman, 30294 Cupeno Lane, representing California Sunset Homeowners
Association, spoke in support of advance funding for signals.
Paula McGaugh, 44627 La Paz Road, spoke in support of an interim signal at Highway
79 and La Paz.
Jon Martin, 45805 Loma Linda, spoke in support of an interim signal at Highway 79
and La Paz and Highway 79 and Pala Road.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to instruct
staff to evaluate the intersections and present a program within 30 days to address
construction of the signals, costs, timing and priorities and the effects on the CIP
program and staffing assignments. The motion was unanimously carried with
Councilmember Birdsall abstaining.
29. Discussion of Timelines for Winchester Road Imlarovements
Mayor Roberts stated he placed this item on the agenda to address concerns regarding
timelines'for Winchester Road improvements. He introduced Mr. John Canty, President
and CEO of J.F. Davidson, to present a report.
Mr. Canty presented a report outlining the new time line for the project and explaining
delays.
RECESS
Mayor Roberrs called a brief recess at 11:37 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 11:56 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to receive
and file the report. The motion was unanimously carried.
Minutes\9~l 3\94 -16- 09/27/94
Cstv Council Minutes September 13, 1994
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to adjourn at
11:47 PM to a meeting on September 27, 1994, 7:00 PM. The motion was unanimously
carried.
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Minutes\9\13\94 -17- O9/27/94
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:05 PM at the
Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron
Roberts presiding.
PRESENT 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberrs
Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City
Clerk June S. Greek.
iNVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor David French, Temecula United Methodist Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the flag salute by Councilmember Birdsall.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Stone presented a certificate of Appreciation to California Curves, inc.
and thanked them for their efforts in the community. Kirk Wright and Gordon Nichol accepted
the certificate.
Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone presented a commemorative plaque to Tim Setlet, former Director
of Public Works, for his 4 years of service with the City of Temecula.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Larry Markham, 41750Winchester Road, requested the Council place an appeal of the action
of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding the "No Parking" designation on Vallejo
Ave. on a future agenda.
Philip Hoxey, 43318 Cielo De Azul, asked if the Redevelopment Agency plans to fund the
entire Zev Buffman project. City Manager Ron Bradley answered that the financing study will
be available in the next six to eight weeks. He explained that once information is obtained,
public hearings will be held to inform the public and to take testimony.
Merian E. Megtee, 28801 Pujol Street, #10, discussed concerns with her residence on Pujol
Street.
Minutes\9~27\94 -1- 10/04/94
City Council Minutes September 27, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Parks announced there will be a meeting of the Murrieta Creek Advisory
Committee, September 28th, at 3:00 PM at Murrieta City Hall. He also thanked the public for
their input, through use of the Buffman Hotline, and encouraged the public to continue giving
their input.
He also requested staff place an appeal of the action of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission
regarding the "No Parking" designation on Vallejo Avenue on a future agenda.
Councilmember Birdsall announced the Temecula Tractor Race, sponsored by the Temecula
Town Association, will be held October 7th through the 9th.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone announced two City Council Candidate Forums will be held at the CRC,
the first on Monday, October 3rd at 7:00 PM, which will also air on television Wednesday,
October 5th at 7:00 PM and Saturday, October 8th at 10:30 AM. The second forum will be
held Tuesday, November 1st at 7:00 PM and the television air dates will be announced at the
next City Council Meeting. All viewings will be shown on inland Valley Cable, Channel 28.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone also announced that Temecula was recently rated Riverside County's
best place to live in an analysis of 21 cities in the county based on health, crime, income,
housing, weather, smog, arts and leisure. He also informed the public that he hosted a fund
raiser for the Temecula Museum and is happy to report that $7,400 was raised. He thanked
Maxine Bendixson for her efforts on the project and also informed the Council and public that
she has fallen and injured her ankle, and wished her a speedy recovery.
CONSENTCALENDAR
Mayor Pro Tem Stone announced that Item No. 5 would be continued due to a lack of quorum.
Councilmember Birdsall announced she would abstain on item 4 due to a conflict of interest.
City Attorney Thorson announced this item would also have to be continued due to a lack of
quorum. Mayor Pro Tem Stone removed Item No. 6 from the Consent Calendar. He
announced he would vote "yes" on Item 94-26, but remains opposed to the opening of
Sanderling Way into the Roripaugh Development.
Councilmember Parks commented on item No. 7 and explained that since requests for funding
are only considered once a year, this function can be served by a special committee appointed
by the City Council. He explained that this program is not being discontinued.
Minutes\9\27\94 -2- 10/04/94
City Council Minutes September 2:7, 1994
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-3 and 7-9 and continue items 4 and 5.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Muf~oz, Roberrs
1. Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2. Minutes
2.1 Approve the minutes of August 23, 1994.
2.2 Approve the minutes of September 7, 1994.
3. Resolution Aporovinq List of Demands
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Reiect the Bid for the Pala Road at Hwv 79S Riqht Turn Lane Project (No. PW94-08)
4.1 Continue to the meeting of October 11, 1994 due to a lack of quorum.
Request to Caltrans for Freeway Guide Sions Identifvino the Old Town Business District
5.1 Continue to the meeting of October 11, 1994 due to a lack of quorum.
Community Service Fundine Proclram Committee
7.1 Dissolve the community Services Funding Program Committee.
Minutes\9\27\94 -3- 10/O4/94
City Council Minutes September 27, 1994
It was moved by Mayor ProTein Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
staff recommendation as follows:
6.1 Approve the revised Owner Participation Agreement for International Rectifier.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. Ordinance Reqardinq ReGulation of Construction Activity
Chief Building Official Tony EImo presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing at 7:38 PM.
Stacey Tescier, 40595 Eyota, Murrieta, asked if this ordinance would prohibit night
construction on the Zev Buffman project if it moves forward.
City Manager Bradley answered this would be a public works project which is
exempted under the ordinance.
Councilmember Parks asked if there is a method to allow exceptions. City Manager
Bradley answered the Council has the ultimate authority.
City Manager Bradley suggested amending Section 2 of the ordinance to permit
emergency work by public utilities, as recommended by the City Attorney. City
Attorney Thorson also suggested adding the words "Nationally recognized" before
holidays.
Councilmember Parks asked if language allowing for exemptions could be added to the
Ordinance. City Attorney Thorson suggested the following language, "The City Council
has the right to exempt projects from the provisions of the ordinance."
Mayor Pro Tem Stone closed the public hearing at 7:52 PM.
Minutes\9\27\94 -5- 10/04/94
City Councir Minutes September 27, 1994
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation, as amended in Section 2 by the City Attorney to permit
emergency work by public utilities, to add the words "Nationally recognized" before
holidays and to authorize the City Council the right to exempt projects from the
provisions of the ordinance.
10.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-25
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
MODIFYING SECTION G(1 .) OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 457.73
ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA IN ORDINANCE NO.
90-04. TO CHANGE THE HOURS AND DAYS DURING WHICH
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS ALLOWED
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
COUNCIL BUSINESS
11. City Council Meetina Schedule
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation with the following scheduling changes: The meeting
of OctOber 25, 1994 will be rescheduled to October 18th; the November 8th meeting
will be rescheduled to November 15th and the meeting of November 22nd will be
rescheduled to November 29th. The meeting of December 13, 1994 will be the only
meeting in December.
11.1
Direct the City Clerk to cancel and/or re-schedule meetings in October,
November and December, 1994, and to perform all the appropriate postings and
noticing requirements of the Government Code.
Minutes\9\27~94 -6- 10/04/94
City Council Minutes September 27, 1994
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
RECESS
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
None
Mu~oz, Robarts
Mayor Pro Tem Stone called a recess at 7:58 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the
previously scheduled CSD and RDA meetings at 8:30 PM.
12. Cable Television Rate ReGulation Procedures
Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Stone asked if there has been an attempt on the City's part to get
together with Inland Valley Cable to discuss the overstating of charges. Mr. Edvalson
stated that will occur between now and the 1 lth of October.
13.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-96
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ADOPTING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES TO REGULATE CABLE
TELEVISION SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT RATES AND REPEALING
RESOLUTION NO. 93-74
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberrs
Non-Profit Loan ProGram Policy
Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney presented the staff report.
Minutes\9~27~94 -7- 10/04/94
Septernber 27, 1994
CiTV Council MinuTes
14.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
13.1 Review and approve the Non-profit Loan Program criteria with revisions as
appropriate.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberts
Consideration of Reoulations for Newsracks in Public Riqht-of-Wav
Chief Building Official Tony Elmo presented the staff report.
City Attorney Thorson stated there has been recently adopted State legislation that
deals with adult materials and newsracks, and this confirms the position of the State
Attorney General that cities may regulate the display to the public of what is on the top
half of the newspaper.
Councilmember Parks asked if this ordinance would add a new fee. Mr. Elmo
answered this ordinance requires an encroachment permit that has been previously
used for signage, and would now apply to newsracks in the public right-of-way.
Councilmember Birdsall asked if this ordinance regulates news racks on private
property. Mr. Elmo answered it does not. City Attorney Thorson reported that State
law does address newsracks in public places.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
14.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-29
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING
CHAPTER 10.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE
REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY
Minutes\9\27\94 -8- 10/04/94
Citv Council Minutes September 27. 1994
15.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberts
Adootion and Implementation of the Emeroency Medical Services Plan
Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report. He announced
that A.J. Wilson, Executive Director of WRCOG, who was scheduled to be present is
ill, however, Michael Osher from the County of Riverside and Tim Vonault of Goodhew
Ambulance are present to answer any questions the Council may have.
Councilmember Parks expressed concern regarding the eight to ten minute response
time for life threatening emergencies. Mr. Osher explained that the Fire Department
responds in those types of emergencies within three to five minutes, and the
ambulance follows with advanced life support systems.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ADOPTING A COOPERATIVE PROGRAM FOR PROVISION OF EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz, Roberts
Minutes\9\27\94 -9- I 0/04/94
City Council Minutes September 27, 1994
16.
RoriDauoh Ranch Soecific Plan Density
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
continue this item to the meeting of October 11, 1994.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Bradley introduced interim Public Works Director Joe Kicak and welcomed him
to the City of Temecula.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
None given.
Councilmember Parks requested a staff report regarding the status of the City's Emergency
Management Plan on a future agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to adjourn at
9:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Mu~oz and Mayor
Roberrs absent.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Minutes\9\27\94 - 1 O- 10/04/94
ITEM 3
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TE1VIECULA 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 mount of
$1,064,381.20.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this llth day of October, 1994.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
R=sos 40 I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMBCULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 94-. was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the llh day of October, 1994 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NOES: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Re.o. 40 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
09/22/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
09/29/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
10/11/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$ 422.437.97
37,529.08
478,830,80
09/22/94 TOTAL PAYROLL:
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 10/11/94 COUNCIL MEETING:
125,783.35
$ 1,064,381.20
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001 GENERAL $ 446,038.92
100 GAS TAX 34,727,66
120 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND 0,00
140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 0,00
165 RDA-LOW/MOD 255,41
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 37, 109,50
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 1.545,18
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 0,00
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 21,239,37
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 0,o0
21 o CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ (CIP) 45,397,78
229 MARGARITA ROAD REIMB. DIST 0,00
?50 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 0,00
JBo RDA CIP 4,731,65
300 SELF-INSURANCE 4,948,05
31 ~ VEHICLES 0,00
320 INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS 7,969,99
33(3 COPY CENTER 5,698,89
340 FACILITIES 12,988,81
38(3 RDA-DEE~T SERVICE 0,00
390 TCSD DEBT SERVICE 315,946.64
PAYROLL
001 GENERAL $ 78.499.23
100 GAS TAX 19,290.53
165 RDA-LOW/MOD 584.61
190 TCSD 20,177.56
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 447.87
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B O.00
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 1,796.77
28(3 RDA-CIP 356.10
30(3 SELF-INSURANCE 598,36
320 iNFORMATION SYSTEMS 1,326.75
339 COPY CENTER 69445
34(3 FACILITIES 2,011.12
$ 938,597,85
125,783,35
TOTAL BY FUND: $ 1,064,381.20
VeX CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
09/Z~, ,. 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER N/~E
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX ([RS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
3384514 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 00028~ FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS)
33861~ 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 00028,:1 FIRSTAX (iRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (1RS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX ([R$)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
37' 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
5 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399550 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDO)
399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD)
20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE
20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE
20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE
20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT I PERSONNEL SERVICE
20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT I PERSONNEL SERVICE
2n~38 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE
09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
000444 STATE
TEMP HELP W/E 08/06/94
TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94
TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94
TENP HELP W/E 08/13/94
TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94
TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94
TEMP HELP W/E 09/03/94
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-2070
100-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
00q-2070
100-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
100-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
300-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
100-2070
165-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-140-999-5118
001-165-999-5118
100-164-604'5118
001-140~999-5118
ITEM
AMOUNT
14,247,11
4,053.10
103.24
2,581.56
46.88
213.16
30.24
87,98
279.83
92.63
156.02
2,97'/.15
736.61
20.88
720.93
17.44
63.98
11.64
22.44
58.36
23.52
67.32
571.16
146.99
236.17
7.81
28.69
3.58
10.54
26.25
3,~3.03
959.85
22.08
518.63
15.40
44.95
8.48
30.03
64.13
17.05
15.26
257.36
22.58
76.75
78.26
78.26
78.26
334.11
CHECK
AMOUNT
26,612.02
6,410.08
925.58
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 2
09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIQOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
20229 09/22/94 000921 AETNA CASUALTY AND SURE
20230 09/22/94 ALMQUIST, RUTH
20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE
20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE
20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE
20232 09/22/94 001072 BANK OF AMERICA NT & SA
20233 09/22/94 BOBROSKY, PATRICIA
20234 09/22/94 001436 BROWN, CONNIE
20235 09/22/94 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS
20236 09/22/94 000129 CAL WEST RENTAL CENTER
20237 09/22/94 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY
20237 09/22/94 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20238 09/22/94 000127
20239 09/22/94
20240 09/22/94
20241 09/22/94
20241 09/22/94
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
CALIFORNIAN LEGAL
001610 CALTRANS-DISTRICT NO. 8
CARPENTER, CONHIE
000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER
000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER
20242 09/22/94 000429
20243 09/22/94
20243 09/22/94
20243 09/22/94
20243 09/22/94
20243 09/22/94
CHESHER, RUTH
000137 CHEVRON U S A INC.
000137 CHEVRON U S A INC.
000137 CHEVRON U S A INC.
000137 CHEVRON U S A INC.
000137 CHEVRON U S A INC.
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
INSURANCE EFFECT 2/26/9
REFUND"CLASS CANCELLED
TENP HELP W/E 08/27/94
TEMP HELP W/E 08/27/94
TEMP HELP W/E 09/03/94
INSTALLMENT PMT FOR 10/
REFUND DU~ TO ILLNESS
PMT TO TCSD INSTRUCTOR
COPIER MAINT CONTRACT E
PARK MAINTENANCE RENTAL
JULY 4 CELBRATION AD
RDA ENV IMPACT REPORT A
DISPLAY TUESDAY
DISPLAY SUNDAY
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARIN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
ENC PERMIT# 08-94-N-SN-
REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED
HARDWARE FOR SIGN INSTA
TAX
GIFT EXCHANGE W/SISTER
789-819-697-2 AUGUST
789-819-697-2 AUGUST
789-819-697-2 AUGUST
789-819-697-2 AUGUST
789-819-697-2 AUGUST
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
300-199-999-5204
190-183-4982
001~140-999-5118
001-140-999-5118
001-140-999-5118
390-1040
190'183-4982
190'183-999-5330
330-199-999-5217
190-180-999-5238
190-180-999-5254
280-199-999-5254
001-120-999-5254
001-120-999-5254
001-120-999-5256
001-161'999'5256
001-161'999"5256
001-161"999'5256
001'161'999"5256
001-120-999-5256
001-120'999'5256
001-120'999'5256
001-120-999'5256
001-120-999'5256
001-120-999"5256
001-161'999'5256
210-165-644-5804
190'183'4982
100-164-601-5244
001-100-999-5258
001-162-999-5263
001-110-999-5263
001-170-999-5262
100-164-602-5262
001-161-999-5262
ITEM
AMOUNT
3,838.74
15.00
361.20
516.00
483.75
315,946.64
35.00
100.00
40.37
35.56
104.27
208.53
52.96
52.96
34.85
37.17
34.85
33.30
37.95
120.81
34.07
22.46
10.84
63.50
66.60
29.43
6,720.00
14.00
276.50
21.43
45.50
17.79
19.31
61.57
23.82
36.85
CHECK
15.00
1,360.95
315,946.64
35.00
100.00
40.37
35.56
312.80
631.75
6~720.00
14.00
297.93
45.50
09/2~,,,
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
20244
20245
20246
20247
20248
20249
20249
20250
20250
20251
20252
20254
20255
20256
20256
20256
20256
20257
20257
20257
20258
20258
20258
20259
20259
20259
20260
20260
20260
2P~z41
16:18
CHECK
DATE
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER NAME
001555 CHRZSTOPHERSOR FXRE PRO
CHURCN~ PAULA
000980 COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY
000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
000447 CONTRONIX OF HEMET
001583 COOL CAPS
001583 COOL CAPS
000155 DAVL[N
000155 DAVLIN
001542 DEFABIIS, SEAM-PAUL MIC
000164 ESGIL CORPORATION
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
FERRIOLS, SOCORRO
001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK C
000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN
000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE
000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE
000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE
000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO
000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO
000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO
HAAG, LISA
HARRIS, SUSAN
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PER]ODE
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
SEMI-ANNUAL FIRE SYSTEM
REFUND-CHILD SICK
IRRIGATION PARTS AND EQ
ALARM MONITORING FEE FO
REPAIR TO RADIO
PROMOTIONAL MILK CAPS F
TAX
09/13/94 COUNICL MEETIN
VHS TAPE AND COPY ON RD
PMT FOR TCSD INSTRUCTOR
SERVICES 7/1/94 - 7/31/
EXTRA SLOPE MAINT SERVI
SLOPE MAINT JULY/AUG 94
REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED
547~666403910099-JS
FRANKLIN CALENDARS FOR
"SEASONS" COMPACT REFIL
FREIGHT
TAX
909 181-1T23 GEN
909 649-1993 GEM
909 699-8632 GEN
MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR THE
400 FORMATTED DISK
FREIGHT
TAX
SVGA 14" COLOR MONITOR
FREIGHT
TAX
REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED
REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-182-gg9-5250
190-183-4982
190-180-~-5212
340-1~q-9~-5250
001-162-~-5242
001-170-g~-5292
001-170-999-5292
001-100-999-5250
280-199-999-5250
190-183-999-5330
210-190-137-5802
193-180~999-5415
193-180-999-5415
190-183-4982
001-100-999-5258
001-161-999-5220
001-140-999-5220
001-140-999-5220
001-140-999-5220
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
001-140-999-5220
001-140-999-5220
190-182-999-5220
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
190-18~-4982
190-183-4982
ITEM
AMOUNT
100.00
65.00
88.89
135.00
146.86
153,00
11.86
701.67
16.16
1,228. O0
234. O0
237.66
20.00
25.00
185.22
15.62
24. O0
4.75
2.23
590.38
1,054.43
16.87
48.96
19.23
4.32
260.00
11.15
20.64
458.00
20.00
35.50
25.00
35.00
PAGE 3
CHECK
AMOUNT
100,00
65.00
88.89
135.00
146.8~
164.8~
717.83
1,228.00
234.00
257.66
25.00
185,22
46.60
1,661.68
r2.51
291.79
513,50
25.00
35.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA ~
09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
20263 09/22/94 000806 HOWARD, BOBBY
PMT FOR TCSD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999'5330
160.00
160.00
20264 09/22/94 HUMES, RICH REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982
25.00
25.00
20265 09/22/94 000193 I C M A - ANNAPOLIS JUN PUBLICATIONS FOR PLANNI 001-161-999-5228
73.45
73.45
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF 00MP 100-2080
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 190-2080
20266 09/22/94 Q00194 1 c M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 191-2080
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 193-2080
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF C04P 500-2080
20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 340-2080
20267 09/22/94 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL MISC POOL SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212
1,187.88
248.62
456.50
74.52
91.09
37.49
29.10
47.41
2,105.20
47.41
20268 09/22/94 001529 JOCHUM, LORI PMT TO TCSD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999-5330
20269 09/22/94 001064 KEYE PRODbCTIVITY CENTE WRITING SEMINAR FOR T A 001-162-999-5261
168.00
139.00
168.00
139.00
20270 09/22/94 000206 KINKO'S OF RIVERSIDE, I COPIES AND MISC SUPPLIE 001-120-999-5220
36.56
20271 09/22/94 001607 L D 0 S COMMUNICATIONS LONG DIST. CALLS HILL 320-199-999-5208
20272 09/22/94 001513 LIBERTY AUTO CENTER REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 001-110-999-5214
20272 09/22/94 001513 LIBERTY AUTO CENTER REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 001-162-999-5214
1,680.65
121.96
116.08
1,6b~.~
238.04
20273 09/22/94 001130 M K BATTERY
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FOR 190-180-999-5214
64.O7
~,,07
20274 09/22/94 001600 MANSUR SERVICES, INC. 2 GALS OF PAINT FOR NEW 001-161-999-5250
57.15
57.15
20275 09/22/94 001142 MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES REVIEW OF STORM DRAIN G 100'164'601'5248
170.00
170.00
20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURXGE PRINTERS, INC.
20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURXGE PRINTERS, INC.
20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURIEE PRINTERS~ INC.
20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS, INC.
20277 09/22/94 000934 MCGRAW HILL, INC.
3 DIVIDERS FOR CAPITAL 001-140-999-5222
CLEAR COMBS 001-140-999-5222
BLANK STOCK FOR TEXT OF 001-140-999-5222
TAX 001-140-999-5222
PUBLICATION FOR PLANNIN 001-161-999-5228
185.00
32.00
356.50
44.45
58.54
617.95
58.54
20278 09/22/94 MCKEE, PATRICIA REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982
20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS,
20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS,
20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS,
20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS,
20280 09/22/94 000885 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
20280 09/22/94 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
20280 09/22/94 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 330-199-999-5277
MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 530-199-999-5277
MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 330-199-999-5277
PROCESSING & DUPLICATIO 330-199-999-5277
SOLANA WAY AT MARGARITA 100-164-601-5402
EMERG WORK ON MARG & SA 100'164-601-5402
EMERG WORK ON RANCHO VI 100'164-601-5402
95.00
439.97
90.68
484.02
24.61
918.00
6,097.00
3,858.00
95.00
1 , 039.28
10,I
V~ CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5
09/Z~, ,~ 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT SERVICES 001-140-999-5248
20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT 001-140-999-5248
20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT 001-140-999-5248
20282 09/22/94 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 08/28/94 001-162-999-5118
20283 09/22/94 PARKER, MICHAEL CK WAS NEVER RETURNED A 001-1190
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 001-2130
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 100-2130
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 100-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 165-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS CEMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 191-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 193-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 280-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 300-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 320-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 330-2390
09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 340-2390
09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 001°2390
2U~,Y+ 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 100-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 165-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 .SURVIVOR 193-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 280-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 330'2390
20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390
20285 09/22/94 PLOUFFE, IO~ROL REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED 190-183-4980
20286 09/22/94 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN
20286 09/22/94 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN
DISPLAY ADVERTISING
DISPLAY ADVERTISING
001-161-999-5256
001-161-999-5256
20287 09/22/94 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY MISC LOCKSMITH SERVICES 190-180-999-5212
20288 09/22/94 000546 RADIO SHACK/BUTTERFIELD
20289 09/22/94 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
20289 09/22/94 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES
COPIES OF BLUEPRINTS
COPIES OF BLUEPRINTS
01-06-29610-0 07/14-08
01-06-29725-0 07/14-08
SERVICE FOR 07/15 - 08/
SERVICE FOR 07/15 ' 08/
SERVICE FOR 07/15 - 08/
20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCMO CALIFORNIA WATER
2n~nQ 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
320-199-9~9-5221
001-161-999-5224
001-161-999-5224
190-181-999-5240
190-181-999-5240
193-180-999-5240
191-180-999-5240
190-180-999-5240
ITEM
AMOUNT
238,77
494,40
499,11
468,00
25.00
171.88
85.88
12,996.93
2,550.22
108.84
2,668.53
87.47
316.46
61.17
106,82
268.21
114.60
294,79
50.51
11.15
.37
13.44
.42
1,44
,19
,46
,93
,93
2.00
70.00
75.66
94.09
30.00
52,04
12.93
24136
14.28
85.74
2,080.68
105.31
299.29
CHECK
AMOUNT
1,232.28
468.0O
25.00
19,913.04
70.00
169,75
30.00
52,04
254,29
2,585.30
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA
09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH CAR WASH & MAINT. FOR L 001-165-999-5214
20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR WASHES FOR CITY VEH 001-162-999-5214
20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR WASH SERVICE 190-180-999-5214
20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR gASH SERVICE 001-110-999-5214
28.00
48.99
16,00
14.50
107.49
20292 09/22/94 001475 REVENUE AT RISK SEMINAR SEMINAR FOR MJM 09/26/9 001-140-999-5258
15.O0
15.00
20293 09/22/94 001046 REXONe FREEDMAN, KLEPET SERV%CES FOR AUGUBT 199 001-130-999'5247
240.00
240.00
20294 09/22/94 REYES, CZARINA REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982
25.00
25.00
20295 09/22/94 000266 RIGHTWAY
PORTABLE TOILET FOR CIT 100-164-601-5238
57.39
57.39
20296 09/22/94 SEEGAR, DONNA REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED 190-183-4982
28.00
28.00
20297 09/22/94 BEVY, VALERIE REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4980
30.00
30,00
20298 09/22/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 66-77-584-8087-02 08/08 340-199-999-5240
47.06
47.06
20299 09/22/94 000557 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - SERVICE FOR 7/31 - 08/3 191-180-999-5319
20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-0157-01 08/05 191-180-999-5319
20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-0169-01 08/05 191-180-999-5319
20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-2147-01 8/10- 191-180-999-5519
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4751TS 100-164-604-5208
20500 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4752 SN 190-180-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4753 BH 190-180-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4754 KH 190-180-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4755 CITY VAN 190-180-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4757 JG 001-120-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4758 RR 001-100-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4759 TE 001-162-999-5208
20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4760 JH 100-164-603-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4761 SM 001-100-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4762 RP 001-100-999-5208
20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4763 PB 001-100-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4764 BB 100-164-601-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4765 BB 100-164-601-5208
20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4767 GT 001-161-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4769 JS 001-100-999-5208
20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4770 RB 001-110-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4204 WE 001-110-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4756 GEN 320-199-999-5208
20500 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 205-4070 GEN 001-140-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 205-7826 GEM 320-199-999-5208
20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 214-1074 GEM USAGE 320-199-999-5208
20301 09/22/94 000291 SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T
836.13
246.68
57.75
18.44
65.93
105.54
40.07
65.00
40.28
39.08
76.07
60.59
86.58
255,45
89.55
42.11
68.27
42.03
77,39
60.12
46.8~
41.99
36.34
125.60
36.34
80.61
1,561.77
OIL CHANGE FOR PW VEH 001-163-999-5214 20.99 20.99
20302 09/22/94 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN PMT FOR T~SD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999-5330 420.00 ~
VOL CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7
09/2c, y~ 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIQOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
20303
20303
20303
20303
20304
20305
20306
20307
20307
20307
20307
20307
20307
20307
20308
20309
20309
20309
20309
20309
20309
20310
20310
20310
20311
20312
20312
20312
20312
20313
20313
20313
20313
20313
20313
20313
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
09/22/94
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000310 TEMECULA CREEK INN
000825 TEMECULA CYCLES
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO,
001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS
001545 TIME MOTION TCX3LS
001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS
001545 TIME MOTION TOULS
001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS
001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS
001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS
000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS
000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS
000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS
ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM
DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT
POLAROID 600 2 PAK 5600
BUSH NELL 7 X 35 MM BIN
TAX
RECREATION SUPPLIES
100-164-601-5218
100-164-601-5218
190-182-999-5301
MEETING ROOM FOR BUDGET 190'180-999-5260
MAINTENANCE - CITY MOTD 001'170'999'5214
AWARDS FOR GOLF TOURN 001-2172
TMT-AE312 12FT PO~R CO
TMT'LP92 DB25 M/M GENDE
TMT"LP93 DB25 F/F GENDE
TMT'LPBO DB9 M/M GENDER
TMT'LPgO DB9 F/F GENDER
FREIGHT
TAX
OFFICE SUPPLIES.
MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COHP
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP
001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF CONP
000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RET1R
000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR MJM SAN JOSE 09/26/94
000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW
000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW
000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW
000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNIFORMS FOR W/E 09/09/
UNIFORMS FOR W/E 09/16/
UNIFORM MAINTENANCE FOR
UNIFORM MAINT FOR TCSD
CITY HALL FLOOR MATS
FLOOR MAT FOR C.R.C.
FLOOR MAT FOR SR CENTER
MISC APERTURE CARDS
001209 VAULT, THE
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
190-180-999-5220
190-180-999-5220
190-180-999-5220
001-2080
100-2080
190-2080
300-2080
320-2080
340-2080
001-2160
100-2160
190-2160
001-140-999-5258
001-2120
100-2120
190-2120
280-2120
190-180-999-5243
190-180-999-5243
340-199-999-5250
190-182-999-5250
190-181-999-5250
330-199-999-5277
198.70
29.99
17.72
111.04
59.45
300,06
256.54
39.75
9.90
9,90
7.90
7.90
4.91
5.84
347.11
12.04
2.28
2,525.26
188.45
275.08
5.00
312.50
50.0O
260.68
112.50
441.72
141.00
65.84
10.06
17.00
.60
23.00
23.00
16.35
16.35
30.75
69.39
16.75
194,70
CHECK
AMOUNT
357.45
59.45
300.06
256.54
86.10
361.43
3,356.29
814.90
141.00
93.50
195,59
194.70
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA S
09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PER]OOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
20315 09/22/94 001076 WESTERN WASTE, INC.
20316 09/22/94 WIECHEC, MATTHEW
20317 09/22/94
WILSON, TAMARA
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL
BOOT REIMBURSEMENT
REFUND-DIFFERENCE IN FE
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-180-999-5238
190-180-999-5243
190-183-4982
ITEM
AMOUNT
455.00
95.00
15.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
455.00
95.00
15.00
TOTAL CHECKS
422,437.97
VC CITY OF TENECULA PAGE
09, . lZ:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERICOS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
100 GAS TAX FUND
190 COHNUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPTTAL ]NPROVENENT PRQJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPNENT AGENCY -
300 XNSURANCE FUND
320 INFO~NATION SYSTENS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
TOTAL
AIIXINT
5,955.04
2,590.27
10,762.91
30.fS
760.00
360.00
385.7'J
2,546.98
12,135.26
37,529.08
VOUCHRE2
09/29/94 '12:22
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VEHDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER
20318 09/Z3/94 000871
20325 09/29/944
20326 09/29/94
20327 09/29/944
20328 09/29/94
20328 09/29/94
20328 09/29/94
20329 09/29/94
20330 09/29/94
20331 09/29/94 000622
20331 09/29/94 000622
20331 09/29/94 000622
20332 09/29/94 001615
20333 09/29/94 000128
203344 09/29/94 001616
20335 09/29/94 001090
20336 09/29/94 000950
20337 09/29/944 000138
20337 09/29/94 000138
20338 09/29/94 000447
20338 09/29/94 000447
20339 09/29/94 001535
20339 09/29/94 001535
20339 09/29/94 001535
20340 09/29/94 000155
20341 09/29/94 001056
203441 09/29/94 001056
20342 09/29/94 000165
20342 09/29/94 000165
CITY OF TEMEOULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIlDOS
VENDOR
NAME
HILTOR
000745 A T & T
001425 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR CORP.
000112
000101 APPLE ONE
000101 APPLE ONE
000101 APPLE ONE
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUMBER
HOTEL ACCOMMOOATIONS FO 190-180-qq9-5261
909-204-1200-0 MJM 001-140-999-5208
LA 601520209019~ TH 320-199-999-5208
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC PLANNING COIW4 ~SRP 10/ 001-161-999-5272
TEMP HELP W/E 09/17/94 280-199-999-5250
TENP HELP W/E 09/17/94 001-140-999-5118
TEMP HELP M/E 09/17/94 190-180-999-5118
001-140-999-5258
AUGUSTINEe DENISE REFUND FOR TCSO CLASS 190-18~-4982
BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER INSTALL LIGHT-POOL DECK 190-182-999o5212
BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER LIGHTING INSTALLATION 190-180-999-5212
BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER SECURITY LIGHTING - C[T 100-164-601-5240
BEARBACXERS FULL PAGE AD IN FTBALL 280-199-999-5264
CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, AUTO INSURANCE FOR PHYS 300-199-999-5201
0016144 ASSOC FOR GOVfT LEASING MANAGING LEASES SEMINAR
CALIFORNIA DEPT OF CUMN ECONUM[C DEVE. MANUAL
CAL[FORNIA DEPT OF GENE CALIF. PLANNERS BOOK LI
CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY
CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
CUMTRONIX OF HEMET
CONTRONIX OF HEMET
CREEKSIDE TEXACO
CREEKSIDE TEXACO
CREEKSIDE TEXACO
DAVLIN
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
FEDERAL EXPRESS
FEDERAL EXPRESS
001-161-999-5228
RDA AD FOR CITY COUNCIL 280-199-999-5262.
INSTALLMENT PtqT 10/13 - 320-2800
INSTALLMENT PMT 10/13 - 320~199-999-5391
UN[DEN RADIO MOOEL # SP 190-180-999-5610
TAX 190~180-999-5610
REAR glNOOt~ REPLACEMENT 300-199-999-5207
V~HICLE MAINT-PUBLIC ~0 I00~164-601-52144
VEHICLE MAINT-PUBLIC ~0 100-16~-601-5214
AUDIO PROD. FOR PLANNIN 001-161-999-5250
SPRAT ROUNDUP-EXTRA t40R
EXTRA ~ORK- REBAR HEADS
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
193-180-~99-5415
193-180-999-5415
001-162-999-52~0
320-199-999-52~0
ITEM
AMOUNT
119.90
.89
60.76
90.00
103.20
516.00
343.1/`
50,00
25.00
978.00
7Z5,78
932.00
200.00
569.46
26.50
9.00
82.53
1,204.99
722.58
786.00
60.92
139.05
131.53
173.46
150.00
396.00
36~.00
41.21
9.50
CHECK
AMOUNT
119.90
.89
60.76
90.00
962.~4
50.00
25.00
2,635.78
2r',~o
26.50
9.00
82,53
1,427,57
8/,,6.92
150.00
760.00
5Q.71
VC
09, 12:22
VOOCHER/
CHECK CHECK VBNDO~
NUMBER DATE NLINBER
20~43 09/29/94 001135
203~'+ 09/29/94 001002
20345 09/29/94 000993
20346 09/29/94 000949
20:Y+7 09/29/94 000184
20347 09/29/94 000184
20:~7 09/29/94 000184
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017'/
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017?
20348 09/29/94 00017?
':m~J,8 09/29/94 00017?
~ 09/29/94 001596
20350 09/29/94 001609
20351 09/29/94 00018~
20352 09/29/94 001517
20353 09/29/94 000796
20354 09/29/94 000939
20355 09/29/94 001570
20356 09/29/94 001407
20357 09/29/94 000945
20357 09/29/94 000945
20357 09/29/94 000945
20358 09/29/94 001553
20359 09/29/94 000596
20360 09/29/94 000219
20360 09/29/94 000219
1 09/29/94 001~.0
VENDOR
MANE
FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL N
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK C
FREEDOM COFFEE, iNC.
G K N RENTALS
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN
G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN
GLENNIES OFFICE PRQOUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GOSCH TOWING & RECOVERY
GREATER ALARM COMPANY,
HANKS HARDHARE
HEALTH & HUMAN RESODRCE
I CRO
1 C B O - INLAND EMPIRE
INFORMATION FOR PUSLIC
iNTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL
L P S COMPUTER SERVICE
L P S CUNPUTER SERVICE
L P S CORPUTER SERVICE
LAWN TECH EQUIPffiENT CON
LEAGUE OF CAL. CITIES
MARTIN 1-NODR PHOTO
HARTIN I*NODR PHOTO
HATROS, ALORA
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUMBER
PRE-EMPLOYNENT PHYSICAL 001-150-q~-5248
MISC pLANNING PUBLICATI
COFFEE SUPPLIES FOR CIT
S[IPLOjM)ER RENTAL
909 695-3564 GEN
909 699-2475 P~
909 699-7945 GEN
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CRC
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CRC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS
001-161-999-5228
340-199-999-5250
100-164-601-5238
320-199-999-5208
100-164-601-5240
320-199-999-5208
190-180-999-5220
190-182-999-5220
190-182-999-5220
001-161-999-5220
001-161-999-5220
001-161-999-5220
001-162-999-5220
190-180-999-5220
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS 190-180-999-5220
PICK-UP DIESEL IN ROJ, D 100-164-601-5430
CITY HALL ALARM MONITOR 340-199-999-5250
REPAIR & NAINT ITEMS AC ~40-199-999-5212
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRO 001-150-999-5250
MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR 94
LUMBER & BLDG CODE SEMI
NETWORK REPORTING SERVI
POOL SUPPLIES
AC POWER SUPPLY
LABOR AND MILEAGE
TAX
R&R BLADE
96TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE
PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR HA
PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR CA
PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR
001-162-999-5226
001-162-999-5261
320-199-999-5228
190-182-999-5212
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
100-164-601-5215
001-100-999-5258
100-16~-601-5250
001-165-999-5250
190-18~-999-5330
iTEM
Ale3UNT
190.00
130.50
167.60
Z20.00
32,79
34.24
3:L62
318.90
28,31
7.04
7.51
27.30
25
125.96
12,60
1.12
100,00
105.00
117.11
302.25
25,00
240.00
600.00
432,08
150.00
70.00
10.50
2] .80
585.00
36.7]
6.7~
806.40
PAGE Z
CHECK
ANOUNT
190,00
130.50
167.60
Z2O,OO
100.65
554.55
100.00
105,00
117.11
302,25
25.00
240.00
600.00
432.08
2~0.50
58~.00
43 J,8
806.40
VOUCHRE2
09/29/94 12:22
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERInnS
VCXJCHER/
OHECK CHEC~ VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER BATE NUMBER NAME
20362 09/29/94 000220 NAUR|CE PRXNTERS, INC.
20362 09/29/94 000220 NAURICE PRINTERS, INC.
20363 09/29/94 001205 NCOERNOTT, TIN K.
2036Z+ 09/29/94 000/.92 MCLARNEY, MARY JANE
20365 09/29/94 001526 MICHAELS STORES, INC.
20365 09/29/94 001526 NICHAELS STORES, INC.
20365 09/29/94 001526 NICHAELS STORES, iNC.
20365 09/29/94 001526 HICHAELS STORES, iNC.
20366 09/29/94 000228 MOBIL
20367 09/29/94 MORIKAWA~ ~SLEY
20368 09/29/94 000239 OLBTEN TEMPORARY SERVXC
20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS
20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS
20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS
20370 09/29/94 PACIFXC-AHERICAN CULTUN
ZTEM
DESCRIPTION
NEIGHBORHOOD MATCH NEtIS
TAX
CPA LICENSE RENEMAL
REIMB. FOR SEN
CRAFT SUPPLIES
CRAFT SUPPLIrES
CRAFT SUPPLIES
CRAFT SUPPLIES
FUEL EXPENSE
REFUND-SECURITY DEPOSIT
TEMP HELP M/E 09/04 -09
5 002 MHITE SOFTBALLS
19 OOZ SOFTBALLS
TAX
SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-170-999-5222
001-170-999-5222
001-1A0-999-5226
001-160-999-5258
190-180-999-5301
190-182-999-5301
190-182-999-5301
190-180-999-5301
001-162-999-5263
190-2900
001-162-99q-5118
190-183-999-5380
190-183-999-5380
190-183-999-5380
190-2900
! TEN
AMOUNT
224.00
17.36
200.00
40.00
35.71
31.29
9.77
52.10
14.46
100.00
775.13
212.81
750.50
58.16
100.00
CHECK
Ali3UNT
241.36
200.00
40.00
128.87
14.46
100.00
20371 09/29/94 PAUL, SANDY REFUND-SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-183-4990
100.00
100.00
20572 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 Q00249 PETTY CASH
20572 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
203?2 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH REINBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REXMBUREMENT
PETTY CASH RE]MBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REIHSURENENT
PETTY CASH REXMBURENENT
PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REIMSURENEHT
PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT
PETTY CASH REIMSUREMENT
PETTY CASH REXNBURENENT
001-100-999-5260
001-110-999-5260
001-140-999-5258
001-150-999-5260
001-16~-999-5220
100-164-601-5260
100-16/,-602-5250
100-16~-604-5220
190-180-999-5220
190-181-999-5301
190-182-999-5301
190-183-999-5:$/,0
7.46
13.62
5.50
3.99
4.31
15.00
14,42
23,69
4,31
38,05
42.95
20.89
19~.19
20375 09/29/94 000253 POSTRASTER
20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER
20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER
20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTNASTER
20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER
20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER
EXPRESS MAIL
EXPRESS MAIL
EXPRESS MAIL
EXPRESS NAIL
EXPRESS MAZL
EXPRESS MAIL
100-164-604-52~0
001-161-999-523B
001-163-999-5230
001-150-999-52~0
001-110*999-5230
001-120-999-52S0
9.95
13.95
13.95
9.95
9.95
29.90
87.65
20374 09/29/94 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKSMITH SERVXCES 190-180-999-5212 60.82 60.82
VO CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE
09/, 12:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERInnS
VOUCHER/
CRECK
NUMBER
20]76
20376
20376
20376
20]77
CHECK
DATE
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
09/29/94
VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER NA~E
000546 RADIO SHACK/BUTTERFIELD
000~26 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL
000426 RANCEO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL
000426 RANCNO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL
000426 RANCRO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL
00070~ S X S, llC/INLAND OIL
000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL
000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL
000704 S K S, IRC/]NLAND OIL
00070/* S K S, INC/IRLAND OIL
000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL
001122 SCOTCH PAINT CORPORATIO
001617 SCOTT, GLENN
001618 SENIORS GOLDEN YEARS
SMITH, ZENAIDA
000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
000574 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
OOlZlZ SOUTHERN CALIF GAS CONP
000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPNON
001576 STEUARD COMPANY, THE
001576 STEWARD COMPANY, THE
001576 STEWARD COMPANY, THE
001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS
000825 TEMECULA CYCLES
000]07 TEHECULA TROPHY CO.
TENECULA VALLEY GYMNAST
TENECULA VALLEY GYMNAST
001487 TIERRA MECHANICAL, INC.
TGASTNASTER$ - AREA
TGASTMASTERS - AREA C-4
00161] TRI-CHAPTER CALBO ABN C
]TEN
DESCRIPTION
NISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES
BLDG & NAINT SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES FOR SENION CEN
BLDG & NAINT SUPPLIES
RETURNED ITEM CREDIT
FUEL EXPENSE Fnn SEPT 1
FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1
FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1
FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1
FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1
FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1
NISC GRAFFITI REMOVAL S
CUTTING TORCH FOR CITY
SR CENTER ANNIVERSARY E
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT
PEST CONTROL SERVICES F
PEST CONTROL SERVICES F
66-77-7~5-0002-01SR CN
66-77-7~5-8082-01 8/22-
ACCT# 11-8272-901-5751-
909 202-5153 GY
PAPER DRILL DITS
FREIGHT
TAX
ENCLOSE FRONT DESK OF C
MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE
POOL TROPHIES
REFUND - EVENT CANCELLA
REFURD - EVENT CANCELLA
BUILDING NAINT SERVICE
SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND
ADDITIONAL STAFF flOURS
UNIFORM BUILD COOE SEMI
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
I00-164-~01-5263
001-110-~-52E3
001-162-'1~x~-526]
O01-165-~q~-5263
001-163-9~9-5263
100-16~-601-5218
100-1(>4-601-5242
190-183-'c~9-5320
001-140-~-5262
190-181-~-5240
001-150-99~-5208
]]O-1W-gqg-5242
330-1~;'-qq~-5242
330-199-999-5242
190-182-~)q-5212
001-170-9q~-5214
190-182-~-5]01
190-~900
190-18]-4990
190-2900
190-183-4990
001-162-999-5261
ITEM
AMOUNT
152.24
226.19
132.72
29.]3
29.52-
342.85
24.54
136.64
47,T3
61.85
325.62
100.00
60.00
26.97
21.00
21.00
30.93
1,225.85
5]6.82
76.24
139.80
5.02
10.83
975.00
201.4J,
19.40
100.00
530.00
67.50
100.00
20.00-
475.00
CHECK
152.24
358.72
657.98
]25.62
100.00
60.00
26.97
42. O0
1,256.78
5]6.82
76.24
155.65
975.00
201
19.40
(:~0.00
67.50
475.00
VOUCHRE2
09/29/94 12:22
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK
NLI~BER DATE
20394 09/29/94
20394 09/29/94
20394 09/29/94
20395 09/29/94
20395 09/29/94
20396 09/29/94
20396 09/29/94
20397 09/29/94
20398 09/29/94
20399 09/29/94
20400 09/29/94
20401 09/29/94
20402 09/29/94
20402 09/29/94
~0403 09/29/94
20403 09/29/94
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIDO$
VENDOR VENDOR ITEM
NLIMBER NAME DESCRIPTION
001565 U S I 25" ROLL LAMINATOR
001565 U S I FREIGHT
001565 U S I TAX
000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR TOOK REFUND U/O PAYING
000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR TOOK REFUND g/O PAYING
000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS FOR PW WEEK OF
000326 URITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS FOR TCSD
001209 VAULT, THE MISC APERTURE CARDS
001437 VIRACK, MARYANN PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR
001433 VYLARI PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR 190-1R'~-990-5~0
000379 W DEAN DAVIDSON CO. K. H]NTERGARDT PK INPRO 210'190-136-5802
000~40 WHITE CAP INDUSTRIES, I BOOT ALLOWANCE FOR R HU 100-1~-601-5243
000820 NINCHAK, KRIS ~ORKERS# CORP M~T 001-1182
000820 WINCHAK, KRIS NAP & PLAN CHECK SERVIC 001-16~-999-5249
000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC RENT FOR OCTOBER 94 340-199-999-5234
000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC CAM FOR SEPTEMBER 94 340-199-999-5234
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
330-1940
330-1940
330-1940
001-100-999-5258
001-100-999-5258
100-16~-601-5243
190-180-999-5243
330-199-999-5277
190-1R~-999-5330
ITEM
AMDUNT
825.00
52.16
63.94
144.00
6.00
23.00
16.35
196.70
208.00
432.00
360.00
83.98
31.23-
945,00
8,803.60
2,673.95
CHECK
ANOUNT
941.10
150.00
39.35
196.70
208.00
432.00
360. O0
83.98
11,477.55
TOTAL CHECKS
37,529.08
CITY OF TENECULA PAGE
12:57 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
100 GAS TAX FUND
190 CONNUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPITAL INPROVENENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPRENT AGENCY -
300 INSURANCE FUND
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
TOTAL
AN(XIWT
391,68Z.1A
10,978,34
13,517.55
17,381.26
38,083.78
~,00~.91
107,00
2,871.82
4~,{S3;0.80
VQUGHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA
09/29/94 12:57 V(XJCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIQOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
20/.07
20407
20407
20407
20/+07
20~07
20407
20408
20408
20408
20408
20409
20410
20410
20410
20410
20410
20411
20411
20412
20413
20413
20413
20414
20414
20415
20415
20416
20416
20416
20416
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
00019 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS
000123 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS
00012~ BURKE WILLIAHS & SORENS
00012~ BURKE WILLI/JqS & SORENS
00012~ BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS
000123 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS
00012~ BURKE UILLIANS & SORENS
001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS
001006 BURTRONZCS BUSINESS SYS
001006 BURTRORICS BUSINESS SYS
001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS
001009 D B X, 1NC.
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT $ERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
000/.81 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM
000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES
000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES
000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES
001501 N. ARINA CCNTRACTORS,
001501 MARINA CONTRACTORS,
000220 MAUR%CE PRINTERS, ]NC.
000220 NAURICE PRINTERS, INC.
000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES
000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES
000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES
000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUMBER
PROF. SERVICES 8/19/9&
PROF SERVXCES 8/31/94
PROF SERVICES 8/31/94
PROF SERVICES 8/31/94
PROF SERVICES 8/31/94
PROF SERVICE 08/'51/94
PROF SERVICES 8/~1/94
001-130-999-5246
001-1280
001-130-999-5246
190-180-999-5246
300-199-999-5207
280-199-999-5246
001-130-999-5246
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 330-1;9-q~-5217
SERV CONTACT RP6OSZ HI 330-1~9-q~9-5217
SERVICE CONTRACT UC1 CA 330-199-~9~-5217
TAX 330-1~9-~-5217
LOOP REPLACE FOR RANCHO 100-164-601-5402
CONTRACT INSPECTOR
CONTRACT INSPECTO~ W/E
CONTRACT INSPECTOR
NO BACKUP-REIMBURSABLE
NO BACKUP-REINBURSEABLE
001-162-999-5250
001-162-999-5250
001-162-999-5250
001-162-999-5250
001-162-999-5250
LANDSCAPE MAINT FOR SEP 193-180-999-5415
LANDSCAPE MAINT FOR SEP 190-180-999-5415
PROF. SERVICES 08/26/94 210-190'120-5802
PROF SERVICES FOR AUGUS
PROF SERVICES FOR AUGUS
PROF. SERVICES FOR 8/1
210-190-137-5802
210-190-137-5802
210-190-137-5802
LONA LINDA PK PHASE II 210-190-134-5804
IOX RETENTION ON INV C4 210-2035
CREATE/DESIGN COVERS FO 001-140-99q-5222
TAX 001-140*999-5222
CITY AUDIT 1~4 001-140-~-5248
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 280-199-9~-5248
SINGLE AUDIT 001-140-999-52&8
REVIEW OF DEVELOPER IMP 001-140-999-5248
TTEM
AMOUNT
3,150.00
307.10
18,706.40
495.50
107.00
2,808.91
3,191.62
1,695.00
700.00
446.00
30.82
3,350.00
3,232.16
2,672.72
5,016.00
6~.16'
32.72'
17,381.26
6,877.81
1,483.01
3,307.92
282.40
2,837.00
28,295.50
2,829.55-
982.00
76.11
6,389.~4
1,200.00
1,200.00
937.78
CHECK
AMOUNT
28,766.53
2,871.82
3,350.00
10,824.00
24,L
1,483.01
6A27.32
25,465.95
1,058.11
9,727.62
VO CITY OF TENECULA PAGE
09/, · 12:57 VOUCHER/CHEC[ REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NLNBER
20417 10/11/94
20417 10/11/94
20417 10/11/94
20417 10/11/94
20417 10/11/94
20418 10/11/94
20419 10/11/94
VENDOR
NAME
001339 NORTON INTERNAT/ONAL
001339 NORTON INTERNATIONAL
001339 MORTON INTERNATIONAL
001339 NONTON INTERNATIONAL
001339 NORTON INTERNATIONAL
000230 NUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES
000231 N G S/LOWRY. INC.
20420 10/11/94 001007
20421 10/11/94
20421 10/11/94
20422 10/11/94
20423 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
~r~p4 10/11/94
10/11/94
10/11/94
~0424 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
20424 10/11/94
20425 10/11/94
20426 10/11/94
NPGCORP.
001584 NEWPONT PRINTING SYSTEM
001584 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM
001500 REGIONAL TRAINING CENTE
000354 RIVERSIDE CO. HEALTH DE
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF#S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO, $HERIFF'S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF*S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFPS
000406 RIVERSIDE CO, SHERIFF'S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF#S
000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S
000310 TENECULA CREEK INN
001512 WIND & SHADE SCREENS,
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
460/5 GALS WHITE PAINT
100/5 GALS RED LEAD FRE
50/5 GALS STENCIL GOARD
1250 LB DROP-ON BEN)S
TAX
CSO ADNIW SERVICES 93/9
SlJRVEYING SERVICES FOR
*'EMERGENCY" STREET REPA
5500 3 PT CHECKS'GEM AC
TAX
TPJ~INING'EFFECT, PRESEN
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFORENENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG
LAW ENFOREMENT FON AUG
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
100-164-601o5218
100-164-601-5218
100-164-S01-5218
100-164-601-5218
100-164-601-5218
190-180-99~-5370
210-1~'-128-5802
100-164-601-5402
001-140-~-5222
001-140-~}9-5222
001-150-999-5248
00t-172-999-5255
001-170-999-5288
001-170-999-5299
001-170-999-5298
001-170-999-5294
001-170-999-5290
001-170-999-5262
001-170-999-5291
001-170-999-5281
001-170-999-5282
001-1230
GOLF TOURN GREEN FEES 001-2172
SHADE COVER OVER TOT LO
190-180-999-5212 ,
ITEM
A~K30NT
3,910.00
1,150.00
350.00
375.00
4,650.24
4,707.50
1,395.00
1,~.2.00
104.01
1,552.00
6,288.25
212,760.58
22,347.36
19,128.40
12,537.14
7,130.88
18,010.42
4,805.91
22,358.50
2,945.60
4,805.92
9,800.32
1,494.00
CHECK
ANOUNT
6,2]3.34
4,650.24
4,707.50
1,395.00
1,'~-6.01
1,552.00
6,288.25
326,810.71
9,800.]2
1,494.00
TOTAL CHECKS 478,630.80
ITEM 4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
APPROVR~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
Anthony EImo, Chief Building Official/~
October 11, 1994
Public Nuisance Abatement - 30301 Nicolas Rd.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
Approve the issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $58,600 to
Environmental Control Systems, Inc. for the removal of all trash, debris, building
foundations and for the securing of all buildings.
Approve an Appropriation of 958,600 for account no. 001-162-999-5250,
Other Outside Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 90-24 Abatement of Public Nuisance was adopted by the City Council
December 4, 1990. This ordinance allows the City to provide a just, equitable and practical
method whereby lands or buildings which are dilapidated, unsafe, dangerous, unsanitary,
cluttered with weeds, debris, abandoned vehicles, or are a menace or hazard to life, health or
general welfare
of the City of Temecula, may be required to be repaired, renovated, vacated, demolished or
cleaned up by removal of offensive conditions.
DISCUSSION:
On approximately May 11,1993,code enforcement received a complaint regarding an alleged
public nuisance located at 30301 Nicolas Rd. After inspection of the premises revealed the
existence of weeds, trash, debris, and unsecured dilapidated buildings, abatement proceedings
were initiated in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 90-24 for Public Nuisance
Abatement. Notices were subsequently sent to all known owners by both first class and
certified mail.
In an effort to determine the extent of the nuisance condition, an inspection warrant was
applied for and granted by the local district court judge. An inspection was then performed
revealing, construction debris, concrete foundations, trash and debris throughout the property.
As a result of this inspection, staff proceeded to declare the property a public nuisance,
V:\TONY~AGENDA\30301.NIC 9/27/94 tda
Agenda Report
August 11,1992
Page 2
requesting that the nuisance be abated in a timely fashion. Upon expiration of the requested
abatement period, a hearing was held before an independent hearing officer for the purpose
of having the property's designation as a public nuisance upheld and the City given the
authority to cause the abatement of the nuisance condition to be done. The hearing also gave
the property owners the ability to give testimony as to why the property should not be
designated a public nuisance and the nuisance abated by the City. The nuisance designation
was upheld by the hearing officer and abatement was ordered. Staff obtained an abatement
warrant on August 17, 1994 and has completed the bidding process for the abatement of the
nuisance conditions.
Bid proposals were received from a total of five (5) firms for the abatement work.
Environmental Control Systems, Inc. was the low bidder with a bid of $58,600. A listing of
all firms and their respective bids are as follows:
1. Seal Coater Company
974,925.00
2. Brimhall Company
972,985.00
3. Nathan C. McDonald
969,000.00
4. Environmental Control Systems, Inc. 958,600.00
5. ASAP Truck &Tractor 958,600.00
(Incomplete Bid)
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is necessary to appropriate 958,600 for account no. 001-162-999-5250,Other Outside
Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance for these services. Following completion of the
abatement process, a public hearing will be held before the Council to consider whether the
958,600 plus related City administrative costs will be recorded as a special assessment
against the property.
V:\TONY~AGENDA\30301.NIC 9/27/94 tda
ITEM 5
TO:
FROM: :~,~,
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
October 11, 1994
Reject the bid for the Pala Road at HWY 79S Right Turn Lane Project
(No. PW94-08)
PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Reject the bid and direct staff to re-bid the Pala Road at HWY 79S Right Turn Lane
Project (PW94-08).
BACKGROUND:
On July 12, 1994 the City Council approved the construction plans and specifications, and
authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. The work to
be performed includes, construction of asphalt pavement, traffic striping and signjng,
embankment construction, and traffic control to construct a right turn lane for traffic
proceeding east on Route 79 "South" to south on Pala Road. This widening project will
reduce congestion on Route 79 "South" during peak levels of traffic. This project was also
bid with an alternative to perform the construction during night hours, from 8:30 p.m. to 5:30
a.m. Sunday evenings thru Friday mornings.
The engineer's estimate for the base bid of this project is $36,000.
One (1) bid for the project was publicly opened on August 4, 1994 and the results for the
base bid is as follows:
Base Bid Alternative Bid
1. Vista Murrieta Corporation .......... $63,073.70
$6,768.00
Staff reviewed the bid proposal from Vista Murrieta Corporation and found that the proposal
was complete and in order, but the unit prices were high. Their schedule of prices showed
that out of the thirty bid unit prices, twenty-six were higher than the engineer's estimate.
Three of the unit prices in the proposal were for the placement of asphalt, which was over
-1 - r:\egdrpt\94\1011 \pw94-08 .awdtajp
58,000 more than estimated. The total bid cost was 563,073.70,which is almost 527,000
higher than estimated.
Vista Murrieta Corporation has not performed any work for the City, but has performed well
in other areas of Riverside County based on comments from references of previous work.
The project's Notice Inviting Bids and the Instructions to Bidders stated that potential bidders
were required to have a contractor's license classification A (General Engineering). Due to the
fact that there is no apparent reason why there was only one bid response for this project,
other than the possibility of the contractor's license requirement. Staff recommends that a
re-bid of this project take place and that the license classification of C-12 (Earthwork and
Paving Contractors) be added to the project specifications too increase the potential of the
number of bidders and a lower bid price.
A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact at this time, this is a Capital Improvement Project and will be funded through
Development Impact Fees.
-2- r:%agdrpt\94\1011\pw94-08.awd/ejp
ITEM 6
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNE'=r.R.~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
City Council
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
October 11, 1994
Request to Caltrans for Freeway Guide Signs Identifying the Old Town
Business District
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94---
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING
THE INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN
TEMECULA BUSINESS DISTRICT
BACKGROUND:
The City has participated in the lease for a billboard located adjacent to Interstate 15
advertising Old Town Temecula. The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Board is being asked
to support additional assistance for billboard leasing as part of its adopted Old Town Specific
Plan Capital/Promotional Improvements Program.
The request for the Caltrans installation of freeway guide signs identifying the Old Town
Temecula Business District will be an additional no cost promotion that is anticipated to bring
patrons off the freeway to do business in Old Town.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
This action will have no adverse fiscal impact on the City.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL REQUF_~TING
~ INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS
IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA BUSINESS
DISTRICT
WI~REAS, the identification of kistoric Old Town Temecula as a business district is
an important concern to the citizens of Temecula; and
WHEREAS, the grade separation between the Old Town and Interstate 15 renders
services and businesses nearly. invisible to Interstate users; and
WHEREAS, Interstate travelers would be better able to plan their stops with advance
notice of business district and services available in Old Town Temecula; and
WHEREAS, Old Town Temecula is a locally historic business district bypassed by the
construction of Interstate
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOW:
Section 1. That a letter, signed by the Mayor, accompany a copy of this resolution
requesting the installation of freeway guide signs by Caltrans to identify the Old Town Temecula
Business District.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, this day, the llth of October, 1994.
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATI'P..ST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERS]DE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 94- _ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1994, by the following vote:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMbERS:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
ITEM 7
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATI'ORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECUULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
October 11, 1994
Interim Director of Public Works Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve a contract with Kicak and Associates to provide Interim City
Engineer/Director of Public Works services.
BACKGROUND:
Due to the departure of Tim Serlet, the City is currently in the process of recruiting a new City
Engineer/Director of Public Works. Until a regular replacement is hired, staff is recommending
that Joe Kicak, of Kicak and Associates be retained as the Interim City Engineer/Director of
Public Works.
Mr. Kicak has over 30 years of municipal engineering experience and currently serves as
contract City Engineer for the City of Grand Terrace. Mr. Kicak has agreed to work 32 hours
per week at a salary of 950.00 per hour. This arrangement is expected to continue until mid-
December when the appointment of a new director is anticipated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Due to salary savings, adequate funds are available in the Public Works Department budget
to fund this contract.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement was made and entered into this 20th day of September 1994. by and
between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Kicak and Associates. a
Civil Engineer and Planner Finn ("Consultant").
The paxties hemto mutually agree as follows:
1. Services. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth.
2. Performance. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the
best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein.
3. Payment. The City agrees to pay Consultant the amount of $50.00 per hour.
This amount will not exceed $25,000 for the total term of the Agreement unless additional
payment is approved by the City Council; provided that the City Manager may approve
additional payment not to exceed $500.
Consultant will submit an invoice at the conclusion of actual services performed.
Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice.
4. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended so long as such amendment is
in writing and agreed upon by both the City Manager and Consultant.
5. Ownership Of Documents. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of
termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original documents, designs,
drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant
to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or
otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
6. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement without cause so long as
written notice of intent to terminate is given to Consultant at least three (3) days prior to the
termination date. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be paid for the services
performed.
7. Indemnification. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and
all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City,
its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them
for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's
negligent acts or omissions under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising
out of the sole negligence of the City.
8. Status of Consultant. Consultant is an independent contractor in all respects in
the performance of this Agreement and shall not be considered an employee of the City for
any purpose. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement.
Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other
compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be
liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of
performing services hereunder.
9. Term. This Agreement shall commence on September 20~ 1994, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later
than March 20, 1995.
10. Subcontracts. The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontracts for services
to be rendered toward the completion of the Consultant's portion of this Agreement without
the consent of the City. At all times, Joseph Kicak shall be primarily responsible for the
performance of the tasks described herein. Consultant shall provide City with fourteen (14)
days' notice prior to the departure of Joseph Kicak from Consultant's employ. Upon such
notice, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement. Upon
termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shah be for the value of
service rendered to the City.
11. Default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of
this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating
Consultant for any work performed after the date of default, Default shall include not
performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of
the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder,
if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the
Consultant, shall not be considered a default.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be
resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, et
seq. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
12. Notices. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service
on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of
the United States Postal Service addressed as follows:
a. City:
Attention: City Manager
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: Joseph Kicak
Kicak and Associates
21935 Van Buren St., Bldg. A, Ste. 3
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or
three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal
Service.
13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached
hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental
hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
In the event of conflict between the terms. conditions, or provisions of this
Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement
shall prevail.
14. Liability. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries,
wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City.
City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or
sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
Consultant agrees to indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its
officers, agents, employees, and representatives for all claims or losses the City may suffer
resulting from any negligent actions or omissions by Consultant.
Consultant shall secure workman's compensation insurance. Upon request of
Consultant, the City shall add Consultant to the City's worker's compensation policy and the
Consultant shall reimburse the City for the cost of said insurance premiums.
15. Licenses. Consultant warrants that it maintains all necessary licenses.
The parties hemto have executed this Agreement on the date and year above
written.
CONSULTANT
By:
Title
ATI'EST:
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Ronald E. Bradley
City Manager
June S. Greek, City Clerk
AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
ITEM 8
APPROVAL R~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
City Clerk
October 11, 1994
Records Destruction Approval
RECOMMENDATION: Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided
under the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
BACKGROUND: On March 22, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 92-17
which authorizes the destruction of certain city records which have become outdated, obsotete
or are excess documents, in compliance with Sections 34090 through 34090.7 of the
Government Code.
The records management program, administered by the City Clerk's Office, is in the process
of microfilming all inactive records that are over two (2) years old. The attached exhibit
details plot plans for the years 1989 and 1989 which have been copied to microfilm. Three
microfilm copies have been prepared, one to be kept in the Planning Department, one in the
City Clerk's records vault and one in permanent off-site storage.
The City Attorney has reviewed this request and has signed Exhibit "1" of the Annual Review
as provided for in Resolution No. 92-17.
ATTACHMENTS:
JSG
Destruction of Records Request
List of Records recommended for destruction
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Clerk
Gail Ziglet,
Office Specialist
September 30, 1994
Destruction of Records Request
Attached is a print out of Plot Plans (Retention Type 20324) from 1989. These records have
been microffimed in triplicate with a copy distributed to the City Clerk's Records Vault, the
Planning Department and a copy to the Vault in San Diego.
The following have reviewed and approved this destruction request.
Pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 34090, I hereby give my consent
to the destruction of records under the direction of the City Clerk pursuant to the City of
Temecula's adopted Destruction of Obsolete Records Policy.
Department:Head: '
City Attorney:
Ga/-y~o~o'll ~PP~r
/o 7~ t s ~,
y
/
Date
RRDESTY...RR061 City of TemecuLa 'DOC. Ref ......... 161 Page 1
09/30/1~94 FiLes Ready fop Destruction Retention Code... 20324 10:33:30
Destruction Date. 12/31/1;94
Dc item Ret. FiLe Refere~e # Storage Nedis
Ref. Date Ref. grief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference
161 01/19/198~ 10376 PLot PLan 10376 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The FiLm
161 07/24/1989 11450 PLot PLan 11450 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AOO01
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/09/1989 8525 PLot Plan 20324 000~ FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/10/1989 11436 PLot PLan 11436 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/14/1989 11541 PLot PLan 11541 20324 0012 FiLm 3821NIAO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/16/1989 11429 PLot PLan 11429 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/16/1989 11437 PLot PLan 11437 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/16/1989 11441 PLot PLan 11441 20]24 0012 Film 3821NIAO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/21/1989 11439 PLot PLan 11439 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/23/1989 11442 PLot PLan 11442 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/25/1989 11447 PLot PLan 11447 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 08/25/1989 11449. PLot Plan 11449 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 08/25/1989 11456 PLot PLan 11456 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/01/1989 11465 PLot PLan 11465 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/05/1989 11502 PLot PLan 11502 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/12/1989 11477 PLot PLan 11477 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
1 19/12/1989 9924 PLot PLan 9924 20324 0012 FiLm 3821~1A0001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/18/1989 11546 PLot PLan 11546 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AOO01
Group 161/120/The Vault
RRDESTY...RR061 City of Te~ecula Page 2
09/jTLOJl~)4 FiLes Ready for Destruction 10:3]:50
Dot Zt~ Rat. FiLe Reference # Storage Nedis
Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference
161 09/19/1989 114~9 PLot PLan 114~ 20324 0012 Fiim 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/20/1989 11495 PLot PLan 114~5 20324 0012 FiLm 3821NIAO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/20/1989 11511 PLot PLan 11511 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/IZO/The VauLt
161 09/20/1989 11513 PLot PLan 11513 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/25/1989 11562 PLot PLan 11562 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/Z6/1989 11505 PLot PLan 11505 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/26/1989 11522 PLot PLan 11522 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/2~1989 11514 PLot PLan 11514 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/the VauLt
161 09/27/1989 11526 PLot PLan 11526 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The vault
161 09/27/1989 11527 PLot PLan 11527 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/28/1989 11531 PLot PLan 11531 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 09/29/1989 11547 PLot PLan 11547 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 10/01/1989 11518 PLot 'PLan 11518 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The vault
161 10/02/1989 11544 PLot PLan 115~/, 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The vault
161 10/04/1989 11545 PLot PLan 11545 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 10/06/1989 11520 PLot PLan 11520 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
1 9/10/1989 11542 PLot PLan 11542 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 10/10/1989 9194 PLot PLan 9194 20324 0004 Fiim 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The vault
RRDESTY...RR061 City of Telaecuta Page
09/]0/1994 Files Reach/for Destruction 10:],_,~3:30
Doe. Itm Ret. File Refere~e # Storage H~ia
Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Lo~etion Refererie
161 10/13/1989 11536 PLot PLan 11536 20324 0012 Film 3821M1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/13/1989 11538 PLot Plan 11538 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/16/1989 11556 Plot PLan 11556 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/16/1989 11557 PLot PLan 11557 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/18/1989 11548 PLot PLan 11548 20]24 0012 Film 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/18/1989 11593 PLot PLan 11593 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/18/1989 11635 PLot PLan 11635 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/25/1989 11572 PLot PLan 11572 20]24 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/26/1989 1156~ PLot PLan 11566 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/]0/1989 11571 Plot PLan 11571 20324 0012 Film 3821HIAO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 10/]1/1989 11608 PLot PLan 11608 20324 0012 Film 3821HIAO001
Group 161/120/The Vault
161 11/01/1989 11604 PLot PLan 11604 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group I 161/120/The Vault
161 11/07/1989 11610 PLot PLan 11610 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001
Group ! 161/120/the Vault
....................... ~ ..........................................
161 11/07/1989 11611 PLot PLan 11611 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group i 161/120/The Vault
161 11/07/1989 11624 PLot PLan 11624 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group i 161/1ZO/the Vault
161 11/09/1989 11607 PLot Plan 11607 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group ! 161/120/The Vault
161 11/15/1989 11620 Plot PLan 11620 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
Group ] 161/120/The Vault
161 11/20/1989 11609 PLot Plan 11609 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001
GroupZ 161/120/The Vault
RRDESTY..,RR061 City of TemecuLa Page 4
09/]0/199/* FiLes Ready for Destruction 10:33:30
Dou Ztem Rat. FiLe Reference # Storage 14edje
Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Cede Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference
161 11/21/1989 11622 PLot PLan 11622 2032/* 0012 FiLm 38211~1A0001
Group Z 161/120/The VauLt
161 11/29/1989 116~ PLOt PLan 1164/* 2032/* 0012 FiLm 38Z1N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 11/]0/1989 116~2 Plot PLan 11642 2032/, 0012 FiLm 38211~1A0001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 11/30/1989 11654 PLot PLan 1165/* 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 11/]0/1989 1168~ PLot PLan 11684 2032/* 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/the Vault
161 12/05/1989 5702 PLot PLan 5702 2032/* 0011 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 12/08/1989 116~5 PLot PLan 11665 2032/* 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 12/08/1989 11666 PLot PLan 11666 2032/* 0012 film ]821H1AO001
Group 161/120/The vault
161 12/11/1989 11669 PLot PLan 11669 2032/* 0012 film ]821M1AO001
Group 161/120/the VauLt
161 12/1]/1989 11681 PLot PLan 11681 2032/, 0012 FiLm ]BZ1N1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
161 01/10/1990 11685 PLot PLan 11685 2032/* 0012 FiLm ]821t~1AO001
Group 161/120/The VauLt
Records Processed
ITEM 9
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer
October 11, 1994
Vehicle Purchase For Fire Inspector
PREPARED BY: Luci Romero, Financial Services Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the purchase of an extended
cab pick-up truck from Paradise Chevrolet. The purchase price is $12,791.71,
excluding tax.
DISCUSSION: On September 20, 1994, the City Council authorized the award of
a bid to Paradise Chevrolet for a two-door extended cab two-wheel drive pick-up truck
for the Community Services Department (TCSD). Given that the Fire Department
desires to purchase the same type of vehicle as the TCSD vehicle, this vehicle may
also be acquired through Paradise Chevrolet. Paradise Chevrolet will honor the bid
amount for the additional vehicle.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds to purchase the vehicle were approved in the FY 1994-95
Fire Department budget.
ITEM 10
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM: ~. ,
DATE:
S U BJ E CT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
October 11, 1994
Authorize Reduction in Faithful Performance Bond Amount in
Tract No. 25004-1.
PREPARED BY: 7~ Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council AUTHORIZE a fifty (50) percent reduction in Faithful Performance Street,
Drainage, Water, and Sewer improvement bond amounts, ACCEPT the Faithful Performance
Improvement bond rider in the reduced amount in Tract No. 25004-1, and DIRECT the City
Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
BACKGROUND:
On August 25,1992, the City Council approved Tract No. 25004-1, and entered into
subdivision agreements with:
JLD Properties, a California General Partnership
22865 Lake Forest Drive,
El Toro, CA 92630
for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and
subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds
issued by Developers Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 229848Sin the amount of $762,500($465,500, $155,500,and $141,500,
respectively) to cover street, water, and sewer improvements.
Bond No. 229848S in the amount of $382,000 ($233,000, $78,000, and $71,000,
respectively) to cover labor and materials for street, water, and sewer improvements.
3. Bond No. 229834S in the amount of $20,900 to cover subdivision monumentation.
Public Works Staff has inspected and verified the percentage of public improvements
completed, and has reviewed the status of water and sewer improvements with the Eastern
Municipal Water District. The Public Works Department therefore recommends a fifty (50)
percent reduction ($381,250) in the Faithful Performance Bond amounts. The remaining
amount is sufficient to cover both the remaining work and provide the minimum warranty bond
level of ten (10%) of the original Faithful Performance bond amounts.
Therefore, it is appropriate to reduce the Faithful Performance Bond amount as follows:
Street, Water, and Sewer Improvements.
$381,250
The subdivider is therefore submitting a Faithful Performance Bond Rider in the following
reduced amount:
Streets, Water, and Sewer Improvements Bond No. 229848S
$381,250
There are no reductions or releases permitted in the Monumentation Bond or Labor and
Materials Bond until all work is completed or until the lien period following City Council
acceptance of the improvements has expired. All releases and reductions are authorized by
City Council action.
The affected streets, although not completed nor accepted, are Diego Drive, Andrews Way,
Suzi Lane, Chandler Drive, and portions of Jons Place, Seraphina Road, Crishelle Lane, Eriks
Court, and Orion Road.
Attachments: Location Map
Public Improvement Bond Rider (on file)
n%agdq~\'g)4\lOll%u*2~O04-10~30/ac
TRACT
~_~~ ~ No. 25004-1
VICINITY ~AP
NO SCALE
TRACT NO. 25004-1
~) -
Location Map
ITEM 11
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
October 11, 1994
Substitute Subdivision ImprovementAgreement and Public Improvement
Bonds in Tract No. 21067
PREPARED BY: ~4J/~ bert Crisp,
AI Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council ACCEPT the substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Faithful
Performance and Labor and Material Bonds for Street, Drainage, Water and Sewer
Improvements, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 21067, and DIRECT the
City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety.
BACKGROUND:
On September 18, 1991, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 21067, and entered into
subdivision agreements with:
Kingsway Construction Corporation
2650 Camino Del Rio North
San Diego, CA 92108
for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and
subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds
issued by Insurance Company of the West as follows:
Bond No. 117 85 65 in the amount of $1,571,500 ($1,255,500, $149,500, and
$166,500, respectively) to cover faithful performance for street, water and sewer
improvements.
Bond No. 117 85 65 in the amount of $785,750 ($628,000, $75,000, and $82,750,
respectively) to cover labor and materials for street, water and sewer improvements.
3. Bond No. 117 85 66 in the amount of $31,284to cover subdivision monumentation.
r:\egd~pt~94~lO11%tr21067 09281ac
Kingsway Construction Corporation subsequently lost control of the site. The new developer
for the subdivision is:
Santa Barbara 86 (Westmark Communities, Inc., General Partner)
One Columbia
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
and they have submitted replacement agreements and securities for the contractual work.
Replacement surety bonds have been posted by the same surety, Insurance Company of the
West, under the same bond numbers and in the same amounts as the original documents.
The contractual eighteen (18) month period for completion of the work under the original
agreement expired March 18, 1993. It is Staff's recommendation that the new developer,
Santa Barbara 86 (Westmark Communities, Inc.) be granted an eighteen (18) month
construction completion period as set forth in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
(Section 20-"Time for Completion of Work/Time Extensions). The contractual completion date
would become April 11, 1996.
The affected streets, although not completed nor accepted, are Trotsdale Drive, Canterfield
Drive, Rein Court, Muirfield Drive, and portions of Jedediah Smith Road and Temecula Lane.
Attachment: Location Map
Substitute Public Improvement Bonds (on file)
Substitute Agreement (on file)
r:\egdmt\94~1011\tr21067 O9281ac
VICINITY MAP
HO ~rALF,
13. .t3,, e w
TRACT NO. 21067
Location Map
ITEM 12
"APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Joe Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (Interim)
October 11, 1994
Solicitation of Construction Bids and Approval of the Plans and
Specifications for the Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements,
(Project No. PW94-03)
PREPARED BY: ~ Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the
Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW94-03,
Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements.
BACKGROUND:
During the design of the Winchester Road Bridge Widening project, staff received numerous
concerns from the public regarding the traffic congestion on Winchester Road from Jefferson
Avenue to Ynez Road. Several alternatives were developed to alleviate some of the
congestion in this area. Three alternatives were chosen to be completed prior to the
Winchester Road Bridge Widening project. One, is to remove the dip section on the east side
of Jefferson Avenue at Winchester Road; two, is to interconnect Caltrans traffic signals with
the City's traffic signal at Winchester Road and Jefferson Avenue; and three, to add an
additional traffic lane on Winchester Road between Jefferson Avenue and the I-15 south
bound on-ramp. The first two alternatives have been completed. The third alternative, is the
proposed Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements, Project PW94-03.
This project will widen the south side of Winchester Road between Jefferson Avenue and the
I-15 south bound on-ramp, which will create an exclusive east bound right turn lane onto the
south bound I-15. Also, the north side of Winchester Road will be widened to provide for a
smother transition from the south bound I-15 off-ramp going west on Winchester Road. The
existing traffic signal will be modified to provide for these widenings and the landscaping and
irrigation will be installed adjacent to the proposed street improvements. These improvements
will be constructed to their ultimate locations and no modifications will be needed during the
Winchester Road Bridge Widening project.
The plans, specifications end contract documents have been completed and the project is
ready to be advertised for construction. The estimated construction cost for this project is
$230,000.
The Consultant has obtained the encroachment permit and approval of the plans from
Caltrans. These plans are available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project is being funded from Measure A.
-:2- r:~agdrpt\94\lOl l~pw~4-O~.bid]ajp
ITEM 13
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
'Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
October 11, 1994
Walcott Corridor Improvements, Project No. PW94-10,
Rancho California Water District Funding Request
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council deny the request by Rancho California Water District to use City funds
to relocate an existing waterline within existing street right-of-way.
BACKGROUND:
The City has begun the design process on the Walcott Corridor. The project includes grading
and paving for interim two (2) lane road on Walcott Lane, Calle Girasol, Calle Chapos and
Nicolas Road.
During the preliminary planning and alignment stages of the project it was determined that
portions of Walcott Lane would have to be lowered to provide for vehicle site distance. This
vertical grade change will require underground utilities to be relocated. Subsequently Rancho
California Water District (RCWD) was contacted to give them the option of including the
necessary pipeline relocation work with the road improvement plans..
RCWD has requested that a portion of the pipeline relocation cost be considered in the overall
road project being funded by the City. RCWD recognizes that utilities have a subordinate right
to the public right-of-way, however they believe that those constituents deriving the benefit
of the project should pay for the facilities.
The pipeline on Walcott Lane was recently constructed and the cost to relocate it is
approximately $585,000of which approximately $195,000are considered new improvements
to be constructed at the new connection of Walcott Lane and La Serena Way and would be
funded by RCWD. The balance of $390,000 is considered by RCWD as a cost to the road
project and is requesting the City fund this construction.
RCWD has been very cooperative in the coordination of previous City Capital Projects and is
requesting consideration in developing a mutually beneficial agreement in the construction of
the proposed road improvements.
Legally, all public utilities which are located within the public right-of-way and do not have
prior rights must be relocated when they conflict with project being performed by the City.
- 1 - r:\agd rpt~94\ 1011 ~w94-10 .agn/ajp
RCWD is requesting release from that section of the code. This release could set a precedent
for future City projects by significantly increasing the cost and preparation time for each City
project. It should also be anticipated that other utilities will expect the same relief.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Walcott Corridor is included in the Capital Improvement Program and is being funded by
Measure A Funds. The request by RCWD would add approximately $390,000to the overall
cost of the project.
Attachment: Sketch
-2- r:\agdrpt\94\1011\pw94-10.agn/ajp
Improvement Corridor
along Waleott Lane.
LalSerena
-- SCOPE OF WORK:
500feet of 30"
iransmission main
extended to
La SereniL
ITEM 14
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building OfficiallY'
October 11, 1994
Approval of Contract Services Agreements
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve contract service agreements
for Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein,
William Frost and Associates, to provide building plan check services to the Building and
Safety Department.
DISCUSSION: On September 27, 1994, the City Council approved an
award of contract to the Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and
Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates. Due to the fact that plan check
services are provided to the City on an as needed basis and compensated as a percentage of
fees collected by the City, the City's standard 3rofessional services contract was modified to
more directly address these services and com 9ensation arrangements.
V:\TONY\AGSNDA\PLANCHCK.REV 1015194 tda
AGREEMENT
FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of September, 1994,
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and VandorDe Chou Associates, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Contractor."
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A
attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the
schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and
to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks
described herein.
3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B.
Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices
shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services
provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice.
SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT:
The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this
Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at
least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the
Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless
the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving
an invoice from the Contractor, the City shall pay Contractor for work
done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section.
If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement
such suspension, termination or abandonment shall make void or
invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
BREACH OF CONTRACT: In the event that Contractor is in default for
cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no
obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work
performed after the date of default. Default shall include not performing
the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City
Manager of the City Failure by the Contractor to make progress in the
performance work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond
his control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, shall not
be considered a default.
-2-
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten ( 1 O) days
after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a
satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default
within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and
without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or
under this Agreement.
6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and
shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are
completed, but in no event later than JUne 30, 1995.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof,
shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section
1280, et seo. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice
on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by
certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the
City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Neil Evans,
Vandoroe Chou Associates. Inc.. 295 Rampart Street. Orange. California
92668 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing
by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served
seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United
States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice
for all purposes.
11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without
the prior written consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
-5-
12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work
hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests'
rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be
included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the
following scope and limits of insurance:
A. Minimum ScoPe of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services
Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive
General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General
Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ).
2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code I "any auto" and endorsement CA
0025.
3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of
the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance.
4.Errors and Omissions insurance.
-6-
Minimum Limits of Insurance: Contractor shall maintain limits of
insurance no less than:
1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury and property damage.
2. Automobile Liability: $500,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's
Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability limits of $500,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of
$1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by
this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following
provisions:
a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except
after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United
States First Class Mail.
b. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coveraae: The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to
-7-
be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products
and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned,
occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased,
hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain
no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the
City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance
of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured
coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any
insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not
contribute with, the Contractor's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with
respect the limits of the insurers liability.
Worker's Compensation and Emclover's Liability Coverage: The
insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
13.
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers
for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the
City.
Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this
clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City
and are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject
to all of the requirements stated herein.
INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnity and hold harmless
the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims,
damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of
or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this
contract.
-9-
The City shall indemnify and hold harmless VANDORPE CHOU and its
agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and
expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the
City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract.
14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when
performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom
from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers
and duties of the building official of the most recent adopted edition of
the California Building Code.
15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall
have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the
Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the
Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the
Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed
appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of
Appeals.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
-10~
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of
this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may
be executed in counterparts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR
By:
Nell Evans.
Vandorpe Chou Associates, Inc.
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
A I I EST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-11-
EXHIBIT "A"
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
PLAN CHECKING
Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for
compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows:
Building code requirement including:
Requirements based upon type of occupancy;
Requirements based upon type of construction;
Engineering regulations including seismic loads;
Detailed regulations of construction;
Fire resistive standards for fire protection;
Fire and life safety requirements;
Accessibility for the physically handicapped.
National Electrical Code requirements
Uniform Plumbing Code requirements
Title 24 energy conservation compliance
City's amendments to the uniform codes
Repetitive plan checks
Review site plan
Review soils reports
Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report
EXHIBIT "A"
PROPOSED FEES
Individual building plans:
Recheck$:
Partial plan checks:
VanDorpe Chou Associates proposes to provide code consulting in accordance with the
following fees:
BLr~D]NG PLAN CHECK
65 % of the plan check fee collected by the City.
Rechecks re included in the basic fee.
Partial plan checks are individually negotiated. Generally,
structural plan check only is 40 percent of the basic fee, energy
plan check only is 15 percent of the basic fee. Other partial plan
checks would be similarly charged.
Preliminm'y Plan Check: There is no charge for preliminary plan check; it is included in
our plan check fee.
Repetitive plans: 15% of the fee charged for the first building type.
Revisions: Revisions to previously checked plans are performed on an
hourly basis at a rate of $50.00 per hour.
Delivery: Pick-up and delivery costs arc included in our fee. Some
jurisdictions send plans to us by United Parcel Service.
ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL PLAN CHECK
Plan checks are performed at 75 percent of the electrical and mechanical permit fees or on an
hourly basis at a rate of $50.00 per hour.
ADDITIONAL WORK
Any additional work not included in the basic services listed above will be performed at an
hourly rate of $50.00 per hour.
CITY OF TEMECULA PROPOSED
AGREEMENT
FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of September, 1994,
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and Ray Graoe & Associates, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor."
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A
attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the
schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and
to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks
described herein.
3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B.
Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices
shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services
provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice.
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Contractor with written notice of the default, The Contractor shall have ten (10) days
after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a
satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default
within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and
without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or
under this Agreement.
6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and
shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are
completed, but in no event later than June 30, 1995.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof,
shall be resolved by arbitration, The arbitrator's decision shall be final,
Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided.by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section
1280, et see. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally,
-3-
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in
the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement,
all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the
course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this
Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used,
reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of
the Contractor.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times
remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly
understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of
this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits,
worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits,
and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of
State and Federal Laws and regulations which, in any manner, affect
those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service
pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe
and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers
and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by
failure of the contractor to comply with this section.
-4-
10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice
on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by
certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the
City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Rav Graee.
Principal, Ray Grage & Associates. 110 S. Main St.. Lake Elsinore,
California 92530 unless and until different addresses may be furnished
in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have
been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited
in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient
service of notice for all purposes.
11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without
the prior written consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
-5-
12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work
hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests'
rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be
included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the
following scope and limits of insurance:
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services
Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive
General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General
Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ).
2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code I "any auto" and endorsement CA
0025.
3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of
the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance.
4.Errors and Omissions insurance.
-6-
B. Contractor shall maintain limits of
Minimum Limits of Insurance:
insurance no less than:
1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury and property damage.
2. Automobile Liability: $500,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's
Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability limits of $ 500,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence,
Deductibles and Self~Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of
$1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by
this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following
provisions:
a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except
after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United
States First Class Mail.
General Liability and Automobile LiabiliW Coverage: The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to
-7-
be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products
and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned,
occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased,
hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain
no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the
City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance
of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured
coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any
insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not
contribute with, the Contractor's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with
respect the limits of the insurers liability.
Worker's Compensation and Emolover's Liability Coverage: The
insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
-8-
13.
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers
for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the
City.
d. Verification of Coverage: Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this
clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City
and are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject
to all of the requirements stated herein.
INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless
the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims,
damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of
or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this
contract.
-9-
The City shall indemnify and hold harmless Ray Grage & Associates and
its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses
and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from
the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract.
14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when
performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom
from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers
and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of
the California Building Code.
15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall
have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the
Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the
Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the
Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed
appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of
Appeals.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
-10-
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of
this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may
be executed in counterparts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR
By:
Ray Grage, Ray Grage & Assicates
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
A~'I'EST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-11-
EXHIBIT "A"
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
PLAN CHECKING
Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for
compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows:
Building code requirement including:
Requirements based upon type of occupancy;
Requirements based upon type of construction;
Engineering regulations including seismic loads;
Detailed regulations of construction;
Fire resistlye standards for fire protection;
Fire and life safety requirements;
Accessibility for the physically handicapped.
National Electrical Code requirements
Uniform Plumbing Code requirements
Title 24 energy conservation compliance
City's amendments to the uniform codes
Repetitive plan checks
Review site plan
Review soils reports
Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT B
Fee Proposal
Our fee for providing Structural Plan Checking Services to the City of Temecula, as
described in our Service Proposal on page 2, will be fifty-two percent (52 % ) of the building
permit fee as established in Table No. 3-A "Building Permit Fees" in the 1991 Uniform
Building Code (Appendix B). The building v~uation will be based on the City of Temecula
Building Valuation Data (Appendix C).
Building plans that have been revised or changed from the original submittal will be required
to be resubmitted to the City of Temecula. The extent of the revisions, and the mount of
time involved correcting the revisions, will be discussed and mutually agreed upon by the
building director of the City of Temecula and Ray Grage and Associates.
At the request of the Building Director of the City of Temecula, Ray Grage and Associates
will be willing to meet with clients to discuss corrections or revisions.
Services other than those shown in Services Proposal, that may be requested by the City of
Temecula, will be billed per attached rote schedule.
Rate Schedule
Principal Engineer ................................... $95.00 Per Hour
Principal Architect ................................... $95.00 Per Hour
Engineer ......................................... $65.00 Per Hour
Architect '. ........................................ $65.00 Per Hour '
Plan Checker ...................................... $50.00 Per Hour
Building Inspector ................................... $50.00 Per Hour
Clerical ......................................... $27.00 Per Hour
Travel ........................................... $.27 Per Mile
Outside Consulting Services .............................. Cost Plus 15 %
Printing and Copies ................................... Cost Plus 15 %
Items not listed are to be negotiated
AGREEMENT
FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of Seotember, 1994,
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and EsQil Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor."
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A
attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the
schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and
to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks
described herein.
3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B.
Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices
shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services
provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice.
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten (10) days
after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a
satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default
within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and
without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or
under this Agreement.
6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and
shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are
completed, but in no event later than June 30, 1995.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof,
shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section
1280, et sea. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
-3-
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in
the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement,
all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the
course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this
Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used,
reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of
the Contractor.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times
remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly
understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of
this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits,
worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits,
and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of
State and Federal Laws and regulations which, in any manner, affect
those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service
pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe
and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers
and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by
failure of the contractor to comply with this section.
-4-
10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice
on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by
certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the
City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Richard Esqate,
President. ESGIL Corporation. 9320 Chesapeake Drive. #208. San Dieao,
California 92123 unless and until different addresses may be furnished
in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have
been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited
in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient
service of notice for all purposes.
11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without
the prior written consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
-5-
12.
LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work
hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests'
rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be
included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the
following scope and limits of insurance:
Minimum Scooe of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services
Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive
General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General
Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ).
2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA
0025.
3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of
the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions insurance.
-6-
Minimum Limits of Insurance: Contractor shall maintain limits of
insurance no less than:
1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury and property damage.
2. Automobile Liability: $ 500,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's
Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability limits of $500,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of
$1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by
this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following
provisions:
a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except
after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United
States First Class Mail.
b. General Liabilitv and Automobile Liability CoveraQe: The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to
-7-
be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products
and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned,
occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased,
hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain
no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the
City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance
of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured
coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any
insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not
contribute with, the Contractor's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with
respect the limits of the insurers liability.
Worker's Comoensation and Emolover's Liability Coverage: The
insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
-8-
13.
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers
for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the
City.
d. Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this
clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City
and are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject
to all of the requirements stated herein.
INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnih/and hold harmless
the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims,
damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of
or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this
contract.
-9-
The City shall indemnify and hold harmless ESGIL and its agents and
employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses,
including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's acts
or omissions pursuant to this contract.
14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when
performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom
from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers
and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of
the California Building Code.
15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall
have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the
Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the
Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the
Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed
appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of
Appeals.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
-10-
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of
this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may
be executed in counterparts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR
By:
Richard Esgate, ESGIL Corporation
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
A]'I'EST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-11-
EXHIBIT "A"
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
PLAN CHECKING
Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for
compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows:
Building code requirement including:
Requirements based upon type of occupancy;
Requirements based upon type of construction;
Engineering regulations including seismic loads;
Detailed regulations of construction;
Fire resistive standards for fire protection;
Fire and life safety requirements;
Accessibility for the physically handicapped.
National Electrical Code requirements
Uniform Plumbing Code requirements
Title 24 energy conservation compliance
City's amendments to the uniform codes
Repetitive plan checks
Review site plan
Review soils reports
Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report
EXHIBIT "A" v:\Tony\Agenda\Ag~5-95.Esgil
~:.IUlBIT B
ESGIL CORPORATION'S
FEE SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED SERVICES IN RESPONSE TO THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RFP DATED APRIL 12, 1994
COMPLETE PLAN REVIEW:
Esgil Corporation's fee shall be 52% of the Permit Fee calculated per Section 304
or the latest published edition of the Uniform Building Code for each building plan
reviewed. The construction valuation shall be based on the most recent valuation
multiplier published by the International Conference of Building Officials in Buildinq
Standards, or on the architects estimated construction cost, or on the Building
Official's cost estimate.
Not withstanding the above, the minimum contractor fee for a plan review shall be
one hundred dc~Ilars ($100.00).
Plan review fee for repetitive identical buildings shall be 52% of the permit fee as
noted above for the first, or basic building, and 10% of the permit fee as noted
above for each repetitive building.
The single fee includes all rechecks and there are no additional charges for
preliminary plan review conferences at our office, expedited processing, reviewing
plans that are eventually found to be incomplete or for the pick-up and delivery of
plans or for meetings with the Building Official at his/her request.
PARTIAL PLAN REVIEW:
Partial plan reviews are discouraged due to the need to coordinate all disciplines in
a plan review, however, the fees for partial plan review when requested are:
1. Basic minimum for any plan review: 35% of UBC Building Permit fee
2. Structural only 6% additional
3. Fire-Life 6% additional
4. · U..P.C. 1% additional
5. N.E.C. 1% additional
6. U.M.C. 1% additional
7. 'title 24 Energy and Sound Control 1% additional
8. Title 24 Disabled Access 1% additional
Total: 52% of UBC fee
PLAN REVIEW OF REVISIONS TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS:
Revisions to previously approved plans will be at Esgil Corporation's published
houdy rates shown on the "Labor Rates Schedule," enclosed. We use our preferred
rate schedule in Temecula.
AGREEMENT
FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1 ;~;h day of September, 1994,
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and Robert Bein/William Frost & Associates . hereinafter referred to as
"Contracto r."
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A
attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the
schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and
to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks
described herein.
3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B.
Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices
shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services
provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice.
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten (10) days
after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a
satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default
within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and
without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or
under this Agreement.
6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on Sectember 13, 1994, and
shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are
completed, but in no event later than June 30. 1995.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof,
shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided.by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section
1280, et sea. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
-3-
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in
the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement,
all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the
course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this
Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used,
reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of
the Contractor.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times
remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly
understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of
this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits,
worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits,
and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of
State and Federal Laws and regulations which, in any manner, affect
those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service
pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe
and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers
and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by
failure of the contractor to comply with this section.
-4-
10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice
on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by
certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the
City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Bill Green, Robert
BeinRVilliam Frost 28765 Sinale Oak Dr.. Temecula, California 92590
unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either
party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-
two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States
Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all
purposes.
11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without
the prior written consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
-5-
12.
LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work
hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests'
rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be
included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the
following scope and limits of insurance:
Minimum Scope Of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services
Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive
General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General
Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ).
2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0003 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA
0025.
3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of
the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions insurance.
B. Contractor shall maintain limits of
Minimum Limits of Insurance:
insurance no less than:
1. General Liability 9500,000 combined single limit per occurrence
for bodily injury and property damage.
2. Automobile Liability: 9500,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's
Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability limits of 9500,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: 91,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of
91,000 must be declared to and approved by the City.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by
this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following
provisions:
a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except
after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United
States First Class Mail.
b. General Liability and Automobile Liabilitv Coverage: The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to
-7-
be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products
and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned,
occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased,
hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain
no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the
City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance
of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured
coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any
insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not
contribute with, the Contractor's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with
respect the limits of the insurers liability.
Worker's Comoensation and Emplover's Liability Coverage: The
insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
-8-
13.
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers
for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the
City.
d. Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this
clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City
and are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject
to all of the requirements stated herein.
INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless
the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims,
damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of
or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this
contract.
The City shall indemnify and hold harmless Ray Grage & Associates and
its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses
and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from
the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract.
14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when
performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom
from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers
and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of
the California Building Code.
15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall
have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the
Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official.
In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the
Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the
Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed
appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of
Appeals.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
-10-
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of
this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may
be executed in counterparts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONTRACTOR CITY OF TEMECULA
By: By:
Bill Green, Robert Bein/William Frost Ron Roberts, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
A ~ ~ EST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
-11-
EXHIBIT "A"
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
PLAN CHECKING
Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for
compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows:
Building code requirement including:
Requirements based upon type of occupancy;
Requirements based upon type of construction;
Engineering regulations including seismic loads;
Detailed regulations of construction;
Fire resistive standards for fire protection;
Fire and life safety requirements;
Accessibility for the physically handicapped.
Na~iona~ Electrical Code requirements
Uniform Plumbing Code requirements
Title 24 energy conservation compliance
City's amendments to the uniform codes
Repetitive plan checks
Review site plan
Review soils reports
Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT B
FRF~ PROPOSAL
FOR
STRUCTURAL PLAN CHF_EKING SERVICES
CrrY OF TK, VIEEULA
BUII.nlNG AND SAFETY
J.N. 400670
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates is prepared to undertake the activities outlined in
the "Scol~ of Services" according to the following proposed m~hod of compensation or as
otherwise negotiated with the Chief Building Official and/or City Manager.
For the performance of services as outlines, RBF proposes to base the professional fees for
the Building and Safety Plan Checking services on fifty percent (50%) of the Building
Perink Fee collected by the Building Department. This will assure the City that no costs will
be incurred for the operation of contract Building Official services.
For the performance of other Consultant Services described in the proposal, RBF proposes to
bill based on the attached Hou~y Rate Schedule.
This proposal is for the exclusive benefit of the City of Temecula and represents a proposal
for Scope of Services at the mutually agreed upon compensation.
ROBERT BEIN, WIllJAM FROST & ASSOCIATES
EXI4mIT B
ROBERT BEIN, W~'J,IAM FROST & ASSOCIATES
HOURLY RATE SCI43~tTI,E
JULY 1, 1994 - ~tYNE 30, 1996
CITY OF TP. NIECULA
Classification
Fee Rate
Buildin2
Chief Building Official
Structural Engineer
Plan Checker Engineer
Plan Examiner
Senior Inspector
Building Technician
Building Inspector
Permit Specialist
$110
$98
$85
$63
$75
$50
$60
$45
Landscape Architecture
Senior Landscape Architect
Assistant Landscape Architect
$68
$52
Computer Services
Computer Aided Design and Drafting(CADD)
Computer Data Entry
Computer Time
$60
$38
$15
Other
Word Processing $35
Consultation in connection with litigation and court appearances will be quoted separately.
Blueprinting reproduction and other direct expenses will be charged at cost.
The above schedule is for straight time. Overtime will charged at 1.25 times the standard
hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will charged at 1.50 times the standard hourly rates or as
negotiated.
The foregoing wage rates are effective through June 30, 1996. The rates may be adjusted
after that date to compensate for labor adjustments and other increases in other costs.
ITEM 15
ORDINANCE NO. 94-25
AN ORDINANCE OF T!:IF. CITY COUNCIL OF THE C[r!~
OF TEMF, CXI,A MODIFYING SECTION G (1.) OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 457.73 ADOPTED
BY REFERENCE BY TB'E CITY OF TEIVIF_,CULA IN
ORDINANCE NO. 90-04. TO CHANGE TRF. HOURS AND
DAYS DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS
THE CITY COLrNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HERFRY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings: That the Temecula City Council hereby wakes the following
findings;
A. That it is the mission of the City of Temecula to maintain a safe, clean,
healthy and orderly community;
B. That it is necessary to re-examine the regulations relating to the days and
times in which construction activity is undertaken;
C. That it is necessary, pending conduct of such study and enactment of
regulations based thereon, that medifications to Section G (1 .), of Riverside County Ordinance
No. 457.73 be imposed pending the completion of such study;
D. That if such moratorium were not imposed current regulations may
compromise the public health, safety, welfare and quality of life.
SECTION 2. That notwithstanding any provision of the City of Temecula Ordinance
No. 90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, during
such time as this ordinance is in full force and effect, no person shall engage in or conduct
construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter (1/4) of a mile of an
occupied residence, between the hours of 6:30 P.M. and 6:30 A.M., Monday through Friday
and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and
6:30 P.M., on Saturday. Further, no construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and
nationally recognized holidays. Public Works projects of any federal, state or local entity or
emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance. Residents
working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities
on Sundays and holidays but must comply with the hourly restrictions set forth for Saturday
when working on Sundays and holidays. The City Council may, by formal action, exempt
projects from the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word
or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason held to be invalid, or unconstitutional by a court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have
adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion
thereof regardless of whether such other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or
portion thereof regardless of whether such other section, be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. This is an urgency ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 36934 and
36937(b) and shall take effect upon its adoption. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency
ordinance because the same is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace,
health or safety. The facts constituting the urgency are set forth in Section 1 and in that
uncontrolled periods when construction activity may currently be undertaken may impact
negatively on the quality of urban life and therefore this ordinance shall be effective immediately
upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this __th day of
,1994.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberrs, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALII~ORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMF_,CULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temeeula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 94-25 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of August, 1994 and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of
September, 1994, by the following vote:
CO~CILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
CO~C~MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Otds\94-25 3
ITEM 16
ORDINANCE NO. 9428
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 10,36 TO THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE
REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF
WAY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF 'rP_AVlECULA DOES I-IF~.RY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
as follows:
Chapter 10.36 is hereby added to the Temecula Municil~l Cede to read
CHAFFER 10,36
REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY
10,36,010
10,36,020,
10,36.030,
10.36,040,
10,36,050,
10.36.060,
10,36.070,
10,36,080,
10.36,090,
10.36.100,
10.36,110,
10,36,120,
PURPOSES AND INTENT.
DEFINITIONS.
REGULATIONS, I~EqTRICTIONS, AND PROCEDURES
I~EL&TING TO NEWSRACKS.
NEWSRACK PERMITS,
PROHIBITION OF NEWSRACKS ON ROADWAYS,
DANGEROUS CONDITIONS OR OBSTRUCTIONS,
STANDARDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALI.ATION.
STANDARDS OF MATERIALS SOLD,
INFORMATION REQUI~Er},
NEWSRACKS IN VIOLATION OF THE REGULATIONS OF
THIS CHAPTER,
APPEALS,
RESTRICTION OF DISPLAYED HARMFUL MATTER TO
MINORS,
10.36.010 PURPOSES AND INTENT. The City Council of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. It is the purpose and intent of this Chapter to provide for a reasonable
and uniform regulation of newsracks in the City of Temecula. The uncontrolled placement
and maintenance of newsracks on the public right-of-way unreasonably interferes with and
obstructs the public's use of such rights-of-way and such obstruction of the free use of
Orda\94-28 -1-
property interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property by the entire
community.
B. The prolifera~on of newsracks on public rights-of-way to display words
and pictorial material describing and depicting explicit sexual conduct and nudity, exposes
children, minors and unwilling adults to such material, unreasonably interferes with the
public's use of such right-of-ways, and constitutes unwarranted invasions of individual
privacy.
C. The Temecula General Plan policies and programs emphasize the
importance of maintaining the aesthetic quality of the City and preventing the uncontrolled
proliferation of signs and structures throughout the City. The regulations set forth in this
Chapter are appropriate and reasonable regulations to protect the aesthetic values of the City
and the health and safety of persons in the City of Temecula. The placement of newsracks
which do not comply with the regulations set forth in this Chapter is detrimental to the
aesthetic values of the City and the health and safety of the persons within the City.
D. It is recognized that the use of rights-of-way is historically associated
with the sale and distribution of newspapers and publications and that access to these areas
for such purposes should not be absolutely denied.
E. The protection and preservation of public health, safety and welfare
requires that certain distance and height restrictions be placed on newsracks to insure the
safety of pedestrians using the sidewalks and the safe flow of traffic on streets.
F. Government agencies and utilities receive numerous claims from
persons alleging injury due to the improper placement and maintenance of objects in the
public right of way, such as power poles, light standards, signals, signal control boxes,
newsracks, trees and similar objects. It is therefore necessary for the City to obtain some
protection for such claims from private parties who will place objects in the public right of
way.
G. It is the purpose and intent of the special regulations for materials
harmful to minors and sexual explicit material to protect and preserve the public health,
safety and welfare of citizenry, especially minors, and that special regulation of the time,
place and manner of the display of harmful matter and sexually explicit materials in
newsracks is necessary. In adopting the regulations under this chapter, it is recognized that
the display of harmful matter or sexually explicit materials in newsracks will cause the
exposure of minors to adult material which, because of their immaturity, may adversely
affect them. In addition, it is recognized that many persons are offended by the public
display of certain sexual material. Special regulation of these uses is necessary to address
these concerns.
H. It is not the intent of the City Council of Temecula under this
Ordinance nor any provision thereof to condone nor legitimize the distribution of obscene,
harmrid to minors or sexually explicit materials, and the Council recognizes that state law
prohibits the distribution of obscene and harmful to minors materials and expects and
encourages law enforcement officials to enforce State Obscenity Statutes against such illegal
activities in Temecula.
I. It is not the intent of this Ordinance to suppress any speech activities
prote~ted by the First Amendment, but to enact a content neutral ordinance and to balance
prorectal activities with the n__~_ to protect the substantial governmental interests described
above.
10.36.020. DEFINITIONS. The foliowing words, terms and phrases, when used in
this division, shall have the meaning ascn'ibed to them in this section, unless it is apparent
from the context that a different meaning is intended.
A, 'Newsrack" shall mean any self-service or coin-operated box,
container, storage unit, or other dispenser installed, used, or maintained for the display or
sale of any written or printed material, including, but not limited to, newspapers, news
periodicals, magazines, books, pictures, photographs, and records.
B. 'Street* shall mean all that area dedicated to public use for public street
purposes and shall include, but not be limited to, roadways, parkways, alleys, and sidewalks.
C. *Parkway' shall mean that area between the sidewalk and the curb of
any street and, where there is no sidewalk, that area between the edge of the roadway and
the property line adjacent thereto. *Parkway" also shall include any area within a roadway
which area is not a sidewaik and is not open to vehicular traffic.
D. "Custodian' shall mean a person who has the responsibility of placing,
servicing, or maintaining a newsra~k by depositing in and/or removing material from such
newsrack and/or by collecting money from such newsrack.
E. 'Harmful Matter* shall mean matter taken as a whole, the predominant
appeal of which to the average person, applying contemporary statewide standards, is a
prurient interest, meaning a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion, and is
patently offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect
to what is suitable material for minors, and lacks significant literary, artistic, political,
educational, or scientific value for minors as described in California Penal Code Section 313,
or its successor Sections.
0t~.\94-28
A. The name, address and telephone number of the person owning the
newsracks and the name, address, and telephone number of the custodian therefor.
B. The location of newstacks being placed within the City.
C. A written statement whereby the person who will place or maintain
such newsrack on a public street agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
officers, agents, or employees from any loss or liability or damages, including expenses and
costs, for bodily or personal injury and for property damage or other damages sustained by
any person as a result of the installation, use, or maintenance of such newsrack within the
City.
D. A certificate of insurance establishing that there is in force and effect
an insurance policy for the permittee which will remain in force during the time such
newsrack is allowed to remain on public property, which policy shall be of public liability
insurance against liability for the death of, or injuries to, persons or damages to property
arising out of accidents attributable to the newsracks on City property. The mount of the
coverage required shall be established by resolution of the City Council and a certificate of
insurance shall not be required unless and until such a resolution is in full force and effect.
The policy of insurance so provided shall contain a contractual liability endorsement covering
the liability assumed by the permittee by the terms of his permit and shall contain a provision
that such policy may not be cancelled except after thirty (30) days' notice in writing given to
the City.
10.36.050. PROHIBITION OF NEWSRACKS ON ROADWAYS. No person
shall instail, use, or maintain any newsrack which projects onto, into, or over any part of the
roadway of any public street or which rests, wholly or in part, upon any portion of the
roadway of any public street.
10.36.060. DANGEROUS CONDITIONS OR OBSTRUCTIONS. Subject to the
specific provision of Section 10.36.070, no person shall install, use, or maintain any
newsrack which, in whole or in part, rests upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway
when such installation, use, or maintenance endangers the safety of persons on property, or
when such area or location is used for public utility purposes, public transportation purpose,
or governmental use, or when such newsrack interferes with or impedes the flow of
pedestrian or vehicular traffic, including the ingress into or egress from any legally parked or
stopped vehicle any residence or place of business, or the use of poles, posts, traffic signs or
signals, hydrants, mailboxes, or other objects permitted at or near such location.
10.36.070. STANDARDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION. Any
newsrack which rests, in whole or in part, upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway
shall comply with the following standards:
A. No newsrack shall exc_,~'d_ five (5') feet in height as measured from the
sidewalk to the highest point on the newsrack, thirty (30") inches in width, or two (2') feet
in depth.
B Newsracks shall only be placed near a curb or adjacent to a wall or
building. Such newsracks placed near the curb shall be parallel thereto and shall be no less
than twenty-four (24') inches from the face of the curb. Newsracks placed adjacent to the
wall of a building shall be placed parallel to such wall and shall be not more than six (6")
inches from the wall. No such newsrack shall be placed or maintained on the sidewalk or
parkway opposite another newsrack or group of newsracks nor in such a manner that
prevents pedestrians from passing freely and without obsWuction along any sidewalk or
through any marked or unmarked crosswalk-
C. No publication vending shall be chained, bolted, or otherwise attached
to property not owned by the owner of such newsrack or to any permanently fixed object
unless the custodian of such newsrack shall have obtained the written permission of the
owner of the property or object to which the newsrack is affixed.
D. Newsracks may be placed next to each other; provided, however, no
group of such newsracks shall extend more than eight (8) lineal feet along a curb or wall,
and a space of no less than three {3') feet shall separate each such group of newsracks,
provided the newsracks are otherwise in compliance with the provisions of this ordinance.
E. Such newsracks may be chained or otherwise attached to one another;
provided, however, no more than three (3) such newsracks may be joined Wgether in this
manner, and a space of no less than three (3') feet of clear space shall separate each group of
three (3) or less such newsracks so attached, pwvided the newsracks are otherwise in
compliance with the pwvisions of this ordinance.
F. No such newsrack or group of such newsracks permitted by the
provisions of Subsection E. of this section shall weigh, in the aggregate, in excess of 125
pounds when empty.
G. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, no newsrack shall
be placed, installed, used, or maintained:
1. Within five (5') feet of any marked crosswalk;
Within fifteen (15') feet of the curb remm of any unmarked
crosswalk;
3. Within five (5') feet of any fife hydrant, fire call box, police
call box, or any other emergency facility or structure;
0~h\94-28
4. Within five (5') feet of any driveway;
5. Within five (5') feet ahead of or twenty-five (25') feet to the
rear of any sign marking a designated bus stop;
6. Within six (6') feet of any bus bench;
7. In any location ff the pheement of the newsrack reduces the
cross space or the passageway of pedestrians to less than six (6') feet;
8. Within three (3') feet of any area improved with hwn, flowers,
shrubs, or trees, or within three (3') feet of any display window or any building abutting the
sidewalk or parkway, or in such a manner as to impede or interfere with the reasonable use
of such window for display purposes; or
H. No such newsrack shall be used for advertising signs or publicity
purposes except relating to the display, sale, or purchase of the publications sold therein.
I. Each such newsrack shall be maintained in a clean and neat condition
and in good repair at all times.
J. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, if the Chief Building
Official finds that the location of a newsrack, in accordance with the standards set forth in
this Section, will create or allow a condition pwhibited by any other section of this Chapter
or will otherwise endanger the public health or safety, the Chief Building Official may
prohibit such location of the newsrack or may allow the location of the newsrack in a manner
deviating from, or at variance with, the standards provided in this Section, subject to such
tens, conditions, and regulations as the Chief Building Official may deem necessary to
protect the public peace, health, safety, and welfare and to carry out the purposes and int.~nt
of this Chapter.
Such finding may be made by the Chief Building Official at any
time.
2. If such finding is made prior to the issuance of a permit, the
finding shall be made by the Director of Public Works shall be made a pan of the permit at
the time of its issuance.
3. If the finding is made subsequent to the issuance of a permit, a
written notice of the finding of the Chief Building Official shall be given to the owner or
custodian of such newsrack with the direction that there shall be compliance with the findings
of the Chief Building Official within ten (10) business days after the date of mailing such
notice.
0rd~\94-28 -7-
10.36.080. STANDARDS OF MATERIALS SOLD. No publication offered for
sale from any newsrack placed or installed in, maintained on, or relocated to any public
sidewalk or parkway, shall be displayed or exhibit in any manner which exposes to public
view from the street any of the following:
A. Any statements or words describing explicit sexual acts, sexual organs
or excrement, where such statement or words have as their purpose or effect, sexual arousal,
gratification or affront.
B. Any picture or illustration of genitals, pubic hair, perineums, anuses,
or anal regions of any person, or any picture or illustration which has as its purpose or
effect, sexual arousal, gratification or affront.
C. Any picture or illustration depicting explicit sexual acts, where such
picture or illustration has as its purpose or effect, sexual arousal, gratification or affront.
Explicit sexual acts means depictions of sexual intercourse, oral copulation, bestiality,
sadism, masochism or excretory functions in conjunction with sexual activity, masturbation
or lewd exhibition of the genitals, where any of the above conduct is depicted or described as
being performed alone or between members of the same or opposite sex or between humans
and animals or other acts of sexual arousal involving any physical contact with a person's
genital, pubic region, pubic hair, perineum, anus or anal region.
D. For purposes of this section, no publication shall be considered
displayed or exhibited if the newsrack in which it is placed is covered on all sides, except for
a one (1') inch wide vertical opening for the purpose of indicating the number of remaining
publications, by opaque material preventing exposure to public view from the street.
10.36.090. INFORMATION REQUIllEr}. Every person or custodian who places
or maintains a newsrack on a public sidewalk or parkway within the City shall have his or
her or its name, address, and telephone number affixed thereto in a place where such
information may be easily seen and shall comply fully with the provisions of Section 17570
of the Business and Professions Code of the State as it exists on the effective date of the
ordinance adopting this Chapter, or as it may be hereafter amended.
10.36.100. NEWSRACKS IN VIOLATION OF THE REGULATIONS OF THIS
CHAPTER. Upon a determination by the Chief Building Official that a newsrack has been
installed, used, or maintained in violation of the provisions of this Chapter, an order to
correct the condition will be issued to the owner and custodian of such newsrack. Such
order shall be attached to said newsrack and confirmed by mailing a copy of such order to
the owner and custodian by certified mail, return receipt requested to the address stated in
the permit application. The order shall be effective upon receipt of the order by the owner
or custodian, or three (3) business days following deposit of the order in the U.S. Mail,
whichever occurs first. The order shall specifically describe the offending condition and
describe the actions necessary to correct it. Both the owner and the custodian shall be
Orda~94-28 -8-
responsible for compliance with the order. If the newsrack is in such a condition or is
placed so as to constitute an immediate danger to pedestrians, motorists or other persons, the
Chief Building Official may move the newsrack or take such other action, including removal,
so as to alleviate the dangerous condition. Unless the determination of the Chid Building
Official is appealed, failure to properly correct the offending condition within ten (I0)
business days after the date of mailing of the order shall result in the offending newsrack
being removed and processed as unclaimed property under the applicable pwvisions of hw
relating thereto. If the offending newsrack is not properly identified as to the owner
pursuant to the pwvisions of this Chapter, such newsrock may be removed immediately and
processed as unclaimed property under the applicable provisions of hw. The Chief Building
Inspector shall cause an inspection to be made of the corrected condition or of the newsrack
reinstailed after removal pursuant to the pwvisions of this section. The owner or custodian
of such newsrack shall be charged an inspection fee for each such newsrack so inspected,
which charge shall be in addition to all the other fees and charges required by hw. The
amount of the inspection fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council.
10.36.110. APPEALS. Any person or entity aggrieved by any finding, notice, or
action taken pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter may appeal, and shall be apprised of
his right to appeal, to the City Manager. The City Manager's decision on the appeal shall be
final. An appeal shall be perfected within three (3) business days after the receipt of the
notice of any protested decision or action by filing with the office of the Chief Building
Inspector a letter of appeal briefly stating the basis for such appeal. The hearing shall be
held on a date no more than ten (10) days after the receipt of the letter of appeal. The
appellant shall be given at least five (5) days' notice of the time and place of the hearing.
The City Manager shall give the appellant, and any other interested party, a reasonable
opportunity to be heard in order to show cause why the determination of the Chief Building
Official should not be upheld. In all such cases, the burden of proof shall be upon the
appellant to show that there was no substantial evidence to support the action proposed to be
taken by the Chief Building Official. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Manager
shall make a final and conclusive determination in writing and the owner or custodian shall
have ten (10) business days after the date of the determination of the appeal to comply with
the order of the City Manager.
10.36.120. RESTRICTION OF DISPLAYED HARMFIlL MATFER TO
MINORS. Any person who knowingly displays, or causes to be displayed, harmful matter
as defined in this Chapter in any newsrack which is located on a public sidewalk, or any
other public place from which minors are not excluded, is guilty of a misdemeanor, unless
such person places what is commonly known as blinder racks in front of the material, so that
the lower two-thirds of the material is not exposed to view and so that no harmful matter is
exposed to public view.
OrdsX94-28 -9-
Section 2. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are
severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence,
paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall
cause the same to be published in the manner required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED this llth day of October, 1994.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
OrdJ\94-28 -10-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, JUNE S. GI~F~FK, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 94-28 was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at
a regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of September, 1994. That thereafter,
said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular m~eting of the City Council on the
llth day of October, 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Otds~94-28 -11-
ITEM 17
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
October 11, 1994
Specific Plan 263 (Regional Center) and Change of Zone 5589
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO
ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO
ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE
CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD
AND WINCHESTER ROAD
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-___
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION
CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING THE
ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY
AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
R:',STAFFRPT~63SP.CC2 10/4/94 sail
Introduce and ready by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 263 (REGIONAL CENTER) LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD
AND WINCHESTER ROAD
Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 263 PROPOSING A
1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE, 810,000
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000
SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND
WINCHESTER ROADS
BACKGROUND
Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were approved unanimously by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on July 18, 1994. The Specific Plan and Change of Zone
appeared on the City Council agenda of September 13, 1994. At that meeting, the Council
continued these items to the October 11, 1994 City Council Meeting to allow the applicant
additional time to work out infrastructure timing issues with City staff. As of the date of this
report, this meeting had not yet occurred. Therefore, an oral report concerning the outcome
of the proposed meeting will be presented at the Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
1. City Council Staff Report, September 13, 1994- Page 3
R:',STAFFP, PT~63SP.CC2 10/4/~4 sdl 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
R:~STAFFRP'I'~263SP.CC2 10/4/94
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor Ron Roberrs
Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone
Councilmember Pat Birdsall
Councilmember Sal Munoz
Councilmember Ron Parks
Gary Thornhill; Director of Planning7~2'~
September 7, 1994
Urban Core Projects
The Urban Core Projects Cl'he Regional Center and Campos Verdes Specific Plans) have been
scheduled for the September 13, 1994 City Council Meeting. Due to the cornpie,city of these
projects, they were forwarded to you, under separate cover, on September 2, 1994. Please
retain all documents until after a final decision on the projects has been made.
As always, should you have questions regarding these projects, please do not hesitate to'call me.
R:\DEBBIE\CAMiaOS.MEM 916194
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY AT'FOR.__. ;RO~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGEF~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
September 13, 1994
Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center) and Change of Zone No. 5589
Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO
ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO
ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE
CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD
AND WINCHESTER ROAD
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-.__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION
CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING THE
ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-2(') (HEAVY
AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN N0. 263 (REGIONAL CENTER) LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ
ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 263 PROPOSING A
1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE. 810,000
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\ INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAl 298,000
SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND
WINCHESTER ROADS.
BACKGROUND
Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were approved unanimously by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on July 18, 1994. The Specific Plan is proposing a 1,375,000
square foot commercial core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi-
Family Residential and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial. The Specific
Plan is accompanied by Change of Zone 5589 which is a proposal to change the zoning on
the property from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum lot
size) to SP (Specific Plan),
DISCUSSION
Specific Plan 263 is located in an area which has a General Plan Overlay designation of Village
Center. Under the General Plan, the intent of the Village Center Overlay is to develop centers
which will help to provide a sense of place, as well as, a focal point for activity. These Village
Centers are intended to contain a concentration and mixture of compatible uses including
retail, housing, and institutional. Each Village Center should have design guidelines and
development standards. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the General Plan Overlay
designation of Village Center. The applicant has provided both language and illustratives that
will facilitate implementation of the Village Center concept.
The applicant has worked with the Public Works staff on the timing and funding of both on-
site and off-site traffic improvements. The Public Works staff has conditioned the project
appropriately.
2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
ATTACHM'ENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 94-
AN ORDINANCE OF TIlE CITY COUNCIl. OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CAI .IFORNIA, AMENDING TItF.
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN TItF. CHANGE
OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF
ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING ~ ZONE PROM R-R
(RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY
AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC
PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT TltF. SO~AST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND
WINCltF. STER ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIl. OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planamg Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law
of the State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The application land use
district as shown on the attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official
Land Use map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as many be amended
hereafter from time to thne by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of
Temecula Official Zoning Map is amended by placing in affect the zone or zones as described
in Change of Zone No. 5589 and in the above title~ and as shown on zoning map attached hereto
and incorporated herein.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this
Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and
against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 5
Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOFrED this 13th day of September,
1994.
RON ROBERTS
MAYOR
ATFEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CAI,IFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula. California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 9 __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at
a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of , 199__, and that
thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , by the foilowing roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMF~MBERS
JUNE S. Gi~F,I:~K
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
/
/
CASE NO. - CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589
EXHIBIT - A
t~ITY COUNCIL DATE - SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
ZONING: SPECIFIC PLAN
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 911194 ktb
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 94-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 263 (R~GIONAL
CEN'IT_,R) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WIN( :HESTER
ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The official zoning map of the City of Temecula, entitled "Temecula/Rancho
California Area" as adopted pursuant to Section 34 of Ordinance No. 90-()4, is amended as
shown which map is made a part of this ordinance.
Section 2. The City of Temecula hereby adopts those Land Use standards set forth in
that certain document entitled "Temecula Regional Center Draft Specific Plan/FIR" dated
February 1, 1994 on file in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full lext of this Ordinance shah
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prio~ to the adoption of this
Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Counci:members voting for and
against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September,
1994.
ATrk~ST:
RON ROBERTS
MAYOR
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TF_,MECULA
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 9 __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at
a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of , 199__, and that
thereafter. said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , by the tbllowing roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COLINCH .MEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S GREEK
CIT, CLERK
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/'7/94 klb 10
ATTACHNIENTNO. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIYIC PLAN 263
PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\
INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MU'LT1. FA1Vf~,Y
RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE
FEET OF RETAIl, CO1VI1MRRCIAL LOCATED AT THE
SOUTFrEAST CORNER OF ~ INTERSECTION' OF YNEZ
AND WINCI:rFSTER ROADS.
WHEREAS, KRDC, Inc. fried Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted
by reference;
WfIEREAS, said Specific Plan application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Specific Plan on July 18, 1994
at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission heating, the Commission
recommended approval of said Specific Plan;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted public hearings pertaining to said Specific Plan
on September 13, 1994, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition to said Specific Plan;
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commasstun proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Specific Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF I'HE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin2s. The City Council in approving the proposed Specific Plan, makes
the following fmdings:
1. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan
designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public
Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 11
2. Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surround;rig land uses of Commercial
to the north (Costco) and west (Palm Plaza).
3. Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property,
because it does not represent a significant change to the pla.nne land use of the area.
Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan. and was certified by the
City Council July 13, 1993. An Addendum to FF_IR 340 along with a new Mitigation
Monitoring Program have been prepared which will be adopted for this project. No immediate
impacts to the environment will result from the adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from
future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding
Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise,
Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries.
4. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to
this Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian
oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center is intended
to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design which provides for the
incorporation of transit facilities.
5. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental
documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Section 2. Enviromnental Comoliance. Previously certi~,.d Environmental Impact
Report No. 340 analyzed the significant impacts of Specific Plan No. 263 and proposed
mitigation measures to reduce these impacts. Since the circulation mitigation measures have
changed, an Addendum to this FEIR has been prepared which determined no additional impacts
as a result of these changes. With this Addendure, a new Mitigation Monitoring Program will
be adopted.
Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves
Specific Plan No. 263 which is attached as Attachment No. 10, located at the southwest comer
of the intersection of Ynez Road and Winchester Road subject to the foliowing conditions:
A. Attachment No. 5, attached hereto.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
R:\STAFFRPT~263$P.CC 9/7/94 klb '12
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13m day of September. 1994.
RON ROBF_.RTS
MAYOR
A'rrF_,ST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HF~REBY 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
, 199__ by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY CI
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
R:\STAFFRPl'X263SP,CC 9r'//o,4 Idb 14
ATTACHMENTNO. 4
RF~OLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF T~F. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADOPTING ~ ADDENDUM TO FF,1R
NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340
INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM AND DETERlVIINING NO ADDITIONAL
IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE
CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ~ INTERSECTION OF
YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD
WHEREAS, KRDC fried a request for an Addendum to FEIR No. 340 in accordance
with Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Addendum application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to said
Addendum on September 13, 1994, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition to said Addendum; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF TE1VIECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following
fmdings:
A. The City Council in approving the proposed Addendum, makes the following
findings, to wit:
1. The Addendum was prepared since the proposed project does not change
any of the impacts identified in FE.J.R No. 340.
2. None of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines
calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
3. Only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make FEIR No.
340 adequate under CEQA.
4. The changes to the EIR made by the Addendure do not raise important new
issues about the significant effects on the environment.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 15
Section 2. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby adopts the
Addendum for FEIR No.340 and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Specific Plan
No.263 and Change of Zone No. 5589 which provisions are set forth in that certain document
entitled "Addendum EIR/2 Regional Center Specific Plan," on f~e in the office of the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 13th day of September, 1994.
RON ROBERTS
MAYOR
A'i'fJ~T:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was cluly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of
September, 1994 by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
JUNE S. GI~gK
CITY CToF-P.K
R:\STAFFRP~263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb I 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\STAFFRIPT\263SP. CC 9r7/94 LIb 17
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center)
Project Description: A Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial
core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi-Family Residential,
and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial with an accompanying
Change of Zone request changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20
(Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum) to SP (Specific Plan).
Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046and 047,921-090-005,006 and 007
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Conditions
The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City
of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning
Specific Plan No. 263, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly
notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify
the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the
defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City of Temecula.
All development within this site shall be in accordance with thr requirements of all City
ordinances, except as expressly modified herein, and State laws, and shall conform
with the approved Specific Plan. Regulations or procedures Pot covered by the Specific
Plan or appurtenant documents shall be subject to the City oldinances in effect at the
time entitlement is required.
This project and all subsequent projects within the site shall comply with all mitigation
measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the adopted Mitiga+ion Monitoring Program.
10.
Prior to issuance of grading permits, approval of development permits, recordation of
final maps, issuance of building permits and issuance of occupancy permits for any
subsequent projects or activities within the site the applicant/developer shall
demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program within EIR No. 348 have been satisfied for the stage
of development that permits are being issued for.
tl.
Prior to the City Council hearing, Planning Area 3 shall be changed to Business Park
and the appropriate zoning and development standards shall be established for Business
Park designation.
R:\STAFFRPT\265SP.CC 9RI94 kib 18
12.
The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ), which includes the. Vransportation Corridor,
along Winchester Road shall be thirty-seven feet (37') in width and shall be shown on
all subsequent development proposal site plans and tentative maps.
13.
Prior to approval of any map or development proposal within ~-ach Planning Area within
the Specific Plan, a detailed design manual for each Plann~n,c: Area shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission.
14.
Within thirty (30) days of the final approval of the project by City Council, the Specific
Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report shall be sdbmitted to the Planning
Department in final form for review and approval. The fiqal form shall include all
conditions of approval and all modifications made by the Planing Commission and City
Council. A master print copy (8 '~" X 11 ") and four (4) copies of the documents shall
be submitted.
15.
Prior to approval of any development plans, all subsequent projects shall receive
appropriate clearances, conditions and approvals from all agencies with jurisdiction on
project review. These agencies shall be determined by the Planning Director and the
City Engineer.
16.
The developer or the developer's successor-in-interest sl.all be responsible for
maintaining the undeveloped portion of the site including weed abatement and litter
removal.
17.
The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City eT Temecula to retain the
services of a qualified consultant to administer and implement, ~e Mitigation Monitoring
Program approved for this project as part of Environmental Impact Report 340 in
compliance with Assembly Bill 3180.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
18.
Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for residential units thc projcct, the project
applicant shall enter into a binding mitigation agreement the with the Temecula Valley
Unified School District to ensure the mitigation of the new students generated by this
Specific Plan. (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994)
19.
If any of these conditions of approval differ from the commitment by the Developer
made in the Specific Plan text or map exhibits or any other documents, the conditions
enumerated herein shall take precedence.
20.
Any proposed amendment to this Specific Plan shall require public hearings and review
by the Planning Commission and City Council, and/or shall be reviewed in accordance
with such rules and regulations for the review of Specific Plan Amendments as may
have been adopted by the City and which are in effect at the time of any proposed
amendment is submitted.
21. The developer shall satisfy all the Quimby Act requirements ~}r the project.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
22.
All utility systems such as electric, including those which provide direct service to the
project site and/or currently exist along public rights-of-ways adjacent to the site
(except electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater), gas, telephone. water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be placed underground, with easements provided a. required, and designed
and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utih-y provider.
23.
Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, as deemed nece sary by the Department
of Public Works, the Developer shall consult with the State of California Department
of Fish and Game, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
to determine if permits or approvals are necessary from such agencies for any action
contemplated by this proposal. Such consultation shall be in writing, and col~ies of said
correspondence, including responses from agencies, shall be submitted to the City.
Where appropriate, the terms, conditions, and recommendations of the noted agencies
shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval into the areas of development.
24.
Prior to issuance of building permits for the various phases of development, the
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements ano public facilities imposed
upon the property or project, including that for traffic and pul~lic facility mitigation as
required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be
in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public
facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which
the Developer requests its building permit for the project o~ any phase thereof, the
Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment Jf Public Facility Fee.
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure
payment of the Public Facility Fee. The amount of the bond snail be $2.00 per square
foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands ti,at said agreement may
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions of this condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
25.
Landscaping and permanent irrigation facilities shall be installed with street
improvements. Perimeter walls if constructed shall be treated with graffiti-resistant
coating and shall be installed adjacent to street improvemen.:s within each phase.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP,CC 9,r7/94 klb 20
26.
A phasing plan addressing the schedule of necessary infrascn~cture requirements shall
be approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director prior to
approval cf cn~' for each subsequent development applicatiof~. (Amended by Planning
Commission on July 18, 1994)
CIRCULATION
27.
As a condition of approval for any subsequent development application associated with
this Specific Plan, the Developer must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip
Reduction Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
28.
Adequate primary and secondary access shall be provided for each phase of
development as approved by the Department of Public Works. Access to office and
commercial areas shall be reviewed by the Department of Public Works at the time of
submittal of individual development applications.
29.
All street sections shall correspond with Typical Roadway Cross Sections and
requirements of the Circulation Element of City's General Plan, City ordinances and
standards.
30.
All intersections intervals shall comply with City and 3altrans standards and
requirements. Accesses shown from Winchester Road to the site are conditional upon
Caltrans' approval. Approval for accesses not currently, shown on the City's
Memorandum of Understanding with Caltrans will be reeuired prior to subsequent
discretionary approvals or any permits being issued by the C;ty.
31.
The Developer shall provide bus bays and shelters within the Specific Plan. Location
and number of bus bays shall be subject to approval of the City and Riverside
Transportation Agency (RTA). If required additional rights-of-way dedications
associated with bus bays shall be provided by the Developer
32.
Necessary improvements have been/will be conditioned based on the project traffic
studies and the conceptual phasing plan shown on Section III. A. 7. of the Specific
Plan. Any substantive rephasing of the development must be approved by the Planning
Commission through a rephasing application. A rephasing of the development
considered to be minor or in substantial conformance with tte construction phasing
plan approved with the adoption of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, as
determined by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director, may be
approved administratively through applicable City procedures. Prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits within any phase, all on and offsite improvements as referred to in
the Traffic Reports and subsequent addenda along with additional requirements set
heroin, or as set by conditions on individual tracts, must be constructed and/or bonded
as required by the Department of Public Works.
33.
Ensuing Traffic Reports, analyzing traffic impacts assaciated with subsequent
development stages of the Specific Plan, shall be submitted to, identify implementation
and timing of the necessary improvements to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts.
34. The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements shall be completed prior to
issuance of any occupancy:
35.
Winchester Road parkway improvements, adjacent to Phase One, including
sidewalks, landscaping, and street lights shall be completed by the Developer.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer is
responsible to bond for the traffic signals at the project's accesses from
Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Winchester Road, as required, including the
associated street improvements, based on traffic ssgnal warrants analysis
relative to subsequent development applications.
Dedicate all necessary right-of-way for the constructran of the Winchester Road
overpass at Interstate 15 (I-15) and the interchange ramps along with
associated additional right-of-way necessary for the widening and improvements
to Winchester Road from Ynez Road to the interchange, The Developer, the
City, and CFD 88-12 shall enter into an agreement that provides for the
reimbursement of acquisition cost of the required right-of-way. (Added by
Planning Commission on July 18, 1994)
A reimbursement agreement shall be executed between the Developer and the
City to reimburse the City the cost of the existing improvements along
Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road,
The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements sh~ll be completed prior to
issuance of occupancy for any development above a cumular_i~e total of 750,000 SF.
The Developer shall support the Community Facilities District (CFD) 88-12
supplemental bond sales necessary for the construction of Overland Drive, from
Ynez Road to Jefferson Avenue (including the I-15 overpass), in accordance
with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying
Overland Drive as a Secondary Highway with 88 foo, full width right-of-way,
and including the traffic signals at tl~e intersections of Overland Drive and Ynez
Road, Jefferson Avenue, and Margarita Road.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit Developer shall
bond for the improvements to Margarita Road, from Solana Way to Winchester
Road, including a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance with
the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Margarita
Road as an Arterial Highway with 110 foot full width right-of-way with a
reimbursement agreement.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer shall
bond for full street improvements to Overland Drive, from Margarita Road to
Ynez Road, including a 12 foot wide raised landscape~ median, in accordance
with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying
Overland Drive as a Major Highway with 100 foot full width right-of-way with
a reimbursement agreement.
R:\STAFFRPT\263$P.CC 9R/94 Idb 22
36.
Drainage
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
Water
45.
The Developer is responsible to bond for prlcr and constru ;t ~he traffic signals at the
intersections listed below. The Developer shall analyze the traffic signal warrants and
shall install the traffic signals accordingly_and/or as directe,~ by the Department of
Public Works at the following intersections: (Amended by Planning Commission on July
18, 1994)
Margarita Road and Winchester Road (upgrade the existing signal)
Margarita Road and North General Kearny Road
Drainage and flood control facilities shall be provided in accordance with the
requirements of the City and/or Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (RCFC&WCD).
Prior to approval of any subsequent development applications, the Developer shall
submit the master drainage plan to the City and RCFC&WCD to review the adequacy
of the proposed and existing downstream drainage facilities.
Drainage facilities within each phase shall be constructed immediately after the
completion of the site grading and prior to or concurrently with the initial site
development within that phase.
All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry 1 O0 year stclm flows, subject to the
approval of the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable.
The Developer shall construct the proposed on and 3ffsite drainage facility
improvements and the offsite detention basin provision as rec,~mmended in the Specific
Plan and Drainage Study documents and/or as directed by the Department of Public
Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable.
As required by the Department of Public Works, additional Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports shall be submitted with subsequent development applications to study the
drainage impacts and analyze necessary measures to mitigate the runoff created as
part of the development of this project.
The DeVeloper shall accept and properly dispose of all off-sit=~, drainage flowing onto
or through the site.
The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration
of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion ot ~low. Protection shall be
provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, inc,!uding enlarging existing
facilities or by securing drainage easements.
and Sewer
Water and sewer facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and
specifications of the City, Rancho California Water District (RCWD), and Eastern
Municipal Water District (EMWD). Such requirements shall be applied at the subdivision
or plot plan stages of the development.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 917194 klb 23
46.
Prior to the approval of subsequent development applicatians, the Developer shall
submit the master water plan to RCWD to check for adequacy of the proposed water
facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the water system from
RCWD.
47.
Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall
submit the master sewer plan to EMWD to check for adequacy of the proposed sewer
facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the sewer system from
EMWD.
48.
Prior to the recordation of any tract map, commercial parcel map, or approval of any
plot plan application, the Developer shall provide the City w~tl evidence that adequate
wastewater treatment facilities are being provided to meet the needs of the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan development.
Grading
49.
No grading shall be permitted for any development area prior to tentative map or plot
plan approval and issuance of grading permits for the specific area of development
unless approved by the Director of Public Works for street purposes, (Added by
Planning Commission on July 18, 1994)
50.
Grading plans and operations shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,
City Grading Standards, the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report,
or any subsequent reports prepared for the project, the conditions of the grading
permit, and accepted grading construction practices and t,'~, recommendations and
standards specified in the Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
document.
51.
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Erosion Control plans shall be prepared in
conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to aujroval by the Department
of Public Works. The Developer shall post security and Enter into an agreement
guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements.
52.
The Developer shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulated by the State Water Resources Control
Board, and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) implemented by the San
Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board.
53.
Each subsequent application for a phase of development shall include a conceptual
grading plan to indicate at a minimum:
· Preliminary quantity estimates for grading.
Techniques and methods which will be used to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process in compliance with the City
Standards and NPDES requirements.
· Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 917194 klb 24
· Designation of the borrow or stockpile site location TO:' import/export material.
Approximate time frames for development including tl~e identification of areas
which will be graded during the rainy months.
· Hydrology and hydraulic concerns and mitigations.
54.
Major grading activities shall be scheduled during the dry season wherever possible,
or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works.
55.
Soils stabilization, which may include revegetation of gradeO areas, shall occur within
30 days of final grading activities as directed by the Department of Public Works.
56. The site shall be watered during grading operations to contro: dust.
57. Temporary drainage and sediment control devices shall be installed as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
58.
An import/export route shall be submitted to the Departmen~ of Public Works prior to
issuance of any grading permit. The plan shall inctude limitat,on to the duration of the
grading operation and construction activities, a Traffic Cont, ~1 Plan, and a daily time
schedule of operations.
59.
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, a soils reports shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works for review and approval, to address engineering, geologic,
seismic, and soils engineering concerns for each tentative map or commercial parcel
map for each phase of proposed development.
60.
All public streets shall be maintinned and cleaned if necessary on a daily basis during
grading operation and construction actiwties. Cash deposit, letter of credit or posting
of bond to guarantee maintenance of all public rights-of-way affected by the grading
operations and construction activities, shall be posted prio, to issuance of grading
permits.
61.
If subsequent Geotechnical and Soils Reports determine that <,ewatering of the site is
necessary during construction, necessary permits (i.e. in uompliance with NPDES
permit) shall be obtained from appropriate agencies prior to approval of the grading
plans.
Phasing
62.
Construction of the development permitted by the Specific PI Jn, including recordation
of final subdivision maps, may be carried out in stages provided that, adequate
vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each stage of development and
further provided that such development conforms substantially with the intent and
purpose of the Specific Plan Phasing Plan.
63.
Development applications shall be submitted for each planning unit in each phase. Total
acreage and land uses within each phase shall be substantially in accordance with the
specifications of the Specific Plan.
R:XSTAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/1/94 klb 25
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
The Temecula Community Regional Center Specific Plan was originally presented to staff as
a mixed-use commercial development combining retail, office, hotel, .nstitutional, and regional
mall facilities. However, the possibility exists that multi-family residential development could
occur within Planning Area 1. In the event that residential development is approved, the
Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) provides additional co~ ~ditions for the Temecula
Regional Center, as follows:
General Requirements
64.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall satisfy the park land dedication
requirements in accordance with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Upon
determination of the actual park land dedication requirement, the City of Temecula shall
have the final decision of requiring the developer to dedicate land for public park
purposes, or pay the equivalent "in-lieu" fee.
65.
Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets tl~at are adjacent to commercial/industrial
development and multi-family residential developm_ent shall be maintained by a private
property owner's association.
66.
All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space in residential areas shall be
maintained by the individual property owner or an established property owner's
association. (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994)
67.
Class II bike lanes shall be designed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation
Master Plan and constructed in concurrence with the street improvements.
68.
The landscaped medians shall be improved in conformance ~.ith the City of Temecula
Landscape Plan Guidelines and Specifications.
69.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall maintain the ~andscaping and medians
until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD.
70.
Construction of all proposed TCSD maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a
pre-job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to
comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of
these areas into the TCSD maintenance program,
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
71.
All proposed TCSD maintenance areas (medians) shall be identified and offered for
dedication on the final map.
72.
Prior to recordation of the respective final map, constructlot drawings for proposed
landscape medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff.
73.
Prior to recordation of the respective final map, the subdivider shall post security and
enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
74,
Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the
developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format directed by TCSD staff, the most
current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project.
75.
Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the
developer or his assignee shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the
appropriate fees for the dedication of arterial and resident~;~l lights into the TCSD
maintenance program.
R:\STAFFILPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb 27
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
VILLAGE CENTER CONCEPT
R:/STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb 28
TO 198969464?7 P. 82
RSCXONAL CF, NTn
pi.nnln~ Area 1
1. lqanninz Ares .1
Descriptive Stunmary
Az~= 1. as d~piotcd in Figure 12A. con,i_,t~ d 71.9q gxms aczcs. devoted prim,Hly m
~d ~i ~el~ Within ~ p~g m ~ ~ ~ m Of m
While ~in~ining ~m~U~ ~ a ~D~ ~nm~ A ~um Of 3~
m~d-f~ily dwelug mu s~ ~ ~ ~ P~g ~ 1. ~ ~enin~ ~y c~h"r
1) 1%fudure of Uses
It is the intent of the mixed use development in planning Azca I of the Tennccnla
Regiona/Center to allow for a mixture of commercial/ofl=icr-/'u~sdtutioDa] and residential
use~. The rn~xcd use developmcnt is designed to encourage active street fzontages and
a cordonable, human-scaled environn~ent that creates a fully functioning shopping street
complex (i.e., a "IViaiu Str. t,t"). This Main SU'~t will b~ integrated into the overall
mixed use development in Planning Area I and will bc connected by both stree~ and
pedestrian walkways to the planned ~ development in piannlng Arca 2. The ~
S=eet will be an easy and quick walk away from offices and residences in the Temecula
Regional Center, allowing both workers and rcsidenr~ to take advantage of the convenient,
locally available shopping opportunities. A conccptual illu~h*aLive site plan depicting the
Main Sucot concept in Planning Area 1 is shown in Figure 12B. A de~lleA view d the
Main Street is illusLrated in Figure 12C.
Vv"nilc r~ development may be the l~ixmuy 1.rid Use in pl.nnlug ~ l, it is
envisioned that fhi. plauniUg area will also include additional employment opporhmities
such as offices and personal service shops and businessca. hstitudonal and botel uses
may be integrated physically into mixed use strucUucs or constmctezl as ~
buildings.
Residcuthfi uses m,y be integrated into the same structure as non-residendaJ useS.
Residential uses and cntries should constitute not more than 30~ of the gn~nd floor of
any of these buildings. In areas which do not direcdy facc onto the slk~pZng meet(s),
frcestanding rcsiden~al builtl~ngs may be constructed, It is also anticipated that sonme
~ree-smuding residential structures will also be emacd in Planning Area 1.
KI-31
2)
In planning for mixed use development, consideration shall be given to joint use of
parking, common areas, landscaping,
specific types of uses, housing types
and sizes of units, and overall
architectural design.
Planning Area 1 development is
proposed as a logical extension of the
central commercial core activity in
Planning Area 2, and a transition
between Planning Area 2 and the
adjacent residential property to the
east. Institutional uses to be
encouraged within Planning Area 1
include local, state or federal level
services (i.e., postal service, economic
development, social service, library,
museum, etc.), if there is a need or
demand for such uses.
Building Scale and Plannin-° Area
Design
Development in Planning Area
should not resemble a typical
suburban shopping center or strip
commercial plaza. The retail and
office uses in Planning Area 1 may be
arranged in a "U"-shaped
configuration around a public green
similar to traditional public greens, or
in a linear fashion to form a "Main
Street" with shops and offices oriented
directly onto the street.
Internal roadway circulation (which
may be implemented by a perimeter
ring road or other similar roadway
configuration) will be provided around
the Main Street area to facilitate
traffic flow in and through Planning
Area 1. The internal roadway system
will distribute traffic to and from
principal access points on the site
Pedestrian connection to adjacent
Temecula Regional Center uses and
to nearby pedestrian
,systems
parallel parking (optional)
4 - lane capacity (typ.)
Conceptual Internal Roadway
III-35
3)
rather than on nearby arterial streets. This ring road may also connect Planning Area I
with Planning Area 2.
Limited on-street parking may be provided on portions of the internal roadway system,
but in areas where the roadways cross parking areas, no on-street parking shall be
allowed. The primary internal access roadway system will most likely be four lanes in
width. The Main Street, on the other hand, will be limited to two through lanes (one in
each direction) in order to foster a pedestrian scale.
Individual buildings within Planning Area 1 may range in height up to 120 feet, provided
that building setbacks and configurations for all structures in excess of 50 feet in height
shall be determined by the City during Development Plan Review to ensure that adequate
light. access and air is available to adjacent structures. Typically, buildings should
maintain a pedestrian scale adjacent to the shopping street. For example, the portion(s)
of a building that abuts a public street may be two or three stories in height. Additional
building stories could progressively step back as the building height and number of stories
increases. Not only will such architectural design permit light and air access to
surrounding areas and ensure a pedestrian scale near ground level, but the massiveness
of the building will be substantially reduced.
Separate building entrances shall be required for commercial/office/institutional and
residential uses when occupying the same structure; provided that this provision does not
preclude internal connections between residential and non-residential uses.
Intensification
In order for the concept of a "Main Street" to truly funcilon, development of a certain
density and intensity is necessary. Greater intensification of land use in this planning area
provides the opportunity for innovative architectural design and landscaping. The higher
concentrations of people will also increase the feasibility of mass transit to serve the site.
Residential uses will be hmited to free-standing buildings containing single family
attached or multi-family homes or vertically integrated buildings containing residential
units over office and/or commercial uses. Because of the increased residential density in
this area~ it is important that recreational arechilies be provided for residents.
Freestanding residential structures, in particular, should contain recreational facilities such
as spas, swimrmng pools, basketball courts, and weight rooms. These facilities may be
provided within buildings or, if provided outside, may be arranged in interior courtyards
or in walled-in enclosures in interior parking lots. Special consideration should be given
to locating facilities with respect to the noise, activity, and light that they will generate.
III-36
freestanding muhi-f~mily
4)
comme~:isZ~fficcrmsdmdom~
uses (WP) with optional
r~sidential on upper
JIILl,. lJltl,]l
Freestanding Residential Buildings & Vertirdly Intqlrated Bufiding~
(Residential Over Commercial/Office Uses) with Recreational Facilities
The paztSng f~.ilifies should not be the dominant vist/al im-Ze of ~c project. Vas~
expanses of paving for ps~ing, without tt~ visual x~lief of landscaping, am higldy
discouraged. Joint-paridng arrangcmcnts betwccn commercial, of~cc, and inst~e~ffions/
tlse~ al~ ellcou~ged to mi~imiT~_ the primbet of parIcing spaces r~luinXl Io serve thc
development and avoid proliferafion of pazk:mg lots, In -aa;tion, completely scparate
p~rlcing areas should be .~,iv,dded for residences.
Incentives for Innovative Design
Up to 300 mul~-f~mily dwHllngs can be ~ in this plnn'n~ng area to provide housing
oppormuities for employees of the vazious businesses within the Temecula P~gional
Center Specific Plan. Conversely, the pJ~,~ned commercial uses will enable p~oject
residents to do their shopping by focC The mixtur~ of r=,sia~'ntial and non-residential land
uses axe dcsignai to clcacase the traf~ generated by project development.
1/I-37
6)
The pedestrian scale of the project will be enhanced by plazas, courtyards, sidewalk cafes,
public mini-parks, pedestrian easements, and overall project landscaping. Pedestrian
linkages will be provided between uses within Planning Area 1 and between Planning
Area I and the larger retail uses in Planning Area 2.
Retail and service commercial uses could predominate on the f~rst floor of the buildings,
with offices and/or residential uses concentrated on the upper floors or behind the
commercial uses. Vertically-integrated buildings offer the opportunity to provide
affordable housing.
Pedestrian-Oriented Desi~,n
The small size of Planning Area 1 will encourage pedestrian movement between uses,
while de-emphasizing automobile use. Retail uses are encouraged on street level to
provided streetscape contiguity and visual interest for pedestrians. Continuous expanses
of blank walls or sharp unbroken vertical surfaces create an uncomfortable atmosphere
for the pedestrian. The mixed use area should incorporate the following elements of good
pedestrian-oriented design:
Pedestrian Circulation: Link interior parking areas and lots to city streets, city-
wide open spaces (e.g., plazas, mini-parks, pedestrian malls, etc.) and the City's
trait system to facilitate travel by walking, biking, or other non-motorized means.
Building Facades: The design of building facades, particularly those facades that
face public streets, should be architecturally interesting and in scale with the
pedestrian. Storefront windows are encouraged in retail shops and, in most cases,
should begin within 18" to 24" of the pavement. Typically, storefront windows
help to entice customers into stores, stimulate visual interest, create "defensible
space" by enhancing public views of store interiors and streets, and establish a
predictable rhythm for passers-by. The scale and width of each storefront should
be limited to establish an intimate scale that is more conducive to the pedestrian
and cyclist than to the automobile. In general, storefront widths should relate to
a human scale. Where storefronts must be large to accommodate specific uses,
the building facades could be articulated with windows, insets, pillars, columns,
arcades or other decorative architectural features to maintain the overall intimacy
of the shopping street.
Signage: A coordinated signage plan for development can facilitate pedestrian
and vehicular movement throughout the planning area, without "visually
assaulting" the senses. Signage should be designed at a scale that is not
overpowering from the pedestrian's perspective. For example, small signs with a
unique texture, shape, or interesting features can be more effective than large,
massive, or glaring signs. This Temecula Regional Center Zoning Ordinance
III-38
7)
8)
contains comprehensive signage criteria for uses within Planning Area 1 (see
Section II/.C.1. in this Specific Plan).
Streetscape Design: To encourage human activity and movement, streets should
be designed with the pedestrian in mind. Continuity in landscape design,
placement of street furreturn, sitting areas, covered arcades for shelter against the
sun and inclement weather, lighting, and paving patterns all contribute to creating
a rich, functional, and aesthetically pleasing environment for pedestrians.
Pedestrian Plazas: All areas of Planning Area 1, and the Main Street in
particular, should be designed with pedestrian gathering spots and should include
plazas and pocket parks for resting, eating, conversing, and people watching.
Pedestrian plazas that are effectively placed within retail and office districts can
be pleasant spaces for resting or having lunch between shopping trips or errands.
Placement of pedestrian plazas must be carefully planned to assure their most
effective use. For this reason, consideration must be given to the location of
plazas relative to the pedestrian circulation panems, sunlight conditions, wind
patterns, and the selection of building and landscape materials.
Organization of Activities: The most important element in creating viable
pedestrian spaces has little to do with the actual physical design of the space; if
a space is to be conducive to pedestrian activity, them must be opportunities for
pedestrian events and activities. Therefore, efforts to planning and organizing
festivals, events, special sidewalk sales, entertalmment, and cultural displays should
be made to help create desired pedestrian activity. Private marketing efforts
should be encouraged to promote these types of community events.
Signage
This Specific Plan includes a comprehensive signage program for the mixed use
development. The program includes retail commemial entry monumentat. ion, building
identification signage, marquee signage, and directional signage. Although the signage
criteria contained in the Zoning Ordinance in this Specific Plan includes maximum
permitted. sign sizes, the individual sign that identifies a given use should be consistent
with the scale and mass of the building on which it is located or which it identifies.
Specific signage materials should be uniform throughout each individual development
within Planning Area 1.
Transit Alternatives/Options
One of the primary objectives of establishing mixed use development within the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan is the creation of a density threshold and a mixture of uses
that is capable of supporting transit alternatives to the automobile. Bus turnouts shall be
provided at appropriate locations within Planning Area 1, subject to approval by the City
111-39
r'iday June 3, 19~4 1:22pm -- Page
9)
b.
Please
t.
of Temecula and, if necessary, the Riverside Transit Agency. Additional Innsit corridor
right-of-way adjar. ent m Winchester Road on ~e western edge of th~ planning area will
allow spac~ for a,-velopment of a mass transit sys~-~ (e.g., light rail, e~.) should such
a system ever be constmu~
Village Center/lVfs~n Street Development Area
The V1llsge CentedMain Slreet concept sh,d! apply to be~tween 10 to 1S acres within
plann½ng Area 1. Blocks within the l~xaill Street area shall b~ el~Fined by a public street
grid system. The ~emnlnder of the pJnnning m could be developcxl in a conventional
f~hlon purSnnnt tO market demand if a continuation of thi~ concept is determined to be
infeasibl~ by the City.
Land Use Development Standards
refer to Zone Ordinance No. in Section KLC of this Specific Plan,
: Plannlng Stsndards
In compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, Village Center
Overlay and 1 =nd Use Element Goal 5 - Policies 5.5 through 5.10, it is impox~nt m
ereate a quality environment which establi~ht~ a ~en.~ of place through eatdul
consideration and integration of the following design elements:
a) Pedestrian orientation
b) Pede~a-ian linkaSP,.
c) Narrow streets and driveways with pedestrian paseos and wide sidew~lirs.
d)
Featur~ such as paseos, armu:les, plazas, courtyank squa~s, galleries and outdoor
cares to encourage gathering.
Z e)
Gathering places such as pavilions, parks and bandstands. Festivals, entertai~7
ment, street vendon, outclcor markets and other special events should be
f) Incorporation of fountnin~ and water boxties.
g) Unique architectural and landscape architectural themes for identity.
h) Ca~ful parking otientatiom
11140
2)
3)
4)
7)
S)
· It is i,mFnlant to note that not all use~ allowed in Planning Aria 1 are n~-ssarily
expected to occur. For thin re~son, some of the above design features may not he
at~prolnial= nor economically feasible. For this reason, only the conch-it of a ~VIain
SlEet" is discussed in depth above. Additional options for possible development in
planning ~ I Lrc discl/sscd in Section IV, Design GI/itleline~, in thk SpCCifiC Plan,,
Access into Pl.nning Alea I ~ be yao~rided from Margarita Road, Apricot Avcnue and
Winchester Road.
Onc (1) minor entry cto~-~'ing is proposed through the Winches~r Road trnn.portntioD
conidor into ]~nnning Alea 1. This minor crossing would ptovidc right-mr~-only access
into thi. Mixed Use pl~nnlng Area (see Figure 12A). This propo~l shafll comply wi~a
the current Memorandum of Underaanding (MOLT) between fine City of Temecula and
Caltrans as to the location and spacing of minOr ~ pOi~tS along Winchester Road,
Special roadway landsca~ treatments, as those depicted in Figur~ 14, 18, and :20,
1 ~nclscape Architectur~ Guidclin~ (S~c. lYE.) Shrill bc provided along Winchester
Margatim. Road and Apricot Avenue.
Major Enlry Monumentation as depicted in Figure :23, T ~-dscape ArchitecturSl
Guidelines, shall be pwvid~d at the intersections of Winctmster Road and Margazita Road,
and Margarita Road and Apricot Avenue, and along Margarita Road and !tFmchester
Road,
Minor Entry Monum~ntation, as dgpiaed in Egum 25, Landscat~ ArchitecUral
Gui&:lines, shall be p,'ovided along Winchester Road. Margarita Road anti Apricot
Avenue.
Please tcfcr m Scc. IV. fOr Specific Design Guidclincs and othcr related design ctitcria.
Please refer to Sec. I]I.A. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply
site-wide:
rrr, A, 1 - Specific Land Use Plan
rrr,/L2 - Circulation Hart
HLA,3 - Drainage Ran
ITI_&,4 - Water and Scwcr Plans
m A.5 - Proj~ct PhasingPla~
m ~.6 - Grading Plan :
l!l_&.7 - Lan&~-~Ving plan'
IILA.8 - Maintemmce Plan
11141
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, JULY 18, 1994
R:\STAFFRPT\263Sp. CC 9/7/94 kJb ~9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 18, 1994
Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center)
Change of Zone No, 5589
Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske
RECOMMENDATION:
RECOMMEND Adoption of Resolution No. 94-~ recommending
approval for Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 based
on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
KRDC Inc.
REPRESENTATIVE:
T & B Planning Consultants
PROPOSAL:
Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial
core, 810,000 square feet of Office/Institutional with possible
Multi-Family Residential and an additional 298,000square feet of
Retail Commercial with an accompanying Change of Zone request
changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20
(Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum tot size) to SP (Specific
Plan No. 263).
LOCATION:
Southeast corner of the intersection of Ynez and Winchester
Roads
EXISTING ZONING:
R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre
minimum lot s~ze)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial)
M-SC (Manufacturing Service Commercial)
A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum lot
size)
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
SP (Specific Plan No. 263)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS:
CC (Community Commercial)
O (Professional Office)
BP (Business Park)
P (Public/Institutional)
Specific Plan Overlay
Village Center Overlay
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS
North:
South:
East:
West:
Commercial Development (Costco)
Vacant
Vacant
Commercial Development (Palm Plaza)
Planning Area 1
Total Area
Possible Residential
Retail/Office Building Area
72 Acres
300 Units
810,000 Square Feet
Planning Area 2
Total Area
Commercial Retail Building Area
97.8 Acres
1,555,000 Square Feet
Planning Area 3
Total Area
Retail/Office Building Area
5.5 Acres
118,000 Square Feet
BACKGROUND
Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were continued from the May 23, 1994and June
6, 1994 Planning Commission meetings. At the May 23 Planning Commission meeting, the
Commission directed the applicant to provide more detailed information on the Village Center
concept proposed for Planning Area 1. At the June 6 Planning Commission meeting, the
applicant requested a continuance to the July 18, 1994 Planning Commission meeting to
enable them to meet with staff to discuss the conditions of approval.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project proposal is a Specific Plan with an accompanying Change of Zone request on
201.3 acres. The project site is located along the south side of Winchester Road between
Ynez and Margarita Roads. The City's General Plan designates the site as Specific Plan and
Village Center overlay areas. The underlying land use designations of the General Plan consist
of Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park and Public Institutional. The
Specific Plan document contains the zoning, development standards and architectural
guidelines for the project site. The proposed zoning and development standards contained
within the Specific Plan document will govern development for this site over the City's
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vg~ 2
Development Code unless it is not addressed in the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance.
ANALYSIS
Viltaqe Center Conceot
Planning Area 1 located within the Regional Center Specific Plan has a General Plan Overlay
designation of Village Center. Under the General Plan, the intent of the Village Center Overlay
is to develop centers which will help to provide a sense of place, as well as, focal points for
community activity. These Village Centers are intended to contain a concentration and
mixture of compatible uses including retail, housing, and institutional. Additionally, each
Village Center should have design guidelines and development standards.
While the applicant has provided language relative to the Regional Center's Village Center, this
language has been deemed inadequate by staff. At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission
meeting, the Commission directed the applicant to provide stronger language in the Specific
Plan which would ensure the development of a Village Center in Planning Area 1. In addition,
staff has requested the applicant provide design guidelines and development standards in the
Specific Plan.
Pursuant to the Commission's direction at the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting,
the applicant has provided new language relative to the Village Center Concept, as well as,
a number of illustratives (reference Attachment 3). Both the language and illustratives will be
included in the Final Specific Plan.
Circulation
At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, staff requested the Commission provide
direction on the timing and funding of both on-site and off-site improvements. The Public
Works Department proposes the following:
That this Specific Plan be required to bond for and construct certain regional
improvements for the project implementation responsibility for regional facilities.
That this Specific Plan be required to support either supplemental bond sales or district
restructuring and supplemental bond sales which provide for certain regional facilities
listed in Attachment "A" to the Mitigation Monitoring Program (refer to Attachment No.
5).
That this Specific Plan be required to bond for and construct certain facilities within
and adjacent to the project as detailed in the Conditions of Approval.
The timing for these facility requirements may be further defined through the
conditioning of subsequent development applications and the requisite phasing
application.
A typical section be added to the Specific Plan for the primary onsite circulation
road(s).
Landscape Development Zone (LDZ)
The provision for a 37 foot Landscape Development Zone along Winchester Road was
discussed at the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant stated he would
provide this 37 foot LDZ. The Final Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan will contain an
exhibit that illustrates this LDZ.
School Mitiaation
The Temecula Unified School District is requesting the developer sign a mitigation agreement
with the District prior to Specific Plan approval. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 340
certified for the site on July 13, 1993 states that "the project applicant shall enter into a
binding agreement with the Temecula Unified School District to insure the provision of
adequate facilities at the time of project occupancy." Staff has conditioned the Specific Plan
to comply with the mitigation proposed in the previously certified EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was prepared for the project and certified by the City
Council on July 13, 1993. Findings of Fact and Statements of Overriding Consideration for
Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation, and Libraries and a
Mitigation Monitoring Program were adopted at that time.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City of Temecuta General Plan designations of
Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public\Institutional, Specific Plan
Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. Upon adoption by the City Council, Change of Zone
5589 which proposes to change the zoning on the site from Rural Residential (R-R) and Heavy
Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan (SP) will render the Specific Plan
consistent with the zoning on the site.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission directed the applicant
to better define the Village Center Concept. Subsequent to this meeting, the applicant has
provided staff with new language and illustratives which better defines the Village Center
Concept. This new language and the illustratives will be provided in the Final Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan. The Commission also provided information to the Public Works
staff on the timing and funding of both on-site and off-site traffic improvements.
FINDINGS
Specific Plan 263
Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan designations
for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public
Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay.
R:\STAFFRPT\263Sp. PC5 7115194 vgw 4
Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surrounding land uses of Commercial to the north
(Costco) and west (Palm Plaza).
Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it
does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area.
Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan, and was certified
by the City Council July 13, 1993. No immediate impacts to the environment will
result from the adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from future development can be
mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were
adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality,
Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries.
Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs
contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to this
Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian
oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center
is intended to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design
which provides for the incorporation of transit facilities.
Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Chanqe of Zone 5589
Change of Zone 5589 wilt not have a significant adverse effect on the environment as
determined in Environmental Impact Report 340 prepared for the project. No
immediate impacts to the environment will result from the Change of Zone from Rural
Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan
(SP). Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than
significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council
on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and
Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries.
Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan. General
Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business
Park, Public\institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay.
Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan.
The site of the proposed Change of Zone is suitable to accommodate all the land uses
currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the parcel is of
adequate size and shape for any proposed use. Landscaping, parking and lot coverage
requirements will be met upon ultimate submittal of a development proposal.
Adequate access exists to the proposed Change of Zone site. Proposed potential
access points to the site will be from Ynez and Margarita Roads. Additional internal
access and required road improvements to the site will be designed and constructed
in conformance with City of Temecula standards.
6. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
PC Resolution No. 94- - Blue Page 7
Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11
Revised "Village Center Concept" Language - Blue Page 22
Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan - Blue Page 23
Attachment "A", Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340 - Blue Page 24
Temecula Valley Unified School District Letter, April 18, 1994- Blue Page 25
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 94-
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7115194 vgw 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TENIECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SPECWIC PLAN NO.
263 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT CO1VI/VIERCIAL CORE,
810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE/INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE
MULTI-FAMII .Y RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE
FEET OF RETAH. COMiX!F. RCIAL; APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE
NO. 5589 TO CHANGE TltE ZONING PROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R-
R) AND FIEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM (A-2-20) TO
SPECIFIC PLAN (SP). ~ PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND
WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-
130-046 AND 047, 921-090-005, 006 AND 007.
WHEREAS, KRDC, Inc. fried Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted
by reference;
WItF~R.EAS, said application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State
and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said application on July 18, 1994 at
which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS. at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said application;
NOW, TItF. RF. FORE, Tlt~, PLANNING COMMISSION OF TItF. CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin2s. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings:
A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of said application makes
the following f'mdings, to wit:
Specific Plan 263
1. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan
designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Offme, Business Park, Public
Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay.
2. Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surrounding land uses of Commercial
to the north (Costco) and west (Palm Plaza).
3. Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property,
because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area.
Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan, and was certified by the
City Council July 13, 1993. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the
adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less
than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on
July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation,
Circulation and Libraries.
4. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation
programs contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to
this Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian
oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center is intended
to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design which provides for the
incorporation of transit facilities.
5. Said f'mdings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental
documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
Change of Zone 5589
1. Change of Zone 5589 will not have a significant adverse effect on the
environment as determined in Environmental Impact Report 340 prepared for the project. No
immediate impacts to the environment will result from the Change of Zone from Rural
Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan (SP).
Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements
of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the
following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries.
2. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the City of Temecula General
Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office,
Business Park, Public\Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Ove~ay.
3. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the goals, policies, and
implementation programs contained in the General Plan.
4. The site of the proposed Change of Zone is suitable to accommodate all
the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the parcel
is of adequate size and shape for any proposed use. Landscaping, parking and lot coverage
requirements will be met upon ultimate submittal of a development proposal.
5. Adequate access exists to the proposed Change of Zone site. Proposed
potential access points to the site will be from Ynez and Margarita Roads. Additional internal
access and required road improvements to the site will be designed and constructed in
conformance with City of Temecula standards.
6. Said f'mdings are supported by analysis. maps, exhibits~ and environmental
documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference.
B. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3,
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. Previously certified Environmental Impact
Report No. 340 analyzed the significant impacts of Specific Plan No. 263 and proposed
mitigation measures to reduce these impacts.
Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
recommends approval of Specific Plan No. 263 located southwest corner of Ynez and
Winchester Roads.
A. Attachment No. 2~ attached hereto.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of July, 1994.
STEVEN J. FORD
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 18th day of July
1994 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
GARY THORNHILL
SECRETARY
R:\STAFFRPT\263$P.PC5 7/15/chl vgw '] 0
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center)
Project Description: A Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial
core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi-Family Residential,
and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial with an accompanying
Change of Zone request changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20
(Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum) to SP (Specific Plan).
Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046and 047,921-090-005,006 and 007
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Conditions
The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City
of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning
Specific Plan No. 263, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly
notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify
the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the
defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City of Temecula.
All development within this site shall be in accordance with the requirements of all City
ordinances, except as expressly modified herein, and State laws, and shall conform
with the approved Specific Plan. Regulations or procedures not covered by the Specific
Plan or appurtenant documents shall be subject to the City ordinances in effect at the
time entitlement is required.
This project and all subsequent projects within the site shall comply with all mitigation
measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program.
Prior to issuance of grading permits, approval of development permits, recordation of
final maps, issuance of building permits and issuance of occupancy permits for any
subsequent projects or activities within the site the applicant/developer shall
demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program within EIR No. 348 have been satisfied for the stage
of development that permits are being issued for.
Prior to the City Council hearing, Planning Area 3 shall be changed to Business Park
and the appropriate zoning and development standards shall be established for Business
Park designation.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP. PC5 7/15194 vgw 12
The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ), which includes the Transportation Corridor,
along Winchester Road shall be thirty-seven feet (37') in width and shall be shown on
all subsequent development proposal eite plans and tentative maps.
,
Prior to approval of any map or development proposal within each Planning Area within
the Specific Plan, a detailed design manual for each Planning Area shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission.
Within thirty (30) days of the final approval of the project by City Council, the Specific
Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report shall be submitted to the Planning
Department in final form for review and approval. The final form shall include all
conditions of approval and all modifications made by the Planing Commission and City
Council. A master print copy (8 ~" X 11 ") and four (4) copies of the documents shall
be submitted.
Prior to approval of any development plans, all subsequent projects shall receive
appropriate clearances, conditions and approvals from all agencies with jurisdiction on
project review. These agencies shall be determined by the Planning Director and the
City Engineer.
10.
The developer or the developer's successor-in-interest shall be responsible for
maintaining the undeveloped portion of the site including weed abatement and litter
removal,
11.
The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City of Temecula to retain the
services of a qualified consultant to administer and implementthe Mitigation Monitoring
Program approved for this project as part of Environmental Impact Report 340 in
compliance with Assembly Bill 3180.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
12.
Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for the project, the project applicant shall
enter into a binding mitigation agreement the with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District to ensure the mitigation of the new students generated by this Specific Plan.
13.
If any of these conditions of approval differ from the commitment by the Developer
made in the Specific Plan text or map exhibits or any other documents, the conditions
enumerated herein shall take precedence.
14.
Any proposed amendment to this Specific Plan shall require public hearings and review
by the Planning Commission and City Council, and/or shall be reviewed in accordance
with such rules and regulations for the review of Specific Plan Amendments as may
have been adopted by the City and which are in effect at the time of any proposed
amendment is submitted.
15. The developer shall satisfy all the Quimby Act requirements for the project.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
16.
All utility systems such as electric, including those which provide direct service to the
project site and/or currently exist along public rights-of-ways adjacent to the site
(except electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater), gas, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be placed underground, with easements provided as required, and designed
and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider.
17.
Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, as deemed necessary by the Department
of Public Works, the Developer shall consult with the State of California Department
of Fish and Game, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
to determine if permits or approvals are necessary from such agencies for any action
contemplated by this proposal. Such consultation shall be in writing, and copies of said
correspondence, including responses from agencies, shall be submitted to the City.
Where appropriate, the terms, conditions, and recommendations of the noted agencies
shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval into the areas of development.
18.
Prior to issuance of building permits for the various phases of development, the
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be
in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public
facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which
the Developer requests its building permit for the project or any phase thereof, the
Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility Fee.
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure
payment of the Public Facility Fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square
foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said agreement may
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions of this condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
19.
Landscaping and permanent irrigation facilities shall be installed with street
improvements. Perimeter walls if constructed shall be treated with graffiti-resistant
coating and shall be installed adjacent to street improvements within each phase.
20.
A phasing plan addressing the schedule of necessary infrastructure requirements shall
be approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director prior to
approval of any subsequent development application.
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 14
29.
30.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer is
responsible to bond for the traffic signals at the project's accesses from
Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Winchester Road, as required, including the
associated street improvements, based on traffic signal warrants analysis
relative to subsequent development applications.
Dedicate all necessary right-of-way for the construction of the Winchester Road
overpass at Interstate 15 (I-15) and the interchange ramps along with
associated additional right-of-way necessary for the widening and improvements
to Winchester Road from Ynez Road to the interchange.
A reimbursement agreement shall be executed between the Developer and the
City to reimburse the City the cost of the existing improvements along
Margarita Road from Solaria Way to Winchester Road.
The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements shall be completed prior to
issuance of occupancy for any development above a cumulative total of 750,000 SF.
The Developer shall support the Community Facilities District (CFD) 88-12
supplemental bond sales necessary for the construction of Overland Drive, from
Ynez Road to Jefferson Avenue (including the F15 overpass), in accordance
with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying
Overland Drive as a Secondary Highway with 88 foot full width right-of-way,
and including the traffic signals at the intersections of Overland Drive and Ynez
Road, Jefferson Avenue, and Margarita Road.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit Developer shall
bond for the improvements to Marganta Road, from Solaria Way to Winchester
Road, including a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance with
the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Margarita
Road as an Arterial Highway with 110 foot full width right-of-way with a
reimbursement agreement.
Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer shall
bond for full street improvements to Overland Drive, from Margarita Road to
Ynez Road, including a 12 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance
with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying
Overland Drive as a Major Highway with 100 foot full width right-of-way with
a reimbursement agreement.
The Developer is responsible to bond for prior and construct the traffic signals at the
intersections listed below. The Developer shall analyze the traffic signal warrants and
shall install the traffic signals accordingly and/or as directed by the Department of
Public Works at the following intersections:
Margarita Road and Winchester Road (upgrade the existing signal)
Margarita Road and North General Kearny Road
R:\STAFFRP'D,263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 16
Drainage
31.
Drainage and flood control facilities shall be provided in accordance with the
requirements of the City and/or Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (RCFC&WCD).
32.
Prior to approval of any subsequent development applications, the Developer shall
submit the master drainage plan to the City and RCFC&WCD to review the adequacy
of the proposed and existing downstream drainage facilities.
33.
Drainage facilities within each phase shall be constructed immediately after the
completion of the site grading and prior to or concurrently with the initial site
development within that phase.
34.
All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry 100 year storm flows, subject to the
approval of the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable.
35.
The Developer shall construct the proposed on and offsite drainage facility
improvements and the offsite detention basin provision as recommended in the Specific
Plan and Drainage Study documents and/or as directed by the Department of Public
Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable.
36.
As required by the Department of Public Works, additional Hydrology and Hydraulic
Reports shall be submitted with subsequent development applications to study the
drainage impacts and analyze necessary measures to mitigate the runoff created as
part of the development of this project.
37.
The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto
or through the site.
38.
The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration
of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be
provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing
facilities or by securing drainage easements.
Water and Sewer
39.
Water and sewer facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and
specifications of the City, Rancho California Water District (RCWD), and Eastern
Municipal Water District (EMWD). Such requirements shall be applied at the subdivision
or plot plan stages of the development.
40.
Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall
submit the master water plan to RCWD to check for adequacy of the proposed water
facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the water system from
RCWD.
41.
Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall
submit the master sewer plan to EMWD to check for adequacy of the proposed sewer
facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the sewer system from
EMWD.
42.
Prior to the recordation of any tract map, commercial parcel map, or approval of any
plot plan application, the Developer shall provide the City with evidence that adequate
wastewater treatment facilities are being provided to meet the needs of the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan development.
Grading
43.
No grading shall be permitted for any development area prior to tentative map or plot
plan approval and issuance of grading permits for the specific area of development.
44.
Grading plans and operations shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,
City Grading Standards, the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report,
or any subsequent reports prepared for the project, the conditions of the grading
permit, and accepted grading construction practices and the recommendations and
standards specified in the Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
document.
45.
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Erosion Control plans shall be prepared in
conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department
of Public Works. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement
guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements.
46.
The Developer shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulated by the State Water Resources Control
Board, and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) implemented by the San
Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board.
47.
Each subsequent application for a phase of development shall include a conceptual
grading plan to indicate at a minimum:
· Preliminary quantity estimates for grading.
Techniques and methods which will be used to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process in compliance with the City
Standards and NPDES requirements.
· Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
· Designation of the borrow or stockpile site location for import/export material.
Approximate time frames for development including the identification of areas
which wilt be graded during the rainy months.
· Hydrology and hydraulic concerns and mitigations.
Major grading activities shall be scheduled during the dry season wherever possible,
or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works.
49.
Soils stabilization, which may include revegetation of graded areas, shall occur within
30 days of final grading activities as directed by the Department of Public Works.
50. The site shall be watered during grading operations to control dust.
51.
Temporary drainage and sediment control devices shall be installed as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
52.
An import/export route shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to
issuance of any grading permit. The plan shall include limitation to the duration of the
grading operation and construction activities, a Traffic Control Plan, and a daily time
schedule of operations.
53.
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, a soils reports shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works for review and approval, to address engineering, geologic,
seismic, and soils engineering concerns for each tentative map or commercial parcel
map for each phase of proposed development.
54.
All public streets shall be maintained and cleaned if necessary on a daily basis during
grading operation and construction activities. Cash deposit, letter of credit or posting
of bond to guarantee maintenance of all public rights-of-way affected by the grading
operations and construction activities, shall be posted prior to issuance of grading
permits.
55.
If subsequent Geotechnical and Soils Reports determine that dewatering of the site is
necessary during construction, necessary permits (ie. in compliance with NPDES
permit) shall be obtained from appropriate agencies prior to approval of the grading
plans.
Phasing
56.
Construction of the development permitted by the Specific Plan, including recordation
of final subdivision maps, may be carried out in stages provided that, adequate
vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each stage of development and
further provided that such development conforms substantially with the intent and
purpose of the Specific Plan Phasing Plan.
57.
Development applications shall be submitted for each planning unit in each phase. Total
acreage and land uses within each phase shah be substantially in accordance with the
specifications of the Specific Plan.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
The Temecula Community Regional Center Specific Plan was originally presented to staff as
a mixed-use commercial development combining retail, office, hotel, institutional, and regional
mall facilities. However, the possibility exists that multi-family residential development could
occur within Planning Area 1. In the event that residential development is approved, the
Temecula Community Services District {TCSD) provides additional conditions for the Temecula
Regional Center, as follows:
General Requirements
58.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall satisfy the park land dedication
requirements in accordance with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Upon
determination of the actual park land dedication requirement, the City of Temecula shall
have the final decision of requiring the developer to dedicate land for public park
purposes, or pay the equivalent "in-lieu" fee.
59.
Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial/industrial
development and multi-family residential development shall be maintained by a private
property owner's association.
60.
All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space shall be maintained by the individual
property owner or an established property owner's association.
61.
Class II bike lanes shall be designed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation
Master Plan and constructed in concurrence with the street improvements.
62.
The landscaped medians shall be improved in conformance with the City of Temecula
Landscape Plan Guidelines and Specifications.
63.
The developer, his successor or assignee, shall maintain the landscaping and medians
until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD.
64.
Construction of all proposed TCSD maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a
pre-job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to
comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of
these areas into the TCSD maintenance program.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
65.
All proposed TCSD maintenance areas (medians) shall be identified and offered for
dedication on the final map.
66.
Prior to recordation of the respective final map, construction drawings for proposed
landscape medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff.
67.
Prior to recordation of the respective final map, the subdivider shall post security and
enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas.
R:\STAFFRI~\2635P.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 20
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
68.
Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the
developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format directed by TCSD staff, the most
current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project.
69.
Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the
developer or his assignee shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the
appropriate fees for the dedication of arterial and residential lights into the TCSD
maintenance program.
R:\STAt~FRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15194 vgw 21
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
REVISED "VILLAGE CENTER CONCEPT" LANGUAGE
R:/STAFFRFF\263SP.PC5 7115/94 vg~' 22
REGIONAL
Phnning Area
1. P!annin~ Area 1
,, Descriptive Summary
Pian,,ins Area 1, as depictat in Figurc 12A, co,,,,iwts of 71.97 gross ames, d~vo2d pr~m,,Hly to
mixed uses inclodlng rclall, office, horn1, institutional, and residential. uses. The commex~ial,
o~ice; and institutional developmeat within this planning area will sezve the needs of rata
residents, while maintaining cx}13lpaflbillty with a residcnHM cllv~ A I:Da.x,b:llg~ Of :300
multi-family dwelling units shall be permitted in Planning Area 1. These dwellings may either
be consl~uctecl as 5'ee-staz~ing sln~tun~s or integrated into the same building w~th off]cc and
1) 1VFL~tUm of Uses
It is the intent of the mix~l use develophint in Planning Area I of the Teme~tla
Regional Centex to allow for a mixtu~ of comm~i/officefmstitutionai and residential
uses. The mixed use development is designed to encourage active street frontages and
a comfortable, human-scaled environwent that Cr,--rps a fully funclioning shopping street
complex (i.e., a "Main Street"). This Main Street will be integrated into the overall
mixed use development in pJnnnirtg Area I and will be connected by both sm~ and
pedeSLrian walkways to the pJanned retail develolxueut in pJnnning Afca 2. ThB MaiD.
Street will be an c~sy and quick walk away from offices and residences in the Temecula
Regional Center, allowing both workers and residents to take advantage of the convenient,
locally available shopping opportunities. A conceptual illt~adve site plan depicting
Main Street concept in Planning Area 1 is shown in Figu~ 12B. A detailed view of
Main Street is illustratut in Figure 12C.
While rntil development my be the ptlmaty lnnd I1~ in Planning ~ 1, it is
envisioned that this planning area wi]] also include adClitiOUnl employment oppommities
such as offices and personal sea-vice shops and businesses. Institutional and hotel uses
may be integrated physically into mixed use 8trdctures Or cons131K:t~ as ~
buildings.
Residential uses may be integrated into the same smmmm as non-residential uses.
Residential uses and cnlfics should consdram not morn than 30~ of the 5,,Amd floor of
any of these buDdln~s. In areas which do not directly face onto the shopping m~ct(s),
frecstandlng residential btfild~ngs m.y l~ ennstmcmcL It is also anticipated that some
free-standing re~dential structures wm also be en~-'ted in Planning Area 1.
III-31
0
2)
In planning for mixed use development, consideration shall be given to joint use of
parking, common areas. landscaping,
specific types of uses, housing types Pedestrian connection to adjacent
and sizes of units, and overall Temecula Regional Center uses and
architectural design. to nearby pedestrian systemS
Planning Area 1 development is ~_A ~ "~
proposed as a logical extension of the
central commercial core activity in
Planning Area 2, and a transition
between Planning Area 2 and the .....
adjacent residential property to the
east. Institutional uses to be : ~ '\
encouraged within Planning Area I I
include local. state or federal level
services (i.e., postal service, economic
development, social service, library,
museum, etc.), if there is a need or
demand for such uses ............
Buildin~ Scale and Plannin.o Area
Design
Development in Planning Area 1
should not resemble a typical
suburban shopping center or strip
commercial plaza. The retail and
office uses in Planning Area I may be
arranged in a "U"-shaped
configuration around a public green
similar to traditional public greens, or
in a linear fashion to form a "Main
Street" with shops and offices oriented
directly onto the street.
Internal roadway circulation (which
may be implemented by a perimeter
ring road or other similar roadway
configuration) will be provided around
the Main Street area to facilitate
traffic flow in and through Planning
Area 1. The internal roadway system
will distribute traffic to and from
principal access points on the site
-.d , ,
· --parallel parking (optional)
~ 4 - lane capacity (typ .)
Conceptual Internal Floadwa~t
III-35
3)
rather than on nearby arterial streets. This ring road may also connect Planning Area 1
with Planning Area 2.
Limited on-street parking may be provided on portions of the internal roadway system,
but in areas where the roadways cross parking areas, no on-street parking shall be
allowed. The primary internal access roadway system will most likely be four lanes in
width. The Main Street, on the other hand, will be limited to two through lanes (one in
each direction) in order to foster a pedestrian scale.
Individual buildings within Planning Area 1 may range in height up to 120 feet, provided
that building setbacks and configurations for all structures in excess of 50 feet in height
shall be determined by the City during Development Plan Review to ensure that adequate
light access and air is available to adjacent structures. Typically, buildings should
maintain a pedestrian scale adjacent to the shopping street. For example, the portion(s)
of a building that abuts a public street may be two or three stories in height. Additional
building stories could progressively step back as the building height and number of stories
increases. Not only will such architectural design permit light and air access to
surrounding areas and ensure a pedestrian scale near ground level, but the massiveness
of the building will be substantially reduced.
Separate building entrances shall be required for commercial/office/institutional and
residential uses when occupying the same structure; provided that this provision does not
preclude internal connections between residential and non-residential uses.
Intensification
In order for the concept of a "Main Street" to truly function, development of a certain
density and intensity is necessary. Greater intensification of land use in this planning area
provides the opportunity for innovative architectural design and landscaping. The higher
concentrations of people will also increase the feasibility of mass transit to serve the site.
Residential uses will be limited to free-standing buildings containing single family
attached or multi-family homes or vertically integrated buildings containing residential
units over office and/or commercial uses. Because of the increased residential density in
this area, it is important that recreational amenities be provided for residents.
Freestanding residential structures, in particular, should contain recreational facilities such
as spas, swimming pools, basketball courts, and weight rooms. These facilities may be
provided within buildings or, if provided outside, may be arranged in interior courtyards
or in walled-in enclosures in interior parking lots. Special consideration should be given
to locating facilities with respect to the noise, activity, and light that they will generate.
111-36
Jl_l,i-e3-1994 10:14 F'ROPI ~ R..,q, lqllqG TO 1,gecjG9464'-/'7 P,e3
fi~-esum~nSmuld-family
Freestanding Residential BuDdlngS & Vertically Integrated Bu~dings
(Residential Over Commercia!/OfDce Uses) with Recreational Facilities
4) Pro!ring Desjim
'[jmlted on-slzcct paz~ing my be provided in PlnfnlnS A~a 1, parti~,lnrly along the
"Main Street* On-street parking spaces ate intended for people rmmlng etnnds and are
*shon-t~tu," spaces. These spaces may be mettaxi u> discouragc l~opk ~mm ~-~g h
them for longer than an hour e~ two. Paxking lots should be placed in the interior of
individual parcels so that the at~zanmce d tbe development f~om the meet is of
buildings and plazas, not parking lots (sec Figure 12B). These interior pa~rln_~ lots arc
intended for *long term" pa~cing.
The parking facilities should net be the dominant visual im,_oe of Ihc project. Vas~
exT~n~p_.~ of l~ving for paddng, without the visual relief of landscaping, arc highly
discouraged. Joint-parking arrangements bctwcen commugial, office, and institutional
uses nr~ cncoungcd to minimize the number of parking spates required to serve the
development and avoid pi6~feration of parking lots. In naAifion, completely separate
pnr~ing areas should be provided for residences.
Incentives for Innovative DesiL, n
Up to 300 multi-family dw~llin~s c8J1 be erected in this plnnn~ng area to provide ho-~'inE
oppornmities for employees of the various businesses Within the Tcmecula Regional
Center Specific Plan. Conversely, dne planned comzncv~al uses will enable p~uject
residents to do their shopping by foot. The mixmrc of residential and non-residential land
uses are designed to decrease the ~ generated by project develop~nenL
m-37
6)
The pedestrian scale of the project will be enhanced by plazas, courtyards, sidewalk cafes,
public mini-parks, pedestrian easements, and overall project landscaping. Pedestrian
linkages will be provided between uses within Planning Area 1 and between Planning
Area 1 and the larger retail uses in Planning Area 2.
Retail and service commemial uses could predominate on the first floor of the buildings.
with offices and/or residential uses concentrated on the upper floors or behind the
commercial uses. Vertically-integrated buildings offer the opportunity to provide
affordable housing.
Pedestrian-Oriented Design
The small size of Planning Area 1 will encourage pedestrian movement between uses,
while de-emphasizing automobile use. Retail uses are encouraged on street leveI to
provided streetscape contiguity and visual interest for pedestrians. Continuous expanses
of blank wails or sharp unbroken vertical surfaces create an uncomfortable atmosphere
for the pedestrian. The mixed use area should incorporate the following elements of good
pedestrian-oriented design:
Pedestrian Circulation: Link interior parking areas and lots to city streets, city-
wide open spaces (e.g., plazas, mini-parks, pedestrian malls, etc.) and the City's
trail system to facilitate travel by walking, biking, or other non-motorized means.
Building Facades: The design of building facades, particularly those facades that
face public streets, should be architecturally interesting and in scale with the
pedestrian. Storefront windows are encouraged in retail shops and, in most cases,
should begin within 18" to 24" of the pavement. Typically, storefront windows
help to entice customers into stores, stimulate visual interest, create "defensible
space" by enhancing public views of store interiors and streets, and establish a
predictable rhythm for passers-by. The scale and width of each storefront should
be limited to establish an intimate scale that is more conducive to the pedestrian
and cyclist than to the automobile. In general, storefront ividths should relate to
a human scale. Where storefronts must be large to accommodate specific uses,
the building facades could be articulated with windows, insets, pillars, columns,
arcades or other decorative architectural features to maintain the overall intimacy
of the shopping street.
Signage: A coordinated signage plan for development can facilitate pedestrian
and vehicular movement throughout the planning area, without "visually
assaulting" the senses. Signage should be designed at a scale that is not
overpowering from the pedestrian's perspective. For example, small signs with a
unique texture, shape, or interesting features can be more effective than large,
massive, or glaring signs. This Temecula Regional Center Zoning Ordinance
111-38
7)
8)
contains comprehensive signage criteria for uses within Planning Area 1 (see
Section III.C.1. in this Specific Plan).
Streetscape Design: To encourage human activity and movement, streets should
be designed with the pedestrian in mind. Continuity in landscape design,
placement of street furniture, sitting areas, covered arcades for shelter against the
sun and inclement weather, lighting, and paving patterns all contribute to creating
a rich, functional, and aesthetically pleasing environment for pedestrians.
Pedestrian Plazas: All areas of Planning Area 1, and the Main Street in
particular, should be designed with pedestrian gathering spots and should include
plazas and pocket parks for resting, eating, conversing, and people watching.
Pedestrian plazas that are effectively placed within retail and office districts can
be pleasant spaces for resting or having lunch between shopping trips or errands.
Placement of pedestrian plazas must be carefully planned to assure their most
effective use. For this reason, consideration must be given to the location of
plazas relative to the pedestrian circulation patterns, sunlight conditions, wind
patterns, and the selection of building and landscape materials.
Organization of Activities: The most important element in creating viable
pedestrian spaces has little to do with the actual physical design of the space; if
a space is to be conducive to pedestrian activity, there must be opportunities for
pedestrian events and activities. Therefore, efforts to planning and organizing
festivals, events, special sidewalk sales, entertainment, and cultural displays should
be made to help create desired pedestrian activity. Private marketing efforts
should be encouraged to promote these types of community events.
Signage
This Specific Plan includes a comprehensive signage program for the mixed use
development. The program includes retail commercial entry monumentation, building
identification signage, marquee signage, and directional signage. Although the signage
criteria contained in the Zoning Ordinance in this Specific Plan includes maximum
permitted sign sizes, the individual sign that identifies a given use should be consistent
with the scale and mass of the building on which it is located or which it identifies.
Specific signage materials should be uniform throughout each individual development
within Planning Area 1.
Transit Alternatives/Options
One of the primary objectives of establishing mixed use development within the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan is the creation of a density threshold and a mixture of uses
that is capable of supporting transit alternatives to the automobile. Bus turnouts shall be
provided at appropriate locations within Planning Area 1, subject to approval by the City
III-39
~Fridoy June 3, 199~, 1:22pm -- Page 2J
J1.Jl~-1994 12:19 ~ I ~I~ ~ 1~ P.~
b,
Please
C.
of Tm anxl, if _ne,:~__~azy, the Rivestatic Trsn~it Agency. Addifiosm] trsnsit corridor
fight-of-way adjaccnt to Winds~mr Rosd on tl~ m ~1~ of ~ ph,,,,,in$ area will
allow sps~ for developmere of a mass U~-~t syswn (e.g., light rail, etc.) should such
asystnmcv~bcconstmctccL
Vi!!n~e Ccnter/IVl'nh~ Sb'cct Development Area
Thc VillsL2c C. entcr/l~-i- SU~et conccpt shall apply to betwere 10 to 15 acres within
PIRnnlaE Azc8 1. BlOCkS within the Main Street area shall be de. fined by a public street
f~ SyStClB, The Fr-mnindCr Of the pl.nnin~ kw'e8 could be developed in a conventional
fs~hlon pursu:~ to market demand if a continuation of ,his concept is d~.ern~inf~l to bc
infcasiblc by the CRy.
Land Use Developmint Standards
refe~ to Zon~ Ordinance No. .
in Section IILC of thig Specific p!nn~
: phnni.~ Standards
In complinnce with th~ goals and policies of the City's General Plan, Villng~ Cenmr
Overlay and Land Use Element Goal 5 - Policim 5.5 through 5.10, it is important
cre. a~ a quality environment which establishes a sens~ of place through careful
considention and Integration of the following design elements:
b) P~de~'ian linka~.
c) Narrow streets and driveways with pedemian paseos and widc sidewalks.
d)
Featu~s such as pascos, arcades, plazas, cour~ards, squares, galleries and oa,~door
cares to ancourage gathering.
f)
Gathering places such as pavilions, parks and bandstands. Festivals, enl~ain-
me. nt, su'eet vendors, outdoor msimts and other special events should be
Incorporation of lOgOfnin~= and water bodies.
Unique arcMtecturel and landscape archite~twal fir, rues for identity.
h) Careful parking orientation.
I1]-40
2)
3)
4)
ltis i.mpofiam to not~lhnt notali uses allowed in Planning Ama 1 are nec~
expecl:gl to occur. For this reason, song of the
appropriate nor econo~ feasible. For thi,~ t'~ason, only the concept of a "Main
Street" is disctuned in depth above. Addidonal options for possible development in
plnnning Area Iag discussed in Section IV, Design C_w~idelint~, in thig
Access into plnnnin~ Area 1 will be provided from Marguita Road, Apricot Avenue and
Winchesl~r Road.
One (1) =i~or entry cro~,,~ is proposed through me W'mcbester Road
corridor into Planning ~ 1. This minor CSt. slin~ would Ixovide right-nun-only acceee
into this ~ Use Pl~--i-g Area (see Figure 12A). This propoeal shall comply with
the current M~morandum of Umteraanding (MOU) between the City of Temecula and
Calinns as m the location and spacing of mines access points along Winchester Roll
Special nantdway laudscape Ue. atnsmts, as those depicted in Figures 14, 18, and
T ~-dscape ~a'chitectum Ouidcliues (Sec. IVY_..) shall be v, ovided along Wiuchester Road,
biargaxita Road and Apricot Aveuue.
Major EnUy Monumentafion as dcpictcd in Figurc :23, Landscape Architcctuntl
Guidelines, shnll be provided nt the interactions of Winchester Road and Mmgdrita Road,
and MarBat'its Road and Apricot Avenuc, and along Margarita Road and W'mchestcr
Road.
Minor Entry Monumentalion, as depicted in Figure 2.5. Landscapc An:hitcctural
Cmidclines, shall be lauvided along Winchesmr Road. Mmgarita Road and Apricot
Avenuc.
Ple, ar, c t~fcr to Scc. IV. for Specific Dcsign C_midc/~tncs and otl~r tcla~ design criteria.
Pleas~ rgfer to Scc. 1TI.A. for k following Development Plans aml Standards dmt apply
site-wide:
1TIA. I- SpecificT~n,tUs~Plan
rlT_A.2 - Cimulation Plan
flTA.3 - Drainage Plan
rlT A.4 - Wafa and Sewer Plans
rfi-A.8 - Maimenwnre Plan
HI-41
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
CONCEPTUAL CIRCULATION SYSTEM PHASING PLAN
DRAFT
ADDENDU1VI EIR
CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN
RECEIVED
.JAN 0 8 1993
'CITY OF TEMECULA
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 1
EIR NO. 348
Lead Agency:
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
(714) 694-6400
Prepared By:
Douglas Wood & Associates
567 San Nicolas Drive, Suite 301
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(714) 644-7977
!
Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan
lrmdings of the traffic analysis indicate that, at projected build-out of the three Kemper[Beclford
projects substantial roadway improvements will be needed in the study area. It is important to
recognize that principal roadway improvements which comprise the planned City of Temecula
Circulation Element will be needed in the future whether or not the proposed projects are
implemented. Although these new and improved roadway facilities would be serving the immediate
access needs of these proposed projects and other numerous planned development projects within
the study area, most of the improvements would also play an important role in serving the general
circulation needs of the Temecula commercial core area which straddle~ the 1-15 corr/dor. Some of
the improvements (e.g. Winchester Road - S.R. 79 widening and 1-15/W'mchester Road interchange
reconstruction) would even serve future regional circulation needa.
The intent of the "conceptual circulation system phasing plan' developed in this study is to present
a logical implementation sequence for the construction of needed area-wide roadway improvements
which also considers the proposed phasing plan for the proposed Kemper/Bedford projects. It should
be noted that project build-out (assumed Year 2000) roadway needs have essentially been based on
full development (build-out) of all land uses within the immediate study area.
The market driven implementation rate of major development projects in the area will have very
strong influence on the timing of future roadway improvement needs. A~ these area development
projects are implemented, they will require access. Many of the phased roadway improvements
suggested in this plan are intended to provide for those local acc, ess needs and at the same time work
towards completing the ultimate area-wide circulation network. In some cases, the phased
improvement is over-designed for the anticipated local development access needs but considers
ultimate needs and the desire to minim/ze future construction impacts related to phased widenings
(e.g., initially building two lanes and the widening to four lanes at the later date). The assessment
of financing/implementation responsibilities for area-wide roadway improvements should consider that
the key elements of the planned circulation system (including the Overland overpass, Data Street
overpass, and Winchester Interchange improvements) will be needed even if proposed
Kernper/Bedford development projects are not implemented.
Since it is more difficult to predict the rate and pattern of long-term (5 to 10 years) development
than short-term (1 to 5 years) development, it should be recognized that the actual roadway ne, ed~
for implementation periods beyond 5 years could vary significantly from the conceptual plan
presented in this study. It is also important to consider that many of the roadway improvements
identified would involve a multi-jurisdiction/agency review and coordination process which could
impact the conceptual implementation plan presented herein.
A~ticipated Project Development Phasing - Project phasing assumed in this analy~Ls is based on the
Project Phasing Plan presented in the individual Specific Plan documents. Sue to changing market
strategies, these phasing plans have been developed as a 'guideline' only for City review and
monitoring. Future market demands may dictate varying approaches to phasing which could alter the
currently expected rate and/or sequence of project implementation. Project Phasing Plan a-~sumptioas
are illustrated in Figures 4, 11, and 18 for the Temecula Regional center, Winchester HilLs, and
Camps Verdes projects respectively. A more detailed breakdown of project phasing assumptions
including anticipated development status and corresponding trip generation (both incremental and
cumulative) by six analysis time periods is presented for each Kemper/Bedford project in Tables 1
through 3.
Anticipated Background Development - In order to analyze roadway system implementation phasing
needs, it was nece~ary to make general assumptions regarding the rate and location of other area
development. For the purposes of this asse.~sment it was assumed that other area development would
build-out at a constant rate over the next eight years and in a manner which would evenly dLstribute
the new development throughout the study area.
Conceptual Circulation System Phasing - Results of the circulation system phasing assessment are
presented in Figures 5 through 10 (Tcme~ula Regional Center), Figures 12 through 17 (Winchester
Hills), and Figures 19 through 24 (Campos Verdes). It should be noted that the Conceptual
Cixculation System Phasing Plan is identical for each of the three projects. The individual phasing
plans differ only in terms of the specific project development status and the corresponding cumulative
project trip generation given for each implementation period.
Our approach in preparing the Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan included planning level
assessments which focused on the immediate access needs of each project as well as capacity of key
congestion "bottle necks" such as the Winchester Road/Ynez Road intersection and Winchester
Road/I-15 interchange. The proposed roadway impiovement implementation sequence has been
formulated to provide incremental stages of relief to these congestion prone areas. Additionally,
.,~se.~ment District 161 and Community Facilities District 88-12 have been considered in the
development of the Phasing Plan,
It is important to recognize that the Conceptual Circulation systems Phasing Plan presented herein
does not imply that the individual Kernper/Bedford projects would be respons~le for implementing
the roadway improvement needs identified in the Conceptual Phasing Plan. At the same time, it also
needs to be recognized that the rate at which projects in the study area are permitted to develop
should be correlated to the circulation systems' ability to adequately ac.~ommedate the traffic which
these projects will generate.
10
1
t
g
I
I]
il
I
Ir
I
I
l:
I
I
I
m:
0
As part of our roadway phasing assessment, we have identified a number of improvements which are
currently anticipated to be critical (either directly or indirectly) to the development of the individual
Kemper/Bedford projects. This does not suggest that the identified improvement,' but rather the
timely implementation of the identifie~l improvement would influence the status of traffic congestion
in the area. The resulting congestion levels could influence the City's ability to issue building permits.
Temecula Regional Center (Refer to Figure 5 through 10)
Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period:
Two-lane interim improvement of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester
Road.
Ynez Road widening from project boundary south to Rancho California Road.
Winchester Road widening from Margarita Road to Mun'ieta Hot Springs Road.
New signal installations on Winchester Road to Margarita Road, Nicolas Road, and
Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
Projected 1994 to 1995 Implementation Period:
Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road.
Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Solaria Way to Wi~3chester Road.
New signal installations on Overland Drive at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, and
Margarita Road.
New signal installations on Winchester Road at Temec~ala Regional Center access
roads.
On-site circulation system improvements/access connections.
Projected 1995 to 1996 Implementation Period Winchester Road interchange ramp improvements.
Two-lane interim Ynez Road/Jackson Avenue extension to Murrieta Hot Springs
Road.
Projected 1996 to 1998 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchange overpass widening.
New aignal irmtallations on Ynez Road at County Center Drive and Sate Street.
new signal installation on Margarita Road at Date Street
Two-lane extension of General Kearney Road easterly to Nicolas Road.
Projected 1998 to 1999 Implementation Period:
Date Street overpass improvements.
11
Projected 1999 to 2000 Implementation Period:
Winchester Road widening between 1-15 and Ynez~Road.
Jackson Avenue widening from the Temecula City limit to Murrieta Hot Springs
Road.
Winchester Hills (Refer to Figures 12 through 17)
Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period:
Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot
Springs Road,
· Two-lane interim improvement of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester
Road.
Four-lane extension of Ynez Road to Date Street alignment
On-site loop street and connector street improvements as depicted in Figure 12.
Widening of Jefferson Avenue from Date Street to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive alignment to Rancho California Road,
New signal installation on Winchester Road at Margarita and Murrieta Hot Springs
Road intemectiom.
Projected 1994-1995 Implementation Period:
Two*lane interim improvement of Date Street west of Yncz Road.
Four-lane improvement of Date Street from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs
Road.
Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road.
Widening of Margafita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road.
Projected 1995-1996 implementation Period:
Six-lane and two-lane interim improvement on Date Street as depicted n Figure 14.
Four-lane on-site and two-lane interim off-site improvement of Ynez Road/.lackson
Avenue to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
On-site loop street and connector street improvements as illustrated in Figure 14.
Four-way stop control at Date Street/Margarita Road, Ynez Road/Project Connector
Street, and Date Street/Ynez Road intersections.
New signal installations at Date Street/Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Margafita
Road/Project Connector Street intersections.
Winchester Road interchange ramp improvements.
12
Projected 1996-1998 Implementation Period:
Winchester Road interchange .overpass widening.
Date Street widening from Lincoln to Margarita Road.
New signal installations on Date Street at Ynez Road, Lincoln and Margarita Road
intersections.
New signal installations on Ynez Road at County Center Drive and the Project
Connector Street intersections.
Projected 1998-1999 Implementation Period:
Construction of the Date Street overpas-~ and installation of new signals on Date
Street at Madison Avenue and the Bu.sine.~ Park access street.
New signal installation at Jackson Avenue/North Business Park access street ' '
Projected 1999-2000 Implementation Period:
Widening of Jackson Avenue between the City limit and Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
Campos Verdes
Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period:
Two-lane interim improvement of Margafita Road from Solaria Way to Winchester
Road.
Four-lane improvement of General kearney Road from the new Margarita Road
alignment to the easterly project limits.
Solaria Way widening between Ynez Road and Margarita Road.
Ynez Road widening from the Overland Drive alignment to Rancho California Road.
Winchester Road widening from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
New signal installations on Margarita Road at Winchester Road and Solana .Way.
Projected 1994-1995 Implementation Period:
Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road.
Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road.
New signal installations on Overland Drive at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, and
Margarita.
New signal installation at intersection of Margafita Road and General Keamey Road.
Projected 1995-1996 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchang~ ramp improvements.
New signal installation at intersection of Margarita Road and Campos Verdes access
road.
13
Projected 1996-1998 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchange overpass widening.
Two-lane General Kearney Road extension from easterly project limits to Nicolas
Road.
Projected 1998-2000 Implementation Period:
(No system improvements assessed to be critical to the development of Campos
Verdes.
Recommended Mitigation Measures
The formulation of recommended mitigation measures for the three Kernper/Bedford urban core
projects has been based on a number factors including:
1. Endings of the original traffic impact studies prepared for the projects;
2. Findings of the project-related traffic utilization analysis of planned area roadway system
capacity; and
3. Findings of the conceptual circulation system phasing analysis.
Assessments of area roadway capacity utilization reveal that cumulative project traffic impacts are
wide-spread but vary significantly in terms of magnitude. Furthermore this analysis also reveals that
project trips are comprised of a combination of new trips and diverted trips. New trips consist of
those project trips which would clearly be added to roadway network such as those vehicle trips which
would have one end of the trip within the project and one end outside of the study area. Diverted
trips describe those project-related trips on area roadways which result from the interaction of land
uses within the projects and other local area land uses (both existing and planned). With diverted
trips, the associated traffic impacts can not be defined as the responsibility of the projects under study
since the opposite end of these trips, in effect, is being generated by other area land uses. At best
the impacts of these trips could be assessed as the responsibility of the land use which is closest to
the location where the impact occurs. It would not be equitable for the Kernper/Bedford projects
to assume full respons~ility for the impact of these diverted trips since elimination of the
Kernper/Bedford projects would not eliminate the land uses which are generating the opposite ends
of these trips. Without the Kernper/Bedford projects these trips would essentially be redistributed
to interact with other local or regional development. .,
14
In terms of the dispersion of project related traffic impacts (e.g. roadway capacity util~ation), it ks
not practical to assess widespread roadway implementation cost responsibilities when "fair share'
a.~sessments represent very small portions of the cost to implement individual roadway improvements.
The approach taken in this assessment is one which recognizes the cumulative impacts over a
widespread area and concentrates an equivalent mitigation effort in a strategic and more effective
manner.
[,
Recommended m~tigation measures for cumulative traffic impacts identified for the Kemper/Bedford
projects are summarized below:
.1. 50 percent implementation respons~ility for Jackson Avenue from the Temecula/Murrieta
City limits to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
· winchester Hills is a~sessed 90 percent of the mitigation.
Temecula Regional Center is assess 10 percent of the Mitigation.
2. 16.6 percent or 1/6th implementation respons~ility for the Date Street overpass.
· Winchester HilLs is assessed 100 percent of the mitigation.
28 percent implementation resp~ns~ility for the Winchester Road interchange overpass
widening and currently planned ramp ~idenings.
Winchester Hills is assessed 17 percent of the mitigation.
Temecula Regional Center ks assessed 80 percent of the mitigation.
Campos Verdes is assessed 3 percent of the mitigation.
5 percent implementation responsibility for the Overland Drive overpass improvement
(Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road).
Temecuia Regional Center is as.sessed 60 percent of the mitigation.
Campos Verdes is assessed 40 percent of the mitigation.
15 percent implementation respons~ility for the Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive
to Rancho California Road.
Temecula Regional Center is as,sessed with 70 percent of the mitigation.
Winchester I--Iilis is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation.
Campos Verdes is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation.
16.6 percent implementation responsibility for the WinchesteF Road widening from Margarita
Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 90 percent of the mitigation.
· Winchester Hills is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation.
Campes Verdes is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation.
15
!
[
25 percent implementation responsibility for the four-lane Margafita Road improvement from
Solana Way to Winchester Road.
· Temecula Reg/onal Center is assessed with 65 percent of the mitigation.
· Winchester Hills is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation.
· Campos Verdes is assessed with 20 percent of the mitigation.
15 percent implementation responsibility for the four-lane Margarita Road improvement from
Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 35 percent of the mitigation..
Winchester HilLs is assessed with 60 percent of the mitigation.
· Campos Verdes is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation.
25 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane Ynez Road improvement
from its present terminus at Equity Drive to the Temecula/Murrieta City limits.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 20 percent of the mitigation.
Winchester Hills is assessed with 80 percent of the mitigation.
10. 16.6 percent of the implementation responsibility for the six-lane Date Street improvement
from the 1-15 overpass structure to Margarita Road.
· Winchester Hills is assessed with 100 percent of the mitigation.
11.13 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane Date Street improvement
from Margafita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
Winchester Hills is assessed with 100 percent of the mitigation.
12. 25 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane improvement of Overland
Drive from Ynez Road to Margafita Road.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 80 percent of the mitigation.
· Winchester Hills is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation.
Campos Verdes is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation.
13. 30 percent of the implementation responsibility for four-lane improvements responsibility for
four-lane improvement of General Kearney Road from Margafita Road to the easterly
C, ampos Vetdes project boundary.
Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 30 percent of the mitigation.
· Campos Vetdes is assessed with 70 percent of the mitigation.
14. 15 percent of the implementation respons~ility for the four-lane improvement of General
Kearney Road from the easterly project limit to Nicolas Road.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 85 percent of the mitigation.
· Campos Vetdes is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation.
16
15. 10 percent of the implementation responsibility for the widening of Solana Way 'from Ynez
Road to Margarita Road,
· Temecula Regional Center is assessexl with 45 percent of the mitigation.
Winchester Hills is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation.
· Campos Verdns is assessed with 45 percent of the mitigation.
16. 5 percent of the implementation responsibility for the widening of Murrieta Hot Springs Road
from Date Street to Canyon Drive.
· Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 30 percent of the mitigation.
Winchester Hills is assessed with 70 percent of the mitigation.
17. Signal system implementation responsibilities would be as indication below.
a) 100 percent responsibility for on-site signals within the Winchester HilLs project including:
· Date Street signals at Business Park Access Street, Ynez Road, Lincoln, and
Margarita Road;
· Ynez Road signals at Business Park Access Street, and Loop Road Connector Street
(near Equity Drive); and
Margarita Road signal at southerly Loop Road Connector Street.
b)
100 percent respons~ility for Temecula Regional Center project perimeter access signals
including:
Winchester Road signal at westerly Regional Center Access Road;
Overland Drive signal at Regional Center Access Road; and
Existing regional modification costs at Palm Plaza Access and Costco Center Access.
c) 100 percent respons~ility for Campos Verdes Access signals on Margarita Road at
General Kearney Road and Campos Verdes Acce~ Street
d)
50 percent responsibility for signals located at the following intersections:
· Margarita Road/Winchester Road;
· Margarita Road/Overland Drive; and
· Ynez Road/Overland Drive.
25 percent responsibility for the signal installations at:
Jackson Avenue/Murrieta Hot Spring~ Road; and
· Margarita Road/Solana Way.
17
It is important to note that the implementation responsibilities detailed herein do not take into
account Ya:mp~r/Bexlfords contfibutioas toward Assessment District 161 and Community Facilities
District 88-12 which together address many of the improvements included in the refined
recommended mitigation measures. KemperfBedford should be given credit where appropriate for
asse.~sments involving the project properties and roadway improvements included in the 161 and 88-12
districts. Credits should also be considered for fight-of-way dedications involving the recommendeel
street improvements.
In addition to the above listed mitigation measures, the individual KemperfBedford projects would
be responsible for implementing all on-site project street improvements which have not already been
discussed. Individual project mitigation would also include preparation of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Programs which meet the requirements of the City's 'soon to be adopted" TDM
ordinance. Please not that' ihe Winchester Hills project, as part of its' mitigation program, has
reserved an easement along the 1-15 property frontage for a potential future collector-distributor
road/interchange system invoMng Date Street.
18
I
1
i
I
l
1
I
l
!
!
1
!
I
i
]
i
*~,..
0
LL.
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
ATTACHMENT "A", MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR EIR NO. 340
R:\STAFFRFI'\263SP.PC5 7/15194 vgw 24
ATFACHMENT "A"
Mitigation Monitoring Program
EIR No. 340, Specific Plan No. 263
The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan has been assigned by the Traffic Engineer the
following percentage utilization of a percentage implementation responsibility for the off-site
c'wculation improvements noted below. This implementation responsib'~ity for the provision of
off-site roadway improvements is intended to mitigate the project' s portion of cumulative traffic
impacts. These improvements and the project's iinplemontation responsibility are listed below:
Improvement
1. Construction of Jackson Avenue from the
Temecula]Murrieta City Limits to Murfieta Hot
Springs Road
2. Winchester Road interchange overpass
widening and currently planned ramp widenings
3. Overland Drive overpass improvement
(Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road)
4. Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive to
Rancho California Road
5. Winchester Road widening from Margarita
Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road
6. Four-lane Margarita Road improvement from
Solana Way to Winchester Road
7. Four-lane Margarita Road impwvement from
Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road
8. Four-lane Ynez Road improvement from its
present terminus at Equity Drive to the
Temecula/Murrieta City limits
9. Four-lane Overland Drive improvement from
Ynez Road to Margarita Road
10 Four-lane impwvement of General Kearny
Road from Margarita Road to the easterly
Campos Vetdes project boundary
11 General Kearny from easterly project limit to
Nicolas Road
Implementation
Responsibility Assigned to
Temecula Regional Center
5.00%
22.40%
3.00%
10.50%
16.94%
16.25%
5.25 %
5.00%
20.00%
9.00%
12.75%
R:~TAFFRFrO43PP.MEk{ 6/2/94 v~ 78
Improvement
12 Widening of Solana Way from Ynez Road to
Ma~garita Rend
13 WiderLing of Murrieta Hot Springs Road from
Date Street to Canyon Drive
14 Project perimeter access signals on Winchester
Road, Overland Drive, the Palm p]n7~ ac. cess
and Costco Center access
15 Signals at the intersections of: Margarita
Road/Winchester Road, Margarita
Road/Overland Drive and Ynez Rend/Overland
Drive
16 Signals at the intersections of Jackson
Avenue/Murrieta Hot Springs Rend and
Margarita Rend/Solana Rend
Implementation
Responsibility Assigned to
Temecula Regional Center
4.50%
1.50%
50.00%*
25.00%*
This percentage implementation responsibility relates to all three Urban Core projects.
Specific percentage responsibility by project is not available.
R:',,~X$1'AFFRPTL~3PP.MIgA 6~2/94 ~ 79
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT L~I I ER, APRIL 18, 1994
R:XSTAFFRPT%263SP.P<:'5 7115194 v~v., 25
TEMECULA VALLEY
Unified School District
SUPERINTENDENT
Patncla B Novotney. EdD
April 18, 1994
Steve Jiannino
City of Temecula Planning Department
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
BOARD Of EDUCATION
SUBJECT: Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan Conditions
Dear Mr. Jiannino:
The Temecu(a Valley Unified School District provides the following information from our review of the proposed Specific
Plan presented to the Planning Commission March 21, 1994.
School Facilities Mitigation Agreement
The proposed development includes the potential for 300 multi-family residential unats, generating
approximately 192 students, as follows:
# of students
Elementary School: 84
Middle School: 57
High Schooh 51
Total 192
This number is lower than the number of 240 Students included in the February 1, 1994 Draft Temecula Regional Center
EIR.
Prior to Specific Plan approval, a signed mitigation agreement will be required between the developer and the School
District to ensure adequate facilities for these new students, based on the Public Facilities Element of the City General
Plan and the General Plan implementation Program.
Section V D.5 of the Draft Specific Plan/EIR should be revised to reflect General Plan Policies and updated School
District infcrmGtion as indicated in the attachment.
If you have any questions, please call me at 695-7340.
Dave Gallaher
Director of Facilities Development
cc: Patricia B. Novotney, Ed.D., Superintendent
John Brooks, Assistant Superintendent Business Services
Lettie Boggs, Coordinator of Facilities Planning
Janet Dixon, Facilities Planning Analyst
Dennis Chiniaeff, KRDC, Inc.
31350 Rancho Vssta Road ' Ternecula CA 92592 ' (909) 676-2661
April 18, 1994
T.R.C. Specific Plan Conditions
Section V D.5
(TVUSD requested update for General Plan consistency - 4/18/941
SCHOOLS
a. Existino Conditions
The proposed project lies within the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) for educational services and facilities. The
District currently operates six elementary (grades K-E) schools, two middle (grades 6-8) schools and two high (grades 9-12) schools,
The attached Table, provided by the District's Facilities Development Department, indicates the current enrollment, permanent
building capacity, and interim (portable classrooms) capacity of each school. As the Table indicates, most District schools are
operating above their permanent building capacity. The portable classrooms are temporary buildings utilized to accommodate the
overflow of students as new permanent facilities are constructed.
b. Project Impacts/Genera/Plan Relationship
The Temecula Valley Unified School District utilizes the following criteria to calculate student generation.
· Attached Dwellinn Units:
Grades K-E - 0.28 students per unit; Grades 6-8 - 0.19 students per unit;
Grades 9-12 - 0.17 students per unit
· Detached [:)wellina Units:
Grades K-E - 0.39; students per unit; Grades 6-8 - 0.24 students per unit;
Grades 9-12 - 0.25 students per unit
The proposed 300 multi-family residential units located within the "mixed-use" commercial area on-s~te could potentially gene
approximately 192 students (utilizing the TVUSD criteria mentioned above). As no school facilities are proposed within the prole~,
boundaries, the estimated 192 students generated by the Temecula Regional Center would require accommodation off-site. As
previously mentioned, most District schools are currently operating above permanent building capacity. The additional students
generated by this project will place an increased demand upon District facilities which are already impacted.
It should be noted that the 300 multi-family residential units are intended to be located over commercial and office uses as
residential flats. Generally, this type of housing does not attract as many families with school aged children as is reflected in the
student generation data from other types of attached dwelling units. The estimated 192 students associates with the project
portray a "worst-case" scenario. It is anticipated that the number of students generated by the project may be lower than the 192
total.
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP
The Temecula Regional Center project site lies within the boundaries of the newly incorpurated City of Temecula. The City General
Plan adopted in October 1993, requires the following mitigation measures with regard to school facilities impacts.
c, General Plan IrnDlernentation ProdTram
Ir~ accordance with the Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan and the General Plan Implementation Program, the impact
of the new students from this project shall be mitigated through a mitigation agreement signed by the developer and the District,
prior to Specific Plan approvals. The developer and District may agree to use one or more of the following financing mechanisms:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Payment of school fees
Dedication of land and/or facilities
Establishment of or annexation to a Community Facilities District
Levying of a special tax
Other alternatives agreed upon by the Developer and the District
d. Level of SiQnificance After Mitiqation
Upon completion of the mitigation measures proposed above, the level of impacts related to Schools will be reduced to an
,~significant level.
0'~
O>-c~
riB"'
>-
OJ
.,,_,
~-:
O:
O:
C%1 0010 CO
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JULY '~8, 1994
R:~STAFFRPT~263SP.CC 9/7194 Idb 30
reconveneOa~a
Chairman Ford declared a recess at 7:17 P.M. The meeting was ~
7:29 P.M.
9. Specific Plan No. 263 and Chanqe of Zone No, 5589
Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot Commercial Core, 810,000
square feet of Office/Institutional and Mixed Use Residential with 298,000
square feet of retail with an accompanying Change of Zone request changing
the zone from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural 20 acre
minimum lot size) to SP (Specific Plan). Located south of Winchester Road
between Ynez and Margarita Roads.
Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske presented the staff report stating the
proposed project had been continued from the June 6, 1994 Planning
Commission meeting.
Commissioner Fahey stated that Condition No, 58 of the Conditions of
Approval should more clearly state that it applied specifically to residential
development in the Specific Plan.
Planner Ubnoske stated the primary issue for the Regional Center is the
Village Center Concept which was carried over from the May 23, 1994
meeting.
Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M.
Dennis Chiniaeff, representative for Kernper Community Development
Company, 27555 Ynez Road, inquired as to the conditions which allow some
community development to occur which interest both the City and Kernper.
Mr. Chiniaeff also said the conditions should be balanced in terms of
property improvements and area improvements. He also questioned whether
Condition No. 12 of the Conditions of Approval applied to the residential
portions of the proposed project. Mr. Chiniaeff asked about Condition No.
18 and the Developer Fee for commercial, office and residential; his
understanding is that these were Facilities fees.
Director Thornhill stated that Condition No. 12 relating to School District
fees does apply to the residential portion of the project.
Assistant City Attorney, Greg Diaz added legal comments relating to the
School Mitigation issue and the impact fee both of which have not been
resolved by the City Council and is under State Law.
Dennis Chiniaeff asked about the payment of $10,000.00 for Community
Facility Fees and whether the fee could be prepaid.
Assistant City Attorney Diaz stated that the ~ 10,000.00 fee could not be
prepaid.
Condition No. 20 to be changed from "of any subsequent development
application" to "for each subsequent development application."
Mr. Chiniaeff, the applicant, inquired about Condition No. 28, Bullet No. 3
regarding the infrastructure being in place prior to issuance of occupancy
permits and the dedication of the right-of-way for the construction of
Winchester Road. Mr. Chiniaeff stated that the Right-of-Way was intended
to be purchased under CFD 88-12. He requested that a provision be made
stating that the acquisition cost be reimbursed for the required right-of-way.
Condition No. 30 states "the developer is responsible to bond and construct
traffic signals.,." The word prior should be struck from the condition.
Condition No. 43 should include "unless approved by the Director of Public
Works for street purposes."
Commissioner Hoagland asked about Condition No, 30 and the method of
reimbursement when improving property other than own and that the
improvements are also part of Campos Verdes,
Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works stated that the Right-of-Way
reimbursement money went to the City for expended funds.
Planning Director Thornhill stated that Condition No. 60 should read "...open
space in residential areas shall be maintained..."
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey
to close the Public Hearing at 7:45 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No.
recommending approval of Specific Plan No. 263 and Change of Zone No.
5589 based on Staff's recommendations subject to the Conditions of
Approval including modifications to Condition No(s) 12, 20, 28, 30, 43, 58,
and 60 as discussed, seconded by Commissioner Fahey.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Hoagland, Salyer, Ford
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Commissioner Hoagland moved to re-order the remaining Agenda items so that
Item 10 follow the Planning Director's Report and other Commission business.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Thornhill stated that the Johnson Ranch hearing needed to be reschedulel
_" ~e to noticing.
PLAf~, MNG COMMISSION DISCUSSION
None
OTHER BUSINL.'c~
None
10.
Specific Plan No. 1, (,, ~nae of Zone No. 56
Report No. 348
Environmental Impact
Specific Plan proposing 308 !
Commercial, approximately 13~
Detention, 10.8 acres of Park i
accompanying Change of Z
Residential) and A-2-20
(Specific Plan).
Commissioners
7:55 P.M. due
..y residential units, 12 acres of
~s of Office/Commercial/Church/
_ r).7 acre Elementary School Site with an
u~._ * changing the zoning from R-R (Rural
AgriculL_-al, 20 acre minimum lot size) to SP
and Fahey excused t~ ._ inselves from the meeting at
conflict of interest. ,
Senior PI Debbie Ubnoske presented the staff rep t and stated that the
originally heard at the June 6, 1994 Planning 'ommission
mee Planner Ubnoske stated that the opening of Sand,, ';ng Way and/or
Street needed to be discussed by the Commission.
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
ADDENDUM TO FEIR 340 CONTAINING MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7194 Idb
ATTACHMENT NO. 10
REGIONAL CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN/EIR
SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
ATTACHMENT NO. 11
CAMPOS VERDES AND REGIONAL CENTER
COMPOSITE LAND USE PLAN
R:\STAFFP, Ff'~63SP.CC 9r7/94 klb ~
ITEM 18
LEGAL ZE_-'CR
TENTATIVE FRALT 27~27
T PARCEL OF LAND CONSiSTiNG OF TRACT 27827-;., ON FiLE IN BOOK
.... SEE 90 THROUGH !00, INCLUSIVE, AND TRACT 27827-2, ON FiLE IN BOOK
250, PAGES i THROUGH 3, INCLUSIVE, BOTH RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "B" /"F LOT LINE
ADiUSTMENT NO. PA94-9032, RECORDED MAY 31, 1994 AS INSTRJMENT NIl.
229114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING I?; THE CiTY
OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFOR.NiA, SAiD PORTION
PARCEL "B" BEi,'4S MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3~ OF SAID TRACT 27527-2;
A 3iSTAN'~E 92 5;4.&% FEET;
u , '4F 'F E.'-77 P~.P"'ET
THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE ')F SAID PARCEL "B" THE FOLLOWING FOj='
COURSES:
1. NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 61.42 FEET:
2. SOUTH ~2°14'55" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40}.87 FEET;
3. SOUTH 62°16'00' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482.2° FEET T9 A
POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082,00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF
SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 27'44'59'' WEST;
4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.15 FEET TO A POINT C'N A
NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LiNE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 14'28'52" WEST, SAID POINT BEING
ALSO THE NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 3! OF SAiD TRACT 27827-1;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 2~827-i THE FOLLOWING
~rNETEEN COIjRSES:
ii.
12.
.. SOUTH 10'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~5.!q FEET;
2. NORTH '73'!8'56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 12,4,~ FEET;
2. _=OUTH 57°20'50" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.43 FEET TO A
POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NCRTHWESTERLS
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 46.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF :SAID
C'_'RVE THROUGH SAID PC. ZNT BEARS NORTH ,-33'07'0'7" EAST;
4. SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A 'CENTRAL AN;iF
!42'4Z'46", A DISTANCE OF 114.58 FEET;
5 NORTH 44'10'08" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 5C,.OO FEET TO THE
BEGiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTH-WESTERLY AND
HAVING A RADIUS OF !00.00 FEET;
>_ ,=n' ESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THDO GH A 'CENTRAL ANGLE OF
2~!t'44'', A DISTANCE OF 45.92 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
A REVERSE CURVE, OONCACE NORTHEASTERLy AND HAViNj
.=~2IJS 'DF 222i.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEAP. L
E !if ......
.~,-1 11;'31 Z,;~ WEST;
'~,DRTHWE.STEPLY AL,DN,.; SALE, REVERSE CJRV:: THROUGH A 'lENTHAL
ANGLE OF 2'03'ii", A DISTANCE 79.5,~ FEET '.;, A P:31NT ';'N
A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAZE CURVE THR,:ij(~H
S~Zi: POINT BEARS SODTH 21'34'20" WEST;
;OUTu 24°26'i ~." WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4,!.'2 FEET T(; THE
~r:rNN/NG OF a TANqENT OURVE, C,~N,jAVE
'~ .... -- __, _A.~TERLk'
HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.0L FEET;
9. SOUTHWESTERLy ALI:ING SAID CURVE THROUC-H A CENTRAL ANGLE
3°0U' L4", A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET;
S,SUTH 10'25'5~" WEST, A DiSTAt,ICE CE
=',~RTH 73°34'0['' WEST, A DISTANCE '0F
SOUTH 16'25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF
NORTH
NORT!{
7 ? ' 3 .t ' 0 i" WEST,
le'~<'52." EAST,
7.~,3 FEET;
S5.CS FEET;
7.24 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 35.~l,D FEET;
A DISTANCE ,DF 2(.!5 FEET;
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPR{~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
October 11, 1994
Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) - A Forty-One Foot, Six Inch
High (41'6"), One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Square Foot Freestanding
Freeway Oriented Sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side
of Interstate 15
Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063
(APPEAL}, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION
TO DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063,TO ALLOW
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH
(41'6"), ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT
FREESTANDING FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF
TEMECULA VALLEY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
911-150-005.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission directed Staff to deny an approximately 41 '6" high freeway oriented
sign at their August 1, 1994 by a 4-0 vote. Staff requested that the Commission provide
direction to deny the sign at approximately 41 '6" in height for two reasons. First, the height
of the proposed sign was not consistent with another freeway oriented sign located on the
adjacent property to the south (Ynez Car Care Center). The Planning Commission, on May 2,
1994, directed Staff to deny a request for a forty (40) foot high sign at the Ynez Car Care
Center, opting to approve a sign between 25 and 30 feet in height. The City Council upheld
the Commission's decision on June 28, 1994, approving a sign between 25 and 30 feet in
height. This decision, in Staff's opinion, sets a precedent in the area. All of this was
explained to the applicant prior to submittal; however, they opted to submit the sign at 41 '6"
in height.
R:\STAFFRPT\6;SPA94.CC 9/26/94 ktb 1
Exhibit 'C'
Legal Description
(to be Grmctze~])
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
R:\STAFFRPT\6]PA9~,CC 9/26/9~ ktb 3
ATrACHMF-NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 94.-
A I~F-qOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063
(APPEAL), UPHOLDING PLANNING CO1VIMISSION'S DECISION TO
DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063, TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH (41'6"),
ONE HUNDliF. I~ TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING
FREEWAY OI~mNTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF TEMECULA VALLF-Y
LOCATED ON ~ EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCF. L NO. 911-150-005.
WHEREAS, Toyota of Temecula filled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 in
accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA94-0063 was processled in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WIF_,REAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA94-0063
on August 1, 1994 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribled by law, at which time
interestled persons had an opportunity to testify either in supper or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing, the Commission
directled Planning Staff to deny Planning Application No. PA94-0063;
WHEREAS, Toyota of Temecula fled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal)
in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WltEREAS, Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) was processed in the time
and manner prescribled by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the City Council receivled a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding Planning Application No. PA94-0063;
WHEREAS, the City Council considerled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal)
on October 11, 1994 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribled by law, at which time
interestled persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the City Council heating, the Council deniled Planning
Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal);
R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/9~ ktb 4
Second, Section 19.4.a.4. of Ordinance No. 348 (Free-Standing Signs) states that not more
than one free-standing sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land (Toyota of Temecula is
located on one parcel). Currently, Toyota of Temecula Valley has a freestanding sign along
Ynez Road, and they do not intend to remove it. The exception to the one freestanding sign
per parcel requirement under Ordinance No. 348 is for a shopping center that has frontage on
two or more streets. Toyota of Temecula does not meet the definition of a shopping center
as defined in Ordinance No. 348.
Since the applicant is currently choosing to construct a freeway oriented sign, they will be
precluded from advertising upon the Auto Mall Marquee in the event that it is constructed.
Should the Auto Mall Marquee be constructed and the applicant wish to advertise on it, they
will need to remove the freeway oriented sign prior to advertising on it.
As required under the submittal requirements for an appeal, the applicant has submitted
reason(s) or rationale to support the appeal. This has been included as Attachment No.
FISCAL IMPACT
NoRe,
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Resolution No. 94- - Page 3
Planning Commission Staff Report: August 1, 1994- Page 7
Draft Planning Commission Minutes: August 1, 1994- Page 8
Exhibits - Page 9
Applicant's Reason(s) or Justification to Support the Appeal - Page 10
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this llth day of October, 1994.
RON ROBERTS
MAYOR
ATf~T:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1 lth day of October,
1994 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JUNE S. GRRF~K
CITY CLERK
R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/9~ ktb 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
AUGUST 1, 1994
R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94,CC 9/26/!~. kib 7
NOW, T!~R~J*ORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMF_~ULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETF_.,RMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. F..j.01liDg~ That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following
findings:
A. The City Council, in denying Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal),
makes the following findings, to wit:
1. The project is not consistent with the City's General Plan. The
freestanding sign does not provide design excellence in signage, nor does it preserve and
enhance the positive qualities of individual districts. Further, it does not contribute to a
streetscape system that provides cohesivehess and enhances community image.
2. The overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of
the public health, safety and general welfare. To allow each existing business along with future
businesses, to erect forty (40) foot high free-standing signs adjacent to Interstate 15 would result
in visual blight. To approve projects that would result in visual blight would be contrary to the
general welfare of the community.
3. The project does not conform to the logical development of the land and
is not compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property.
Based upon precedent established from decisions made by the City Council and Planning
Commission, no signs individual use or center identification signs in this area, along Interstate
15 in excess of thirty feet have been approved. To approve a forty-one foot, six inch (41 '6")
high free-standing sign at this location would not conform to the logical development of the land
and would be inconsistent with present and future logical development in the area. In addition,
the forty-one foot, six inch (41'6") high freeway oriented sign is not compatible with the scale
of the buildings that are located on the site.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance, The City of Temecula City Council hereby
determines that Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) is a statutory exemption under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15270 (a) of the CEQA
Guidelines. This Exemption states: "CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency
rejects or disapproves."
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/94
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
August 1, 1994
Planning Application No. 94-0063 - A Forty-One Foot, Six Inch High (41'6"),
One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Square Foot Freestanding Freeway Oriented
Sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side of Interstate 15
Prepared By:
Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner
RECO1VE'~'ENDATION:
DIRECT Staff to deny Planning Application No. 94-0063 for a
forty-one foot six inch (41 '6") high, one hundred twenty-two (122)
square foot fleestanding freeway oriented sign for Toyota of
Temecula Valley
BACKGROUND
Planning Application No. 94-0063 was submitted to the Planning Department on July 7, 1994.
This project is before the Planning Commission because current policy requires Commission
direction with respect to freeway oriented signs. Staff is requesting that the Commission provide
direction to deny the sign at approximately 41'6" in height for two reasons. First, the height
of the sign is not consistent with another fleeway oriented sign that is located on the adjacent
property to the south (Ynez Car Care Center). The Planning Commission denied a request for
a forty (40) foot high sign at the Ynez Car Care Center, opting to approve a sign between 25
and 30 feet in height. The City Council upheld the Commission's decision approving a sign
between 25 and 30 feet in height. This decision, in StafFs opinion, sets a precedent in the area.
All of this was explained to the applicant prior to submittal; however, they have opted to submit
the sign at 41'6" in height.
Second, Section 19.4.a.4. of Ordinance No. 348 (Free-Standing Signs) states that not more than
one free-standing sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land (Toyota of Temecula is located on
one parcel). Currently, Toyota of Temecula Valley has a freestanding sign along Ynez Road,
and they do not intend to remove it. The exception to the one freestanding sign per parcel
requirement under Ordinance No. 348 is for a shopping center that has frontage on two or more
streets. Toyota of Temecula does not meet the definition of a shopping center as defined in
Ordinance No. 348.
R:xSTAFFRPTXf3PA94.PC 7/27/94 vgw
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 1, 1994
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 1, 1994
Commissioner Fahey said she is not in favor of granting an extension of time to the
applicant.
Chairman Ford said he would like to see the applicant construct the wall with a time
schedule. He clarified the Commission's direction would be to enforce the public
use permit.
3. Review Capital Improvement PrOaram (CIP). for Consistency with the General Plan
Senior Planner John Meyer presented the staff report.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to
approve staff recommendation and Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 94-
27 "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S 1994-1995 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED CITY GENERAL
PLAN"
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
3 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagland, Ford
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Salyer
Direct Staff to Deny PA94-0063 for A Forty-One Foot Six Inch (41 '6"0) Hiah, One
Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Souare Foot Freestandina Freeway Oriented Siqn for
Toyota of Temecula Valley
Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to
direct staff to deny Planning Application No. 94-0063 for a forty-one foot six inch
(41 '6"} high, one hundred twenty-two (122} square foot freestanding freeway
oriented sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley
Chairman Ford asked jf the applicant's existing sign was removed and this sign
placed, would staff view the request differently.
Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan said yes.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
3 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagland, Ford
I
PCMIN08/01/94 2 09123/94
Should the Commission approve the requested application, they should be aware of Condition
of Approval No. 9 of Plot Plan No. 249 Cremecula Auto Mall Marquee). A portion of this
condition states: "...all members and future members of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall will
forego requesting any additional freeway oriented signage as long as the Temecula Valley Auto
Mall Marquee is erected."
Since the applicant is currently choosing to construct a freeway oriented sign, they will be
precluded from advertising upon the Auto Mall Marquee in the event that it is constructed.
Should the sign be constructed and the applicant wish to advertise on it, they will need to
remove the freeway oriented sign prior to advertising on it.
Attachments:
Exhibits - Blue Page 3
a. Site Plan
b. Elevations
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:\ST~FFRPT\63PA9/,,CC 9/26/9~ ktb 9
CITY OF TEMECULA
Z..-->
CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0063
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - AUGUST 1, 1994
SITE PLAN
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Salyer
AUGUST1,1994
5. Director's Hearing Update
Report included in the agenda package.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
6. Planning ADDliCatiOn NO. 94-0042, Amendment No. 1 - Public Use Permit
Proposed expansion to existing church including sanctuary, a worship/
fellowship hall, administrative space, preschool and day school facility, to be
developed in three phases.
Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report.
Commissioner Hoagland and Chairman Ford expressed concerns regarding adequate
parking at build-out of the project.
Rev. Lyle Peterson, 29834 Corte Granada, Temecula, representing Hope Lutheran
Church, provided background on the Hope Lutheran Church and outlined the
proposal.
Tim Holt, Chief Architect, 275 N. El Cielo, Palm Springs, talked about the
architectural aspects of the project.
John Rogers, 27393 Ynez Road, #154, Temecula, project engineer, talked about
the engineering aspects of the project. He said Conditions of Approval Nos. 12, 15,
18, 25 refer to a written report requiring mitigated measures outlined in the
mitigation monitoring program have been satisfied however, there are conditions
imposed by the negative declaration and suggested the Commission delete these
four conditions. He also said Condition No. 57 requires the applicant to pay any
capital fee imposed on the project including that imposed as mitigation under the
E.I.R. Negative Declaration however, they have not been given any conditions.
Vince DiDonato, Alhambra Group Landscape Architects, 28441 Rancho California
Road, Suite G, landscape architect for the project, provided an overview of the
landscape plan for the project. Mr. DiDonato questioned Condition 11 (a), and said
there is a significant amount of large trees on the project and he feels it his
responsibility for identifying those trees which should remain on the site. He also
expressed a concern regarding Condition 16, which he feels is inappropriate for the
location recommended.
PCMIN08101194 3 09123/94
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
APPLICANT'S REASON(S) OR JUSTIFICATION TO SUPPORT THE APPEAL
R:\STAFFRPT\6]PA94.CC 9/26/94 kLb 10
Reasot~ or just. ification ~o support the appeal:
The staff report, prepared by the City Planning Dept., for the
Planning Commission, cited two factors as the basis for the de-
nial of the proposed freeway sign.
The first issue dealt with the height of the proposed sign
(41'-6'). The report states that a precedent of 25'-30' has been
set. There are at this time, signs along the freeway that exceed
30', Norm Reeves Honda and the Texaco Gas station to name two.
Since these signs were existing prior to the approval of the
Ynez.Car Care Center" application, precedence has been set, in
fact, for taller freeway signs.
The second issue refers to section 19.4.a.4. of ordinance
no. 348, which states,."...that not more than one free-standing
sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land...~ It appears that
there has been some inconsistency in the past regarding the in-
terpretation of this section. Currently, there are approximately
nine businesses with what appears to be two free-standing signs
cn the property, one on the frontage road and one on the freeway.
This particular property has received approval twice in the
past for a freeway sign in addition to the monument along Ynez
Road. The first was in January of 1991 by Bedford Properties. The
second, was the approval by tne Temecu!a City Council for ~ 73'
tall "AuLo Center Message Sign". With the approval Of the pro-
pose8 Toyota Freeway sign the existing approval for the Auto Cen-
ter sign would become abandoned.
The proposed Toyota Freeway sign complies with the city's
adepted code, o~ freeway oriented signage, sections t9.4.a.l.(a)
and 19.4.a.l.(b) of ordinance No. 348.
In conclusion, we respectfully request that the Temecula
City Council grant approval of the proposed 41'-6" tall Toyota
Freeway sign.
Desired action to be taken:
To reverse the decision cf the Planning Commission and grant
approval of the proposed 122 square foot, 41'-6" over all height
(from existing property grade), "Toyota" Freeway sign.
,.
CITY OF TEMECULA
2!'-4.60"
TOYOTA
~'-8.53'
2'-6.18
A 41 '-6.75"
33'-9.29"
B
~- F 3,-6.12-
Total 122 Sq. Ft.
CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0063
EXHIBIT - B
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - AUGUST 1, 1994
ELEVATION
R:\FAGANMXREPORTSITOYOSGN.pC 7/26/94 mf
ITEM 19
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
October 11, 1994
Planning Application No. PA94-0017, Development Agreement for Tract 27827
Prepared By:
Saied Naaseh, Associate'Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA94-017
2. introduce and read by title only an ordinanc~ entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 94-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT AND
RESTATEMENTOF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA,
INC., DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN
NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-
0017
BACKGROUND:
On September 19, 1994 the Planning Commission approved PA94-0017 with a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Billie Blair was absent). The original Development Agreement (No. 37) was
approved by the County of Riverside for the Roripaugh Hills Specific Plan (S.P. 164), which
includes Tract 27827, on November 4, 1988. In 1993, the developer initiated negotiations
with the former City Manager, Mr. Dave Dixon, and the former City Attorney, Mr. Scott Field,
for a new Development Agreement. These commitments set the foundation for the revisions
in the Development Agreement Fee for this project. The proposed revisions would reduce the
Development Agreement Fee from $5,183.00 to $3,000.00 and would entitle the develoDer
to a maximum of $82,000.00in credits toward the construction of an on site public park. The
construction of this park was a Condition of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
In light of the concerns of the citizens regarding the house sizes and the house values when
Tract 27827 was originally approved, the Planning Commission's main concern was adding
provisions to the Development Agreement requiring a minimum house size of 1000 square feet
to insure that the developer would not reduce the house sizes in the future. It should be noted
that the square footage of the houses apDroved with Tract 27827 range between 1000 to
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. 94---
ATrACI-HvIENT NO. 1
ORDINANCE NO. __
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWI~J~N THF~ CITY OF
TEMECULA AND COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC.,
DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOIVIF.~, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN
NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATIONNO.
0017 (PA94-O017)
WItEREAS, Section 65864 et ~t. of the Government Code of the State of California
and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and
maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in said Resolution, Coscan
Homes California, Inc., hereinafter "COSCAN" has fried with the City of Temecula an
application for a Development Agreement which reflects an amendment and re-statement of
existing County Development Agreement #37, (hereinafter "this Agreement"), of a residential
housing subdivision on its property located at the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and North
General Kearney Road, herelnafter the "Subject Property" which application has been reviewed
and accepted for filing by the Planning Director; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with
Coscan, has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning
Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September
19, 1994 (Planning Commission), and October 11, 1994 (City Council) at which time they heard
and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to
this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Coscan, that it:
A. Is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs
specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that this Agreement makes reasonable
provision for the use of certain real property for residential development consistent with the
General Plan's land use designation of Medium Density Residential;
B. Is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the
land use district in which the Subject Property referred to therein is located as this Agreement
provides for residential development pursuant to a Specific Plan which includes significant park
and recreational improvements;
R:XSTAFFRF~ITPA94.CC 10/4/~4 klb 4
C. Is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use
practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the
remainder of the City;
D. Will not 'be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it
provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof;
E. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in
a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public
hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project
applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and
fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as
shown on the latest equaliTed assessment roll;
F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date,
time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the heating body, a general explanation of
the matter to be considered, a general description and text or by diagram of the location of the
real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative
remedies;
G. Notice of the public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper
of general circulation at least ten (10) days prior to the City Council public hearing, mailed at
least ten (10) days prior to the heating to the project applicant, to each agency expected to
provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners
within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll;
H. Notice of the City Council hearing included the date, the time, and place of the
public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, the general explanation of the matter to be
considered, a general description in text or by diagram of the location of the real property that
is the subject of the heating, and the notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies;
I. City Council approved this Agreement by Ordinance based upon evidence and
findings of the Planning Commission and new evidence presented at the hearing on this
Agreement, giving its reasons therefore and set forth their relationship between this Agreement
and the General Plan;
K. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this
legislation and this Agreement are as follows:
1. Generation of municipal revenue;
2. Construction of public infrastnctore facilities;
3. Enhancement of the quality of life, including recreation facilities for
present and future residents of the City;
4. The opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating
significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City;
5. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and traffic signal mitigation);
6. Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional
infrastructure improvements; and,
7. The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use
and the protection of significant natural resources.
Section 2. APPROVAL. This Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference as Attachment "3" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to
evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of
Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this
Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has
received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement.
Section 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of
this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold
any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty
(30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The
City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this
Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption
of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish
a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and
against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA94-0017
Project Description: A ReQuest for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative
Tract No. 27827
Assessor's Parcel No,: 911-150-035 and 911-150-038
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars
($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California
Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required
above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be voided by reason of failure
of condition.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITHOUT MINIMUM HOUSE SIZES
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF
City Clerk
City of Temecula
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
City Clerk
City of Temeeula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula CA 92590
(Space Above Line For Recorder's Use)
AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017
K: IDMSLIL W. DIRTY085996. WP
2.
3.
4.
5.
m
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Definitions ............................................ 5
Interest of Owner ........................................ 7
Exhibits .............................................. 7
Term ............................................... 7
Assignment ........................................... 8
5. I Right to Assign .................................... 8
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9
5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10
Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10
Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11
Relationship of Parties .................................... 12
Changes in Project ...................................... 12
Timing of Development ................................... 12
Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12
11. I Hold Harmless .................................... 12
11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement,. ................... 13
11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14
11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15
11.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15
Public Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16
12.1 Intent .......................................... 16
12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16
12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17
12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17
12.5 Timing ......................................... 18
K:tDMSLIL W. DIRtO~B5996. WP
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Reservations of Authority ' 18
13.1 Limitations, Reservations, and Exceptions ................... 18
13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals ....................... 19
13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law ............. 19
13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies ...................... 20
13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension .......................... 20
13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps .............................. 20
Development of the Property ................................ 21
14.1 Rights to Develop .................................. 21
14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations ................ 21
14.3 Changes and Amendments ............................. 21
Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement .................... 22
Financing District ...................................... 23
Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement ....................... 23
Enforcement .......................................... 23
Events of Default ....................................... 23
Procedure Upon Default ................................... 24
Damages Upon Termination ................................ 24
Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................. 24
Notices ............................................. 25
Cooperation .......................................... 25
Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms .................... 26
Entire Agreement ....................................... 26
Counterparts .......................................... 26
Authority to Execute ..................................... 27
K:~DMSLIL Vt~DIRIOG85996. WP ii
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALq
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EXHTRIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE
EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK
K:IDMSLIL V~DIRtOO85996. WP iii
AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF TEMECULA
and
COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC.,
dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOlVfF-~
This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered
into to be effective on the date it is recorded with' the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective
Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and
Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes
("Owner"):
R_ECITALS
A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seo. ("Development
Agreement Statutes"), Day-Bar I, a California general paxtnership and others and the County of
Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the
Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No.
323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37").
B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within
County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision,
(the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a part of the municipal
boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement
encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as
"Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original
Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not
amended or impacted by this Agreement.
C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Developmeni Agreement Statutes, the City
became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon
incorporation of the City.
D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and
Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this
Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project.
E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statutes, the City's police
powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with
persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal
boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property
may be developed in the City.
F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the
City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of
certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner
shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement.
G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by
the staff of the City, the Planning Commission of the City and the City Council of City and have
been found to be fair, just and reasonable.
H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the
public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement.
I. All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act have been met with respect to this Agreement.
J. Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public
facilities impact fees for residential development within City CRSA Fees"). City requires these
revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of
the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development.
K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact
fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during
the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent
City from ever receiving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires to reduce the County
Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees.
L. .On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the
imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation
resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to
Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees
subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-33 I,
the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3)
acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard").
M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted
Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or
payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (1,000) people to reside in the proposed
subdivision.
N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of
increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner
to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance
of building permits for the Project.
O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the
generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the
K:tDMSLIL W. DIRiOD85996. WP 3
Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context othenvise requires:
1.1 "City" is the City of Temecula.
1.2 *City Public FaciLity Fee' is an amount to be established by Ordinance of
1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside.
1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County
Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37.
1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with
or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication
of land, the construction of improvements or pubLic facilities, or the payment of fees in order
to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or
other pubLic interests.
1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined
in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project.
1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development
approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property,
including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which
were approved by the County or the City.
1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant
to the Mello-Rcos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Cede Section
53311 et s~, as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et seq.. as
amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911
(California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special
assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost
K: IDMS~JL MA DIRtGO85996, WP 5
of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a specific
geographical area of the City.
1.9 "Interim Public Facilities Fee" means an amount of Three Thousand
Dollars ($3,000.00) per each residential unit developed in the Project.
1.10 'Land Use Regulations* means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, roles,
regulations and official policies of City, governing the development and use of land including
without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision
requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation
or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction
standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property listed on Exhibit B
which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date of this Agreement. "Land Use
Regulations" does not include any County or City ordinance, resolution, code, role, regulation,
or official policy, governing:
(a) The conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations;
(b) Taxes and assessments;
(c) The control and abatement of nuisances;
(d) The granting of encroachment permits and t-b.e conveyance of rights
and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property;
(e) The exercise of the power of eminent domain.
1.11 "Owner" means the person having a legal or equitable interest in the
Project;
1.12
Development Plan.
1.13
"Project" is the development of the Property in accordance with the
"Property" is the real property described in Exhibit C.
1.14
adopted by City.
1.15
"RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as
"Subsequent Development Approvals" means all development approvals
required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property.
1.16 "Subsequent Land Use Regulation" means any Land Use Regulation
adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement.
2. IntereSt of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee title interest in the
Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be
bound by this Agreement.
3. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached
hereto and made a part hereof by this reference:
Exhibit
Designation
A
B
C
D
E
Term.
4.1
Description
Existing Development Approvals
Existing Land Use Regulations
Legal Description of the Property
Notice From Mortgagee
Site Plan of Park
The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and
shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated,
modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the
parties hereto.
4.2
occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any
appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit filed against the City to set aside,
withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement.
K: IDMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 7
This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the
5. Assignment.
5.1 Right to Assign. The Owner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign
the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et see.. or Riverside County Ordinance
No. 460, as the same was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by
Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, parmership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time
during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or
assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations
arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following
conditions precedent:
(a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this
Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of
all or a part of the Property.
(b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within
fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such
sale, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a
form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or
assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and .
unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this
Agreement.
Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions
shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any
purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this
Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee until and unless such agreement is executed.
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or
assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless
such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided
by City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions:
(a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any part of the
Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust.
(b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement.
(c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed
agreement required under Pasagraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above.
(d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security
equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its
obligations hereunder.
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the
sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been.. finally subdivided and
is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate
user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate
with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement
without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the
following conditions:
(a) the lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in
'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or
other ultimate user; and
(b) a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for a building on a lot,
and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid.
5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after
an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the
terms and conditions of this Section.
6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the
Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and
modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and
representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or
modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation
or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and
purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable
costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make
reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City.
Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall
defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good
faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law.
Co) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form
as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices,
K:tDM$;IJL W, DIRtO085996. WP ~ 0
shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the
performance of the Owner's obligations under this Agreement.
(c) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth
on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of
this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten
(10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but
not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under
this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part
thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such
foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have
an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other
affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such performance, provided
however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent
to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a
condition precedent to City's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer
or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1
of this Agreement.
(e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion
thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the
Owner set forth herein shall not be entitled to any rights to develop which have or may have
vested as a result of this Agreement.
K:tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996~ WP 11
7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the
benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance
with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement.
8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between
City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City.
9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing
Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City
equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first
instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the
Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the
adoption of this Agreement).
10. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time
predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon
numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and
demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California
Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camar~llo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984),
that the failure of the panics therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later
adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such par~ies, it is the
parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have
the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner
deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any
timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan.
11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation.
11. i Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents,
employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for
K: IDMSIJL W, DIRIOO95996. WP 12
personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct
or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee
or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and
representatives from actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of
Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This h01d harmless agreement applies to all
damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the
operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied,
or approved plans or specifications for the Project.
11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement. In the event the County seeks
to challenge the right of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate
Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this
Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of
Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays
in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint
defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against
any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such
action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any Its pendens) and to share the
costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such
action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement
and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro
rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of conu-ibution of the total units
owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units
within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference
in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development
K: [DMSLIL W. DIR$O085996. WP 13
Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the
responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated are lawfully the funds
of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the
payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and
Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought
by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the
defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is
an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party
shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal.
11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any
legal action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this
Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any
shortfall between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities
Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise
have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be
responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts
collected and held by City under ~the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment
by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like
amount paid by City.
11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County
prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this
Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as
the case may be, shall revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect
at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement
K:~DMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 14
is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions
set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and
from the date of .said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the
County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No.
37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding
said ruling of invalidiVy.
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its
expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit
granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall
promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the
defense. If City fails to pwmptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if
City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any
such claim, action, or proceeding.
11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel
approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and
any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages
(including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage,
punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands,
debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest,
fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness
fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing
this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City
K: IDMSLIL W. DIRtO085996. WP 15
or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or
detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure,
or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning any
Hazardous Substance or hazardous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject
of this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant
to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Cede Section
25364, and their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from
liability.
12. Public Benefits. Public Improvements and Facilities.
12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers
private benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits.
Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private
benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs
resulting from development of the Project.
12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential).
(a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or
City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date,
Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per
dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below.
At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim
Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other
public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residential development projects
in the City.
K: IDMSLIL W. DIRtO~85996. WP 16
Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within
which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City
Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a fight to review, audit and verify all costs associated with
said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the parties. If
at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced
above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the
City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall
be defined as onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility
work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic
removal and wetlands mitigation.
12.5 Timing. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
City Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement
shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first
production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be
paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the
Property. Collection of any and all interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities
Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with
the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said
model homes, which MOU is dated for reference
13. Reservations of Authority.
13.1 Limitations. Reservations, and Exceptions.
,1994.
Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the
development of the Property:
(a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated
actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals.
K: iDMSiJL W. DIRIOO85996. WP ] 8
(b) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development
exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence a~ of the Effective Date and
throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal
Mitigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in
existence when paid.
12.3 Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Agreement, Owner
agrees to dedicate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered,
park land equalling approximately three (3) acres pursuant to that certain undated
Parkland/l-~ndscape Improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown
on Exhibit E which is attached and made a part hereof and incorporated by this reference.
Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of
easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for
dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the
construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City
accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall
be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation
relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company. to issue a CLTA title
insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shall be
provided to City. If City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a
CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City.
12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the
improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive
a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees
based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the
Project's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a total maximum credit of
K: ~MS~L W. DIRIO085996. WP 17
Co) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions,
applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and
any other matter of procedure.
(c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however,
that no such subsequen~y adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to
development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly
to development throughout the City.
(d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications
including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical
Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code.
(e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan.
Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing
of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan
and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property.
(f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan
provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to
development of the Property.
13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent
City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent Land Use
Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent
City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the
basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development
Plan.
13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that
State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent
K: [DMSLIL W. DIR10085996, WP 19
or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions
of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State
or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such
laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce.
13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties
that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of
the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City and this Agreement does
not limit the authority of such other public agencies.
13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section
66~52.6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s)
(vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended
to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement
13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or
tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development
of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section
66410, et seo_.~ and Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by
reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-0~, and if this Agreement is
determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right
to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the rights, obligations, and protections afforded
the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall
supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above,
development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions
in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances
concerning vesting maps.
K: [DMStJI, W. DIRIOOEI5996. WP 20
14. Development of the Property.
14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, including
payment of the hterim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the
Property in accordance with, and to the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall
remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as
contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the
permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size
of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes
shall be those set forth in the Development Plan.
14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise
provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public
Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the
Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of
proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications
applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City
shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development
Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provid?d by this Agreement
including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City Public
Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all
applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed
in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract
for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of
Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner.
14.3 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and
further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may
K: IDMSSJI, W. DIRIOO8599& WP 2 ]
demonstrate that changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing Development
Approvals. In the event the Owner finds that a change in the Existing Development Approva/s
is necessary or appropriate, the Owner shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to
effectuate such change. If approved, any such change in the Existing Development Approvals
sha/1 be incorporated herein as an addendum to this Agreement and may be further changed from
time to time as provided in this Section. Owner, shall, within thirty (30) days of written demand
by City, reimburse City for any and all reasonable costs, associated with any amendment or
change to this .Agreement that is initiated by Owner or Owner's successor. Unless otherwise
required by law, as determined in City's reasonable discretion, a change to the Existing
Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this
Agreement provided such change does not:
(a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or,
(b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or,
(c) Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings; or,
(d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public
purposes within the Property as a whole; or,
(e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or a supplemental
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code.
15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement.
(a) Pursuant to City Resolution No. 91-52, as it may be subsequently
amended, City shall review this Agreement at least once during every twelve (12) month period
from the Effective Date of this Agreement. The Owner or successor shall reimburse City for the
reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of written demand from
City.
K:tDMSLIL W, DIRIO085996, WP 22
(b) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate
good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such
evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require.
16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in
exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the
financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities,
lands, and improvements to serve the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside
the Property. It is acknowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as
requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds.
17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or
canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided
for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested
by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development
Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no
such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of
reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City.
18. Enforcement. Unless amended or canoeled as herein provided, this Agreement
is enforceable by any party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific
plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or amend the
rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design,
improvement, and construction standards and specifications.
19. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening
of one or more of the following events or conditions:
(a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to
City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made;
K:gDMStJL W. DIRIO085996. WP 23
(b) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial
evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions
of this Agreement.
20. Procedure Upon Default.
(a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify
this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City.
(b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied
if on periodic review the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
(c) Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third
person.
(d) Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed
by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor.
(e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided
for in this Agreement or in City' s regulations governing development agreements are available
to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach.
21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would
not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to
this Agreement or the application thereof.
In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity
available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers,
employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee
of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for
breach of that Agreement by City.
K: [DMStJL W. DIR[O085996. WP ~ 4
22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of
breach of this Agreement or to enforce a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is
entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs,
23. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in
writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid and presumed
delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit
thereof in United States Mail. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:
To City: City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: City Attorney
Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows:
To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes
12865 Pointe De1 Mar, Suite 200
Del Mar, CA 92014
Attention: William A. Davidson
With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman
11975 E1 Camino Real, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92130
Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq.
A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter
notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly take
action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required
processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for
development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall
cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land
use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated
K:lDMStJL W. DIRtOO95996. WP 25
therewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s), building inspector(s), and/or
other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project.
25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms.
(a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the
feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive.
Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations
are joint and several
(c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by
mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of
the Agreement.
(d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and
benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not
limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any fight of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete,
final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is
intended by the parties to completely state the agreement in full. Any agreement or
representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation
thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void.
27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each
of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an original. No counterpart shall be
deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the
other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party seeking enforcement
thereof.
K:tDMSLILW. DIRtGO85996. WP 26
28. Authority to Execute. Each party hereto expressly warrants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their
corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its
obligations hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executexl by the parties on the day and
year first above written.
"City"
City of Temecula
By:
Ron Robe~s, Mayor
june S. Greek, City Clerk
AnDroved as to form:
~'eter M. Thorson, City Attorney
"Owner"
Coscan Homes California, Inc.,
a California corporatign, dba
Coscan Davidson Homes
-
William A. Davidson
(t edname)
its Pres~Y~ent
(~tle)
Stephen H. Dawe
(typedname)
its Executive Vice-President
(title)
K. ~DMSIJI, W. DIRIO095996. WP 27
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
On ~.r,:~k ,6~ c D~ ~c-r~q-, before me, '~ [e__ ~- . .~ccc_. there insert the
name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared
~,L~-, ,~-, A. ~,%, i~o~ ~. ~-r~p~ ~, 3~-C, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscrib~ to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature /-Z252 -
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On , before me, [here insert the
name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared
, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
SEAL
K:IDMSIJL W. DIRIOO85996. WP 2g
Development Agreement No. 37
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No.
164. Amendment No.
ZONING
Ordinance No. 348.2788
(Zone Change No. 450!)
Ordinance No.
164 as amended by Specific Plan No.
1.
348.2927
(Zone Change No. 5127)
LAND DIVISIONS
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 and Final Tract Map
No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Book 177, pages 72-76.)
The development approvals listed above include the approved
maps and all conditions of approval.
COPIES OF THE EXlSTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE
ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
F_.XH. LE_ T A
Development Agreement No. 37
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
2. Ordinance No.
3. Ordinance No.
348 2857.
Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as
amended through Resolution No. 88-485.
340.
348 as amended through Ordinance
4. Ordinance No.
448 a.
5. Ordinance No.
458 8.
6. Ordinance No.
460 92.
7. Ordinance No.
461 6.
8. Ordinance No.
509
9. Ordinance No.
546.7a.
10. Ordinance No.
547.5.
11. Ordinance No.
555.15.
12. Ordinance No.
617.1.
448 as amended through Ordinance No.
458 as amended through Ordinance No.
460 as amended
461 as amended
509 as amended
546 as amended
547 as amended
555 as amended
617 as amended
13. Ordinance No. 650.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
14.
Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and
Requirements for the Consideration of Development
Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and
Resolution No. 88-119.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE
ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
F..XHIBITB
Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement
Development Agreement:
Amendment and Restatement
of Development Agreement
Specific Plan No. 164. Roripaugh
Planning Application No. 94-0017
Date:
To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula
Pursuant to Section 6Co) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement
of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by
as Mortgagee for the property (or portion therecO to receive
copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the terms
and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of
any such Notices should be mailed to the following address:
(Mortgagee)
(Person/Department)
(Address)
(City/State/Zip)
(Telephone No.)
A copy of this Notice should be filed with the project file to insure proper and timely
notice is given. Under the terms of said Amendment and Restatement of Development
Agreement, as Mortgagee is entitled to receive copies of any- Notice of
Default within ten (10) days of sending any such Notice to Owner. Failure to send any
such Notice may have serious legal conseouences for the City.
This request is to remain in effect until revoked by as
Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated.
The person executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and
represents that the entity he/she represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is
entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of
Development Agreement.
The undersigned declares the above information is true and correct under the penalty
of perjury under the laws of the State of California.
Dated: _, 1994.
MORTGAGEE
.By:
(signature)
(printed frame)
I~:
(title)
[Notary required]
This Notice is to be sent to both the City Clerk and Planning Director for the City of
Temecula at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 or such other location
as Temecula City Hall may be located in the future.
-2-
SEP OB '~ 09:41AT~T F~'X___. ~.2/Z
EXH~BffE
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MINIMUM HOUSE SIZES
RECORDED AT THE REQUF_.ST OF
City Clerk
City of Temecula
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
City Clerk
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula CA 92590
(Space Above Line For Recorder's Use)
AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
7.
8.
9.
I0.
11.
12.
Definitions ............................................ 5
Interest of Owner ........................................ 7
Exhibits .............................................. 7
Term ............................................... 7
Assignment ........................................... 8
5. i Right to Assign .................................... 8
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9
5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10
Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10
Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11
Relationship of Parties .................................... 12
Changes in Project ...................................... 12
Timing of Development ................................... 12
Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12
11. I Hold Harmless .................................... 12
11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement,. ................... 13
i 1.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14
I 1.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15
I 1.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15
Public
Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16
12. I Intent .......................................... 16
12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16
12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17
12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17
12.5 Timing ......................................... 18
EXHIBITS
EX}{I~IT A
EXHIBrr B
EXHIBIT C
F. XISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE
EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK
~:: u~s~t w, otmoo~sss~. w~ iii
AMFND1V[ENTANDRESTATEMENTOFDEVELOPMENTAGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF TE1V[ECL~A
and
COSCAN HOMF-~ CALIFORNIA, INC.,
dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMY. S
This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered
into to be effective on the date it is recorded with the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective
Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and
Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes
("Owner"):
RECITALS
A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seq. ("Development
Agr.eement Statutes"), Dav-Bar I, a California general partnership and others and the County of
Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the
Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No.
323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37").
B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within
County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision,
(the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a pan of the municipal
boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement
encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as
"Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original
Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not
amended or impacted by this Agreement.
C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Development 'Agreement Statutes, the City
became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon
incorporation of the City.
D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and
Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this
Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project.
E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statutes, the City's police
powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with
persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal
boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property
may be developed in the City.
F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the
City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of
certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner
shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement.
G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by
the staff of the City, the Planning Commission of the City and the City Council of City and have
been found to be fair, just and reasonable.
H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the
public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement.
All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act have been met with respect to this Agreement.
Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public
facilities impact fees for residential development within City ("RSA Fees"). City requires these
revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of
the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development.
K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact
fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during
the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent
City from ever receiving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires m reduce the County
Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees.
L. On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the
imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation
resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to
Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees
subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-331,
the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3)
acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard").
M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted
Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or
payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (I ,000) people to reside in the proposed
subdivision.
N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of
increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner
to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance
of building permits for the Project.
O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the
generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the
4 ~ CQSTa fiF_SA FAX ~. 714'TS~S~18 P. 04
this AF~carat-
NOW. TI~RI in ceauideralion of ec above y.~Itals a~ of the mutual
he. xei~dl~ contained ~ for ou'~e~ Zood anti v~tmble condderatlm,. ths t~ mad suflidmcy
of ¢aich is hereby acknowlcdl~ ~tt i~_nt~ralca tinrear, thc paraet ~re~
4
City.
Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires:
1.1 "City" is the City of Temecuta.
1.2 "City Public Facility Fee" is an amount to be established by Ordinance of
1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside.
1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County
Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37.
1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with
or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication
of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order
to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or
other. public interests.
1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined
in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project.
1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development
approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property,
including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which
were approved by the County or the City.
1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant
to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Code Section
53311 et seq. as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et seq., as
amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911
(California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special
assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost
1.14
adopted by City.
1.15
"RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as
"Subsequent Development Approvals" means all development approvals
required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property,
1.16 "Subsequent land Use Regulation" means any I.and Use Regulation
adopted and effective after the Effective Date of' this Agreement.
2. Interest of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee title interest in the
Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be
bound by this Agreement.
3. ExhibitS. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached
hereto and made a part hereof by this reference:
Exhibit
Designation
A
B
C
D
E
Term.
Description
Existing Development Approvals
Existing I_and Use Regulations
Legal Description of the Property
Notice From Mortgagee
Site Plan of Paxk
4.1 The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and
shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated,
modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the
parries hereto.
4.2
occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any
appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit fried against the City to set aside,
withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement.
K:'~3MBLIL W. DIRlGO85998, Wp 7
This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the
5. Assignment.
5.1 Right to Assign. The Owner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign
the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et sea.. or Riverside County Ordinance
No. 460, as the same'was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by
Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, pamership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time
during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or
assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations
arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following
conditions precedent:
(a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this
Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of
all or a pan of the Property.
(b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within
fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such
sate, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a
form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or
assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and
unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this
Agreement.
Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions
shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any
purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this
Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee, but the Benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to 'such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee until and unless such agreement is executed.
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or
assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless
such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided
hy City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions:
(a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any pan of the
Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust.
(b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement.
(c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed
agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above.
(d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security
equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its
obligations hereunder.
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the
sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been finally subdivided and
is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate
user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate
with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement
without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the
following conditions:
(a) the lot has Been finally subdivided and individually (and not in
'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or
other ultimate user; and
(b) a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for a building on a lot,
and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid.
5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after
an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the
terms and conditions of this Section.
6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the
Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and
modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and
representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or
modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation
or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and
purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable
costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make
reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City.
Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall
defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good
faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law.
(b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form
as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices,
K.'IDMSLJL W. DIRIOOE5996. WP ~ 0
shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the
performance of the Owner's obligations under this Agreement.
(e) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth
on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of
this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten
(10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but
not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under
this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Properly, or any part
thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such
foreclosure, shall take the Property, or pan thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have
an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other
affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such pe~ormance, provided
however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent
to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a
condition precedent to City's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer
or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1
of this Agreement.
(e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion
thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the
Owner set forth herein shall not be entitled to any fights to develop which have or may have
vested as a result of this Agreement.
11
7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the
benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance
with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement.
8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between
City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City.
9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing
Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City
equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first
instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the
Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the
adoption of this Agreement).
I0. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time
predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon
numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and
demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California
Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cat. 3d 465 (1984),
that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later
adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties, it is the
parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have
the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner
deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any
timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan.
11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation.
11. i Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents,
employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for
personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct
or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee
or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and
representatives from actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of
Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This hold harmless agreement applies to all
damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the
operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied,
or approved plans or specifications for the Project.
11.2 County Litigation ConcerninE Agreement. In the event the County seeks
to challenge the fight of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate
Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this
Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of
Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays
in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint
defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against
any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such
action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any l!s pendens) and to share the
costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such
action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement
and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro
rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of contribution of the total units
owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units
within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference
in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development
K:IDMSLIL W. DIR{OG95396 WP 13
Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the
responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated axe lawfully the funds
of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the
payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and
Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought
by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the
defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is
an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party
shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal.
11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any
legal. action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this
Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any
shortfail between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities
Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise
have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be
responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts
collected and held by City under .the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment
by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like
amount paid by City.
11.4. County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County
prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this
Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as
the case may be, shail revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect
at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement
is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions
set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and
from the date of said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the
County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No.
37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding
said ruling of invalidity,
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its
expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit
granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall
promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the
defense. If City fails to promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if
City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any
such claim, action, or proceeding.
11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel
. approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and
any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages
(including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage,
punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands,
debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest,
fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness
fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing
this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City
K: {DMSIJ[, W. DIRtG085996. WP 1 ~
or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or
detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure,
or other plan (regardless of whether underta!~en due to governmental action) concerning any
H~7~rdous Substance or h~:'~rdous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject
of this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant
to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Code Section
25364, and their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from
liability.
12. Public Benefits, Public improvements and Facilities.
12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers
priv.ate benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits.
Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private
benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs
resulting from development of the Project.
12.2 Public Facilities Fee fResidential~.
(a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or
City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date,
Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per
dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below.
At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim
Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other
public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residentiai development projects
in the City.
Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within
which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City
Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a right to review, audit and verify all costs associated with
said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the parties. If
at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced
above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the
City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall
be defined a.s onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility
work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic
removal and wetlands mitigation.
12.5 Timing,. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
City .Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement
shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first
production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be
paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the
Property. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities
Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with
the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said
model homes, which MOU is dated for reference , 1994.
13. Reservations of Authority.
13.1 Limitations, Reservations. and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the
development of the Property:
(a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated
actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals.
K:~DM.SLIL W. DIRIO095996. WP 1 ~
Co) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development
exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence as of the Effective Date and
throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal
Mitigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in
existence when paid.
12.3. Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Agreement, Owner
agrees to dedicate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered,
park land equalling approximately three (3) acres pursuant to that certain undated
parkland/Landscape Improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown
on Exhlbit E which is attached and made a part hereof and incorporated by this reference.
Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of
easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for
dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the
construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City
accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall
be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation
relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company to issue a CLTA title
insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shall be
provided to City. If City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a
CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City.
12.4 Park improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the
improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive
a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees
based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the
Project's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a tota/maximum credit of
K: LDMStJL W. DtRtO095~96. WP 17
(b) Procedural regulations relating to heanng bodies, petitions.
applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and
any other matter of procedure.
(c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however,
that no such subsequently adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to
development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly
to development throughout the City.
(d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications
including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical
Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code.
(e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan.
Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing
of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan
and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property.
(f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan
provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to
development of the Property.
13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent
City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent I..and Use
Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent
City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the
basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development
Plan.
13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that
State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent
K: LDMSIJL W. DIRIO0 85.g96. WP 19
or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions
of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State
or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such
laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce.
13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties
that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of
the development of the Property separately from or joinfly with City and this Agreement does
not limit the authority of such other public agencies.
13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section
66452,6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s)
(vest.ed or regular) approvext as pan of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended
to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement
13.6 Vestin~ Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or
tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development
of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section
66410, et Seq.~ and Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by
reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04, and if this Agreement is
determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right
to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the rights, obligations, and protections afforded
the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall
supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above,
development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions
in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances
concerning vesting maps.
K.' ~DMSLIL W. 0/R10085996, WP 20
14. Development of the Property.
14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, including
payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the
Property in accordance with, and to the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall
remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as
contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the
permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size
of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes
shall be those set forth in the Development Plan.
14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise
provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public
Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the
Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of
proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications
applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City
shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development
Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement
including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City.Public
Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all
applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed
in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract
for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of
Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner.
14.3 Chan~es and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and
further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may
K.' IDMSIJL W, DIRIG(:)8599E, WP 2 1
i~onday October ~ 199Z> 2:05 --
F~X NO. 7147555848
P. 05
dcrnon.~u at~ that changes are {ttmpropdate and mutually dc~L'-able tn the Bxixf~g 13~mlopment
Approvals. In {he evcnt ~ Owne~ finds Ib. at a change In t~e Bzlstlng I:~W, lopmcnt
iS ncCe&.laP] or ~lmpzt)pdstt~, me {~er si!~1] ~p~y f~ S Slll~cqtlent Development Al:)ptoval to
effedum such e, hange, If al~pt. oved. any such c. han~ in ~e ~xls6ng DevOUt &pptov'dls
~ha]] be incorpon~d hewein as an add~ndum to P~h Agzement and rn~y 5~ fm-d~r changed from
~-~e~o time aS provided ln flds Sectiort. Owner, shall, wil~thitty(30)thyg ofwxilten demmld
by Cfty, relmbur~ City for any and all ,x~ooa51~ ~, ~hted With any amendment or
Change to this A~xnent 11~ is inidm~d by Owner or Owners successor. Unleg othorwise
required by law, u de~mnined in City's reasonable disete6on, a ~ ~o te ]~xis~ng
D~velopment Approvals shall be deemed "m~not" and not require an amendment to this
A~feement provided ~uch chsnp d~ not:
(a) Alt~ ~e pe. tmltted use~ of the Prepetty as t whore;
Co) lnc~'eaz the density or inteasipJ of us~ of the Property a~ a whole; or,
(e) In4m~.se the mlximum h~iRht and ~ of perinitial building; or,
(d) Deletca3rt~lui~mcntfofthere~t~tticaordedleationofl~dforpubllc
pt~l~s withB tl~ Property as a whole;
(e) Cons6tu~e a project t~lujflsg a subsequent. or a supplemental
Eavl~onmonlnl Imp~t Report puz'~u2nt to Section 21166 of the Public Resourt~ Code.
14.4 M'mimum Unit ~ Owner agre~ 1~1 the llnit~ m be cotxstrdeted On
l>topclty shall be t minimum of one ~hotls~md CI,000) ~cluax~ fe~t in size.
15. .Perledie Review of Compliance ~h
(a) Pu~uant to City Re~olu~en No. 91-52, ~x it may be
amended, City shaR review lids Agreement at !~ast o,~cs dining every twelve 02) month period
from t~ Effe~ive Da~ of ~ds Agreement. Tb~ Own~ or s~ec~sor shall x~nbu~c C~ty tot time
reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of
written demand from City.
I~0'a ZI~'S~SkeIS '0N ~,~ NVlIZ~HNa m AN(10q0119~:tt
Co) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate
good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such
evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require.
16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in
exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the
financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities,
lands, and improvements to serve the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside
the Property. It is aclcnowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as
requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds.
17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or
canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided
for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested
by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development
Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no
such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of
reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City.
18. Enforcement. Unless amended or canceled as herein provided, this Agreement
is enforceable by a~y party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific
plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or a.mend the
rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design,
improvement, and construction standards and specifications.
i9. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening
of one or more of the following events or conditions:
(a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to
City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made;
K:IDMSIJL W. DIRIG085996. WP 23
(c)
person.
(d)
Co) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial
evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions
of this Agreement.
20. Procedure Upon Default.
(a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify
this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City.
(b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied
if on periodic xeview the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third
Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed
by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor.
(e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided
for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements are available
to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach.
21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would
not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to
this Agreement or the application thereof.
In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity
available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers,
employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee
of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for
breach of that Agreement by City.
K:IDMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 24
22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of
breach of this Agreement or to enforce a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is
entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs.
23. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in
writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid and presumed
delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit
thereof in United States Mail. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:
To City: City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: City Attorney
Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows:
To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
Del Mar, CA 92014
Attention: William A. Davidson
With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman
11975 El Camino Real, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92130
Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq.
A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter
notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly takd
action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required
processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for
development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall
cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land
use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated
K:~DMStJL 'f~DIRtOO85996, WP 25
merewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s),. building inspector(s), and/or
other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project.
25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms.
(a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the
feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive.
Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations
are joint and several.
(c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by
mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of
the Agreement.
(d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and
benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not
limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any right of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete,
final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is
intended by the parties to c6mpletely state the agreement in full. Any agreement or
representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation
thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void.
2'7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each
of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an original. No counterpart shall be
deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the
other party to this Agreement is in the physic. al possession of the party seeking enforcement
thereof.
K: ~DMSiJL W. DIRIOOE59S6. WP ~ 6
28. Authority to Execute. Each party hereto expressly warrants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their
corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its
obligations hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the day and
year first above written.
"City"
City of Temecula
By:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
june S. Greek, City Clerk
Amproved as to form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
"Owner"
Coscan Homes California, Inc.,
a California corporation, dba
Coscan Davidson Homes
William A. Davidson
(t ed name)
its Pres~Y]genr' (rifle)
By: ~.c-,~t
Stephen H. Dawe
(typed Bame)
its Executive Vice~President
(title)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
On ~riSk m~ c ~, ~cr~, before me, ~ tL ~..~cc~. [here insert the
name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared
~,~,~-~ A ~.~.~,1~o~ e~ s-r~,~ ~. G.~..-q personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the ~ame in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(SEAL
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On , before me, [here insert the
name and title of the officer/notary] personally appeared
, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(SEAL)
K: iDMSIJL W. DIRtO085.996. WP 2 ~
Developmen~ Agreemen~ N~. 37
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 164 as amended
164. Amendment No. 1.
ZONING
Ordinance No. 348.2788'
(Zone Change No. 4501)
Ordinance No. 348.2927
(Zone Change No. 5127)
LAND DIVISIONS
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703
No. 20703-! (Recorded at Book
by Specific Plan No.
and Final Tract Map
177, pages 72-76.)
The development approvals lis~ed above include the approved
maps and all conditions of approval.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE
ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
A
Development Agreement No. 37
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
!. Riverside County Comprehensive
amended through Resolution No.
2. Ordinance No. 340.
3. Ordinance No. 348 as amended
348.2857.
4. Ordinance No. 448 as amended
448.a.
5. Ordinance No. 458 as amended
458.8.
6. Ordinance No. 460 as amended
460.92.
7. Ordinance No. 461 as amended
46~.6.
Ordinance No. 509 as amended
509.2.
9. Ordinance No. 546 as amended
546.7a.
10. Ord~nanceNo. 547 as amended
547.5,
11. Ordinance No. 555 as amended
555.15.
617 as amended
General Plan as
88-485.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No.
12. Ordinance No.
617.1.
13. Ordinance No. 650.
14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and
Requirements for the Consideration of Development
Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and
Resolution No. 88-119.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE
ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
EXHIBIT B
Exhibit 'C'
Legal Description
(to be attached)
LEGAL
TENTATIVE TRACT 27827
PARCEL OF LAND CONSiSTiNG ~F IRA,iT 27837-i, ON FiLE fN BOOK 249,
,S 90 T~ROjGH !00, INCLUSiVe, AND ;RACT 2~827-2, ON F!LS IN BOOK
PAGES i ~HROUGH 3 INCLUSIVE BOTH RECORDS OF ~IVERSIDE CC. UNTY,
CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "B" ~F LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT NO. PA94-0032, RECORDED MAY 31, [994 AS INSTRUMENT
220114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING iN THE CiTY
')F TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAiD PORTION OF
PARCEL 'B' BEING MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIgED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGiNNiNG AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3~ OF SAiD TRACT 27827-2;
~.'-'li'i~' i}T'-' ', ~ °'l~' 3 ,-!, 'r_,
A DISTANCE OF 5~4,83 FEET;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF
COURSES:
SAiD PARCEL "B" THE FOLLOWING FOUR
1. NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6i.42 FEET:
2, SOUTH 02°i4'55" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40}.87 FEET;
3. SOUTH 62°16'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482.29 FEET TO A
POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF
SAiD CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 27~44'59'' WEST~
4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.i5 FEET TO A POINT C'N A
NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LiNE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 14'28'52' WEST, SAID POINT BEING
ALSO THE NORTHERLY OORNER OF LOT 3! OF SAID TRACT 27~27-1;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 27827-! THE FOLLOWING
NINETEEN OOURSES:
i. SOUTH I~'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF .~5,!9 FEET:
2. NORTH 73'!e'56'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~2.4~ FEET:
3.SOUTH 57"~0'56' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38,43 FEET TO A
POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY
AND HAViNO A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAZD
C'JRVE THROUGH SAID POINT ~EARS NORTH .~3'07'07" EAST;
4. SOUTHWESTEELY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
i~2~42'4e'', A DISTANCE OF !14.58 FEET~
5. NORTH 44'~0'08' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 50,00 FEET TO THE
BEGiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND
H~VIN] A RADIUS OF !00.00 FEET~
~. NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL AN:zLE OF
2d~10'44'', A DISTANCE OF 45.92 ~ TO Tu~ BEGiNNr~ia
A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A
RADIUS OF 2211.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS
SOUTH 1}~31'38'' WEST;
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD REVERSE CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 2'03'~[", A DISTANCE 79.59 FEET i'D A POINT
A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAiD CURVE THRGUGH
~" '3 '20
r,_.lNl BEARS SOUTH 21 4 " WEST;
8. S~UTH 24~26'13'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 44.~2 FEET TO THE
~EGiNNiNG OF A TAXiGENT CURVE, CON,iAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AXE
HATING A RADIUS OF ~89 . 00 FEET;
9. SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
3~00' L4", A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET:
10. SODTH 16°25'59" WEIST, A DiSTAl'ICE CF I?,TI] FEET;
ii. NORTH 73°34'0['' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 135.00 FEET:
12. SOUTH [6'25'5~' WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~7,24 FEET;
!3. NORTH 73~34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.~',0 FEET:
i ,~ NORTH i ,' ~ ~= ' ~ ..... T a D/STANOE nr -'r~ ~ ~ ~TT~ ·
15. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A
16. SOUTH [o'25'59" WEST, A
I~. NORTH 7~°34'0!'' WEST, l
18. NORTH !6° 25'59" EAST, A
19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT
DISTANCE OF [5~.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 18.43 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 20,29 FEET:
DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO
"F" OF SAID TRACT 27827-[,
BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST
TRACT 27827-2;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY
i,
2. SOUTH
3. NORTH
4. SOUTH
5. NORTH
o. SOUTH
7. NORTH
8. NORTH
9. NORTH
i0. SOUTH
11. NORTH
POINT
ELEVEN COURSES:
NORTH 73°34'01.. WEST
16° 25'59" WEST
73°34'01" WEST
16°25 59" WEST
73°34 0l" WEST
!6°25 59" WEST
73° 34 0i" WEST
i6°25 59" EAST
73° 34 01" WEST,
!o~ 25 59" WEST,
0i" WEST,
OF BEGINNING.
CORNER OF LOT !8 OF SAID
THE
A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 4.26 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF !05.00 FEET~
A DISTANCE OF 33.80 FEET~
A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 80.20 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET;
A SiSTANCE OF 155.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF !o.33 FEET;
A DISTANCE ~F 85.00 FEET TO THE
LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 'THE
Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement
Development Agreement:
Amendment and Restatement
of Development Agreement
Specific Plan No. 164. Roripaugh
Plannin~ Application No. 94-0017
Date:
To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula
Pursuant to Section 6(b) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement
of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by
as Mortgagee for the property (or portion thereof) to receive
copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the terms
and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of
any such Notices should be mailed to the following address:
(Mortgagee)
(Person/Department)
(Address)
(City/StateJzip)
(Telephone No.)
A copy of this Notice should be fled with the project file to insure proper and timely
notice is given. Under the terms of said Amendment and Restatement of Development
Agreement, as Mortgagee is enti~ed to receive copies of any'Notice of
Default within ten (10) days of sendinE any such Notice to Owner. Failure to send any
such Notice may have serious legal consequences for the Citw.
This request is to remain in effect until revoked by as
Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated.
The person executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and
represents that the entity he/she represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is
entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of
Development Agreement.
F. XH~ffE
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19. 1994
Mike Knowlton, 39130 Pale Vista Road, Temecula, expressed opposition
proposed project density and presented a petition of opposition from th/h/h,~//
surrounding property owners. ,/./
Commissioner Slaven said she understands the issue before~dth the property
owners and the residents surrounding the property, how/e~r she said she supports
staff's recommendation for denial.
/
Commissioner Fahey said the proposed projec't/~not in compliance with the General
Plan and probably will not be in complianc~ a result of the special study.
· ' , by Commissioner Slaven to close
Map No. 25063 and Adopt Rebution No. 94- denying Change of Zone No. 5598
/
AYES: A/ COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Slaven, Webster, Ford
NOES: , / 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair
9. PA94-0017
Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Commissioner Webster asked if the County has provided any response regarding
their interpretation of the fees.
Director Thornhill stated the City has been in disagreement with the County
regarding fees since the City's incorporation and it is the City's position that once
the City incorporated and was providing the levels of service to the developments
the City should collect the fees. He added that the City believes the clause that is
contained in the Development Agreements that were previously negotiated with the
County is improper.
Assistant City Attorney Greg Diaz said the County has been consistent in their
position that they are entitled to fees as a matter of contract law. The City
Attorney's office has reviewed the provisions of the government code as it pertains
to Development Agreements and the incorporation of new cities and it was
determined that once incorporated, the City is entitled to 100% of the fees. He
added that the developer in this Development Agreement has agreed to provide
funds to defend the City's position should the City go to court in defense of their
position on the fees.
PCMINOg/19/94 5 09/28/94
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
Chairman Ford opened the public hearing.
Dale Gleed, 12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200, Del Mar, representing the applicant
Coscan Davidson Homes, said they have worked with the City Planning Department
on the agreement and are satisfied with the fee requirement.
Chairman Ford said he remembers at the time the project went before the Council
there was discussions regarding minimum home sizes and he is concerned there is
no language included in the Development Agreement which addresses that
discussion.
Director Gary Thornhill said he remembers the discussion however, he does not
remember that being included in the Conditions of Approval.
Dale Gleed stated the house sizes proposed range from 1000 to 1500 square feet.
Chairman Ford said he would like to see the comments made regarding the unit size
tied to the Development Agreement.
Director Thornhill said he would have to go back to the minutes of that Council
meeting and if that was the intent of the Council, he would then determine what
that intent was and bring that back at another hearing. He said he doesn't recall
any precise comments regarding square footage.
Dale Gleed said the plan today is the same as the original concept plan, however, if
the applicant changed the plans, they would have to bring that back to the Planning
Department. Mr. Gleed said he would be willing to agree to a 1000 square foot
minimum,
Commissioner Fahey said the issues raised by Chairman Ford are important and
staff should review prior to sending this item forward to the City Council,
It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by Chairman Ford to approve
Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA94-0017 and Adopt Resolution No. 94-
recommending approval of PA94-0017 by City Council, based on the analysis and
findings contained in the staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval and
direct staff to follow up on the comments made during the City Council hearing on
minimum house sizes.'
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
4 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Slaven, Webster, Ford
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair
PCMIN09/19/94 6 09/2BI94
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
R:\STAI~FP, PT~I7PA~..CC 10/4/94
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 19, 1994
Planning Application No.: PA94-0017
(Development Agreement for Tract 27827)
Prepared By: Saied Naaseh
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for PA94-0017; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 94- recommending approval of
PA94-0017 by City Council, based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Rf!port; and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approva:.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Leo Roripaugh
REPRESENTATIVE:
Sanford Edward
PROPOSAL:
A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for
Tentative Tract No. 27827
LOCATION:
Located on the northwest corner of l-4icolas Road and North
General Kearney Road
EXISTING ZONING:
SP (Specific Plan)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Santa Gertrudis Creek
Specific Plan No. 164, Medium High Density
Residential (5.1 Dwelling Units Per Acre)
R-2 (Multiple Family Dweqings)
O (Office-Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
N/A
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 ';',. 91ling units per acre)
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Santa Gertrudis Creek
Single Family Dwellings
Single Family Dwellings
Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Number of Lots:
Existing Development Agreement Fee:
Proposed Development Agreement Fee:
22.5 acres
162
$5,183.00/Unit
$3,000.00/Unit
BACKGROUND
The original Development Agreement (No. 37) was approved by the County of Riverside for
the Roripaugh Hills Specific Plan (S.P. 164) which includes Tract 27827 on November 4,
1988. In 1993, the developer initiated negotiations with the former City Manager, Mr. Dave
Dixon, and the former City Attorney, Mr. Scott Field, for a new Development Agreement.
These commitments set the foundation for the revisions in the Development Agreement Fee
for this project. The proposed revisions would reduce the Development Agreement Fee from
$5,183.00 to $3,000.00 and would entitle the developer to a maximum of $82,000.00 in
credits toward the construction of an on site public park. The construction of this park was
a Condition of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Development Agreement Fee includes only an Interim Public Facilities Fee and
has eliminated other fees associated with County approved Development Agreements such
as Regional Parkland Fee, Habitat Conservation Fee and Public Services Offset Fee.
interim Public Facilities Fee
The proposed Development Agreement is for a period of ten (10) y~ ars and applies to Tract
27827. This tract was approved by the City Council on January 25, 1994 and contains 162
single family lots and a three (3) acre public park. The Interim Public Facilities Fee will be
$3,000.00 per unit and will be paid for the first five (5) years of the 'erm of the Development
Agreement. After this period, the developer will either continue to pay the Interim Public
Facility Fee of $3,000.00 or such other Public Facilities Fee adopted by the City and applied
to other residential projects.
Public Park and Park Improvement Fee Credits
According to an Agreement signed at the recordation of the map between the City and the
developer, the three (3) acre park will be constructed and dedicated to the City prior to
issuance of the 34th Certificate of Occupancy of the project or within eighteen months of the
recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever comes first. The developer will
receive credits against the Interim Public Facilities Fee for a maximum of $82,000.00. The
amount of credit will be determined by the difference between the actual cost of improving
the park and the project's Quimby Park requirements.
ANALYSIS
The existing approved Development Agreement includes the follow!ng fees:
Public Facilities Fee
Regional Parkland Fee
Habitat Conservation Fee
Public Services Offset Fee
$2,292.00
$424.00
$315.00
$2,152.00
Total Development Agreement Fee
$5,183.00
According to the County, all County approved Development Agreements have a section which
purports to require the split of certain fees between the County and a city should any portion
of the property by covered the agreement become part of a city. That section provides that
the Regional Parkland Fee ($424.00), the Habitat Conservation and Open Space Land Fee
($315.00) would continue to be fully payable to the County. Additionally, two-thirds (2/3) of
the Public Services Offset Fee ($2, 152.00)and 5.3% Public Facilities Fee ($2,292.00)would
be payable to the County. Therefore, according to the County, a total of $2,295.14is payable
to the County from the $5,183.00 Development Agreement Fee, leaving $2,887.85 as the
City's portion of this fee. The proposed $3,000.00 Interim Public Facilities Fee is greater than
$2,887.85, City's portion of the existing Development Agreement Fee, should the County
interpretation of the fees be used.
However, the City contends that the County's interpretation of the Development Agreement
is not in accordance with State law which provides that the benefits of a Development
Agreement as well as its burdens transfer to a City upon incorporatior,. As the property which
is the subject of this Development Agreement is now within the City boundaries the County
is no longer entitled to any fees under the Development Agreement,
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
This project will be consistent with the General Plan since the General Plan currently
designates the site as Medium Density Residential and the approved development project
which is implemented by this Development Agreement for this site is consistent with this
designation. This project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2's High
Density zone since the development project which is implemented by this Development
Agreement it meets all the requirements for this zone.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A Initial Study was prepared for this project and it revealed no significant impacts. Therefore,
Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Since prior commitments by the former City Manager and City Attorney were made to the
developer in regards to reducing the Development Agreement Fee, Staff supports this p~'oject.
It should be noted that for any new Development Agreements, Staff would be looking at
increased fees to be justified by a new fee study.
City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Pro~.,: will result in the
a. Generation of municipal revenue;
b. Public infrastructure facilities;
Enhancement of the quality of life; including recreation facilities for present and
future residents of the City;
The opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating
significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City;
e. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and traffic signal mitigation);
Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional
infrastructure improvements; and,
The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use and the
protection of significant natural resources.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 6
Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10
Initial Study - Blue Page 12
Approved Development Agreement - Blue Page 27
Proposed Development Agreement - Blue Page 28
Exhibits - Blue Page 29
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Tract Map 27827
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 94.-_
ATi'ACHMENT N0. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 94-_
A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING CO1VIMISSION OF
TIEIF- CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
BY TIFF. CITY COUNCH~ OF AMF. ND1VIENT AND
RESTATEMF. NT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, RORIPAUGH; PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA94-0017
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WIt~.REAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Ten~ecula has received an
application for an Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, Specific Plan No.
164, Roripaugh; Planning Application No. PA94-0017, (hereinafter "Development Agreement" );
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public Laaring on September 19.
1994, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve
the Development Agreement, Atxachment No. 5, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 and
incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full herein.
Section 2. That in recommending the adoption by the City Council of the Developmere
Agreement the Planning Commission hereby make the following findings:
1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general
land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temeculas's General Plan in that the
Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for
residential development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of
Medium Density Residential; and,
2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the u~'.es authorized in, and the
regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the Property st oject to the Development
Agreement is located as the Development Agreement provides for single faraily homes and that
this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the
opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan, and,
R:\STAFFRPT\17PA94.PC 9/15/94 klb 7
3. The Development Agreemere is in conformity with the public convenience.
general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance
of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and,
4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental m the health, safety, or
general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and,
5. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Comzaission was published in
a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Pl,:nning commission public
hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project
applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and
fire protection, and to all propony owners within three hundred feet (300') of the property as
shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and,
6. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date,
time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the heating body, a general explanation of
the matter to be considered, a general description and text or by diagram of the location of the
real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative
remedies; and,
7. The Development Agreement complies with the goal~ and objectives of the
Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the
period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures
and conditions of approval imposed; and.
8. The Development Agreement complies with requirements of the zoning district
in which the applicant proposes to develop in that the Specific Plan zoning of High Density
Residential is consistent with the Medium Density Residential :3eneral Plan Land Use
Designation; and,
9. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the Cit> of Temecula from this
legislation and this Development Agreement are as follows:
City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the:
a. Generation of municipal revenue;
b. Public infrastructure facilities:
c. Enhancement of the quality of life; including recreation facilities for
present and filmre residents of the City;
d. The oppormhity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating
significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorem tax revenues for the City;
e. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fu'e and traffic signal mitigation);
R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.PC 9/15/94 klb 8
f. Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional
infrastructure improvements; and,
g. The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use
and the protection of significant natural resources.
Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shah cause this Resolution to
be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of
STEVEI~'J. FORD
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof. held on the __ day of
, by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
GARY THORNHILL
SECRETLY
R:\STAFFRPT~17PA94.PC 9/15/94 Irdb 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA94-0017
Project Description: A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for
Tentative Tract No. 27827
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
911-150-035and 911-150-038
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars
($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California
Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required
above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be voided by reason of failure
of condition.
R:\STAFFRPT~ITPA94.PC 9/15/9~ lab I 1
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
INITIAL STUDY
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Initial Environmental Study
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
II.
1. Name of Project:
Roripaugh Estates
2. Case Numbers:
Planning Application No. PA94-0017 (Development Agreement)
3. Location of Project:
Located on the North-west corner ot Nicolas Road and North
General Kearney Road
4. Description of Project:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative
Tract No. 27827
August 8, 1994
6. Name of Proponent:
Leo Roripaugh
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
P.O. Box 2
Temecula. CA 92590
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section lID
I. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures"
X
Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering
of the soil?
X
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
X
The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
X
Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils. either on
or off the site?
X
Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion?
X
g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake?
X
R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.IS 9/15/94 tjs I ~
Yes Maybe
Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such
earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, ground
failure, or similar hazards?
X
Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zor e?
X
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
X
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
X
Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether
locally or regionally? __ __ X
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff?.
_ __x
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not limited to, temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
_ x__
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions. withdrawals. or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations?
X
h,
Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public
water supplies?
__x
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such
as flooding?
X
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native
species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops. and
aquatic plants)?
X
R:\STAFFRPT\I7pA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs '~4
Yes
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or
endangered species of plants?
c, Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing specms?
d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop?
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of
animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, fish.
amphibians, shellfish, benthie organisms, and/or insects)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or
endangered species of animals?
c. The introduction of new wildlife species into an area?
d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations?
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in:
a. Alteration of the present land use of an area?
b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described
in a community or general plan?
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
Maybe
No
X
R:x, STAFFRPTX17PA94.1S 9115194 tjs 1 ~
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances
in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous
substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals,
oil or radiation)?
b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or to~ic
materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals,
or radiation)?
c. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan?
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, densit3,
or growth rate of the human population of an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand
for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including
public transportation?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or
result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of
the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
Yes Maybe N__o
X
X
X
X
R:\$TAFFRFF\I7PA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs 'l 6
e. Maintenance of public facilities. including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? __
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energ2,
or require the development of new sources of energy? __
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to any of the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? __
b. Communications systems? __
c. Water systems? __
d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? __
e. Storm water drainage systems? __
f. Solid waste disposal systems? __
g. Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient patlern of
utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? __
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? __
b. The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including
the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as hospitals and
schools) to toxic pollutant emissions? __
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public~ __
b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? __
c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? __
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality ,~r
quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? __
Yes
Maybe
N__o
R:\STAFFRPT\17PA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs 'l 7
20.
Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric,
archaeological or historic site.'?
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure, or object?
c. Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values?
d. Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes
Maybe
N_..Q
X
R:XSTAFFRPTXlTPAq4.1S 9/15/94 tjs
IH. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Earth
1 .a.d.
No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions ~r in changes in geologic
substructures, destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features
since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the
impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated wi~ the mitigation measures
proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Trac~ Map No. 27827.
1.b.
No. The project will not cause disruptions, displacements, compacti~n, or overcovering of soil,
since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the
impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures
proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
1 .c.g.
No. The project will not result in change in topography or ground surface relief features, or
modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Deciaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
1 .e.f.
No. The project will not result in an increase in wind or water erosion of soils. either on or off
the site and changes in siltation, deposition or erosion since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed wire the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
1.h.i.
No. The project will not result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as
earthquakes, and development near an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone, since the General Plan
EIR does not identify the site in being in any of these areas. However, the site is within a
liquefaction zone as identified in the General Plan EIR since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Air
No. The project will not result in the local deterioration of air quality since the project does not
involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction
of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
2.b.c.
No. The project will not create objectionable odors or cause alteration of air movement,
temperature or moistare or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally since the project
does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the
construction of this site have been mitigamd with the mitigation n: '~asures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827
Water
3.a.c.d.
e.f.g.h.
i.
No. The project will not cause changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters, alterations to the course or flow of flood waters, change in the
amount of surface water in any waterbody, discharge into surface waters or in any alterations of
surface water quality, alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters, change in the
quantity of ground waters, reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies, or exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding since the
project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from
the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
3.b.
No. This project will not cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff sinco the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are
anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site h~,ve been mitigated with the
mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
Plant Life
4.a.b.d.
No. This project will not change the diversity of species, or number of any native species of
plant, reduce the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants or
reduce the acreage of any agricultural crop since the project does not involve any construction.
No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been
mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
No. This project will not introduce new species of plants since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Animal Life
No. The project will not cause a change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of
animals since the project does not involve any construction. No impazts are anticipated since all
the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated v,!th the mitigation measures
proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
5.b.c.
d.e.
No. The project will not cause a reduction in numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or
endangered species of animals, introduction of new wildlife species into the area, a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals or deterioration to existing fish o~r wildlife habitat since the
project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from
the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
R:\STAFFRjrI~17PA94.1S 9115194 tjs 20
Noise
No. The project will not increase the existing noise levels since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed wi~h the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
6.b.c.
No. The project will not expose people to severe noise or vibrations since the project does not
involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction
of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Light and Glare
,
No. The project will not cause an increase in light and glare since the project does not involve
any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this
site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Land Use
No. The project will not cause an alteration of the present land use of the area since the project
does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the
construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
8.b.
No. The proposed project will not cause alteration to the future planned land use of this area.
when ultimately developed, as described in the draf~ General Plm, which designates the site as
Medium Density Residential since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are
anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the
mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
Natural Resources
9.a.b.
No. The project will not result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources and
depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources when the site is ultimately developed since the
project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from
the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Risk of Upset
10.a.b.
No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion and/or, the release of hazardous substances,
when the site is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No
impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated
with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract
Map No. 27827.
R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.1S 9/15/94
10.c.
No. The project will not result in any interference with an emergenci~ response plan when the site
is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are
anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the
mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declarahon for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
Population
11.
No. This project will not make alterations to the location, distribution. density, or growth rate of
the human population of this area since the project does not involve an~ construction. No impacts
are anticipated since all the impacts from the consu'uction of this site have been mitigated with the
mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
Housin~
12.
No. The project will not affect existing housing and create a demand for new housing since the
project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from
the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Transnortation/Circulation
13.a.f.
No. The project will not generate daily trips, increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists
or pedestrians since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated
since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation
measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentanve Tract Map No. 27827.
13.b.c.d.
No. The project will not create additional demand on parking, cause a substantial impact on
existing transportation systems, alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods and alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic since the project does not involve any
construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site
have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with. the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Public Services
14.a.h.c.
d.e.f.
No. The project will not have a substantial impact on fire protection, police protection, schools,
parks and other governmental services since the project does not involve any construction. No
impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated
with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract
Map No. 27827.
R:\STAFFRPTX17PA<)4.1S 9115/94
Energy
15.a.b.
No. The project will not result in substantial use of fuel or energy since the project does not
involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction
of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Utilities
16.a.b.c.
d.e.f.g.
No. The project will not result in a need for new system or substantial alterations to any of the
following: power or natural gas, communication systems, water systems, sanitary sewer systems,
storm water drainage systems, solid waste disposal systems and will not result in a disjointed or
inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above since the project
does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the
construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation m,-.asures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Human Health
17.a.
No. The project will not create potential health hazards when the site is ultimately developed since
the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts
from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigat on measures proposed with
the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27227.
17.b.
No. The project will not expose people to potential health hazards. including the exposure of
sensitive receptors such as hospitals and schools to toxic pollutant emissions since the project does
not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the
construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
Aesthetics
18.a.b.c.
No. The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public,
the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or in a detrimental visual impact
on the surrounding area since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are
anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the
mitigation measure~ proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
Recreation
19.
No. The project will not result in an impact upon the quality or quatuity of existing recreational
resources or opportunities since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are
anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the
mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declar~Ti,on for Tentative Tract Map
No. 27827.
R:\STAFFRPT\17pA94.1S 9115194
Cultural Resources
20.a.b.c.
d.
No. The project wiif not result in alteration or destruction of an) paleontologic, prehistoric,
archeological or historic site, adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object, any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values, or restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact
area since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the
impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated witix the mitigation measures
proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827.
R:\STAFFRPTH7PA94.IS 9/15/94 tjs 24
IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Does the project have the potential to either: degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish,
wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal
species, or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
Yes Maybe N_,~o
Does the project have the potential to achieve short
ten, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental
goals? (A short term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long term impacts will endure well into the
future. )
X
Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate resources may be
relatively small, but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment is significant.)
X
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
V DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE 1VIINEVIUS' IMPACT FINDINGS
Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect,
either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources?
Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish,
amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued
viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code).
Yes
N__o
X
R:\STAFFRFr\ITPA94.IS 9115194 tjs 25
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case
because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached sheets and
in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will
mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Signature
Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner
Name and Title
Aumast 8. 1994
Date
R:~STAFFRPT~lTPA94.1S 9115194 tjs 26
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
APPROVED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
15. NORTH ~3°34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF !'5L.00 FEET:
lo. .SOUTH io'25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE ,ilF 18.47 FEET:
17. NORTH 79~34'0!'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
18. NORTH !6°25'59" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20,29 FEET;
19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT "F" OF SAiD TRACT 2782~-!,
BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT !3 I)F SAiD
TRACT 27827-2;
TO THE
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE
="Li/?W~;G ELEVEN COURSES:
i. NORTH 73°34'01'' WEST, A
2. SOUTH 16° 25'59
3. NORTH 73°34'01
4. SOUTH 16°25'59
5. NORTH 73'34'01
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 THE
6
7
8
9
!0
!i
SOUTH I0°25'59 WEST
NORTH 73°34'01 WEST
NORTH 16°25'59" EAST
NORTH 73° 34'01" WEST
SOUTH !0~25'5}'' WEST
NORTH 73=54'0i" WEST
POINT cDF BEGINNING.
i31.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF
WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4.20 FEET;
WEST, A DISTANCE OF !05.00 FEET;
WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.80 FEET;
WEST A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 86.20 FEET:
A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 155.00 FEET:
A DISTANCE OF 1o.37 FEET;
A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET TO
tHE
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNE'.~
FINANCE OFFICE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Harwood T. Edvalson, Assistant City Manager
October 11, 1994
Disapproval of Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and
Associated Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision, and Ordering a
Refund for Excessive Rates
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DISAPPROVING THE CABLE TELEVISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER
AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION, AND
ORDERING A REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES
BACKGROUND:
The City of Temecula has been granted authority under the 1992 Cable Act to regulate basic
tier rates, along with installation and equipment charges for cable operators operating within
the City limits. Pursuant to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations, Burke,
Williams & Sorensen, with consulting services from the accounting firm of Diehi, Evans, has
reviewed the cable television rates of Inland Valley Cablevision for the period of September
1, 1993 through July 14, 1994.
The attached documentation provides an in-depth explanation of the review process, and
describes the conclusions and recommended findings. Inland Valley Cablevision has been
provided the appropriate documentation, and has been requested to make a response before
the public hearing.
ITEM 20
Recorded at request of
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
County of Riverside
When recorded return to
Riverside County Planning Director
4080 Lemon ~treet, 9th Floor
Riverside. CA 92501
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT N0. 37
A development agreement between
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
and
DAV BAR I
and others
Specific Plan No. 164 - Roripaugh
[~ ~) OCT 4 1988
Development Agreement No. 37
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2,
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.1.5
1,1.6
1.1.7
1.1.8
1.1.9
1.1.10
1.1.11
1.1.12
1.1.13
1.1.14
1.1.15
1.1.16
1.1.17
1.2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
2.5
2.6
2.7
HEADING PAGE
RECITALS ................ 1
DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS ........ 3
Definitions ......... 3
Agreement ........ 3
COUNTY ...... 3
Development ....... 3
Development Approvals ..... 3
Development Exaction ....... 3
Development Plan .......... 4
Effective Date ......... 4
Existing Development Approvals 4
Existing Land Use Regulations 4
Land Use Regulations ........ 4
OWNER ...... 4
Mortgagee ............. 5
Pro]ect .............. 5
Property .......... 5
Reservations of Authority ..... 5
Subsequent Development Approvals 5
Subsequent Land Use Regulations 5
Exhibits .............. 5
GENERAL PROVISIONS ........... 5
Binding Effect of Agreement ..... 5
Ownership of Property ........ 5
Term ...... ~ 6
Assignment ......... 6
Right to Assign .......... 6
Release of Transferring Owner 6
Subsequent Assignment ...... 7
Partial Release of Purchaser,
Transferee. or Assignee of
Industrial or Commercial Lot .... 7
Termination of Agreement With
Respect to Individual Lots Upon
Sale to Public and Completion
of Construction ...... 7
Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement 8
Termination ............ 8
Notices ..... 8
i
SECTION HEADING PAGE
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.6.1
3.6.2
3.6.3
3,6.4
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2,2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.3
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
7.1
7.2
7.3
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ...... 10
Rights to Develop 10
Effect of Agreement on Land Use
Regulations ......... 10
Timing of Development ........ 10
Phasing Plan ............. 11
Changes and Amendments ........
Reservations of Authority ...... ll
Limitations, Reservations and
Exceptions ......
Subsequent Development Approvals 13
Modification or Suspension by
State or Federal Law 13
Intent . 13
Public Works ....
Provision of Real Pro~e~t½ '
Interests by COUNTY ......... 13
Regulation by Other Public Agencies 14
Tentative Tract Map Extension .... 14
Vesting Tentative Maps . 14
PUBLIC BENEFITS ........... 14
Intent ....... 14
Public Facilities and Services
Mitigation Fee .......... 15
Amount and Components of Fee .? 15
Time of Payment ....... 15
Reduction for Low-Occupancy .... 15
Annual Fee Adjustment ..... 16
Credits ........ 16
Continuatio~ of Fees ..... 16
FINANCING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
17
REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE ....... 17
Periodic Review ....... 1~
Special Review 17
Procedure 17
Proceedings'Upon ~o~i~i~a~i~n'
or Termination ........... 18
Hearing on Modification or Termination 18
Certificate of Agreement Compliance 18
INCORPORATION AND ANNEXATION .
19
Intent
Incorporation
Annexation
..... 19
...... 19
..... 19
ii
SECTION HEADING PAGE
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
10.
11.
11 1
11 2
11 3
11 4
11 5
11 6
11.7
11 8
11 9
11 10
11 11
11 12
11 13
11 14
11 15
11 16
11 17
11 18
11 19
11 20
DEFAULT AND REMEDIES .......
19
Remedies in General ......... 19
Specific Performance ........ 20
Release ............... 20
Termination or Modification of
Agreement for Default of OWNER .... 20
Termination of Agreement for
Default of COUNTY .......... 21
THIRD PARTY LITIGATION ........ 21
General Plan Litigation . 21
Third Party Ligitation Concerning
Agreement . 22
Indemnity ...... 21
Environment Assurances ....... 22
Reservation of Rights ...... 22
Survival ..... 23
MORTGAGEE PROTECTION .
23
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ....... 24
Recordation of Agreement ...... 24
Entire Agreement ....... 24
Severability ........... 24
Interpretation and Governing Law . 24
Section Headings ......... 25
Singular and Plural ....... 25
Joint and Several Obligations 25
Time of Essence ..... 25
Waiver ........... 25
No Third Party Beneficiaries 25
Force Majeure ....... 25
Mutual Covenants .......
Successors in Interest .......
Counterparts
Jurisdiction and Venue .
Project as a Private Undertaking
Further Actions and Instruments
Eminent Domain
Agent for Service of Process
Authority to Execute
Signatures
25
26
26
26
26
26
26
27
27
27
iii
DEv~ELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 37
Th~s Development Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is
entered into effective on the date it is recorded with the
Riverside County Recorder (hereinafter the "Effective Date") by
and among the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (hereinafter "COUNTY"), and the
persons and entities listed below (hereinafter "OWNER"):
DAV BAR I. a California General Partnership:
JOHN E. RORIPAUGH:
JUNE RORIPAUGH TULL;
LEO E.'RORIPAUGH and MARlAN E. RORIPAUGH, Trustees of the Leo E.
Roripaugh and Marian E. Roripaugh 1975 Trust:
LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARlAN E. RORIPAUGH 1975 TRUST: and
LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARIAN E. RORIPAUGH
BAR-DAV. a California Partnership
DAV-BAR II, a California General Partnership
RECITALS
WHEREAS, COUNTY is authorized to enter into binding
development agreements with persons having legal or equitable
interests in real property for the development of such property,
pursuant to Section 65864, et seq. of the Government Code: and.
WHEREAS. COUNTY has adopted rules and regulations for
consideration of development agreements, pursuant to Section
65865 of the Government Code: and,
WHEREAS. OWNER has requested COUNTY to enter into a
development agreement and proceedings have been taken in
accordance with the rules and regulations of COUNTY: and,
WHEREAS. by electing to enter into this Agreement. COUNTY
shall bind future Boards of Supervisors of COUNTY by the
obligations specified herein and limit the future exercise of
certain governmental and proprietary powers of COUNTY: and,
WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of this Agreement have
undergone extensive review by COUNTY and the Board of Supervisors
and have been found to be fair. just and reasonable: and.
WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of Riverside
County and the public health, safety and welfare will be served
by entering into this Agreement: and.
WHEREAS. all of the procedures of the California
Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to the
Project and the Agreement: and,
WHEREAS. this Agreement and the Pro]ect are consistent
with the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan and any
Specific Plan applicable thereto: and.
-1-
WHEREAS. all actions taken and approvals given by COUNTY
have been duly taken or approved in accordance with all
applicable legal reguirements for notice. public hearings.
findings. votes, and other procedural matters= and.
WHEREAS. development of the Property in accordance with
this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to COUNTY and
will further important policies and goals of COUNTY: and.
WHEREAS. this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in
planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property.
ensure progressive installation of necessary improvements.
provide for public services appropriate to the development of the
Project. and generally serve the purposes for which development
agreements under Sections 65864. et seq. of the Government Code
are intended; and.
WHEREAS. on July 26. 1988. Special Assessment District
No. 161 was formed by County Resolution No. 88-347 pursuant to a
petition. executed by OWNER. requesting the District to be formed
and consenting to said District being formed to provide a
financing mechanism to pay for the construction of certain public
facilities that would benefit the Property and OWNER advanced
those monies needed to pay all costs associated with forming said
District and retained and paid civil engineers to design and
engineer the public facilities to be constructed. and said public
facilities were designed to benefit the Property and certain of
the facilities may have been oversized to benefit adjacent
properties and the public at large; and.
WHEREAS. OWNER has incurred and will in the future incur
substantial costs in order to assure development of the Property
in accordance with this Agreement: and.
WHEREAS. OWNER has incurred and will in the future
substantial costs in excess of the generally applicable
requirements in order to assure vesting of legal rights to
develop the Property in accordance with this Agreement.
incur
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
-2-
to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the
of development on the environment or other public
interests.
impacts
1.1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing
Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use
Regulations applicable to development of the Property.
1.1.7 "Effective Date" means the date this
Agreement is recorded with the County Recorder.
1.1.8 "Existing Development Approvals" means
all Development Approvals approved or issued prior to the
Effective Date. Existing Development Approvals includes
the Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit "C" and all
other Approvals which are a matter of public record on
the Effective Date.
1.1.9 "Existing Land Use Regulations" means all
Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date.
Existing Land Use Regulations includes the Regulations
incorporated herein as Exhibit "D" and all other
Regulations which are a matter of public record on the
Effective Date.
1.1.10 "Land Use Regulations" means all
ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations and
official policies of COUNTY governing the development and
use of land, including, withoutlimitation, the permitted
use of land. the density or intensity of use, subdivision
requirements. the maximum height and size of proposed
buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication
of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement
and construction standards and specifications applicable
to the development of the property. "Land Use
Regulations" does not include any COUNTY ordinance,
resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy.
governing:
(a) The conduct of businesses.
and occupations:
(b) Taxes and assessments:
professions.
(c) The control and abatement of nuisances:
(d) The granting of encroachment permits and
the conveyance of rights and interests which
provide for the use of or the entry upon public
property;
(e) The exercise of the power of eminent
domain.
1.1.11 "OWNER" means the persons and entities
listed as OWNER on page 1 of this Agreement and their
successors in interest to all or any part of the Property.
-4-
COVENANTS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals
and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
~. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS.
1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this
Agreement shall be defined as follows:
1.1.1
Agreement.
"Agreement" means this Development
1.1.2 "COUNTY" means the County of Riverside. a
political subdivision of the State of California.
1.1.3 "Development" means the improvement of
the Property for the purposes of completing the
structures, improvements and facilities comprising the
Project including. but not limited to: grading: the
construction of infrastructure and public facilities
related to the Project whether located within or outside
the Property: the construction of buildings and
structures: and the installation of landscaping.
"Development" does not include the maintenance, repair,
reconstruction or redevelopment of any building.
structure, improvement or facility after the construction
and completion thereof.
1.1.4 "Development Approvals" means all permits
and other entitlements for use subject to approval or
issuance by COUNTY in connection with development of the
Property including, but not limited to:
Ca) Specific plans and specific plan
amendments:
(b) Tentative and final subdivision and
parcel maps:
(c) Conditional use permits. public use
permits and plot plans:
(d) Zoning:
(e) Grading and building permits.
1.1.5 "Development Exaction" means any
requirement of COUNTY in connection with or pursuant to
any Land Use Regulation or Development Approval for the
dedication of land, the construction of improvements or
public facilities, or the payment of fees in order
-3-
1.1.12 "Mortgagee" means a mortgagee of a
mortgage. a beneficiary under a deed of trust or any
other security-device lender. and their successors and
assigns.
1.1.13 "Pro3ect" means the development of the
Property contemplated by the Development Plan as such
Plan may be further defined. enhanced or modified
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
1.1.14 "Property" means the real property
described on Exhibit "A" and shown on Exhibit "B" to
Agreement.
this
1.1.15 "Reservations of Authority" means the
rights and authority excepted from the assurances and
rights provided to OWNER under this Agreement and
reserved to COUNTY under Section 3.6 of this Agreement.
1.1.16 "Subsequent Development Approvals" means
all Development Approvals required subsequent to the
Effective Date in connection with development of the
Property.
1.1.17 "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" means
any Land Use Regulations adopted and effective after the
Effective Date of this Agreement.
1.2 Exhibits. The following documents are attached to.
and by this reference made a part of. this Agreement:
Exhibit "A" -- Legal Description of the Property.
Exhibit "B" -- Map showing Property and its
location.
Exhibit "C" -- Existing Development Approvals.
Exhibit "D" -- Existing Land Use Regulations.
Exhibit "E" -- Fee Credits.
2. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
2.1 Bindinu Effect of Aureement. The Property is
hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the
Property is hereby authorized and shall be carried out only in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
2.2 Ownership of PropertY. OWNER represents and
covenants that it is the owner of the fee simple title to the
Property or a portion thereof.
-5-
2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on
the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of 10 (ten)
years thereafter unless this term is modified or extended
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
2.4 Assignment.
2.4.1 Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the
right to sell. transfer or assign the Property in whole
or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall
violate the Subdivision Map Act. Government Code Section
66410. et seq., or Riverside County Ordinance No. 460) to
any person, partnership, )oint venture, firm or
corporation at any time during the term of this
Agreement: provided, however, that any such sale.
transfer or assignment shall include the assignment and
assumption of the rights, duties and obligations arising
under or from this Agreement and be made in strict
compliance with the following conditions precedent:
(a) No sale. transfer or assignment of any
right or interest under this Agreement shall be
made unless made together with the sale, transfer
or assignment of all or a part of the Property.
(b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer
or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days
thereafter. OWNER shall notify COUNTY. in writing.
of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall
provide COUNTY with an executed agreement, in a
form reasonably acceptable to COUNTY, by the
purchaser. transferee or assignee and providing
therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee
expressly and unconditionally assumes all the
duties and obligations of OWNER under this
Agreement.
Any sale, transfer or assignment not made in strict
compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute
a default by Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding
the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to
execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) Of this
Subsetsriot 2.4.1, the burdens of this Agreement shall be
binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but
the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such
purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such
agreement is executed.
2.4.2 Release of Transferring Owner.
Notwithstanding any sale, transfer or assignment, a
transferring OWNER shall continue to be obligated under
this Agreement unless such transferring OWNER is given a
release in writing by COUNTY, which release shall be
provided by COUNTY upon the full satisfaction by such
transferring OWNER of the following conditions:
-6-
(a) OWNER no longer has a legal or equitable
interest in all or any part of the Property.
(b) OWNER is not then in default under this
Agreement.
(c) OWNER has provided COUNTY with the notice
and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b)
of Subsection 2.4.1 above.
(d) The purchaser. transferee or assignee
provides COUNTY with security equivalent to any
security previously provided by OWNER to secure
performance of its obligations hereunder.
2.4.3 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent
sale, transfer or assignment after an initial sale,
transfer or assignment shall be made only in accordance
with and subject to the terms and conditions of this
Section.
2.4.4 Partial Release of Purchaser, Transferee
or AssiGnee of Industrial or Commercial Lot. A
purchaser, transferee or assignee of a lot. which has
been finally subdivided as provided for in the
Development Plan and for which a commercial or industrial
plot plan for development of the lot has been finally
approved pursuant to the Development Plan, may submit a
request. in writing, to COUNTY to release said lot from
the obligations under this Agreement relating to all
other portions of the property. Within thirty (30) days
of such request, COUNTY shall review, and if the above
conditions are satisfied shall approve the request for
release and notify the purchaser. transferee or assignee
in writing thereof. No such release approved pursuant to
this Subsection 2.4.4 shall cause. or otherwise affect, a
release of OWNER from its duties and obligations under
this Agreement.
2.4.5 Termination of Aareement With Respect-to
Individual Lots Upon Sale to Public and Completion of
Construction. The provisions of Subsection 2.4.1 shall
not [pply to the Sale or lease (for a period longer than
one Fear) of any lot which has been finally subdivided
and is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to
a member of the public or other ultimate user.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement,
this Agreement shall terminate With respect to any lot
and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject
to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of
any further document upon satisfaction of both of the
following conditions:
(a) The lot has been finally subdivided and
individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased
-7-
(for a period longer than one year) to a member of
the public or other ultimate user; and,
(b) A Certificate of Occupancy has been
issued for a building on the lot, and the fees set
forth under Section 4 of this Agreement have been
'paid.
2.5 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This
Agreement may be amended or cancelled in whole or in parr only by
written consent of all parties in the manner provided for in
Government Code Section 65868. This provision shall not limit
any remedy of COUNTY or OWNER as provided by this Agreement.
2.6 Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed
terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of
the following events:
(a) Expiration of the stated term of this
Agreement as set forth in Section 2.3.
(b) Entry of a final judgment setting aside.
voiding or annulling the adoption of the ordinance
approving this Agreement.
(c) The adoption of a referendum measure
overriding or repealing the ordinance approving
Agreement.
this
(d) Completion of the Project in accordance with
the terms of this Agreement including issuance of all
required occupancy permits and acceptance by COUNTY or
applicable public agency of all required dedications.
Termination of this Agreement shall not constitute
termination of any other land use entitlements approved for the
Property. Upon the termination of this Agreement, no party shall
have any further right or obligation hereunder except with
respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to such
termination or with respect to any default in the performance of
the provisions of this Agreement which has occurred prior to such'
terminationor with respect to any obligations which are
specifically ~et forth as surviving this Agreement. Upon such
termination, any public facilities and services mitigation fees
paid pursuant to Section 4.2 of this Agreement by OWNER to COUNTY
for residential units on which construction has not yet begun
shall be refunded to OWNER by COUNTY.
2.7 Notices.
(a) As used in this Agreement, "notice" includes.
but is not limited to, the communication of notice,
request, demand. approval. statement. report, acceptance.
consent, waiver. appointment or other communication
required or permitted hereunder.
-8-
time.
(b) All notices shall be in Writing and shall be
considered given either: (i) when delivered in person to
the recipient named below: or (ii) on the date of
delivery shown on the return receipt. after deposit in
the United States mail in a sealed envelope as either
regis_tered or certified mail with return receipt
requested. and postage and postal charges prepaid. and
addressed to the recipient named below= or (iii) on the
date of delivery shown in the records of the telegraph
company after transmission by telegraph to the recipient
named below. All notices shall be addressed as follows:
If to COUNTY:
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 14th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
with copies to:
County Administrative Officer
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 12th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
and
Director
Planning Department
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon St., 9th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
County Counsel
County of Riverside
3535 Tenth St., Suite 300
Riverside. CA 92501
If to OWNER:
Davidson Communities
12520 High Bluff Drive
Suite 300
San Diego. CA. 92130
with a copy to:
Dennis D. O'Neil, Esq.
Pettis, Tester, Kruse & Krinsky
18881 Yon Karman, 16th. Floor
lrvine. CA. 92715
(c) Either party may. by notice given at any
require subsequent notices to be given to another person or
-9-
entity. whether a party or an officer or representative of a
party. or to a different address. or both. Notices g£ven before
actual receipt of notice of change shall not be invalidated by
the change.
3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
3.1 Rights tO Develop. Subject to the terms of this
Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, OWNER shall
have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with,
and to the extent of, the Development Plan. The Pro}ect shall
remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required
to complete the Project as contemplated by 'the Development Plan.
Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted
uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the
maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for
reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be
those set forth in the Development Plan.
3.2 Effect of Acreement on Land Use ReCulations.
Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement
including the Reservations of Authority. the rules, regulations-
and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property,
the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum
height and size of proposed buildings, and the design,
improvement and construction standards and specifications
applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing
Land Use Regulations. In connection with any Subsequent
Development Approval. COUNTY shall exercise its discretion in
accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this
Agreement including, but not limited to, the Reservations of
Authority. COUNTY shall accept for processing, review and action
all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals. and such
applications shall be processed in the normal manner for
processing such matters.
3.3 Timin~ of Development. The parties acknowledge
that OWNER cannot at this time predict when or the. rate at which
phases of the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend
upon numerous factors which are not within the control of OWNER,
such as market orientation and demand, interest cares.
absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the
California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City
of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, that the failure of the
parties therein to provide for the timing of.development resulted
in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of
development to prevail over such parties' agreement. it is the
parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and
providing that OWNER shall have the right to develop the Property
in such order and at such rate and at such times as OWNER deems
appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business
judgment. subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set
forth in the Development Plan or the Phasing Plan set forth in
Section 3.4.
-10-
3.4 Phasing Plan. Development of the Property shall be
sub3ect to all timing and phasing requirements established by the
Development Plan.
3.5 Chanaes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge
that refinement and further development of the Project will
require Subse'quent Development Approvals and may demonstrate that
changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing
Development Approvals. In the event OWNER rinds that a change in
the Existing Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate.
OWNER shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to
effectuate such change and COUNTY shall process and act on such
application in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations.
except as otherwise provided by this Agreement including the
Reservations of Authority. If approved. any such change in the
Existing Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an
addendum to Exhibit "C", and may be further changed from time to
time as provided in this Section. Unless otherwise required by
law. as determined in COUNTY's reasonable discretion, a change to
the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and
not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change
does not:
(a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a
whole: or,
(b) Increase the density or intensity of use of
the Property as a whole: or.
(c) Increase the maximum height and size of
permitted buildings: or.
(d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or
dedication of land for public purposes within the
Property as a whole: or,
(e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to
Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code.
3.6 Reservations of Authority.
3.6.1 Limitations, Reservations and
ExcePM~ions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations
shall apply to the development of the Property.
(a) Processing fees and charges of every Kind
and nature imposed by COUNTY to cover the estimated
actual costs to COUNTY of processing applications
for Development Approvals or for monitoring
compliance with any Development Approvals granted
or issued.
-11-
(b) Procedural regulations re~ating to
hearing bodies. petitions. applications. notices.
findings. records. hearings. reports.
recommendations. appeals and any other matter of
procedure.
(c) Regulations governing construction
standards and specifications including. without
limitation. the County's Building Code. Plumbing
Code. Mechanical Code. Electrical Code. Fire Code
and Grading Code.
(d) Regulations imposing Development
Exactions: provided. however. that no such
subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall be
applicable to development of the Property unless
such Development Exaction is applied uniformly to
development. either throughout the COUNTY or within
a defined area of benefit which includes the
Property. No such subsequently adopted Development
Exaction shall apply if its application to the
Property would physically prevent development of
the Property for the uses and to the density or
intensity of development set forth in the
Development Plan. In the event any such
subseguently adopted Development Exaction fulfills
the same purposes. in whole or in part. as the fees
set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. COUNTY
shall allow a credit against such subsequently
adopted Development Exaction for the fees paid
under Section 4 of this Agreement to the extent
such fees fulfill the same purposes.
(e) Regulations which may be in conflict with
the Development Plan but which are reasonably
necessary to protect the public health and safety.
To the extent possible. any such regulations shall
be applied and construed so as to provide OWNER
with the rights and assurances provided under this
Agreement.
(f) Regulations which are not in conflict
--with the Development Plan. Any regulation. whether
adopted by initiative or otherwise. limiting the
rate or timing of development of the Property shall
be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and
shall therefore not be applicable to the
development of the Property.
(g) Regulations which are in conflict with
the Development Plan provided OWNER has given
written consent to the application of such
regulations to development of the Property.
-12-
3.6.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This
Agreement shall not prevent COUNTY, in acting on
Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying
Subsequent Land Use Regulations which do not conflict
with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement
prevent COUNTY from denying or conditionally approving
any Subsequent Development Approval on the basis of the
Existing Land Use Regulations or any Subsequent Land Use
Regulation not in conflict with the Development Plan.
3.6.3 Modification or Suspension by State or
Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or
regulations, enacted after the Effective Date of this
Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or
more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions
of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may
be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or
regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not
inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the
extent such laws or regulations do not render such
remaining provisions impractical to enforce.
3.6.4 Intent. The parties acknowledge and
agree that COUNTY is restricted in its authority to limit
its police power by contract and that the foregoing
limitations, reservations and exceptions are intended to
reserve to COUNTY all of its police power which cannot be
so limited. This Agreement shall be construed, contrary
to its stated terms if necessary, to reserve to COUNTY
all such power and authority which cannot be restricted
by contract.
3.7 Public Works. If OWNER is required by this
Agreement to construct any public works facilities which will be
dedicated to COUNTY or any other public agency upon completion,
and if required by applicable laws to do so, OWNER shall perform
such work in the same manner and subject to the same requirements
as would be applicable to COUNTY or such other public agency
should it have undertaken such construction.
3.8 Provision of Real Property Interests by COUNTY. In
any instance ~here OWNER is required to construct any public
improvement on land not owned by OWNER, OWNER shall at its sole
cost and expense provide or cause to be provided, the real
property interests necessary for the construction of such public
improvements. In the event OWNER is unable, after exercising
reasonable efforts. including, but not limited to, the rights
under Sections 1001 and 1002 of the Civil Code, to acquire the
real property interests necessary for the construction of such
public improvements. and if so instructed by OWNER and upon
OWNER'S provision of adequate security for costs COUNTY may
reasonably incur, COUNTY shall negotiate the purchase of the
necessary real property interests to allow OWNER to construct the
public improvements as required by this Agreement and. if
-13-
necessary, in accordance with the procedures established by law.
use its power of eminent domain to acquire such required real
property interests. OWNER shall pay all costs associated with
such acquisition or'dondemnation proceedings. This section 3.8
is not intended by the parties to impose upon the OWNER an
enforceable d~ty to acquire land or construct any public
improvements on land not owned by OWNER, except to the extent
that the OWNER elects to proceed With the development of the
Project. and then only in accordance with valid conditions
imposed by the COUNTY upon the development of the Project under
the Subdivision Map Act or other legal authority.
3.9 Regulation by other Public Agencies. It is
acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within
the control of COUNTY possess authority to regulate aspects of
the development of the Property separately from or jointly with
COUNTY and'this Agreement does not limit the authority of such
other public agencies. For example, pursuant to Government Code
Section 66477 and Section 10.35 of Riverside County Ordinance No.
460, another local public agency may provide local park and
recreation services and facilities and in that event, it is
permitted, and therefore shall be permitted by the parties, to
participate jointly with COUNTY to determine the location of land
to be dedicated Or in lieu fees to be paid for local park
purposes. provided that COUNTY shall exercise its authority
subject to the terms of this Agreement.
3.10 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Government Code. no
tentative subdivision map or tentative parcel map. heretofore or
hereafter approved in connection with development of the
Property. shall be granted an extension of time except in
accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations.
3.11 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final
subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or
hereafter approved in connection with development of the
Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision M~p Act
(Government Code Section 66410, et seq.) and Riverside County
Ordinance No. 460 and if this Agreement is determined by a final
judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insolaf as it grants a
vested right ~0 develop to OWNER, then and to that extent the
rights and protections afforded OWNER under the laws and
ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the
provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately
above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided
in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be
controlling over any conflicting provision of law or ordinance
concerning vesting maps.
4. PUBLIC BENEFITS.
4.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that
development of the Property will result in substantial public
-14-
needs which will not be fully met by the Development Plan and
further acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers
substantial private benefits on OWNER which should be balanced by
commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to
provide consideration to the public to balance the private
benefits conferred on OWNER by providing more fully for the
satisfaction of the public needs resulting from the Project.
4.2 Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee.
4.2.1 Amount and Components of Fee. OWNER
shall pay to COUNTY a public facilities and services
mitigation fee in the total amount of $4277.00 for each
residential unit constructed on the Property, which fee
shall be comprised of the following components:
(a) Public Facilities Fee
$1891 per Residential
Unit
(b) Regional Parkland Fee
$350.00 per
Residential Unit with
$50.00 allocated for
recreational trails
(c)
Habitat Conservation
and Open Space Land
Bank Fee
$260.00 per
Residential Unit
(d)
Public Services
Offset Fee
$1776.00 per
Residential Unit
The amount
mitigation
subsection
of the public facilities and services
fee shall be adjusted annually as provided
4.2.4.
in
4.2.2 Time of Payment. The fees required
pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be paid to COUNTY
prior' to the issuance of building permits for each
residential unit. No fees shall be payable for building
permits issued prior to the Effective Date of this
Agreement. but the fees required pursuant to Subsection
4.2.1 shall be paid prior to the re-issuance or extension
of any building permit for a residential unit for which
such fees have not previously been paid.
4.2.3 Reduction for Low-Occupancy Residential
Units. The fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1
shall be reduced by 33.3 percent for low-occupancy
residential units. For the purposes of this Subsection.
low-occupancy residential units shall be limited to the
following:
(a) One bedroom and studio apartments
rooms, dens, and any similar room shall be
considered to be bedrooms);
(family
(b) Mobilehomes:
(c) 'Residential units in developments that
are legally restricted to occupancy by senior
citizens pursuant to Riverside County Ordinance No.
348 or state law.
4.2.4 Annual Fee Adjustment. The fees required
pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be adjusted annually
during the term of this Agreement on the anniversary of
the Effective Date in accordance with the changes in the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Los
Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside Area (hereinafter CPI)
published monthly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics. The annual adjustment shall be calculated in
the following manner:
(a) Divide the CPI for month and year of the
Effective Date into the CPI for the month
immediately preceding the anniversary in which said
fees are to be adjusted.
(b) Multiply the quotient obtained by the
calculation in Paragraph (a) above times said fees.
(c) The result of the multiplication obtained
in Paragraph (b) above shall constitute the fees
payable during the succeeding year.
If the CPI specified herein is discontinued or revised
during the term of this Agreement. such other government
index or computation with which it is replaced shall be
used in order to obtain substantially the same result as
would have been obtained if the CPI had not been
discontinued.
In no event shall the fees be less than the fees set
forth in Subsection 4.2.1.
4.2.B Credits. OWNER shall be entitled to
credit against the fees required pursuant to Subsection
4.2.1 for the dedication of land. the construction of
improvements or the payment of fees as specifically set
forth in Exhibit "E".
To the extent that Subsection 4.2.4 results in an
increase in the fees payable pursuant to 4.2.1(a). then
the credit provided in this Subsection for Public
Facilities as specified in Exhibit "E" shall be likewise
increased by the same percentage. No increase in the
credits set forth in Exhibit "E" shall be allowed for any
item which is not specifically identified as a Public
Facility Credit on Exhibit "E".
4.3 Continuation of Fees. Should all or any portion of
Property become part of a city or another county. the fees
payable pursuant to Section 4.2 shall remain and still be payable
to COUNTY on the following basis:
-16-
(b) Upon completion of a periodic review or a
special review. the Planning Director shall submit a
report to the Board of Supervisors setting forth the
evidence concerning good faith compliance by OWNER with
the terms of this Agreement and his recommended finding
on that issue.
(c) If the Board finds on the basis of substantial
evidence that OWNER has complied in good faith with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement. the review shall
be concluded.
(d) If the Board makes a preliminary finding that
OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement. the Board may modify or
terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 6.4 and
section 6.5. Notice of default as provided under Section
8.4 of this Agreement shall be given to OWNER prior to or
concurrent with. proceedings under Section 6.4 and
section 6.5.
6.4 Proceedinas Upon Modification or Termination. If.
upon a finding under Section 6.3. COUNTY determines to proceed '
with modification or termination of this Agreement. COUNTY shall
give written notice to OWNER of its intention so to do. The
notice shall be given at least ten calendar days prior to the
scheduled hearing and shall contain:
(a) The time and place of the hearing;
(b) A statement as to whether or not COUNTY
proposes to terminate or to modify the Agreement; and.
(c) Such other information as is reasonably
necessary to inform OWNER of the nature of the proceeding.
6.5 Hearin~ on Modification or Termination. At the
time and place set for the hearing on'modification or
termination. OWNER shall be given an opportunity ~o be heard.
OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with
the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The burden of proof
on this issue shall be on OWNER. If the Board of Supervisors
finds, basedeSpot substantial evidence, that OWNER has not
complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the
Agreement. the Board may terminate this Agreement or modify this
Agreement and impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary
to protect the interests of the County. The decision of the
Board of Supervisors shall be final, subject only to ~udicial
review pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
6.6 Certificate of Aareement Compliance. If. at the
conclusion of a Periodic or Special Review. OWNER is found to be
in compliance with this Agreement. COUNTY shall. upon request by
OWNER. issue a Certificate of Agreement Compliance
("Certificate") to OWNER stating that after the most recent
-18-
(a) Fees under 4.2.1(a) shall be payable at the
rate of five and three tenths percent (5.3%) thereof to
COUNTY and the remainder to such city or other county.
(b) Fees payable under Subsections 4.2.1(b) and
{c) shall be fully payable to COUNTY.
(c) Fees under Subsection 4.2.1(d) shall be
payable at the rate of one-third (1/3) thereof to such
city or other county and the remainder to COUNTY.
5. FINANCING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
If deemed appropriate. COUNTY and OWNER will cooperate
the formation of any special assessment district, community
facilities district or alternate financing mechanism to pay for
the construction and/or maintenance and operation of public
infrastructure facilities required as part of the Development
Plan. COUNTY also agrees that, to the extent any such district
or other financing entity is formed and sells bonds in order to
finance such reimbursements. OWNER may be reimbursed to the
extent that OWNER spends funds or dedicates land for the
establishment of public facilities. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, it is acknowledged and agreed by the parties that
nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as
requiring COUNTY or the COUNTY Board of Supervisors to form any
such district or to issue and sell bonds.
in
6. REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE.
6.1 Periodic Review. The Planning Director shall
review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of
the Effective Date, in order to ascertain the good faith
compliance by OWNER with the terms of the Agreement. OWNER shall
submit an Annual Monitoring Report, in a form acceptable to the
Planning Director, within 30 days after written notice from the
Planning Director. The Annual Monitoring Report shall be
accompanied by an annual review and administration fee sufficient
to defray the estimated costs of review and administration of the
Agreement during the succeeding year. The amount of the annual
review and administration fee shall be set annually by resolution
of the Board of Supervisors.
6.2 Special Review. The Board of Supervisors may order
a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time.
The Planning Director shall conduct such special reviews.
6.3 Procedure.
(a) During either a periodic review or a special
review. OWNER shall. be required to demonstrate good faith
compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The burden
of proof on this issue shall be on OWNER.
-17-
Periodic or Special Review and based upon the information Known
or made Known to the Planning Director and Board of Supervisors
that (1) this Agreement remains in effect and (2) OWNER is not in
default. The Certificate shall be in recordable form. shall
contain information necessary to communicate constructive record
notice of the finding of compliance, shall state whether the
Certificate is issued after a Periodic or Special Review and
shall state the anticipated date of commencement of the next
Periodic Review. OWNER may record the Certificate with the
County Recorder.
Whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by
assignees or other transferees or OWNER, COUNTY shall not be
bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the
Periodic or Special Review, but was concealed from or otherwise
not known to the Planning Director or Board of Supervisors.
7. INCORPORATION AND ANNEXATION.
7.1 Intent. If all or any portion of the Property is
annexed to or otherwise becomes a part of a city or another
county. it is the intent of the parties that this Agreement shall
survive and be binding upon such other jurisdiction.
7.2 Incorporation. If at any time during the term of
this Agreement. a city is incorporated comprising all or any
portion of the Property. the validity and effect of this
Agreement shall be governed by Section 65865.3 of the Government
Code.
7.3 Annexation. OWNER and COUNTY shall oppose. in
accordance with the procedures provided by law. the annexation to
any city of all or any portion of the Property unless both OWNER
and COUNTY give written consent to such annexation.
8. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES.
8.1 'Remedies in General. It is acknowledged by the-
parties that COUNTY would not have entered into this Agreement
it were to bedliable in damages under this Agreement, or with
respect to this Agreement or the application thereof.
if
In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue
any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any
provision of this Agreement, except that COUNTY shall not be
liable in damages to OWNER, or to any successor in interest of
OWNER. or to any other person, and OWNER covenants not to sue for
damages or claim any damages:
(a) For any breach of this Agreement or for any
cause of action which arises out of this Agreement; or
-19-
(b) For the taking. impairment or restriction of
any right or interest conveyed or provided under or
pursuant to this Agreement: or
(c) Arising out of or connected with any dispute.
controversy or issue regarding the application or
interpretation or effect of the provisions of this
Agreement.
8.2 Specific Performance. The parties acknowledge that
money damages and remedies at law generally are inadequate and
specific performance and other non-monetary relief are
particularly appropriate remedies for the enforcement of this
Agreement and should be available to all parties for the
following reasons:
(a) Money damages are unavailable against COUNTY
as provided in Section 8.1 above.
(b) Due to the size, nature and scope of the
project, it may not be practical or possible to restore
the Property to its natural condition once implementation
of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation,
OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have
had to utilize the Property or portions thereof. OWNER
has invested significant time and resources and performed
extensive planning and processing of the Project in
agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be
investing even more significant time and resources in
implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of
this Agreement. and it is not possible to determine the
sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for
such efforts.
8.3 Release. Except for nondamage remedies. including
the remedy of specific performance and judicial review as
provided for in Section 6.5. OWNER. for itself. its successors
and assignees. hereby releases the COUNTY. its officers. agents
and employees from any and all claims. demands, actions. or suits
of any kind or nature arising out of any liability. known or
unknown. present or future. including. but not limited to. any
claim or liability. based or asserted. pursuant to Article I.
Section 19 of the California Constitution. the Fifth Amendment of
the United States Constitution. or any other law or ordinance
which seeks to impose any other liability or damage. whatsoever.
upon the COUNTY because it entered into this Agreement or because
of the terms of this Agreement.
8.4 Termination or Modification of A~reement for
Default of OWNER. Subject to the provisions contained in
Subsection 6.5 herein. COUNTY may terminate or modify this
Agreement for any failure of OWNER to perform any material duty
or obligation of OWNER under this Agreement. or to comply in good
faith with the terms of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to
as "default"): provided. however. COUNTY may terminate or modify
-20-
this Agreement pursuant to this Section only after providing
written notice to OWNER of default setting forth the nature of
the default and the actions, if any, required by OWNER to cure
such default and, where the default can be cured, OWNER has
failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days
after the offstrive date of such notice or, in the event that
such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be
cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions
necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to
diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default.
8.5 Termination of ~areement for Default of COUNTY.
OWNER may terminate this Agreement only in the event of a default
by COUNTY in the performance of a material term of this Agreement
and only after providing written notice to COUNTY of default
setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any,
required by COUNTY to cure such default and, where the default
can be cured, COUNTY has failed to take such actions and cure
such default within 60 days after the effective date of such
notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within
such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has
failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default
within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete'
such actions and cure such default.
9. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION.
9.1 General.Plan Litication. COUNTY has determined
that this Agreement is consistent with its Comprehensive General
Plan. herein called General Plan. and that the General Plan meets
all requirements of law. OWNER has reviewed the General Plan and
concurs with COUNTY's determination. The parties acknowledge
that:
(a) Litigation is now pending challenging the
legality. validity and adequacy of certain provisions of
the General Plan: and.
(b) In the future there may be other similar -
challenges to the General Plan: and,
(c) If successful. such challenges could delay or
prevent the performance of this Agreement and the
development of the Property.
COUNTY shall have no liability in damages under
this Agreement for any failure of COUNTY to perform under this
Agreement or the inability of OWNER to develop the Property as
contemplated by the Development Plan of this Agreement as the
result of a judicial determination that on the Effective Date.
at any time thereafter. the General Plan. or portions thereof.
are invalid or inadequate or not in compliance with law.
or
-21-
9.2 Third Party Litigation ConcerninQ Agreement. OWNER
shall defend. at its expense. including attorneys' fees.
indemnify. and hold harmless COUNTY, its agents. officers and
employees from any claim. action or proceeding against COUNTY.
its agents. officers. or employees to attacK. set aside. void, or
annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any
permit granted pursuant to this Agreement. COUNTY shall promptly
notify OWNER of any such claim. action or proceeding. and COUNTY
shall cooperate in the defense. If COUNTY fails to promptly
notify OWNER of any such claim, action or proceeding, or if
COUNTY fails to cooperate in the defense, OWNER shall not
thereafter he responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless
COUNTY. COUNTY may in its discretion participate in the defense
of any such claim, action or proceeding.
9.3 Indemnity. In addition to the provisions of 9.2
above. OWNER shall indemnify and hold COUNTY, its officers,
agents. e-ployees and independent contractors free and harmless
from any liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or
omission of OWNER, its officers, agents, employees,
subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage.
bodily injury, or death (OWNER'S employees included) or any other
element of damage of any kind or nature. relating to or in any
way connected with or arising from the activities contemplated
hereunder. including, but not limited to. the study, design,
engineering, construction, completion, failure and conveyance of
the public improvements. save and except claims for damages
arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful
misconduct of COUNTY. OWNER shall defend, at its expense,
including attorneys' fees, COUNTY, its officers, agents.
employees and independent contractors in any legal action based
upon such alleged acts or omissions. COUNTY may in its
discretion participate in the defense of any such legal action.
9.4 Environment Assurances. OWNER shall indemnify and
hold COUNTY. its officers, agents, and employees free and
harmless from any liability, based or asserted, upon any act or
omission of OWNER, its officers, agents, employees..
subcontractors. predecessors in interest. successors. assigns and
independent contractors for any violation of any federal. state
or local law, ordinance or regulation relating to industrial
hygiene or tc&,environmental conditions on, under or about the
Property, including, but not limited to. soil and groundwater
conditions, and OWNER shall defend, at its expense, including
attorneys' fees, COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees in
any action based or asserted upon any such alleged act or
omission. COUNTY may in its discretion participate in the
defense of any such action.
9.5 Reservation of Riahts. With respect to Sections
9.2.9.3 and 9.4 heroin. COUNTY reserves the right to either (1)
approve the attorney(s) which OWNER selects. hires or otherwise
engages to defend COUNTY hereunder, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld. or (2) conduct its own defense, provided,
however, that OWNER shall reimburse COUNTY forthwith for any and
-22-
all reasonable expenses incurred for such defense, including
attorneys' fees, upon billing and accounting therefor.
9.6
through 9.6.
Agreement.
Survival.
inclusive.
The provisions of this Sections 9.1
shall survive the termination of this
lo.
MORTGAGEE PROTECTION.
The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not
prevent or limit OWNER, in any manner, at OWNER's sole
discretion. from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof
or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or
other security device securing financing with respect to the
Property. COUNTY acknowledges that the lenders providing such
financing may require certain Agreement interpretatiSns and
modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time. to meet
with OWNER and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in
good faith any such request for interpretation or modification.
COUNTY will nor unreasonably withhold its consent to any such
requested interpretation or modification provided such
interpretation or modification is consistent With the intent and
purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall
be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a
breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid.
diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the
Property made in good faith and for value, unless
otherwise required by law.
(b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust
encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which
Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the
COUNTY in the manner specified herein for giving notices.
shall be entitled to receive written notification from
COUNTY of "any default by .OWNER in the performance of
OWNER's obligations under this Agreement.
(c) If COUNTY timely receives a request from a
Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default
give~['to OWNER under the terms of this Agreement, COUNTY
shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee
within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to
OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right. but not the
obligation. to cure the default during the remaining cure
period allowed such party under this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the
Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of
the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such
foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof,
subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding
any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no
-23-
Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this
Agreement to perform any of OWNER'S obligations or other
affirmative covenants of OWNER hereunder. or to guarantee
such performance: provided. however. that to the extent
that any covenant to be performed by OWNER is a condition
precedent to the performance of a covenant by COUNTY .
the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition
precedent to COUNTY's performance hereunder. and further
provided that any sale. transfer or assignment by any
Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the
provisions of Section 2.4 of this Agreement.
11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
11.1 Recordation of AUreement. This Agreement and any
amendment or cancellation thereof shall be recorded with the
County Recorder by the Clerk of the Board Supervisors within the
period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code.
11.2 Entire Aareement. This Agreement sets forth and
contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties,
and there are no oral or written representations, understandings
or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements Which are not
contained or expressly referred to heroin. No testimony or
evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants
shall be admissible in any proceeding of any Kind or nature to
interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement.
11.3 Severability. I[ any term, provision, covenant or
condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or
unenforceable. the remainder of this Agreement shall not be
affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not
rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the
purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
provision of the Public Benefits set forth in Section 4 of this
Agreement, including the payment of the fees set forth therein.
are essential elements of this Agreement and COUNTY Would not
have entered into this Agreement but for such provisions, and
therefore in the event such provisions are determined to be
invalid, void or unenforceable, this entire Agreement shall be
null and void and of no force and effect whatsoever.
11.4 Interpretation and Governin~ Law. This Agreement
and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and
interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of
California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole
according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the
objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of
construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved
against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting
this Agreement. all parties having been represented by counsel in
the negotiation and preparation hereof.
-2¢-
11.5 Section Headinas. All section headings and
subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not
affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement.
11.6 Singular and Plural. As used herein, the singular
of any word iacludes the plural.
11.7 Joint and Several ObliQations. If at any time
during the term of this Agreement the Property is owned. in whole
or in part. by more than one OWNER, all obligations of such
OWNERS under this Agreement shall be )oint and several, and the
default of any such OWNER shall be the default of all such
OWNERS. Notwithstanding the foregoing. no OWNER of a single lot
which has been finally subdivided and sold to such OWNER as a
member of the general public or otherwise as an ultimate user
shall have any obligation under this Agreement except as provided
under'Section 4 hereof.
11.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the
performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time
is an element.
11.9 Waiverl Failure by a party to insist u~3n the
strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by
the other party, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights
upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a
waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict
compliance by the other party with the terms of this Agreement
thereafter.
11.10 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is
made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the
parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall
have any right of action based upon any provision of this
Agreement.
11.11 Force Ma%eure. Neither party shall be deemed to
be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its
obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods,
earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar
hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the
party's contr~ol, (including the party's employment force),
government regulations. court actions (such as restraining orders
or in)unctions). or other causes beyond the party's control. If
any such events shall occur. the term of this Agreement and the
time for performance by either party of any of its obligations
hereunder may be extended by the written agreement of the parties
for the period of time that such events prevented such
performance. provided that the term of this Agreement shall not
be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years.
11.12 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained heroin
are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the
concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited
thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such
bonefired party.
-25-
11.13 Successors in Interest. The burdens of this
Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this
Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the
parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this Agreement
shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute
covenants running with the land. Each covenant to do or refrain
faom doing some act hereunder with regard to development of the
Property: (a) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every
portion of the Property: (b) runs with the Property and each
portion thereof: and. (c) is binding upon each party and each
successor in interest during ownership of the Property or any
portion thereof.
11.14 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed
the parties in counterparts. Which counterparts shall be
construed together and have the same effect as if all of the
parties had executed the same instrument.
by
11.15 Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or in
equity arising under this Agreement or brought by an party hereto
for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the
validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and
tried in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside. State of
California. and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law
providing for the filing, removal or change of venus to any other
Court.
11.16 Pro~ect as a Private Undertaking. It is
specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties
hereto that the development of the Project is a private
development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the
other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an
independent contracting entity with respect to the terms,
covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. No
partnership. joint venture or other association of any kind is
formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between COUNTY
and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the
development of private property and the owner of such property.
11.17 Further Actions and Instruments. Each of the
parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to
the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance
of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of
the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either
party at any time. the other party shall promptly execute. with
acknowledgemerit or affidavit if reasonably required. and file or
record such required instruments and writings and take any
actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this
Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions
of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions
contemplated by this Agreement.
11.18 Eminent Domain.
shall be construed to limit or
its power of eminent domain.
No provision of this Agreement
restrict the exercise by COUNTY of
11.19 Auent for Service of Process. In the event OWNER
is not a resident of the State of California or it is an
association, partnership or joint venture without a member,
partner or joint yentutor resident of the State of California, or
it is a foreign corporation, then in any such event, OWNER shall
file with the Planning Director, upon its execution of this
Agreement, a ~]esignation of a natural person residing in the
State of California, giving his or her name, residence and
business addresses, as its agent for the purpose of service of
process in any court action arising out of or based upon this
Agreement, and the delivery to such agent of a copy of any
process in any such action shall constitute valid service upon
OWNER. If for any reason service of such process upon such agent
is not feasible, then in such event OWNER may be personally
served with such process out of this County and such service
shall constitute valid service upon OWNER. OWNER is amenable to
the process so served, submits to the jurisdiction of the Court
so obtained and waives any and all objections and protests
thereto.
11.20 Authority to Execute. The person or persons
executing this Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and
represents that he/they have the authority to execute this
Agreement on behalf of his/their corporation, partnership or
business entity and warrants and represents that he/they has/have
the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of its obligations
hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement on the day and year set forth below.
3807LIT
9-23-88
ATTEST:
GERALD A. MALONEY
(SEAL)
COUNT OF RIVEESID
rman isors
-27-
OCT 4
OWNER
Dated: Io / .
DAV BAR I. a California General
Its:
Dated: ,~/.~/~,.'c By:
Its: "'
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
col ':~Y OF San Diego
,,i October 12, 1988
DAV BAR I __. the parI~er~lljp
' '~E13_~a~ J. Speer
William A. David~n~ known en me to be the
:~ COUNTYOF San Diego
.~ on October 19, 198__8
Joseph E. Tra~y and
of sat,sfactory ewdence) to be tt~e Dersons who executeci the w;thin instrument as Senior Vice
, · Bartart ~merican
corporated
knowntometoDeomeoftneDa~neBo~ DAV BAR I.
a California General Partnership
./
19;~*~ , before me the unaers,gnecL a
FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-29-
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL ~EN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT JUNE R. TULL has made, constituted, and appointed, and
by these presents does n~ke, constitute, and appoint LEO E.
RORIPAUGH, of Temecula, California, her true and lawful attorney
for her and in her name, place, and stead, and for her use and
benefit in all matters pertaining to any interest she may have in
and to any and all real property located in Riverside County,
State of California.
GIVING AND GRANTING unto LEO E. RORIPAUGH, full power and
authority to do and perform all and every act and thing
whatsoever reguisite and necessary. to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as she might or
could do if personally present, and hereby ratifying and
confirming all that her said attorney, LEO R. RORIPAUGS, shall
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of these presents as
above stated.
IN WITNESS WHEP, EOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the
/~ day of October, 1988.
STATE OF ALASKA }
) ss.
THIRD JUDICI~ DISTRICT )
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the /~day of October, 1988,
before me, the undersigned Notary PUblic, in and for Alaska, duly
commissioned and sworn as such, personally appeared JUNE R. TULL,
who is known to me and to me ~nown to be the individual named in
and who executed the above and foregoing Power of Attorney, and
she acknowledged to me the execution thereof as her free and
voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein set
forth.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
my notarial seal the day and year in this certificate first above
written.
Dated: ./.j ",'.
JUNE RORIPAUGB TULL
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
k ..~ ~ ~ '_ S.S.
COUNTY OF
On ti~,s the_ ">'. 11-__dayof './L! ,1 '. 19 ~7 Ileforeme.
the underssgned. a Notary Public in and f~ said County and Site.
L~ ,-"- ~:,,r: .i ._ \i ,,
...... provedlo~eoflffie.4~lsolsatlslaclof~eviG~91ce
~_ -j,,- .'(,, "~ ~- ~c',,t'
Drlnc~pal :and i'~ "} ~ . themto~s
~ name~as AItOn~ey~n laCt.
/~ "'.,,F~ ~-";
Signature __
FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP
(ALL SIGNAUTRES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-30-
~TATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ SS
19 ~ . i~efore m t~ un0erslgne~, a
FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-31-
Dated:
Dated:
LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARIAN E.
MA IAN E. RO{=~IPAUGH ~:
STATE OF CALIFOR,I~A .
cou~T~ o~ ~f',G,c~C ss,
and ackn~legM mat ~ exam ~ .
S~tum of NO~
SAFECO
TITLE INSURINCE
19 ~ Detore me me unOers~gne0. a
FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-32-
Dated:
Dated:
MAR~N E. RORIPAUGN
STATE OF CAUFORI~IA .
COUN'~' O~
~n th,s the J
SS.
FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-33-
BAR-DAV. a California Partnership
Dated:
Dated:
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
i:ol XTY OF San Diego
October 12, 1988
Pre~hient. and fl/a
-~.,,l~r~ ,,f Davidson Communities. Inc.
BAR-DAV __. the parlnership
'~lizabe~ Speer ~ a
· her.re me. the tsndersigned. a Notary Public in and fnr
William A. D_avidson known to me to be the
. known Io me to be
"'~FFXClAL SEAL
COUNTYOF San Diego
On October 19, 1988
sa,cI State, personally al~peared ,
before me, the unders~gned, a Nolary Public ~n and for
Joseph E. Tracy
incorporated
.o,0o,.,.on ...c.,.~ ,pe ..,,~.....,,..,.., g.,...., ,o ,,..,- .
Notaly pubhc-Calilornil
SAN DIEGO COUNT
a Cali£ornia General Pa=f'ne=shlp y '99
S ,gnat ure ,~' 'dr-. 'i--, J~' ~T'j ~'. ' .~ (This area for officill .otarml
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-34-
Dated:
DAV-BAR IX, a California General
Partnership
Its:
Dated:
BF:
Its:
~ -TXTE OF CXI,IFORNI X
~'~ cot NTY or San Diego ~'
on October 12, 1988 . bef,,re me. lbe undersigned, a Notary Public in and
~ai,i >~a~e. per~,nall~ appeared Willi~ A. Davidson known ~ me ~n be the
~ -.,,,,~, ,,f Davidson Co~unities . I~C · . the cnr~ralion fi,al ex~'med
5lizab h Je ~ped or Printed~
~ COUNTY OF San Diego
~ Joseph E. Tracy
~ ~ ~ i ~o~1 y ~ 0 · 40 Dro~ to me on t~/i
of sat,sfacto~ evsdence) to ~ the persons who executed the within instrument ~s S e~io ~ V tC ~
Incorporated
known to me to ~e One of the OartnerS Of DAV BAR I,
a California General Partnership
(ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.
EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE
OFFICERS.)
-35-
evelopment Agreement No. 5
EXHIBIT A - Page 1 of 12
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
THE LAND REFERRED TO BELOW
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY
CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
IS SITUATED IN THE
OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF
PARCEL 1:
ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 163, 164, 165, 166, 181, 182, 183 AND
184, APRICOT STREET, BANANA STREET, ILM4XLTON AV~qUE, OOJ~4 ~AY
AVENUE AND HANCOCK AVENUE AS SHOWN ON MAP OP THE TEPLECULIL I,ILI4D
AND WATER COMPANY ON PILE IN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBEDAN POI,LOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF T!~ C~rTERLXNE OF BAlD ~/M~ILTON
AVENUE WITH THE E~STER~Y LINE OF ~T C~TIXN P~C~ OF
CO~,TO ~Z CO~ OF RI~XDB BY DEE ~E ~Y 15,
1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF ~8, ~8 OF ~IDE ~,
C~XFO~IA:
~CE SO~ 42 DZ~E~ 05' 29~ ~, ~ONG ~ID ~I~ 0F
~ILTON ~, · DIBT~a OF 261.21 ~ ~ ~ MOST ~ST~Y
CORNER OF TH&T PORTION OF 2~ID LOT 184 CONVEYED TO
E. RORIPAU~, ~ ~, BY D~ PILED FOR ~ D[~ 27, 1945
AS INSTR~ NO, 3005, OF OFFIC~ ~C0~S OF ~XD/ ~,
~IFO~IA;
~CE 20~ 76 DEG~ 18' 29w ~, (FO~Y ~D 2~ 76
DEGREES 26' mT) ~oNo m NOR~T~Y LM OF ~ID P~
CO~G TO LEO [. RORIPAU~, ~, A DIST~a OF 317.10
~CE ~0~ 51 DEGREES 56' 20" ~T, (FO~Y KCO~E SO~ 52
DECREES 07' ~T) ~G ~ NORS~Y LM OF SAID P~
CO~ TO LEO [. RO~PAU~, ~ ~, A DI~C/OF 945,26 FEET
(FO~Y ~CO~E 943,7 ~) ~ ~ MOST ~T~Y ~ OF
SAID P~ ~ ~ LEO RO~PAU~, ~ ~; ~ ~
BEING ~ MOST NOR~LY ~ OF ~T ~RTION OF ~D L~ 183
CO~ ~ LEO K, RO~PA~, ~ ~, ~ D~ PILED FOR
DECN~ 27, 1945 M ~~ ~, 3004 OF O,l~ ~2 OF
DEG~ 28' 25" ~T) ~NG ~ ~R~T~Y L~ OF ~D ~T
~lO~ P~C~ ~ ~ LEO K, RO~PAU~, ~ ~, A DIST~C/
OF 1,411.97 F~ ~ ~ MO~ ~T~Y ~ OF ~D P~C~,
~a BO~ ~ DE~ 54' 44w ~T, ~ ~ ~~ OF
BAlD ~C~ ~, A DX~ OF 4,570.08 ~ ~ ~ ~ST
B~ BY DEE FILE ~R ~ B~ND 7, 1960 U
NO. 78468 OF O'lC~ ~8 OF ~IDK ~,
Page 2 of 12
THENCE NORTH 41 DEGREES 57 ' 46 ', ( FORMERLy RECORDED NORTH 42
DEGREES 31' 05" WEST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLy LINE OF SAID PARCEL
CONVEYED TO J. B. SHAMEL, A DISTANCE OF 1,439.23 FEET (FORMERLY
RECORDED 1,431.71 FEET ) T0 THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL, SAID CORNER BEING ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE
WlHCHESTER- TEMECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEEDS
RECORDS OF RTVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e 11" fiST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34
DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE, A DISTANCE
OF 489.60 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL
OF LAND CONVEYED TO JOHN E. RORIPAUGH BY DEED FILED FOR RECORD
MAY 2, 1963 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 45246, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 57e 46w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 42
DEGREES 31' 05" EAST) ADISTANCE OF 1,089.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e I1" EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34
DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) A DISTANCE OF 205.18 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 41 DEGREES 57v 46" WEST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 42
DEGREES 31 ' 05 w WEST ) A DI STANCE OF 1,089.00 FEET TO SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF WlNCHESTED-TENECULA ROAD;
THE PROCEEDING THREE (3) COURSES ARE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF
SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO JOHN E. RORIPAUGH;
THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e 11'' EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34
DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) A DISTANCE OF 166.74 FEET;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE BOUTHEAST HAVING A
EADIUS OF 925.37 FEET, THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 1X DEGREES 37' 00', AN
ARC LENGTH OF 187.62 FEET:
THENCE NORTH 46 DEGREES 44* 11w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 46
DEGREES 11' 55w EAST) A DISTANCE OF 529.48 FEET;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST HAVING A
RADIUS OF 530.50 FEET, SOUGH AN ANGLE OF 34 DEGRF, ES 32~ 30", AN
ARC LENGTH OF 319.82 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 12 DEGREES 11* 41'' EAST, (FORMERLY NECORDED NORTH 11
DEGREES 39' 25* BAST) A DISTANCE OF 504.67 FEET TO THE CENTERLIRE
OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE, SAID CENTERLINE ALSO BEING THE BOUTHERLY
LINE OP SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO THE COtJNTY OF !rIVERSIDE BY DEED
RECOEDRD J'ULY 15, 1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF ItAPB, RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 52' 39 EAST, ALONG SAID BOUTHE!tLY LINE,
A DISTANCE OF 5.67 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTIIERLY CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL:
THENCE NORTH I~DEGREV8 33' 31" EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 13
DEGREES 01' 15w EAST) ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF BAlD PARCEL, A
DISTANCE OF 1,596.82 FEET (IrOItMER~Y IrECORDED 1o597.25 PEET) TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPTING THEREFRON THAT FORTION LYING NORTRw-RLy OF T!~ SOUTHERLY
LINE OF NXCOL~S ROAD AS CONVEYED TO TH~ COtgiTY OF RIVERSIDE BY
DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND
RE-RECORDED MAY 7, 1979 AS INSTHUMENT NO. 92671 BOTH OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, ~IT-IFORNIA;
Page 3 of 12
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM TEAT PORTION LYING WITHIN TRACT 20703-2,
AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 185 PAGES 37 THROUGH 44,
INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYXNG WITHIN TRACT 20703-3,
AS SHOWN BY MaP ON FILE IN BOOK 186 PAGES 20 THROUGH 28,
INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS. RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
PARCEL 2:
BEING A PORTION OF THAT PORTION OF THE TEMECULA RANCHO AS
DESCRIBED IN a DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1970 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
ALSO BEING
DESCRIBED
INSTRUMENT
CALIFORNIA,
A PORTION OF THAT PORTION OF THE TEMECULA RANCHO AS
AS PARCEL 3 IN a DEED RECORDED MAY 29, 1969 AS
NO. 53291 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
BEING NONE PARTICt,-aqLY DESCRIBEDAS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT MAP NO. 3883
ON FILE IN BOOK 53 PAGES I THROUGH 35 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID POINT BEING ON THE
PROLONGATION LINE OF TRACT MaP 3334 SAID LINE BEING COMMON WITH
THE LINE BETWEEN MURRIETA aND TENECULA PORTIONS OF TIlE TRNECULA
RANCHO AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NAP NO. 3883;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG 8AID RANClIO LINE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56'
04' EAST 690.51 FEET TO a CURVED PORTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF
NICOLAS ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAP NO. 854-F, SAID
CURVE BEING NON-TANGENT WITH SAID RANCliO LINE, SAID POINT RAVING
A RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 02 DEGREES 52' 11w WEST SAID CURVE
BEINC CONCAVE TO THE NORTHERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 111.42 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5 DEGREES 19* 13w TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE IN a RADIAL DIRECTION OF SOUTH 8 DEGREES 11e 24M EAST
55.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WaY LINE OF SAID NXCOLAS
ROAD;
THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES 32e 03w WEST 33.24 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 43* 24w EAST 181.55 FEET TO a TANGENT
CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 100.00
FEET;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 26.20 FEET SOUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE Off 15 DEGREES 00~ 38w TO A TANGENT LIME;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TANGENT LINE SOUTH 20 DEGNEES 44v
02' EAST 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO
THE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH ARADXUS OF 48,00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 63.76 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a
CEI~TRAL ANGLE OF 76 DEGNEES 06' 22M;
THENCE LEAVING SAID CURVE IN a SOUTHEASTERLY DXNECTXON 80UTH 2
DEGREES 10~ 13' EAST 131.15 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF
LOT 33 OF SAID TRACT 3883 SAID POXNT ALSO BEING AN ANGLE POINT IN
THE BOUNDANY OF SAID TRACT 3883;
Page 4 of 12
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN SAID LOT 181;
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM T~IAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 166 DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 166, SAID POINT
BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOH]4 JAY
AVENUE AS SHOIfi4 ON SAID MAP OF THE TEMEC'tJLA LAND AND WATER
COMPANY;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 41 DEGREES
58" WEST, 139.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE SODTH 51 DEGREES 04' 52" NEST, 336.83 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 47' 46w WEST. 120.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID DEED RECORDED JANUARY 22, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 81619 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
SAID LINE ALSO BEING CO)~tON WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE
WINCHESTER--
TENECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED
RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 12 DEGREES 12' 14'
EAST, 501,78 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE;
THENCE SOU'I'dEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE
SOUTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" EAST, 408.94 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LO~ 182 DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 181, SAID
POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOHN
JAY AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TH~ TEMECULA LAMD AXTD WATER
COMPANY;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANA STREET
NORTH 48 DEGREES 16' 44" EAST, 272.01 FEE~ TO YHZ TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANA ~YREET NORTH 46
DEGREES 16' 44" MAST, 423.79 FEEt TO THE CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS
ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAY NO. 854-P;'
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLy ALONO SAID CENTERLINE OF NICROLAS ROAD SOtFrH
73 DEGREES 34' 01" FAST 93.79 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 25' 59w WEST, 360.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH M DEGKF. F_~ 34' 01w Wr. ST, 317.40 F~E'T TO ~ THU~
POINT OF BEGINNING;
ALSO EXCEPTING TliEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN TRACT
20703-1 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76
INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFOHNIA;
Page 5 Of 12 "
.THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ]LLONG SAID TRACT BOUNDARy SOUTH 12 DEGREES
18' 23" EAST 512.54 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF NORTH GENERAL
KEARNEY AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 53291;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CMERLINE NORTH 47 DEGREES 59'
28" EAST 156.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE BEING
CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A Su&DIUS OF 1200.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTREASTEALY 890.92 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42 DEGREES 32' 24'' TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER
OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 91390;
THENCE NORTH 5 DEGREES 27' 04w HAST 306.46 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE
INTERSECTION OF SAID NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY AND SAID NICOLAS ROAD;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID' CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS ROAD SOUTH
75 DEGREES 12' 17" WEST 543.81 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH WITH A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 138.34 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6 DEGREES 36 ' 19'' TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
SAID LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
NO. 2534 APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON
JULY 31, 1987.
PARCEL 3:
THAT PORTION OF RANClIO TEMECULA AS SHOWN BY HAP ON FILE IN BOOK 1
PAGE 37 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE
NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO, 3334 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK 54 PAGES 25 TO 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANT T~n£ON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54 '
EAST, 2922.78
THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES 19' 22'' EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING & RADIUS OF
1200.00 FEET;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 340.15 FEET THROUGH a CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 10 DEGREES 14'
THENCE CONTINUING EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 424.32 FEET SOUGH A
CEHTR~.L ANGLE OF 20 DEGREES 15'
THENCE TARGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 75 DEGREES 10 ' 35 w HA~T
2091.62 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH W5 DEGR~ED 10' 35'' WEST, 1706.86 MET TO THE "TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING'';
THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 75 DEGNEED 10' 35" WEST, 384.77 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING A
RADIUS OF 1200.00
THENCE SOUTNNESTEALY ALONG SAID CURVE 764 · 47 FEET SOUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36 DEGREES 30'
Page 6 of 12
THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 68 DEGREES 19' 22" WEST, 89.24
FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE
OF SAID TRACT NO. 3334;
THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGED LINE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 54* 44" WEST,
1210.54 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 50 DEGREES 10'
THENCE SOUTH 80 DEGREES 13'
THENCE NORTH.12 DEGREES 20'
THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 40'
THENCE SOUTH 12 DEGREES 20'
THENCE NORTH 47 DEGREES
25' EAST, 179.54 FEET;
48" EAST, 342.48 FEET;
00" WEST, 120.00 FEET;
00" EAST, 168.00 FEZ'T:
00' EAST, 512.80 FEET;
59' 53" EAST, 155.60
FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF a TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST HAVING A
RADIUS OF 1200.00 FRET;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 73.77 FEET THROUGH a
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3 DEGREES 31' 21w;
THENCE SOUTH 58 DEGREES 31' 18" EAST, 270.35 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 82 DEGREES 01~ 19w EAST, 266.58 FRET;
THENCE NORTH 45 DEGREES 34' 21' EAST, 778.56 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 83 DEGREES 17' 25" EAST, 342,34 FEET TO a LINE WHICH
BEARS 80UTII 14 DEGREES 49' 25w EAST FROM TEE wTRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING";
THENCE NORTH 14 DEGREES 49' 28w WEST, 871.85 FRET TO THE wTHUE
POINT OF BEGINNING";
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THaT PORTION DESCRIBED ES FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT MAP NO. 3883
AS SHOWN BY MaP ON FILE IN BOON 63 PAGES TBROUGB 35 OF RAPS,
RECORDS OF RIVERSXDE COUNTY, CaLXFOENIA, SAID POINT BEING ON THE
PROLONGATION LINE OF TRACT M~P NO. 3334 SAID LINE BEING COMMON
WITH THE LINE BETWEEN MURRIETA aND TEMECULA PORTIONS OF THE
TEMECULA RANCHO aS SHOWN ON SAID TRaCT MAP NO. 3883;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAXD RANCHO LINE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56v
04" EAST, 690.51 FEET TO a CURVED PORTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF
NICOLAS ROaD aS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAP NO. 854-F, SAID
RANCNO LINE, SAID POINT HAVING a RADIAL BEAMING OF NORTH 02
DEGREES 52* 11" WEST, SaID CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO TBX NORTHERLY
WITH a RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET, ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CUNVE TBROU~H a CENTRAL ANGLE OF
5 DEGREES 19' 13", 111.42 FEET;
THENCE IN A RADIAL DIRECTION OF SOUT~ 8 DEGREES 11~ 24" WEST,
55.00 FEET TOo"'fiIB 80UTHERLY RX~rr OF WAY LINE OF Bald NZCOLaS
ROAD:
THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES 32* 03' WEST, 33.24 FRET;
THENCE 80UTH 5 DEGREES 43~ 24' EAST, 181.55 FEET TO A TENGENT
CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY WITH a !aDIUS OF 100.00
FEET:
THENCE SOUTHFaSTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTPaT./LMGLE OF
15 DEGREES 00' 38', 26.20 FEET TO A TaNGENT LINE;
Page 7 of 12
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TANGENT LXNE SOUTH 20 DEGREES 44'
02" EAST, 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO
THE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH ARADIUS OF 48.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
76 DEGREES 06* 22", 63.76 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING ~AID CURVE IN A SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION SOUTH 2
DEGREES 10* 13" EAST, 131.15 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF
LOT 33 OF SAID TRACT 3883; SAID POINT ALSO BEING aN ANGLE POINT
IN THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 3883;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TRACT BOUNDARY SOUTH 12 DEGREES
18' 23' EAST, 512.54 FEET TO CENTERLINE OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY
AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 53291 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 47 DEGREES 59~
28" EAST, 156.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF a TANGENT CURVE BEING
CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET:
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a CENTRP, L ANGLE OF
42 DEGREES 32* 24", 890.92 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF
SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, OF a PARCEL OF LaND DESCRIBED IN DEED
RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1970 AS XNSTHUMENT NO. 91390 OF OFFXCIAL
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALXFORNIA:
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE 80UTIiWESTERLY BOUNDANY LINE OF
SAID PANCRL RECORDED AS XHSTHUHENT NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: NORTH 65 DEGREES 42' 25" WEST,
658.63 FEETTO SAID RaNCH0 LINE:
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RANCI!0 LINE 80UTH 44 DEGREES 56'
04' WEST, 202.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:"
BEGINNING AT a POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE
NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 3334, AS SHOWN 3Y MAP ON FXLE IN
BOOK 54 PAGES 25 TO 30, XMCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORD8 OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANT TIiEREON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54' 44w
EAST, 2922.78 FEET TO ~ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING:
THENCE 80UTH 68 DEGREES 19~ 22" EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING a RADIUS OF
1200.00 FEET, DELTA 16 DEGREES 14' 28w LENGTH OF 340.15 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 26* 10" EBaT, 385.37 FEET:
THENCE NORTH 65 DEGREES 43' 19w WEST, 658.77 FEET:
THENCE NORTH 4d DESPOt8 54* 44" EAST, 318.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING:
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL MAP
5732, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 13 PAGE 85 OF PARCEL MAPS,
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, rmT-IFOANIA;
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN NICHOLAS ROAD
AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23,
1979 AS XNSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RS-RECORDED RAY 7, 1979 aS
INSTRUMENT NO. 92671 BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA:
Page 8 of 12
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN TRACT
20703-1 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76
INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
SAID LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOT LIME ADJUSTMENT
NO. 2429, AS DISCLOSED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JANUARY 16, 1987 AS
INSTRUMENT NO~ 13075 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORHIA.
PARCEL 4:
ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 181, 182, 183 BAD 184, APRICOT AVENUE,
BANANA STREET, AND HAMILTON AVENUE, OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND
WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY RAP ON FILE XN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF
MAPS, RECORDS OF BAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LYING NORTHERLY OF
THE NORTHERLY LINE OF NICOLaS RORD, RE CONVEYED TO THE COt,4TY OF
RIVERSIDE BY DOC"JMENT RECORDED APRXL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 80861 AND RE-RECORDED MAY 7, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92671
BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING NORTHERLY OF THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HAMILTON
AVENUE WITH THE EASTERLY LIME OF THAT CERTAIN PANCRL OF LAND
CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED JULY 15,
1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF MAPS, leECORES OF I~IVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 42 DEGREES 05' 29w EAST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF
HAMILTON AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 261.21 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY
CORNER OF THAT PORTX0N OF SAID LOT 184 CONVEYED TO LEO
E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, BY DEED FILED FOR R~CORE DECEMBER 27, 1945
AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3005, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 76 DEGREES 18' 29w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 76
DEGREES 26' EAST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL
CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, a DISTANCE OF 317.10 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHS1 DEGREES 56' 20w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 52
DEGREES 07' EAST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LIN~ OF SAID PARCEL
CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, A DISTANCE OF 945.26 FEET
(FORMERLY RECORDED 943.7 FEET) TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF
SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO RORIPAUGH, ET AL; SAID CORNER ALSO
BEING THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF GAID LOT 183
CONVEYED TO LEO Z. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, BY DEED FXLED FOR RECORD
DECEMBER 27, 1945 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3004, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREE8 58v 04w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 69
DEGREES 28' 25" EAST) aLONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF 8aID LAST
MEI4TIONED PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, a DISTANCE
OF 1,411.97 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL, SAID
CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF SAIDAPRICOT STREET.
Page 9 of 12
PARCEL 5:
THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 181, 182 AND JOHN JAY AVENUE, OF THE
TENECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHO~N BY HAP ON FILE IN BOOK
8 PAGE 359 OF NAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THAT PORTION.OF LOT 181 LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF
NXCOLAS ROAD, AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DOCUMENT
RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RECORDED HAy
7, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92671, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 182
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 181, SAID
POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STHEETAND JOHN
JAY AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF ~ TEMECULA LAND AND WATER
CONPINY;'
THENCE NORTHFJ[STERLY [LONG ~ SAID CENTERLINE OF BRNRNA STREET
NORTH 48 DEGREES 16' 44" EAST 272.01 FEET TO ~ ~RUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLIREOP BANANA STREET NORTH 48
DEGREES 16' 44" F.~ST 423.79 FEET TO ~ CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS
ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RXVERSIDE IOiP NO. 854-F;
THENCE SOUTHEaSTERLy ALONG SAID CENTERLIME OF NICOLBS RO~D SOUTa
73 DEGREES 34' 01" r.~ST 93.79 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 25' 59" WEST 360.00 MET;
THENCE NORTH 73 DEGREES 34' 01" WEST 317.40 FEET TO ~ TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 181 BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBEDAS FOLLOWS:
BEGZNNZNG AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAZD LOT 181, SAID
POINT BEZNG TKE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND 3OHM
3AY AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MaP OF THE T~4ZCULA LARD/LWD WATER
COMPANY;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLy aLONG BAXD CENTERLINE OF JOHN 3AY AVenUE ,
NORTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" WEST 139.03 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 51 DEGREES 04' 52w EAST 192.23 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 73 DEGREES 34' 01" EAST 152.60 FEET TO THE
CENTERLINE OF 8AID BANANA STREET;
THENCE 80UTHWF~TERLY aLONG SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANa STREET SOUTH
48 DEGREES 16t 44n WEST 272.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Page 10 of 12
?ARCEL
THAT PORTION OF LOT %66 AND JOHN JAY AVENUE, OF THE TEMECULA LAND
AND WATER COMPANY AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF
MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT %66, SAID POINT
BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOHN JAY
AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF THE TRNECULA LAND AND WATER
COMPANY;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE
NORTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" WEST %39.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE SOUTH 51 DEGREES 04w 52' WEST 336.83 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 47' 46w WEST 120.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID DEED RECORDED JANUARY 22, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 8%69 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE OOUNTY, CALIFORNIA,
SAID.LINE ALSO BEING CO)e40N WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE
WINCHESTER-TENECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVENSIDE
BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEED,
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LINE NORTH %2 DEGREES %2' %4"
EAST 501.78 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE
SOUTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" EAST 408.94 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
PARCEL 7:
THAT PORTION OF RANCH0 TEMECULA IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK % PAGE 37 OF
PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUI~eY, ClLLXFOENTi, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE
NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT 334, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK
54 PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF-MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANCE THENEON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54' 44w
MAST, 2,992.78 FEET FROM THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF RAID TRACT;
THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES %9' 22' EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
TO A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY RAVING A RADIU~ OF %,200.00
FEET; ~
THENCE SOUTHEASTER~Y ALONG RAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL RNGLE OF
%6 DEGREES %4' 28w AN ARC DISTANCE OF 340.15 F~ET;
THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 26' %0w WEST, TO THE CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS
ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED
APRIL 23, %979 AS INSTRt~4ENT NO. 92671 .OF OFFICIAL RECORDS-OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE SOUTH 75 DEGREES %2' 17" WEST, ALONG SAID CENTEKLZRE,
543,8% FEETTOT HE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLy
HAVING A RADIUS OF %200 FEET;
Pa~e 11 of 12
THENCE SOUTH 75 DEGREES 12' 17" WEST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE,
543.81 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY
RAVING A RADIUS OF 1200 FEET:
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE AND ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11 D~GREES 55' 32" AN ARC LENGTH OF
249.76 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO THE COMMON LINE BETWEEN HURRIETA AND
TEMECULA PORTIONS OF SAID TENECULA RANCHO;
THENCE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56' 04" EAST, ALONG SAID RANCliO LINE TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 8:
THAT PORTION OF THE TENECULA RANCHO IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAPS ON FILE IN BOOK i PAGE 37
OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE SAID
TEMECULA RANCHO AND THE LINE SEPARATING THE MURRIETA PORTION AND
THE TEMECULA PORTION OF THE SAID TEMECULA RANCUO;
THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 55' 06" WEST A DISTANCE OF 2,004.90 FEET
ALONG THE LAST SAID LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF MEGINNING;
THENCE CONTIr4~JINO SOUTH 44 DEGREES 55' 06" WEST A DISTANCE OF
906.36 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE SAID LINE SEPARATING THE
MURRIETA PORTION AND THE TZMECULA PORTION OF THE SAID TEMECULA
RANCRO AND THE CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS ROAD;
THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES 19' 14" EAST, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF
SAID NICHOLAS ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 88.91 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF
A TANGENT CURVE RAVING A RADIUS OF 1,200.00 FEET AND CONCAVE
NORTHERLY;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 340.35
FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 DEGREES 15' 01" TO THE INTER-
SECTION OF SAID NICHOLAS ROAD AND MARGANITA ROAD;
THENCE IN A NON-TANGENT DIRECTION NORTH 5 DEGREES 25' 52" EAST
ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID MARGADITA ROAD A DISTANCE OF 260.54
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF
680.00 FEET AND CONCAVE EASTERLY;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 468.64
FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3g DEGREES 29' 14w TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 9:
LOTS 1, 2, 3, 17, 21 AND 23 INCLUSIVE OF TRACT 20703-1, AS SHOWN
BY RAP ON FILE IN ROOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76 OF MAPS, RECORDS
OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
PARCEL 10:
LOTS i THROUGH 105, INCLUSIVE OF TRACT 20703-2, AS SHOWN BY NAP
ON FILE IN ROOK 185 PACES 37 THROUGH 44, INCLUSIVE, OF NAPS,
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Paqe 12 of 12
PARCEL ll:
LOTS 1 THROUGH 132, ZNCLUSZVE OF TRACT 20703-3, AS SHOWN BY MAP
ON FILE IN BOOK 186 PAGES 20 THROUGH 28, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS,
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COt,VNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Development Agreement No. 37
EXHIBIT B
MAP SHOWING PROPERTY AND ITS LOCATION
Development Agreement No. 37
EXHIBIT C
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 164 as amended
164, Amendment No. 1.
ZONING
Ordinance No. 348.2788
(Zone Change No. 4501)
Ordinance No. 348.2927
(Zone Change No. 5127)
LAND DIVISIONS
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703
No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Book
by Specific Plan No.
and Final Tract Map
177, pages 72-76.)
The development approvals listed above include the approved
maps and all conditions of approval.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE
ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
Development Agreement No.
EXHIBIT D
37
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as
amended through Resolution No. 88-485.
Ordinance No. 340.
Ordinance No. 348 as amended through Ordinance No.
348.2857.
Ordinance No. 448 as amended through Ordinance No.
448.a.
Ordinance No. 458 as amended through Ordinance No.
458.8.
Ordinance No. 460 as amended through Ordinance No.
460.92.
Ordinance No. 461 as amended through Ordinance No.
461.6.
Ordinance No. 509 as amended through Ordinance No.
509.2.
Ordinance No. 546 as amended through Ordznance No.
546.7a.
10. Ordinance No.
547.5.
11. Ordinance NO.
555.15.
12. Ordznance No.
617.1.
547 as amended through Ordinance No.
555 as amended through Ordinance No.
617 as amended through Ordinance No.
13. Ordinance No. 650.
14.
Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and
Requirements for the Consideration of Development
Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and
Resolution No. 88-119.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE
ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
Development Agreement No.
EXHIBIT E
FEE CREDITS
None.
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
R:\STAFFI~tI'~ITPA94.1S 9115194 tjs 28
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF
City Clerk
City of Temecula
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
City Clerk
City of Temecuta
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula CA 92590
(Space Above Line For Recorder's Use)
AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Definitions ............................................ 5
2. Interest of Owner ........................................ 7
3. Exhibits .............................................. 7
4. Term ............................................... 7
5. Assignment ........................................... 8
5. 1 R/ght to Assign .................................... 8
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9
5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10
6. Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10
7. Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11
8. Relationship of Parties .................................... 12
9. Changes in Project ...................................... 12
10. Timing of Development ................................... 12
11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12
11.1 Hold Harmless .................................... 12
i 1.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement .................... 13
11.3 public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14
11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15
11.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15
12. Public Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16
12.1 Intent .......................................... 16
12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16
12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17
12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17
12.5 Timing ......................................... 18
K:$DMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP i
13. Reservations of Authority ...................... ' ............ 18
13. I Limitations, Reservations, and Exceptions ................... 18
13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals ....................... 19
13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law ............. 19
13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies ...................... 20
13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension .......................... 20
13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps .............................. 20
14. Development of the Property ................................ 21
14.1 Rights to Develop .................................. 21
14.2 Effect of Agreement on T~nd Use Regulations ................ 21
14.3 Changes and Amendments ............................. 21
15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement .................... 22
16. Financing District ...................................... 23
17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement ....................... 23
18. Enforcement .......................................... 23
19. Events of Default ....................................... 23
20. Procedure Upon Default ................................... 24
21. Damages Upon Termination ................................ 24
22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................. 24
23. Notices ............................................. 25
24. Cooperation .......................................... 25
25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms .................... 26
26. Entire Agreement ....................................... 26
27. Counterparts .......................................... 26
28. Authority to Execute ..................................... 27
K:tDMSLIL W, DIRLO085996. WP ii
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE
EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK
K:t~A4S~IL W,~)1~1~085996. V,/P iii
AMF~NDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVFJ~OPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF TEMECULA
and
COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC.,
dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES
This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered
into to be effective on the date it is recorded with' the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective
Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and
Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes
("Owner"):
RECITALS
A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seq. ("Development
Agreement Statutes"), Day-Bar I, a California general partnership and others and the County of
Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the
Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No.
323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37").
B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within
County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision,
(the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a part of the municipal
boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement
encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as
"Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original
Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not
amended or impacted by this Agreement.
K: [DMSt./L W. DIRlOOB5996. WP 1
C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City
became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon
incorporation of the City.
D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and
Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this
Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project.
E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statu~es, the City's police
powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with
persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal
boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property
may be developed in the City.
F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the
City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of
certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner
shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement.
G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by
the staff of the City, the Planniffg Commission of the City and the City Cguncil of City and have
been found to be fair, just and reasonable.
H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the
public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement.
I. All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act have been met with respect to this Agreement.
J. Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public
facilities impact fees for residential development within City CRSA Fees"). City requires these
K:IDMSLIL W. DIRtO085996. WP 2
revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of
the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development.
K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact
fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during
the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent
City from ever r~iving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires to reduce the County
Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees.
L. .On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the
imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation
resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to
Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees
subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-331,
the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3)
acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard").
M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted
Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or
payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (1,000) people t0 reside in the proposed
subdivision.
N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of
increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner
to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance
of building permits for the Project.
O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the
generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the
K: tDMSLIL W. DIRIOG85996. WP 3
quality of life, including recreation facilities for present and future residents of the City. The
benefits to the City and Owner contemplated by development of the Project include:
(1) the opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating
significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City;
(2) payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and waffic signal mitigation);
· (3) participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional
infrastructure improvements;
~4) the creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use
and the protection of significant natural resources.
P. The City and Owner acknowledge that due to the present economic situation, none
of these benefits to the City are possible unless the Project proceeds with development.
Q: Without admitting or determining any fights or obligations as between City and
Owner, each to the other, with respect to the amount of the Quimby Park requirements, and to
balance the needs of the City to provide adequate parks and recreational facilities with the
difficulty of land development in today's economy, City and Owner agree that in lieu of
additional Quimby Park requirements, Owner will dedicate and develop park land as described
in this Agreement.
R. City Council of City has approved this Agreement by Ordinance No. __
adopted on , and effective on ("Effective
Date"). On the Effective Date, Development Agreement No. 37 shall be terminated as to the
Project only and of no further force and effect with respect to the Project, having been replaced
by this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of the above Recitals and of the mutual covenants
hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged and incorporated herein, the parties agree:
K:IDMSLIL V~DIRIOO85996. WP 4
City.
Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires:
1.1 "City" is the City of Temecula.
1.2 "City Public Facility Fee" is an mount to be established by Ordinance of
1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside.
1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County
Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37.
1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with
or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication
of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order
to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or
other public interests.
1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined
in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project.
1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development
approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property,
including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which
were approved by the County or the City.
1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant
to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Code Section
53311 et $eq, as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et see_.. as
amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911
(California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special
assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost
K:IDMSLIL W. DIRIOOEI5996, WP 5
of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a specific
geographical area of the City.
1.9 "Interim Public Facilities Fee" means an amount of Three Thousand
Dollars ($3,000.00) per each residential unit developed in the Project.
1.10 "Land Use Regulations" means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules,
regulations and official policies of City, governing the development and use of land including
without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision
requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation
or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction
standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property listed on Exhibit B
which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date of this Agreement. "Land Use
Regulations" does not include any County or City ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation,
or official policy, governing:
(a) The conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations;
Co) Taxes and assessments;
(c) The control and abatement of nuisances;
(d) The granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights
and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property;
(e) The exercise of the power of eminent domain.
1.11 "Owner" means the person having a legal or equitable interest in the
Project;
1.12
Development Plan.
1.13
"Project" is the development of the Property in accordance with the
"Property" is the real property described in Exhibit C.
K:tDMSLIL V~DIRtO085996. WP 6
1.14
adopted by City.
1.15
*RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as
*Subsequent Development Approvals' means all development approvals
required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property.
1.16 "Subsequent Land Use Regulation" means any Land Use Regulation
adopted and ~ffective after the Effective Date of this Agreement.
2. Interest of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee tifie interest in the
Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be
bound by this Agreement.
3. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached
hereto and made a part hereof by this reference:
Exhibit
Designation
A
B
C
D
E
Term.
Description
Existing Development Approvals
Existing l ~nd Use Regulations
Legal Description of the Property
Notice From Mortgagee
Site Plan of Park
4.1 The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and
shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated,
modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the
parties hereto.
4.2 This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the
occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any
appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit fried against the City to set aside,
withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement.
K:tDMSLIL W. DIRIOO85996. WP 7
5. Assignment.
5.1 Right to Assign. The Own~r shall have the right to s~ll, transfer, orassign
the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et see.. or Riverside County Ordinance
No. 460, as the same'was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by
Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time
during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or
assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations
arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following
conditions precedent:
(a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this
Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of
all or a part of the Property.
Co) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within
fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such
sale, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a
form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or
assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and
unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this
Agreement.
Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions
shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any
purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this
Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee, or
assignee until and unless such agreement is executed.
5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or
assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless
such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided
by City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions:
(a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any part of the
Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust.
(b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement.
(c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed
agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above.
(d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security
equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its
obligations hereunder.
5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to
Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the
sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been finally subdivided and
is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate
user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate
with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement
without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the
following conditions:
(a) the lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in
'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or
other ultimate user; and
K: $DMSLIL W, DIRiOOB5996. WP ~)
Co) a Ceni~cato of Occupancy has been issued' for a building on a lot,
and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid.
5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after
an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the
toms and conditions of this Section.
6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hemto agree that this Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the
Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and
modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and
representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or
modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation
or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and
purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable
costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make
reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City.
Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall
defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good
faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law.
(b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form
as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices,
K:LOMSLIL W. DIRIG085996. WP 10
shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the
performance of the 0wner's obligations under this Agreement.
(c) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth
on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of
this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten
(10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but
not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under
this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any pan
thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such
foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have
an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other
affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such performance, provided
however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent
to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a
condition precedent to City' s performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer
or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1
of this Agreement.
(e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion
thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the
Owner set forth heroin shall not be enti~ed to any rights to develop which have or may have
vested as a result of this Agreement.
K:IDMSLIL t.~DIRIOO85996. WP 11
7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the
benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance
with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement.
8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between
City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City.
9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing
Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City
equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first
instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the
Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the
adoption of this Agreement).
10. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time
predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon
numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and
demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California
Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984),
that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later
adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties, it is the
parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have
the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner
deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any
timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan.
1 I. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation.
11.1 Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents,
employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for
K: IDMStJL W. DtR~O085996. WP 12
personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct
or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contracWr, subcontractor, agent, employee
or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and
representatives fwm actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of
Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This h01d harmless agreement applies to all
damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the
operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied,
or approved plans or specifications for the Project.
11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement. In the event the County seeks
to challenge the right of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate
Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this
Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of
Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays
in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint
defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against
any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such
action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any lis pendens) and to share the
costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such
action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement
and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro
rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of contribution of the total units
owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units
within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference
in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development
K: $DMSUL W. DIRiOOBS996. WP 1 ~
Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the
responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated are lawfully the funds
of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the
payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and
Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought
by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the
defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is
an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party
shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal.
11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any
legal action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this
Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any
shortfall between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities
Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise
have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be
responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts
collected and held by City under the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment
by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like
amount paid by City.
11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County
prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this
Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as
the case may be, shall revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect
at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement
K:tDMStJL W. DIRIO085996. WP 14
is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions
set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and
from the date of said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the
County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No.
37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding
said ruling of invalidity.
11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its
expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit
granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall
promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the
defense. If City fails to promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if
City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any
such claim, action, or proceeding.
11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel
approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and
any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages
(including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage,
punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands,
debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest,
fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness
fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing
this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City
K:tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996. WP
or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or
detoxiftcation, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure,
or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning any
Hazardous Substance or baTarclous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject
of this Agreement. The forego'rag indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant
to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Code Section
25364, a~d their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from
liability.
12. Public Benefits. Public Improvements and Facilities.
12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers
private benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits.
Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private
benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs
resulting from development of the Project.
12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential).
(a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or
City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date,
Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per
dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below.
At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim
Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other
public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residential development projects
in the City.
K:IDMSIJL W. D/RIO085996. WP 16
(b) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development
exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence as of the Effective Date and
throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal
]v~itigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in
existence when paid.
12.3 Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Algrcement, Owner
agrees to de~ticate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered,
park land equalling approxima~ly three (3) a~res pursuant to that certain undated
Parkland/Landscape improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown
on Exhibit E which is attached and made a pa~ hereof and incorporated by this reference.
Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of
easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for
dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the
construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City
accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall
be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation
relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company to issue a CLTA title
insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shah be
provided to City. if City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a
CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City.
12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the
improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive
a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees
based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the
Pro. ject's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a total maximum credit of
K: tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996, WP ] '7
Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within
which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City
Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a right to review, audit and verify all costs associated with
said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the panics. If
at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced
above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the
City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall
be defined as onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility
work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic
removal and weftands mitigation.
12.5 TiminE. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or
City Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement
shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first
production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be
paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the
Property. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities
Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with
the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said
model homes, which MOU is dated for reference , 1994.
13. Reservations of Authority.
13.1 Limitations. Reservations. and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the
development of the Property:
(a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated
actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals.
K: IDMSIJL W. DIRIOOE5996. WP 18
(b) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions,
applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and
any other matter of procedure.
(c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however,
that no such subsequently adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to
development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly
to development throughout the City.
(d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications
including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical
Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code.
(e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan.
Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing
of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan
and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property.
(f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan
provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to
development of the Property.
13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent
City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent Land Use
Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent
City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the
basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development
Plan.
13.3 Modification or SuSpension by State or Federal Law. In the event that
State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent
K: iOMS L,'L W. D/RiO O B5996. WP 19
or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions
of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State
or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such
laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce.
13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties
that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of
the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City and this Agreement does
not limit the authority of such other public agencies.
13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section
66452.6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s)
(vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended
to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement
13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or
tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development
of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section
66410, et sea.~ and Riversi~te County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by
reference into the Ten~ecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04, and if this Agreement is
determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right
to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the fights, obligations, and protections afforded
the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall
supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above,
development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions
in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances
concerning vesting maps.
K: tDMSLIL W.D/R{O085996, WP
14. Development of the Property.
14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the tens of this Agreement, including
payment of the Intorim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the
Property in accordance with, and W the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall
remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as
contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the
permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size
of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes
shall be those set forth in the Development Plan.
14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise
provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public
Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the
Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of
proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications
applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City
shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development
Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement
including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City Public
Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all
applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed
in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract
for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of
Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner.
14.3 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and
further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may
t~: IDMS~dL W.O/RI ooes996. wP 2 1
demonstrate that changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing Development
Approvals. In the event the Owner finds that a change in the Existing Development Approvals
is necessary or appropriate, the Owner shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval 'to
effectuate such change. If approved, any such change in the Existing Development Approvals
shall be incorporated herein as an addendure to this Agreement and may be further changed from
time to time as provided in this Section. Owner, shall, within thirty (30) days of written demand
by City, reimburse City for any and all reasonable costs, associated with any amendment or
change to this.Agreement that is initiated by Owner or Owner's successor. Unless otherwise
required by law, as determined in City's reasonable discretion, a change to the Existing
Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this
Agreement provided such change does not:
(a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or,
Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or,
(c)Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings; or,
(d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public
purposes within the Property as a whole; or,
(e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or a supplemental
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code.
15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement.
(a) Pursuant to City Resolution No. 91-52, as it may be subsequenfiy
amended, City shall review this Agreement at least once duting every twelve (12) month period
from the Effective Date of this Agreement. The Owner or successor shall reimburse City for the
reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of written demand from
City.
K:~DMSLIL W. DIRLO085996, WP 22
(b) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate
good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such
evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require.
16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in
exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the
financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities,
lands, and improvements to aen~e the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside
the Property. It is acknowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as
requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds.
17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or
canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided
for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested
by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development
Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no
such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of
reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City.
18. Enforcement. Unless amended or can~led as herein pr. ovided, this Agreement
is enforceable by any party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific
plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or amend the
rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design,
improvement, and construction standards and specifications.
19. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening
of one or more of the following events or conditions:
(a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to
City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made;
K: [DMSL,'L W. D/RIO085996. WP
(b) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial
evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions
of this Agreement.
20. Procedure Upon Default.
(a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify
this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City.
(b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied
if on periodic xeview the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
(c) Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third
person.
(d) Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed
by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor.
(e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided
for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements are available
to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach.
21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would
not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to
this Agreement or the application thereof.
In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity
available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers,
employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee
of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for
breach of that Agreement by City.
K:IDMSL/L W. DIRtO085996. WP 24
22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of
breach of this Agreement or to enforce a pwvision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is
entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs.
23. H0tices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in
writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mall, postage prepaid and presumed
delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit
thereof in United States Mall. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:
To City: City of Temeeula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: City Attorney
Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows:
To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
Del Mar, CA 92014
Attention: William A. Davidson
With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman
11975 E1 Camino Real, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92130
Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq.
A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter
notices shall be addressed a~d transmitted to the new address.
24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly take
action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required
processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for
development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall
cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land
use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated
K:tDMSLIL W. DIR$O085996. WP 25
therewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s), building inspector(s), and/or
other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project.
25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Tens.
(a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the
feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive.
Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations
are joint and several.
(c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by
mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of
the Agreement.
(d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and
benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not
limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any right of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete,
final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is
intended by the parties to completely state the agreement in full.. Any agreement or
representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation
thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void.
27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each
of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an Original. No counterpart shall be
deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the
other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party seeking enforcement
thereof.
K: tDMSLIL W.O/nlO085996. WP 26
28. Authority to Execute. Each party hemto expressly wan'ants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their
corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that
he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its
obligations hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the day and
year first above written.
"City"
City of Temecula
By:
Ron Roberrs, Mayor
i'Une S. Greek, City Clerk
Am.roved as to form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
"Owner"
Coscan Homes California, Inc.,
a California corporation, dba
Coscan Davidson Homes
William A. Davidson
(t ed name)
its President
(title)
Stephen H. Dawe
(typed name)
its Executive Vice-President
(title)
K:IDMSLILW. DIRIOQ85996, WP 27
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
Onf2r;~k,~L~r~, ,q~dr, before me, '~ktt_. ~..~cec_ [here insert the
name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared
~,~-,~.~, A. D,~,,~o,~ ~. 3-r~,~. ~. FL~.-~, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On , before me, [here insert the
name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared
, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(SEAL)
K: IDIdSUL ~,DIRIO085998. WP 2 8
Development Agreement No. 37
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 164 as amended by Specific Plan No.
164, Amendment No. 1.
ZONING
Ordinance No. 348.2788
(Zone Change No. 4501)
Ordinance No. 348.2927
(Zone Change No. 5127)
LAND DIVISIONS
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 and Final Tract Map
No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Boo~ 177, pages 72-76.)
The development approvals listed above include the approved
maps and all conditions of approval.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE
ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
_.EXIle_IT A
Development Agreement No. 37
EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS
2. Ordinance No.
3 Ordinance No.
348.2857.
4 Ordinance No.
448.a.
5 Ordinance No.
458.8.
6 Ordinance No.
460.92.
7 Ordinance No.
461.6.
8 Ordinance No.
509.2.
9 Ordinance No.
546.7a.
10. Ordinance No.
547.5.,
11. Ordinance No.
555.15.
12. Ordinance No.
617.1.
Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as
amended through Resolution No. 88-485.
340.
348 as amended through Ordinance No.
448 as amended
458 as amended
460 as amended
461 as amended
509 as amended
546 as amended
547 as amended
555 as amended
617 as amended
through Ordinance No.
through Ordinance No
through Ordinance No
through Ordinance No
through Ordinance No
through Ordinance
through Ordinance
through Ordinance
through Ordinance
No
No
No
No
13. Ordinance No. 650.
14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and
Requirements for the Consideration of Development
Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and
Resolution No. 88-119.
COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE
ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
F. XHIBITB
Exhibit 'C"
Legal Description
(to be attached)
LEGAL DESGRiPTION
TENTATIVE TRACT 27827
AT PARCEL OF LAND CONSISTING OF TRACT 27827-i, ON FiLE IN BOOk Z49,
.,GES 9c THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, AND TRACT 27827-2, ON FILE IN BOOK
250, PAGES L THROUGH 3, INCLUSIVE, BOTH RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "S" OF LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT NO. PA94-0032, RECORDED MAY 31, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO.
220114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING IN THE CiTY
OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAiD FORTION OF
PARCEL "B" BEING MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIRED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 30 OF SAiD TRACT 27827-2~
....... z,~-._-.~. A!.q'N/'' THE WESTERLY LiNF
A liETAHOE O[ E,=4.8%' FEET;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL
CGURSES:
1.
2.
3.
"B" THE FOLLOWING FOUR
NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6i.~2 FEET;
SOUTH o2°14'554 EAST, A DISTANCE OF 409,87 FEET;
SOUTH 62°16'01~'' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482,2o FEET TO A
ROINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE. CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF
SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT SEARS SOUTH 2~°44'59'' WEST;
4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.15 FEET TO A POINT ON A
NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH
SA!~ POINT BEARS SOUTH !4'28'52" WEST, SAID POINT BEING
ALSO THE NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 31 OF SAID TRACT 27827-l;
THENil WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 27827-! THE FOLLOWING
NINETEEN COURSES:
SOUTH 16'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.!~ FEET;
2 NORTH 73°18'56'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 12.4~ FEET;
3 SOUTH 57°20'50'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.43 FEET TO A
POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID
CURVE THROUGH SAiD POINT BEARS NORTH 83'07'07" EAST;
4 SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
!42'42'46", A DISTANCE OF 114.5R FEET;
5 NORTH 44~10'08'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE
RESiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND
HAVIN~ A RADIUS OF !0O.00 FEET;
s NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL AN~LE OF
2e'!e'44". A DISTANCE OF 45.92 FEET TO THE REGiNNING OF
A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A
RAiIUS OF 222i.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL SEARS
S~UTH 1~,~31'j8'' WEST;
NORTHWESTERLy ALONG SAID REVERSE CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
A~LE OF 2'03'!1". A DISTANCE 79.59 FEET l<, A POINT ON
A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAil' CURVE THROUGH
SAIL POINT REARS SOUTH 21'34'20" WEST;
8 SOUTH 24°26'13" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4,1.'2 FEET TO THE
REcINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CON,iAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND
HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.00 FEET;
9. SOUTHWESTERLy ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
3°00'[4'', A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET;
!0. SOUTH 16°25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 17.50 FEET;
i!. NORTH 73°34'01', WEST, A DISTANCE OF 135.00 FEET;
12. SOUTH 16'25'59'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 17.24 FEET;
13. NORTH 73°34'01- WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.f~0 FEET;
i4. NORTH 10~25'59'' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20.!5 FEET;
15. NORTH 73~34'0I'' WEST, A
io. SOUTH 10'25'59" WEST, A
17. NORTH 73°34'0!'' WEST, A
18. NORTH 16°25'59" EAST, A
19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT
DISTANCE OF [5[.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 18.43 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 26.29 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO THE
"F" OF SAID TRACT 27827-!,
BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST
TRACT 27827-2;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY
FOLLOWING ELEVEN COURSES:
I. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST A
2. SOUTH
3. NORTH
4. SOUTH
5 NORTH
6 SOUTH
7 NORTH
8 NORTH
9 NORTH
!O SOUTH
1i NORTH
POINT
16° 25'59" WEST A
73~34'01" WEST A
16"25'59" WEST A
73°34'01" WEST A
16°25'59" WEST A
73"34'01" WEST A
16°25'59'' EAST A
73° 34'01" WEST A
I6° 25'59" WEST A
73~34'0i" WEST A
OF BEGINNING.
CORNER OF LOT 18 OF SAID
LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 THE
DISTANCE OF
DISTANCE OF
DISTANCE OF
DISTANCE OF
DISTANCE OF
131.00 FEET;
4.26 FEET;
105.00 FEET;
33.80 FEET;
131.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 86.20 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 155.00 FEET:
DISTANCE OF lo.33 FEET;
DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET TO THE
Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement
Development Augment:
Amendment and Re~atement
of Development Agreement
Specific Plan No. 164. Ror~augh
Planning Application No. 944)017
Date:
To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula
Pursuant to Section 6(b) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement
of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by
as Mortgagee for the pwperty (or portion thereof) to receive
copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the tens
and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of
any such Notices should be mailed to the following address:
(Mortgagee)
(Person]Department)
(Address)
(City/State/Zip)
(Telephone No.)
A copy of this Notice shouM be filed with the project fie to insure proper and timely
notice is given. Under the/enns of said Amendment and Restatement of Development
Agreement, as Mortgagee is enti~ed to rec__eive copies of any Notice of
Default within ten (10) davs of SelldlnE ally Slleh Notice to Owner. Failure to send any
such Notice may have serious legal conseeuences for the City.
This request is to remain in effect unffi revoked by as
Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated.
The penon executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and
represents that the entity hashe represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is
entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of
Development Agreement.
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
EXHIBITS
R:~STAFFPAwr\17PA~4.1S 9/15/94 I~,_ 29
CITY OF TEMECULA
{
CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827
EXHIBIT - A VICINITY MAP
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - SP (SPECIFIC PLAN)
BP ,~
CC
M
."'--n ' SITE
LM /
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (7 TO 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE)
CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
CITY OF TEMECULA
,t I/
CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827
EXHIBIT-D TRACT MAP 27827
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
Based on information provided to date, the City's consultants have determined that the cable
systems 9, 119 subscribers have been overcharged $0.16 per month for basic tier service.
Those with remote control and converter boxes were overcharged $0.21 and 80.18 per
month, respectively. Projecting a rebate by Inland Valley of approximately 823,000 to
subscribers, the City will have to rebate the 5% franchise fee on those lost revenues, totaling
approximately $1,200.
The City has spent approximately $5,700 dollars to date on attorney and accountant fees to
prepare the proposed rate rebate for its citizens.
RESOLUTION NO. _
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA
DISAPPROVING TFIF~ CABt,F~ TF.t,~-VISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE
TIER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY
CABLEVISION, AND ORDERING A REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES
The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula ("City") was certified to regulate rates for cable
programming services and equipment pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection
and Competition Act of 1992;
WHEREAS, Western Communication, dba Inland Valley Cablevision ("Inland
Valley") holds a franchise to operate a cable television system within the City;
WHEREAS, on or about January 26, 1994, Inland Valley fled its Form 393 with the
City seeking approval of its maximum initial permitted rates for regulated cable programming
services and equipment;
WltEREAS, the City has obtained reports dated September 29, 1994 from Burke,
Williams & Sorensen and September 21, 1994 from Diehl, Evans & Company, analyzing the
Form 393 submitted by Inland Vatley;
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing pursuant to Sections 76.935
and 76.935 and 76.942 of Ti~e 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations to take written and
oral testimony from all interested paxties, including Inland Valley, concerning the Form 393
submitted by Inland Valley, the aforementioned reports and Inland Valley's response thereto;
and;
Wlt!~REAS, the City Council has considered the testimony received during the public
hearing and the reports and letter described above;
NOW, TItF~REFORE, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby resolves,
determines and orders as follows:
Section 1. The rates and charges for the Basic Services Tier and associated
equipment as identified in the FCC Form 393 are hereby disapproved for the reasons and on
the grounds contained in the Reports of Burke, Williams & Sorerisen and Diehl, Evans &
Company, which reports are incorporated inW this Resolution by reference as if fully stated
herein.
Section 2. This Resolution constitutes a written decision disapproving, in whole or
in part, initial rates within the meaning of Section 76.936 of the Rules and Regulations of the
Commission.
Section 3. The permitted rates for the basic service tier and associated equipment
for the period from September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994 shall be as follows:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Basic service tier (23 channels) - $11.66
Hourly Service Charge - $44.50
Installation of unwired homes - $44.50
Installation of pre-wircd homes - $29.82
Installation of additionai connection
at time of initial instsllation - $11.13
Installation of addtional connection
as separate installation - $22.25
New install - underground $ 0.00
Trip charge $ 0.00
Tier change charge $ 0.00
Monthly charge for lease of remote control $ 0.32
Monthly charge of converter box $ 2.34
Section 4. For the period from October 11, 1993 through July 14, 1994, Inland
Valley shall refund to subscribers that portion of previously paid basic service tier and
equipment rates in excess of the permitted rates established in Section 3 of this Resolution.
Inland Valley shall implement the refund no later than 30 days kfter the date this
Resolution is approved by the City Council.
Section 5. Inland Valley, in its discretion, may implement the refund required in
Section 4 in the following manner.
A. By returning overcharges to those subscribers who actually paid the
overcharges, either through direct payment or as a specifically identified credit to those
subscribers' bill; or
B. By means of a prospective percentage reduction in the rates for the basic
service tier or associated equipment to cover the cumulative overcharge. This shall be
reflected as a specifically identified, one-time credit on prospective bffis to the class of
subscribers that currently subscribe to the cable system.
Section 6. All refunds required pursuant to Section 4 shall include interest
computed at the same rate as established by the United States Internal Revenue Service for
tax refunds and additional tax payments.
Section 7. At least ten (10) days prior to implementing any refunds, Inland Valley
shall notify the City how it intends to implement the refund order and how it calculated the
mount of the refund.
Section 8. Inland VaLley shall notify the City of the gross mount of the refund
owing subscribers and the mount of the refund upon which Inland Valley paid any franchise
fee to the City. Within thirty (30) days of receiv'mg the statement from Inland Valley, the
City shall refund to Inland VaLley that portion of the franchise fee that was paid on refunds
made to subscribers.
Section 9. The City Council has determined that the maximum rate for the cable
programming service tier is $0.507 per channel, or $10.14 for the 20 channels offered on the
second tier. However, Inland Valley is charging subscribers $10.37 for the cable
programming service tier. The City Manager is hereby directed to bring this discrepancy to
the attention of the FCC for the purpose of determining if subscribers are entitled to a refund
on the cable programming service tier.
Section 10. Should Inland Valley appeal this rate determination of the City Council
of the City of Temecula to the FCC pursuant to Section 76.944 of the Rules and Regulations
of the Commission, the City Council does grant an automatic stay of the execution of the
refund ordered hereunder. Such stay does not constitute a change in the effective date or
implementation date of this Resolution. Nor does such stay, in any way, constitute an
endorsement of the rates and charges in effect from September 1, 1993 to July 14, 1994.
Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby directed to post a copy of this resolution in
such place or places as City Notices are normally posted and to make copies to this decision
available to the public at the office of the City Clerk during normal business hours.
Section 12. This resolution shall become effective as of the date of adoption.
PASSED AND ADOFrED by the City Council of the City of Temecula at its regular
meeting held on the 11 of October, 1994.
ATFEST:
Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF R1VERSII)E)ss
COUNTY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify
that Resolution No. 94-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 11 day of October 1994, by the foilowing
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCn.MEMBERS:
C OUNCILlVlEIMBERS:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
P:~syersk'dnhncbl.res
LAW OFFICES
BURKE, WILL/AMS & SONENSKN
September 29, 1994
Mayor Ron Roberrs
and Members of the City Council
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and
Associated Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision
Dear Mayor Roberts and City Councilmembers:
In 1992, Congress enacted the Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (the "1992 Cable Act"). One
of the principal objectives of the 1992 Cable Act was to regulate
cable television rates, which had risen significantly since
Congress had deregulated cable rates pursuant in 1984.
In order to implement the 1992 Cable Act, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) adopted regulations establishing a
"benchmark" system of rate regulation. These initial rate
regulations were contained in the FCC's April 1993 First Report and
Order, which went into effect on September 1, 1993.
Temecula's cable operator, Inland Valley Cablevision,
like all other cable operators throughout the nation, instituted a
new rate structure on September 1, 1993 in order to comply with the
FCC's benchmark rates. Inland Valley Cablevision also filed a rate
regulation.form with the City, known as the Form 393, so that the
city could independently determine if Inland Valley Cablevision's
rates complied with the FCC regulations.
The benchmark rates represents the rates a cable operator
would charge if it were subject to "effective competition." The
benchmark system was derived from a nation-wide rate survey the FCC
conducted as September 30, 1992. Based on the survey, the FCC
concluded that cable rates should be reduced by 10% from their
September 30, 1992 levels to account for a lack of effective
competition in the cable television industry.
September 29, 1994
Page 2
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, with consulting services from
the accounting firm of Diehl, Evans, has reviewed the cable
television rates contained in Inland Valley's Form393. The Report
of Diehl, Evans is attached.
It is our conclusion that Inland Valley Cablevision's
rates in Temecula are in excess of the rates permitted pursuant to
FCC Regulations, and that a refund is in order. Consequently, it
is recommended that the City Council adopt the enclosed Resolution
entitled:
"A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Temecula Disapproving the Cable Television
Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated
Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision, and
Ordering a Refund for Excessive Rates."
The principal effect of this Resolution is to reduce
basic tier cable rates. This means that as a result of rate
regulation, since September 30, 1992 basic tier rates have been
reduced from $12.31 for 14 channels to $11.66 for 23 channels.
I. BackGround
Under the 1992 Cable Act, cities are authorized to
regulate "basic tier" rates, along with installation and equipment
charges. The "basic tier" of cable service includes all broadcast
television channels, any public, educational and governmental
channels required by the franchise and any other channels the
operator choose to carry on the basic tier. Each cable operator is
required to offer the basic tier of service. Cable operators may
not require subscription to any other tier as a condition of
receiving programming offered on a per channel or pay-per-view
basis.
The 1992 Cable Act further permits subscribers and cities
to file complaints with the FCC if they believe rates for the
second service tier (known as the cable programming service or
"CPS" tier) are unreasonable. The CPS tier typically includes most
satellite channels, like CNN, WTBS and Prime Ticket, but excludes
premium and pay-per-view channels.
ORANGE: 1535. '~
September 29, 1994
Page 3
Once Temecula became certified to regulate rates, Inland
Valley Cablevision was required to file a rate schedule with the
City -- known as a Form 393 -- to obtain City approval of its basic
tier rates. Essentially, the Form 393 takes the operator through
two steps to establish maximum rates for the basic service tier and
for equipment and installation charges.
First, the maximum rates for equipment and installation
are determined based upon actual cost plus a reasonable profit.
These maximum rates are established by determining the capital
costs and expenses associated with each type of equipment (e.g.
converter boxes, remote controls) and service (e.g., installation
for unwired and prewired homes).
In particular, an "hourly service charge" is determined.
The hourly service charge represents the cable operator's hourly
labor rate for performing the various types of installations. For
example, if the hourly service charge is $27.14 (the national
average) and its takes 1.25 hours to install service at a prewired
home, then the maximum service charge for installing service at a
prewired house is 1.25 x $27.14 = $33.93.
Second, maximum basic service tier rates as established.
The Form 393 is designed to squeeze out "monopoly profits" from
subscriber rates. To do this , the Form 393 uses a series of
worksheets to determine if rates need to be reduced, and by how
much. Three factors are used to determine benchmark rates: number
of subscribers, number of channels, and number of satellite
signals. Then, if the actual cable rates are below the benchmark
rates, the current rates become the maximum regulated rates,
whichever is less.
More recently, the FCC has replaced the Form 393 with the
Form 1200. This new form was a result of the FCC's March 30, 1994,
Second Report and Order, in which the FCC concluded that its
original determination that rates should be reduced by an average
of 10% was insufficient, and that rates actually should be reduced
by approximately 17%. Accordingly, the FCC issued a new Form 1200
and a new set of rate regulations. These regulations went into
effect on July 14, 1994, and on that same date, Inland Valley
Cablevision, like cable operators throughout the nation, readjusted
its rates.
535.1
September 29, 1994
Page 4
However, instead of setting benchmark rates, Inland chose
the option of basing its maximum permitted rate on a cost-of-
service showing. The FCC also adopted on March 30, 1994 cost-of-
service rate regulations to provide a "safety valve" to cable
operators ensuring them compensatory rates if their benchmark rates
were too low. The cost-of-service standards were issued as interim
regulations pending the outcome of a cost study currently underway
at the FCC. Only the cable operator, not the FCC or the City can
decide, whether to undertake a cost-of-service showing. Cost-of-
service showings must be submitted on FCC Form 1220. Inland
submitted its Form 1220 to the City on August 15, 1994.
A very brief summary of the impact of rate regulation on
Temecula is attached. A more detailed explanation of our review of
Inland Valley Cablevision's Form 393 is set forth below.
II. Review of Inland Valley Cablevision's Form 393
The Diehl, Evans review of Inland Valley Cablevision's
Form 393 disclosed several material errors in setting the maximum
basic tier and equipment and installation rates. In summary,
Diehl, Evans found as follows:
1. Basic Tier Rates. On September 30, 1992, Inland
offered two service tiers subject to regulation: the basic tier
comprising 14 channels, and the CPS tier comprising 23 channels.
At that time, Inland charged $12.31 for 14 channels of basic tier
service and $18.74 for 37 channels of Basic/CPS service. (These
rates include a $0.46 pass-through charge for the possessory
interest tax.)
On September 1, 1993, Inland retiered in'response to rate
regulation, offering 23 basic tier channels and 20 CPS tier
channels. Concurrently, Inland modified its rates to charge $11.82
for basic tier service and $22.19 for basic/CPS service.
Subsequently, Inland filed its Form 393, claiming a maximum
permitted rate for basic tier service of $11.87. (All of these
rates include the $0.46 pass through.)
Diehl, Evans' analysis concludes that Inland's Form 393
contains a number of material errors. Consequently, it is
recommended that the maximum basdic service tier rate should be
reduced to $11.66 for 23 channels or $0.507. This amounts to a
refund to basic service tier subscribers of $0.16 per month.
ORANGE: 1535,1
September 29, 1994
Page 5
2. EauiDment and Installation Rates. FCC Regulations
set the maximum equipment and installation rates at the lesser of
the maximum permitted rate according to the Form 393 or the actual
rate. In this case, Inland's equipment rental rates exceed its
permitted rates.
Specifically, Inland's equipment and installation rate
schedule will be adjusted as follows:
Permitted A c t u a 1 Lower of
Rate Rate Actual or
Permitted
Rate
Hourly Rate
$44.52 $44.50 $44.50
Installation of unwired 44.52 44.50 44.50
homes
Installation of prewired 29.83 29.82 29.82
homes
Installation of
additional connection at
time of initial
11.13 11.13 11.13
Installation of
additional connections as
separate installation
22.26 22.25 22.25
New install underground 0.00
0.00 0.00
Trip charge 0.00 0.00 0.00
Charge for changing tiers 0.00
0.00 0.00
Monthly charge for lease 0.32 0.50 0.32
of remote control
Monthly charge
converter box
of 2.34 2.55 2.34
ORANuE: 1535 · 1
September 29, 1994
Page 6
III. Recommendation
Our recommendation on implementing our review of the Form
393 have two components: Establishing Maximum Rates and Refunds.
1. Establishina Maximum Rates. The basic service tier
rate for the period from September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994
should be reduced from the then current rate of $11.82 per month to
$11.66 per month, and a refund should be ordered. This should be
implemented thirty (30) days after the City Council establishes the
maximum rate.
The maximum equipment and service charges should be set
at the lower of the permitted and actual rates.
2. Refunds. FCC Regulations provide that the City may
not order refunds for more than one year retroactively.
Consequently, if a city is to order any refunds for the full period
between September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994, it is required to
act by September 1, 1994. Unfortunately, in order to complete our
review of Inland's rates, several document requests were necessary,
delaying completion of the review. Consequently, refund liability
is from October ll, 1993 through July 14, 1994.
In this case, Inland was overcharging on its basic rates
by $0.16 per month. Consequently, for the period from October 11,
1993, through July 15, 1994, each basic tier subscriber will be
refunded or credited approximately $1.44, which will be
approximately $13,131.36 for 9,119 subscribers for 9 months.
In addition, Inland was overcharging on remote controls
and converter boxes by $0.21 and $0.18 per month, respectively.
Consequently, basic subscribers who also leased a remote control
and converter will receive an additional refund or credit of $3.51.
Further, the FCC regulates rates for the CPS tier. This
same analysis indicates a $0.23 per month overcharge for CPS
service. The Resolution directs the City Manager to bring this
discrepancy to the attention of the FCC.
Finally, FCC Regulations also specify certain procedures
for ordering rate refunds. Accordingly, the recommended refund
order directs Inland to take the following steps within thirty days
after Council action:
ORANGE: 15:]5.1
September 29, 1994
Page 7
A. Inland may make refunds:
(i) By refunding overcharges to those subscribers
who actually paid the overcharges; or
(ii) By means of a specifically identified, one-
time credit on prospective bills.
Refunds shall include interest computed at
applicable rates published by the Internal. Revenue
Service for tax refunds and additional tax
payments.
When the City orders a cable operator to pay
refunds to subscribers, it also must return to the
operator that portion of the franchise fee that was
paid on the total amount of the refund to
subscribers. The City must promptly return the
franchise fee overcharge either in an immediate
lump sum payment, or Inland may deduct it from
future franchise fee payments.
In conclusion, the FCC Regulations require that the City
Council conduct a public hearing at which Inland may testify before
any of the above actions are taken. I will be available at that
public hearing to answer any questions the City Council may have.
cc:
Very truly yours,
SCOTT F. FIELD
of BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
William Morgan, CPA
ORANuc: 1535.1
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGI~k'3~,n-UPON LIMITED PROCEDLr~
REVIEV~ OF CABLE TV RATES
AS OF SEPTE1VI~ER 21,
B DmHL,EVANS
&COMPANY
18401 VL)N KAP,.MAN AVE., SUITE 200
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 927151542
PHONE (714) ?57 7100
FAX (714) 7572707
September 21, 1994
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON AGREED-UPON
LIMITED PROCEDURES REVIEW
City Council
City of Temecula
Temecula. California
We have applied certain agreed-upon procedures to the accounting records of Western
Communications. Our procedures and findings are noted herein. It is understood that this report is
solely for your information and is not to be referred to or distributed for any purpose to anyone who
is not a member of City Council or management of the City of Temecula, or an employee or
authorized representative of Western Communications. However, if this report is made a matter of
public record, its distribution will not be limited.
Because the procedures we performed do not constitute an examination in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards, we do not express an opinion on any of the accounts or items referred
to herein. In connection with these procedures, except as noted herein, no matters came to our
attention that caused us to believe that other specified accounts or items should be adjusted.
However, had we performed additional procedures, or had we made an examination of the financial
statements of Western Communications in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards,
other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report
relates only to the accounts and items specified herein, and does not extend to the financial statements
of Western Communications taken as a whole.
Although defalcations and similar irregularities may occasionally be disclosed by this type of
engagement, it is not designed for such purpose and should not be relied upon to disclose fraud,
should any exist.
-1-
OTHER OFFICES AT
2965 ROOSEVELT 5TP-jEET
CAILLSBAD. CA 92008 238c~
1619) 729-2343
FAX (619) 729 2234
SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES
We applied the following procedures to the accounts and records of Western Communications,
hereinafter referred to as "Western":
1. We compared channel line-ups and cable rates of Western as of September 30, 1992 and
September 1, 1993. (See Schedule 1).
2. We compared the number of channels and cable rates on the City of Temecula with other
selected Southern California cable TV systems. (See Schedule 2).
We compared equipment and installation rates for Western with other selected Southern
Califorma cable systems, and with average rates from a survey of 147 cable systems
compiled by the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors
(NATOA). (See Schedule 3).
We reviewed FCC Form 393 (as prepared by Western) to determine if the form had been
completed accurately and in accordance with FCC regulations and rate tables. Our review
included the following procedures:
We agreed key financial and subscriber data on Form 393 to the books and records
of Western. Our procedures included a review of channel cards, a review of sample
customer bills, vouching of purchase invoices related to the acquisition of remote
controls and converter boxes and a review of Western's worksheets supporting their
computation of the hourly service charge and other charges.
We recomputed and compared the benchmark channel rates as of September 30, 1992
and January 3, 1994 (the initial date of regulation) with the rates reported on
Form 393.
We prepared a comprehensive letter to Western management setting forth questionable
areas in the computation of Form 393. We had various phone conferences with
Western officials regarding these matters.
d. We recomputed the maximum permitted per channel rate and the maximum permitted
rate for the basic service tier (exclusive of any franchise fee).
-2-
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
On September 30, 1992, according to Worksheet 2 of the original Form 393, Western
offered 36 channels under two tiers for $18.28. Based on our review of the channel card,
Western was actually offering 37 channels at September 30, 1992. Also, the actual price
for both tiers was $18.74, a $0.46 difference. Western "passes through" the County
property tax to subscribers. The FCC Form 393 only permits franchise fees to be passed
through to subscribers. Consequently, the property tax of $0.46 should have been added
back to the basic tier rate. (See Schedule 1).
According to Worksheet 1 on the original Form 393, Western offered 44 channels under
two tiers for $20.29. However, Western's channel card, which listed 45 channels,
indicated that no programming was available on two channels. Accordingly, our revised
Form 393 reflects 43 channels. Also, the rates on Worksheet 1 have been adjusted to the
actual rate in effect on the "initial date of regulation" plus the $0.46 property tax
pass-through. (See Schedule 1 and the discussion at paragraph 5 below).
Before adjustments recommended in this report, the average price per channel for the two
tiers decreased only $.01, or 2.0%, from September 30, 1992 to September 1, 1993.
Schedule 2 presents a comparison of the number of channels and basic cable rates on the
City of Temecula with other selected Southern California Cable TV systems as of
September 1, 1993. The City of Temecula's per channel rate of $0.516 and rate of
$22.19 for 43 channels is reasonable, and is hi line with other Southern California cable
systems.
5. In connection with our review of Form 393, we made the following adjustments:
a. Worksheet 1, Line 101:
On Worksheet 1 of the original Form 393, as filed by Western, the Tier Charge for
the Basic Tier was reported as $12.88, and Tier 2 was reported as $7.41. As further
explained below, the Basic Tier amount should have been $11.82, and Tier 2 should
have been $10.37.
Under cable regulations issued by the FCC, the "initial date of regulation" is defined
as "'the date of local notice that the system is subject to regulation". According to 47
CFR Section 76.922(b)(ii)(c)(2), this date is when the City sends a written notice to
the cable cable operator that it is certified to regulate rates. Generally, the City also
notifies the operator at this time that it has 30 days to complete and forward Form 393
to the City.
On January 3, 1994, the City of Temecula sent notice to Western that it was certified
by the FCC to regulate basic tier rates. On January 26, 1994, Western forwarded
Form 393 to the City of Temecula. The cable rates, number of subscribers, etc. used
on Worksheet 1 of Form 393 should have been as of January 3, 1994.
-3-
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED)
5. (Continued):
a. Worksheet 1, Line 101 (Continued):
In reviewing the Form 393 from Western, we noted that the cable rates and number
of subscribers used on Worksheet 1 for the "Initial Date of Regulation" were as of a
date prior to September 1, 1993. Accordingly, in the revised Form 393, as p~esented
at Schedule 5, the mounts for Worksheet 1 were recompnted using cable rates in
effect on or after September 1, 1993, plus the $0.46 property tax pass-through.
b. Worksheet 1, Line 104/Worksheet 3, Line 301:
On the original Form 393, the amount reported on Worksheet 1, Line 104, was
$46,866, and the mount reported on Worksheet 3, Line 301, was $17,717. These
amounts should be substantially the same, as explained below.
On November 10, 1993 the FCC issued a "Public Notice" entitled, "Questions and
Answers on Completion of FCC Form 393 and Associated Filing Requirements".
Question No. 7 dealt with amounts to be reported on Lines 104 and 301. The answer
to this question stated, in part: "Where operators have restmcmred equipment rates
as of September 1, 1993....we would anticipate that in most cases, absent special
circumstances, operators will enter on Line 104 the same, or nea~y the same, number
on Line 301".
Accordingly, in our revised Form 393, we have used $16,509 at both Line 104 and
301.
c. Worksheet 1, Lines 121 Through 128:
Line 121
The benchmark cable rate is a function of the number of satellites channels in relation
to the total of all channels, utilizing a table developed by the FCC. Based on the
information supplied by Western, at the date of initial regulation, using a total of 43
channels, 28 of which were satellite, the benchmark calculation would have been
$0.524.
Line 124
The instructions that accompany the FCC Form 393 calculate the time period factor
as "the number of whole months from September 30, 1992 to the date the cable
operator submits the FCC Form 393." Therefore, this number varies according to the
date of submission of each cable operator's filing. The date of filing was January 26,
1994. The whole months from September 30, 1992 to January 26, 1994 totals 15.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED)
5. (Continued)
d. Worksheet 2, Line 220:
Line 220
The benchmark cable rate is a function of the number of satellites channels in relation
to the total of all channels, utilizing a table developed by the FCC. Based on the
information supplied by Western, for September 1992, using a total of 37 channels,
24 of which were satellite, the benchmark calculation would have ben $0.590,
e. Revisions to Cable Rates:
Based on the adjustments discussed above, and based on our revised Form 393, as
presemed at Schedule 5, the maximum permitted rate for the basic service tier should
be decreased from $11.82 ($11.36 as computed by Western, plus $0.46) to $11.66.
Recommendation: We suggest that the rate for the basic service tier be reduced from
$11.82 to $11.66, retroactive to September 1, 1993. This will result in a rate
reduction of $0.16 per subscriber per month.
f. Equipment and Installation Charges:
Noted below is a comparison of the remote control charge, converter box charge and
hourly service charge for the City of Temecula with the National average for 147
cable systems (as published by the National Association of Telecorrtmunications
Officers and Advisors, or NATOA) and with certain other Southern California cable
systems.
City of Temecula (Western)
Charge For
Remote Hourly
Control Converter Service
Charge Box Charge
$ .50 $ 2.55 $ 44.50
National Average
.25 2.00 27.14
City of Alhambra (Cencom)
.12 1.65 20.00
City of Cosha Mesa (Copley/Colony) .27
1.70 38.09
South Orange County (Dimension) .16
1.96 24.00
-5-
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED)
5. (Continued)
f. Equipment and Installation Charges (Continued):
Noted below is a discussion of how Western computed these charges, and our
recommended revisions to the charges, where appropriate.
Remote Control Chante
On Form 393, Schedule C, Western reported a "gross book cost" for remote controls
of $21,703 for 2,725 units, or a cost per unit of $7.96. This mount appears
reasonable when compared with 1993 purchase invoices for remote controls. (During
1993, a large number of units were purchased at a unit price of $7.00, plus sales tax
and freight.)
However, in our opinion, the depreciation charge on the remote controls was not
reasonable. The annual depreciation charge on Schedule C was $10,852, or exactly
one-half of the total costs of acquisition. This means that Western has depreciated the
remotes over two years. An official of Western advised us that the remotes normally
are depreciated over five years. A five-year life appears reasonable. Accordingly,
in our recomputed Form 393 at Schedule 5, we have used a depreciable life of five
years. and a depreciation charge of $4,341.
Also, on Form 393, Part III, Step C, Line 9, our review indicated that the number of
maintenance and service hours related to the remote controls should be 104 hours,
rather than 124 hours. (See Schedule 4).
As a result of these adjusmaents, we recommend that the charge for a remote control
be decreased from $0.50 to $0.32.
Converter Box Charge
On Form 393, Schedule C, Western reported a "gross book cost" for converter boxes
of $389,983 for 2,725 units, or a cost per unit of $143.11. A unit price of $143.11
appears excessive when compared with 1993 purchase invoices. (During 1993, most
converter boxes were purchased at prices ranging from $116.00 to $120.00, including
sales tax and freight.) Also, an official at Western advised us that converter boxes
normally are depreciated over 10 years. Accordingly, we made the following
adjustments to Schedule C:
-6-
SUMMARY OF HNDINGS (CONTINUED)
(Continued)
f. Converter Box Charge (Continued):
Cost
As Originally
Reported $ 389,983
As Adjusted
(2,725 units
at $120.00)
Accumulated Net Book
Depreciation Value
ROI Currein
(At 11.25 %) Depreciation
$ 72,239 $ 317,744 $ 35,746 $ 34,981
(18.5%)
327,000 60,495 266,505 29,982 32,700
(18.5%)
Also, on Form 393, Part III, Step D, Line 16, our review indicated that the number
of maintenance and service hours related to the converter boxes should be 312 hours
rather than 373 hours. (See Schedule 4).
As a result of these adjustments, we recommend that the charge for a converter box
be decreased from $2.55 to $2.34.
HourIv Service Charge
The hou~y service charge was computed in the following manner by Western:
Annual Costs for Maintenance
and Installation
$129~657
Total Labor Hours
2~912
Hou~y Service Charge
In reviewing this calculation, the number of labor hours appeared to be low based on
a subscriber count of 8,656. (Please noted that an increase in the number of labor
hours would cause a decrease in the hourly service charge.) Upon investigation, we
were informed by Western management that Inland Valley Cablevision charges
customers only for time that the installation personnel are at the cnstomer's home
performing the installation. Travel time and other "overhead" type hours are not
included. By conwast, most other cable operators compute the hourly rate, and charge
customers, based on an "average cost method" which includes travel and other
overhead hours. Also, many other cable operators have a separate "trip charge" in
addition to their standard installation charges. (See Schedule 3). If, in fact, Western
is charging customers only for hours spent at the customer's home, and not for travel
and preparation time, then we agree that the $44.52 rate per hour is reasonable.
However, the scope of this engagement did not include a review of actual time charges
included on the bills to Temecula subscribers.
-7-
SUPPORTING SCHEDULES
SCHEDULE 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMPARISON OF CHANNEL LINE-UPS AND CABLE RATES
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1992 AND SEPTEMBER 1, 1993
Description
September 30. 1992 September 1, 1993
Channels Pricing Channels Pricing
Tier 1:
Total channels 14 $ 12.31 23 $ 11.82
Price per channel 0.879 0.513
Tier 2:
Total channels 23 6.43 20 10.37
Price per channel 0.279 0.518
Totals for
Tier 1 and
Tier 2:
Total Channels
Price Per Channel
37 $ 18.74 43 $ 22.19
$ 0.506 $ 0.516
Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review.
-8-
SCHEDULE 2
COMPARISON OF CABLE TV RATES FOR VARIOUS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES
AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993
Basic Tier Second Tier
Number Rate Basic Number Rate CPS
City of Per Service of Per Service
(Cable Operator) Channels Channel Rate Channels Channel Rate
City of Temecula
(Inland Valley) 23 $ .513 $ 11.82 20 $ .518 $ 10.37
National Average
City of Alhambra
(Crown - Cencom)
20 .551 11.09
29 .456 13.23 25 .456 11.40
City ofBrea
(Century) 36 .715 25.75 6 .568 3.41
City ofBuenaPark
(Comcas0 33 .293 9.66 19 .750 14.26
City of Garden Grove
(Paragon)
City of Lakewood
(Colony) 33 .349 11.52 26 .349 9.07
City of Long Beach
(CVI) 26 .537 13.95 18 .425 7.65
City of Orange
(Cablevision) 21 .534 11.20 20 .534 10.70
City of Peramoum
(Continental) 21 .406 8.53 27 .505 13.64
South Orange County
(Dimension) 28 .523 14.64 16 .506 8.10
City of Yorba Linda
(Jones Spacelink)
33 .423 13.96 20 .450 8.99
Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review.
-9-
SCHEDULE 2
COMPARISON OF CABLE TV RATES FOR VARIOUS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES
(CONTINUED)
AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993
Total - Both Tiers
Number Rate Basic
City of Per Plus CPS
(Cable Overator) Channels Channel Rate
City of Temecula
(Inland Valley) 43
National Average
City of Alhambra
(Crown - Cencom)
$ .516 $ 22.19
54 .456 24.63
City ofBma
(Cenmry) 42 .694 29.16
City ofBuenaPark
(Comcast) 52 .395 23.92
City of Garden Grove
(Paragon) 62 .343 21.25
City ofLakewood
(Colony) 59 .349 20.59
City ofLongBeach
(CVI) 44 .491 21.60
City of Orange
(Cablevision) 41 .534 21.90
City of Peramount
(Continental) 48 .462 22.17
South Orange County
(Dimension) 44 .517 22.74
City of Yorba Linda
(Jones Spacelink)
53 .433 22.95
Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review.
-10-
SCHEDULE 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMPARISON OF EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION RATES FOR THE
CITY OF TEMECULA WITH OTI-IFR CABLE TV SYSTEMS
AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993
Description
Amoums
City ~f Temecula City of Lakewood South Orange From National
finland Valley) (Covlev/Colonv) County (Dimension) Survev (Note 1)
Average
Hours Amount Hours Amount Hours Amount Hours Amount
Equipment
Charges:
Remote control $ .50 $ .19 $ .16 $ .25
Converter boxes 2.55 1.38 1.96 2.00
Installation
Charges:
Hourly service
charge 44.50 31.44 24.00 27.14
Unwired Home -
Initial
Installation:
· Aerial 1.0 44.50 1.3 39.30 1.43 34.34 1.56 39.96
· Underground 2.33 73.25 (Note 2)
Prewired Home .67 29.82 1.0 31.44 .60 14.72 .92 23.29
Additional
Outlets:
· With initial
installation .25 11.13 .8 26.09 .25 9.81 .55 14.01
· Separate
installation .50 22.25 1.0 31.44 .55 13.08 .88 22.43
Other Charges:
Charge for
changing tiers 1.99 2.00 17.38
Trip charge 26.09 (Note 2)
Note 1:
These hours and dollar mounts are "averages" from a national survey of 147 cable
systems. The amount were compiled by the National Association of Telecommunlcations
Officers and Advisors (NATOA).
Note 2: This information was not available in NATORs survey.
Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review.
-11-
SCHEDULE 4
CITY OF TEMECULA
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR HOURS
JUNE 30, 1993
Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review.
-12-
SCHEDULE 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
FORM 393, AS REVISED BY DIEI'IL, EVANS AND COMPANY
(UNAUDITED)
FILE NAME I:\1994~ACCKI~8789FC1.WK1
FCC 393 - PART I
REQUEST FOR CABLE RATE APPROVAL
COVER SHEET
Community Unit Identification Code
CA
Name of Cable Operator
INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION
Mailing Address
Date: 21 - Sep - 94
City
Person to contact regarding this form
State ZIP Code
Telephone Fax Number
Local Franchlsing Authority
~ CITY OF TEMECULA
Mailing Address
City ~e ZIP Code
This form is being ftind with respect to:
~ basic rate regulation
~'~ cable progr~mmlqg service rate regulation
If this form is being filed in response to a complaint about your cable programming service rates, please attach a copy of the
complaint to this cover sheet.
The following sections are to be completed after you have filled out the workshee~s in PARTS II and III and calculated
your actual and permitted rates.
FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND EQUIPMENT
Program Sen, ice Rate
I (1) Number of channels in basic service tier
(4) Maidmum permitted rate for basic service tier (exclusive of any franchise fee):
(multiply (1) by (3) above)
23
$11.82
$0.507
$11.66
Note: If your current rate for the basic service tier (entry 2) exceeds the maidmum permitted rate for that tier (entry 4), you
must submit a cost-of-service showing or your basic service rate will be reduced to the maximum permitted level shown in
entry4,
Franchise fees have been excluded from this analysis in order to compare your monthly rate for the
basic service tier to the maximum permitted level. whether you itemize them or not, any franchise
fees you pay for the basic service tier should be added to your monthly rate us part of the service
when billing your subscribers. See 47 C,F.R. Section 76.985.
EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION RATES
Note: Your equipment and installation rates for the basic sen, ice tier must not be included in your program service rate for th3'
tier, but rather must be completely unbundled. In addition, those equipment and installation rates must not exceed your actu~
costs including a reasonable profit. The method for unbu~tlling your equipment and installation rates from the basic sentice
progr~mmlng rate, (i~ nece~ty), and for determining your permitted equipment and installation rates, is prescribed in PART II,
(unbundling) and PART Ill (rate-setting) of this form. Enter in the spaces below the rate figures you have calculated in PART IIl
of this form. Your actual basic sen, ice equipment and installation charges may not exceed these rates, although they may be lower.
(1) Charges for basic service installatious* (from Lines
6 or 7 of Equipment and Installation Worksheet)
(a) Hourly rate OR
(b) Average installation charges:
1. Installation of unwired homes
2. Iustaliationofprewiredhomes
3. Installation of additional connetion at time of
initial installation
4. Installationofadditionalconnections
requiring separate installation
5. Other installations (specify)
TRIP CHARGE
NEW INSTALL-UNDERGROUND
Item 3
(2)Charge~or changing tiers (if any) (from Line 29,
30,or 31 of Equipment and Installation Worksheet)
(:3)Monthly charge for lease of remote controls (from
Line 21 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet)
Remote control type 1:
Remote control type 2:
Remote control type 3:
Monthly charge for lease of converter boxes (from
Line 14 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet)
Converter box type 1:
Converter box type 2:
Converter box type 3:
(5) Monthly charge for lease of other equipment (from
Line 28 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet)
Other equipment (specify)
Other 2:
Au r UAL
$44.50
$~.50
$29.82
$11.13
$22.25
$o.oo
$o.oo
$0.00
PERMH-r~,D
RECOMMENDED
$44.52 $44.50
$44.52 $44.50
$29.83 $29,82
$11.13 $11.13
$22.26 $22.25
$0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
$O.50 $0.32 $0.32
$2.55 $2.34 $2.34
* If you have further charges for additional connections beyond those reflected in your installation charge, attach a sheet
e~plaining your calcuhtious and setting forth those additional charges. SEE Note to Equipment and Installation Worksheet
instructions in PART III of this form.
,¢
o
FCC FORM 393 - PART III
WORKSHEET FOR CALCULATING EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION CHARGES
Cabie Operator Name:
Community Unit ID (CUID):
INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION
Franchise Authority:
Date: 21 -Sap-94
CITY OF TEMECULA
Line 1.
Line 2.
Line3.
line4.
Line 5.
Step A. Hourly Service Charge
Annual cost of maintenance and installation of cable facilities
and Services (exclude purchase cost of consumer equipment)
(B0ac 1 of Schedule A + Bent 2 of Schedule B)
Customer equipment and installation parentage (attach explanation)
Annual customer equipment maintenance and installation costs,
excluding cost of leased equipment (Line 1 · Line 2)
Total labor horns for maintenance and installation of customer
equipment and service (attach explanation)
Hourly service charge (HSC) (Line 3/Line 4)
$193,517
67.0%
$129,657
2,912
$44.52
line 6.
OR
Line 7.
Step B. Installation charge
Uniform HSC for all installations (insert amount from Line 5)
Average charge for installation type
(See schednic D for average installation chugc calculations)
a. Unwired home instuilation (Schedule D, Linea.2)
b. Prewired home installation (Schedule D, Line2.b)
c. Additional connection instaltation at time of initial instaHation
(Schedule D, Line c.2)
d. Additional connection instuilation requiring separate inst'llation
(Schedule D, Line d.2)
c. Other installations (specify: (Schedule D, Line e.2)
Item I Unwired home installation underFound
Item 2
Item 3
$44.52
44.5:P-
29.
11.',
22.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
Step C. Charges for Licensed Remotes
(Calculate leparately for each nignificant differrent type and atlach additional sheets al necessary)
Line 8.
Line 9.
Line 10.
Line 11.
Line 12.
Line 13.
Line 14.
Annul capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C)
Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation)
Total maintenance/service cost (Line 5 x Line 9)
Total cost of remote (Line 8 + Line 1.0)
Number of units in service (Col. i o[ Schedule C)
Unit cost (Line 11/Line 12)
Rate per month (Line 13/12 months)
Remote 1
5,766
104
4,631
10,396
2,725
3.815
0.318
Remote 2 ~
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0
FCC FORM 393 - PART III, Page 2
Step D. Charges for Leased Converter Boxes
Calculate scparatley for each =iSnificantly differnet type and attach additional sheets as neecuRry)
Line 15.
Line 16.
Line 17.
Line 18.
Line 19.
Line 20
Line 21
Annual Capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C)
Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation)
Total maintenancc/serviCa COst (Line 5 x Line 16)
Total COst of converter b~x (Line 15 + Line 17)
Number of units in service (Col. I of Schedule C)
Unit cost (Line 18/Line 19)
Rate per month (Line 20/12 months)
Type 1
62,682
312
2.342
Type 2
Line 22.
Line 23.
Line 24.
Line 25.
Line 26.
Line 27.
Line 28.
Step E. Charges for Other Leased Equipment
Annul Capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C)
Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation)
Total maintcnancc/servlcc cost (Line 5 x Line 23)
Total cost of converter box (Line 22 + Line 23)
N umber of units in service or # of subs. (Col. 1 of Schedule C)
Unit cost (Line 25/Line 26)
Rate per month (Line 27/12 months)
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Step F. Charges for Changing Sendice Tiers or Equipment
Ling 29. Nominal charge for chanSin8 service tiers OR
Line 30. uniform HSC for changin8 service tiers (Line 5) OR
l Line 31. Avs. charSe for changin8 service tiers (Line 5 x Av8. hours to chanBe tiers)
1.99
0 44.5(~
Step G. Franchise Area Monthly Equipment and Installation Costs for Adjustment of Regualtcd Service
Line 32.
[Line 33.
j Line 34.
Annual customer equipment and installation costs (Line 3 +Bca 3 of Sched, C)
Adjustment of Line 32 to franchise area level: See instructions
Attach explanation of adjustment method.
Monthly equipment and installation cost (Line 33/12 months).
Enter on Worksheet 3, Line 301.
198,104
1 198,10~
16,509
FCC FORM 393 - PART III
SCHEDULE D
AVERAGE INSTALLATION CHARGES
Cable Operator Name:
INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION
Franchise Authority:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Community Unit ID (CUID):
Date: 21 -Sep-94.
This form is being filed for: Basic Tier
Cable Programming Sen/ice
Unwired Home installation:
1. Average Hours per Installation (attach explanation)
2. Unwirad Home Instalation Charge (Line a.1 x HSC)
Prewired Home Installation:
1. Average Hours per Installation (attach explanation)
2. Pra~vired Home Instalation Charge (Line b.1 x HSC)
Additional Connection Installation at Time of Initial Installation:
1. Average Hours per Additional Connection (attach explanation)
2. Additional Connection-initial Instalation Charge (Line c.1 x HSC)
Additional Connection Installation after Initial Installation:
1. Average Hours per Additional Connection (attach explanation)
2. Additional Connection-Separate Instalation Charge (Line d.1 x HSC)
Other installation (by Item Type):
Unwired Home Installation:
1, Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation)
2. item 1 Instalation Charge (Line e.1 x HSC)
Trip Charge
3. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation)
4. Item 2 Instalation Charge (Line e.3 x HSC)
5. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation)
6. Item 3 Instalation Charge (Line e.5 x HSC)
7. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation)
8. Item 4 Instalation Charge (Line e.7 x HSC)
Note: For HSC (Hourly Service Charge) use amount from Line 5 of the Worksbeet for Calculating
Equipment and Installation Charges (Page 25 of FCC Form 393).
1.00
44.52
0.67
29.83
0.25
11.13
0.50
22.26
0.00
0.00_.
O,
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
FI LENAME I:\1994~CCTG\88789fc3
FCC FORM 393 - PANT III
SCHEDULE A
CAPITAL COSTS OF SERVICE INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT
A B C
Equipment Gross Book Aceurn
Dcpr
Vehicles 30,022 16.208
Tools 6,308 2,614
Maintenance
Facility :59.282 12,GG2
Drops
Other 591A80 193365
TOTAL 687,092 224209
11.25%
G
Taxes
D E F Federal Slate
DefeaTed Net Book Return on Intome Income
Taxes B-(C+D) lnvestmcnl Tax Tax
0 13,814 1,554 0
3,694 416
0 47,260 5,317 0
398,115 44,788
0 462,883 52,074
H
Current j
Provimion for Total
Dcp~e,~iation (add F,G,H)
0 5,752 7,306
631 1.047
0
0 3,100 8,417
0
56,194 100.982
0 65.677 117,751
BOX 1
SCHEDULE B
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES FOR SERVICE INSTALLATION A MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT
(Exciudin8 Depreciation)
{s.p;= u,,=, l o,,.;.::1 o,,., 8':1 °'h"o I
Box 2
A
Equipment
} Remote 1
~ Remote 2
I Remote 3
Coav. Box 1
Conv. Box 2
Cony. Box 3
Other
Other
TOTAL
SCHEDULE C
CAPITAL COSTS OF LEASED CUSTOMER EQUIPMENT
B C
Gross Book Accum
Depr
2 1.703 9,038
11.25% G
Taxes H
D E F Federal State Current
Deferred Net Book Return on Income Income Provision for
Taxes B-(C+D) Investmen1 Ta~ Tax Depreciation
0 12,665 1,425 0 0 4,341
0 266,505 29,962 0 0 32,700
327,000 60,495
348,703
69,533
0 279,170 31,407 0 0 37,041
Total # J
of units Total
in service (add F.G.H)
2,725 5,766
I 0
{ 0
2.725 ' 62,682
0
0
5,450 68,448
BOX 3
ITEM 2 1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPR(~
CITY ATI'ORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhilt, Director of Planning
October 11, 1994
Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Density
Prepared By:
John Meyer, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and Provide Direction to Staff
BACKGROUND
This item was continued from the Council's September 27, 1994 agenda at the request of the
applicant. Attached for the Council's review is the September 27, 1994 staff report and a
letter from the applicant to the Director of Planning stating his viewpoint,
Attachments
2.
3.
4.
September 27, 1994 Staff Report - Page 2
August 30, 1994 from the Keith Companies to the Director of Planning - Page 3
Staff Letters Dated July 18 and August 15, 1994 - Page 4
Excerpts from City of Temecula General Plan - Page 5
R:\GF~qPLAN~RORIPAGH.CC2 10/3/94
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
' APPRO~
CITY ATI'ORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager~'2''
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
September 27, 1994
Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Density
Prepared By:
John Meyer, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and Provide Direction to Staff
BACKGROUND
The property owner representative and the specific plan applicant have requested that the City
Council make a determination on the density of the subject specific plan proposal. The
Planning Department has been working with new applicants of the subject Specific Plan since
May, 1994. A formal planning application was received in August, 1994, for the Specific Plan
and Change of Zone. As previously stated, calculation of density has been an ongoing issue
surrounding this project. Specifically, whether the 3 dwelling units per acre, as setforth in the
General Plan is a gross density versus a net density,
During the General Plan's public hearing process before the Planning Commission, a property
owner representative requested that Roripaugh Ranch be granted an overall density of 3
dwetiing units per acre. Staff concurred with the request but the Commission ultimately set
the density at 2 dwelling units per acre. The Commission felt that the City would be better
served if an increase in the density was considered concurrently with a Specific Plan proposal.
Before the City Council, the property owner representative again requested that Roripaugh
Ranch be granted an overati density of 3 dwelling units per acre. At its August 17, 1993
meeting the City Council granted the applicant's request.
DISCUSSION
When the General Plan was revised to reflect the changes made by the City Council (Pre-Final
Edition, December 1993)the Key Objectives for Roripaugh Specific Plan (Table 2-9, Land Use
Element, page 2-40) stated:
"To develop a master planned residential community that
provides a variety of housing types suited to the terrain and shall
not exceed an average of three dwelling units lTer acre grading
that is sensitive to natural landforms; and developrnent that
protects sensitive natural resources of the area,"
R:\GEI,~LAJ~RORIPAGH,CC 9119194
The property owner's representative and the project applicant interpreted the term "average
density" as to mean gross density over the entire 790 acre site,
Shortly after meeting with the applicant in May, staff provided a follow-up letter outlining the
steps that would be used by the Department to process the Specific Plan application. Based
on a request from the applicant, staff wrote a letter On Juiy 18, 1994 (attached for the
Council's review), referencing the density, as stated above, and indicating how the General
Pian provided for the calculating of density.
Section IV.A.1 of the Land Use Element (page 2-23) states:
"The maximum density defines the maximum number of units per
net acre at which development can occur within a given area.
Net acre is defined as the gross project or lot area, less that
portion of the site to be used for the following: arterial, major,
secondary and collector roads; and the floodway portion of a
floodplain, Determination of precise density, development
location, and lot coverage on any residential property is a
function of:
Opportunities and constraints presented by natural, cultural or scenic
features;
Policies and implementation programs of the General Plan intended to
maximize public safety; achieve high quality site planning and design;
provide sufficient levels of public service; retain significant natural
resources; ensure compatibility between uses; and encourage
development of Village Centers;
Building and development stanclards contained in the Development Code,
public works standares, and other regulations and ordinances."
Subsequent to receiving this letter, the specific plan application was submitted to the Planning
Department. Again the preliminary maximum unit count was based on .a gross acre density
calculation. On August 15, 1994 another letter was issued by the Planning Department
indicating that this was inaccurate and inconsistent with the General Plan.
CONCLUSION
The owner's representative and the specific plan applicant feh there was sufficient
discrepancy in the record to warrant the City Council review of this issue. As a result, staff
agreed to bring the issue before the Council. Staff believes the language under the Key
Objective for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan does not contradict other portions of the Land
Use Element and that calculating density is stated in a strait forward manner based on net
density.
Should the Council wish to revise the manner in which allowable density is calculated, it
should direct staff to bring back a General Plan Amendment to revise the text of the General
Plan. Such action will affect how density is calculated on a community wide basis.
R:%GE.N~L,AJ~RORJ]PAGR.CC 9/19/94 2
Attachments
1. Staff Letters Dated July 18 and August 15, 1994- Page 4
2. Excerpts from City of Temecula General Plan - Page 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
AUGUST 30, 1994 FROM THE KEITH COMPANIES TO THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
R:\GP, NPLAN~RORIPAGH.CC2 10/3/94 3
Abr~-3i-l.~9~ 09: i~ F~OM The Ke i~, Co. Ri~ERSIDE TO 6~41~e5 ~. Ci
THE KEITH COMPANIES- IN'L~ND ~tPII~S, INC,
Mo~no Va~' ® ~ ~more · Palm ~n · Vic~lUc
AuSust JO, 1~)4
Mr. Gsr~, TborubiU, PlanninS Director
CiZy of Tamecull
4317,1 Business Park Drive
Tamecull California 92590
R. oripaugh Ranch - General Plan Consistency
Thank you for meeting with P, ic Stephens and me and listenins to our thoughts about
your letter to us, dated August' 17, regarding ~e consistency of our Specific Plan
application with the Land Use Element of the Tamecull General Plan. As you are aware,
we &re steadfast about the intent of City Council as well as the notion that City Council
took ~ year as it relates to the maximum number of dwelling units permitted on the
Koripau~ Kanch property.
Please oonsider the following points regarding our position:
While acknowledging the l~nguage in the 'General Plan that identifies net acres as
the basis for calculating density, the General Plan subsequently goes on to provide
"additional direction" to 'Specific Plan ms, including Roripaugh Ranch, wherein
it seatag that Roripau~h Ranch shall not exceed a maximum avenge of three
dwelling units per acre;
Johnson Ranch was given direction by City Council during last year's General
Plan process. Said direction was that Johnson .Ranch was entitled to 1.5 dwelling
units per gross acre;
Rancho Bella Vista/Mountain View was approved at a density of 3.0 units per
gross acre;
Additionally, enclosed for your review is the trmxscript of the City Council hearing
of AuguSt 17, 1993 we have prepared, where the Nicolas Valley area, including
Itoripacgh Ranch was discussed. The transcript clearly shows that it was the
understanding and iraant of all contamed, including City Council, that three units
per gross acre is that which was bemg considered tad approved for R, oripaugh
As I am sur~ you Feel, we do not want to stand before the Pining Commission and City
Counci3 with a question as to whether we are consistent with the General Plan in ie~uis
V
AL~-Sl-199~ 09:11 ~ROM The K~l~h Co. RI~ERSiEE TO 6941999 P.B2
of the allowable density. This is the most basic of issues that we must hsve resolved
We also feel quite comfortable; 2iron the issues outlined heroin, that a finding of
consistency with the Land Use Elementof the General l:'lan would not ram any question
of resistsrice.
Our desire is to resolve this issue and concentrate on the desi2n details proposed in the
$psci~c Plan. The final density and number o£ dwelling. units on goripau~h Ranch will
then be determined as they should be, based on the merits and festures of the physical
desi2n of the proje~ and the relationship with the physical surroundings.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. We look forward to resolving
thiS issue in a manner h~s~.permits us to turn our attention to the merits of the project
itself. Please give me or Ric Stephens a call should you have any questions or would like
to discuss this issue further.
Smcerely,
Tom G Nievez
Senior Planner
Norm Dyer,. GRC Development
Tom Clerk, GRC Development
Bob Lindauer, The Keiih Companies
Ric Stephens, The Keith Companies
RiCk RoboXts, The Keith Companies
Tom Bimey, The Keith Companies
]THEKgrrH COMPANIES
PJ. JG-31-i994 09:11 FROM The Keitn Ca. RIUERSIDE TO 6941999 F.03
Transcript of the Ternecula City Council Hearing of
August 17, 1993
Ho~au
Mayor-
S. ~gdvard:
~v~a~Of:
S. Edward:
Mayor.
G. Thorahilh
R~uest to reopen the public hearing to consider Area 5, Nicohs Valley, and
r~ceive public testimony
Public hearing is reopened on Nicolas Vailby, Area 5. We do have three
rcquesu to speak.
My ntme is Sinford Edward, 110 Newport C~at~r Drlvc, r~prescndng
Roril~ugh l~nch Inc. Mayor, councilpersons, we are essentially ~,king that
have a littic clmup. Rori~ugh hnc. h is parcel no. 8, the hrge parcel on the
s~-ea. Wc have two r~luests. One revolves around the entire g00 acres. The
other revolves around just the panhandle, whi& is 160 acres.
It should be noted that the panhandle area is in the City and the other part is
not inside the City, but within fie Sphere.
Correct. Staff recommended to the Phnning Commission that the land use
be designated at 3 units per acre overall. That was starfs recommendation.
But the Planning Commission basically deferred and said they preferred to
have the landowner come in with a Specific Plan. We are in agreement with
that. But then, subsequent to the Planning Commission, at looking at the
maps and anticipated land uses, we are going to be prechd~ from the
opportunity of coming before you at a hter datc with a $pecific Plan and EIR
that would mitigate any issues that would essentially allow us to d¢velop at 3
units to the acre. So, in order to be able to do that, and not have to ask for
a General Plan Amendment, we're requesting that one hnd use category be
added to the anticipated lind use, and thaz's the Low Medium land use....and
that a couple of the areas which have a 0 - 5 degree slope be changed to a LM,
Low Medium land use. All that will effectively do is allow us, when ~e do
come back with a Specific Plan, to try to get that overall 3 units per acre,
which staff did rccommcnd, and to be able to do so without having to go
through a General Plan Amendment.
Does staff agree with the conclusion of the speaker wkh respect to the impact
of that request? Do you want that repeated?
[ heard most of it. h's hard to relate it to the kind of area that he's
talking about. That's the only problem I have. How much of the
property os in the 0 - 5% slope area?
AbG-3i-lg94 09:12 ~ROM The Kel~n Co. RIUERSIDE TO 694199~ P.g4
S. Saber&
G. ThomhHh
S. Edvard:
G- Thornhill:
Mayor:
G. Thornhill:
Mayor:
S. Edward:
Mayor:.
P. Birdsall:
Mayor:
G. Thornhi!l:
ParJut
G. Thornhill:
Parks.
S. Edward:
On the larSc 640 acre pared, I'd say approximately 40 to 50%. If we were to
¢k-vclop, quo:e/unquore, at the maximum allowable designations, according to
the map u it exists right now, we would end up with approximately I000 units
on 800 acres, which would be far short of even stafi"s recommendation of 3
units per acre. We basically have 2 land use categories on the map as it exists
now. That's Hillside Residential and Low Residential.
This is the first time that I am aware of this one. Did you write John
(Meyer) a letter?
Yes. I think that's where we are suffering from John's absence. We wrote him
on both June 11 and July 14.
remember the other properties, but not this one.
Does staff need more time to sit down with the applicant?
I think we need to report back to the Council on this. Unfortunately,
Mr. Meyer had a conversation that...information....(inauch'ble)
Do you have a problem with that?
No, I don't have a problem with that.
Does Council have a problem with that?
No. 8, then, we are going to take out of this bunch. Is that correct?
~ight.
I think, conceptually, I don't have too much of a problem with this
bemuse of the slopes involved. Usually, you egn develop at those
densities on those slopes, but... (inaud~le)
This will come back as s Specific Plan?
Absolutely.
You want some flexibility in the Speeiflc Pla~ to allow some little bit higher
densities in eertaln areas so you can pay for all the improvements you are
going to have to put in.
Exactly. We don't anticipate going beyond the 3 units per acre, but, as you're
suggesting, there may be some areas where development will take place at a
AUG-3!-199~ ~9:1i FROM The Kei%n Co. RIUERSIDE TO 6941999
Mayor:
S. Edward.:
Ma~o~.
Larry ~ynch:
L. Lynch:
Mayor.'
R. Stephens:
Mayor:
D. Hog:
much lower level. But if we don't have fie flexibility in the areas that have less
slope to get the deusit~ back, effectively the proper~ won't be developable.
There's on last issue, which is the second one, H1 just mention it in passing,
and that relates to the panhandle. That right now has a current Assessment
District tax, which is locked in at a basic rate. And we want to get the
underlying maps to conform to that Assessment District rate. That is
someth;,sg we had discussed with staff and they told us it vats an overall policy,
but this was one partlcular instance where they didn't realize it was existing
and we weren't able to pick it up.
OK. Again, I think perhaps that's an issue that be further developed with surf
a~d then when it comes back, we can address thc total package.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. Larry Lynch rotdressing No. 61.
Representing DL Equities, owner of Rancho Bella Vista. I want to confirm
that the Spedfie Plan, as adopted by the County, is to be "adopted, as is" as
part of this General Plan.
Starf is nodding affirmatively.
(Not applicable)
Richard Stephens, addressing Ro~paugh Ranch.
.Richard Stephens, The Keith Companies, representing Gent~ Homes. We are
m agreement with Mr. Edward's request, I'd llke to also remind you that the
site has numerous environmental constraints and giving that little higher
density allows for much more flexibility in land planning or creadve solutions
to problems.
We did have one question, and that xeas the significance of the exhibit with the
red coloring. It looks like, perhaps staff can clarify this, that there was a
request made on the site for a Specific Plan designation that was denied. Am
I misinterpreting the significance of this exhibit?
Mn Hogan?
Yes. That's not a denial of a Specific Plan. That map only depicts the different
[and use requests we have received and whether or not there was a
recommendation to support it or oppose it. So, when a property owner comes
in. he would be able to identify the property and identify what staffs
AL~-3i-i994 e9:15 F~ON The K~i~n Cc. RIUERS[DE TO 6941999 P.06
~ S~h~s:
D. Hog~u:
Mayor:.
S. Edwer&
5. Edward:
K. Jackson:
Mayor:.
rec~mmend~tlon was without having to look through a rather complicated
mistfix,
Thank you. All right, we have no other requests to speak on this group. Dave,
do you want to proceed?
Starting... I'm going to give thc introduction to all the properties inchded in
here. And rll mention Item No. 8 as a matter of course, as the Council's
position on that has nlready been made clc-ar. One Moment.
Thc original general Plan for that area showed a combination of Open Space,
d
Hillside resi ential and Low Density Residential They requcsted Open Sl~ce,
Hillside Kesidend:i, Low density and Low Medium density residential so that
the tots] average density on the proiect would increase to 3 units per acre.
After some discussion, sraff doesn't have any problems with making a change
in had usc density, w/th the understanding that the final density of the project,
for the entire area, wi][ not exceed 3 uniu per acre. We~d llke to make that
recommendation to Council.
OF,- Does the applicant fed OK with that, iust for the purposes of moving
along?
YeaIn, that sounds good on the surface. I thought, prior to this, that the
understanding was that staff wanted us to come in with a Specific Plan. And
my concern is, iet's say it says we can yield 3.1 or somet~ng like that. I hate
to lock myself into a ccillng right now, Like anybody involved in the process,
there's always give and take and it seems like I'm giving fight out of the chute
and I don't even know what the ramifications are. So, I would ask for
clarification just to be contingent upon the Specific Phn and I'll get hammered
then. I'H get beat up hter,
I think we need to have a target density though. We need it for
traffic/circulation, for all the other elements we have to deal with in the
General Plan. And to me, we're changing {Tom 2 to 3, and that seems to give
you a lot of tierabillty.
OK., alrlght, 6jr enough.
Minor modifications of 10% one way or the other, which will give him 3.1, if
that is a concern.
Alright, I think we have agreement and concurrence.
4
TOTA_ P. 86
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF LI= I '~ ~:RS DATED JULY 18 AND AUGUST 15, 1994
R:\GENPLANXROILLPAGH,CC2 10/3/94 4
of Temecula
s P~r~ Drive · Temecula. Californl~ 92590
July 18, 1994
(909J 694-1989 · FAX ICY09} 694-1999
Tom Nieves
The Keith Companies
22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300
Moreno Valley, CA 92553
SUBJECT: Maximum Density for the Roripauoda Ranch Specific Plan
Dear Mr. Nieves:
This letter is in response to your request of the Planning Department' s determination of the
overall density for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan.
The I and Use Element of the City' s adopted General Plan states that the Roripaugh Ranch
Specific Plan project "...shall not exceed an average of three dwelling units per acre...' The
Land Use Element further states: "The maximum density. defines the maximum number of
units per net acre at which development can occur within a ~ven area. Net acre is defined
as the g-ross project or lot area, less that pomon of the site to be used for the following:
arterial, major, secondary and collector roads: and the floodway portion of a flood plato.'
Second, please be aware that net acreage is not the sole determinant of the overall densiry.
Section IV(A)(1) of the land Use Element also lists the other factors that are used in
determining net density. These factors include: opportunities and constraints of the site (e.g.
topography, hydrology, sensitive habitats, etc.), policies and implementation progra. rns of the
General Plan, and other City building and development standards.
Third, you have had discussions with staff regarding the definitions of Average Density and
Target Densit-j, as the terms apply to this project. However, because the site has multiple
Land use designations, and because the General Plan specifically states the project's avera.,Ze
density, the target density provisions do not apply to this project. Therefore, it is your
responsibility to provide staff with a calculation of the net acreage of the site in order to
determine the preliminary maximum unit count.
Mr. Tom Nieves
July 18, 1994
Page Two
In addition to the density issue, them are other issues that still need to be resolved prior to
the submittal of an application for thix project. It is the Planning Depaxtment's position that
there has not been an adequate discussion of the opportunities and constraints of the site as
outlined in a letter to you dated May 25, 1994.
While the opportunities and constraints have been discussed in general terms, staff ha~ yet be
presented with any information other than the preliminary land use plan. Specifically, staff
would like to see detailed information as it relates to biological resources, axcbaeology,
paleontology, topography, hydrology, infrastructure, and surrounding land use patterns. In
addition, stuff would like to review a conceptual site plan of the commercial axeas which
show how these areas will conform m the Village Center concept shown in the General Plan.
Upon reviewing the most recent illustrative site plan depicting two small commercial sites,
staff is concerned about the these areas conforming to the General Plan.
In closing, I would like to take this opportunity to invite you and your representatives to
disc.us~ the oppormhities and constraints of the site. ff you wish to set up said meeting, or
you have any questions about this letter, please contact Craig Ruiz at (909) 694-6400.
Sincerely,
Gary. Thornhill
Dn-ector of Planning
cc: Thomas Clark, Royal-Clark Development
of Temecula
s Park Drive · Temecula. California 92590
August 15, 1994
694-1989 · gAX/909) 694-199~
Tom Nieves
The Keith Companies
22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300
Moreno Valley, CA 92553
SUBfECT: General Plan Consistency for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan
Dear Mr. Nieves:
Ci~' staff has performed a cursory. review of your submittal for the above referenced project.
After reviewing the proposed density for the project, it is staffs opinion that the project is
inconsistent with the Ciry.'s General Plan.
Previously, staff indicated to you, both verbally and in written correspondence, that the
General Plan states this project shall not exceed a maximum of three units per "net" acre.
Staff further stated that net acreage is defined as the gross project area less that portion of
the site to be used for General Plan Circulation roadways and the floodway portion of a flood
plain. However, no data has been provided on the amount of net acreage. The proposed
2,370 units is based upon "gross" acreage, which inconsistent with the General Plan.
In order for staff to continue processing this application, you will need to do one of the
following:
1. Reduce the number of units proposed in the specific plan based upon a calculation
of the net acreage of the site and submit the revised plan.
2. File a General Plan Amendment to reflect the increase in density proposed in the
specific plan. Please note, based upon staffs initial review of the plan and prior
comments provided to you, staff will most likely be unable to support a General Plan
Amendment for an increase in density.
It should be noted that City staff has not yet reviewed this project. If staff continues
processing the project, further comments will be provided.
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXCERPTS FROM CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN - PAGE 5
R:/GENPLAN'xRORII~AGH.CC? 10/3t94 5
CITY OF TEMECULA Land Use Element
1. Residential Designations
Each of the residential use cstego~es includes a rang~ of allowable densities.
The maximum density defines the ma,~tirnum number of uni5 per net acr~ at
which development can occur within a given area. Net acr~ is defined as the
gross project or lot area, te~s that portion of the site m be used for the following:
arterial, major, secondary and collector roads; and the floodway pomon of a flood
plato. Determination of precise density, development location, and lot coverage
on any residential property is a function of:
Opportunities and constraints presented by natural, cultural or scenic
fsatur~s;
Policies and implementation progr~rn-~ of the General Plan intended to
maximize public safety; achieve high quality site p}nnni~lg and design;
provide sufficient levels of public service; retain significant natural
nno~; ensure compatibility between usc-~; and encourage development
of Village C~ntet~.
Building and development standards contained in the Development Code,
pubic works standards, and other regulations and ordinances.
Future residential development is expected to occur at the target level of density
stated in Table 2-7 for each residential designation. Development at a density
between the target and maximum level may only occur for the Hillside, Very
Low, Low and Low Medium designations, at the discretion of the Planning
Commission/City Council in exchange for special public benefits (as identified
in Policy 5.1). The amenities or public benefits provided are intended to satisfy
a ne~l over and above the minimum requirements of the General Plan and other
city policies and regulations. It is assumed that some residential development
will occur below the target level of density and some development will occur
above the target level based on the provision of public amentries or benefits. For
purpos~ of analyzing the impacts of the General Plan, the target level of density
for the above identified designations is assumexL A target level of density is not
established for the Medium and High designations so as not to preclude or
discourage the development of afffordablc housing. However, for purposes of
analyzin. g the impacts of the General Plan, a probable level of development
within the Medium and High designations is assumed.
TI~-OP~Cip.12~.Lr~ · Ds~c: November 9, 1993 Page 2-'~
al !
t;
ITEM 22
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager,
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning.
October 11, 1994
Award of a Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry to Prepare the Nicolas
Valley Special Study
Prepared By: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION: 1.
Award a Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry in
the amount of ~24,673 to prepare the Nicolas Valley
Special Study and authorize the Mayor to execute said
contract.
BACKGROUND
During the City's General Plan adoption process, the area known as Nicolas Valley was
designated as a Special Study Overlay. The Special Study Overlay designation is intended for
those areas in the community that require a comprehensive, detailed evaluation ot
development and constraints. The purpose of the special study is to recommend any changes
to General Plan land uses based upon analysis of the following:
· The provision of flood control, sewer, water and other services;
· The impacts of the surrounding development in terms of traffic, light, noise, etc;
· Methods to provide a transition between rural and urban development;
· Topography and related visual impacts of development;
· Existing lot patterns;
· Traffic circulation and impacts on level of service; and
· Vegetation and wildlife resources,
The City of Temecula issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to local consulting firms to prepare
a Special Study for the Nicolas Valley area. In response to the City's request, three firms
submitted proposals. The Selection Committee of Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Public
Works Director Tim Serlet and Senior Planner John Meyer reviewed all three proposals and
ranked the firms based upon their expertise and ability to address the issues in Nicolas Valley.
Staff then met with the preferred consultant to discuss and negotiate the proposed scope of
work and costs of the project. Staff has been successful in negotiating a reduced project price
from that which was originally submitted.
R:\STAFFRFF'd~CVALLY.CC 10/5/94 Ires 1
FISCAL IMPACT
The approval of the contract will result in the expenditure of $24,673. This amount has been
budgeted for in the Planning Department's current fiscal year budget. In addition, should the
study recommend an amendment to the General Plan, there will additional administrative costs
to prepare said amendment.
Attachments:
Special Study Overlay Map - Page 3
Scope of Work - Page 4
Project Time Line - Page 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
SPECIAL STUDY OVERLAY MAP
SPECiAl, STUDY OVERLAY
~Special Study Overlay
General Plan Prog. ram
i~ L~ ~ THE
![ PLANNING
HGURE 2-6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
SCOPE OF WORK
TASK 1
Subtask
Output
TASK 2
Subtask
Output
TASK 3
Subtask
Output
TASK 4
Subtask
SCOPE OF WORK
MEET WITH CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN BACKGROUND DATA.
Conduct one two-hour meeting at the City of Temecula to include the
following:
A. Introduction of consultant team to background information.
B. The Project Team's review of available background data.
The Project Team and City Staff will establish the background research phase
of scope. Presentation of relevant baseline material to Consultant for further
review.
REVIEW BACKGROUND DATA.
During a three-week period, the Project Team will review background data,
illustrate pragmatic data in both a graphic 1"-200' scale overlay mapping
exercise, and present a letter report outlining to major issues.
A preliminary understanding of the project area's jurisdictional, physical and
environmental influences. This will be translated on to maps at 1 "=200'
scale in trace overlay format, as well as an outline report identifying to the
major issues.
FIELD TRIP TO THE PROJECT AREA FOR ONSITE REVIEW OF
APPLICABLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Undertake a half-day field trip to site to verify background assumptions.
The Project Team will verify the project area's characteristics through afield
reconnaissance.
OPPORTUNITY AND CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Undertake research to ascertain and determine
constraints for the project and the project area.
the opportunities and
Evaluate governmental issues:
1. Land use compatibility with existing and proposed uses/plans,
includes an examination of existing lot configurations and a
review of the general plan and community issues with staff.
proposals\ternecula\nicolas .vly
1
Output
TASK 5
Subtask
Output
TASK 6
Subtask
Identify and evaluate engineering issues, such as, drainage/flooding,
infrastructure and service needs. Includes an examination of soils and
slo. pe/~opography.
Prepare one reproducible original of an opportunities and constraints
report in written and graphic format using a I"=200' scale
topographic base map with overlay describing the findings of the tasks
described above.
A reproducible original of the opportunity and constraints analysis report and
map at 1 " =200' scale, with recommendations regarding the client contracting
special studies subconsultant.
STAFF REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITY AND CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Evaluate significance of issues identified in the Opportunity and Constraints
Analysis and derive a consensus for the issues affecting the property.
A. Discuss report findings.
B. Establish the capacity analysis strategy.
C. Meeting to review preliminary opportunities and constraints graphic.
NBS/Lowry will prepare preliminary opportunities and constraints for meeting
with City. NBS/Lowry will incorporate review comments and submit final
material to City.
JOINT WORKSHOP WITH CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND GENERAL PUBLIC
Meet with the City Council, Planning Commission and the interested residents
of the Nicholas Valley in the early stages of the project in order to review
opportunities and constraints analysis. Meeting to be conducted by City Staff.
Output
TASK 7
Subtask
Initial meeting with the Council, Commission and public to present the
opportunities and constraints report and map.
PREPARE ALTERNATIVE LAND USE CAPACITY CONCEPTS
Based upon the completed opportunities and constraints analysis and relevant
input received from Public Workshop, NBS/Lowry will prepare and evaluate
potential alternative land use capacity alternatives.
proposals\ternecula\nicolas .vly
Output
TASK 8
Subtask
Output
Two alternative land use capacity concepts will be prepared. Potential
land use intensity variations will be prepared, based upon alternative
infrastructure phasing and geographic or biological constraints.
The first alternative will analyze just the study area and the capacity
of infrastructure based upon General Plan build-out in the area.
The second alternative will address pending master plan applications
under the assumption they will be approved. The impact of this
assumption will determine the available infrastructure and phasing of
improvements and the capacity potential based on available
infrastructure.
The alternative land use capacity concepts will be evaluated in an
effort to identify potential positive and negative issues associated with
each concept and weigh them as they relate to each other and the
surrounding community. The different issues to be evaluated include:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Land use/market
Traffic and circulation
General biological opportunities or constraints
Preliminary infrastructure analysis/infrastructure phasing
Pending land use entitlements and surrounding land uses
Surrounding community character
Graphic diagrams of preliminary land use capacity concepts at 1~=200'
scale. A reproducible original of a written analysis of the benefits and
potential problems associated with each alternative. A preliminary
infrastructure phasing for each alternative.
STAFF REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE LAND USE CAPACITY
CONCEPTS
Evaluate significance of issues identified in the land use capacity analysis and
derive a consensus on the issues affecting the project area.
A. Discuss the report findings by phone.
B. Confirm the capacity analysis.
C. Finalize study report and distribute.
Finalize report and distribute one reproducible original to staff.
proposals~ternecula\nicolas.vty
3
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PROJECT TIME LINE
R:\STAFFRPT\NICVALLy. CC 10/5/94 hns ~
SENT BY:NBS/LOWry, InC. ; 9-28-94 ;IO:OOAM; Zrvine~ 909694547?;# 3
Special Land Use And Can'ying Capacity Study
For The Nicola~ VaLley Overlay Area.
LfidUmPla~
IlM!iili
T~'a_" Iir'~lJe
ITEM 23
APPROVAL:R~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Manager/City Council
Joseph Kicak, interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
October 11, 1994
Proposed Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street",
Acknowledgemerit Sign Size
PREPARED BY: ~l~/] Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street" acknowledgement
sign size.
BACKGROUND:
On August 9, 1994 the City Council approved the adoption of the Keep Temecula Clean
"Adopt-A-Street" Program. At that time City staff was directed to reduce the proposed 30"
X 30" acknowledgement sign.
At this time City staff has acquired two (2) proto type acknowledgement signs, 18" X 18" and
24" X 24" for J::ouncil's review and approval.
Upon approval, the acknowledgement signs will be installed at 15 locations already identified
in the program, when "adopted".
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Public Works Department Sign Maintenance Account 100-164-601 -
5244.
r: ~agdrpt~94~1011 ~ADOPTSTR.sigtajp
ITEM 1
ITEM 24
aPPROV~~
FINANCE OFFICER
CI'~'Y R~M~AGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
City Clerk ~.
October 11, 1994
Community Services Commission Appointment
RECOMMENDATION: Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint two
applicants to fill full three-year terms.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council's adopted policy and procedure for making
appointments and re-appointments, the two commission positions which had terms that
expired October 2, 1994, were advertised in two local newspapers of general circulation. The
applications received were forwarded to the President and Vice President of the Temecula
Community Services District for review.
Councilmember Birdsall and Mayor Pro Tem Stone have recommended the re-appointments
of Commissioners Jeff Nimeshein and Rich Saltysiak for full three (3) year terms of office.
Attached are copies of the applications which were received by the filing deadline of
September 27, 1994.
ATTACHMENTS: Copies of Applications for Appointment
APPL,CAT, O. ,.D
CO~v~j'NITY ~ERVICES CONMISSION
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE:
NAME: Jeffery Nimeshein
ADDRESS: 311 Via Gilberto
5 Years
YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA
Temecula 92592
(909) 699-9924
HOME PHONE:
HumAn Services Manager
OCCUPATION:
8450 La Mesa Blvd., La Mesa, CA
EM PLOYER/AD DRESS:
91941
(619) 464-0505
WORK PHONE:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
M.S. Recreation Administration
B.A. Recreation
A.A. Physical Education
~J
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON
WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
Temecula Community Services Commission - 1990-Present
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service):
California Park & Recreation Society
California Boards & Commissions
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY
YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Uee additional paper
H necessa~): I have successfully served on the very active Community Services
Commission from its inception. This commission has performed a vital role in
the advancement of Park and Recreation development in Temecula. Over this period
I have contributed countless time and energy serving on numerous committees
dealing with important issues and community development. Furthermore, I have
taken a leadership role on many issues, and also served as chairman of the
commission this past year. With over 25 years of education, training and experience
in the Park, Recreation and Community Services field, I feel eminently qualified
and honored to serve on the Community Services Commission.
(continued on next page)
I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this
information for publicity purposes. ,
OA :
PLEASE NOTE: Appl~ations will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies.
Retum to: City Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/forms/COM-O01
(continued from page 1)
I believe I have made a strong individual contribution to the community,
while working in harmony as a team member with other commissioners.
There has been considerable accomplishment, but there is still much to do.
My past commission experience will be invaluable in this future process.
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSIC I~ ~ 4,
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecul~
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE: COMMUNIT¥ SERVICE DTSTRTCT
NAME: Rich Soltysiak
ADDRESS: 30519 Wailea Court
YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA: Seven
HOME PHONE:
676-1470
WORKPHONE:
676-1470
OCCUPATION: CiVil Engineering COnSultant
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS: , ,,- ...........
Self-~mployed .... ~ ....
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DE(~REES:
BS/CE Marquette University~' Milwaukee; WiSconsin - 1979
Registered Civil Engineer, State of California -' 1983 m
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH "~
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: _
Temecula and Murrieta Coordinating Committee since 1991 '
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professi0naL~echnicaltcommun~, seaice):.,
BRIEFLY ~ATE WHY-YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION; AND WHY YOUj::':~:2~'~:-2~f-:':i'
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION.': BE SPECIFIC (Use addmonal; paper ~ :~"~[~ ~':
necessa~): ' ~ .... ' :F :'- .: - ,': :' rri ' "'
I unde~nd ~at any or all information on ~is form may be veHfied.-I consent to ~e release of
information for public~ purposes. ' ' ~ ....
SIGNATURE: · DA~: ~ '-'
PL~SE NO~: Applications will be kept on fge for consideration of ~re vacancies.t. - .....
Remm to: C~ Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, TeMcula, CA 9~90 17141
. ".-...--~- . : . "'..1: :: ~:.[' .==l?:_-4~ ~ 't-'C'~'Ei'c:
2~o~s/CO~1 ' '
CITY OF TEMECULA
BOARD, COMMITTEaR C MMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE:
YEARS RESIDENT
ADDRESS:c.':~C'~!'Z'J'' /fj/~ /_4j ,c~*A ~/"- OF ECULA
HOME PHONE:
WORK PHONE:
OCCUPATION:
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON
WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD ~/OMMISSION, AND WHY
Remm to: CJ~ ~3174 ~siness Park DHve, Temecula, CA 9~90 (714~6~-19~
2/formslCOM-O01
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
City Clerk
October 11, 1994
Public Traffic Safety Commission Appointment
RECOMMENDATION: Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint an
applicant to fill a full three-year term.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council's adopted policy and procedure for making
appointments and re-appointments, the commission position which has a term that expires
October 2, 1994, was advertised in two local newspapers of general circulation. The
applications received were forwarded to the Mayor who serves as liaison for the Commission
and Councilmember Mu~oz for review.
Due to Mayor Robert's Sister City trip to Europe, we were unable to secure his
recommendation on time for the agenda deadline. Staff will transmit his recommendation
under separate cover as soon as it is received. Councilmember Mu~oz recommends the
appointment of Commissioner non Guerriero.
Attached are copies of the applications which were received by the filing deadline of
September 27, 1994.
ATTACHMENTS: Copies of Applications for Appointment
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY CO~IISSION T E B ' ~ j
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH 0 S RVE:
NAME: RON GUERRIERO ~- ~
YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA
ADDRESS: 41510 CHENIN BLANC 92591 6,3
HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE:
676-6150 SAME
OCCUPATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY TRAINER
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:
41510 CHENIN BLANC TEMECULA
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
AA POLICE SCIENCE BA CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION/SOCIOLOGY
UCR-COURSE WORK IN GOVT. CONTRACTS CALIF. CO~MJNITY COLLEGE TEACHING CERT.
CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LICENSE CALIF. CERTIFIED HAZARD MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR
NIOSH SCBA INSTRUCTOR
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON
WHICH YOU H~%S~%DARAT~RI~pY~RMM~i~F~rEE (DRUGS & YOTj"DZ) TVHS
1990-1994
TEMECULA/MURRIETA TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
SEVERAL SUBCOMMITTEE' S AND AD HOC COMMIi"F~ES FOR PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
BOARD MEMBER, TEMECULA BALLOON & WINE FESTIVAL, BOARD MEMBER, TEMECULA TOWN ASSOC.
PAST PRES. TVHS FOOTBALL PAR_!NT SUPPORT G~0LrP(B~amn~CF~q) wn nnArm' ~ Ag~r~
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY
YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper
if necessary): AS A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER WORKING IN THE TRAFFIC DIVISION, I
WORKED ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION, TRAFFIC STATS, AND WORKED WITH THE CITY TRAFFIC
DIVISION, AS WELL AS WITH THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. I FEEL I HAVE CONTRIBUTED MUCH
THE THE PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION IN MY FOUR YEARS, AND KNOW I CAN CONTINUE
TO CONTRIBUTE IF ALLOWED TO REMAIN. I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION CAN ASSIST THE CITY
COUNCIL IN MANY WAYS, WITH THIER DIRECTION, AND I AM READY TO SPEND THE TIME REQUIRED
TO ACHIEVE THE COUNCILS GOALS FOR A BETTER TEMECULA.
I HAVE SERVED ON SEVERAL SUBCOMMITTEES, AND AD HOC COMMITTEES THE PAST FOUR
YEARS, AND CURRENTLY SERVE ON THE JEFFERSON CORRIDOR COMMITTEE, AND LOWER 79
COMMITTEE. I ASK THAT I BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE SERVICE TO THE CITY, AND COUNCIL.
I understand ~at any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this
/jrN::jjjor.!?p..rpq,~s r DATE: SEPTEMBER 22 1994
PLEAi~be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies. ,
Retum to: City Cierk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
21fon~alCOM*O01
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COM~
AR
NAME: '~ ~ R C/vlC/~ C~)(~)'/Y~'//7/~RS RESIDENT
HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE:
OCCUPAT,O.:
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
/Yew V~K 7_,~/~e,~'/7'~ - /,~--<Z-
Lr)eR T/ F/ e ,4 7'e //v' '7~'R,=.= /~ ~Sn~e T'y- (',:>? Se.,.
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMI'I'rEE OR COMMISSION ON
WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service):
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY
YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUArIFlED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper
I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this
information for publicity purposes.
B,G.. TU.E: ~ / .~ ~ .. ,~: ?_,, _ ~.~
PLEASE NOTE: Applications will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies.
Retum to: City Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/formslCOM-OO1
ITEM 26
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
October 11, 1994
Communications from Supervisor Buster regarding Winchester Road
Widening
PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek
RECOMMENDATION: Consider the suggestions set forth in the letter from Supervisor
Bob Buster dated September 19, 1994.
BACKGROUND: The attached letter from Supervisor Bob Buster deals with the City's
desire to assist in expediting the widening of Winchester Road.
jsg
BOB BUSTER
SUPERVISOR FIRST DISTRICT
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
September 19, 1994
The Honorable Ron Roberts, Mayor
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
cc: City Council
R. Bradley
T. Serle=
Dear Ron:
The Board of Supervisors will soon be making a number of decisions
pertaining to the future of Assessment District 161. While all are
important,' decisions affecting the completion of Winchester Road
appear to be of highest interest to district homeowners and
property owners, Temecula Valley Unified School District and the
City of Temecula.
For a number of months, several current and former Temecula council
members have been "volunteering" the financial assistance of the
city in the completion of Winchester, particularly the stretch
between Margarita and Murrieta Hot Springs roads. The Board
recently approved in concept a proposal that would allow a public
Dr private entity to advance money for construction, with later
reimbursement from district proceeds.
Given that the city's assistance has been volunteered by other than
a majority of the City Council, I thought it would be appropriate
to contact you in an effort to ascertain the city's official
position. If the city has any interest in such a course of action,
I suggest that we get together, with the appropriate staff, to
discuss possibilities. Please contact Leannah Bradley or Ken Van
Vechten at my Riverside office to set a date and time.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me. Thank you, in advance, for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Supervisor Bob Buster
First District
Riverside County
BB:kvv
cc: Mentbers, Board of Supervisors
Larry Parrish, Chief Administrative Officer
'] 4~80 LEMON STREET, 14TH FLOOR · P. O. EOX 1369 "* RIVERSIDE. CA 92502-1359 · (9091 275-1010 · FAX :,~'Jg) 686-2909
'1 410(32 CCUNTY CENTER DRIVE,. SUITE A2.05 · TEMECULA, CA 92591 "{,°09) 694-5150 · ~=AX (909) i594-5190
ITEM 27
' APPROV,~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM:
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
DATE:
October 11, 1994
SUBJECT:
Design Services Contract - Parkview Fire Station Project
PREPARED BY: (~ .~Lx~/Phyllis L. Ruse, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the city Council award contract of $174,313to RJM
Design Group for the preparation of the master plan, schematic design drawings, construction
documents, and project administration for the Parkview Fire Station Project.
BACKGROUND: On May 26, 1994, the City solicited Statements of Qualifications
from architectural and landscape architectural firms for design services for the Parkview Fire
Station Project. The approximately 46 acre site is south of the Rancho Vista ballfields at the
Rancho California Sports Park and north of Pauba Road. The master plan will include the area
from the channel bed, the slope, and region up to Pauba Road. It will extend east to west
between Margarita Road and the 10 acre church site on Pauba Road.
The City received several Statements of Qualifications which were reviewed and ranked by
a review committee. The six (6) firms judged to be the most qualified were invited to offer
an oral presentation to a selection committee comprised of a member from the City Council
(Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone), a battalion chief from the Fire Department, and City staff. The
selection committee ranked RJM Design Group as the most qualified firm for this project.
Staff has negotiated with RJM Design Group a final Scope of Work and a cost proposal of
$174,313 for this project.
Upon award of a contract with the design team, staff will form a project committee to develop
the master plan for the site. It is envisioned that the ultimate improvements will include a fire
station to service the City east of Interstate Highway 15, off-site road improvements along
Pauba Road, passive parkland amenities, and footprints for possible municipal buildings to be
determined at a later date. A construction estimate of $1,650,000is projected to cover the
first phase which consists of the fire station and off-site road improvements.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of this Design Services Contract is $174,313. This project
is budgeted and approved in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 1994-95. The
current construction budget is $1,250,000. However, it is projected that sufficient funds from
Fire Mitigation Fees will be collected to fund this project. Fire Mitigation Fees can only be
used for fire projection projects.
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
19 , between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and RJM Design Group, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in
the "Statement of Qualifications" submitted by Consultam dated June 30, 1994 in
response to City's "Request for Qualifications for the Parkview Site Improvement
Project."
PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best
of his ability, experience and talent, perform, all tasks described herein.
PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, at the hourly rates set forth
in Section 9.4 of Exhibit "A" attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the
above tasks. This amount will not exceed $174,313 {One Hundred Seventy-Four
Thousand Three Hundred Thirteen Dollars and No/100) for the total term of the
Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council.
Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices
shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services
provided in the previous month, Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice.
SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT. The City may,
at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof,
by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon
receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this
Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty-five (35) days after
receiving an invoice from the Consultant, the City shall pay Consultant for work
done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section.
If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such
suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the
remainder of this Agreement.
BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under
the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue
compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. Default
shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction
of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the
performance of work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his
control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered
a default.
v:\rjmprKvw .agr -1 - 100394
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults in the
performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10)
days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering
a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default
within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and
without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity
or under this Agreement.
TERM. This Agreement shall commence on the first date stated above and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no
event later than March 31, 1996.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between
the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall
be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired
judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section
1280, et sea. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of
termination, suspension or abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents,
designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be
performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City
and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the
permission of the Consultant.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shall at all times remain as
to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers,
employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any
of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except 'as herein set forth. The
Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its
officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of
the City.
No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall
not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing
services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or
indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing
services hereunder.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and
Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in
any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The
Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations.
v:\rjmprkvw .agr -2- 100394
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000combined single lirnit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: Workers'
Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California
and Employers' Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000
must be declared to and approved by the City.
Other Insurence Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall
contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after
thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City via United States First
Class Mail.
General Liability and Automobile Liability coverages. The City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as
insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the
Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or
automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The
coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers,
With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the
work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage
shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers. Any insurance or serf-insurance maintained
by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in
excess of, and not contribute with, the Consultant's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall
not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials, employees
or volunteers.
The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against
whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits
of the insurer's liability.
Worker's Compensation and Employers' Liability Coverage. The insurer
shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work
performed by the Consultant for the City.
v:\rjrnl)rkvw .agr -4* 100394
Verification of Coveraae. Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. The
certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The
certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences. The City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies, at any time.
Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies
or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All
coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements
stated herein.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall
reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as
respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant
shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
13.
LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary licenses,
including but not limited to City Business License.
14.
INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the
City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all
claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the
City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be
imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising
out of Consultant's negligent performance under the terms of this Agreement,
excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City.
15.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or i~strument attached
hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or
incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the
subject matter hereof.
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this
Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement
shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and
after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed
in counterparts.
v:\rjmprkvw .agr -5- 100394
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above writlen.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TEMECULA
By: By
RJM Design Group, Inc. Ron Roberts, Mayor
Robert J. Mueting, President
APPROVED AS TOFORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
v:\rjmprkvw .agr -6- 100394
EXhibit "A"
PARK VIEW SITE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK
DESCRIFrION OF SERVICES
PHASE I
1.0 RESOURCE DOCUMENTATION
Obtain documentation available from the City pertaining to this project (including
topographic and boundary survey, soils investigation and rifle report).
One meeting with City staff to review the project scope; refine time schedules; develop
comprehensive use progrnm,~; functional space requirements; and a financial plan.
Assist the City in establishing a Project Committee and laying the ground work for
receiving community input as necessary to develop a comprehensive program to meet the
present and future needs of the City of Temecula.
We suggest working with a Project Committee made up of representatives from the City
Council, City Staff, Parks and Recreation Commission, the Fire Department and
individuals from the COmmUIlity that have a special interest or background related to the
specific facilities in the Parkview Site. We propose extensive coordination between the
Project Committee and the Design Team and integration of their expertise into the design
process.
C. Review State and local codes and standards applicable to site development.
D. Acquire base map and resource information from City.
In general, we anticipate the following resources will be necessary to be furnished by the
City. These kems have been expressly excluded from our scope of services.
1. Enviromental studies and Environmental Impact Report.
2. Demographic profdes and facilities survey.
3. Space requirements.
4. Staff projections and population projections.
5. Financing plan.
6. Approved Park and Recreation Master Plan.
MEETINGS: (1) - 1-Kickoff meeting with key players to obtain documentation and
establish project schedule.
PRODUCTS: Updated schedule
P~k~iew Site Improvmamt Project Pa~e 1
City of Tcmecula/994-5 1
2.0 D~,-fMLED ~fll~ ANALYSIS
Our next tasic will he to physically review, analyze, and document existing site assets and
deficiencies. The analysis of the site and surrounding relationships shall also be review~ in
regard to the potential importance of phasing for initial and future construaion.
A. Conduct field investigations and analysis of existing conditions including utilities,
drainage and topo and easements. Photo document site and prepare initial site awareness
score.
B. Produce site analysis/opportunities and constraints exhibit.
C. Prepare utilities availability map.
D. Evaluate off-site R.O.W. improvements necessary for site access.
E. Obtain and review existing hydrology studies that are available from other developments
in the project vicinity.
PRODUCTS: Opportunities and constraints/site analysis map, utilities availability map, base
map at appropriate scale.
Park,~ew S~te Improvmmt Project P~e 2
City of Temecula/994-51
3.0 PROGRAMMING/SITE PLANNING/MAS-rF,~R PLAN
A primary service proposed within our overall scope of work is an intensive programming phase
scheduled during the first portion of the project. Our programming services shall be organized
such that the participating users shall be initially interviewed, presented with interim information
and results for review and discussion, and shall receive a final presentation in regards to the
general recommendation of the program specific to all park and fire station facilities. During the
programming period, sessions shall be conducted with the Project Committee and our Design
Team for review and presentationof programming analysis and studies. The Programming Phase
is an intensive and concentrated scenario of site and building planning, area projections, and
functional relationships. The Programming Phase is one of the most important aspects of the
entire project in that it shall establish the immediate foundation and relationships for all park
components.
SrrE AWARENESS TOUR/WO~OP
Site Scores
Prepare draft site scores for site awareness tour.
B. Prepare workbook for site awareness tour including refined site scores.
C. Conduct morning awareness tour on-site during community workshop.
D. Conduct a one day community workshop.
E. During workshop, develop (3) site plan alternatives for parkview site at conceptual level.
Compile a summary bubble diagram of workshop consensus plan showing building spatial
relationships, site facilities and circulation.
Conduct meeting with city staff to review consensus plan, spatial arrangements, site, and
building program.
An Architectural Program shall be prepared for the Fire Station component of the
project. Interviews shall be conducted to determined required space allocations.
Functional adjacencies, equipmere specifications and support systems shall be identified
and presented.
I. Civil Design/Documemation
A one page Summary Report shall include evaluation of alternatives and recommendation
for:
· On-site utility systems
· Off-site utilities work
· Site grading and drainage
· Parking improvements and paving
Parkview Site lmprovmeat Project Page 3
City of Tera=cula/994-51
K,
Project Budgeting
Services relating to the development of a Statement of Probable Construction
Cost based on programming and scheduling studies and consisting of:
· Conversion of programmed requirements to net area requirements.
· Development of initial approximate gross facility. areas.
· Evaluation of construction market conditions.
· Application of unit cost data to gross areas.
· Estimates of related costs such as site and facility development,
landscaping, utilities, services, furniture, equipment and design services.
Prepare preliminary master plan based upon City staff comments on consensus plan and
refined program.
Meet with City/Agency for review of prelimin~'y master p|an.
Prepare final master plan, program requirements for picnic, parking and park facilities
and amenities and conceptual floor plan/elevations of the fire station facility based on
City/Agency comments.
MEETINGS:
PRODUCTS:
(1) - All Day Workshop
(2) - City Review Meetings
Meeting notes, program graphics (tissue format) and written summary of
program recommendations, preliminary master plan, final master plan
and fire station conceptual floor plan.
Parkview Site Improvement Project Page 4
City of T~mecula/994-51
4.O
PHASE H
5.0
A.
B.
D.
E.
F.
JOINT MEk'~ING
Prepare for and attend (2) Public review meetings to present site analysis, project
program, and site master plan. Submit for review and approval.
MEETINGS: (2) - Public Review Meetings
PRODUCTS: Mounted drawings as produced in site analysis and programming.
Site master plan documents.
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
Prepare schematic designs and plans relative to the fire station and fire station site.
Provide an estimate of probable construction cost for the proposed fire station facility and
site improvements.
Section 404 Report (N.I.C.)
Section 1601 Report (N.I.C.)
Conduct meeting with the City staff, to review and discuss Schematic Proposals.
Refine Schematic Plans based on staff input.
MEETINGS: (1) - City staff meeting
PRODUCTS: Schematic layout plans of the fire station, parkLag, site landscape,
lighting and site f~rniture concepts, cost estimate, meeting notes.
Parkview Site Improvemeat Project Page 5
City of Temccula/994-51
6.0 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
The sixth task of our services shall be to prepare all preliminary plans and cost analysis based
upon the approved schematic desigu documents in order to fix and describe the scope and
character of the entire Project, including landscape architectural, architectural civil, structural,
mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate.
Consideration shall be given to availability of materials, equipment and labor, construction
sequencing and scheduling, economic analysis of construction, user safety and maintenance
requirements, and energy conservation. In addition, during Design Development Phase,
requirements for cabinets, casework, hardware, and related specialties shall be determined. A
preliminary furniture plan shall be prepared indicating usage and furniture layout of every work
station, office, and support space. Final selection of materials, textures, and colors shall occur.
Prepare final designs and plans relative to site, architectural, structural, electrical, civil,
and mechanical engineering associated to the proposed project complete with site and
floor plans, exterior elevations.
B. Prepare preliminary grading, drainage, sewer, utilkies, access and circulation studies.
C, Perform earthwork take offs.
D. Prepare probable estimates of construction costs per square foot.
E. Conduct staff meeting to review final design prior to construction drawings.
MEETINGS: (1) City staff meeting,
PRODUCTS:
Refined preliminary plans, elevations, refined cost analysis, defined
mechanical and electrical systems, preliminary civil plans, materials
board and cost estimate.
7.0 CON~-[RUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE
The final Construction Document Phase of the project consists of the preparation of the
construction documents to include final drawings, specifications, calculations, and final cost
estimates. Our proposal includes complete archkectural and engineering services required to
execute the project. Specifically, we have included the following disciplines.
A. Landscape Architectural/Site Development
B. Architectural
C. Civil Engineering
Parkvlew Site Improvmumt Proj~t P~e 6
City of Temecu|a/994-Sl
Prepare and Process Best Management Practices (BMP's): Pursuant to federal
mandate, all grading projects commencing after November of 1990 must employ
best management practices which remove effluents and pollutants from runoff
water to a degree of water quality acceptability prior to discharge into a natural
system. During the construction document stage, the design team proposes to
review possible BMP's with the city for incorporation into the parkview site
landscape system.
D. Structural Engineering
E. Mechanical Engineering
F. Electrical Engineering
During this phase, the Contract Documents are prepared setting forth in detail the requirements
for the construction of the project. General conditions, instructions to bidders, and all special
requirements are defined, and when combined with the various trade specifications, a complete
project manual is produced.
8.0 BIDDING PHASE
Bidding Procedures
The Consultant shall assist the City with the Bidding Phase of the project. Questions,
clarifications, or conflicts arising out of the bidding process will be resolved by addenda prepared
by the Consultant (maximum (2) two addenda). Addenda to the contract for construction shall
be prepared in writing to document any clarification or modification made to the contract
documents.
Parkview Site Isnprovment Proj~sct Page
City of Tcmccula/994-51
9.0 CONSTRUCTION ADMIN1S-rRATION PHASE
The Consultant Design Team shall conduct Biweekly job site meetings for a 6 month construction
period to generally review and evaluate the construction schedule, monitor weekly performance,
review quality control stand_ards, and provide assistance for any clarification or revision to the
contract for construction. Shop drawings and related submittals shall be reviewed and returned
to the consultant for appropriate action. The Contractor's requests for information, proposal
requests, and related communications shall be artended to on a regular basis. Contractor's pay
requests shall be reviewed by the Consultant on a monthly basis in accordance with the amount
of work completed and in accordance with the contract documents. At every job site meeting,
min~.ltes shall be prepared, published and distributed by the Consultant to all parties concerned,
specifically noting current action items and related responsibilities.
Upon completion of the Construction Phase the Consultant shall organize and conduct a final
walk-through and review. A final punch list for all required corrections and remaining work
shall be prepared.
During the Construction Phase of the project, the following services shall be furnished:
Preeonstruction Conference
A preconstruction conference shall be organized and conducted to brief all parties concerned with
general and special requirements of the contract for construction. Procedural matters, routing
of information, and project representatives shall be defined. Attendees shall include
representatives from the City's staff, the Consultant, the Contractor, and all major subcontractors.
Job Site Meetings
Bi-weekly job site meetings (total of 13) shall be scheduled and conducted by the Consultant for
the same day and time through the duration of the project. Scheduling, coordination, requests
for information, and changes to the contract for construction are routinely monitored. The
Consultant shall publish and distribute a field report for each job site meeting, documenting the
progress of construction and specifically noting current and delinquent action items.
Submittal and Shop Drawing Review
The Consultant shall review all required shop drawings and related submittals as required by the
contract documents.
Parkview Sit~ Improvemint Project Page g
City of Terr~eula/994-51
Project Close=Out
At the completion of the Construction Phase a final job site meeting and review of the entire
facility shall be conducted. A final punch list will be published and distributed by the Consultant
to all parties concerned, specifically noting required corrections, non-conforming work, and work
remaining to be completed. A second walk-through shall be conducted when all punch list items
have been corrected, at which time a Final Notice of Completion shall be filed by the City.
Parkview Site hnprovement Project Page 9
City of Temecula/994-S 1
SECTION 10.0 FEE SUMMARY ESTIMATE
10.1
PHASE I:
FEE SC/HEDULE
It is the objective of our Design Team to provide the most comprehensive, yet efficiem
approach to the development of the PARKVIEW SITE IMI~ROVE1VIENT PROJECT.
Fees for Phase I and Phase II are as follows:
Master Plan for 46 acre site
1.0 Resource Docunaentation
2.0 Detailed Site Analysis
3.0 Programming/Site phnni/lg/
Master plan
4.0 Joint Meeting
Subtotal
$ 4000.00
$ 5432.00
$24,240.00
$ 1.000.00
$34,672.00
PHASE H:
Design and Construction Documents for Fire station Building and ± 1% acre Site
development.
(Based on 9300 SF Bldg)
5.0 Schematic Design
6,0 Design Development
7,0 Construction Documents
8.0 Bidding
9.0 Construction Administration
(Bi-weeldy visits based upon a six
month construction period)
$15,488.00
$26,911.00
$73,441.00
$ 4,921.00
$18.880.00
Subtotal
$139,641.00
Grand Fee Total
$174,313.00
Parkvle~v Site lmltovemeat Proj,et P~ge 10
City of Tcme~ul~/994-51
9.2
9.3
Reimburse Allowance
sin order to save consultant mark-up on reprographic, printing, photographic, and
delivery expenses, it is our suggestion that a Temequla account be established at a local
blueprint company for the PARKVIEW TEMECULA SITE IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT. This will save the city approximately 10-20% city discount and consultant
mark-up)
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The following items shall not be a part of the fee identified in the
above, but shall be reimbursable to RJM Design Group.
payment section
Additional meetings and site visits as authorized by the City of Temecula.
Preparation of Topographic and Boundary information.
Environmental Impact Report, if required, shall be provided under separate contract.
9.4
RJM Design Group shall provide the necessary plan check revisions requested by the
city for two plan check reviews. All subsequent changes shall be done in accordance
with the attached Standard Hourly Fee Schedule.
STANDARD HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE
The Client agrees to pay Consultant as compensation for all authorized work included in
the Scope of Services heretofore stated, at the hourly rates below.
PRINCIPAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
DESIGNER
SENIOR DRAFTSPERSON
JUNIOR DRAFTSPERSON
FIELD OBSERVATION
WORD PROCESSOR
$100.00 Per hour
$88.00 per hour
$82.00 per hour
$55.00 per hour
$48.00 per hour
$88.00 per hour
$35.00 per hour
Billings for all time and materials and contract extension work shall be in accordance with the level of
work perfomed and will be broken into the categories listed above.
FEE ESCALATION:
Fees will be escalated each August 1st in accordance with any increase in the Consumer's Price index
or other mutually agreed upon cost index. Beginning with August 1, 1995.
All provisions for escalations stated, pertain to all contract extension and additional work.
parkview Site Improvmmt Project Page 11
City of Ten~cula/994-51
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:15
PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California.
President Jeff Stone presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
3 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone
2 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz, Roberts
Also present were General Manager Ronald E. Bradley, General Counsel Peter Thorson and
City Clerk June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Parks to approve Consent Calendar
No. 1. The motion was unanimously carried with Director Mu~oz and Roberts absent.
1. Minutes
1.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORT
None given.
Minutes. CSD\092794 - 1 - 7/19/94
Temecula Communitv Services District Minutes September 27, 1994
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Birdsall to adjourn at 8:16 PM to a
meeting on October 11,1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista
Road, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried with Director Mu~oz and
Roberts absent.
Jeff Stone, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk\Board Secretary
Minutes.CSD\092794 -2- 7/19/94
ITEM 2
· APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services
October 11, 1994
Utility Agreements for Pala Community Park - Project No. PW93-03CSD
PREPARED BY: ~' Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
Dennis Armstrong, Assistant Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract For Extension Of Electric Line
Underground with Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to provide for installation
of an underground line extension to Pala Community Park.
2. Authorize the payment of SCE application fees in the amount of $16,235.71.
Authorize the Mayor to execute the Water System Construction Agreement and the
Agency Agreement with Rancho California Water District (RCWD) to provide for
installation of domestic water service to Pala Community Park.
BACKGROUND:
The first phase of construction began on August 17, 1994. The contractor is scheduled to
begin installing the underground utilities at the end of October, 1994. Therefore, the
Community Services District must enter into the following agreements prior to the installation
of the underground utilities: Contract For Extension Of Electric Line Underground (SCE) and
Water System Construction Agreement and Agency Agreement (RCWD).
The attached standard agreements have been reviewed by the City Attorney and found to be
acceptable for execution.
r:\agdrpt\94\101 l\pw93-03.ut¥/alp
FISCAL IMPACT:
Application fees in the amount of $5,731.71 will be paid to RCWD. The application fees for
an SCE service extension total $16,235.71. A portion of the SCE fees may be refundable
after the completion of the project in accordance with the provisions specified in section 8 of
the SCE contract. Although utility application fees are not a part of the construction contract,
sufficient funds are available in the Capital Projects Account for Pala Community Park. This
project is being funded through Development Impact Fees.
ATTACHMENTS:
Contract For Extension Of Electric Line Underground (SCE)
Water System ConstruCtion Agreement (RCWD)
Agency Agreement (RCWD)
r:\agdrpt\94\101 l\pw93-03.uty/ajp
REVISED: 9/6/94
CONTRACT FOR EXTERSION OF ELECTRIC LIRE
UNDER6ROUND - RULE NO. 15
This Contract, issued this 6th day of September , 1994 , is made between SOOTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON CONPANY, a corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'Edison'). and
City of Temecula
(hereinafter referred to as 'App]icant'.)
RECITALS:
Applicant has requested Edison, pursuant to Edison's Rule No. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for
in tellatioR f an underground line extension to the location or locations in the County of
, State of California, substantially described as follows:
44900 Temecula Lane
Temecula, CA 92591
for delivery of electricity to serve the ]cad specified in this Contract or to reach a residential
subdivision or Commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1
or 15.2.
In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this
Contract. the parties named above agree as follows:
1. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the legal
right to occupy public streets, roads, and highways necessary for the construction. operation. and
maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public )ands and private
property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison. subject to the terms of this
Contract.
2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Ru]e
No. 15. 'Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises'.
7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be
feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9
is tclb~Odesignated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to
be feet.
4. Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is $19,527.00 , Which amount
is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section 8. of Rule No. 15.
5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the
o f
6. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant. Applicant shall perform additional work or
install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs.
Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit
first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amounts due herein.
7. The total a~o~u~,o be paid by Applicant to Edison concurrently with the execution of this
1 71
Contract shall be $ which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable ~nounts
required hereunder. less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and
nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated
as shown below:
Descr i Dt i on Amount
a. Line 5,excess cable & ITCC Non-Refundable Billinq $15,261.83
b. PLUS 780' X 6,90 + ITCC Refundable BillinQ $ 7,211,88
c. LESS Structs, Excav, Duct & Tre~l~l~ursable Credit $ 6,238.00
d. Total Customer Billinq $16,235,71
e. OR Total Customer Credit -0-
G860324.02 -1-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract.
(Print or Type, except for Signature)
Corporation. or
partnership:
Signature: /
Mailing Address:
Title:
Telephone:
Amount Advanced:
(If group of
Applicants)
City of Temecula
Ronald E. Bradley
43172 Business Park Dr.,
City Manager
909 694-6411
Temecula, CA 92590
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COHPANY
District Manager (Sqgnature)
San Jacinto Valley
District
Date Executed:
Date Edison First Ready to Serve
W.O. No. 6677-2303 32324
AssQc. W.O. NO(S).
GBE0324.02
-4-
10. Applicant agrees to install, and commence using in a bona fide manner within six months aft-
the date the line extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, th
appliances and items on which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service
fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for, the Company may calculate and
bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Company s line extension Rule in effect at the
time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and
equipment installed.
11. Title to and ownership of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder,
which are to be owned, operated, and maintained by Edison as provided by Edison's tariffs. shall vest in
Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant-
Installed facilities, title to each and every component part thereof shell immediately pass to Edison free
and clear of all liens and encumbrances, without further action upon the part of Applicant.
12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its
contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. lhe warranty period shall begin from the
date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that
period, Edison, at its election, shall either (a) repair Or replace the defective work and/or equipment,
or {b) demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and, in eitber
event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant,
upon demand by Edison, shall promptly correct, to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental
agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty.
13. Applicant shall, at its own cost, defend, indemnify and hD)d harmless Edison, its officers,
agents, employees, assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability, damages,
losses, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any
of them, resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages tD any property caused by Applicant
or its contractor and employees, officers or agents of either Applicant op its contractor, or any of them,
and arising out of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this Contract.
14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs, including Rule
15, filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission.
15. 'This Contract shall, at all times, be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California, as said Commission may, from time to time, direct in the
exercise of its jurisdiction.
16. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is (i executed and delivered by Applicant
Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within 90 days of the bate first written above, and
accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take
effect without further notice to Applicant.
17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above, when applicable, if the Applicant does not commence
installation of any Applicant-installed facilities (i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year
from the effective date of this Contract, Edison may, in its discretion, revise the basis of its estimates
and recalculate the refundable, nonrefundable, and reimbursable sums set forth herein.
18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ~ ~nh~ ?~ 19q/,
G860324,02 -3-
REVISED: 9/6/94
CONTRACT FOR EXTEWSION OF ELECTRIC LINE
UNDERGROUND - RULE NO. 15
This Contract. issued this 6th day of September , ]994__ . ts made between SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY. a corporation (heroinafter referred to as 'Edison'), and
City of Temecula
(hereinafter referred to as "Applicant".)
RECITALS:
Applicant has requested Edison. pursuant to Edison's Rule NO. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for
in tailsrich. f an underground line extension to the location or locations in the County of
. follows:
State of California. substantially described as
44900 Temecula Lane
Temecula, CA 92591
for delivery of electricity to serve the load specified in this Contract or to reach a residential
subdivision or commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1
or 15.2.
In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this
Contract, the parties named above agree as follows:
1. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the legal
right to occupy public streets, roads. and highways necessary for the construction, operation. and
maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public lands and private
property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison. subject to the terms of this
Contract,
2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Rule
No. 16, "Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises',
7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be
feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9
is toTb~Odesignated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to
be feet.
4, Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is S19,527.00 , which amount
is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section B. of Rule No. 15.
5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the
tnhr; .. ,;; q; d-installed cos,: of an equi,,alent overhead li.e .; te.si ,n is
o f
6. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant. Applicant shall perform additional work or
install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs.
Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit
first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amount~ due heroin.
7. The total amount to be paid by Applicant to Edison concurrently with the execution of this
Contract shall be $ 16 f 235.71 which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable a~ounts
required hereunder. less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and
nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated
as shown below:
Descr i pt i on Amount
a. Line 5,excess cable & ITCC Non-Refundable Billinq $15,261.83
b, PLUS 780' X 6.90 + ITCC Refundable Billino $ 7,211.88
c, LEgS Structs, Excav, Duct & TreR~'~ursable Credit $ 6,238.00
d. Total Customer Billinq $16,235.71
e. OR Total Custome~ Credit -0-
G85D3Z4.02 -t-
8. The refundable amount set forth in Paragraph 4 herein shall be subject to refund. without
interest, in accordance with the following provisions:
{a) Refunds will be made for connection of (1) separately metered permanent load and/or customs
and (2) permanently installed load which is in excess of the toad for which allowance has been made where
added by a customer within one year of first taking service.
(b) Refunds will be made on the basis of $ 9,2 5 per foot for each foot that the allowable
free length, as listed below, exceeds the additional length of an equivalent overhead line, if any,
required to serve such new load and/or customers.
rof connection of additional load by existing
(c) Refunds will be made within 90 days. a.fter. date of first service to permanent load and/or
customers, and within 90 days of date of notlflcetl~
customers. except that refunds due may be cumulated be o e pa)n~ent until they aggregate $25, or, if the
total refundable balance is less than $25, until the amount due equals the balance.
{d) Where there is a series of extensions, on any of which an amount is still refundable, and Edison
makes succeeding free extensions with excess allowances or where additional load or customers connect to
succeeding extensions, refunds will be made to repay in turn each of such amounts which remain refundable
beginning with the first in series from the original point of supply.
(el When two or more parties make a joint advance on the same extension, refundable amounts will be
distributed to these parties in the same proportion as their individual advances bear to the total joint
aovance.
{f) No refund will be made by Edison in excess of the amount subject to refund nor after a period of
ten years from the date Edison is first ready to render service from the extension, and any unrefunded
amount remaining at the end of the ten-year period will become the property of Edison.
9. ALLOWABLE FREE LENGTH OF EXTENSION:
ALLOWANCE * X NUMBER = FEET DF FREE EXTENSION
Lighting and Appliance Customer{s) 300 feet
Electric Refrigerator Customer{s) 75 feet
Electric Range Customer{s) 2DO feet
Electric Water Heater Customer{s) 275 feet
Electric Clothes Dryer Customer{s) 40 feet
k~ of Heating Equipment (1.5 kW
or more per unit) 35 feet
HP of Motors {i hp or more per motor) 50 feet
Home Freezer Customer{s) 5D feet
Automatic Dishwasher Customer{s) 2D feet
Air Cooling Installations {less than
one hp per unit) 50 feet
Furnace Blower Motors 10 feet
Heat Pump Customer{s) 800 feet
HP of Air Conditioning Load {room or
central unit} 75 feet
OTHER SERVICE
kW of Connected Lighting Load
kW of Connected Cooking or Heating Load
HP of Connected Motor Load {one hp or
more per motor)
HP of Air Conditioning Load
(room or central unit)
1,000 Lumens of Street Lighting
125 feet
75 feet
175 feet
50 feet
25 feet
Total Free Footage
Total Free Footage Allowed
FEET OF FREE EXTENSION
-0-
G860324.D2 -2-
10. Applicant agrees to install, and cormnonce using in a bona fide manner within six months after
the date the line extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, those
appliances and itemson which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service or
fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for, the Company may calculate and
bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Company's line extension Rule in effect at the
time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and
equipment installed.
11. Title to and ownership Of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder,
which are to be owned, operated, and maintained by Edison as prqv__i~ed by Edison's tariffs, shall vest in
Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant-
installed facilities, title tD each and every component part thereof shell in~nediately pass to Edison free
and clear of all liens and encumbrances, without further action upon the part of Applicant.
12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its
contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. The warranty period shall begin fro~ the
date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that
period, Edison, at its election, shall either {a) repair or replace the defective work and/or equipment,
or (b) demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and, in either
event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant,
upon demand by Edison, shall promptly correct, to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental
agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty.
13. Applicant shall, at its own cost, defend, indemnify and hold harmless Edison, its officers,
agents, employees, assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability, damages,
losses, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any
of them, resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages to any property caused by Applicant
or its contractor and employees, officers or agents of either Applicant or its contractor, or any of them,
and arising cut of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this Contract.
14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs, including Rule No.
i5, filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission.
15. This Contract shall, at all times, be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California, as said Commission may, from time to time, direct in the
exercise of its jurisdiction.
i6. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is {i} executed and delivered by Applicant to
Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within 90 days of the date first written above, and (ii)
accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take
effect without further notice to Applicant.
17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above, when applicable, if the Applicant does nat commence
installation of any Applicant-installed facilities {i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year
from the effective date of this Contract, Edison may, in its discretion, revise the basis of its estimates
and recalculate the refundable, nonrefundable, and reimb~;/sable sums set forth heroin.
18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ¶ ~o~nh~r ?A, 199/~ ·
GaGO324.02 -3-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Contract.
(Print or Type, except for Signature)
Corporation. or
Partnership: City Of TemecUla
Name of Individua~//~
/
Signature:
Mailing Address:/
Title:
Telephone:
Amount Advanced:
(If group of
Applicants)
43172 Business Park Dr., Temecula,
909 694-6411
CA 92590
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
District Manager (S~gnature)
San Oacinto Valley
District
Date Executed:
Date Edison First Ready to Serve
w.0. No. 6677-2303 32324
Assoc. W.O. No(s).
G860324.02 -4-
REVISED: 9/6/94
CONTRACT FOR EXTENSION OF ELECTR]C LINE
UNDERGROUND - RULE NO. 15
This Contract, issued this 6th day of September , 1994 , is made between SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation (heroinafter referred to as 'Edison"~', and
City of Temecula
(heroinafter referred to as "App]icant".)
RECITALS:
Applicant has requested Edison, pursuant to Edison'a Rule No. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for
in tallarSon. f an underground line extension to the location or locationsin the County of
t zvers e
· State of California· substantially described as follows:
44900 Temecula Lane
Temecula, CA 92591
for delivery of e]ectricity to serve the load specified in this Contract or to reach a residential
subdivision or commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1
or 15.2.
In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this
Contract, the parties named above agree as follows:
I. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the )egal
right to occupy public streets, roads, and highways necessary for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public lands and private
property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison, subject to the terms of this
Contract.
2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Rule
No. 16, "Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises'.
7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be
feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9
is to~b~Odeslgnated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to
be feet.
4. Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is $19,527.00 , which amount
is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section B. of Rule No. 15.
5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the
= qEeTd-installed cost of an equivalent overhead li.. exteos, . is
o f
B. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant, Applicant shall perform additional work or
install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs.
Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit
first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amount~ due heroin.
,. The t;;a %e pa,d by Applicant to Ed,son concurr.ntly w,th the .xesution of this
Contract shall 1 7which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable amounts
required hereunder, less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and
nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated
as shown below:
a. Line
b.
d.
Description Amount
5,excess cable & I~CC Non-Refundable Billinq $15~261,83
PLUS 780' X 6,9D + I~CC Refundable Billinq $ 7~211.88
LESS Structs~ Excav~ Duct & ~reRne~'~ursable Credit $ 6~238.00
Total Customer Billinq $16~235.71
OR Total Customer Credit -0-
G860324.02 -1-
8. The refundable amount set forth in Paragraph 4 heroin shall be subject to refund, without
interest, in accordance with the following provisions:
(a) Refunds will be ma~e for connection of {1) separately metered permanent load and/or customer.
and (2) permanently installed load which is in excess of the load for which allowance has been made where
added by a customer within one year of first taking service.
(b) Refunds will be made on the basis of $ 9 o 2 5 per foot for each foot that the allowable
free length, as listed below, exceeds the additional length of an equivalent overhead line, if any,
required to serve such new load and/or customers.
(c) Refunds will be made within 9D days after date of first service to permanent load and/or
customers, and within gO days of date of notification of connection of additional load by existing
customers, except that refunds due may be cumulated before payment until they aggregate $25, or, if the
total refundable balance is less than $25, until the amount due equals the balance.
(d) Where there is a series of extensions, on any of which an an~unt is still refundable, and Edison
makes succeeding free extensions with excess allowances or where additional load or customers connect to
succeeding extensions, refunds will be made to repay in turn each of such amounts which remain refundable
beginning with the first in series from the original point of supply.
(el When two or more parties make a joint advance on the same extension, refundable amounts will be
distributed to these parties in the same proportion as their individual advances beer to the total joint
advance.
(f) No refund will be made by Edison in excess of the amount subject to refund nor after a period of
ten years from the date Edison is first ready to render service from the extension, and any unrefunded
amount remaining at the end of the ten-year period will become the property of Edison.
9. ALLOWABLE FREE LENGTH OF EXTENSION:
ALLOWANCE * X NUMBER = FEET OF FREE EXTENSION
Lighting and Appliance Customer{s) 300 feet
Electric Refrigerator Customer(s) 75 feet
Electric Range Customer{s) 200 feet
Electric Water Heater Customer{s) 275 feet
Electric Clothes Dryer Customer(s) 40 feet
kW of Heating Equipment {1.5 kW
or more per unit) 35 feet
HP of Motors {i hp or more per motor) 50 feet
Home Freezer Customer(s) 50 feet
Automatic Dishwasher Customer{s) 20 feet
Air Cooling Installations {less than
one hp per unit) 50 feet
Furnace Blower Motors 10 feet
Heat Pump Customer{s) 800 feet
HP of Air Conditioning Load (room or
central unit) 75 feet
DTHER SERVICE
kW of Connected Lighting Load
kW of Connected Cooking or Heating Load
HP of Connected Motor Load (one hp or
more per motor)
HP Df Air Conditioning Load
(room or central unit)
1,000 Lumens of Street Lighting
125 feet
75 feet
175 feet
50 feet
25 feet
Total Free Footage
Total Free Footage Allowed
FEET OF FREE EXTENSION
-0-
G86D324.02
10. Applicant agrees to install. and commence using in a bona fide manner within six months after
the date the llne extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, those
appliances and items on which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service or
fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for. the Company may calculate and
bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Compan~s line extension Rule in effect at-t'ne
time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and
equipment installed.
11. Title to and ownership of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder.
which are to be owned. operated. and maintained by Edison as pr~v_].i~ed by Edison's tariffs. shall vest in
Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that Upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant-
installed facilities, title to each and every component part thereof shall ir~nediately pass to Edison free
and clear of all liens and encumbrances. without further action upon the part of Applicant.
12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its
contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. The warranty period shall begin frcm~ the
date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that
period. Edison, at its election. shall either (a) repair or replace the defective work and/or equipment.
or {b} demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and. in either
event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant.
upon demand by Edison. shall promptly correct. to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental
agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty.
I3. Applicant shall. at its own cost. defend. indemnify and hold harmless Edison. its officers.
agents. employees. assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability. damages.
losses. claims. demands, actions. causes of action. costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any
of them. resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages to any property caused by Applicant
or its contractor and employees. off icers or agents of either Applicant or its contractor. or any of them.
and arising out of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this ContraCt.
14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs. including Rule No.
15. filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission.
15. ~his Contract shall. at all times. be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California. as said Commission may. from time to time. direct in the
exercise of its jurisdiction.
16. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is i) executed and delivered by Applicant to
Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within g0 days of the date first written above. and {ii)
accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take
effect without further notice to Applicant.
17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above. when applicable. if the Applicant does not commence
installation of any Applicant-installed facilities (i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year
frDm the effective date of this Contract. Edison may. in,its discretion. revise the basis of its estimates
and recalculate the refundable. nonrefundable. and reimbu~/Sabte sums set forth heroin.
18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ~ Octobe~ 28, 1994 .
G860324,02 -3~
IN WITNESS WHEREOP. the parties hereto have executed this Contract.
{Print or Type. except for Signature)
Corporation. or
Partnership: City of Temecula
Name of Individual /
Signature: V//
Mailing Address:
Title: V/
Telephone:
Amount Advanced:
{If group of
Applicants}
43172 Business Park Dr.,
909 694-6411
Temecula, CA 92590
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
District Manager (S~gnature)
San Jacinto Valley
District
Date Executed:
Date Edison First Ready to Serve
w.0. No. 6677-2303 32324
Assoc. W.0. No(s).
G860324.02 -4- ~
RANCH0 CALIFORNIA VATEl DISTXICT
OF RIVZRSIDE COUNTY
VATEI $YSTEN CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
(DEVELOPER INITIATED/CONTKACTOI INSTALLED)
THIS AGREEMENT is made on this llth day of October 1994 . by and
between RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, a public
agency of the State of California, hereShelter designated as the 'District'
end City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Dr.,Temecula, CA 92590 ,
represented by Ronald E. Bradley,City M~r
'Developer',
located st
Ph. No. (909) 694-6444
hereinafter designated as the
W~rEEAS, Developer iS plannan2 a development of three (3)
lo~(s) located within the development referenced wAthin records of the
County of Riverside, State of California. as:
Lots 87, 88 and 89 of Tract No. 21067 and is
further identified on the map attached to and made a part of this
Agreement$ and
WHEREAS, said subdivision viII require a water distribution system to
provide domestic water service to the lands referenced above; and
W~RZAS, Developer is desirous of havin2 the District provide
domestic water service to said lands and is viiiin2 to convey to the
· District the water distribution system after the construction thereof.
contingent upon the Dlstrict's acceptance of such conveyance on the terms
and conditions set forth herein.
THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGKEZ AS FOLLOWS:
1. District agrees to provide domestic water service to the
aforesaid development in compliance with its applicable rules. regulations,
APPENDIX 'L'
8/1/91
ordinances, orders when, as, and If Developer has complied vltb the terms
end conditions contained herein.
2. Developer agrees to construct the water system facilities
necessary for aforesaid development in accordance with the following terms
and conditions:
A. Developer viII cause water flystem facilities to be
constructed ·s shown on the Discrict approved water construction
drawings at its expense by · qualified California licensed
Contractor. Said Contractor shall be currently licensed by the State
of California with either a specialty contractor, 'C-3&, pipeline
license or a General Engineerins Contractor, "A" license. Said
contractor shall be experienced in the construction of domestic racer
systems and shall have been reviewed by the District and epproved by
the District as · qualified Contractor before I contract is signed
and construction begins.
I. Said water system facilities will be constructed and
installed in full compliance with all applicable rules, regulations
and ordinances of District including, bu~ not limited to, District's
Standard Snecifications and Standard Drawl·as for Veter end SanStar7
Sever Yacllities.
'C. Vater construction drawings for said water system
facilities shall be approved by District prior to the presentation
thereof to contractors for bidding purposes and said facilities shall
be constructed and installed in full compliance with said ·pproved
vater construction drawings and District specifications referenced in
paragraph 'B' above.
D. The entire cost of the construction of such domestic
system shall be paid by the Developer. Such construction shall be
APPENDIX
811191
inspected by District personnel for conformance with the spproved
dravinSs and District specifications.
Z. The District is not responsible and does not own the
water system facilities until the7 ere inspected and approved by the
District,' the-Paithful'Perf~,u,ance 'Bond is executed and accepted by
the District, all fees and charSos ere paid in fuZZ, the
Unconditional Lien Vaiver and Release and the gater System Grant Deed
ere executed and accepted by the District. Until such
Developer is responsible for the facilities and is liable for
damsBe to said facilities,
F. All existin2 District facilities shall be protected in
place. Any damaled District facilities shell be replaced or repaired
by ~eveloper at the davalope:'s expense to the satisfaction of
District.
G. Developer will, on demand, pay all costs incurred by the
District as may be necessary to complete construction lncludin2 the
applicable hourly rate for an inspector for such time as may be
required as determined by District to inspect the construction of the
water system facilities. Said rates shall be that which is
applicable at the time of actual inspection. The inspector shall
work under the supervision of District, and shall provide inspection
until the vater system facilities is accepted and approvad as stated
herein.
3. Construction shall not basin until District issues the 'Notice
to Proceed". Prior to District issuin2 "rotice to Proceed", Developer
shall submit the followinS:
A. Copy of contract between Developer and Contractor
verifying cost of water system facility construction.
811191
APPENDIX 'L'
B. Certiftcntloa of streets to finnl Irede,
C. Certificates of insurance for contractor and all
subcontractors on District form (A reSins of A in the latest issue of
Best's Key Ratins Guide, Property-Casualty, Written by A.H. Best
Company).
D. A faithful performance bond with corporate surety or
sureties satisfactory to the District (A resins of A in the latest
issue of Best's Key Rating Guide, Property-Casualty, Written by A.H.
Best Company) on District forms. Said performance bond bait8 for not
less than one hundred percent (100Z) of the tots1 contract price.
Said bond Susrsntees the completion of the facilities (including
submission of the Unconditional Lien Waiver and Release and the Water
System Grsnt Deed) and Suarantees the materials and workmanship of
the installed domestic water system against failures of any type for
one (1) year from the date of the fllins of the 'Notice of
Completion'. Said bond shall provide for the payment of all costs
incurred by the District for the repair of such failures within the
one (1) year Suerattle period.
separate City/County bondinI is required, Developer can submit
approved copy of City/County bondins in lieu of District bond.
4. The District will provide construction water sad firs
protection to the development after the Contractor has completed all items
on the District Inspector's Construction Deficiency List, evidence has been
submitted indicstin8 County acceptance of compsction, acceptable
becterioloSicnl test results have been obtained, and any remaining
inspection fees art paid in full.
APPENDIX 'L'
8flfg~
5- The District will provide drop-in meters to the development and
file a Notice of Completion after the following has been submitted:
A. Drop-in Meter Application and all related meter
installation and connection fees.
B. Unconditional Lien Waiver and Release for waterline
construction.
C. A Grant Deed executed b7 Developer vesting title of said
water system facilities to the District. 5aid Grant Deed must be on
District form and vests title only after the District files the
Notice of Completion. In the event water rights are appurtenant to
the development, Developer shall also grant said water rights to the
District on District form.
D. An Agency Agreement will be required for each parcel if
there is not a current Agenc7 Agreement recorded against the
property. The Agenc7 Agreement gives the District the right of
management of the groundwater resource to the District. for the
benefit of all District customers.
6. At District's option, the terms and conditions of this
Agreement will become null and void and District will have no further'
obligations hereunder in the event the construction of the facilities
covered herein has not begun within 12 months of the date of this
Agreement. In the event construction has not been accepted by District
within 24 months of the date of this Agreement, this Agreement and an7
other related water system facility requirements must then be revised to
include any new conditions and to cover all increased costs, including an7
new fees and charges which may be in effect at that time. No further work
will be permitted until all provisions of this paragraph have been
fulfilled.
APPENDIX
8/1/91
7. Developer agrees to hold the District free and harmless from
any expense or liability resulting from the construction or installation of
the water system facilities, and further agrees that Developer will
indemnify the District and viii hold it, its employees and agents free and
harmlesl from and against any and ell liabilities for death, injury, loss
or damage to .persons -or .property which may arise before, after or during
construction of the water system facilities as a result of any work
performed by Developer or on its behalf.
8. In the event that either party shall fail to perform its part
of this Agreement, and suit shall be comehoed, or an attorney employed to
enforce the provisions thereof, the party who fails to perform his part of
the Agreement agrees to pay any and all costs involved therein, and to pay
a reasonable attorney's fee.
9. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit
of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto, and each of them.
10. Vhenever in this Agreement notice is required to be given, the
same shall be given by certified mall, postage prepaid, addressed to the
respective parties It the following addresses:
To Eancho California rarer District:
Rancho California ~ater District
General ~anager
P.O. Box 174
Tamsouls, California 92390-0174
TO Developer:
City of Temecula
Ci~V Manager
43174 Business Park
Tamsouls, CA 92590-3606
APPENDIX "L'
811191
ZZ. This ASFeemenC coDe/ins IZ~ of the terms and conditions agreed
upon by the parties hereto, end no o~her aircements, oral or otherwise,
shall be deemed to exist or to bind the parties hereto unless hereafter
duXy placed in writin8 and executed by the undersiSned.
8/1191
APPENDIX 'L'
RANCHO CALIFOKNIA WATER DISTRICT
General ManeSet
Date:
DEVELOPEl
Company: City of Temecula
By:
Name: Ronald E. Bradley
Tt~e: City Manager
Date:
APPENDIX 'L'
Slllgl
W, .zo'7
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
42135 Winchester Roac~
Post Office Box 9017
_Temecula CA 92589-901"
AGENCY AGREEMENT NO.
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 1 lth day of October
19 94 ,by and
between City Of T~.mertt]~
(hereinafter referred to as "Landowner"), and RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT. a Dubhc corporanon
organized and existing under Division 13 of the Wafer Code of the State of Califorma (nerelnafter referred to as me
"District"), for the property described as follows: p= 1 = Co---,,,,ity Park
(legal description attached).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS. the District has power and authority to act as agent
for the extraction. diversion. storage and distribution of water
owned by other parties: and
WHEREAS. Landowner es the owner of certain land within the
D~strlct described In Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part
hereof: and
WHEREAS, said land owned by Landowner is a portion of lane
found by the United States District Court. United States of
America vs. Fallbrook Public Utility District, et el., m the
United States Dis~_nct Court, Southern District of California.
Southern Division. Case No. 1247. affirmed in part by the Urnted
grates Court of Appeals for tRe Ninth Circuit, Case No. 18931. to
, land riDerlab to Certain rivers and Streams, including the
anta Marganta Rrver and its tributaries. and also which may De
lane ovenay~ng percolating waters under a court decree entered
December 26 1940 ~n the case Rancho Santa Margarlta vs.
Vail. 11 CaL.2d 401 (19391. and reinstated by the United States
Court of ApDea~s for the Ninth Circuit in said Case No 18931:
are
WHEREAS. Landowner w~tnout transferring any water right and
pr~vnege pertaining to said land, does desire to empower the
D~stnct to act as its agent and the agent of its Successors and
assigns to extract. store and d~vert me water to which it is
entitled (herelnafter referred to as "local water"1 and to supply
the same to its land and all other land having. under the laws of
the State of Cafitorma or pursuant to any ludgement or contract,
a tegal right to have sa~d water apphed thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE in consideranon of the mutual prom~ses
and agreements herera contained. the parties hereto agree as
follows:
Section 1. Landowner hereby designates the Dmtrict its
excius~ve agent and the exclusive agent of its assigns and
successors In interest tar the extraction. dwerslon, storage.
blendrng and distribution of all local water upon or under the
lands of Landowner referred to in the recitals hereof for the
burpose of butting Sa~d local water to beneficial use to the fulleel
extent of which it ~s capaPle for the lands and inhabitants of
Landowner and all other lands within the watershed of me Santa
Margarlta R~ver, and its tributaries on Which said local water now
and hereafter may be legally apDhed. It is the intention of
Landowner by this Agreement to maintain a binding and
~ermanent arrangement whereby said local water shall be
oDerly maintained and be perpetually delivered and distributed
o all of said lands entitled mereto and the subdivisions thereof
for the use of Landowner. Its assigns and its successors in
roterest and other owners of such lands.
Section 2. Landowner hereby grants to the D~stnct the right to
blend local water with imported supplemental water. to d~stnbute
imported water to Landowner in i~eu of or In addmen to the
distribution of local water and to Store ~moor~ed water under me
lands of Landowner,
Section 3. Landowner agrees that all local water to De used by
Landowner within the DIStrict shall De obtained from the D~strlct
or its assigns and successors in interest. Landowner snail not
divert or extract within or outside the boundaries of the District
local water for Landowners own use within the Dlstnct nor shall
Landowner supply local water for use within the District by
others. Landowner further agrees not to divert or extract within
the District local water for use Dy Landowner or 0there outside
the Distract. Landowner reserves to itself its assigns and its
successors In Interest all water right5 and Dnvileges presently
owned and which may De herematter acquired pertaining to Said
land and nothing in this Agreement snail be construed as
appropriating or dedicating sa~e water rights or any water to
public use
Section 4 This agency snail be effectwe and ~rrevocable in
perpetuity and the same snarl be eeemeo an agency coupled
with an interest. provided nowever tn~s Agreement shall
terminate and be of no further force or effect upon a
determination by any court of Competent jurisdiction m an
appropriate action that the-method of extraction and distribution
of sa~d local water nereln provided is not a Proper method of
exercising the riDerlab and other water rights of Landowner.
Section 5. The District agrees to d~vert. extract. store and
distribute local water for the benefit of Landowner The D~stnct
agrees to accluire by lease. burchase. gin or omerw~se all wells
and water distribution facihtles useful and necessary to extract.
store and distribute sa~d local water to the lands and Inhabitants
entitled thereto ~n accordance with tins Agreement, Nothing
contained here~n shall prohibit the D~stnct from exercising any of
its powers granted by the Cahfom~a Water D~strlct Law nor snail
the District be brohib~ted from acGumng supplemental water for
distribution to all lands within the District
Section 6. This Agreement shalt not be assignable Dy the D~strict
without the written consent of Landowner: provided nowever.
the District may contract with any munlc.aal. public or private
corporation for the management and operation of any water
facilities owned by or leased by the D~strict.
Section 7. The District snail nave full controi of the afiocatlon of
all costs of acclulsition an0 construction of D~stnct facilities using
any method or a combination of methods. as set forth m the
California Water D~strlct Law, or raising tunes to defray said
costs. The District may adopt such rules and regutanons for the
diStributIOn Of tracal water as it beems necessary Tne DISTriCt
may allocate the distribution df the available local water ~n any
manner authorized ~n The California Water D~stnct Law or the
rules and regulations of the District adopted pursuant to said
law Rates and charges for the distribution Of local water may De
made aria snal; De payable by Lanaowner, its assigns and the
successors m Interest as detertamed by the Board of D~rectors
of the Distnct from time to time: provided. however. said rates
and charges shal~ not be so set to discriminate between water
users In substantmlly the same classification
SECTION 8 Neither the DIstnct nor the Landowner warrants The
auantlty or auahty ot the local water to be extracted and
a~stnDulea by tne D~strict
SECTION 9 The District and Landowner intend that the
prows~ons of the Agency Agreement shall constitute covenants
that run w~th the land and shah inure to the benefit of and be
bindrag upon the assigns and successors in interest of the
Dlstnct and Landowner The District and Landowner therefore
agree as follows: ta) The D~stnct is the owner of land and water
d~stributlon facilihes within its boundaries which will be benefitted
by the Agency Agreement. The District land benefits from The
Agency Agreement because wells located on the District land
nave a more assured reliable water supply. The District land
particularly benefitted by the terms of this Agency Agreement is
described in Exhibit "B" of that certain Agency Agreement
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Rwerside as
Document No 398782 by the D~strlct on October 22, 1992,
wmcn ts ~ncorporated heroin by reference. Landowners land
conefits from the rights set forth in Sections 1 and 5 above to
connect to the District's water system. The covenants of the
Agency Agreement alsra benefit all other landowners within the
boundaries of the District who have similarly covenanted with
the D~stnct. by securing a reliable region-wide water source. and
its attendant ~ncreased property values. The boundands of the
District are described In Exhibit "C" of that certain Agency
Agreement recorded m the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside as Document No 398782 ra> me Distrio: o- OCtODe'
22 1992, which IS Incorporated herera ray reference Linedwho'
is the owner of land which Is affected by the covenants o; this
Agency Agreement and' is descrlbec in Exnlp:t "t- ~D Tn~
covenants of this Agency Agreement snal: de DIROIR_C UDC-
successive owners of the lane oescrloed in Exhsra~: "A e' ~
interest therein Or a bertion thereof for the Deneht Of the Disthe,
land and facilities and other landowners who have s~mdarty
covehinted with the D~stnct. lc} The parties agree that the acts
required by th~s Agency Agreemen: relate to the use repair
maintenance and improvement O~ the long described ~n Exmpzt
"A". (d) The parties agree that the Agency Agreemen! snarl be
recorded at the County Recorder s Oft~ce o~ RIverside County ft
is further agreed that this Agency Agreement snal, not be
effective until it is recorded at the o~Ece of tne R~versloe County
Recorder. and crabsent for recordatlon is nereev giver
SECTION 10. In the event Landowner snail conve~ transfer or
m any manner alienate title to all Or any perhen ot the real
proper~y of Landowner iracited within the DEStnCt. the successors
in interest in the fee Simple estate or any lessor estate oT Said
real property shall execute an Agency Agreement m tne ~oentlcal
form hereof as a condition precedent to said transfer: proweed
however, non-compliance with sa~d condition snail in no w~se de
Construed to annul or terminate the agency created hereby and
all rights and duties hereunder snail De bindrag on me assigns
and successors In interest of the reai property of Landowner
located within the D~stnct
SECTION 11. If any one or more of the terms prows~ons
covenants or condffions of this Agency Agreement snail to any
extent be declared invalid. unenforceable, void or voidable for
any reason whatsoever by a court of competent ~unsd~ctlon+ the
findrag or order or decree of which becomes final, none of the
remaining terms. provisions, covenants and con01tsons of this
Agency Agreement snail be affected thereby and each provision
of this Agency Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to th~
fullest extent permitted by law
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
above written.
City of Temecula
P'Lan~owner
CORPORATESEALi
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
ATTEST:
Secretary:
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
By:
General Manager
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PALA COMMUNITY PARK
Lots 87, 88 and 89, of Tract No. 21067, in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State
of California, as shown by map on file in Book 231 of Maps, Pages 41 through 48, inclusive,
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of said County.
pwl 3\agdrpt\94\O927\pw93-O3.uty
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on
Tuesday, September 13, 1994, 8:59 P.M. at the Temecula Community Recreation Center,
30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California, Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT: 5
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberts, Stone,
Parks
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson, City
Clerk June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Mu~oz to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
1.1 Approve the minutes of August 9, 1994.
1.2 Approve the minutes of August 23, 1994.
The motion was unanimously carried.
2. RDA Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Criteria
Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney presented the staff report.
Agency Member Stone asked legal counsel if he has a conflict on this item based on
his ownership of property in Old Town. City Attorney Peter Thorson ruled no
conflict exists since no specific property in Old Town Temecula is involved.
Theresa McLeod, 42200 Main Street, No. F128, spoke in favor of leaving the loan
criteria as it stands with a $100,0001imit.
Agency Member Stone stated the City is not a bank and emphasized his
commitment to the $100,000 limit.
RDAMIN/09/13/94 1 O8/29/94
Redevelopment Aaency Minutes September 13, 1994
Agency Member Mu~oz voiced his support of the $100,000 limit.
Agency Member Birdsall requested that a site map and documentation of bank
denial of funding be added to the loan application package and check list.
Chairperson Parks stated there needs to be a method to review projects on an
individual basis, perhaps through a different program. He emphasized the benefits
of projects that clearly meet redevelopment goals and reinvest a portion of the
$14,000,000 redevelopment funds back into the community.
Agency Member Roberts suggested that larger loans should be referred to Riverside
County Economic Development funding.
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to
direct staff to maintain the policy without change in the amounts authorized and
further directed that a requirement for a site map, and documentation of bank denial
of funding be added to the loan application package and check list.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberrs, Stone
NOES:
1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Parks
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Executive Director Ron Bradley informed the Agency the proposed bylaws for the Main
Street Program have been submitted to the Old Town Merchants Association for review.
He also reported that the in-house technical work has been completed to assist them with
the recruitment for the Main Street Director. He stated the package will be going to them
this week for their review and comment and will be shared with the Agency.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
Agency Member Birdsall asked that the Agency Members see the documentation before it
is distributed, because of the concerns she had outlined. She asked if the existing
organization will become the Main Street Organization or whether a new organization will
be formed.
Executive Director Bradley explained that the Main Street Program will stand on its own as
a new organization and what the Old Town Merchants Organization choose to do is up to
them. He said that concerns of the organization are being met and the program will be
agendized for Agency Review and input.
RDAMIN/09/13~94 2 08~29~94
Redevelooment Aaencv Minutes Seotember 13, 1994
Chairperson Parks requested that the RTC apartment project be placed on the agenda for a
status report.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Roberrs to adjourn
at 9:25 P.M. to a meeting on September 27, 1994, 8:00 PM. The motion was
unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
Chairperson Ronald J. Parks
City Clerk June S. Greek
RDAMIN/09/13/94 3 08/29/94
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
A regular meeting of the City of Temeeula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on Tuesday,
September 27, 1994, 8:16 P.M. at the Temeeula Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista
Road, Temecula, California, Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT: 3
ABSENT: 2
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Stone, Parks
Mufioz, Roberrs
Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson, City Clerk
June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to approve Consent
Calendar Items 1 and 2.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 2
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Stone, Parks
AGENCY MEMBERS: None
AGENCY MEMBERS: Mufioz, Roberrs
Minutes
1.1 Approve the minutes of September 7, 1994.
Final Version of the International Rectifier Owner Participation Agreement
2.1 Approve the revised Owner Participation Agreement for International Rectifier.
RDAMJNI09127194 1 08~29~94
Redevelopment Aclencv Minutes
AGENCY BUSINESS
September 27, 1994
h was moved by Agency Member Birdsall, seconded by Agency Member Stone to continue Items 3
and 5 to the meeting of October 11, 1994.
Contract Amendment to Provide Visual Impact Analysis in the EIR for Old Town
Redevelopment Project
Appropriation and AuthOrization to Release Funds for Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign
Lease
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 2
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Stone, Parks
AGENCY MEMBERS: None
AGENCY MEMBERS: Mufioz, Roberrs
Status Report on Proposed Purchase of Rancbo West Apartments
Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report.
Agency Member Birdsall suggested that if the City does purchase these apartments, a couple
of units be used as a mini recreation center. She explained this type of facility has been very
successful in other cities and information is available through the League of California Cities.
Therese McLeod, 42200 Main Street, No. F128, addressed the Agency regarding the
importance of quality apartment management and recommended retaining the current
management company of the Rancho West Apartments if the City acquires this property.
Chairperson Ron Parks ordered the item received and filed.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
None given.
RDAMINI09127194 2 08/29/94
Redevelopmerit Aaencv Minutes
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
September 27, 1994
Executive Director Ron Bradley reported that the Buffman Hot Line has received 125 calls on both
sides of the issue. He thanked the citizens for their input and encouraged everyone to participate.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to adjourn at 8:30
P.M. to a meeting on October 11, 1994, 8:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
ATYE S T:
Chairperson Ronald J. Parks
City Clerk June S. Greek
RDAMINI09127194 3 08/29194
ITEM 2
CITY MANAGER ~", [
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
Redevelopment Agency Board Members
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
DATE:
October 11, 1994
SUBJECT:
Contract Amendments to Provide a Visual Impact Analysis in the
EIR for the Old Town Redevelopment Project
RECOMMENDATION:
It is requested that the Redevelopment Agency Board authorize the City Manager to:
(1)
Approve an amendment to the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to add
a visual impact analysis into the Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town
Redevelopment Project; and,
(2)
Increase the amount of the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates by
$9,887.96; and,
(3)
Approve an amendment to the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo to
perform additional building design services needed to support the visual impact
analysis; and,
(4)
Increase the amount of the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo by
$13,000.
BACKGROUND:
On May 31, 1994, the Redevelopment Agency approved the contract with Tom Dodson &
Associates to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town Redevelopment
(Buffman) Project. On June 27, 1994, City staff held a Public Scoping Meeting to solicit
citizen input on the topics and issues that should be included in the EIR. During the meeting,
several people expressed a concern that the proposed project, including the Western Bypass
Corridor, would have a significant adverse impact on the area's visual character.
Based upon these comments, staff determined that adding a visual analysis into the EIR was
necessary to adequately address the community's concerns. As a result, staff requested that
Tom Dodson contact a firm experienced in computer assisted visual analysis and have them
submit a proposal to the City. A Riverside-based firm, Geographics, submitted a proposal in
August to perform a comprehensive Aesthetic and Visual Analysis. A copy of the Geographics
proposal is included in Attachment No. 1.
In the process of preparing the scope of work for the visual impact analysis, a need for
additional information on the locations and shapes of the proposed arena and hotels was
identified. This additional design work will allow the visual impact analysis to include more
than "wire box" outlines of the proposed facilities. This would help the Planning Commission,
City Council, and general public to more easily assess the potential impacts of this project.
A copy of the scope of work for this proposed contract amendment is included in Attachment
No. 2.
During the September 7th meeting, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency approved the
transfer of $65,000 to the RDA Consulting Account with the stipulation that all additional
consultant contracts be presented to the City Council/Redevelopment Agency for their
approval. These proposed contract amendments are some of the additional anticipated
consultant expenses included in staff's presentation at the September 7th Workshop. It is
staff's opinion that this analysis is needed to ensure that the EIR for the Old Town
Redevelopment Project is complete, provides needed information to the Council and
community, and is technically defensible.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approving this contract amendment would increase the current contracts with Tom Dodson
& Associates from $75,800 to $85,687.96 and with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo from
$54,62Oto $67,620. No additional funds are being added to the contract with Tom Dodson
& Associates to cover Dodson's extra expense of adding the Geographic analysis work ~nto
the EIR. One half of the cost of these contact amendments would be funded by The Zev
Buffman Group under the existing agreement with T.Z.B.G. Inc.
Attachments:
1. Geographics Proposal - Page 3.
2. Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo Proposal - Page 4.
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT ORDER NO.
The Agreement dated May 31, 1994, between the City of Temecula and Tom Dodson &
Associates (herein referred to as "Agreement") is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1.
The approved Scope of Work of the Agreement (Exhibit A) is hereby amended to
include the work activities described in Exhibit 1 of this Amendment. The work
activities in Exhibit 1 are added to the Scope of Work as Task 8.
Section 2.
Section 3 of the Agreement, Payment, is hereby amended to increase the total (not-to-
exceed) cost of the contract from $75.800 to $85.688.
Section 3.
All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shah remain the same.
The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Date and Year above written.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TE1VIECULA
By: By:
Tom Dodsom President
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
A'I-rI:~ST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
EXHIBIT NO. 1
WORK PLAN.
AESTHETIC A~NrD VISUAL ANALYSIS TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
OLD TOWN RE_DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AUGUST 2, 1994
Introduction
This proposal oudines the approach and methodology for the analysis of aesthetic and visual
impacts for the Old Town Redevelopment Project EIR. The analysis is limited to the portions of
the proposed project with the highest potential for aesthetic impacts--the Wild West Arena, two
major proposed hotels, and the construction of the Western By-pass Road in the vicinity of the
p.roposed~ structures.
These portions of the project axe located in a visually sensitive area. They are visible from the
elevated portions of Interstate 15 and Rancho California Road and serve as part of the mountainous
backdrop to many views.of Old Town Temecula.
Geographies proposes a visual and aesthetic analysis methodology consisting of six major
components:
· Comprehensive site analysis
· Photographic documentation
· Visual simulations
· Written analysis of the aesthetic impacts
· Aesthetic mitigation measures
· Light and glare analysis
I. Comprehensive Site Anah'sis
The goal of the Compi'ehensive Site Analysis is to provide baseline data on the aesthetic
opportunities and constraints of the site in its existing condition. This data provides an analytical
framework for detailed analysis of aesthetic issues and impacts.
A,
The analysis will begin with the establishment of key viewpoints. It is expected
that as many as six Viewpoints will be required to represent critical views of the
site.
A written viewshed analysis of the site will be conducted. as viewed from the key
viewpoints. The viewshed analysis will identify both areas of high visual
prominence and sensitivity within the study area, as well as areas of lesser visual
sensitivity.
4178 CHESTNUT STREI=:i
II~fl=i'.l|[s]~l~l,'l ~'l~,.?' 'ibm FACSIMILE 909 369 8837
II. Photographic' Documentation
Color photographs well be produced depicting existing conditions on the study area as viewed from
the key viewpoints identified in the previous analysis. As noted, as many as six viewpoints are
anticipated to be required.
Color photographs will be ha.ken from eye level with a medium format camera eqUipped with a lens
that approximates as closely as possible the view as seen by the unaided human eye. The
photographs will be rephotographed as black-and whim PMTs using a large format process camera
for reproduction in the final report
III. - Color 'Visual Simulations -.
Large scale visual simulations will be produced precisely illustrating the impacts of specific
development proposals, as viewed from two of the six analysis viewpoints identified in the
proceeding analysis. It is anticipated that the visual simulation views will be from locations on the
two major traffic arteries with high degrees of expsure to the project--Interstate 5 and Rancho
California Road. The aim of the simulations is to realistically portray the eventual appearance of
the proposed development. including grading, roadway improvements, structures, and other
visually significant project features. The visual simulations will use color photographic images,
ivith project additions realistically rendered on the surface of the enlargements. In the absence of
specific architectural plans. typical buildings or building envelopes will be rendered in a manner
agreed upon in consultation with the project proponent anc~ project architect.
The visual simulations (ragether with photographs depicting existing conditions from the same
viewpoint) will be produced at a scale suitable for us~ in public hearings -- 30" x 40" -- and will
be rephotographed as black-and white PMTs using a large format process camera for reproduction
in the Environmental Impact Report.
IV. Written Anah'sis
The written technical report will document existing conditions, project impacts, and mitigation
measures in compliance with CEQA and local roles to implement CEQA. Determination will be
made whether mitigation measures will reduce impacts to insignificance and provide criteria for
significance.
The detailed environmental analysis will employ a general framework drawn from the Vi,qual
Contrast Rating $vStem methodology developed by the Bureau of Land Management, to.tether
withconcepts drawn from Scenic Oualitv Evaluation methodology.
The following are descriptions of proposed written analysis methodologies.
The Contrast Rating System was developed by the Bureau of Land Management in
its Visual Resource Manaeernent System.
This contrast rating system is used to measure the degree of contrast.between the
existing landscape and human addition to it.
The process segregates a landscape into its major'features, defined within the BLM
system as land]water surface, vegetation, and human additions. Each landscape
feature in turn, is divided into its basic elements of form, line, color, and texture.
The Contrast Rating compares the landscape addition with existing conditions,
feature by feature, element by element according to the degree of contrast: strong,
moderate. we~k, or none
Visual Contrast
Negligible
Negligible
Definition
Object ks visible in clear conditions but
otherwise unnoticeable.
Object is evident but not particularly
noticeable.
Weak
· Object is Cleariy seen but seldom prominent
in relation to the overall scene.
Moderate'
Object is prominent or codominant in the
overall seen& but is the focus of attention
onl9 in occasional conditions.
S~ong
Focus of attention in most views.
Extreme Dominates all views completely.
Using this methodology, thd rep6rt will determine the visual impacts of the
pi'oposed project.
The Scenic Quall.w of the Existing 'Landscape
Scenic Quality. Evaluation is a methodolqgy which has been developed over the past '
30 years to assess the aesthetic quality of a landscape in objective terms. What had
been considered extremely subjective has been found to be identifiable, consistent. '
qualifies that can be cle.o21y described and weighted. The Scenic Quality Evaluation
methodology is based on these four basic criteria:
varie_ty includes the number of objects in a landscape, their distribution. and
relationship in terms of the scale between them.. Landscapes with
considerable variety have the potential of possessing high levels of scenic
quality. Variety is in opposition to monotony, where the' repetition of a
limited number of visual elemenxs can be uninteresting.
Vividne~ is that qu',~ity in the visual landscape which has the power to
create a lasting impression, The most obvious source of vividness is
contrast4 ff it avoids confusion.
Unity is the balanced, orderly, harmonious quality of combined landscape
elements. A unified landscape is not the simple sum of i.ts elements, but
rather a balanced compatibility between components.
lJniqueness is 'the scarc!ty of an object or landscape in a physiographic
region, Unique objects can be of physical, biological or human interest.
3
These four factors act in complex concert to create the visual quality of a landscape.
Variety and vividness can lead to higher- visual quality, but only if they do not
diminish the unity of the scene. A great range of variety containing vivid visual
elements may produce an extraordinary landscape if unified, or the scene may be a
disorderly clutter if there is no unity. On the other-hand, a strongly unified
landscape can be a visual monotone if it does not contain variety and vi~.'idness.
The presence of unique elements can add value to any lanclscape.
V, Visual MitigatiOn Measures
A detaileli range of visual mitigation options will be developed as required for sensitive areas
within the project site. Additional mitigation measures of a broader and more conceptual nature
will also be outlined. '
Recommended mitigation measures may address grading, road alignments, architectural elements
and massing, height/bulk limits, use of materials, and landscaping, li_ohtino. q, i~dscaping, and
project effects on adjacent hillsides.
Determination will be made ~0ncerning the'impact of the project following implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures.
VI~ Light and Glare Analysis
A comprehensive light and glare analysis '&'ill be performed. Determinations will be made
concerning potential light ahd glare impacts on surrounding areas. The issue of potential project
light pollution which could adversely affect astronomical observation at 'Mount Palomar
Observator,J, will also be addressed. Mitigation measures will be recommended as required.
4
COST.PROPOSAL
AESTHETiC AND VISUAL ANALYSIS TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
OLD TOWN lIEDEVELOPMENT PRO/ECT
AUGUST 2, 1994
III.
Visual Analysis
A. ' Field and Photography Time 12 hours x $60.00/hour
B. Analysis/Report Writin~
Alternatives Analysis/Response to Comments
32 hours x $60.00/hour
Photographic Documentation
A. Photographic Processing and Enlargements
B. PMTs for inclusion in report
30" x 40" Visual Simulations
A. Photographic Prtyzessing and Enlargements
.Per Simulation $ 174.00
Tax $ 13.49
x two simulations
.(before and after of two views, a lotal of four prints)
B. Simulation Production
$. 720.00
$ 1,920.00
$ 112.00
$ .120.00
$ 7~9.96
S 5,400.00
C ,
P~frs for inclusion in report
Mounting
54.00
92.00
IV. RepOrt Graphics
Visual Analysis Map
6 hours x $40.0 0/hour
Meeting Attendance
Project (5oordination Meetings
8 hours x $60.0O/hour
TOTAL
$ 240.00
k 480.00
$ 9,887.96
5
Additional meeting attendance or attendance as required atpublic hearings will be billed hourly at
$60.00/hour.
PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT
Douglas McCulloh will serve as project manager and principal investigator for this project, Scott
Meek and Carole Buchheim will be responsible for technical graphics production. Photographic
processing will be subc6ntracted to Custom Graphics of Santa Aria.
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT ORDER NO.
The Agreement dated June 14, 1994, between the City of Temecula and Wimberly Allison
Tong & Coo (herein referred to as "Agreement") is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1.
The approved Scope of Work of the Agreement (Exhibit A) is hereby amended to
include the work activities described in Exhibit 1 of this Amendment.
Section 2.
Section 3 of the Agreement, Payment, is hereby amended to increase the total (not-to-
exceed) cost of the contract from $54,620 to $67,620.
Section 3.
All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain the same.
The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Date and Year above written.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TEMECULA
By: By:
Michael R. Paneri, AIA
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
EXHIBIT NO. 1
SCOPE OF WORK
Our scope of work will ~ddtess the area of the West Side Specific Plan nnd include the
Con~pt Dasiin of the ~ Phase I ~,,,~ Phase ~1 Herds, and the commercial and
residential compon~ts of the project to the south, along the proposed We~rn Bypass
Cotrlder. The pu~o~ of the P~-Concept Design, is to establish buildin8 fotX printing.
Kale and mmin~, and preliminary architectural design, d~picting the character of esr. h
proj~t component- This in~,,,,ation will b~ ues~ by C~ogrephius to illustr~m the probable
buildin~ ¢on.fi~uretinns and their impact on the views in their photoFaphic documents.
Although, the~ are many alt=rnatives that should be nonsid~td at a funtr~ ~te, for this
effo~ WAT~'G will prepare one (1) Pre-eon~ept Design alternative, which refl,~ts a high
degree of impeel; to the exittang site. The teem agreed that this "worst case scenario" was
appropriats to allow the most flexibility in the final dmign of the project components. This
scenario may mean that the site is mass graded and padded with low priorit), ~ven w
utilizing the natural tefiain and topography that exist. We will also assume that thc
preliminary western bypass design, which was provided to us by you, will be used.
The n~sult of this effort will be ~e following delivffabtes.
1. A Sitz Plan at I :50 scale, dcpicling building footprinu, parking lots, landscaped trees,
significant site cin:ulation and sugared grading modifications.
2. Building Messing Elevations and/or W'i~ Diagrams at 1:50 scale, which convey ~e vertical
height and possible roof configurations of each Fojeet component.
3. Indicative Architectural El~atioas at l/J6 - 1/32'-1'0' scale, showingpoffions of the
proposed architectu~ for each building component. This will include suggestions for
building color, materials, fenaswation, roof lines and other significant architectual detuiis
that visually impact the view. it was agreed, ~nt ~ese elevations Would be created along
the norffi/south frontage facing Old Town, where the majority of the visual imp,,~t study
photographs will be taken.
Our effort will also includes time m r~view thes~ Pre-Concepmal designs with the Ctv/, Zev
Buffman and Gene Hancock as ~ey develop. In addton, we will coord inst~ with C.~Faphics
fnroughout the process and particularly during our final pmssntetion phase. Please let me know if
~u have any further questions.
PROFESSIONAl.
The fees for this work have been divided into two pans, since there is concern abom the
total amount or fees expanded in addition to soma question regarding the level of detail
which should be shown on the photographs.
For Items numbered I and 2 described above, the fee will be $8,500.00. For Item 3, ~e fee
will be $3.500.00. The estimated reintbursable expenses will be $1.000.00.
ITEM 3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY MANAGER~
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
Redevelopment Agency Board
Ronald E. Bradley, Executive Director
October 11, 1994
Appropriation and Authorization to Release Funds for Old Town Specific
Plan Billboard Sign Lease
Prepared by Harwoood Edvalson:
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council appropriate $20,000 to Redevelopment Agency Account # 280-199-
999-5264,and authorize payment of the Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease for two
billboards in an amount not to exceed $20,000.
BACKGROUND:
On February 8, 1994, the City Council took action to adopt the Old Town Specific Plan. One
of the plan's components is an implementation plan. As part of the implementation plan, the
Old Town Capital/Promotional Improvements Program - 1994-2000 identifies a four year
program for assistance in leasing billboards along Interstate 15. The assistance program is
designed to use diminishing City participation to help promote the Old Town business district
through billboard advertising.
The City has received a request from the Old Town Temecula Main Street Association for
release of funds to assist with the billboard lease. The billboard basic lease in FY 93-94 was
$2,000 per month. In that fiscal year, the Agency contributed 50% of the base rate for the
billboard lease totalling ~12,000.
As seen on the attached pages of the plan, the Agency's contribution for Fiscal Year 1994-95
is estimated at $20,000. The Old Town Specific Plan anticipates two billboards along the
Interstate, one north and one south. With the current lease rate of $1600 per month, the
amount requested by the Main Street Association will pay for 50% of the annual lease rate
for two signs, or 100% of the annual lease rate for one sign. The Agency's contribution of
100% for one sign would be contrary to the concept of diminishing Agency participation as
identified in the specific plan. Future years of the plan anticipate reduced annual assistance
of fifteen thousand, and seventy five hundred dollars (see attached).
In a separate action, Staff has additionally recommended that the City Council adopt a
resolution requesting Caltrans to install freeway guide signs identifying the Temecula Old
Town business district.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
If the Council desires to fund this program, it is necessary to appropriate $20,000 from RDA
Unreserved Fund Balance to Account # 280-199-999-5264.
1. Year One - 1994 (Cont'd.)
First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements
Conduct first year design studies for
intersection realignment and construction of
a bridge over Murrieta Creek with two lane
facility and installation of traffic signals at
Front Street
Old Town Sixth St:feet Parking Area
Provide public parking at Sixth and Front
Streets area of Old Town. First year dgsign
studies.
b. Economic Development Programs/Descriptions
Old Town Facade Improvement Program*
Provides grants or loans to eligible
rehabilitation work to commercial facades.
*Program described in greater detail in
previous section of Specific Plan
Establish Main Street Organization/
Coordinator/Office
Organization of Board of Directors, Articles
of Incorporation and Bylaws. Salary for
coordinator. Office lease/office costs.
Billboard Sign Lease
The City in conjunction with the Old To'am
Merchants or Chamber of Coiiimerce seek to
lease and advertise Old Town on two
billboards along 1-15 - one to the north of
Old Town and one to the south. City
provides 50% of billboard's base rate for
first year, with decreasing involvement in
future years. Merchants contribute other
50% of billboard lease rate and all
administrative costs and sign design. City
approval necessary.
V-37
Estimated Cost
$100,000
$65,315
$50,000
$75,000
City of Temecula
Old Town Specific Plan
m
m
3. Year Two - 1995
a. Studies Title/Description
Circulation - Traffic Study
New by-pass route along Diaz Road, Felix
Valdez Avenue and Pujol Street Feasibility
Study and Preliminary Cost Estimates.
CLrculation - Alignment Study
Santiago/First Street/Front Street Study to
provide engineering level alignments and
preliminary Cost Estimates.
First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements
Conduct second year studies for intersection
realignment and construction realignment
and construction of a bridge over Murrieta
Creek.
b. Economic Development Programs/Descriptions
Old Town Facade Improvement Program -
Year Two
Maintain Main Street Manager Salary/Office -
Year Two
City contribution deereases while merchant
. (BID) contribution increases.
Billboard Sign Lease - Year Two
City contffbution decreases while merchant
(BID) contribution increase.
Estimated Cost
$40,000
$30,000
$150,000
$50,000
$60,000
II
City of Temecula
Old Town Specific Plan
V - 40
Estimated Cost
1
n
il
d. Business Recruitment and RetenMon
Continue BRAG Team - Year Two
The BRAG Team needs to continue for
several years to be successful.
Business Atlzaction Program
Once the Old Town Main Street
Coordinator has developed a program of
incentives to attract and assist new
businesses to locate in Old Town,
implementation must 'be started. Loans and
loan application assistance with City Pei,iiit
processing, and assistance in meeting design
guidelines need to be provided.
4. Year Three - 1996
a. Studies Title/Descrivt~on
None Antidpated
b. Economic Development Programs/Description
Maintain Main S~zeet Manager Salary/Office -
Year Three
City contribution decreases while merchant
(BID) contribution increases.
Old Town Facade Improvement Program -
Yeaz Three
Billboard Sign Lease - Year Tkree
City contribution decreases while merchant
(BID) contribution increases.
In-Kind Services
In-Kind Services
$40,000
$50,000
City of Temecula
Old Town Specific Plan
V - 42
V - 45
Year Four - 1997 (Cont'd.)
First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements
Conduct final construction drawings/
documents.
Felix Valdez Realignment
Design studies for realignment proposal.
Reassessment of the feasibility of allowing
Sidewalk Vendors in Old Town.
b. Economic Development
Billboard Sign Lease - Final Year
Maintain Main Street Manager/Office -
Year Four
Old Town Facade Improvement Program -
Final Year
Nonconforming Sign Removal Program -
Year Two
c. Phvsical Improvements
Front Street Reconstruction Project
The City should target a centralized portion
of Front Street (between Fourth and Third)
for a similar paving and sidewalk program
to the improvements on West Main Street.
Improvements would include new paving,
curb and gutter, the board sidewalk
program,.special intersection art/paving,
and trees.
Estimated Cost
$250,000
$62,500
Unknown
$30,000
$50,000
$20,000
$370,000
City of Temecula
Old Town Specific Plan
!
[
ITEM 4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/Redevelopment Agency
Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager
October 11, 1994
Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee
Prepared by Marilyn Whisenand:
RECOMMENDATION:
1) That the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee retain the existing
committee structure of three appointed members and four elected members;
and;
2) That staff be directed to seek applications for the three appointments to the
committee and to prepare election procedures for the four elected
representBtives.
3) That the City Council appropriate $15,000 to Account #280-199-999-5225
RDA elections from Unreserved Fund Balance.
BACKGROUND:
The Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee was formed in accordance with a
stipulated judgment which resulted from a law suit between the Redevelopment Agency of the
County of Riverside and Robert Dawes (Save Historic Old Temecula Association) which was
filed when the County first adopted the redevelopment plan. The Temecula Redevelopment
Agency became a party to the lawsuit when they activated the Agency and assumed
responsibility for the redevelopment plan in July of 1991.
The original stipulated judgment requires the formation of an Old Town Redevelopment
Advisory Committee consisting of seven residents and/or business owners. Three Committee
members are to be appointed by the Council and four elected. The purpose of the Committee
is to review redevelopment actions proposed to be undertaken by the City/Agency within the
Old Town area and provide an advisory report to the City/Agency.
In February of 1994, an interim stipulation was prepared which proposed to modify the original
judgement with respect to the makeup of the committee by decreasing the number of
members from seven to five and requiring that all members be appointed by the City Council
Although these changes were agreed upon by the parties to the lawsuit, the revised stipulation
has not been filed with the Court and it is still possible to make adjustments.
The Committee has reviewed the proposed changes to the stipulated judgement and has
expressed their strong preference to remain a seven-person body; four elected by Old Town
residents/business persons and three appointed by the City Council.
Staff has researched the procedures to be followed for an election which would be designed
after elections held by other redevelopment agencies for project area committees. Costs are
estimated at $2,000 for staff time and from $12,000to $15,000for additional expenses such
as advertising, election management end oversight. The election would occur on a two year
cycle.
Attached is a description of the current committee makeup. Since terms have expired for all
but one of the existing committee members, it is important that staff receive direction
regarding the method the Council prefers for the appointment and/or election of the
committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimates of the cost required to hold an election for Old Town Advisory Committee members
is $2,000 for staff services and $12,000to $15,000 of associated costs.
P:%eyersk\rdacom.old