HomeMy WebLinkAbout112691 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA TEMPORARY COMMUNITY CENTER
27475 COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE
NOVEMBER 26, 1991 - 7:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 - City Hal/Main Conference Room - 43174 Business Park
Drive~ Closed session, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9Ia) re: Pulte
Homes vs. The City of Temecula and 54956.9(b) to discuss potential litigation
Next in Order:
Ordinance.' No. 91-43
Resolution: No, 91-114
CALL TO ORDER:
Invocation
Pastor Ron Bolt, Peoples Church of the Valley
Flag Salute
Councilmember Birdsall
ROLL CALL:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz, Parks
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Presentation of Cable Television Grants - Jones Intercable
Proclamation - Family Week
Proclamation - National Hospice Month
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council
on items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are
limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item
not listed on the Agenda or on the consent Calendar, a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, p/ease come forward and state vour name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request To Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Standard Ordinance Adox2tion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
I. I Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2
Minutes
RECOMMENDA T/ON.'
2. 1 Approve the minutes of November 12, 1991 as mailed.
3
Resolution ADDrOVinG LiSt of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3. 1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A.
4
City Treasurer's RePOrt for Period Endine October 31, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
4. 1 Receive and File Report
5
Combininq Balance Sheet and Statement of Exx2enditures and Revenues and Chanoes
in Fund Balance for Period Endin~7 Sez2tember 30. 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
5. I Receive and File Report
5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992
ATTACHMENT "A "
OF TIlE CITY OF TEMECULA
BUDGET AS SET FORTH IN
6
Renewal of City Liability Insurance
RECOMMENDATION:
6. I Approve renewal of contract with Insurance Company of the West to
provide General Liability, Excess Liability and Public Officials Errors and
Omission coverage.
Final Parcel Mao No. 26852
Property located on the North Side of Winchester Road at Margarita Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve Final Parcel Map No. 26852 subject to the Conditions of
Approval contained in the staff report.
8
Memorandum of Understandino with Bedford Proi)erties - Reqardin~7 Series II Bonds for
CFD 88-12
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a Memorandum of
Understanding with Bedford Properties concerning the sale of bonds in
excess of ~ 19,000,000.
9
Adootion of Standard Drawinos for Public Works Construction
RECOMMENDATION:
9, 1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON-CODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ORDINANCE AND ADOPTING STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
10
Ordinance Aoorovino Zone Chanoe No. 5740
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9142
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF
ZONE APPLICATION NO. 5740 CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-A-20 TO I-P
AND R-5 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
RIDGEPARK DRIVE, SOUTH OF RANCNO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 940-3 10-020 AND 02 1.
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 projectfs) 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.
11 Plot Plan No. 239 - Ax~olicant Rancho California Water District HeadQuarters
11.45 acre site located northwesterly of the intersection of Diaz Road and Rio Nedo.
RECOMMENDATION.'
11.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239
11.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECU/A
APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 239 TO CONSTRUCT RANCHO CALIFORNIA
WATER DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX AS FOLLOWS: 40,000
SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING; 13,000 SQUARE FOOT
SINGLE STORY WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE; 20,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE
STORY OPERA TIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING; RANCHO CALIFORNIA
WATER DISTRICT SERWCE VEHICLE STORAGE YARD AND
EMPLOYEE/VISITOR PARKING AREAS ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 11.5 + ~-
ACRES L OCA TED BETWEEN A VENIDA DE VENTAS AND WINCHESTER ROAD,
APPROXIMATELY 3/4 MILES WEST OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-024 (PARENT NO.)
12
Parcel MaD 24085 - A~Dlicant Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
73 acre site located on the westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension
of Winchester Road.
RECOMMENDA T/ON:
12. 1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085
12.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE DIAZ
ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-022.
13 Parcel Ma~ 24086 - Az2xTIicant Rancho California Citv Center Association No. I
70 acre site located on the westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension
of Winchester Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086
13.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO, 24086 TO SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 49 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE
FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL 909-120-020
14
Tentative Tract Mao No. 25892 - Az2alicant David Pearson
20 acre site located on the south side of Pauba Road, between Ynez and Margarita
Roads.
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892 TO SUBDIVIDEA 20 ACRE PARCEL INTO
34 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN YNEZ AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-090-005
COUNCIL BUSINESS
15
Pulte Homes vs City of Temecula (a challenc/e to the Citv's Sx2here of Influence
northeast of the aresent City boundarv)
RECOMMENDATION.'
15. I Consider approval of Settlement Agreement.
6
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: December 10, 1991, 7:00 PM, Temporary Temecula Community
Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SER~CES DISTRICT MEETING - (To be hew at 8:00)
Next ~ Orde~
Ordinance: No. 91-02
Resolution: No. 91-13
CALL TO ORDER:
President J. Sal Mufioz
ROLL CALL:
D/RECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Mufioz
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, p/ease come forward and state
your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes
RECOMMENDA T/ON:
1. I Approve the minutes of the meeting of November 12, 1991 as mailed.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
2
Discussion of Lease of Prox2ertv for use as Temz2orarv Senior Center and for Youth
Proorams
(Placed on the agenda at the request of Director Lindemans)
2/agenda/112691 7
11/21/91
3
Comz2rehensive Overview of Goals for Youth and Teen Programs
This report will be transmitted under separate cover.
4
Combininq Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues and ExzTenditures and Changes
in Fund Balance for Period Endino Sex2tember 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
4. 1 Receive and File Report
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT- Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT- Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting December 10, 1991, 8:00 PM, Temporary
Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive,
Temecula, California
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 91-11
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson Peg Moore presiding
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mufioz, Parks,
Moore
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, p/ease come forward and state your name
and address for the record.
AGENCY BUSINESS
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1. I Approve the minutes of the meeting of November 12, 1991
2
Combining Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues and Expenditures and ChanGes
in Fund Balance for Period Endin(7 Seotember 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
2. I Receive and File Report
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting December 10, 1991,
Temecula Community
Temecula, California
8:00 PM, Temporary
Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive,
2/~end~'l 12691 9 11/21/91
PROCLAMATIONS
AND
PRESENTATIONS
The City of Temecula
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the family has been the vehicle of survival and stability in every culture
from ancient Egypt to present-day America; and
WHEREAS, individuals first find identity within the family circle, realize their
relationship to others and to a Supreme Being, and discover there exists moral absolutes such
as truth and honest, right and wrong; and
WHEREAS, the family group is the first unit of government, the primary place where
individuals learn rules of conduct and infractions for disobedience; where respect, honor and
wholesome standards of behavior are practiced, and where individuals learn to interact,
communicate, acquire social sldlls and form and express personal views; and
WHEREAS, to focus on family, give thanks for its existence and encourage wholesome
family life, it has become traditional for the President and Congress of the United States to
proclaim the week in which Thanksgiving Day falls as "National Family Week";
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Ronald J. Parks, on behalf of the City Council of the City of
Temecula, hereby proclaim the week of November 24 through, December l, 1991 to be:
1991 California Family Week
in the City of Temecula, and encourage the celebration of this week through family reunions and
by establishing stronger family ties, reinforcing and instituting family traditions, feasting,
worshipping together and with other appropriate activities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this 261h Day of November, 1991.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
The City of Tetnecula
PR OCLAMA TION
WHEREAS, Hospice care has been demonstrated to be an humanitarian way for
terminally ill patients to approach the end of their lives in relative comfort, with appropriate,
competent, and compassionate care in an environment of personal individuality and dignity; and
WHEREAS, the hospice concept advocates care of the patient and family by attending
to their physical, emotional, social, and spiritual needs; and
WHEREAS, hospice care is provided by an interdisciplinary team of physicians, nurses,
social workers, pharmacists, psychological and spiritual counselors, and community volunteers
trained in the hospice concept of care; and
WHEREAS, The Elizabeth Hospice offers services to any patient with a life threatening
or terminal illness, living in the Temecula Valley regardless of age, race, religion, national
origin, sex, handicap or ability to pay and;
WHEREAS, there remains a great need to increase public awareness of the benefits of
hospice care;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Ronald J. Parks, on behalf of the City Council of the City of
Temecula, hereby proclaim the month of November, 1991 to be:
NATIONAL HOSPICE MONTH
in the City of Temecula, and call upon the medical community, churches and community
organizations to participate in appropriate forums, programs and activities designed to encourage
recognition and support of hospice care.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this 261h Day of November, 1991.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ITEM 1
ITEM 2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD NOVEMBER 12, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:02 PM at the
Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula,
California. Mayor Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Mu~oz, Parks
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field and City Clerk
June S. Greek.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Erik Krag, Temecula Evangelical Free Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Moore.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Parks presented a Certificate to Valor to Andrew Gonzales, who at the age of eight
rescued a three year old child from drowning in a neighborhood pool.
Mayor Parks proclaimed Thursday, November 21,1991 as "Great American Smokeout Day".
Dennis Frank of the American Cancer Society, accepted the proclamation.
PUBLIC FORUM
John Dedovesch, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, addressed the City Council asking that the traffic
signal on Ynez and Winchester Road be properly synchronized. He also requested an
explanation of a 46 cent County Tax on cable TV services, imposed within City limits.
Councilmember Birdsall explained this is a State-mandated Tax as part of concessions made
to offset fees going to the County, such as booking fees.
Joe Gareffa, 30042 Calle Halcon, addressed the City Council concerning the proposed
expenditure for an Auto Mall Sign. He asked that an explanation of Redevelopment Funds,
and what they can be used for, be given to the community. He further stated that a decision
to place a sign such as this should be carefully researched with extensive public input taken.
He suggested a display be made available and the planned location disclosed far enough in
advance to accurately gauge public opinion.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -1- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
November 12, 1991
Tony Marino, KRTM 88.9 FM, 28715 Via Montezuma, addressed the City Council regarding
the shooting incident at the Yellow Brick Road arcade. He stated the City has a problem with
weak security in this area, as well as loitering and drugs. He suggested that a 90-day curfew
be imposed at 9:00 PM, seven days a week. He further suggested that if caught after 9:00
PM, youth should be taken to jail where parents would be required to pick them up and be
subject to a fine of at least $500.
John Hunneman, KRTM 88.9 FM, 28715 Via Montezuma, stated teens have no place to go
in the City and asked that the City open a temporary Community Recreation Center and
proceed with the permanent center immediately.
Councilmember Lindemans asked that this matter be placed on the agenda by a 4/5ths vote.
City Attorney Field counseled that this item could not be placed on the agenda because it has
not been properly noticed. He stated this could be placed on the next agenda for action.
Councilmember Mufloz stated that not enough youth programs, inadequate security and lack
of adult supervision are problems that need to be addressed. He also asked that the
possibility of a temporary CRC be investigated.
Councilmember Birdsall stated that the Boys and Girls Club will be opening in approximately
two weeks. She stated the problem she sees with a 9:00 PM curfew, is the Police
Department would spend all their time dealing with curfew violators instead of handling more
serious problems.
Councilmember Moore asked staff to do research and bring back model programs that have
been successfully in other cities.
R. Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, asked that trees other than Eucalyptus be used in
future landscape designs for the City of Temecula, stating the recent fires in Sacramento were
fueled in large degree by Eucalyptus Trees.
David Ciabattoni, 41646 Avenida De La Reina, thanked the City Council for the street closure
on Avenida De La Reina, stating this has made a big difference on the safety of the residents.
He also thanked Tim Serlet for his aid in solving the problem.
Mr. Ciabattoni also addressed the City Council regarding the Public Safety Commission,
stating that this is an important Commission that deserves more authority and more assigned
staff time. He stated many of the problems being discussed tonight should be addressed by
the Public Safety Commission.
Joseph F. Seguin, 41640 Avenida De La Reina, addressed the City Council regarding City
costs. He asked that a controller be assigned, answerable only to the City Council, to reduce
costs, possibly by combining departments.
Chris Martinelli, 30255 Corte Cantania, addressed the City Council asking that concrete
suggestions be given to the Community to eradicate gangs in this City.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -2- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
November 12.1991
Paul R. Serau, 31675 Leish Lane, expressed concern about the growing crime in Temecula
and stated the Community needs to get behind the City Council and the Police Department
to solve this problem. He asked that careful consideration be given to future building in
Temecula, stating high density housing makes these problems more prevalent.
James Marpie, 19290 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, asked that the City put in applications for
grants being offered by the State for Flood Control and stated the deadline for these grants
is December 6, 1991.
Councilmember Mu~oz asked that staff get a grant application in to the State by the
December 6, 1991 deadline.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Lindemans requested that Item No. 5 be removed from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Mu~oz requested the removal of Item No. 6. Mayor Parks stated he would
abstain from Item No. 8 due to a conflict of interest.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-4, and 7-11.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
1.1
2. Minutes
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
None
None
Waive reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in
the agenda.
Approve the minutes of October 1, 1991.
Approve the minutes of October 8, 1991.
Approve the minutes of October 10, 1991.
Approve the minutes of October 22, 1991.
Approve the minutes of October 29, 1991.
Hinutes\11\12\91 -3- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
9.
November 12, 1991
Ordinance Establishing City Clerk as Custodian of City Seal and Insignia
9.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-39
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING THE CITY CLERK AS CUSTODIAN OF THE CITY SEAL AND
INSIGNIA
10. Ordinance Pertaining to Advertising Reoulations and Use of Directional Sions
10.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9140
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING
CHAPTER FOUR TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
ADVERTISING REGULATIONS AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE
USE OF DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
11.
Ordinance Reaardina ChanGe of Zone No. 17/First Extension of Time for Vestinq
Tentative Tract MaD NO. 23125
11.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9141
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 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.
17, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-A-2½ (RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL - 2½
ACRES MINIMUM) TO Rol AND R-5 (ONE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND OPEN
SPACE COMBINING ZONE - RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS) ALONG THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE
ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-330-004 AND 926-
070-020
RECESS
Mayor Parks called a brief recess to change the tape at 8:01 PM. The meeting was
reconvened at 8:02 PM.
Ninutes\l 1 \12\91 -5- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
5.
November 12.1991
Acceotance of Offer of Dedication - Portion of Via Las Colinas
City Engineer Tim Serlet introduced the staff report.
Councilmember Lindemans stated his concern on this project that it lacks two separate
access points.
David Jerik, representing the applicant, stated at the time the complex was built, the
County felt a driveway on Rancho California Road would be more of a hazard than a
help. He further stated that the City already has responsibility for half of the road and
requested that this remainder be accepted.
Councilmember Mufloz asked if it is the intention of the City to have Moraga Road go
through, why is it not being addressed at this time.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
continue this item to the meeting of November 26, 1991.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Award of Desion Contract - MarQarita Road
Councilmember Mur~oz asked the reason CFD financing might not be available. Tim
Serlet, City Engineer stated that all of the property owners may not agree.
City Attorney Field explained that a sub-zone is proposed that would be established to
tax only adjacent property owners.
Councilmember Mur~oz asked why the full width improvements design is not being
considered at this time. City Manager Dixon stated the Council could direct staff to
design the full width design.
Mayor Parks stated that he would like to approve staff recommendation to get this
project started, however he would not object to the further instruction to design the
full-width improvements.
Hinutes\11\12\91 -6- 11/19/91
Citv Council Minutes November 12.1991
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
6.1
Award a design contract for street and drainage improvements for
Margarita Road from Winchester Road to North General Kearny Road to
Robert Rein, William Frost and Associates for an amount not to exceed
$62,950.00.
6.2
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Authorize the City Manager to execute the same.
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
It was moved by Councilmember Mu~oz, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
instruct staff to design the full width improvements for the balance of the road from
General Kearny to Solana Way.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
RECESS
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
BirdsalI, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
None
None
Mayor Parks called a recess at 8:30 PM to accommodate the previously scheduled Community
Services District Meeting. The meeting was reconvened following the Community Services
District Meeting at 9:13 PM.
Councilmember Muf~oz requested the agenda be reordered to hear Item No. 21, due to the
number of people who wish to speak on this item. Hearing no objections, Mayor Parks
reordered the agenda.
21. Consideration of Traffic Alternatives - Calle Medusa
C. M. (Max) Gilliss, Special Consultant to City Manager's Office, introduced the staff
report.
Hinutes\11\12\~1 -7- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12.1991
Mayor Parks called a brief recess at 9:20 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 9:21 PM.
Gary Taylor, 40811 Calle Medusa, stated the problem on Calle Medusa is too many
cars driving too fast. He asked that this issue be made a priority.
Evonne Taylor, 40811 Calle Medusa, stated that two attempted abductions have taken
place on Calle Medusa, and asked the City Council to make this street safe for resident
children.
Nelson Betancourt, 40835 Catle Medusa, said he made a survey of residents in the
Hidden Hills area. He reported out of 231 responses, 125 people agreed that a
solution to the Calle Medusa problem is a bypass road. He requested that the City
Council move forward to complete Walcott Lane as a through street and relieve some
of the traffic on Calle Medusa.
Councilmember Mu~oz asked staff to report on this alternative. Tim Serlet, City
Engineer, stated the task force looked at the Walcott alternative, and felt that this
solution would not substantially reduce traffic on Calle Medusa. He explained that the
alternative route must be effective enough so that people will elect to use it. He
stated that Butterfield Road would provide the most relief for residents on Calle
Medusa.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
extend the meeting until 11:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
Jane Adams, 40451 Calle Medusa, stated her daughter was the child who was almost
abducted on Calle Medusa, and asked that this problem be solved.
Dennis Fritz, 39910 Jeffrey Heights Road, asked that the City Council not create a
more serious problem on another road by trying to solve the Calle Medusa problem.
He stated that if Calle Gerisol goes through, the speed limit would be raised to 55
miles per hour, thus creating a more serious problem than that on Calle Medusa.
Jay Vanderwall, 992 Carnation Avenue, Costa Mesa, stated he feels the estimates for
building Butterfield Road are much too high and quoted general figures illustrating this
point.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -8- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12, 1991
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Muf~oz to
approve staff recommendations as follows:
21.1 Approve the following Traffic and Transportation Commission
recommendations:
Extension of Margarita Road
Extension of Butterfield Stage Road
Completion of improvements at Nicolas Road and Winchester
Road
21.2 Direct staff to proceed with implementation of the approved
alternatives.
21.3
Consider recommendation to table any further action on Calla Medusa
by the City Council for a minimum 24 month period of time.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
12. Chance of Zone No. 5631 - Vestine Tentative Tract No. 25320
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, stated the applicant requests the City Council
contidue the public hearing to the City Council meeting of December 1 O, 1991.
Mayor Parks opened the public hearing at 10:17 PM.
Norman K. Dunn, 30434 Colina Verde, addressed the City Council in opposition to the
proposed Zone Change, based on high densities and water shortages.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
continue this item to the meeting of December 10, 1991.
Hinutes\11\12\~1 -9- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muf~oz,
Parks
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
November 12, 1991
RECESS
Mayor Parks called a recess at 10:20 PM. The meeting was reconvened at 10:31 PM.
13. Chanae of Zone No. 5470
Mayor Parks stated he would abstain from this item due to a conflict of interest and
turned the meeting over to Mayor Pro Tern Birdsall.
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall opened the public hearing at 10:35 PM.
Tony Terrich, Tomack Engineering, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant
concurs with staff recommendation.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall closed the public hearing at 10:35 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
approve staff recommendations 13.1 and 13.2 as follows:
13.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 5740.
13.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-111
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5740 CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-A-
20 TO I-P AND R-5 ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
RIDGEPARK DRIVE AND SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND
KNOWN AS A$SESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 940-310-020 AND 021.
Hinutes\11\12\91 -10- 11/19/91
November 12, 1991
City Council Minutes
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mui%oz
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendation 13.3 as follows:
13.3
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9142
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF
ZONE APPLICATION NO. 5740 CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-A-20 TO I-P
AND R-5 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
RIDGEPARK DRIVE, SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS, 940-320-020 AND 021
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
14. Second Extension of Time, Vestinq Tentative Tract Mao No. 23125
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Mayor Parks opened the public hearing at 10:38 PM.
Ron Williams, Ranpac, representing the applicant, stated the applicant concurs with
staff recommendation.
Mayor Parks closed the public hearing at 10:39 PM.
Hinutes\11\12\91 -11- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12, 1991
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendations as follows:
14.1
Accept Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Second Extension of
Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125.
14.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-112
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 23125, A 212 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH 13 OPEN
SPACE LOTS ON 88.4 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DE
PORTOLA ROAD AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-330-004 AND 926-070-020
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCIL BUSINESS
Hearing no objects from Council, Mayor Parks reordered the agenda to hear Items 19 and 20
since public "Request To Speak" forms have been turned in on these items.
19. Alionment of Butterfield Staoe Road Study
Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer, introduced the staff report.
John Moramarco, 32720 Rancho California Road, representing Callaway Winery,
stated that the level of the road at a 14 foot maximum is acceptable to the winery.
He expressed concern about the number of homes to be built west of the road, stating
that if the canyons are filled, air flow will be blocked, and wind machines would
become necessary to prevent freezing.
Mayor Parks asked if this information could be shown on the environmental
documentation for future developments. Doug Stewart stated this could be made a
key criteria.
City Manager Dixon further stated that the problem of air flow through this area will
also be addressed on the general plan.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -12- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
November 12. 1991
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve the vertical alignment for Butterfield Stage Road north of Rancho California
Road adjacent to Callaway Winery and direct staff to proceed with processing the
second extension of time for Vesting Tract Map 23103.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
20. Consideration of Chanae of Zone 5425 and Tentative Tract MaD No. 24308
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Scotty McDowell, 42601 Pradera Way, asked that the City Council approve staff
recommendation and forward a recommendation of denial to the County of Riverside
for Change of Zone 5425. He stated this zone change would be inconsistent with
SWAP and would permanently damage the view in this area.
Mayor Parks stated he would like to see the City Council adopt a policy that would
permit some uses by the property owners in this area.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
20.1
Direct staff to forward a recommendation of denial to the County of
Riverside Planning Department relative to Change of Zone No. 5425 and
Tentative Tract Map No. 24308.
20.2
Direct staff to formally request that the County of Riverside adopt a
policy which provides that whenever the County considers a project
having any impact upon a local jurisdiction, proper notification be given
to that jurisdiction. Further that the community be allowed to provide
input on the project prior to action by the Board of Supervisors.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Ninutes\11\12\91 -1]* 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12.1991
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to extend
the meeting until 11:30 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
15. Maraarita Villaae Soecific Plan/Rancho California Road Reimbursement Aareement
City Engineer Tim Serlet introduced the staff report.
Councilmember Mur~oz asked the reason for the $2,000,000 limit. City Engineer Serlet
stated that this amount is based on the latest engineer's estimate for the project.
City Attorney Field stated this agreement modifies the original agreement with the
County of Riverside to add the additional improvements needed. He stated that the
$2,000,000 cap was needed to negotiate this contract.
16.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendations as follows:
15.1
Approve an agreement with the developers of the Margarita Village
Specific Plan (Bedford Development Corporation, Marlborough
Development Corporation, Margarita Village Development Company and
Tayco) to reimburse the City for the construction of certain
improvements to the I-15/Rancho California Road Freeway Ramps and
Rancho California road from Margarita Road to westerly of Moraga
Road; through the imposition of an additional building permit fee of
approximately $2,600 per residential unit; and
15.2
The motion was carried by the following vote:
Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
NOESi I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufloz
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Legal Advocacy in Suooort of Other Cities
City Attorney Field introduced the staff report.
City Manager Dixon asked that the City Manager be advised and be in agreement with
each case.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve a policy to authorize the City Attorney to join in Amicus briefs which are
"urged" by the League of California Cities with the stipulation that the City Manager
shall be advised of and approve each case.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -14- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12, 1991
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muf~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Parks called a brief recess at 11:31 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 11:32 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to extend
the meeting to 11:45 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
17. ADoointment of Old Town Historic Review Board
June Greek, City Clerk, introduced the staff report.
Councilmember Muf~oz questioned the reason for recommending Christina Grina as an
alternate.
Councilmember Lindemans responded that the committee felt that Mrs. Grina would
serve better working on the Master Plan of Old Town where her expertise would be
fully utilized.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve committee recommendation and directed the staff to place changes to the
policy guidelines on a future agenda.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
18. Change of Zone No. 19 - Old Town Historical District Boundary
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -15- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes
November 12, 1991
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
direct staff to establish a boundary proposal for the Old Town Temecula Historical
District expansion with the addition of the lots on both sides of Front Street south of
First Street; the 96 acre Margarita Canyon parcel southwest of the I-15 interchange
and Front Street; and all of the lots located on both sides of Sixth Street west of the
creek; notice all property owners within proposed boundary and schedule for public
hearing by the Council.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
None given.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
After a brief discussion, it was decided by full concurrence that Council would meet in
December on the 10th and 17th instead of the regularly scheduled meeting of December 24,
1991.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Birdsail to adjourn at
11:52 PM to the meeting on December 19, 1991, at 5:30 at City Hall, Main Conference
Room. The motion was unananimously carried.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Hinutes\11\12\91 -16- 11/19/91
ITEM 3
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN
EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been
audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amounts of
$807,299.10
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOFrED, this 26th day of November, 1991.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Resoa 221
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
11/07/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
1 I/13/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/15/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/18/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/14/91 PAYROLL
$596,845.70
$25,22.1.85
$53,932.62
$38,521 ,O2
$92,777.91
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR THE 11/26/91 COUNCIL MEETING:
$807,299.10
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
001 GENERAL
016 RDA
019 TCSD
029 TCSD
042 SKR(K-RAT/
TOTAL BY FUND:
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
I. r.,~NRyF~iNANC~OFFi~:~!ER~
I, MARK OCHEN~(~3Z;<O~
$691,118,88
$3,422,18
$91,704.54
$16,357.00
$4,696.50
$807,299.10
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
11107/91 City of lemecula
Fiscal Year: 1992 Chec[ Register
Check Sate Vendor Name
Invoice Date PIO Sate Sescription Gross Siscount Net
00008428 1k105191POSTNAST POSTN~TER
110591 11/05191 11/05/91 POSTAGE/BULK NAILING 421.40 0.00 421.40
Check TotaIs:
00008430 11106191 RIVERHAS RIV, ~. HABITAT ~MSE~ATION
110691 11/06/91 11106/91 K-RAT PAY~NT F~ OCTOBER
Check Totals=
00008431 11107191HUNTESCR HUNTIN6TON ESCROW ERVICE
11/7191 11/07/91 11/07/91 BUS SARN/ESCROll
421.40 0.00 421,40
4,696.~0 0.00 4,696.50
4,696.50 0.00 4~696.50
454,455.00 -0.00 454,455.00
Check Totals:
00008432 11/07/91A~ISTAM ASSISTANCE BUILD OF TENECULA
103191 10/31/91 10131191 B~LANCE OF CS FON)INBI1991
454,455.00 0.00 454,455.00
1,366.12 0.00 1,3~.12
00008433 11/07/91 BENEFIT BENEFIT ANERIC~
11/01R1 I0/15/91
10/31191 10131191
Check Totals:
10/15/910CTONER
10/31/91 OCTOBER 1013il91
1,).12 0.00 1,3&6.12
1,655.71 S.OS 1,655.71
4,901.49 0.00 4,901.49
Check Tatals:
00008434 11/07/91 BESTFORt. BEST FOR LESS TIRES
11798 10/17/91 10964 10/14/91 TIRE FOR CHEV.4X4 IE337874
6,557.20 0.00 6~557.20
73.25 0.00 73.25
Check Totals:
00008435 11107191 BIRDSALL BIRDSALL, PATRICIA
103191 10131/91 10/31R1 REINB FOR PHONE CHGS
73.25 0.00 73.25
14.00 0.00 14.00
00008436 11/07/91 CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
4947/9472 10/31191 10626
37212 10131/91
2303/3883 I0/02/91 10626
Check Totals=
07/01/91 IOI111911PUSLIC NOTICES
10/31/91 SUBSCRIPTION/YEAR
07/01/91 LEGAL NOTICES/BCT,
14.00 0,00 14.00
115.38 0.00 115.38
48,00 0.00 48,00
37,56 0.00 37,56
00008437 11/07/91CASTRO!K CASTRO,
103191 i0/31/91
Check Totals:
KAREN
10/31/91 RILEABE OCTOBER
200,94 0.00 200.94
31.35 0.00 51.35
Check Totals:
00008438 11/07/91COUNTYPU COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
13142~ 10/31/91 10201 06/30/91 SUPPLIES
31.35 0.00 51.35
86.86 0.00 86.86
00008439 11107191DAVLIN DAVLIM
89-23:117 10/31/91 11001 I0108191
89-23:129 k0/23/91 11001 10/08/91
Check Totals:
TAPES FOR TRAFFIC COt(NISSION
TAPE TRAFFIC CON~ISSISN/OCT23
S6.86 0.00 86.86
11.34 0.00 11.34
130,00 0.00 130.00
Check Totals:
00008440 11/07/91EXECGALL THE EXECUTIVE GALLERY, INC.
041203401? 10/19/91 10923 09/27/91PICTURES;SLDB.&SAFETY OFFICE
141.34 0.00 141,34
59.95 0.00 59.95
00008441 11/07/91 GETPACED GET PAGED
0896047-IN 10/25/91 10987
0895868 10/10/91 0246
0895868-IN 10/10/91 0219
895868-IN 11/01/91 0228
Check Totals:
59.95 0.00 59.95
10/07/91PABER RENTAL/OCTDBER/PRDRATED 27.08 0.00 27.08
09/06/91PAGER RENTALS/NOV. 12.50 0.00 12.S0
07/15/91 PABEA RENTALS/NOV. 3150 0.00 37.50
07/01/91 PASERS/NOV. 150.00 0,00 150.00
il/07/gl City ol leeecui~ Fa?e:
Fiscal Year; 1992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description Gross Discount Net
1831 10/25191 10897 09/27/91 STEERING WHEELISAN HICKS PARK 89.09 0,00 89,09
000~454 11/07191 PETROLAN PETROU~NE
188166 10/28/91 10~/94
Check Totals:
10/2181 FUEL (PROPANE) G&S TRUCk
89,09 0,00 89.09
22.51 0.00 22.51
Check Totals:
00008455 I1/07/91R.B.EXPR R,G,EXPRESS HE~NGER SERVICE
41&l 10/01/91 0225 07101191 SERVICES FOR OCT.
41&I-CR 10131191 10131191 CREDIT NERO/EXCEEDED C.O.
22.51 0,00 22,51
275,00 O.O0 275,00
75,~- , O.OO 75,00-
0000845& 11107191RAN-CAL RAN-CAL JANITURIAL SUPPLY
1756 10/31/91 11010 10129191
4698 10122191 10898 10/01/91
0647 10/28/91 10898 10/01/91
Check Totals: 200.00 0.00 200.00
GATHROON PAPER SUPPLIES 117.38
JANI.SUPPLIES;PARK FACIL.TCSD 46.28
JANI,~PPLIESIPARK FACIL,TCSD 13,97
0.00 117,38
0.00 4&.28
O.O0 13.97
Check Totals:
00008457 11/07/91 REGENTS REGENTS OF UNIV, OF CALIF.
II/O1R1 11/01/91 11101191UCLA EXTENSION COURSE
177.63 0.00 177.63
390,00 0,00 390.00
00008458 11107/91SEARSINO SEARS INDUSTRIAL SALES
40301102 I0121191 10957 09/20/91
Check Totals: 390,00 0.00 390,00
TOOL DOX;NETAL GAUGE 489.07 0.00 489.07
00008459 11/07/91 SIRSEED SIR SPEEDY
4388 10125/91 11002
Check Totals: 489.07
10122191RUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATI0NS 328,64
0.00 489.07
0.00 328.64
Check Totals: 328.64
00008460 11/07191 STADIUMS STADIUN SPORTING GOODS
11/08/91 11/08/91 11/08/91 GIFT CERTIFICATE/SFT GALL TOU 50.00
0,00 328.64
0.00 50,00
Check Totals:
00008461 11/07/91 STETSON STETON IDENTIFICATION PRDDUC
28651-1-01 10/28191 10970 10/07/91 SIGNS FOR CITY HALL
28651-0-01 10123/91 10970 10/07/91 SIGNS FOR CITY HALL
50.00 0,00 50.00
149,79 0,00 149,79
50.18 0,00 50.18
00008462 I1107191 TEN TROP TENECULA TROPHY
10214 10/14/91 10936
Check Totals: 19~.97
10102/91 PLAQUES;GOLF TOURNANENT;IO/19 150,31
0.00 199.97
0.00 150.31
Check Totals:
0000846~ 11/07/91TEHCULAT TERECULA TOWNE ASSOC
110191 11101191 0227 07/01/91 HALL RENT/CLEANING/NOV,
150,31 0.00 150,I1
510.00 0.00 510,00
Check Totals:
00008464 11107191TOWNCTR TOWN CENTER STATIONERS
11254-0 ll/OA/91 11014 10122191 BINDERS FOR O&S
510.00 0.00 510.00
23.52 0,00 23.52
Check Totals: 23,52
00008465 11/07/91UNIGLOGE UNIGLOGE BUTTERFIELO TRAVEL
103191 10/31/91 11040 11/01/91 AIR TICKET;MONTEREY HTG;C,C. 118.00
0.00 25,52
0.00 118.00
Check Totals: 118.00 0.00 118.00
00008466 11/07/91UNUR UNUN LIFE INS. CO. OF ANERICA
103191 10/31/91 10/31/~10CIOBER INSURANCE 2j07.89 0.00 2,107.69
iI/07/9i City of Iemecu[a
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station~
Check Date Vendor
Invoice
Date
Male
PIO Date Description 6ross Discount Met
00008467 11/07/91 XEROX-2 XEROX CURPORATIGN-BILLING
530987504 11101191 0251 07/01/91
Check Totals: 2,107.69 0.00 2,107,,
LEASE COPIES/NOV. 1,182,76 0,00 1,182,76
00008468 1112&191 ALLIED ALLIED BARRICADE
118757-00 11/01/91 10980 10116191
118555-00 10151191 11004 10122191
118502-00 10/30/91 10980 10/16/91
119505-00 10130191 10788 09150191
118459-00 10/29/91 10788 09150191
Check Totals: 1,182.76 0.00 1,182.76
SIGNS & fiATERIALS AS MEEDED
8ARRICADES;CGNES;PUD,DURKG
SIGNS i MTERIAL8 AS NEEDED
SIGNG 4 RATERIALS;PUB.NURKS
SIGNS & MTER]ALS;POR.NORK8
17.95 0.00 17.95
6,558.87 0.00 &,358,87
175.35 ' 0,00 175.35
39.44 O,O0 39.44
39.07 0.00 39.07
Check Totals:
00008469 11/26/91BURKE,NN BURKE, NILLIARS & GORENSER
07291 10/23/91 10/23/91 SEPT LE6AL FEES
07282 10/22/91 10122191 SEPT. LE6AL FEES
72900 10/23/91 10/23/91 SEPT LEBAL FEES
6,&~0.68 0.00 6~630,68
3,422.18 0.00 3,422.18
3,150.00 0,00 3,150.00
2,474.16 0.00 2,474.16
00008470 11126191 CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
308511025 10151191 10840 09/19/91
103191 10/31/91 10777 09112191
308511029 I0131191 10780 09/12191
308511024 10/31/91 10886 09/17191
308511028 10131191 10778 09/12/91
308511027 10/51/91 10779 09/12/91
308511016 10/16/91 0252 08/28/91
Check Totals:
EXTRA BORK OR~ERIDCT. SERV
REMOVE DEBRIS/OCTOBER
NEED ABATERENT/OCTOBER
NV 60ALS ON FEILD/Pe~ N./OCT
REPAIR IRRIGATION/OCTOBER
REPAIR NATER MAIN LINE/OCT.
MONTHLY MAXNTIOCTODER
9~046.34 0.00 9,046.34
1,920.00 0.00 1~920.00
2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
900.00 0.00 900.00
200,00 0,00 200,~
72,50 0.00 72.50.
76.25 0.00 76.2
297026.40 0.00 29,026.46
0000G471 11/26/91 COUNTSUN COUNTS UNLIMITED
2001 I0122/91 10873
09123191
Check Totals:
TRAFFIC COUNTS; PUBLIC NORKS
34,195.15 0.00 54,t95.15
1J80.00 0.00 1,480.00
00008475 11/26/91 HANKSHAM HANKS HARDMARE
108530 10/03/91 10682 08/21/91
107965 '10/01/91 10682 08/21/91
107790 10/01/91 10682 08/21/91
108501 10/03/91 10682 08/21/91
110510 10/15/91 10682 08121/91
110688 10116191 10682 08/21191
110545 10/16/91 10682 08/21191
111566 10/23/91 10682 08/21191
112517 10/22191 10682 08/21/91
112782 10/29/91 10682 08121191
97778 10/01/91 10682 08121/91
109211 10/08/91 10682 08/21191
112595 10/28/91 10682 08/21/91
108303 10/05/91 10682 08/21/91
112688 10/29/91 10682 08/21/91
111525 10122191 10682 08/21/91
111985 10/24/91 lObB2 08121t91
111996 i0/24191 10682 08/21/91
111751 10/23/91 10682 08/21/91
112463 10/28/91 10682 08/21/91
111321 10/22/91 10719
110935 10/18/91 10719
Check Totals:
MISC.REPAIR & MAINT, ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & NRINT, ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & HAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR a MAtNT. ITEMS
NISC.REPRIR & MAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR k MAINT. ITEMS
MISC,REPAIR & MAINT, ITEMS
MISC,REPAIR & MAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & MMNT. ITEMS
NISC.REPAIR & MAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & MAINT, ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & MAINT. ITEMS
M]SC.REPAIR & ~AINT. ITEMS
M[SC,REPAIR & MAINT. ITEMS
NISC.REPAIR & fiAINT, ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & NAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & MAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR 6 MAINT. ITEMS
MISC.REPAIR & MAINl. ITENS
NISC.REPAIR & NAINT. ITEMS
08/27/91 ACCOUNTIREPAIR ITEMS: CITY
08/27/91 ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITEMS: CITY
1,480.00 0.00 1J80.00
7.52 0,00 7.52
8,84 0.00 8.84
8,28 O,OO 8.28
4.30 0,00 4,30
12.59 0.00 12.59
12,80 O.OO 12,80
212,61 O.O0 212.61
9.55 0.00 9,55
16.04 0,00 16.04
30.75 0.00 30.75
4.51 0.00 4.51
24,36 0.00 24,56
14,6B 0.00, 14.68
23,65- 0,00 23,65-
0,85 O,OO 0.85
7,62 0.00 7,62
64,54 0.00 64.5~
78.82 0,00 78.8~
21,52 0,00 21.52
22.13 0.00 22.15
24.87 0,00 24.87
0.65 0.00 0.65
Fiscai ~sar: !992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Ra~e
Invoice Date P/O Date DescriDtion
108745 10/07/91 10719 08127/91 ACCOONT;REPAIR MERE; CITY
108922 10107191 10719
10811& 10/02/91 10719
108190 10/02/91 10719
109,!.lB 10109191 10719
110571 1011&191 10719
112927 10/30/91 10719
113089 10/30/91 10719 08127191
112540 10/28/91 10719 08/27191
111538 10/22/91 10817 0911bl91
113029 10130191
11:3028 10/:30/91 1099:3 1011&191
112820 10/30R1 1099:3 10/1&/91
111825 10/24/91 10993 I0/I&/91
111783 10/24/91 10993 10/I~81
110120 10/14/91 10817 09116191
110:354 10115191 10817 09/I&RI
110245 10/10/91 10817 09116191
10858:3 10104191 10817 0911bl91
108904 10/07/91 10817 09116/91
109079 10/08/91 10817 09/16/91
107681 1010181 10817 09116/91
108045 10/02191 10817 09/16/91
109145 10/08/91 10817 09116191
1105:39 10116/91 10817 09116191
110464 10/16/91 10817 09/16191
112869 10129191 10817 09/16/91
111567 10/23191 10817 09/1&/91
11062:3 10/17/91 10817 09116191
08127191 ACCOUNT;REPAIR HERE; CITY
08/27/91 ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITERE; CITY
08/27/91 ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITEMS; CITY
08/27/91 ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITERE; CITY
08127/91 8CCOONT;REPAIR ITERE; CITY
08/27/91ACCOUNTIREPAIR ITERE; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITBtS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITEflSI CITY
HARDMARE;TOOLS~PUBLIC OORKS
STREEl flAINI*.SOPPLIEO;PUB.W[8
STREET NAINT.SUPPLIES;PUG.MKS
STREET NAINT,SUPPLIES;PUB,NKS
STREET HA1HT,S~PLIES~PUG,MKS
STREET HAINT,SUPPLIESIPUB,N[S
HARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC MORKS
HARDMAREITOOLSIPUBLIC NORKS
HARDWARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC NORKS
HARDMARE;IDOLS;PUBLIC MORES
NARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC MORES
HARDtAREiTOOLS;PUBLIC NORIS
NARDMARE;TORLS;PUBLIC MORES
HARBMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC NORIS
HARDiARE;TORLS;PUBLIC NORIS
HARDMARE;TOOLSIPUBL!C NORKS
HARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC MORKS
HARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC MORKS
HARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC NORKS
HARDMARE;TOOLS;PUBLIC NORKS
6ross
2,55
1.56
99.45
8.77
~9.40
12.91
6.8~
120.87
1:3.12-
86.84
27,12
:30, 16
12.:37
212.18
28. &2
5,70
7.76
0.80
77.25
21,24
95.49
3~. 28
25.74
49,54
65.12
Discount
0.00
0.~
0.~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
'0,00
O,OO
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
O.O0
O,OU
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net
2.55
1,3B
8.77
3t40
12.91
120.07
4:3.0B
1L12-
86.84
27.12
17.83
:30.16
212.18
28.62
5.70
7.76
O.BO
77.25
2~.24
25.74
49.54
65.12
00008476 11/26/91KLEINFEL KLEINFELDER
701654 10/01/91
10/01/91
Check Totals:
6/:30-7/26 SERVICES
L,740,64
7,000.00
0.00 1,740.64
0.00 7,000,00
00008477 11/26/91 ONESTEP
102591
Check Totals:
ONE STEP NAINT. & CLEANING CO
I0/25/91 0214 07/01/91 JANITORIAL SERVICE/OCTOBER
7,000.00
1,87100
0.00 7,000.00
0.00 1,875.00
00008478 11/26/91 RAMTEK RAMTEK
3816 10/31191 0282 10/14191
ZBI7 10/:31/91 0282 10/14/91
Check Totals:
SERVICES 10/21-10/25
SERVICES 10/21-10/24
1,873.00
9,:348.21
:3,190.09
0.00 1,87:3.00
O.OO 9,348.21
0.00 :3,190.09
00008479 11/26/91 RIVERSID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
101494-0 10129t91 10996 10/01/91
Check Totals:
BOND COPIER PAPER
12,~8J0
1,176.65
0.00 12,5:38.30
0.00 1,176.6:3
Check Totals:
00008480 11/26/91SCHUMACH SCHUMACHER AUTO SALE & LEASIN
1178 10/04/91 10770 08/29/91 1992 CHEVY 8-10 PICK-UP,B&S
1,176.6:3
14,250.17
0.00 1,176.6:3
0,00 14,250.17
Check Totals:
00008481 Iif26/91 WINDSOR1 WINDSOR PARTNERS-RANCHO IND
12/01/91 12/01/91 11/:30/91 RENT FOR DECEREER
14,250,17
28,527.11
0.00 14,250,17
0.00 28,527.11
Check Totals: 28,527.11 0,00 28,527.11
1!/~7/91
Fiscal Year: 1992
Cneck
Report Totals: 5%.845.70
Net
Fiscal YeEF:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date R/O Date Oescriotion Gross Oiscount Net
00008483 11/13I~1 SICKNELL DICKNELL TRAVEL CENTER
ll/O&/gl-1 11/06/~1 !llO&!~l AIRFARE/CONFERENCE !16.85 0.00 ll&.R5
Check Totals:
00008484 i1/13/~! CARLWARR CARL WARREN & CO.
53236 10/07/~1 I0/07/~1FORSYTME/STATEFARM
00008485 11113191 [CMA ICMA
2DFCM.53 10/10/9!
20FCM,54 I0t24101
11/01/91 10/31/91
Check Totals:
10/10/91 Normal PayrolJO/lO
10/24/91 Normal Pay, 10/24
10/31/91 DEPOSIT FOR OCTOBER
116.85 0,00 116.85
278.50 0.00 278.50
278.50 0.00 278.50
558.40 0.00 558.40
514.00 0.00 514.00
9,5!5.09 0.00 9,315.09
Check Totals:
00008486 11/13/9! PERSRETI PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
110691 ll/O&/9I ../06/ol PERS RET. PAYMENT/NOV. 7,9I
10J87,49 0.00 10J87.49
12,217.41 0.00 12,217.41
00008~87 !1!13/91PETTYC PETTY CASH
I006~I 10/06/gl
Check Totals:
10/06191 CASH REINS. FOR OCT.
!2,217.41 0,00 !2.2!7.41
!72.14 0.00 I72.14
Check Totals:
00008488 1!!13/9! SOUTHCED SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
717042B98C 10/24/91 !0/24/~1 Y717042898/9/18-10/!9
7170507~C 10/24R1 10/24/91Y7!705073~/9/18-10/19
717059917C 10/24/91 10/24/91 Y717030917/9/18-10/!9
367010011C !0/24/9! 10/24R! Y367010011/9/18-10/!9
172.14 0.00 172.14
604.74 0.00 604,74
605.73 0.00 605.75
I2~.86 0.00 126.86
512.15 0.00 5!2.!3
Chec~ Totals:
00008489 !I/13/91 WINDSOR! WINDSOR PARTNERS-RANCRO
!2/01/qi 12101/9! 02~5 07/0~/91 iYR. RENT/DEC, 91 PAYMENT
1,849.46 0.00 1,849.A&
200.00 O,O0 200.00
Check Totals:
200.00 0.00 200.00
Report Totals: 25.221.85 0.00 25,221.85
Check Bate Vendor Name
Invo~ce Bate P/O Bate Descriotlon Gross Siscount Net
00008429 11/05/91 BOYB&81R BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF TEMECULA
110591 !1/08/91 11/05/91 BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB LOAN 24,800.00 0.00 24~800.0~
Check Totals: 24.800.00
00008490 11/15/91TEMECULA TENEOULA CREEK INN
111591 11/IS/91 11/15/91 DEP. CONF. LUNCHEON/NOV.23 500.00
0.00 24,800.00
0.00 500.00
Chock Totals: 500.00 0.00 500.00
00008492 11/15/91AVP AVP VISION PLAN
111291 11/50/91 11112191 PREMIUM FOR NOV, 91 561.85 0.00 561.85
Check Totals:
00008495 11/15/91 CALIFSIG CALIFORNIA SIGN & TINT
1517 I1!01191 11016 10/29/9110 N'S FOR CITY VEHICLES
561.85 0.00 561.85
25.86 0.00 25.86
Check Totals:
00008494 11/i5/91 COLONIAL COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
111291 11/30/9! 1!/12/91 PREMIUMS FOR NOV. 91
25.86 0.00 25,86
967.75 0.00 967.75
Check Totals: 967.75 0,00 967.75
00008495 11/15/91CSMFO CA SO OF MUNI FIN 0FFICERS
1319 !0/24/91 10/24/91 MEMBERSHIP DUES/JAN 92-DEC92 65.00 0.00 65.00
Check Totals: 65.00
00008496 11/15/91 DELL CON DELL COMPUTER CORP.
11368248 10/22/91 10944 10/08/91 COMPUTER HARDWARE & SOFTWARE 3,555.18
0.00 65.00
0.00 3,535.18
Check Totals:
00008497 11/15/9i DENTICAR DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA
111291 11/30/g! 1!/12/9! PREHIUM FDR NOV.
3,535.18 0.00 5.535,1
799.00 0.00 799,00
Check Totals:
00008498 11/i5/9! GLENNIES GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT5
6116~-0 10/22/91 10986 10/22/91 DATA LABELS;PRINTER FEB
7q°,> 0,00 79~',0=:
51.36 0.00 51.56
Check Totals:
00008499 11115/9! GLOBAL GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIES
11077867 10t01191 10733 08/27/91 CABLE COVER~BLACK 25FT ROLL 57.8! 0,00 57,81
Check Totals: 57.8! 0.00 57,8L
00008500 11/15/91 GREAT G.R.E.A.T. TRUST
111291 11/50/9! 1!/!2/91 PREMIUM FOR NOV. 91 760.00 0.00 760.00
Check Totals: 760.00 0.00 760.00
00008501 1!/!5/9I GTEBILL GTE
1975854~ i1/01/91 11/01/91 TELEPHONE SERVICE/OCT ~I 3.401.74 0.00 3.401.74
Check Totals: 3!401.74 0.00 ~.401.74
00008502 !!/!5i91 RILLS HILLS, JULIE
IIt891 Ii/08/91 11 08/91 T-SHIRT PAINTING/REFUND 2(.0n (!.(IC,
I 20.00
Cried: Totals: 20,00
tl)O"j8505 1!/15/71HAHROON~ r4AHF: CONSTRL!CTIO~; CO
111291 11/12/91 c2~c'
~ ~ I0/01/91 SPORTS PRK.CONSESSION PROJECT !6,357,00
0.00 2( ,m'.
0.00 16,557 ,(!U
Check Totals: I6,357.00 0,00 16,~57,((I
000085o4 l!'lS/~i F'OST~AE' F'OST~ASTEF:
F1--:
.~,a, ~ear: !992 Chic: Reoister : .......
Check Date Vendor Name
lnvnice Date P/D Sate Description Gross Discount Net
9244628 10/20/91 10/20/91 EXPRESS HAIL/SEPI-ODT 135.50 0.00 151.50
Check Totals:
00008505 11/15/91 RANCHOAR RANCNO ARMY-NAVY STORE
6861 11/05/91 11019 10/28/91 SLICKERS:EMERGENCY EQUIP.
133.50 0.00 133.50
301.55 O.OQ 301.55
Check Totals:
00008506 11/15/91SCAMUNIC SO CA MUNICIPAL ATHLETIC FED
7111 11/01/91 11/01/91 MEMBERSHIP SUES FOR 1992
7112 11/01/91 11/01/91 MEMBERSHIP SUES FOR 1992
301.55 0.00 301.55
15.00 0.00 !5.00
15.00 0.00 !5.00
Check Totals:
00008507 tl/15/91 SHELDON SHELDON EXTINGUISHER
41674 11/12/91 11029 10/31/91 FIRE EXI.CITY VEHICLES;B&S
50.00 O.O0 30.00
1(B.37 0.00 148.37
Check Totals:
00008508 11/15/91 SINGLES SINGLE SOURCE SUPPLY
007112 ii/05/91 10319 06/30/91 DISK LABELS/DISK
148.37 0.00 148.37
75.14 0,00 75.14
Check Totals: 75.14
00008509 11/i5/9i SYSTEM SYSTEM SOURCE? INC.
50843 10/18/91 10727 08/12/91 SIABDNAL SORTERS;HANGERS 330.B0 0.00 350.80
50851 10123191 10764 07126191 PLAN SINS;FILE TOPS:NAHEPLATE 104.65 O.OO 104.65
50890 10/25/91 10864 09/19/91 KEYBOARD TRAYS;DELIVERY CHRBS 604.97 0.00 604.97
0.00 75.14
Check Totals:
'q008510 11/15/91TEMECULA TEMECULA CREEK INN
GL001175 10/23/91 10/23/91 MEETINGS IN TOWN/OCT 10
1,040.42 0.00 1,040.42
122.85 0.00 122.85
Check Totals: 122.83 0.00 !22.83
00008511 I!,'15/91 TON.+~CTP, TOWN CENTER STATIONERS
1157E-0 ~, ,~,~i~l !?3728 07/10/9i MACHINE STAND !98.2~ 0.0(i 19B.2E
Check Totals: 198.26 0.00 198.26
Report Totals: 53,932.62 0.00 55,932.62
Fiscal ~ir: !;~l Cnec~ Re~i!~y Station: ~3~9
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date DescriDtion Gross Discount Net
00008346 10/31/91WMG,IRMA WItLIARS. IRMA
102991 10/31/91 10/31/91 ASSISTANCE HALLOWEEN 55.00 0.00 SO.OK
Check Totals:
00008515 11/18/91ABRICRED ABRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP,
110191 11/01/91 0230 07/01191 1YR LEASE/TRACTOR/NOV,91
35,00 0,00 35,00
846,02 0,00 846,02
Check Totals: 846,02 0,00 846,02
00008514 11/18/91CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
01799 11/12/91 10938 10102/91 LEGAL NOTICESI PLANNING DEPT, 38,72 D,O0 38,72
1000/9900 10/25/91 10626 07/01/91LEBAL NOTICES/10/25/91 65,82 0.00 65,82
11271 10/50/91 10626 07/01/91 LEGAL NOTICES/10/27/91 31,75 0.00 31,75
522816175 10/06/91 10626 07/01/91 LEGAL NOTICES/Ii/OI/91 65.82 O.O0 65,82
Check Totals: 202,11 O,OD 202,11
00008515 11/18/91 COUCH COUCH, CHRISTINE
5005 10/51/91 10/31/91 PAYHENT FOR HAUNTED HDUSE WRK 100,00 O,O0 100,00
Check Totals: i00,00 0.00 100.00
00008516 11/!8/91 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN SEMINARS
6544239 10128/91 10983 10/17/91 MASTER FILERS;DAYTIMERS 231,50 0.00 231,50
Check Totals: 23!.50 0.00 231.50
00008517 11/18/9! GLENNIES GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
63%2-0 11/06/91 11017 10/24/91 BDOKENDS;CLIPBOA~S~RECDRDERS 79.52 0,00 79,52
63962-1 11/08/91 11017 10/24/9! BOOKENOS:CLIPBOAROS~RECDROERS 16.16 D,O0 16,16.
Check Totals: 95,68 0,00 95,68
00008518 11/18/91GTEBILL GTE
69q86328 !I/07/9! 1!/07/91 PHONE SERVICE/!!/4-12/5 I9,57 0,00 19.37
Check Totals:
00008519 11/18/91JRFREEMA J. R. FREEMAN CO.. INC
41946 11/08/91 11025 !0/01/91 TYPEWRITER:CITY CLERKS OFFICE
!~.57 0.0(! !9,37
524.74 0.00. 524.74
Check Totals:
00008520 !1/18/91MARGARIT MAROARITA OFFICIALS ASSOC,
00033 11/03/9! 0233 07/01/91 UMPIRE TOURNAHENT/11/2/91
524,74 0.00 524.74
369.36 0.00 569.36
Check Totals:
00008521 11/18/91RIVERSID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
10184>0 11/08/91 11027 10/29/91 LOCKING SUPPLY CADINET:TCSD
101649-2 11/07/91 11013 10/23/91 OFFICE SUPPLIES)COD
369.36 0,00 369.36
210.I2 0.00 210,12
38.9! O.OO 38.91
Check Totals:
00008522 11/18/9I SECURITY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
0823C 10/01/9! 10/01/91 4798020000010823/SEPT CHARGES
249.03 0,00 249,03
683.77 0.00 683.77
Check Totals: 685.77 0.00 683.77
00008525 !!/18/9i SHELDON SHELDON EXTINGUISHER
41673 !1/12/9I 11030 !0/5!/91 FIRE EXT.CITY VEHICLESIPUB,WK 100,21 0,00 100.21
Check Totals:
00008524 11/!8/91 SO CAt-2 SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
~4934598 10/30/91 10/30/91 7!4-349-3439/OCTOBER CHGS
3457418D !0/30/9! 10/30/91 714-345-TqB/OCT CHGS
~437C i0i~ii91 10/10/91 714-34~-3437/SEPT CHGS
!00.2! 0.00 100.21
45.84 0.00 45.84
68.14 0.00 68.I4
59,07 0.00 59,07
Check Date VendoF Name
Invoice Oato P/D Date Description Gross Discount Net
3436D 10/51/91 10/31/91 714-349-5456/OCT. CHBS. 49.35 0,00 49.55
00008525 11/18/91TEM TRDP TEMECULA TROPHY
llOOZ 10/29/91 10971
Check Totals: 222.38
10/11/91 1ST & 2NO PLACE PLAQUES:TCSD 48.38
0.00 222.38
0.00 48.38
00008526 11/18/91WESTLUMB WESTERN LUMBER
980505 10/29/91 10832
Check Totals: 48.38
09/D6/91 PIPE:HINGES;CARPETS=DETECTOR 127.43
0.00 48,38
0.00 127.43
Check Totals: 127.43
00008527 11/26/91 ALLCITY ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
1105 10/08/91 0293 10/08/91 TRAFFIC CONTROL;9/22-10/5 5,913.6I
112I 10/22/91 0293 10/08/91 TRAFFIC CONTRDL;10/6-10/19 5,345.97
1140 11/04/91 0293 10/08/91 TRAFFIC CONTRDL;lO/20-11/2 3,871.5I
0,00 127.45
0.00 5~913.61
0.00 5,345,97
0.00 3,871.5I
00008528 11/26/91 KLEINEL KLEINFELDER
701882 11/08/91 0232
Check Totals: 13.131.09
11/08/91 SERVICES RENDERED/9128-10/25 7,000.00
0.00 13!131.09
0.00 7,000.00
00008529 11/26/91 8AMTEK RAMTEK
382! 10/31/01 0282
3822 10/3!/9! 0202
3823 10/51/91 0282
3824 10/31/91 0282
Check Totals: 7,000.00
10/14/91 ROUTINE STRT MAIN.lO/28-10/31 4!648.87
10/14/91 ROUTINE STT MAIN./OCT 29 667.60
10/I4/91 ROUTINE STT MAIN. 10!28-11/1 7,286.33
10/14/9i ROUTINE STT MAIH.IO/28-10/30 1,932.!5
0.00 7,000.00
0.00 4,648.87
0.00 667,60
0.00 7,286.35
0.00 1,932.15
Check Totals: 14,534.95
0.00 14.554.95
Reoort Totals: 38,521,02 0,00 38,521.02
ITEM NO. 5
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
November 26, 1991
Combining Balance Sheet September 30, 1991 and the Statement of
Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three
Months Ended September 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991 and
the Statement of'Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the
Three Months Ended September 30, 1991.
2. Adopt Resolution 91- to amend the Fiscal Year 1991-92 Budget
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the City for the three months ended September 30, 1991. The requested
transfer of $3,845 in election costs results from coordinating the City's Council
election date with that of the national general election. In addition a transfer of
$11,250 is being requested to cover unanticipated costs relating to office furnishings
and tenant improvements in the new City Hall facility.
Please see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1991
Resolution 91- to amend the FY 1991-92 Budget
Attachment "A"
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE FISCAL
YEAR 1990-91 BUDGET AS DETAILED IN
ATTACHMENT "A"
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
SECTION 1. That the FY 1990-91 Annual Budget of the City of Temecula is hereby
amended as detailed in Attachment A.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of November, 1991.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
4\Rc~cm220
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 91- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 261h day of November, 1991 by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT A
BUDGET TRANSFERS
TRANSFER
FROM:
A/C No.
001-301
001-301
Descrip.
Unreserved
Fund
Balance
Unreserved
Fund
Balance
Amount
$3,845.00
~11,250.00
TRANSFER TO:
A/C No. Descrip.
001-120-999- Election
42-5223 Costs
001-199-999- Office
44-5602 Equip.
AmouRt
~3,845.00
$11,250.00
o ®~-~E
×c~-
~D 0
~D
0 "~
E
r~~r'z'lO~>~['' h
so
..--
cU ~-
0
Z
ITEM NO. 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER~TV~
TO~
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
Nov~3mber 26, 1991
City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 1991
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
report as of October 31, 1991.
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment
portfolio and receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government
Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. The City's investment portfolio is in
compliance with the Code Sections as of October 31, 1991.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENT: City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 1991
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Report
As of October 31, 1991
Cash Activity for the Month of October:
Cash and Investments as of October 1, 1991
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of October 31, 1991
Cash and Investments Portfolio as of October 31, 1991:
Type of Investment
Institution
Yield
Demand Deposits
Treasury Service Shares
Petty Cash
Certificate of Deposit
Local Agency Investment Fund
Security Pacific
Pacific Horizons
N/A
Overland Bank
State Treasurer
N/A
3,920%
N/A
5.250%
6.719%
Cash and Investments as of October 31, 1991
(1)-This amount includes outstanding checks.
Per Government Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with
the City of Temecula's Investment Policy and there are adequate funds available
to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next thirty days of the City
of Temecula.
Prepared by Alicia Almanza
Maturity
Date
N/A
N/A
N/A
02/22/92
N/A
14,237,602
1,884,837
(2,899,802)
13,222,637
Balance
as of
October31, 1991
H53,841) (1)
643,488
800
100,000
12,932,190
13,222,637
ITEM 6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
November 26, 1991
SUBJECT:
Liability Insurance
PREPARED BY:
Grant M. Yates, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 91- to
authorize renewal of the City's General Liability, Excess Liability, Automobile, and
Public Officials Errors and Omissions insurance with Insurance Company of the West.
DISCUSSION: The City's current policy with the Insurance Company of the
West for General Liability, Excess Liability, Automobile, and Public Officials Errors and
Omissions insurance expires on December 1, 1991. Staff has solicited proposals from
the following brokers/agencies to cover the City for the upcoming plan year; Cal-
Surance, Insurance Company of the West, Strachota, CIGNA, and the Southern
California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (SCJPIA). The total cost for General
Liability, Excess Liability, Automobile, and Public Officials Errors and Omissions
Insurance is summarized as follows:
Broker/Agency Carrier Price
CaI-Surance Insurance Company of the West $ 97,782
SCJPIA N/A ~103,350
Strachota CIGNA ~ 09,281
Staff is recommending that the City renew with Insurance Company of the West.
This recommendation is based not only on cost, but because the Broker and carrier
are very experienced with insuring municipalities and have provided the City with
quality service for the past year. The renewal policy is identical to the policy currently
in place.
The City was not able to become insured through the Southern California Joint
Powers Authority (SCJPIA) because the City's traffic signal contract with the County
contains a hold harmless clause that releases the County from liability. The SCJPIA
would not cover any claim relating to traffic signals which in effect prohibits the City
from obtaining this coverage.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City has budgeted adequate funds to cover the cost of
renewing the coverage.
ATTACHMENT:
Resolution No. 91-__ Authorizing Renewal of Coverage
with Insurance Company of the West.
ITEM 7
APPROVAL ~ ' 7'
CITY ATTORNEY, _ '
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
November 26, 1991
Final Parcel Map No. 26852
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council APPROVE Final Parcel Map No. 26852 subject to the Conditions
of Approval
DISCUSSION:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26852, the associated Change of Zone ( No. 11 ) and the Plot
Plan J No. 224) were approved by the City of Ternecula Planning Commission on June
17, 1991, and the Temecula City Council on July 2, 1991.
Final Parcel Map No. 26852 contains 13 parcels on 2~, acres fronting on the north side
of Winchester and Margarita Road. Two large remainder parcels total approximately
73 acres, thus the total site is roughly 97 gross acres. The newly constructed
Costco Store Japproximately 115,280 square feet) is located on Parcel 13.
The following fees have been paid Jot deferred) for Final Parcel Map No. 26852:
* Area Drainage Fees
* Traffic Signal Mitigation
(Paid) $ 27,539.25
(Paid) $ 18.736.24
The following bonds have been posted for Final Parcel Map No. 26852:
Faithful
Performance
Survey Monuments
$ 7,000.00
ENG\PM26852.STF 1
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that the City Council APPROVE Final Parcel Map No. 26852 subject
to the Conditions of Approval.
TN:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
q..
5.
6.
Development Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Department Staff Report
Conditions of Approval
Fees and Securities Report
ENG\PH26852. STF 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO,: Parcel Map No, 26852
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
( K-Rat )
Parks and Recreation
(Qulmby)
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 19
N/A
Condition No. 73
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No.
Fire Mitigation
N/A (With PP 22u,)
Flood Control
(ADP)
Riverside Service Area
(RSA)
Condition No. 9 and 67
N/A
ENG\PM26852.STF
CITY OF TEMECULA )'
LOCATION 'MAP
Recommendation:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 17, 1991
Case No.:
Change of Zone No. 11
Plot Plan No. 224
Parcel Map No. 26852
Prepared By: Steve Jiannino
That the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council:
ADOPT a Negative Declaration for Change of
Zone No. 11, Plot Plan No. 22q, and Parcel
Map No. 26852;
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 11 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report;
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 22~, based on the
Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
Bedford Development Co.
J.F. Davidson Associates and Herron 8 Rumansoff
Change of Zone from R-R I Rural Residential ) to C-
P-S IScenic Highway Commercial) on 2~, acres of a
97.3 acre site, construction of a 1~,9,500 square feet
commercial center on 19.7 acres and subdivide 97.3
acres into 13 parcels with two remainder parcels.
Northwest corner of Margarlta and Winchester
Roads.
A: PP22L~ 1
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
R-R ( Rural Residential )
North: R-R {Rural Residential)
South: R-R (Rural Residential)
East: R-R { Rural Residential )
West: R-R { Rural Residential )
PROPOSED ZONING: C-P-S
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
SWAP DESIGNATION:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
( Scenic Highway Commercial)
North: Vacant/Industrial Commercial
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant
C ( Commercial )
Project Area:
No. of Lots:
Proposed Zone Change:
No. of Buildings:
Total Building
Square Footage:
Total Parking Provided:
Total Parking Required:
Buildings are
Proposed on Lots:
97.32 acres
13 + 2 remainders
C-P-S on Lots 1-13
3
149,696 sq.ft.
859 spaces
749 spaces
4, 7 and 13
The Change of Zone, Parcel Map and Plot Plan were
submitted tothe City Planning Department February
20, 1991. The Plot Plan was requested previously,
but could not be processed without the zone change
due to the fact that the proposed use was not
consistent with the R-R zoning.
The project has been reviewed by the Development
Review Committee I DRC), both at a Pre-DRC and a
Formal DRC meeting. This site is within the
boundaries of Assessment District No. 161.
Construction has begun on the first phase
development of the Assessment District.
This construction includes the widening of
Winchester Road between Margarlta and Ynez
Roads, along with the Santa Gertrudis Creek Flood
Channel improvements.
The project has involved negotiations with GaiTFans
on the location and access to driveways along
Winchester Road. GaiTtans has also been involved
A:PP224 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
in the discussions involving the signalization of the
two intersections shown on Plot Plan No. 22~. The
applicant has received approval of the proposed
improvements and signalization for Winchester Road
as proposed for Plot Plan No. 22u,.
This project proposes a Change of Zone from R-R
(Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway
Commercial) on 2Lt acres, on proposed Lots 1-13 of
Parce) Map No. 26852, to subdivide 97.3 acres into
13 parcels with two remainder parcels and to
construct three retail commercial buildings totaling
149,696 square feet on Lots 4, 7 and 13 of Parcel
Map No. 26852 located on the northwest corner of
Margarita and Winchester Roads.
Chanqe of Zone No. 11
Change of Zone No. 11 proposes a change in zoning
classification from R-R to C-P-S on 2q acres
fronting the north side of Winchester Road between
Margarita Road and RCWD well site No. 108. The
Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) designation for the
area is C, Commercial. The proposed C-P-S zoning
is consistent with the SWAP designation. An
industrial park development has been constructed
to the northwest of the site and the proposed
regional mall is being processed to the south across
Winchester Road. Winchester Road is being
improved as part of Assessment District No. 161 to
a 13~, foot right-d-way urban arterial. The
Assessment District is also responsible for the
construction of flood control drainage ways and
main sewer lines. The first phase of the
construction has begun with major infrastructure
being done around this site.
Parcel Map No. 26852
Parcel Map No. 26852 is a proposal for a 13 lot
commercial subdivision of the 24 acres fronting the
north side of Winchester Road between Margarita
Road and RCWD well site No. 108 with two large
remainder parcels on a 97 acre site. The 13 parcels
cover the same area as being proposed for Change
of Zone No. 11. The remainder parcels are
separated from the other lots by Santa Gertrudis
Creek and Margarita Road.
A: PP224 3
The site is within the boundaries of Assessment
District No. 161. The Assessment District was
formed to provide major infrastructure
improvements along Winchester road within the City
and County boundaries. The first phase of
construction for the Assessment District is already
under way. The first phase improvements include
construction of Winchester Road from Margarita
Road to Ynez Road, the channelization of Santa
Gertrudls Creek, and portions of Margarita Road.
These improvements provide necessary
infrastructure for the construction of the proposed
commercial center within the proposed Parcel Map
boundaries.
The proposed access points for the parcels have
been tentatively approved by CalTrans. The
remainder of the frontage along Winchester Road
would have restricted access. The access points
also provide access to Rancho California Water well
sites. The developer will also record reciprocal
access and maintenance agreements between the
parcels for access, drainage and parking facilities.
The proposed Parcel Map conforms to the proposed
development for Plot Plan No. 224 and possible
future development along the Winchester Road
frontage. Development ls currently being proposed
for Parcels 4, 7 and 13, with the other parcels being
available for future development.
The City is requesting a 25 feet wide easement along
Winchester Road for a future transportation
corridor as required by SWAP. The applicant is
protesting this requirement since it does not exist
on current developments and will not be easily
obtained in some areas. The 25 feet is not a
requirement of CalTrans, it is a part of the adopted
SWAP Transportation Plan.
Plot Plan No. 224
Plot Plan No. 22~, proposes the construction of a
149,696 square feet commercial center. The project
consists of 3 buildings with a major building being
115,280 square feet. The proposed tenant for this
building is Costco. The other buildings are 23,916
and 10,500 square feet.
The proposal provides for two access points on
Winchester and Margarlta Roads. The access points
on Winchester Road have been tentatively approved
A: PP224 4
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
by CalTrans with the access drive closest to
Margarita providing access to RCWD well site No.
110 and the project.
The proposed development complies with current
code development standards in regards to parking
and interior traffic circulation. The site design has
been reviewed by City Staff at Pre and Formal
Development Review Committee meetings. The
applicant has addressed Staff's concerns regarding
the site design for the project. The applicant made
modification to the parking layout and eliminated the
proposed development along Winchester Road at
Staff's request. Staff had concerns regarding the
free standing pad concept originally proposed along
Winchester Road. A Plot Plan application or other
appropriate City application will be required to be
processed and approved prior to any building
construction on any parcels other than Parcels 4, 7
and 13 of Parcel Map No. 26852. The overall
circulation and access points to Winchester and
Margarlta Roads are being established with this
development.
The proposed architecture for the project is Neo
Mediterranean incorporating the use of stucco,
concrete tile roof treatment, concrete block,
parapet wall and archways. The applicant is
providing architectural treatment to the building by
the use of plant-on features to provide movement in
the flat building face. The increased architectural
treatment is being provided on the elevations that
face the public right-of-way.
The project is consistent with the SWAP designation
of C {Commercial) and 2-5 DU/AC (dwelling units
per acre). The area encompassing Change of Zone
No. 11 and Plot Plan No. 22u, is designated C
{ Commercial), while the area designated 2-5 DU/AC
is the remainder portion of Parcel Map No. 26852.
The remainder area designated as 2-5 DU/AC is a
part of Specific Plan no. 255 which is currently
being processed by the City. The proposed Parcel
Map, Zone Change and Plot Plan are consistent with
other proposed developments along Winchester
Road. As such, it is likely that Change of Zone No.
11, Parcel Map No. 26852 and Plot Plan No. 224 will
be consistent with the ultimate City General Plan
when it is adopted.
A: PP224 5
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
Pursuant to applicable portions of the California
Environmental Quality Act ICEQA), an Initial
Environmental Assessment was prepared for the
project. Based on the assessment, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration is being recommended for
adoption.
Chanqe of Zone No. 11
The proposed Change of Zone will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the Ceneral
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is compatible with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning,
and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
compatible with surrounding development and
improvements.
The site is physically suited for the proposed
Change of Zone in that required
infrastructure exists or is being provided in
the area including commercial roadways,
drainage facilities, and main sewer and water
lines.
The proposed Change of Zone is consistent
with the SWAP designation of C J Commercial ).
The zone change will be beneficial by
providing an area for needed services and
employment.
A:PP22~, 6
FINDINGS:
Parcel Map no. 26852
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning
and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. 460,
Schedule E.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
A: PP224 7
FINDINGS:
10.
11.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Winchester
and Margarita Roads.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
Plot Plan No. 22u,
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 22~, will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal is characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City~s future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and directives
anticipated in the City's General Plan.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 3~,8, ~,60; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
{Planning and Zoning Law).
A:PP22~, 8
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided; as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed structure, reference proposed Plot
Plan No. 224, Exhibit E of the Staff Report.
The project, as designed and conditioned,
will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare; nor will it adversely impact the built
or natural environment as determined in the
Initial Environmental Assessment of this
proposal. Reference the attached project
Conditions of Approval and Initial
Environmental Study.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations, and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposal's
general vicinity.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
sitems primary frontage is on Winchester
Road, a dedicated CalTrans right-of-way.
Improvement of the abutting roadways shall
be as per the City Engineering Department
and CalTrans.
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
within the proposed project. None are
exhibited on the underlying parcel map, nor
are easements evident on deedl s ) describing
the property in question.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
A:PP22~. 9
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend to the City Council:
ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration for
Change of Zone No. 11, Plot Plan No. 22u,,
and Parcel Map No. 26852;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 11 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 220, based on the
Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
SJ: ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
0,.
5.
6.
7.
Resolution for Change of Zone No. 11
Resolution for Parcel Map No. 26852
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 26852
Resolution for Plot Plan No. 220,
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 220,
initial Study
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Change of Zone No. 11
D. Parcel Map
E. Plot Plan
F. Elevations
A: PP220, 10
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
CZ-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ZONE NO. 11
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R I RURAL RESIDENTIAL)
TO C-P-S {SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-110-029, 031; 910-180-026,
027; AND 910-130-028, 029, 031.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Change of Zone No. 11 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on
June 17, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Change of Zone;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1, Findings, That the City of Temecula Planning Commission
hereby makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty ~30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
{1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
( 2 ) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A:PP224 11
CZ-11
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the
proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The proposed Change of Zone will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is compatible with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning,
and SWAP.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
compatible with surrounding development and
improvements.
A: PP22~ 12
cz-}l
d)
The site is physically suited for the proposed
Change of Zone in that required
infrastructure exists or is being provided in
the area including commercial roadways,
drainage facilities, and main sewer and water
lines.
e)
The proposed Change of Zone is consistent
with the SWAP designation of C (Commercial).
The zone change will be beneficial by
providing an area for needed services and
employment.
D. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study was performed for this project when determined that
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
no significant impact would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because impacts will be mitigated by adherence to the attached Conditions of
Approval which have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Zone Change No. 11 to change the zoning on 20, acres of land from R-R
{ Rural Residential ) to C-P-5 I Scenic Highway Commercial ) on property located at the
northwest corner of Winchester and Margarlta Roads.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
A:PP22~ 13
CZ-~,i
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 17th day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:PP224
ATTACHMENT 2
PM-26852
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 26852 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 13 PARCELS AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS
AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WINCHESTER AND
MARGARITA ROADS.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Parcel Map No. 26852 in accordance
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on June
17, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty ~30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
{1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A:PP22u, 15
PM-26852
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
[ 2 ) The Pianning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel
Map No. 26852 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: PP221.1 16
PH-26852
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
u,60, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through. or use of,
property within the proposed land division.
A land division may be approved if it is found
that alternate easements for access or for use
will be provided and that they will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsectlon
shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court
of competent jurisdiction.
A: PP22~, 17
PH-26852
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a) The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning
and SWAP.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
d)
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No.
Schedule E.
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area ·
f)
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoldably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
A: PP22q. 18
PM-26852
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Winchester
and Margarita Roads.
i)
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2_:. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study was performed for this project when determined that
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
no signiflcant impact would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because impacts will be miti9ated by adherence to the attached Conditions of
Approval which have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby 9ranted.
A:PP22LI 19
PM-26852
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 for the subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel into 13
parcels located at the northwest corner of Winchester and Margar)ta Roads subject
to the following conditions:
A. Attachment 3, attached hereto.
SECTION ~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 17th day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:PP22q 20
PM-26852
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 26852
Project Description: 1~ Lot Commercial
Subdivision with 2 Remainders, on 97 acres
located at the northwest corner of
Winchester and Marqarita Roads.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 911-180-026
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance ~,60, Schedule E, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance u,60. The expiration
date is
The subdlvider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the City Engineer
and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall
address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance L~60 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Provide reciprocal access, parking, drainage and maintenance agreements
between all the parcels through an REA or CCF, R's prepared by the applicant,
reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and City Attorney.
Document to be recorded with the final map.
A:PP22~. 21
10.
11.
12.
13.
2M-26852
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmitta) dated April 24, 1991,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated April 15, 1991, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance ~,60, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department~s letter dated March 7, 1991, a copy of which
is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the C-P-S | Scenic Highway Commercial ) zone.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to recordat{on of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety Department.
1~,. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory."
"A Liquefaction Hazard Report {County Ceologic Report No. 793) has
been done for this site and is on file in the Planning Department."
A: PP22u, 22
15.
16.
17.
PM-26852
Construction excavation has high potential to impact significant,
nonrenewable paleontologic resources. A qualified vertebrate
paleontologist must be retained to develop a mitigation program prior to
issuance of grading permits.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for
the following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. The applicant shall comply with
the recommendations outlined in the San Bernardlno County Museum
transmlttal dated May 6, 1991.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
A:PP224 23
18.
19.
20.
21.
PM-26852
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdlvision's approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director
and the Director of Building and Safety.
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Parcel Map No. 26852, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 66u,99.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the
City fails to promptly notify the subdlvider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecu)a.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
A: PP22~, 2u,
PM-26852
22.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars 151,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars I$1,250. O0 ) fee, in compliance with A B
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4( d ){2 ) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight 1~,8) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Came Code Section
711 .~,lc).
23. Dedicate right-of-way along Winchester Road along remainder parcel.
24.
The applicant shall comply with recommendations set forth in the County
Geologist transmittal dated April 23, 1991.
25.
A 25 foot wide transportation corridor easement shall be dedicated along
Winchester Road.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
26.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
27.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~,60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
28.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
A:PP224 25
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
311.
35.
36.
PM-26852
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
GaiTtans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
Margarita Road from Highway 79 to the proposed bridge over Santa Gertrudis
Creek shall be improved with full improvements or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
with County Standard No. 100 ( 86'/110' ).
In the event that Winchester Road (Highway 79) is not constructed by
Assessment District 161 prior to the final map recordat/on, the developer shall
construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street
improvements plus one 18 foot lane per GaiTtans Standard {110'/13~,'). The
improvements shall be constructed per GaiTtans letter dated March 1~,, prior
to occupancy.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66L~62.5, which shall
be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road (Highway 79) and
Margarita Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of access
points and public street intersections as approved by the City Engineer and
GaiTtans.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall
be delineated or noticed on the final map.
An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the
Final Map.
A:PP224 26
37.
38.
P~-26852
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
A Notice of Intention to form and/or join the Landscape and Lighting District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in
District information shall be borne by the developer.
39.
4O.
41.
~2.
43.
Notice of Intention to join the median island Landscape Maintenance District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in
District information shall be borne by the developer.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping I street and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. ~,61 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineering
Department.
A: PP224 27
t~5.
~6.
~7.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
55.
56.
57,
PM-26852
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall
be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
as determined by the City Engineer and shall be shown on the street
improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb
sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
if grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
As deemed necessary by the Engineering Department, a copy of the
improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside
County Flood Control District for review.
A:PP22~ 28
PM-26852
58.
The subdivlder shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site. In the event the City Engineer permits the
use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of
Ordinance No. ~,60 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
59.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion ~f flow.
Protection shall be p~ovided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
60.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A
subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any
plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula
regarding flood damage protection for development within a Flood Zone "A",
which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA.
61.
The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
62.
Prior to final map, the subdlvider shall notify the City~s CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
63.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer~s Office.
Prior to any.work being performed on the private streets or drives, fees shall
be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's
Office.
65.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
66.
Prior to any work being performed, an application for a Development Permit
shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City
of Temecula. All requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with as
directed and approved by the City Engineer.
67.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
A:PP224 29
PM-26852
68,
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the following
right-of-way:
Winchester Road ( Hiqhway 79)
69.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within
its right-of-way.
70.
Should this project lie within any assessment/benefit district, the applicant
shall prior to recordatlon make application for and pay for their
reapportionment of the assessments or pay the unit fees in the benefit district
unless said fees are deferred to building permit.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
71.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
72.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
73.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of
payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
district has not been finally established by the date on which developer
requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the
developer Shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a
copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing
this Agreement, developer shall post 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. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated lassuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of
this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the
process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for
this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
A:PP224 30
PM-26852
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and
9utter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and
street lights on all interior public streets.
75.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours durin9 construction.
76.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0. 05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
77.
A signing and striping plan shall be under design by a registered Civil
Engineer for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for Winchester Road
(Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included in the street
improvement plans as determined by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
78.
All signing and striping shall be installed and functional per the approved
plans and as approved in the field by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
A: PP224 31
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
April 15, 1991
J.F. DavidSOn Associates,
Post Office Box 340
Tomsouls, CA 92390
Inc.
Attention: David B. ~aari
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re:
Parcel M~p 26852
Plot Plan 224
City of Temecula
You have sent us material regarding these cases for our "review
as a Land Use case and as a land subdivision". We do not make
floodproofing recommendations or write flood hazard reports for
projects in incorporated cities. But it is appropriate that we
comment on Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel since we are involved
with the flood control aspects of Assessment District 161.
We have recently approved the plans for Santa Gertrudia Creek
Channel. The channel will capture and safely convey the 100 year
storm runOff in that stream when it has been constructed in its
entirety according to plans, and when surrounding land
developments have been brought up to grade as proposed. Zf the
project iS constructed in stages, as we understand ie now being
considered, additional study would be necessary ~o determine its
performance.
Zt should also be noted that Assessment District 161 has not yet
made application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision {CLOMR)
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Properties
within the FEMA mapped floodplain will remain subject to flood
insurance requirements until FEMA has issued a letter of Map
Revision (LOMR}, and the District cannot guarantee that FEHA will
find the proposed improvements acceptable. The District will not
accept the Santa Gertrudis Channel for operation and maintenance
until it has been completed, all necessary grading adjacent to
the channel has been completed, and the improvements have been
approval by FEHA.
:)HN H. KASHUBA
lenior Civil Engineer
c:
City of Temecula
Engineering Department
Bedford Properties
Attn: Grog Erickson
RANPAt
Attn: Chuck Collins
JHK:;ln
I ~:[n CHT',' F'L~NhilI6 [:'EF'T,
::IiVE::I iDE COUnt,u
April 23, 1991
Ranpac Soils, Inc.
41710 Enterprise Circle South
Temecula, CA 92390
Attention: Christopher Krall
Won S. Yoo
Subject:
Liquefaction Hazard
Work Order No. 690-161
Plot Plan 2~4
A.P.N.: 910-110-029
County Geologic Report No.
City Of Tomecola
793
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the liquefaction aspects of your report entitled
"Preliminary GoDtechnical Investigation, Margarita Meadows
Commercial Center, Winchester and Margarita Road, Tomecola, CA,"
dated November I, 1990.
Your report determined that:
The potential for liquefaction of the subsurface soils at
this site during a seismic event is considered to be
moderate.
The most significant effect of liquefaction at the site
would be settlement of the ground surface. Indicated
settlement on the order of one inch would be possible on
localized areas of the site. Differential settlement at
the site from zero to one inch is likely to occur across
distances of 300 feet or more.
Other effects of liquefaction including loss of bearing
capacity, sand boils and lateral spreading are considered
unlikely.
Your report recommended that:
All foundations shall be constructed entirely in
compacted fill. The depth of fill shall extend a minimum
of two footing widths beneath the base of the footing
witha minimum of = feet and maximum of 8 feet. The area
of recompaction shall extend five feet' outside the
foundationsperimeter.
z, Om- I EMON STREET,
~fH FLOOR
79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SUITE
BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 922a
County CoOlogic Repoxt ao, ~13
)pril 23# 199~
Page ~
2. All paVementS ind concrete ~lab~ shall ~c C~ll~tY~otc~ o~
3. Continuous fQuti.gs ~hall ~ - minimum 12 inches wide and
1~ inches Mlow lowes~ adJ[cen+. grade. Isn] ated ~ootin,4~
pre~o~re for' these footings ~der cnmbine~ de~,l and
~8tlo 1Ave lo~U is 2000 p~=. Allowable bearing
preocure m.~ be i~re~ ~ XO percent ~or ea~,h ~ot
depth up to ~axlmum of 3~00 psf.
4. Conoret~ mlabs -on- grarle shell hav~ a minAmum thlekncss
or 4 in,~},es nominal ~o~- ~i~ht~V lo~dea ~lcors.
Fill ~lopes ~hall b~ ~roperly keyed. box,chad and
compau~;~a with ~ain~ge devices Ins~.allca in ~:cordanuc
with Chapter 70 of the l~tast UBJ fo~ Buil~inrJ Code and
Appu~uJ{w E o~ Vo~ report.
It. is our oFln~on that ~e ,-e~ort wa~ ~re~ro~ ~n ~ COmpetenL
manner and sat j~fies the addit ;ena~ inform-tion requested under ~
Calif~rnia ~v{To~un~al Quality Ao~ revi~. Final ai~[,~'oval o~ th.
~e~Or~ is h.reby given.
The recommendations made in your report
liguofactlon hazard= shall l)c adaawrm4 to
conctruct3r~n of the p~oJ~ct.
R[VERSID~ CO~';Y P
~O~e~h a ~a~g, P ~i )l ctn~
../
for mitigation of
In I,l'~e ac~gn And
City Of Temacula, ~lemdng - ~teve Jiannl~c
~crron & ~umenscfZ XEuhJ~ect~ - Russell RulnansuEf
DISTRZCT 8,~,O, BOX 231
SAN BERNAR~XNO, CA 92402
TDD (714} 383-4609
PETE WlL50~, GovernDr
April 16, 1991
08-Rlv-79-R2.86/R3.18
Planning Department
Attention: Steve Jiannino
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA
Suite 200
92390
Your Reference: Plot Plan 224, Parcel Map 26852,
Change of Zone 11
Dear Mr. Jiannino:
An Encroachment Permit will be required for the proposed
Signage and Landscaping within the State R/W. In addition,
Development Review branch has the following concerns:
Grading,
Caltrans'
~he connection to State Highway 79 (SH 79) called out as a 50'
Driveway, approximately 1200 feet southwest of Margarita Road, must
be a street connection, not a driveway, as shown on Permit
application 90-1868 and as agreed to in several previous meetings
between Caltrans personnel and JF Davidson engineers.
Access to the proposed development must be taken off this local
street, not off of the State highway. Perhaps the developer might
consider a cul-de-sac configuration to accomplish this.
The Traffic Study done for Assessment District 161 widening of
Winchester Road) by Kunzman and Associates did not study this
intersection to determine the need for signalization. If signals
are to be constructed, warrants must be met.
The access shown approximately 500 feet southwest of margarita Road
is intended to serve the Rancho California Water District property
only. It may not be used as an additional access to the proposed
development.
Also, it must conform to the configuration shown on Permit
application 90-1868 (see attached, highlighted mockup of that
access point).
The Water District access shall be a Caltrans standard NS-A,
Case A, type of driveway. Curb returns are not permitted.
Details and elevations of the proposed Pylon Signage at the Slte
Entry from SH 79 must be submitted a part of the Permit application
package.
In addition to the above-noted concerns, this office must see the
following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Conditions of Approval
Grading and drainage Plans (not conceptuals)
A copy of any documents providing additional State R/W
A copy of the Traffic Study
A check print of the Parcel Map (not Tentative Map). The map
need not be signed and recorded, but must be stamped with the
City's "Stamp of Approval".
A check print of any plans for improvements within the State
R/W (including Landscaping Plans)
If you should have any questions, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah or
Mr. Mike Sim at (714) 383-4384. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tim Chowdhury
District Development Review Engineer
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
March 14, 1991
PETE WILSON, Govemor
Development Review
08-Riv-79-R3.180
Your Reference:
PP 224/PM 26852/CZ 11
Planning Department
City Hall
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed PP 224/PM
26852/CZ 11 located northwest corner of Winchester Road and
Margarita Road near Rancho California area.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted
under additional comments.
If any work is necessary within the State highway right of way,
the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final
approval will be determined during the Encroachment Permit
process ·
If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Nahro Saoud
of our Development Review Section at (714) 383-4384.
TIM CHOWDHURY
Chief, Development
Review Branch
Att
WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHICFaD BELOW BE INCLUDED
APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT:
DATE
~ )
( Co TE PM
IN THE CONDITION8 OF
NORMAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE HALF--WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHMAY.
/
N0~AL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE 5'~' HALF--WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY.
CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD /V/~--/~, TYPE//~2--~ ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY.
PARKING SHALL 8E PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHIaAY BY PAIHTING THE CUR8 RED AND/ON 8Y THE PROPER PLACEHINT
OF NO PARKING SIGNS,
RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY, STATE STANDARD WHEELCHAIR
RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS ·
A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSI~L ACCESS TO THE
STATE HIGHWAY,
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY,
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS ·
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL 8E PROVIDED BY __ STANDARD __ DRIVEWAYS.
VEHI~ ACCESS SHALL NOT BE PRCVID~) WITHIN Of THE INTERSECTION AT
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGH~4AY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD--TYPE CONNECTION.
VEHiCULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY.
ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELONED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR
NPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY.
65
LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCEt CCeIPLY WITH FIXED 09JECT SET BACK
AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS ·
A LEFT--TURN LANEt INCLUOING SHCULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDEHINGe. SHALL 8E PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY,
A TRAFFIC STUOY iNDICATING ON AND OFF--SITE FLO~ PATTERNS AND ~LUNEE~, PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED HITXGATIQN
MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED ·
PARXZNG SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A NANNEE THAT HiLL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHiCULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTS# INCLUOING PARKING
STALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT# WITHIN __ OF THE ENTRANCE FRDIq THE STATE HIGHWAY.
CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN
OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD 8E GIVEN TO CLIqULATIVE iNCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO INSURE
THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED ·
//PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL CQIRqENTS. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT.
//
CONSTRUCTiON/[)ENOLITiOII WITHIN PRESENT OR PRIED STATE RIGHT OF I~AY SHOLJLD BE INI~ESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL
HAZARDOUS WASTE ( I, E ,ASBESTOS# PETROCNENICALS# ETC. ) AND NITIGATED AS PER REQUIRENENTS OF REGI. JLATORY AGENCIES.
WHEN PLANS ARE SU&NITTEDf PLEASE CONFORN TO THE REQUIRENENTS OF THE ATTACHED ;eP~NDOUTfi o THIS ~JILL EXPEDITE
THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TINS REGUiRED FOR PLAN CHECK, PZR. OV:IDP, TO APPl*.T'C.A.1NTT,
ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEN~, CONSIDERATION NUST RE GIVEN TO THE CLffIJLATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPHENT
IN THIS AREA, ANY NEASURES NECESSARY TO NITIGATE THE CUIIJLATiVE INPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR W[TH DEVELOPHiNT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEN,
CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION; OR FUTURE PROVISIONt OF SIGNILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE
INTER~CTICN Of HI) THE STATE HEGI~i~y kHEN ~I~RRANTS ARE 14~T.
//IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL CGULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON
THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEN OF THE AREA, ANY NEASURES TO NITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE iNPACTS SHALL BE
INCLUOED ~ITH THE DEVELOPHiNT ·
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR
OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY HAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGH~/AY ·
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS SEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY # AND DEVELOPHENT
IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE CONPATISLE WiTH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT ,
TT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLED
HIGHWAYS. ~ND DEVELOPHiNTt IN ORDER TO BE CQIqPATIBLE WiTH THIS CONCERN~ NAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATION
HEASURES, DEVELOPNENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANT NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION,
CALTRANS DISTRICT S
DEVELOPNENT i~EVIEW BRANCH
P,O. Box 231'
SAN BERNARDINO, C.~ 92402
~ COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL,
//.~ COPY OF ANY DOCUNENTS PROVIDING NDDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT QF WAY UPON RECORDATIOR OF THE HAP.
ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THiS PROPERTY,
A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONNENTAL STUDY,
/._/A CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT NAP,
Z//A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEHiNTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HEGHVAY RIGHT OF WAY.
.~/'/A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE,
Date: March 13, 1991
Riv-79-R3.180
(Co-Rte-PM)
PP 224/PM 26852 / CZ 11
(Your Reference)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
We need cross-sections at 50 ft intervals, from 100 ft each side
of the project limits, within state Right-Of-Way (R/W). The cross-
sections must conform to the requirements of the attached
"HANDOUT".
The Caltrans Right-Of-Way (R/W) line must be shown and labeled on
the next submittal.
The driveways connections should be compatible with the existing
and future road system of the area.
The centerline of proposed driveway shown approximately 520 ft
southwesterly of Margarita Road must be located and constructed as
shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868, SHEET NO 5. The Rancho California water
district property shall not have a separate access to state
highway.
Show the existing state stationing along the highway centerline
according tO the stations shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868.
The Right-OF-Way in the Vicinity of Rancho California water
district property does not agree with our record.
The proposed driveway shown northwest of Winchester Road (HWY 79)
must accommodate the DETECTOR SETBACK requirements (See attached
sheet).
State law requires Outdoor Advertising clearance for signs proposed
adjacent to interstate and primary highways. Clearance must be
obtained form:
Highway Outdoor Advertising Branch
California Department of Transportation
1120 N street
Sacramento, CA. 95814
(916) 445-3337
N~F'9
FIRE DEPARTMENT
_, 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE ,, PERRiS, CALIFORNIA 92370
~ (714) 657-3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
March 7, 1991
TO: City of Temecula
ATTN: Planning Department
RE: CZ 11 & PM 26852
The Riverside County Fire Department has no comments regarding the above
referenced projects. All fire protection requirements will be addressed
on related Plot Plan 224.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Depar=ment Planner
By
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
LC/tm
71 LND10 OFFICE
79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201
(619) 342-8886 · FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNINGDIVISION
~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th State, Rivenlde, CA 92501
(714) 275-4777 · FAX (714) 369-7451
F'I TEMECULA OFFICE
41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Tcmccula, CA 92390
(714) 694-5070 · FAX (714) 694-5076
(~ ptthted on recycled pa~er
FROM:
RE:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DATE:
'DF TEMECULA
:Steve j~annlno
U ~t-24-qI
'he E~rrei Mar. >Io. 26~52 for this proherr and
letter I~ ftled. The requirements for a '._'-AN %3 letter
A clearance l.?tteu fFcm the aDpFoDJlate
:~ [tfrrr-.l~ Fe.nlonAi Water Qt[a!Itv C:rntFoi
S,-ar,d . ~hZ'TE~ For Pro nects within the
:ERn Dleae Wate~ t],,TalltV Contrei Bo~fd
sphere =Dr Influence. t written clearance
rwo C.DDles of the Par:el MaD.
,\ 'viII-serve" letter from the
aqlencv/agencles 9ecvln~ potable water.
B. :Sh,Duld the pro.~ect be se,ved 3aF~Itacy sewer ~ervl:e3,
thls Department w,muld nee~ on!y:
A "will-serve" letter fr:,m the
agency/agencle~ servlDq oo~abie
water and sanltarv ~ewer~.
C~ty of Temecuia
FaQe Two
ATTN: Steve J~ann~no
April 24. i99/
m~neFA1) to Drove the water DotAble.
A complete set of plans showing All
JeLalls of the proposed and e:,:lstlng
wateF systems: sizes and tvpes of
plpe and calculations ShIDWln,~ thtt
adequate ~Llantlty and pressLiFe Can be
malnta~ned (Calzfornla WateFworks
Standards - Caltfornxa Health and
~afetV Code and Callfornla
AdmLnlsttatlve Code. Tltte
These plans must be stgned bv a
re0!stered cIv1c engzn~er.
BCI General Contractors
attn: Rick Finken
28765 Single Oak Drive,
Temecula, CA 92390
Suite 200
re: PALEONTOLOGIC ASSESSMENT,
PARCEL MAP ~ ~4D51,
CALIFORNIA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN(::)
GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY
DR. ALLAN D. GRIL~MER
Director
RANCHO
Dear Mr. Finken,
At your request, the San Bernardino County Musetin] has conducted a
paleontologic assess.nent, including a search of perti,~ent
geologic literature, a review of the Regional Paleontologic
Locality Inventol-y, and a field survey for parcel ~ 21361, a 29-
acre parcel in Rancho California, Riverside County. The parcel
is on the northwest side of Winchester Road between Ynez Road and
Franklin Avenue. Specifically, the parcel is within Township 7
South and Range 3 West and if projected, falls within the
southeast quarter of section 21, as shown on the Murrieta, CA
7.5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle map.
Background
Previous geologic mapping by Mann ( 1955 ) and Kennedy ( 1977 )
indicate that the parcel is located on recent alluvitm~ and on or
'near the Pauba Formation. These aut]~ors report fossil
Pleistocene horse. The Pauba Formation overlies the Bishop Ash
and thus is less than 700,000 years BP. Review of the ].egional
Paleontologic Locality Inventory at the San Bernardino County
Museum does not indicate that previous paleontologic resource
a~.~essment$ have been conducted for the Temecula parcel and that
no paleontologic localities are recorded within one mile of the
parcel. However, more than 200 paleontologic resource localities
are known from the Pauba Formation in the Murrieta-Temecula area.
The Pauba Formation unconformably overlies the Unnamed Sandstone.
The faunal assemblage from the Pauba Formation in the Temecula-
Murrieta area, sun~arized below, suggests a late
Irvingtonian/early Rancholabrean LMA ill contrast to the ear]y-
late Irvingtonian fauna from the Unnamed Sandstone in the
California Oaks area (Reynolds and Reynolds, 1990).
M. i. nlperdtor.
imperial manm~oth
mastodon
large camel
llama
pronghorn
deer
large horse
small horse
jack rabbit
cottontail
shrew
squirrel
kangaroo rat
[z, ocket gopher
deer mouse
wood rat
vole
king snake
rattlesnake
pond turtle
toad
chub fish
land snail
Methods
The field assessment was conducted on May 3, 1991, by Quintin
Lake, Musekuu Tech II of the San Bernardino County Museum. He has
had previous experience in Lz, aleontologic resource assessments and
salvage in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Parcel ~ 21361
was inspected by foot traverses at approximately 30 meter
intervals. Recent alluvikm~ was verified to occur on the parcel
in association with the Santa Gertrudis stream bed as was the
presence of coarse to meditm~-grained sands interpreted to
· represent the Pauba Formation.
Results and Recommendations
Available geologic literature describes the Pauba Formation as
fossiliferous. Resource localities in the Regional Paleontologic
Locality Inventory indicate that the Pauba Formation is very
fossiliferous in the Murrieta-Temecula area.
Construction excavation has high potential to impact significant,
nonrenewable paleontologic resources on the Temecula parcel. The
--developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist tel
$develop a program of mitigation for the parcel which will conform
to the guidelines of CEQA and Riverside County. The impact
mitigation program must include, but not be limited to:
1. Monitoring of excavation in areas identified as likely to
contain paleontoloSic resources by a qualified paleontologic
monitor'. The monitor should be equipped to salvaEe fossils as
they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove
samples of sediments which are likely to contain the remains of
small fossil mammals. The monitor must be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant
or large specimens. The most cost-efficient method of salvage of
small fossils is to remove sediments containing the fossils to
stockpiles offsite. The fossils can be removed by screen washing
elsewhere while excavation continues on site.
2. Preparation of recovered specimens to a point of
identification, includinS washinS of sediments to recover small
vertebrates. This will allow 'the fossils to be described in a
report of findings and reduces the volume of matrix around
specimens being stored.
3. Identification and curation of specimens into an established
n~useun~ repository with retrievable storage.
~. Preparation of a report of findings with an appended itemized
inventory of z~pecimens. The report and inventory, when submitted
to the approF-.riate Lead Agency, signifies completion of the
program to mitigate impacts to paleontologic resources.
References cited
Kennedy, M.P., 1977. Recency and character of faultinF~ alon~ the
Elsinore fauit zone in southern Riverside County,
California. California Division of Mines and Geology
Special Report 131: 12 p.
Mann, J.F., 1955. GeoloSy of a portion of the Elsinore fault
zone. California. California Division of Mines Special
Report ~3: 22 p.
Reynolds, R.E. and R.L. Reynolds, 1990. IrvinEtonian? faunas
from the Pauba Formation, Temecula, Riverside County,
Califc, rnia, ix~ Abstracts of ProceedinSs, 1990 Mojave Desert.
Quaternary Research Sympositm~. Redlands, San Bernardino
County Musetm~ Association Quarterly, 37(2):37.
Kat]~leen Sprin~er~ Pl'oject Manager
Eart]! Sciences
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM
2024 Or,ng, TrefOil~ ,6R/sdL~r~.~A 92374 · 1714) 798-8570 · 422-1610
INVOICE: ~050.0506.1
To: BCI General Contractors
attn: Rick Fin]:en, Project Manager
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 200. Temecula,
CA 92390
COUNTY OF SAN 8ERNAROINO
GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY
DR ALLAN D, GRIESEMER
Director
For: PALEONTOLOGIC RECORDS SEARCH, PARCEL 21361, RANCHO
CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Regional Paleontologic Locality Inventory access fee
and first hour:
Field survey, 3 hrs @ $32./hr
Mileage, 115 mi @ .38/h~
Report, 3 hrs @ $32./hr
$50.00
96.00
~3.70
96.00
TOTAL $285.70
ATTACHMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
PP-22~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PLOT PLAN NO. 220, TO CONSTRUCT 10,9,500 SQUARE
FEET COMMERCIAL CENTER ON A PARCEL CONTAINING
20, ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER AND MARGARITA ROADS.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Plot Plan No. 220, in accordance with
the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
pertaining to said Plot Plan on June 17, 1991, at which time interested persons had
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report
regarding the Plot Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty 130) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
J l ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
~ 2 ) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A: PP220, 32
PP-22½
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and
meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
{1 ) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
{2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 220, proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: PP224 33
PP-22~
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be
approved unless the followin9 findin9s can be made:
a)
The proposed use must conform to all the
General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of state law and City
ordinances.
b)
The overall development of the land is
designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare; conforms
to the logical development of the land and is
compatible with the present and future logical
development of the surrounding property.
12 ) The Planning Commission, in recommending approval
of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 22L1 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal is characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date.
b)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City~s future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and directlves
anticipated in the City's General Plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 3~8, LI60; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
(Planning and Zoning Law).
A: PP22~. 3u..
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
PP-22½
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided; as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed structure, reference proposed Plot
Plan No. 22~,, Exhibit E of the Staff Report.
The project, as designed and conditioned,
will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare; nor will it adversely impact the built
or natural environment as determined in the
Initial Environmental Assessment of this
proposal. Reference the attached project
Conditions of Approval and Initial
Environmental Study.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a ,significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations, and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposaPs
general vicinity.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-d-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
site's primary frontage is on Winchester
Road, a dedicated CalTrans right-of-way.
Improvement of the abuttln9 roadways shall
be as per the City Engineering Department
and CalTrans.
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
within the proposed project. None are
exhibited on the underlying parcel map, nor
are easements evident on deedl s) describing
the property in question.
A: PP22u, 35
PP-22~
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps. exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan
proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site. and
is compatible with the present and future development of the
surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore. is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Plot Plan No. 220, to construct a 10,9,500 square feet commercial center
located at the northwest corner of Winchester and Margarlta Roads subject to the
following conditions:
A. Attachment 5, attached hereto.
SECTION 0,.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof. held
on the 17th day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: PP220, 36
PP-224
ATTACHMENT 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: 22u,
Project Description: Retail Center of
approximately 150,000 square feet.
Assessor~s Parcel No.: 910-110-029 and
910-180-019
Planninq Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for 3 buildings for 115,280
square feet; 23,916 square feet; and 10,500 square feet.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan
No. 22u,. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee 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 permittee of any
such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the
permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two 12) years of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the two 12) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the baginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall
expire on
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 22~ marked Exhibit E, or as amended by these
conditions.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
The applicant shall comply with the Engineering Department"s Conditions of
Approval which are included herein.
A: PP22u, 37
10.
11.
12.
13.
PP-22~
Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department~s transmittal
dated March 11, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County
Flood Control Distrlct~s transmlttal dated April 15, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section
of Ordinance No. 5u,6 and the County Fire Warden~s transmittal dated April 23,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County
Geologist~s transmittal dated April 23, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, three (3) copies of a Parking,
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department of approval. The location, number, genus, species, and
container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements
of Ordinance No. 3u,8, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee. Landscape plans shall conform to conceptual landscape
plans marked Exhibit C.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. An
automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped areas shall be
maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten i10) feet of an
entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than thirty {30)
inches.
A minimum of 7u,9 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section
18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 3u,8. 71~9 parking spaces shall be
provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit E. The parking area shall be
surfaced with aspbaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on u,
inches of Class II base or as may be recommended by a qualified Soils
Engineer.
A minimum of 9 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit E. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be
identified by a permanently affixed raflectorized sign constructed of porcelain
on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the international Symbol of
Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and
shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height
if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade,
A: PP22L~ 38
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
~1,
22.
PP-22~
or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished
grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous
place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17
inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically
handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's
expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at __
or by telephone "
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in
blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain clearance
and/or permits from the following agencies:
Planning Department
Engineering Department
Environmental Health
Rancho Water District
CalTrans
School District
Riverside County Flood Control
Fire Department
Eastern Municipal Water District
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on
Exhibit F.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with that shown on Exhibit F I Color Elevations).
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. Each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be made with
masonry block and a steel gate which screens the bins from external view.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along
streets and within the parking areas.
All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval
and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No.
655.
A: PP224 39
23.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
PP-224
This project is located within a subsidence or liquefaction zone. Prior to
issuance of any building permit by the Department of Building and Safety, a
California Licensed Soils Engineer or Geologist shall submit a report to the
Building and Safety Department identifying the potential for liquefaction or
subsidence. Where hazard of liquefaction or subsidence is determined to
exist, appropriate mitigation measures must be demonstrated.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is
based on {the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development) lthe
number of single family residential units on lots which are a minimum of one-
half {1/2) gross acre in size). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by
the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees
required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under
the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or
resolution.
23 Class I I bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as approved
by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. The
area does not have to be enclosed.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts
to be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of plantlngs, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed
with the Department of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, all required landscape planting
and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the
Director of Building and Safety. The plants shall be healthy and free of
weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed
and in good working order.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or
any use allowed by this permit.
Within forty-eight {48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars 151,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711 .Liid)~2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar 1525.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (u,8) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
A: PP22u, u,0
PP-224
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711AIc).
31.
A minimum of seven {7) loading spaces shall be provided as shown on
approved Exhibit E.
32.
A plot plan application must be processed for any approvals for any additional
buildings other than the three approved by this plot plan.
Dedicate a 25 foot wide transportation corridor easement along Winchester
Road prior to issuance of building permits.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the San
Bernardino County Museum transmittal dated May 6, 1991.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
35.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
GaiTtans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
36.
The developer shall submit two ~2 ) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2~,"x36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A: PP224 u,.1
37.
38.
39.
41.
42.
u,3.
~,4.
45.
46.
47.
u,8.
PP-224
The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
Prior to any work being performed, an application for Development Permit
shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City
of Temecula. All requirements of this Ordinance shall be complied with as
directed and approved by the City Engineer.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters and approval by the City Engineer and
all appropriate agencies.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street
improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans.
Street improvement plans including parkway trees and street lights prepared
by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer and all
appropriate agencies shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance
of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location
of existing utility facilities within the right-of-way.
Prior to any work being performed on the private parking areas or drives,
fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City
Engineer's Office.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-d-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the following
right-of-way.
Winchester Road ( Hiqhway 79)
A: PP224
51.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
PP-22½
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed 9uaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping ( street and parks ).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the City Engineer based
on the recommendations of the Riverside County Flood Control District.
A permit from the Riverside County Flood Control District is required for
work within its right-d-way.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from Riverside County
Flood Control District to outlet storm flows directly into the flood control
channel.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
As deemed necessary by the Engineering Department, a copy of the
improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside
County Flood Control District for review.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains.
A:PP22~, q.3
PP-22½
this Agreement, 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. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated lassuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of
this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the
process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for
this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
67. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
68.
improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall
be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
69.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
as determined by the City Engineer, and shall be shown on the street
improvement plans in accordance with County Standard u,00 and o,01 lcurb
sidewalk).
70.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. ~61 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
71.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along all public street frontages in
accordance with Riverside County Standard Nos. u,00 and u,01.
72.
improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
73.
This minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
75.
Construct all street improvements including but not limited to curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and
street lights on all interior public streets.
76.
In the event road or off-site right-d-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-d-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
A: PP22u,
PP-224
developer~s cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66u,62.5, which shall
be at no cost to the City.
77.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Transportation Enqineerlnq
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
78.
A signing and striping plan shall be under design by a registered Civil
Engineer for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for Winchester Road
(Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included in the street
improvement plans as determined by the City Engineer.
79.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be under design by a registered Civil Engineer
for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for the intersection of
Winchester Road (Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included for
reference with the second plan check submittal of the street improvement
plans.
80.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be under design by a Registered Civil Engineer
for approval by CaITrans and the City Engineer for the intersection of
Winchester Road (Highway 79) and the approved entry point, and shall be
included for reference with the second plan check submittal of the street
improvement plans.
81.
Traffic signal interconnect shall be under design by a Registered Civil
Engineer to show 11/2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #3 pull boxes on 200
foot centers along the property fronting Winchester Road ( Highway 79). This
design shall be shown on the traffic signal plans and must be approved by
CalTrans and the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
82.
All signing and striping shall be installed and functional per the approved
plans and as approved in the field by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
83.
The traffic signal for the intersection of Winchester Road I Highway 79) at the
approved access point shall be operational and complete per the approved
plans.
The traffic signal interconnect shall be installed in place per the approved
plans.
A: PP22~ u,6
T0:
FliOM:
liE:
County of Rxverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTN: Steve Jiannino
AM~IN~nvironmental
PLOT PLAN NO. 224
RATE: 03-11-91
Health Specialist IV
The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No,
224 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water
services should be available in this area. Prior to any
building plan submittals, the following items will be
required:
1. "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate
water and sewsring agencies.
Three complete sets of plans for each food
establishment will be submitted, including a
fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a
plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance
with the California Uniform Retail Food
Facilities Law. For speclfic reference,
please contact Food Facility Plan
examiners at (714) 358-5172).
A clR~E~O~9._JJ~.~L from the Hazardous Materials
Management Branch Services (Jon Mohoroski,
358-5055), wlll be required indicating that the
project has been cleared for:
a. Underground storage tanks,
b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services.
c. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with
AB 2185),
d. Waste reduction Management.
SM:dr
co: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
_,
GL~-N J. NEWMAN
FIRB C~I~!P
April 23, 19~1
CiTY Or TE~E~'LA
PLANNING DE~T
FLOT PLAN 224
With respect, cc the condiulon$ of ayproval regardin8 the above referenced
plot pla~, the Firs Depart-mann rac~mends the following fire pro~ecttcn
metauras be provld%d in accordance wlt~z Riverside County Ordinances and/or
reco$nlzsd fire protection standards:
1. The [ire Department ~s required to set a minimum f~re flow for
the re.,nodel or construction of ell ccm~eTcia! bui!dln~s uain~ the
;roce~ra ee=abllshed in Ordinance 5~6.
Provlde or show there exists a wa~er aVe:e~ capable of deliverins ~000
GFM for s 3 hour duration at 20 ~$I reelduel o~era=inM pressure,
which a=ue= ~e available before a=y combustible ~ateriel i~ placed
ca nhe Job site,
A ccmbinaninn of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, ;on ·
~Ooped system (6"X~"2~X2½), will be located not less than 2~ feet
or m~re ~ka~ i~5 fse~ frc~ any portion of the building as measured
alone apTroved vehicular treve!way=.. ~he required fire fl~w shall
be available from an~ adjacent hydr~nt(e) in the system.
The required fzre flow ms? be ad]~>sted at a later point in 2the permit
process cc reflect changes in design. construction type, area separation
or buil~-in fire protection Eelsurea. :
Applicant/:evelcper ehal~ furnish one cop7 of the water sMStem plans to
the Fire Department ~or review. Plans shall conform to the fire hFdrant
mFpee, location and e~aci~g, anao the system shaLL =set the fire flow
rsRuiremezts. Plane shall be si~ne~/ap~roved by a rsgiste~ed civil
snglneer and ~hs l~cal wa~er com.~acV ~itb the foL!owin~ ce~tiflcation:
"I serti~,~ rha= ~ha ~eeie~ of the water sye~e~ is in actor ante with
the requirements prescribed by uhe Riverei~a County Firs Deper~menL'
PLANNING DIVISlQH
f714) 694-507C, FAX (714~ 6'3&5076
l~dica~ valve and ~ire aapartman~ connectio~ shall hs l~c~ted C~ the
~r~nt, within 50 ~eet ~ a ~ydran~, and · minimum of 25 ~eeC from
bui~i~g(o~. A ztate~an~ that the buildin~(s3 will be au~oma~ieally
fire sp~inkLere~ must be included on the ~itle page o~ ~he building
pla~e.
I~$tall ~ supervised water~ow moniunzi~ ~ire alar~ eyetam.' Plans
..~e~ be ~ubmi~ued ~ t~a Fire Depar~ne~ £cr ap2rovel D~io~ to
installation, ee p~: UBC.
~ e~atemen= thaC the building rill be au:ouaClcally f/re sprinklered
muau appear o~ =~e ti~le pass of the builain~ plans.
Occupancy ssparaUio~ will be required a~ per ~he UnxBorm Building Code.
Section 503.
Lne=all patio hardware and e~iE ei$ne es par Chapter 33 of the Uniform
3ulldlng Co~S.
Znsta!l ?erdahie ~lr~ ex:ineulshet~ wluh a mlni~um retina of 2A-10EC.
Contact a clr~lfle~ aa~lnguleher company for proper plecem~n~ of equipment.
13.
Prior ;o =he issuance o[ ~ullCln8 per~Acs, the a[plicaut/d~v~lcpe= shell
be responsible to submi~ a check or money order In the amount o~ $558.00
~o the Riverside County Firs Department for plan charm fees.
Prior co =he issuance c[ butldtn~ ~ermIte, ohm developer shall depnsi=,
~th trim Cl~y of Tamecuts, a check o~ money or~e= e~uallng c~he sum of
25c per mqusre ~oct as mitigation fo~ [ire protection impacts, T~ts
aucunu must be sub~Icts~ ee~aratelT from cha plan chec~ review ~ees.
Final condlClo~ vill be addressed when b~lldin~ plans are reviewed in
~he ~uildin~ an~ Sa[ety Office.
All questions rags=dice
the P~anning and Enilueerin~
RAYMOND H. P~GiS
Chisf Firs Deperumen~ Planner
Laura Cabrzl, Fi~e ,fety Specialis~
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
April 15, 1991
J.F. Davidson Associates,
Post Office Box 340
Temecula, CA 92390
Znc.
Attention: David B. Saari
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re:
Parcel Hap 26852
Plot Plan 224
City of Tamecula
You have sent us material regarding these cases for our "revie~
as a Land Use case end as a land subdivision". ~e do not make
floodproofing recommendations or write flood hazard reports for
projects in incorporated cities. But it is appropriate that we
comment on Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel since we are involved
with the flood control aspects of Assessment District 161.
We have recently approved the plans for Santa Gertrudis Creek
Channel. The channel will capture and safely convey the 100 year
storm runoff in that 8treim when it has been constructed in its
entirety accordin9 to plans, and when surrounding land
developments have been brought up to grade as proposed. If the
project is constructed in stages, as we understand is now being
considered, additional study would be necessary to determine its
performance.
It should else be noted that AsSeSsment District 161 has not yet
made application for a Conditional Letter of Hap Revision (CLOMR)
from the Federal Emer9ency Management Agency (FEMA). Properties
within the FEMA mapped floodplain will remain subject to flood
insurance requirements until FEMA has issued a letter of Map
Revision (LOHR), and the District cannot guarantee that FEMA will
find the proposed improvements acceptable. The Dietrick will not
accept the Santa Gertrudie Channel for operation and maintenance
until it has been completed, all
the channel has been completed,
approval by FEHA.
City of Temecula
Engineering Department
Bedford Properties
Attn: Gre9 Erickeen
RANPAC
Attn: Chuck Collins
necessary grading adjacent to
and the improvements have been
}HN H. KASHUBA
.enior Civil Engineer
JHK:pln
April 23, 1991
Ranpac Soils, rnc.
41710 Enterprise Circle 5outh
Temecula, CA 92390
Attention: Christopher Krall
Won S.
Subject:
Liquefaction Hazard
Work Order No. 690-161
Plot Plan 224
A.P.N.: 910-110-029
County Geologic Report
City of TemecUla
793
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the liquefaction aspects of your report entitled
"Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Margarita Meadows
Commercial Center, Winchester and Margarita Road, Temecula, CA,"
dated November 1, 1990.
Your report determined that:
The potential for liquefaction of the subsurface soils
this site during a seismic event is considered to
moderate.
be
The most significant effect of liquefaction at the site
would be settlement of the ground surface. Indicated
settlement on the order of one inch would be possible on
localized areas of the site. Differential settlement at
the site from zero to one inch ks likely to occur across
distances of 300 feet or more.
Other effects of liquefaction including loss of bearing
capacity, sand boils and lateral spreading are considered
unlikely.
Your report recommended that:
All foundations shall be constructed entirely in
compacted fill. The depth of fill shall extend a minimum
of two footing widths beneath the base of the footing
with a minimum of 2 feet and maximum of 8 feet. The area
of recompaction shall extend f£ve feet' outside the
foundation,per.imeter.
STREET, ~FrH FLOOR
79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. JITE
8EFIMUOA OUNES, CALIFORN{A
(<-' .'~2.8:
F'. '.
cuunty Caologic Report Bo, 793
~pril ~3,
~aga 2
2. All pave=en=s and ~ncrete elab.~ shall Be cola~t.~uctcu on
· m~n[mu~ of two feet o= recu~pacted native ~oils
ce.,epacte~ fill.
3. Ctzutinuou~ footings Ghall ~ ~ mi~l~u~ 12 inches w~e
~hall ~o s min{m~ 1~ lnch~ ~rc, Allowable ~eari~mg
pTesuure ~or these footings ~er cumbine~ de~,l nnd
~tatiO 1Ave loa~o 1s 2000 ~sf. AJlownble bearing
preucure =~y be increa~ ~y 10 ~ercHt~t ~or each Foot
~. Concret~ s~a~s -on- gra~]~ sh~ll ha~ a ~inimum thickness
O~ ~ in,:hes nominal for iiJht~y loaded floor=.
Fill ~lo~es ~all b~ ~roperl~ keyea, ~91,ch~
compacted with ~ain~ge ~evices ~ns~.allc~ i~ a~:co~-danco
wi~h Chapter 70 of th~ l~t~St Un] r~ Suildi.U Code and
IL is our opln~.~n that ~e repor= wa~ prepared Xn a
m~n~er and eat }~fies ~h~ addit {on~l inror~t. ion rcque~tea under
Cali[~rn$a ~xv~ro~cntal Qualit~ Ao~ review. Final albino'oval o~ th~
~eport Is h~reby given.
l~qucractlo~ h~ard$ shatl ~c i~aerad ~o in I.he acci~n ~nd
cOnctructJnn ~f the F~u~.ct.
Vu~ truly
RIVER~IDR C0~'fY P NG D~ ~T
doceph. a, Rtohardg, 9 a~i ~ Pi ct-nP
c~: C~t~ ~f TemacUla, ~lam~ng - ~teve
Rcrrcn & Rum~nso[{ xruh~.ect3 - Russell
April 16, 1991
08-Riv-79-R2.86/R3.18
Planning Department
Attention: Steve Jiannino
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA
Suite 200
92390
Your Reference: Plot Plan 224, Parcel Map
26852, Change of Zone 11
Dear Mr. Jiannino:
An Encroachment Permit will be required for the proposed
Signage and Landscaping within the State R/W. In addition,
Development Review branch has the following concerns:
Grading
Caltrans
~he connection to State Highway 79 (SH 79) called out as a 50
Driveway, approximately 1200 feet southwest of Margarita Road, must
be a street connection, not a driveway, as shown on Permit
application 90-1868 and as agreed to in several previous meetings
between Caltrans personnel and JF Davidson engineers.
Access to the proposed development must be taken off this local
street, not off of the State highway. Perhaps the developer might
consider a cul-de-sac configuration to accomplish this.
The Traffic Study done for Assessment District 161 (widening of
Winchester Road) by Kunzman and Associates did not study this
intersection to determine the need for signalization. If signals
are to be constructed, warrants must be met.
The access shown approximately 500 feet southwest of margarita Road
is intended to serve the Rancho California Water District property
only. It may not be used as an additional access to the proposed
development.
Also, it must conform to the configuration shown on Permit
application 90-1868 (see attached, highlighted mockup of that
access point).
The Water District access shall be a Caltrans standard NS-A,
Case A, type of driveway. Curb returns are not permitted.
Details and elevations of the proposed Pylon Signage at the Site
Entry from SH 79 must be submitted a part of the Permit application
package.
In addition to the above-noted concerns, this office must see the
following:
a
Conditions of Approval
Grading and drainage Plans (not conceptuals)
A copy of any documents providing additional State R/W
A copy of the Traffic Study
A check print of the Parcel Map (not Tentative Map). The map
need not be signed and recorded, but must be stamped with the
City's "Stamp of Approval".
A check print of any plans for improvements within the State
R/W (including Landscaping Plans)
If you should have any questions, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah or
Mr. Mike Sim at (714) 383-4384. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tim Chowdhury c
District Development Review Engineer
STATE C~ CALIFC~N~A--SUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING ACt~NCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT ~, P.O. BOX 231
SAN ~RNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402
TDD (714) 3~3-4609
March 14, 1991
Development Review
08-Riv-79-R3,180
Your Reference:
PP 224/PM 26852/CZ
PETE WILSON. Governor
11
Planning Department
City Hall
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed PP 224/PM
26852/CZ 11 located northwest corner of Winchester Road and
Margarita Road near Rancho CalifOrnia area.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted
under additional comments.
If any work is necessary within the State highway right of way,
the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final
approval will be determined during the Encroachment Permit
process.
If addiltional information is desired, please call Mr. Nahro Saoud
of our Development Review Section at (714) 383-4384.
TIM CHOWDHURY
Chief, Development
Review Branch
Att
C~L~.i~tNB DNVXLOPNXNT I~VIEW FOIO!
PLAN CHECKER
WE irEQUEST T1L~T THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE
APPROVAL FOR THI2 PROJECT:
/
NORMAL RIGHT OF UAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE ~7 HALF--WIDTH ON TNE STATE HIGHWAY.
/
NORMAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE if'5" HALF--WIDTH ON THE STATE NIGHWAY.
CURB AND C~TTER, STATE STANDARD/V/e~--/~, TYPE/~2--,~ ALONG THE STATE NIGHWAY.
CONDITION8 OF
PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY PAINTING THE CURB RED AND/OR BY THE PROPER PLACEMENT
OF NO PARKING SIGNS,
RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY. STATE STANDARD WHEELCHAIR
RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURS RETURNS.
A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE
STATE HIGHWAY.
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT 8E DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY.
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS.
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY
STANDARD DRIVEWAYS.
VEHIOINt AC~S$ SHALL NOT BE P~OVIDE) NITHIN
THE INTERSECTIGN AT
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL 8E PROVIDED BY A ROAD--TYPE CONNECTION.
VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL 8E PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE RIGHVAY RIGHT OF WAY.
},CCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A NANHER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR
/' MPN ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY, ' '
/,,/
LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE NIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE t COMPLY WITH FLIED O~J~CT SET 8AC~
AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS.
A LEFT-TURN LANE, INCLUOING SHOULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WlDENING~ SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY.
A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF--SITE FLOW PATTERNS AND VOLUMES# PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSEO MITIGATION
MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED.
__ PARKING SHALL BE OEVELC)PED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR HOVEHINT CONFLICTSt INCLUOING PARKING
STALL ENTRANCE AND EXITI WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY.
CARE SHALL SE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERV~ AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN
OF THE STATE NIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHCULD SE GIVEN TO CUMULATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO INSURE
THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED ·
//PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL CCI~ENTS. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT.
/,,-/
CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF WAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIA
HAZARDOUS VASTE ( I ,E eAS8ESTO$# pETROCHEMICALS~ ETC, ) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REC4JLATORY AGENCIES.
WHEN PLANS ARE ~JSMITTEDt PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REGUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED IIHANDOUTtl, THIS VILL EXPEDITE
THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK, PRO~TZDE TO APP~.,ZCA.X~'T.
ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
ON THE STATE HIGHWAY $YSTEM~ CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATiVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVEL0PHENT
IN THIS AREA, ~d4Y MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT QF TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WiTH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM,
CONSIDERATION SHALL SE GIVEN TO THE PROVISIONt OR FUTURE PROVISIORf OF SlGNILIZATIOR AND LIGHTING OF THE
INTER~CTIGN OF HI) THE STATE NIG~41,Y k~N ~U~RN4TS ARE HIT.
l/ T APPEARS T..T T.E TRAFFIC .D/OR DRA,.AGE GENERATED .Y T.,S P.OROSAL..VEA S.G.,F, NT EF,ECT O.
THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ~J4Y HEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SHALL BE
INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELORNENT.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE NIGH~4AY I$ INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHVAYS F-LIGIBLE FOR
OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY RAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS SEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC NIGHVAYt AND DEVELGPNENT
IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT ·
ZT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELL
HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVELOPMENTt IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THiS CONCERN# MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATI(~..
MEASURES · DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION ·
CALTRANS DISTRICT 8'
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH
P.O. Box 231
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402
A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR HEVISED APPROVAL.
A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATIOR OF THE MAP ·
ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.
A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.
CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT NAP.
CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY iMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF ~AY.
CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE.
Date: March 13, 1991
Riv-79-R3.180
(Co-Rte-PM)
PP 224/PM 26852 / CZ 11
(Your Reference)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
We need cross-sections at 50 ft intervals, from 100 ft each side
of the project limits, within state Right-Of-Way (R/W). The cross-
sections must conform to the requirements of the attached
"HANDOUT".
The Caltrans Right-Of-Way (R/W) line must be shown and labeled on
the next submittal.
The driveways connections should be compatible with the existing
and future road system of the area.
The centerline of proposed driveway shown approximately 520 ft
southwesterly of Margarita Road must be located and constructed as
shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868, SHEET NO 5. The Rancho California water
dlstrict property shall not have a separate access to state
highway.
Show the existing state stationing along the highway centerline
according to the stations shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868.
The Right-OF-Way in the Vicinity of Rancho California water
district property does not agree with our record.
The proposed driveway shown northwest of Winchester Road (h~4Y 79)
must accommodate the DETECTOR SETBACK requirements (See attached
sheet).
State law requires Outdoor Advertising clearance for signs proposed
adjacent to interstate and primary highways. Clearance must be
obtained form:
Highway Outdoor Advertising Branch
California Department of Transportation
1120 N street
Sacramento, CA. 95814
(916) 445-3337
I
I
C~ C~
C~, c
E m
nc-~
11!//////,, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN(
GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY
SAN BERNARDiNO COUNTY MUSEUM i .LLA. D. GR,E.EM .
2024 Orange Tree Lane · Redl~ds, CA 92374 · (714) 798-8570 * 422-161( I ;-~-- . I ~'DR.
,. :)
BCI General Contractors
attn: Rick Finken ..........
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92390
re: PALEONTOLOGIC ASSESSMENT, PARCEL MAP ~ ~IDCI, RANCHO
CALIFORNIA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Dear Mr. Fin],:en,
At your request, the San Bernardino COLli]ty Musetm~ has conducted
paleontologic assessment, including a search of pertinent
geologic literature, a review of the Regional Paleontologic
Locality Inventory, and a field survey for parcel ~ 21361, a 29-
acre parcel in Rancho California, Riverside County. The F,arcel
is on the northwest side of Winchester Road between Ynez Road and
Franklin Avenue. Specifically, the parcel is within Towuship 7
South and Range 3 West and if projected, falls within the
southeast quarter of section 21, as shown on the Murrieta, CA
7.5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle map.
Background
Previous geologic mapping by Mam~ ( 1955 ) and Kennedy ( 1977 )
indicate that the parcel is located on recent alluvi~uu and on or
'near the Pauba Formation. These authors report fossil
· Pleistocene horse. The Pauba Formation overlies the Bi.=hop Ash
and thus is less than 700.000 years BP. Review of the ~egic, nal
Paleontologic Locality Inventory at the San Bernardino County
Museum does not indicate that previous paleontologic resource
a.~sessments ]]ave beea conducted for the Temecula parcel and t.]~at
no paleontologic localities are recorded within one mile of the
parcel. However, more than 200 paleontologic resource localities
are known from the Pauba Formation in the Murrieta-Temecula area.
The Pauba Formation unconformably overlies the Unnamed Sandstone.
The faunal assemblage from the Pauba Formation in the Temecula-
Murrieta area, sunm~arized below, suggests a late
Irvingtonian/early Rancholabrean ~A in contrast to the ear]y-
late Irvingtonian ~auna from the Unnamed Sandstone in the
California Oaks area (Reynolds and Reynolds, 1990).
Mcl,unu. tttz~s sp. of. M. fmpe,~'d~:Ot'. imperial m&nm~oth
Han~tt sp, mastodon
C~melops 5p. large camel
Henzidz~cheni~ sp. llama
~nt i l occtl~ra? Sp. prollghorn
OdocoiZe~s sp. deer
Equ[~s sF.. (1~) large horse
Eq~x~s sF,. (sin) small horse
£epus sl:., jack rabbit
Sy[ ~ ~ h~9'us sp. cottontail
Sorex sp. shrew
~;mnospernlophilus sp. squirrel
Dipodontvs sp. kangaroo rat
Th. omou~>,s bott<xe poc]:et ~opher
PerOItO, SCLLS sp. deer mouse
Neoto~nd sp. wood rat
M~crotu. s ca~ ~fopn.~cus vole
tcll,,p?-opt=ltis sp. ]{illg sna]fe
CrotaZ~s sp. rattlesna]<e
CZeu~O,s sp. pond turtle
[:ufo sp. toad
Gf. Kd o~'<~tt ~? chub fish
S~cc~ne,:r sF,. land snail
Methods
The field assessment was conducted on May 3, 1991, by Quintin
Lake, Museum Tech II of the San Bernardino County Museum. He has
had previous experience in paleontologic resource assessments and
salvage in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Parcel ~ 21361
was inspected by foot traverses at approximately 30 meter
intervals. Recent alluvitm~ was verified to occur on the parcel
in association with the Santa Gertrudis stream bed as was the
presence of coarse to meditm~-grained sands interpreted to
· re[:.resent the Pauba Formation.
Results and Recommendations
Available ~eoloEic literature describes the Pauba Formation as
fossiliferous. Resource localities in the ReSional Paleontolo~ic
Locality Inventory indicate that the Pauba Formation is very
fossiliferous in the Murrieta-Temecula area.
Construction excavation has high potential to impact significant,
nonrenewable paleontologic resources on the Temecula parcel. The
~/~developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to
develop a program of mitigation fox' the parcel which will conform
to the guidelines of CEQA and Riverside County. The impact
mitigation proSram must include, but not be limited to:
1. Monitoring of excavation in areas identified as likely to
contain paleontologic resources by a qualified paleontologic
monitor. The monitor should be equipped to salvage fossils as
they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove
samples of sediments which are likely to contain the remains of
small fossil meals. The monitor must be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant
or large specimens. The most cost-efficient method of salvage of
small fossils is to remove sediments containing the fossils to
stockpiles offsite. The fossils can be removed by screen washiF
elsewhere while e>:cavation continues on site.
2. Preparation of recovered specimens to a point of
identification, including washing of sediments to 1-ecover small
vertebrates. This will allow the fossils to be described in a
report of findings and reduces the volume of matrix around
specimens being stored.
3. Identification and curation of specimens into an established
museum re~--.ository with retrievable storage.
l~. PreF, aration ,_',f a report of findings with an appended itemized
inventory of ~pecin/ens. The reF,ort and inventory, when submitted
t'o the a[--.proF.riate Lead ASency, siF~nifies comF. letion of the
F. ro~r~m to mit. i~ate impacts to pateontolosic resources.
References cited
Kenne,_~y, M.P., 1977. Recency and character of faultinS alone the
Elsinore fault zone in southern Riverside Cotlllty,
California. California Division of Mjne~ and Gec, lc,~y
Special Re[=,ort 131: 12 p.
Mann, J.F., 1955. Geology of a F,ortic, n of the Elsinore fault
zone, California. California Division of Mines Special
Report ~: 22 p.
Reynolds, R.E. and R.L. Reynolds, 1990. Irvingtonian? faunas
from the Pauba Formation, Temecula, Riverside County,
California, in Abstracts of Proceedings, 1990 Mojave Desert
Quaternary Research Symposium. Redlands, San Bernardino
County Musetm~ Association Quarterly, 37 ( 2 ): 37.
Kathleen Springer~ Project Manager
Earth Sciences
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM
III
~024 O~',ng, TreeZ. JZ~n~ .GR, acII.JI~.:~A 92374 , 1714) 798-8570 · 422-1610
INVOICE: ~050.0506.1
To: BCI General Contractors
att]l: Rick Fin];en, Project Manager
28765 .qin~le Oak Drive, Suite 200,
C~ 92390
COUNTY OF SAN SERNARDII',
GENERAL SERVICES AGENC'
I
DR ALLAN D. GRIESEMER
Dilector
For: PALEONTOLOGIC RECORDS SEARCH, PARCEL 21361, RANCHO
CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Regional Pale,:,ntologic Locality Inventory access fee
and first hour:
Field survey, 3 hrs @ $32./hr
Mileage, 115 mi @ .38/h~
Report, 3 hrs @ $32./hr
TOTAL
$50.00
96.00
~3.70
96.00
$285.70
ATTACHMENT 6
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
II
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
Bedford Properties/Costco
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
PO Box 9016
Temecula, CA 92390
(714) 676-5641
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
April 25, 1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Plot Plan No. 224, Change of Zone
No. 11, and Parcel Map No. 26852
Location of Proposal:
Northwest corner of Marqarita and
Winchester Roads
7. Proposal:
Chanqe of Zone from R-R I Rural
Residential ) to C-P-S I Scenic Hiqhway
Commercial ) on 24 acres of a 57 acre
site; subdivide the 57 acres into 13
commercial lots and a remainder; and
construct a 175,000 square foot
commercial center on 19.7 acres
proposed for commercial zoninq.
Environmental Impacts
( Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
A:PP224 47
The destruction, covering oF modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
Fates, drainage patterns, or the
Fate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PP224 48
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
{birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PP224
10.
11.
12.
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticicles,
chemicals or radiation ) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 50
13.
15.
Transportation/Circulation.
proposal result in:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Will the
Yes Maybe N__~o
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? __ X
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ X
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ __ X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? __ X
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? __ X
b. Police protection? __ X __
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? __ X
f. Other governmental services: __ X
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ __ X
A:PP224 51
16.
17,
18,
19.
20.
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard ( excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics, Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Yes
Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 52
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? {A 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. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? __
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
A: PP224 53
Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1.d.
1.e.
1.f.
1.g.
2.b.
No. The area is not with any known fault zones and is flat, vacant
land.
Maybe. All new development causes displacement and overcoverlng of
soils. The project will incorporate open landscape areas, along with
obtaining and adherin9 to City grading and building permits which will
provide mitigation measures for this impact. The impact will not be
significant.
No. The area is currently flat vacant land and will not require
substantial amounts of cut or fill to establish the proposed building
pads.
No. No unique geologic or physical features exist on site. The site is
flat.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion increase during grading activities.
The potential for water erosion is low due to the fact that the site is
flat. Wind erosion will be mitigated by standard grading practices and
adherence to grading and building permits.
Maybe. The area is traversed by Santa Certrudis Creek which is being
channelized as part of Assessment District No. 161. The flood control
improvements are currently under construction. Construction of the
channel per approved improvement plans will mitigate significant
impacts.
Maybe. The area is within a liquefaction hazard zone. A geotechnical
investigation of the site was performed. Adherence to the
recommendations made in County Geologic Report No. 793 will provide
mitigation for possible impacts.
Maybe. The project will impact local air quality due to the increased
auto traffic in the area. Although the project should decrease overall
travel miles by providing a shopping opportunity in closer proximity to
the urban population. No overall impact.
No. There are no industrial or commercial activities proposed that
would cause objectionable odors.
No. There are no industrial or commercial activities proposed that
should alter air movement or temperature.
A:PP22u, 54
Water
3.a.
3,b.
3.c.
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
Plant Life
4.a.
No. The project is adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek which is an
intermittent flowing creek. The creek is currently being channelized
with approval of Assessment District 161. The channelization is not a
result of this project. This project is being designed to drain into the
channelized flood control facilities. This drainage pattern will not
result in any substantial change in either marine or fresh waters.
Maybe. The project will cause changes in the absorption rate due to the
overcovering of soil The natural drainage pattern will remain
unchanged. Obtaining and adhering the grading and building permits
will provide mitigation for possible impacts.
No. The natural drainage pattern will remain the same and will not be
altered by this project.
No. The project will not increase the amount of water in any body of
water. The site is not located in close proximity to any standing bodies
of water.
No. The surface runoff does not run directly into any bodies of water.
No. The project does not propose any ground cuts or construction that
would alter the direction or rate of flow of ground water.
Maybe. The decrease in absorption rate will decrease the amount of
ground water available from the site, but providing irrigated
landscaping areas will mitigate for potential decreases. There will be
no overall impact.
No. The amount of water consumed will be a small increase in the
overall water demand of the area.
Maybe. The area is within a liquefaction zone and flood zone.
Adherence to County Geologic Report No. 793 recommendation will
provide mitigations for liquefaction impacts. The current
channelizatlon of Santa Gertrudis Creek will provide mitigation for the
flood zone potential.
Maybe. The mass grading of the site will eliminate the current
vegetation on site. No rare species of plant were seen on site and the
overall native vegetation of the area will not be significantly effected by
this project.
No. No rare or unique plant species were observed on this site.
A:PP224 55
Maybe. The project includes proposed landscape areas that will
introduce new plants to the area. The plants will be required to be
drought tolerant and include native species. The impact will not be
significant. The channelization of Santa Gertrudis Creek and
Winchester Road are larger physical barriers.
No. The area is not currently used for agricultural crops.
Animal Life
5.8.
Maybe. The project's mass grading will eliminate existing animal
species. The area is impacted currently and increased commercial and
industrial activity within the area does not make this site viable for
maintaining native species.
5.b.
Maybe. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen's Kangaroo
Rat which is a listed endangered species. The County and City have
received a 10-A permit for the incidental take of the rat. The payment
of a fee in this area has been deemed proper mitigation for the impact
of habitat loss.
5.c,
No. No unique wildlife habitats exist on site.
Noise
Maybe. The noise level will increase during construction of the site,
which will be a temporary impact. The economical use will generate
increased noise level mainly from vehicle use of the site. No residential
structures are located near the site and the noise level will not be a
significant impact to the area.
6.b.
No. Severe noise generations are not anticipated at this site.
Light and Glare
Maybe. The project will require parking lot and outside lighting. The
project will be conditioned to have lights hooded and directed away from
public rights-of-way and adjoining properties. The project must
conform to the requirements of the Palomar Observatory for lighting
impacts.
Land Use
No. The project will alter the current vacant use of the site and the
development doesn't conform to the current zoning for the site. The
project does conform to the General Plan Guideline SWAP designation for
the site of C I Commercial ) and other commercial developments proposed
or being constructed in the vicinity.
A:PP22~ 56
Natural Resources.
9.8.
No. The proposed commercial uses will not substantially increase the
rate of use of natural resources.
9.b.
No. The project will not substantially deplete non-renewable
resources. The commercial use proposed will not generate a large
demand on non-renewable resources.
Risk of Upset
10.a.
No. The commercial uses proposed do not include uses that would
result in a risk of explosion.
10.b.
No. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans or
evacuation plans. Proper circulation has been conditioned to be
maintained with development of the project.
Population
11.
No. The proposed commercial project will not alter the current
population location or density. The project will provide an employment
area for existing residence of the City and surrounding area. The
project will not require an increased population demand.
Housing.
12.
No. The project is a proposed commercial center and will not affect
housing demand.
TransportationJ Circulation
13.a.
Yes. The commercial project will increase traffic and vehicular
movement. The improvements being constructed with Assessment
District No. 161 and improvements condltloned on the project will
mitigate the impacts to a level of insignificance. The conditions include
recommendations required per the Traffic Study submitted and
approved for the project.
13.b.
Maybe. The project will result in a demand for increased parking. The
required parking for the proposed project will be provided on-site per
City Codes as part of the project design.
13.c.
Maybe. The project will impact the existing road system, but the
impacts will be mitigated by the improvements required as Conditions
of Approval on the project.
13.d.
No. The project will not alter the existing road patterns. The project
has been conditioned to improve the existing roadways.
A:PP224 57
13.e.
No. The project will not require or impact waterborne, rail or air
traffic. The site will be served by an improved roadway system.
13.f.
Maybe. The increased traffic will increase possible vehicle hazards.
The project has been conditioned to provide adequate street
improvements and safety controls to mitigate the possible impacts.
Public Services
l~.a,b,c,
e,f.
Maybe. The proposed development will impact these public services.
The project has been conditioned to construct necessary improvements
and pay appropriate fee mitigation for these impacts.
lu,.d.
No. The project is a commercial center and will not impact current or
planned recreational facilities.
Energy
15.a,b.
No. The project is for the development of a standard type retail
commercial center and will not require the use of substantial amounts of
fuel or require new sources of energy to be developed.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. The surrounding area has the current utilities available or they
are being constructed with Assessment District No. 161. No additional
utility systems will be required to be constructed with this project.
Human Health
17.a.
No. The project is a standard retail commercial type center and no uses
are proposed that will cause a health hazard.
17.b.
Maybe. The project is within a liquefaction zone. County Geologic
Report No. 793 was completed for the project. Adherence to the
recommendation contained within the report will mitigate the potential
liquefaction impacts.
Aesthetics
18.
No. The project is not within any designated view sheds and does not
obscure scenic vistas.
Recreation
19.
No. The project is not being proposed on an existing or planned
recreation or open space site.
A:PP22u, 58
Cultural Resources
20.a.
Maybe. The project is within the Pauba Formation which is
fossiliferous. The applicant shall retain a qualified vertebrate
paleontologist to develop a mitigation program prior to issuance of
grading permits as outlined in the San Bernardino County Museum
transmittal dated May 6, 1991.
20.b-d.
No. A preliminary cultural survey was conducted on the site and no
cultural resources were identified on site.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
21 .a.
No. The area does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas and
no rare or endangered species exist on site.
21 .b.
No. The project as conditioned will not significantly impact short or
long term environmental goals.
21 .c.
Maybe. The project, while not causing a significant impact to traffic
circulation because of proposed improvements contained within the
project design, will add to the accumulative effect on the transportation
system. The current construction and additional improvements
proposed by Assessment District No. 161 will provide mitigation
measures for the accumulative impacts on the transportation system.
A:PP224 59
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
April 25, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
A:PP224 60
Z
Frl
· =~' ~:~r. Z z
o -s ~. ul o
I:~."~ u~"u
" u~_. a.: :o -To , a'
~m_.o~'..
· n
,.,n ,..,.n ~m
I/1"I
m
-I
Z
CITY OF TEMECULA )
LOCATION 'MAP
CASE NO.c~'' It >
P.C. DATE
~ ~-~.-'// ,
CITY OF TEMECULA )'
SP
· q
N
SWAP MAP
CASE NO. ,,'z-
p.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
PARCEL MAP NO. 26852
DATE: November 14, 1991
IMPROVEMENTS
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
TOTAL
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
tt~lairrtet~nce Retw~ion (101 for one year)
*(or Bonds if work is completed)
MATERIAL & LABOR
SECURITY
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
$ -0-
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees
$
$
$
$
$
$
7,000.00
-0=
-0-
-0-
-0=
-0-
Planning Fee
Qulmby Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Plan Check Fee Due
Inspection Fee Due
Monument Inspection Fee
Fee Paid To Date (Credit)
Total Inspectlon/Plan Check Fees Due
114.00
-0-
8.00
1,010.00
-0-
350.00
1,~82.00
-0-
ENG\PM26852.STF
ITEM 8
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY ,~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER
SCOTT F. FIELD
NOVEMBER 26, 1991
CFD 88-12 (YNEZ CORRIDOR)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to
execute a Memorandum of Understanding with Bedford Properties concerning the sale of
bonds in excess of $19,000,000.
DISCUSSION: The County Debt Advisory Committee has required, as a
condition for approval of the sale of any bonds for CFD 88-12, that a surety be provided to
insure that should there be default on the bonds and a delay in foreclosure on the land
securing the bonds, the surety would pay any debt payments that come due. After many
months of negotiations, a surety has agreed to issue the necessary security instrument.
The surety is recluiring that Bedford and Kernper guarantee the surety as well as pledge the
value of their land holdings.
Bedford and Kemper .are willing to pay for the surety and sign the guarantee. However,
the cost of the surety depends on the potential, not the actual amount of bonds issued.
Further, Bedford's own bank places limits on Bedford's ability to pledge its land.
Consequently, Bedford and Kemper have requested that, as a condition of executing the
surety agreement, the City agree not to issue any bonds in excess of $19,000,000
without the consent of the majority of the property owners. (This $19,000,000 will cover
the first series of bonds, which include widening Ynez, $2,000,000 for parks and the cost
of designing Overland, the freeway bridges and loops, and land acquisition for Overland).
Further, they are requesting that the City not object should they wish to petition the
County to reduce the bond authorization from the $60,000,000 presently provided in the
CFD 88-12.
Accordingly, it is recommended that Council approve a Memorandum of Understanding.
ATTACHMENTS:
- Memorandum of Understanding
- Summary of Series I, II and III Bonds
sff\l 15430.AGD
3. This Memorandum does not apply to any sub-zone within
CFD 88-12.
· r o ~n \ any
Title: Vice Pre.si~ent - Genera] C0unse]
city of Tem®oula
Ronald J. Parks
Mayor
Attest:
June Greek
city Clerk
Approved as to fSrm:
Pre1~req~ 8y:~QIP
~EDF,_;r,-, I--Lr=r-
CFD 88-12: Ynez Road Corridor
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES
October 1, 1991
YNEZ ROAD WIDENING
ROADWAY ITEMS
SEWER ITEMS
LANDSCAPING ITEMS
RIOHT. OF-WAY
TOTAL !~STIMATE
$3,213,736
$339,400
$584,653
$190.008
$896,401
$0
$5,224,198
ROADWRY ITEMS
STRUCTURE ITEMS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
TOTAL ESTIMATE
OVERLAND DRIVE OVERCROSSING @ 1-15
$1,814,611
$7,310,169
$1,540,000
$10,664,780
RANCHO'CALHrORNIA ROAD INTERCHANGE
ROADWAh' ITEMS
STRUCTLYR~ ITEMS
RIGhT-OIl-WAY
TOTAL ESTIMATE
$2.835,000
$2,455,000
$1,575,000
$6,865,000
WINCHESTER ROAD INTERCHANGE
ROADWAY ITEMS
STRUCTURE ITEMS
RIGHT-OBWAY
TOTAL E3TIMATE
$3,125,0(X)
$2,965,000
$1,575,000
$7,665,000
ORAh~ TOT~kL
$S0,418.978
CC~4MUNITY FACXL%TIEB DISTRICT 88-12
~'1I ROAD COKKIDOR
CITY O~ TE~iCULA
$9,124,780.00
$410~ 615.10
$273~743.40
SUBTOT,Iv, L 81,117#785.51
SUBTOTAL
EST~eAT~) r~3iAwc3~3 C0STI AND OTSlR INCZDEIqTAL$
$3,234,494.38
$13,477t059.93
PMPOSID ~OleD JUiO~IT
ITEM 9
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
November 26, 1991
Adoption of Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction
PREPARED BY: Michael D. Wolff, Senior Public Works Inspector
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the attached Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction,
repealing Ordinance 461 adopted from Riverside County upon incorporation by the City by
introducing and adopting an Ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON-CODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ORDINANCES AND ADOPTING STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION.
BACKGROUND:
At the direction of the Director of Public Works, the Public Works Department assembled
Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction for the City of Temecula.
The drawings were reviewed by Public Works Staff and were then sent to the Coordinating
Committee for review and comments. The Coordinating Committee reviewed the drawing
through a subcommittee which was comprised of five (5) Coordinating Committee members
and three (3) Public Works employees. The subcommittee's comments were incorporated into
the preliminary drawings and have been accepted by the Public Works Department and the
Coordinating Committee as proposed.
The Public Works Construction drawings were revised due to inconsistencies between
Ordinance 461 adopted December 2, 1989, and the Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction (Green Book, adopted by City), The inconsistencies which were addressed by
the subcommittee were as follows:
-1- p~l\sgdspt\l126\drawings.sld 111891
County of Riverside classifies concrete design as Class A, B, and C. The City of
Temecula Standards will utilize Green Book for concrete design as follows:
520-C-2500 for street surface improvements (520 Ibs. of Portland cement per
cubic yard of concrete as compared to 470 Ibs. of Portland cement per cubic
yard for Class B).
560-C-3250 for drainage facilities and storm drain structures (560 Ibs. of
Portland cement per cubic yard as compared to 564 Ibs. of Portland cement per
cubic yard for Class A).
Cs
560-C-3250 miscellaneous concrete, street lights, and traffic signal foundations
(560 Ibs. of Portland cement per cubic yard compared to 564 Ibs. of Portland
cement per cubic yard).
Class II Base rock shall be specified as crushed aggregate rock in accordance with
Green Book. Tolerances shall be the same as Green Book.
Subgrade (dirt grade) shall be +0.04 feet (approximately '~ inch). Finish grade
(rock) shall be d:O.02 feet. (approximately ~A inch).
Compaction of finish grade and subgrade shall be 95% compaction for top one foot
(1 ft.) and 90% compaction below one foot (1 ft.).
Placement of asphalt pavement shall conform to Green Book Standards and shall be
limited to placement of no more than three inches (3") in one lift (Green Book specifies
asphalt shall be placed with material temperatures between 265°F and 325°F, and the
three inch (3") lift limit shall be to maintain industry standard).
s
The County of Riverside Flood Control Standard Drawings shall be used for all design
and construction of flood control and storm drain systems. The adopted standards
from County Ordinance 461 does not contain a complete set of storm drain or flood
control standards, therefore to eliminate the use of two (2) partial sets of standards,
the use of the County Flood Control Standards will provide a complete and consistent
set of standards for flood control and storm drain.
The Drawings consist of the Standard Drawings adopted by City Council from County
Ordinance 461 with the above-stated modifications or additions and the following additional
drawings:
114 Pavement Design Requirements (pavement design based on "R" value and traffic
index)
203 Type "E", "F" and "G" curbs for parking lots
207 Commercial drive approach
404 Equestrian trail
405 Trench repair
The Standard Drawings for Public Works construction shall become effective thirty (30) days
after the second reading of Ordinance 91- (first reading will be November 26, 1991,
second reading will be December 10, 1991).
The Standard Drawings will be available for purchase by the public at the Public Works
counter for $17.50 per set ($.25 per single sheet). A copy is on file at the Public Works
Department for review.
FISCAL IMPACT:
To minimize any fiscal impact from the implementation of the new standards, existing and
future projects or developments will be reviewed per the following:
Existing projects or developments with plans submitted prior to January 1 O, 1992 and
signed by the Deputy City Engineer prior to March 1, 1992, shall be constructed
utilizing the standards to which they were designed.
Projects or developments existing and under construction shall continue to be
constructed utilizing the standards to which they were designed.
Projects or developments with plans submitted after January 10, 1992 shall be
designed and constructed utilizing the updated City of Temecula Standards.
Projects or developments with plans which may have been submitted prior to
January 10, 1992, and have not been signed by the Deputy City Engineer prior to
March 1, 1992, shall be designed and constructed utilizing the updated City of
Temecula Standards.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit "A" - Proposed letter to construction industry
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON-CODIFIED
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE AND ADOPTING STANDARD
DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference portions of the non-codi~ed
Riverside County Ordinances. On the effective date of this Ordinance, Ordinance No. 461 of
the non-codi~ed Riverside County Ordinances is hereby repealed.
SECTION 2. The attached standard drawings for Public Works Construction are hereby
adopted. They are to be used on all public works projects in conjunction with the standard
specifications for public works Construction (Green Book). Any inconsistency between the
standard drawings and the Green Book shall be resolved in favor of the Standard Drawings.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 91- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the __. day of , 1991, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
3rune S. Greek, City Clerk
5/ords31 -2-
ITEM 10
ORDINANCE NO. 9142
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF
ZONE APPLICATION NO. 5740 CHANGING THE
ZONE FROM R-A-20 TO I-P AND R-5 ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF RIDGEPARK DRIVE, SOUTH OF
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 940-310-020 AND 021
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law
of the State of California, and the City of Temecula. The application land use district as shown
on the attached Exhibit "A" is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Land Use map
for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as may be amended hereafter from time to
time by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of Temecula Official Zoning
Map is amended by placing in effect the zone or zones as described in Change of Zone No. 5740
and in the above title, and as shown on zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. 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
remaining parts of this Ordinance.
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 and cause copies of this
Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of November, 1991.
AT'FEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Otda 9142
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Iune S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 91-42 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of November, 1991, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 261h day
of November, 1991, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
0 COUNCILMEMBER:
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3/Ords 91~6
EXHIBIT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
CHANGE OF ZONE 5740
PARCELS OF LAND BEING A PART OF PARCELS 20 AND 21, PARCEL MAP
18254, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN PARCEL MAP BOOK 116, PAGES 69
THROUGH 78, INCLUSIVE, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
ZONING
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 20, AS
SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE NORTH 47'36'58" EAST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID
PARCEL 20 A DISTANCE OF 617.95 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 51'47'51" EAST DEPARTING SAID LINE A DISTANCE OF
1073.56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHWESTERLY, RAVING A RADIUS OF 3500.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 08'26'51", AN ARC LENGTH OF 516.03 FEET TO A POINT ON
THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 21;
THENCE SOUTH 11'06'14" WEST ALONG SAID LINE A DISTANCE OF
525.58 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 66°42'29'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 1331.O5 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 20;
THENCE NORTH 31'23'58" WEST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID
PARCEL 20 A DISTANCE OF 684.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINS 28.39 ACRES, MORE
OR LESS.
IP ZONING
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 20, AS
SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE NORTH 47'36'58" EAST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID
PARCEL 20 A DISTANCE OF 617.95 FEET;
THENCE DEPARTING SAID LINE SOUTH 51'47'51" EAST A DISTANCE OF
130.76 FEET TO A POINT ON THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 20,
SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 82'01'31" EAST A DISTANCE OF 679.55 FEET TO A
POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF KATHLEEN WAY,
AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
1
CITY OF TEMECULA
CITY COUNCIL
MAP NO:
CHANGE OF ZONE NO: 5740
ORDINANCE NO: 91-
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
S\STAFFRPT~574OCZ.CC 9
ITEM 11
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 26, 1991
Plot Plan No. 239
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Charly Ray
Staff Recommends that the City Council:
1.
ADOPT the negative declaration for Plot Plan No. 239
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-_ approving Plot Plan No. 239
based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff
report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
Rancho California Water District
Donald J. Gillis (Gillis Iler and Clark)
Construction of the new Rancho California Water District
Headquarters Complex as follows:
40,000 square foot 2-story office building
13,000 square foot single story warehouse
structure
20,000 square foot single story operations
maintenance building
Service Vehicle Storage Yard at 250 spaces and
EmployeeNisitor Parking Areas at 287 spaces.
Total site area: 11.5 +/- acres
LOCATION: Between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road,
approximately 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road.
EXISTING ZONING:
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
SWAP DESIGNATION:
L-I (Light-Industrial)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
As existing, no change proposed
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant
DISCUSSION
The City Planning Commission considered Plot Plan No. 239 at the regularly scheduled
Commission hearing of October 7, 1991. In their deliberation of the proposal's merits the
Commission concluded the project was appropriate in terms of its land use and design. It was
further determined that the project as designed and conditioned would not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment. To this extent, the Commission accepted the
environmental assessment of the project prepared by the Rancho California Water District.
This assessment together with a finding of "Deminimis Impacts" was filed by the R,C,W,D.
with the Riverside County Clerk and Recorder on July 12, 1991. The required 30 days
posting of the environmental determination concluded on August 14, 1991. Based on the
foregoing, the Commission deleted Condition No. 20 (Assembly Bill 3158 compliance/negative
Environmental Declaration Posting fee payment).
The Commission also amended Condition No. 15 to read as follows:
15.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of minimum 24" box canopy trees along
streets, and within parking areas. Additional landscaping as approved by the Planning
Director shall also be provided along the project site's northeasterly perimeter wall.
Condition No. 54. duplicated requirements specified in Condition No. 52, and was deleted.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on the public testimony for this project, and the considerations of the Planning
Commission at their hearing of October 7, 1991, Staff concurs with the Commission's
recommendation for project approval, including the project conditions as amended above.
RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends that the City Council:
Attachments: 1.
2.
3.
1. ADOPT the negative declaration for Plot Plan No. 239
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-_ approving Plot Plan No, 239
based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff
report,
Resolution Approving Plot Plan No. 239 - page 3
Conditions of Approval Plot Plan No. 239 - page 10
Planning Commission Minutes, Public Hearing Item No. 8, Plot
Plan No. 239, dated October 7, 1991 - page 11
Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 7, 1991 -
page 12
Fee Checklist - page 13
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP.CC 3
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-_
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP, CC 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 239 TO CONSTRUCT
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS
COMPLEX AS FOLLOWS: 40,000 SQUARE FOOT 2-STORY
OFFICE BUILDING; 13,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY
WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE; 20,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE
STORY OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING; RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT SERVICE VEHICLE STORAGE
YARD AND EMPLOYEE/VISITOR PARKING AREAS ON A PARCEL
CONTAINING 11.5 +/- ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN AVENIDA
DE VENTAS AND WINCHESTER ROAD, APPROXIMATELY %
MILES WEST OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 909-120-024 (PARENT NO.)
WHEREAS, The Rancho California Water District filed Plot Plan No. 239 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Plot Plan on October 7,
1991 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Plot Plan;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot
Plan on November 26, 1991, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and
Staff Report regarding the Plot Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP.CC 5
SECTION 1.
Findings
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set
forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
plan.
The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
S\STAFFRPT\239-FP.CC 6
(1)
There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 239 proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or
which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following
findings can be made:
The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with
all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances,
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the
land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the
surrounding property.
The City Council, in approving the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following
findings, to wit:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 239 will be
consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. The project, as
conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances
and development standards. Further, the proposal is characteristic of
similar development approved by the City to date and that anticipated
in it's vicinity based on current development trends.
(2)
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or
interference with the City's future General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the Plan. The project is compatible with
existing development standards which will likely be included in the
City's future General Plan. Substantial inconsistency is unlikely.
(3)
The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning
and zoning laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and
California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and
Zoning Law).
(4)
As conditioned, the site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land
use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use. A reversion to acreage and lot
line adjustment affecting underlying parcels are required prior to
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP. CC 7
issuance of building permits. Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided, as well as sufficient area to appropriately
construct the proposed structures (Reference Exhibits D and E.)
(5)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
public health or welfare. Reference the proposal's Initial Environmental
Assessment, (Attachment No. 3), and project Conditions of Approval
(Attachment No. 2).
(6)
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property.
It does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land
use of the area. As conditioned, the project conforms with applicable
land use and development regulations, and reflects design elements
currently existing within the City.
(7)
The project has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project draws access
from Winchester Road and Avertida de Ventas, improved dedicated City
rights-of-way. Project access, as designed and conditioned, conforms
with applicable City Engineering standards and ordinances.
(8)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
built or natural environment as determined in the Initial Study
performed for this project. Reference the attached Initial Environmental
Study and Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239.
(9)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting documentation is attached.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical
development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
SECTION 2.
Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a
significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
granted.
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP.CC 8
SECTION 3.
Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Plot Plan No. 239 for the operation
and construction of Rancho California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows:
40,000 square foot 2-story office building; 13,000 square foot single story warehouse
structure; 20,000 square foot single story operations and maintenance building; Rancho
California Water District service vehicle storage yard and employee/visitor parking areas on
a parcel containing 11.5 +/- Acres located between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road,
approximately % miles west of Diaz Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-024
(Parent no.) subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
,1991.
RONALD J PARKS
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the __ day of
, 1991 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE So GREEK
CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP,CC 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP. CC 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: 239
Project Description:
Construction of the new Rancho
California Water District
HeadQuarters Complex as
follows:
40,000 square feet 2
story office building
13,000 square feet single
story warehouse structure
20,000 square feet single
storyoperations/
maintenance building
Rancho California Water
District Employee, Service
Storage Yard & Visitor
Parking Areas totaling 537
spaces
Assessor's Parcel No.:
909-120-024
(Parent No.)
Planning Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for construction of the new
RanchO California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows: 40,000
square feet 2 story office building, 13,000 sq.ft. single story warehouse
structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations/maintenance building and
supporting Rancho California Water District employee, service storage yard and
visitor parking areas.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula,
its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory
agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 239. The
City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action,
or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the
STAFF~T~239.PP 16
defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim,
action or proceeding, or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall expire
on
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 239 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these
conditions.
Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, (3) copies of a Parking,
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements of
Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, or
within the time frame specified by the City Planning Director and City Building
Official. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped
areas shall be maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten (10)
feet of an entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than
thirty (30) inches.
Five hundred and thirty-seven parking spaces, designed in accordance with
Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, shall be provided as
shown on the Approved Exhibit D. The parking area shall be surfaced with
asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on 4 inches of Class
II base.
A minimum of 5 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit D. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified
by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel,
beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The
sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at
the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the
bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a
STAFFi~>T~239-PP 17
minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each
entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches,
clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped
persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed
vehicles may be reclaimed at __ or
by telephone "
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue
paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits F. 1, F.2.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with Exhibits F.1, F.2 and Exhibits 1.1, 1.2.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safety
Department, a six foot high decorative wall shall be constructed the perimeter
of the project's proposed vehicle storage yard as illustrated on the project site
plan, Exhibit D. The required wall shall be subject to the approval of the
Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning Director.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. As a minimum, each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be
constructed of materials architecturally compatible with the primary facility,
utilizing a steel gate which screens bins from external view.
Landscaping plans hsall incorporate the use of minimum 24" box canopy tress
along streets, and within parking areas. Additionallandscaping as approvedby
the Planning Director shall also be provided along the project site's
northeasterly perimeter wall.
STAFFRPT~23S.PP 18
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 (Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation and
Procurement) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on
the gross acreage of the parcel proposed for development. Should Ordinance
No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior
to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall
pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by
County ordinance or resolution.
Seven (7) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as
approved by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project
area.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts to
be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of planrings, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the planting for one year, shall be filed with
the Department of Building and Safety.
Contingent upon availability of irrigation water, prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits all required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been
installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The
plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. Alternatively,
installation of landscaping may be secured by bonding means, and in amounts
specified by the Director of Planning; and installed at such times as irrigation
water is in adequate supply as determined by RCWD and the City Planning
Director.
Within forty eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applioant/dcvclopor -,,hall deliver to the Planning Deportment a cashiers check
or moncy order payablc to the County Clcrk in the amount of Onc Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy Five Dollars (~1,275.00), which includes thc One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fcc, in compliancc with AB
3158, required by Fi3h and Game Codc Scction 711.4(d)(2) plus thc Twenty
Fivc Dollar (~25.00) County adminictrativc foc to cnablc the City to filc thc
Noticc of Dctormination required under Public Rcsourecs Codc Scction 21152
and 14 Cal. Codc of Rcgulations 15075. If within 3uch forty eight (48) hour
period the opplicant/dcvclopcr has not dclivcrcd to thc Planning Dcpartmcnt the
check required 3bore, thc approval for the projeer grantcd hcrcin shall bc void
by rca3on of failurc of oondition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any
use allowed by this permit.
Engineerina Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this project,
and shall be completed at no cost to .~ny Govcrnmcnt Agcncy, the City of Temecula.
All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Engineering Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
22. As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
23.
The developer shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24"x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
24.
The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report specifically related
to the project site to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the
soils stability and geological conditions of the site, as well as the structural
design of driveway and parking lot areas.
25.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check, and shall address
the restricted use zone, fault line area; and areas of potential liquefaction and
subsidence as identified by the report prepared by Schaefer Dixon Associates,
dated June 7, 1989 and August 15, 1989, for PM 21383.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters having been received, and subsequently
approved by the City Engineer,
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street
improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, and traffic control devices as
appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
33.
c. Landscaping (street parkway).
d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines if needed.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
STAFFRPT\239,PP 2 1
34.
35.
Drainage calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All onsite and offsite drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City
Engineer.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
36.
All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
37.
A precise grading plan and site improvement plan shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department for review and approval. The building pad shall be
certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil
Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site
conditions.
38.
Lot Line Adjustment 21 shall be approved by the Planning Department and a
copy of the recorded documents shall be provided by the applicant to the
Department of Public Works prior to any building permits being issued.
39.
40.
41.
42.
A Parcel Map for reversion to acreage shall be prepared and submitted to the
Planning Department to be recorded over the affected parcels of Parcel Map
21383. The Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building
permits.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic signal impact.
Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V.
Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T.V.
Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
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 Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the
STAFFP~T~,23S.PP 22
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, 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. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
43, A minimum flowline grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Onsite improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives
shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
45.
All landscaping adjacent to driveway approaches shall be installed to provide
for adequate site distance.
46.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards or
a commercial curb return approach may be used and shall be shown on the
street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401
(curb sidewalk). The easterly driveway on Winchester Road, and the two
driveways on Avenida De Ventas shall be a minimum width of 36 feet. The
two westerly driveways on Winchester Road shall be a minimum width of 30
feet.
Riverside County Fire Department
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot plan,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
47.
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established in
Ordinance 546.
STAFFF~°T%239,PP 23
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
The applicant/developer shall provide or show there exists a water system
capable of delivering 4000 GPM for a 3 hour duration at 20 PSI residual
operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material
is place on the job site.
A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system
(6"x4"2~x2~), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet
from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular
travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent
hydrant(s) in the system.
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to
reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire
protection measures.
The applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types,
location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements.
Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water
company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the water
system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Department."
The applicant/developer shall install a complete fire sprinkler system in all
buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be
located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet
from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire
sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans.
The applicant/developer shall install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire
alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval
prior to installation, as per UBC.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must appear
on the title page of the building plans.
Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code,
Section 503.
The applicant/developer shall install panic hardware and exit signs as per
Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. Low level Exit Signs, where exit
signs are required by Section 3314(a).
57. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
STAFFRPT~239,PP ~)4
58.
The applicant/developer shall install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum
rating of 2A-IOBC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper
placement of equipment.
59.
Applicant/developer shall be responsible for obtaining underground or
aboveground permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments.
60.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be
responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of 8558.00 to the
Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
61.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall deposit,
with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of 25 ¢ per
square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be
submitted seoaratelv from the plan check review fees.
62. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans
must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
63. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the
Building and Safety Office.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and
Engineering staff.
Riverside County Deoartment Of Health
The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 239 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior
to any building plan review for Health clearance, the following items are required:
64. "Wili-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
65.
'A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch
(Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has
been cleared for:
Underground storage tanks
Hazardous Waste Generator Services
Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185)
Waste reduction management
66. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA approvals).
$TAFFRPT%239.PP 25
Note: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of
Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance.
City of Temecula Deoartment of Building and Safetv
67. A request for street addressing must be made prior to submittal Building Plan
Review.
68.
The applicant/developer shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1988
editions of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 1990
National Electrical Code, California State Administrative Code, Title 24
Handicapped and Energy Regulations and the Temecula City Code.
69. Lighting on site and located on structures shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance No. 655.
STAFFF~T~239,PP 26
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OF OCTOBER 7, 1991;
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 8
PLOT PLAN NO. 239
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP.CC 11
pLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 7, 1991
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF expressed a concern for the
transportation conditions indicating that prior to
recordation the applicant will get credit for the
mitigation fee and contributing 46% of the construction
costs and entering into a reimbursement agreement;
however, they are building them.
ROBERT RIGHETTI stated that Condition 39, credit given
toward signal mitigation fee, is being deleted and the
conditions outlined are taking the previous conditions
and revising them.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing
at 8:15 P.M. and Deny Minor Change No. i for Parcel Map
No. 25059 and APProve Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change
No. 1, subject to the modification and deletion of
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map NO. 25059, seconded
by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
8. PLOT PLAN NO. 239 -- RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Proposal to construct three structures to house Rancho
California Water District Headquarters functions as
follows: 2 story office at 40,000 square feet; warehouse
at 13,000 square feet and an Operations Building at
20,000 square feet. Located northwesterly of the
intersection of Diaz Road and Rio Nedo.
CHARLES HAY provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:25 P.M.
JOHN HERBERT, 28061 Diaz Road, Temecula, concurred with
the staff report. Mr. Herbert requested clarification of
the following Conditions: Item 20, project is not subject
to the Fish and Game review and therefore should not
be subject to the fees; Item 15, applicant stated they did
not have the funds to place all specimen trees in the
project; and regarding Conditions 16, 33, 40 and 42,
developer has paid these fees already.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested modifying the first
engineering condition to reflect "...at no cost to the
City."
TPCMINIO/07/91 -10- 10/08/91
pLItNNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991
(
DOUG STEWART Concurred with the amendment.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested that the requirement for this
fee be mitigated.
MIKE GRAY advised that this was a standard fee on all
buildings in the City and there is no proposal for
deferment of the fee.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDqUeStioned if Mr. Gray would be adverse
to deleting Condition 54 which was a duplicate of
Condition 52.
MIKE GRAY concurred with the recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY requested clarification on Condition
20.
JOHN CAVARAUGH advised that this was a state mandated fee
and the applicant can file a deminimous exemption.
DAN GILLISS, 193 Hartford Drive, Newport Beach, answered
questions regarding the proposed gas pumps that were
referenced in the plans.
COMMISSIONER FANEY suggested clarifying what the
Commission wanted to see in the way of trees.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he felt 24" box trees
were appropriate, particularly along Diaz Road.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing
at 8:35 P.M. and recommend AdoPtiOn of the Negative
Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239 and AdoPt Resolution
91-(next} approving Plot Plan No. 239, modifying Condition
No. 15 to specify 24" box trees, No. 20, language to
reflect whether or not the applicant must pay the fees,
No. 54 deleted and top of page 20, to read "...at no cost
to the City.", seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey,
Ford, Noagland
NOES:
0 COMMISSIONERS: None
9. PARCEL MAP 24085
9.1 Proposal to create 57 commercial/industrial parcel on a
73 acre site in M-SC zone. Located on the westerly side
TPCMIN10/07/91 -11- 10/08/91
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PLOT PLAN NO. 239
DATED
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP.CC 12
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.: Plot Plan No. 239 (PP 239)
Prepared By: Charles Ray
Recommendation:
The Planning Department Staff
recommends that the Planning
Commission:
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative
Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239; and
ADOPT Resolution 91- recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 239; based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
Rancho California Water District
Donald J. Gillis (Gillis Iler and Clark)
Construction of the new Rancho California Water
District Headquarters Complex as follows:
40,000 square feet 2-story office building
13,000 square feet single story warehouse
structure
20,000 square feet single story operations
maintenance building
Service Vehicle Storage Yard at 250 spaces
and Employee/Visitor Parking Areas at 287
spaces.
Total site area: 11.5 +/- acres
STAFFRPT\239.PP
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
Between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road,
approximately 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road.
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
North: M-SC
South: M-SC
East: M-SC
West: M-SC
As existing no change proposed
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant
Site Area:
Approximately 11.5 acres
Building Area:
2-story office
Building: 40,000 square feet
Warehouse: 13,000 square feet +/-
Operations Maintenance
Building: 20,000 square feet +/-
Total: 73,000 square feet +/-
Parking Provided:
For: District Vehicles per Rancho Water District
vehicle storage yard requirements: 250
spaces
For: Employees/Visitors: 270 required, 287
provided
Plot Plan No. 239 was submitted to the City of
Temecula Planning Department on June 17, 1991.
The project, as originally proposed, conformed
substantially with applicable design standards and
zoning ordinances. Review, comment and concerns
STAFFRPT~239.PP 2
regarding the proposal focused primarily on
determination of traffic impact mitigation necessary
to support the project. Further, as the subject site
consists of 13 separate lots, or portions thereof, the
applicant is also required to process a parcel map to
effect a "Reversion to Acreage" in order to effect the
project as configured. Both of the aforementioned
concerns are addressed in the following project
analysis.
ANALYSIS:
Land Use and Architectural Compatibility
The proposed use is identified as one of those
permitted, subject to plot plan approval, under the
subject site's current zoning designation of
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
(Reference Exhibit B). Adjacent properties are
currently vacant, but will likely be developed with
similar commercial/industrial projects based on recent
development patterns within the City. Project
materials and design elements proposed by the
applicant are considered compatible with the design
guidelines currently observed by the City. As such,
the project is considered compatible with applicable
City development standards and ordinances affecting
the proposal site and neighboring properties, as well
as probable future development of surrounding
parcels.
Landscaping
Appropriately, on-site planting and irrigation schemes
are in keeping with City policies regarding water
conservation and use of drought-tolerant vegetative
species. The project site also includes a
"Demonstration Garden", evidencing the Water
District's commitment to regional water-
conservation; employing drought tolerant species in
locally appropriate applications.
Site Access
The site is accessible by recently improved rights of
way for Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road
STAFFRPT~239,PP 3
extensions. Improvements for these rights of way
have been approved by the City of Temecula in
conjunction with the underlying Parcel Map 21383.
Primary project site ingress and egress for employees
and visitors is provided by 2, two-way commercial-
width drives accessing Winchester Road at the
southwesterly corner of the project site, as indicated
on the project site plan (Reference Exhibit D).
Access to dedicated employee parking areas, is card-
controlled via a secondary internal entrance point
also indicated on Exhibit D.
District maintenance vehicle access is provided via 3
separate commercial width drives leading into the
district vehicle storage yard as shown on the project
site plan; one drive fronts Winchester Road, while
two are proposed on the Avertida De Ventas
frontage. Ingress/egress at these points is controlled
by rolling gates, also indicated on the project site
plan.
Traffic linDacts
At the request of the Public Works Department, the
applicant submitted a focused traffic analysis based
upon the original traffic study prepared by the
subdivider. Project related traffic impacts, as
documented by the traffic study submitted by the
applicant, are mitigated by signalization and public
facilities fees, specified in the attached Conditions of
Approval. (Reference also Attachment No. 5 - "Fee
Checklist". )
Parking and On-Site Circulation
The structure, as designed, is user-specific, with
parking facilities designed to support administrative
and maintenance functions of the Rancho California
Water District. Employee/visitor parking exceeds the
minimum of 270 spaces required by ordinance; 287
are provided. Parking for district vehicles is
proposed at 250 spaces based on current
requirements, and allowing for programmed
STAFFR~T~239,PP 4
expansion of services support activities per R. C .W.D.
specifications.
As conditioned, on-site circulation patterns and drive
aisle designs are considered adequate to support the
project.
Grading and Drainage
The existing site is essentially level, having been
rough graded in accordance with grading plans for
the underlying Parcel Map No. 21383.
Toxic/Hazardous Materials Use & Storage
The applicant proposes on-site temporary holding of
used vehicle lubricants employing a reclaimed oil
system. The system will consist of an above grade
tank covered with a concrete envelope. This tank
will be periodically drained by a licensed contractor,
and final disposition of used oil and related by
products will be the contractor's responsibility.
Location of the proposed reclaimed oil storage tank
is indicated on the project site plan (Reference
Exhibit D).
Plans for temporary holding and recycling of used
petroleum products have been reviewed and
approved by the County Fire and Health
Departments, as mitigated by the attached project
Conditions of Approval.
Uniform Buildina Code and State Mao Act Compliance
Pursuant to section 504 of the Uniform Building
Code (UBC), the applicant is required to eliminate the
property lines currently subdividing the project site.
In summary, the referenced UBC section prohibits
single structures from crossing property lines as is
currently proposed by the applicant (Reference
Exhibit D.1.) The formal process to accomplish this
("Reversion to Acreage", per Chapter 6 of the State
Map Act) entails redescription of the property and
recordation of a new map reflecting the project site
STAFFRPT~239.PP 5
as a single parcel. Recordation of this map is
conditioned to issuance of Building Permits
(Reference Condition of Approval No. 39.)
The project site as currently indicated also reflects a
lot line adjustment along the proposal's westerly
boundary. Existing and adjusted property lines are
indicated in Exhibit H. Lot Line Adjustment No. 21
filed independently by Johnson + Johnson, the
project site owner, will effect the adjusted property
lines as proposed by Plot Plan No. 239.
Approval of LLA No. 21 is also required prior to
issuance of Building Permits (Reference Condition
No. 38.)
EXISTING ZONING,
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN
AND SWAP CONSISTENCY:
The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing
zoning and subdivision ordinances affecting the
subject property, and is compatible with Southwest
Area Plan (SWAP) land use recommendations for the
site (Reference Exhibit C). As discussed previously,
the proposal is also compatible with existing and
anticipated development in its immediate vicinity.
As such, Plot Plan No. 239 will likely be consistent
with the City's General Plan recommendations for
the property in question, upon the Plan's final
adoption.
ENVIRONMENTAL .
DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to applicable portions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial
Environmental Assessment was prepared for Plot
Plan No. 239. Based on findings contained in that
assessment, it was determined the project in
question will not have a significant impact on the
built or natural environment; a Negative Declaration
of potential environmental impacts is recommended
for adoption.
FINDINGS:
There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 239 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
STAFFRPT~239.PP B
State law. The project, as conditioned,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
ordinances and development standards.
Further, the proposal is characteristic of
similar development approved by the City to
date and that anticipated in it's vicinity based
on current development trends.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with the City's
future General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the Plan. The
project is compatible with existing
development standards which will likely be
included in the City's future General Plan.
Substantial inconsistency is unlikely.
The proposed use or action as conditioned
complies with State planning and zoning laws.
Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and
California Governmental Code Sections
65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law).
As conditioned, the site is suitable to
accommodate the proposed land use in terms
of the size and shape of the lot configuration,
circulation patterns, access, and intensity of
use. A reversion to acreage and lot line
adjustment affecting underlying parcels are
required prior to issuance of building permits.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided, as well as sufficient
area to appropriately construct the proposed
structures (Reference Exhibits D and E.)
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare. Reference the proposal's Initial
Environmental Assessment, (Attachment No.
3), and project Conditions of Approval
(Attachment No. 2).
6. The proposal will not have an adverse effect
STAFFRPT\239.PP 7
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property. It does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. As
conditioned, the project conforms with
applicable land use and development
regulations, and reflects design elements
currently existing within the City.
The project has acceptable access to
dedicated rights-of-way which are open to,
and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
draws access from Winchester Road and
Avenida de Ventas, improved dedicated City
rights-of-way. Project access, as designed
and conditioned, conforms with applicable
City Engineering standards and ordinances.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial Study
performed for this project. Reference the
attached Initial Environmental Study and
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps,
exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
vgw
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative
Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239, and
ADOPT Resolution 91- recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 239; based on the
analysis and findings contained in
the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
STAFFlt>T%239,PP 8
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A
B
C
D
D.1
E.1, E.2
F. 1, F.2,
F.3
G.1, G.2,
G.3
H
Vicinity Map
Zoning Map
SWAP Recommended Land Use
Site Plan
Site Plan/Underlying Parcelization Composite
Landscape Plans
Elevations
Floor Plans
Parcel Map No. 21383 - Adjusted Property
Lines
1. Color Exterior
2. Materials Samples
Fee Check List
STAFFRPT~239.PP 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PLOT PLAN NO. 239 TO CONSTRUCT RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS
COMPLEX AS FOLLOWS: 40,000 SQ.FT. 2-STORY
OFFICE BUILDING; 13,000 SQ.FT. SINGLE STORY
WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE; 20,000 SQ.FT. SINGLE STORY
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING; RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT SERVICE VEHICLE
STORAGE YARD AND EMPLOYEE/VISITOR PARKING
AREAS ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 11.5 +/- ACRES
LOCATED BETWEEN AVENIDA DE VENTAS AND
WINCHESTER ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 3/4 MILES WEST
OF OIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-120-024 (PARENT NO.)
WHEREAS, The Rancho California Water District filed Plot Plan No. 239
in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
pertaining to said Plot Plan on October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report
regarding the Plot Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findinos. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
STAFFI~T~239,PP 10
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
(a)
There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including the
issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of
STAFFRPT~239.PP 11
the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 239 proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be
approved unless the following findings can be made:
a)
The proposed use must conform to all the
General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of state law and City
ordinances.
b)
The overall development of the land is
designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare; conforms
to the logical development of the land and is
compatible with the present and future logical
development of the surrounding property.
(2) The Planning Commission, in recommending approval
of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 239 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as conditioned,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
STAFFRPT%239.PP I 2
ordinances and development standards.
Further, the proposal is characteristic of
similar development approved by the City to
date; and that is anticipated in it's vicinity
based on current development trends.
b)
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with the City's
future General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the Plan. The
project is compatible with existing
development standards which will likely be
included in the City's future General Plan.
Substantial inconsistency is unlikely.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
(Planning and Zoning Law).
d)
As conditioned, the site is suitable to
accommodate the proposed land use in terms
of the size and shape of the lot configuration,
circulation patterns, access, and intensity of
use. A reversion to acreage and lot line
adjustments affecting underlying parcels are
required prior to issuance of building permits.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided, as well as sufficient
area to appropriately construct the proposed
structures (Reference Exhibits D and E.)
e)
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare. Reference the proposal's Initial
Environmental Assessment, (Attachment No.
3), and project Conditions of Approval
(Attachment No. 2).
f)
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property. It does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. As
STAFFP~aT%239,PP 13
conditioned, the project conforms with
applicable land use and development
regulations and reflects design elements
currently existing within the City.
g)
The project has acceptable access to
dedicated rights-of-way which are open to,
and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
draws access from Winchester Road and
Avenida de Ventas, improved dedicated City
rights-of-way. Project access, as designed
and conditioned, conforms with applicable
City Engineering standards and ordinances.
h)
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial Study
performed for this project. Reference the
attached Initial Environmental Study and
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239.
i)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps,
exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan
proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and
is compatible with the present and future development of the
surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Comoliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Plot
Plan No. 239 to construct Rancho California Water District headquarters complex as
STAFFI~T~239,PP 14
follows: 40,000 square feet 2-story office building 13,000 square feet single story
warehouse structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations maintenance
building, Rancho California Water District, service vehicle storage yard and
employee/visitor parking areas, on a parcel containing 11.5 +/- acres located between
Avenida de Ventas and Winchester Road, approximately 3/4 miles west of Diaz Road
and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-024 (Parent No.) subject to the
following conditions:
A. Reference Attachment No. 2.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day
of , 199
JOHN HOAGLAND
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 , 199_ by the following vote of the
Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
· PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFI~T~239.PP I 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: 239
Project Description:
Construction of the new Rancho
California Water District
HeadQuarters Comolex as
follows:
40,000 square feet 2
story office building
13,000 square feet single
story warehouse structure
20,000 square feet single
storyoperations/
maintenance building
Rancho California Water
District Employee, Service
Storage Yard & Visitor
Parking Areas totaling 537
spaces
Assessor's Parcel No.:
909-120-024
(Parent No.)
Planning Deoartment
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for construction of the new
Rancho California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows: 40,000
square feet 2 story office building, 13,000 sq.ft. single story warehouse
structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations/maintenance building and
supporting Rancho California Water District employee, service storage yard and
visitor parking areas.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula,
its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory
agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 239. The
City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action,
or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the
STAFFPg°T~239-PP 16
defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim,
action or proceeding, or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the two {2) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall expire
on
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 239 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these
conditions.
Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, (3) copies of a Parking,
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements of
Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, or
within the time frame specified by the City Planning Director and City Building
Official. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped
areas shall be maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten (10)
feet of an entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than
thirty (30)inches.
Five hundred and thirty-seven parking spaces, designed in accordance with
Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, shall be provided as
shown on the Approved Exhibit D. The parking area shall be surfaced with
asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on 4 inches of Class
II base.
A minimum of 5 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit D. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified
by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel,
beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The
sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at
the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the
bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a
STAFFF~l~239,PP 17
minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each
entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches,
clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
10,
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped
persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed
vehicles may be reclaimed at __ or
by telephone "
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue
paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits F. 1, F.2.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with Exhibits F. 1, F.2 and Exhibits I. 1, 1.2.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safety
Department, a six foot high decorative wall shall be constructed the perimeter
of the project's proposed vehicle storage yard as illustrated on the project site
plan, Exhibit D. The required wall shall be subject to the approval of the
Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning Director.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. As a minimum, each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be
constructed of materials architecturally compatible with the primary facility,
utilizing a steel gate which screens bins from external view.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along
streets and within the parking areas.
STAFFI~239.PP 18
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 (Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation and
Procurement) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on
the gross acreage of the parcel proposed for development. Should Ordinance
No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior
to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall
pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by
County ordinance or resolution.
Seven (7) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as
approved by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project
area.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts to
be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of planrings, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the planting for one year, shall be filed with
the Department of Building and Safety.
Contingent upon availability of irrigation water, prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits all required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been
installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The
plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. Alternatively,
installation of landscaping may be secured by bonding means, and in amounts
specified by the Director of Planning; and installed at such times as irrigation
water is in adequate supply as determined by RCWD and the City Planning
Director.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any
use allowed by this permit.
$TAFFRPT~239.PP I 9
Engineering Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this project,
and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
22.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
23.
The developer shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24"x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
24.
The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report specifically related
to the project site to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the
soils stability and geological conditions of the site, as well as the structural
· design of driveway and parking lot areas.
25.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check, and shall address
the restricted use zone, fault line area; and areas of potential liquefaction and
subsidence as identified by the report prepared by Schaefer Dixon Associates,
dated June 7, 1989 and August 15, 1989, for PM 21383.
STA~=3e.~P 20
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters having been received, and subsequently
approved by the City Engineer.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street
improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, and traffic control devices as
appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
33.
c. Landscaping (street parkway).
d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines if needed.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
STAFFRPT~239 ,PP 2 1
34.
35.
Drainage calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All onsite and offsite drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City
Engineer.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
36. All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
37.
A precise grading plan and site improvement plan shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department for review and approval. The building pad shall be
certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil
Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site
conditions.
38.
Lot Line Adjustment 21 shall be approved by the Planning Department and a
copy of the recorded documents shall be provided by the applicant to the
Department of Public Works prior to any building permits being issued.
39.
40.
41.
42.
A Parcel Map for reversion to acreage shall be prepared and submitted to the
Planning Department to be recorded over the affected parcels of Parcel Map
21383. The Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building
permits.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic Signal impact.
Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V.
Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T.V.
Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
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 Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the
STAFFti°T~239.PP 22
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, 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. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; ~ that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
43. A minimum flowline grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Onsite improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives
shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
45.
All landscaping adjacent to driveway approaches shall be installed to provide
for adequate site distance.
46.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards or
a commercial curb return approach may be used and shall be shown on the
street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401
(curb sidewalk). The easterly driveway on Winchester Road, and the two
driveways on Avenida De Ventas shall be a minimum width of 36 feet. The
two westerly driveways on Winchester Road shall be a minimum width of 30
feet.
Riverside County Fire Deoartment
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot plan,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
47.
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established in
Ordinance 546.
STAFF~>T%239,PP 23
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
The applicant/developer shall provide or show there exists a water system
capable of delivering 4000 GPM for a 3 hour duration at 20 PSI residual
operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material
is place on the job site.
A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system
(6"x4"2~x2~), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet
from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular
travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent
hydrant(s) in the system.
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to
reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire
protection measures.
The applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types,
location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements.
Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water
company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the water
system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Department."
The applicant/developer shall install a complete fire sprinkler system in all
buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be
located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet
from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire
sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans.
The applicant/developer shall install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire
alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval
prior to installation, as per UBC.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must appear
on the title page of the building plans.
Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code,
Section 503.
The applicant/developer shall install panic hardware and exit signs as per
Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. Low level Exit Signs, where exit
signs are required by Section 3314(a).
57. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
STAFFI~°T~239.PP 24
58.
The applicant/developer shall install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum
rating of 2A-10BC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper
placement of equipment.
59.
Applicant/developer shall be responsible for obtaining underground or
aboveground permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments.
60.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be
responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00 to the
Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
61.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall deposit,
with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of 25¢ per
square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be
submitted seoaratelv from the plan check review fees.
62. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans
must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
63. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the
Building and Safety Office.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and
Engineering staff.
Riverside County DePartment Of Health
The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 239 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior
to any building plan review for Health clearance, the following items are required:
64. "Will:serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
65.
· A clearance lette,r from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch
(Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055}, will be required indicating that the project has
been cleared for:
Underground storage tanks
Hazardous Waste Generator Services
Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185)
Waste reduction management
66. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA approvals).
STAFF~°T'%239'PP 25
Note: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of
Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance.
City of Temecula Deoartment of Building and Safety
67.
A request for street addressing must be made prior to submittal Building Plan
Review.
68.
The applicant/developer shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1988
editions of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 1990
National Electrical Code, California State Administrative Code, Title 24
Handicapped and Energy Regulations and the Temecula City Code.
69.
Lighting on site and located on structures shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance No. 655,
STAFFR~T~239,PP 26
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent: Rancho California Water District
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
28061 Diaz Road, Temecula. CA
(714) 676-4101
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
August 26,1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Plot Plan No. 239 (PP 239)-Rancho California Water
District Headauarters Complex
Location of Proposal:
Between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road,
aooroximatelv 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yqf Maybe N__o
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
S\$TAFFRPT~23S.PP 27
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~239.PP ~)8
Plant
8.
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?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
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)?
Reduction of the ~umbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~;39,PP 29
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
bB
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SXST~FFRPT~23S.PP 30
YeS Maybe No
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
X
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
X
11.
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
X
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
X
13.
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
X
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
X
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
X
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
X
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
S\STAFFRPT%239 .PP 3 1
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16..
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
ao Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~239.pp 3 2
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yq~ Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT\239.PP 33
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT~239,PP 34
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1.C.
1.d.
1.f.
1.g.
Air
2.a,b,c.
No. Construction is not proposed at depths sufficient to adversely affect
geologic substructures of the site. Similarly significant grading/fill
activities are not proposed - no significant impacts.
YeS. Compaction and overcovering of soil is necessary to implement the
proposal. The relatively nominal scale of this project does not indicate
likelihood of significant impacts on regional topography or soil
characteristics.
No. Reference Items 1 .a and 1 .b. The subject site is essentially level at
present. Further, fill activities of significance are not proposed.
No. No unique geologic or topographic features currently exist on the
subject site.
No. Nominal alterations in regional surface erosion patterns can be
expected if this project is eventually realized. Proposed additional on-site
structures and paving will likely reduce erosion at the project site;
resulting in additional off-site drainage discharge volumes. Impacts on
regional drainage characteristics are insignificant as mitigated by project
specific drainage conveyances. (Reference City of Temecula Engineering
Department Conditions of Approval.)
No. Construction is not proposed that would logically affect distant
beach. sands. Neither should the project produce deposition/erosion
potentially modifying stream channels or lake beds.
No. The subject site is not affected by known earthquake, landslide,
mudslide or ground failure hazards. Further, all proposed fill/compaction
and subsurface construction shall conform to applicable City and Uniform
Building Code standards.
No. Addition of localized air pollutants will result from increased vehicle
traffic accessing the project site with little or no noticeable regional
impacts. Short term increases in localized pollutants and associated
noxious odors are likely during construction activities. Impacts are not
considered significant regionally.
S%STAFFRPT~239.PP 3 5
Water
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d,e.
3.f,g.
3.h.
3.i.
Plant Life
4.a-d.
No. The proposed structure is not located within defined marine or fresh
water flows.
No. Currently permeable ground will be rendered impervious as a result
of this proposal. Consequently, surface runoff and absorption rates on
the project site itself will change. Site drainage shall conform with plans
approved by the City of Temecula. Necessary improvements to effect
proper site drainage shall be as indicated in the attached drainage plans
and project conditions of approval. No significant impacts on drainage
patterns are anticipated. Reference also Item 1 .e.
No. Plans proposed at this time indicate no potential adverse on or off
site flooding impacts. Proposed drainage plans and all related necessary
improvements shall be as specified by the City Engineering Department.
NO. Increased runoff from the project site may nominally increase
surface levels and turbidity of off-site bodies of water with no impacts
of significance.
N0. Reduced permeation at the project site may eventually affect
underlying groundwater. Impacts of this project individually are
considered insignificant.
No. Water consumption rates typical of small commercial/industrial
projects is proposed. All water consumption activities are subject to
monitoring and allowances specified by the applicable purveyor.
Proposed vehicle washing activities shall utilize recycled water per
applicable local and state requirements, Landscaping and irrigation shall
respect current drought conditions affecting the City as specified in the
project Conditions of Approval and exhibited by the proposed project
landscape and irrigation plan concepts.
Reference Item No. 3.c.
NO. The project site is currently barren of all vegetation, new plant
species which may be introduced as a result of required site landscaping
cannot be considered invasive because of the referenced lack of existing
on-site vegetation. Similarly, no impacts are anticipated on agricultural
8ssets.
Animal Life
5.a-c.
NO. Minor losses of common urban species, e.g., small lizards, insects,
rodents, and their habitats may result from this project. Numerically and
qualitatively, these losses are considered environmentally insignificant.
Further, if not previously paid, the applicant is required to submit
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat procurement fees in the amount
specified by City ordinance. Such monies are to be used for purchase
of suitable habitat for the Kangaroo Rat as it is gradually displaced due
to generalized development of the Temecula Valley. This proposal
contributes incrementally to regional displacement of the Kangaroo Rat.
Noise
6.8.
Maybe. Minor increases in local ambient noise levels will occur.
No. subsequent to project implementation and commercial/industrial
occupancy of the project site. Area-wide noise impacts will be
insignificant. Proposed hours of operation shall conform with normal
business hours of operations, generally considered to be between 7:00
A.M. and 8:00 P,M. Short term construction noise levels generated may
result in temporary localized disturbances considered insignificant as
adjacent properties are currently vacant.
Light and Glare
No. While the project could potentially impact night skies, the proposal
is required to comply with applicable City/Palomar Observatory lighting
policies and ordinance(s). These policies and ordinances address
potential night-sky lighting impacts of development proposals that might
logically affect activities of the Mr. Palomar Astronomical Observatory.
Land Use
Nq. The project is consistent with underlying land use ordinances and
Southwest Area Plan guidelines affecting the subject property. No
change in Land Use designations is proposed in conjunction with this
project; no anticipated impacts.
Natural Resources
9.a,b.
No. The proposal is of limited scale and will not logically deplete
substantial amounts of renewable or non-renewable natural resources.
S\STAFFRPT~239.PP 37
Risk of Uoset
10.a,b.
No. Use and storage of hazardous substances e.g. waste oil/petroleum
products proposed has been reviewed and approved in concept by the
Riverside County Fire Department and the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health Services. Potential risk of upset involving
hazardous substances e.g. fuel, oil, petroleum wastes, is reduced to
insignificance through compliance with the attached project Conditions
of Approval.
Population
11.
NQ, The project does not contain population relocation elements.
Housing
12.
NO. No housing is proposed to be added nor deleted.
Transportation/Circulation
13.a,c.
NO. Commercial/industrial construction of relatively limited scale is
proposed, generating similarly limited amounts of destination traffic.
Traffic generated will consist primarily of daily Rancho California Water
District operations vehicles and commuting employees. Nominal
amounts of visitor traffic can also be expected. Regionally, traffic
impacts of this individual project are determined to be insignificant.
Further, the project is required to contribute monies to area-wide, as well
as localized public improvements (e.g., signalization mitigation)
proportionate to the proposal's anticipated impacts as determined by the
City Public Works Department.
13.b.
Yes. In compliance with City ordinance and project specific
requirements,the project provides a total of 537 additional off-street,
improved parking spaces as referenced in the proposal's Conditions of
Approval (attached), and as indicated on Staff Report Exhibit D.
13.d.
Ng, The project will attract additional destination traffic, primarily
employees and service vehicles, to the subject site upon its
implementation. Impacts on regional circulation patterns are expected
to be insignificant given the proposal's limited scale. Reference also
Item 13.a.
13.e.
NO. The project is not in a location which will logically affect
waterborne, rail or air traffic, nor does it propose addition 3r deletion of
such facilities.
S~STAFFRPT~239.PP 38
13.f.
Maybe. Increases in traffic generated by this proposal may consequently
increase the possibility of traffic accidents. Impacts are likely to be
unnoticeable in view of the proposal's limited scope and proposed
infrastructure improvements supporting the project.
Public Services
14.a-c.
M6ybe. New commercial/industrial development may generate at least
nominal increased demands for police and fire protection services, utility
provisions and, indirectly, schools. Mitigation is realized through project-
specific building permit fees, assessment districts, property taxes, and
similar funding mechanisms.
14.d.
Maybe. Construction is not proposed which will directly impact schools
or parks. However, the applicant is required by state law to contribute
applicable school fees as partial mitigation for secondary impacts on
school systems resulting from the commercial findustrial development
proposed.
14.e.
Yqi. Construction of new roads and associated increases in road
maintenance activities in the immediate vicinity of the proposal will be
required due to proportionate increases in traffic generated locally.
Mitigation of such impacts are as specified by the City Public Works
Department in the project's Conditions of Approval, attached.
14.f,
NO. Impacts on other governmental services have not been identified at
this time.
Enerav
15.a,b. N0. Reference Item Nos. 9.a. and b.
Utilities
16.a-f.
N~. Service line extensions and increased demands can be expected for
the utilities referenced. The facility itself supports regional water
acquisition and distribution activities. No significant impacts are
anticipated.
Human Health
17.a,b.
NO. The project does not include introduction of potential health hazards
of significance to the region; nor are there existing identified health
hazards at the project site, Potential hazards associated with use 3nd
storage of toxic materials on the subject site are mitigated per the
attached project Conditions of Approval.
S\STAFFRPT~239.PP 39
Aesthetics
18.
No. The application has been reviewed for architectural quality and
compatibility by the City, and is considered appropriate in the context of
existing and proposed development in its vicinity.
Recreation
19.
NO. Additional recreational assets are not proposed, nor are they to be
deleted in conjunction with this project; direct impacts on recreational
facilities are not anticipated.
Cultural Resources
20.a.
No. Construction is not proposed that will logically affect known
archaeological religious or cultural assets; no identified impacts.
20.b.
Nq. The proposal is not within an identified historic
preservation/conservation district. As such, impacts on the existing
character of historic assets in the region are unlikely.
21 .a,b,
c,d.
NO. Reference Item Nos. 1-20.
S\STAFFRPT~239,PP 40
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
August 26. 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT~239.PP 41
CITY OF TEMECULA )
./
e
:./'
C $
EXHIBIT NO-A
~P.C. DATE ~0'! ,~i j
CITY OF TEMECULA )
( oof~T :?-,:>Ni~ ) .~.,.,~ .o.b
/q'b'(.,,-I~n~C4c,~)ri,q,~.r-'Jb'ViCE;CZ~ef, rd,~~.p.c. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
EXHIBIT NO.
~P.C. DATE
ii !
n'I· I~ II i"
! li]iil!i] ~hi.iII*".`l, !; .,,lh ,~ I!!! !~
.:t ;;
0 <
<
0 :=
z
': It
i l~ :i ii
~ :: :! :i::[ i] if: ':i :i , l': } l lil"
: ....
]°
Z I- 4
el ~ r~
~ t ll!lilll~lljl .! .
k' 'l' 'l'~'i' 'l'/t'
ldld.u.!.l.L.I!Li.l-,-u.t .......l,-i---.--
,,
Z
< -
II k3
[1
, []
/
li
®1
0
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
S\STAFFRPT\239-PP, CC 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Plot Plan No. 239
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 16
N/A
Condition No. 42
Condition No. 40
N/A
Condition No. 61
Condition No. 33
S\STAFFRPT\239.PP
ITEM 12
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 25, 1991
Parcel Map No. 24085
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
Debbie Ubnoske
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel
Map No. 24085; and
ADOPT Resolution 91-_ approving Tentative
Parcel Map No. 24085 based on the analysis
contained in the staff report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
NBS/Lowry
To create 57 parcels on a 72.6 acre site
Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future
extension of Winchester Road
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
S~STAFFRPT\24085 .cc
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Not Requested
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Murrieta Creek
West: Vacant
Gross Site Area:
Net Site Area:
No. of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Earthwork:
72.6 acres
55.9 acres
57
0.98 acres
Cut = 363,000
yards
Fill -- 363,000
yards
cubic
cubic
BACKGROUND:
The proposed parcel map was given a recommendation of approval by the Planning
Commission on October 21, 1991. The project was originally submitted to the
County in November of 1988. The project was transferred to the City in April of
1991 where it has undergone additional review.
The Planning Commission changed a condition of approval for the project relative to
bus turnouts.
At the Planning Commission meeting, concern was expressed by the City of Murrieta
relative to potential traffic impacts. The Planning Commission expressed their desire
to work with the City of Murrieta, however, the projects could not be continued
indefinitely. The City of Murrieta is still several months away from a circulation plan
which could address their issues.
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 2
Additional issue areas contained within the Analysis Section of the Agenda Report
dated October 21, 1991 are as follows:
Fault Hazards, Liquefaction Potential, Flood Hazard, Drainage, Grading, Biological
Impacts, Landscape and Architectural Standards, Water and Sewer Availability, Lot
Line Adjustments and Street Realignments, Lot Size, Access, Archaeological
Resources and Fossil Resources.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN, SWAP AND ZONING CONSISTENCY:
Parcel Map No. 24085 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the
site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the requirements of the M-
SC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. The project is consistent with existing
and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity, and there is a reasonable
probability that the project will be consistent with the Future General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24085 indicates that the project will not
have any impacts on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of
insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration.
FINDINGS:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project, A
Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the
General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-
industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use
designation, the Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to , or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
5. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 3
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 57 PARCELS AT
THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE
FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-022.
WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No.
24085 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on
October 21, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
~;ECTION 1. Findin.q~. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the
following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 5
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking
other actions, including the issuance of building permits,
pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map
No. 24085 proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 6
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a) That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will
be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 7
public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
(2) The City Council in Approving approval the proposed
Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 6
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION :::]. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Parcel Map No.
24085 for the subdivision of a 72.6 acre parcel into 57 parcels located at the
westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and
S\STAFFRPT~24085,cc 9
known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-022 subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
,1991.
RONALD J PARKS
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the
__ day of , 1991 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 10
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
24085
To create 57
oarcels on a 72.6
acre site
909-120-022
Planning Deoartment
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule "E", unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 11
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to I and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
B. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated September 17,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated November 16, 1990,
a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated June 5, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined
in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached.
15. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
A. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
S~STAFFRt>T\24085.cc 12
17.
18.
development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone,
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are
the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS)
shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified
environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the
City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded
with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety.
19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor
Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan.
"Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required,
and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior
to issuance of building permits."
"Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek.
Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the
Conditions of ApprOval."
"The s'ite is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map
includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human
- occupancy are allowed."
"The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures.
Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault and
Ground Fissure Hazard Area."
"County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on
June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the
Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as
follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence,
liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill."
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 13
20.
21.
22.
23.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits,
an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development
and shall include the following:
(1) Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
(2)
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas
which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of
January through March.
(3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
(4) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall
excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests,
the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A
qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the
authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of
cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to
temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor
grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow
recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
S\STAFFRPT~24085,cC 14
24.
25.
26.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding
property.
All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least
10 feet landscaped.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection and certified
in writing by the landscape architect.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study
is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required wall
shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Mitigation fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No.
663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the
payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the
fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County
ordinance or resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to
attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel
Map No, 24085, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against
the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense, If the City fails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
S~STAFFBPT~24085.cc 15
27.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the
requirement to be installed underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
28,
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by
all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall
make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's
shah be subject to the following conditions:
A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such
provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with
the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage
and facilities.
The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by
reference into the CC&R's.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to
S%STAFFRPT~24085.cc 16
29.
30.
a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly
reimbursed.
(1)
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the
City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the
Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building
permits.
(2)
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements
ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads,
drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the
issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the
right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have
any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in
the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses
of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of
said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate
under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all
owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet
changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall
permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale.
This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
S%STAFFRPT~24085.cc 17
31.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of and
record all lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the
realignment of the future right of way of Winchester Road.
Deoartment of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Department of
Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
32.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
33.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
34.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which
is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements
of said section.
35.
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement
plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within
a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101
(38'/50').
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 18
36.
37.
38.
39.
4O.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
Diaz Road shall be improved or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101 (76'/100').
Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78').
Avenida de Ventas and Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street
improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within a 51' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County
Standard No. 111 (28'/39').
If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient
public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved
and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be
constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60')
at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the event
the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as provided in
the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City for the acquisition of such easement at the developer's cost pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so
noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public
street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated
or noticed on the final map.
Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior
to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works.
S\STAFFRPT\24085.cc 19
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as
appropriate.
B. Storm drain facilities.
C. Landscaping (street and parks).
D. Sewer and domestic water systems.
E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining development.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety
Department.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 20
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
as approved by the Department of Public Works.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and
shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall
also address setback requirements for fault line areas.
The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of
Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the
Department of Public Works.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for
the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property.
A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the recordation of the final map.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with
supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
64. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 2 1
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
65.
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of
map revision from FEMA.
66. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
67.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the
Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
68.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public
Works.
69.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
70.
An application for Development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this
ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department
of Public Works.
71.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
72. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
right-of-way.
73. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to,
specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and
S~STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 2 2
clearance letters as requested.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
74.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
75.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
76.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer
shall post 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. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to 'the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
77.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C, pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on
all interior public streets.
78.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be
provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 23
to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
79.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Engineerina
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
80.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street
improvement plans.
81.
Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida
de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall
be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check
submittal.
82.
The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and
construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz
Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals
shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
83.
The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to
contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road
to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland
overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass
corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
84.
"Prior to recordation of the Final Map, developer shall provide bus turnouts with
pedestrian entrances as approved by Riverside Transit Authority and the
Department of Public Works. Turnouts shall be shown on the Street
Improvement Plans."
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 24
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
85.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public
Works.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
86.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the
approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
87. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance.
88. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site at the intersection of local
streets.
89.
Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent
to the project,
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 25
pLANNTNG COMMT~8~ON MTNUT~8
OCTOBER 21, 1991
and hearing the testimony, he would feel comfortable with sending
forth a recommendation to the Council that they approve this map.
Mr. Hoagland added that the Council could deny the recommendation
based on the information they receive.
DOUG STEWART stated that the city is planning on going out with a
request for qualifications on certain issues of the western by-pass
corridor that only affect Temecula. The request is going to look
at an alignment study and intersection study. There is an
opportunity for the City of Murrieta to join us in the study and
add how the by-pass corridor could affect their proposed
circulation element. Mr. Stewart added that he was not sure how
long that would take; however, he did not see a quick decision on
this from the City of Murrieta for a couple of months.
COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he had no problems with the first two
maps (PM 24085 and 24086); however, he still has a problem with the
grading on the other two maps. COMMISSIONER FAREY concurred that
she too expressed a concern for the grading.
10. PARCEL MAP 24085
10.1
Proposal to create 57 commercial/industrial parcels on a
73 acre site in the M-SC zone. Located on the westerly
side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of
Winchester Road.
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
9:00 P.M. and recommend that the City Council Adopt the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085 and Adopt
Resolution 91-[next) approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
24085 with modifications to Condition 19 relating to
earthquake faulting and notification of geological
testing and Transportation Condition 84 added, as noted
.above, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAREY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i
COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
11. PARCEL MAP8 24086
Proposa to create 49 c6~rcial/industrhl parcels on
11.1 a 70 ac~e~ite in the M-Scl'ene. Located on ~he westerly
side of Dia Road, north of e future ex~e~nt~ion of
Winchester xR~. f~ ,,.
PCMN] 0/'21/91 ' 12 -- 10/23/91
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA.
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.: Parcel Map No. 24085
Prepared By: Scott Wright
Recommendation: 1.
2.
ADOPT THE NEGATIVE
DECLARATION; AND
ADOPT RESOLUTION 91-
RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF PARCEL
MAP NO. 24085
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Rancho California City Center Association No. I
REPRESENTATIVE:
NBS/Lowry
PROPOSAL:
To create 57 parcels on a 72.6 acre site
LOCATION:
Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future
extension of Winchester Road
EXISTING ZONING:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M-
SC)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not Requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
S\STAFFRPT~24085 1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Murrieta Creek
West: Vacant
Gross Site Area:
Net Site Area:
No.' of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Earthwork:
72.6 acres
55.9 acres
57
0.98 acres
Cut = 363,000
yards
Fill = 363,000
yards
cubic
cubic
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085 was submitted to
the County on November 22, 1988. The application
was continued at the Land Development Committee
(LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending
submittal of paleontological and biological surveys,
additional grading information, geology and
liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a
traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No.
24085 at four subsequent meetings, pending
clearance from the County Geologist and the County
Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological
report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional
information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of
the biological survey.
Parcel Map No. 24085 was transmitted to the City
on April 11, 1990. City Staff requested a copy of
the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a
traffic study, an archaelolgy report, information
regarding property boundaries and the alignment of
Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture
standards.
The proposal is to create 57 parcels with an average
parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with
a gross area of 72.6 acres. There is an open space
area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use
S\STAFFRPT~24085 2
ANALYSIS:
zone recommended in the geologic report. The
easterly side of the site comprises a Murrieta Creek
channel easement and a flood control easement to
the County of Riverside.
Traffic linDacts
Future development of the site of Parcel Map No.
24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip
ends per day. The traffic study prepared in
conjunction with the project determined that
projected future traffic based on existing traffic,
project generated traffic, and traffic generated by
other growth in the area will result in a peak hour
Level of Service D or better at all intersections within
the scope of the traffic study if recommended
improvements are implemented. The
recommendations include contributing to the
extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at
certain intersection, contributing to the signalization
of other intersections, providing a signing and
striping plan, and contributing to the construction of
the Overland overcrossing and the restriping of
Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements
are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval.
Fault Hazards
The site is traversed by a potentially active fault
which was previously unmapped. The geologic
report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map
defines a fault zone with two branches and
recommends the establishment of a restricted use
zone to include observed faults, their in-line
projections, and a buffer zone. The larger branch of
the restricted use zone is shown on the tentative
parcel map as an open space area 150 feet in width.
No habitable structure shall be constructed within
either branch of the restricted use zone.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 3
Liouefaction Potential
Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion
of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface
subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4
inches. The geologic report recommends that thte
effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing
capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading
be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the
site when grading and building plans become
available. Soils reports addressing the issues
delineated above shall be a condition of approval of
the subject parcel map and of any future
development proposals on the site.
Flood Hazard
A portion of the proposed parcels are located within
the 100 year flood plain limits of Murrieta Creek.
Measures to remove the project from the 100 year
flood plain are listed in the Conditions of Approval
(see County Flood Control District letter of November
16, 1990).
Drainaoe
The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta
CreekFFemecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and
payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are
required to drain toward adjacent streets or an
adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer.
Parcel Map 21383 is located adjacent to and upslope
from the site. If development of the subject property
occurs before development of the site of Parcel Map
No. 21383, adequate inlet facilities shall be
constructed to collect all tributary flows and convey
them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading shall be
designed to penetrate existing tributary drainage
areas and outlet points, and development of the
subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated
S\STAFFI~oT~24085
to ensure that water courses remain unobstructed
and that stormwaters are not diverted from one
watershed to another. The site, including each
phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 1 O0
year tributary storm flows.
Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic
yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be up to 25 feet
in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high.
Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation
which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut or
fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2:1. The slope
stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut
slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of
29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope
faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes.
The recommendations of the slope stability report
are included in the conditions of approval.
Biological Impacts
Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of
the presence of any plant or animal species classified
as rare or endangered. The project will involve the
loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of
birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an
incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant
impact which is mitigated by the retention of an
open space park area in the larger restricted use
zone. Further mitigations may be required by State
and Federal resource agencies relative to channel
improvements for Murrieta Creek, The use of native
California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will
enhance reoccupation of the bird community.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 5
Landscaoe and Architectural Standards
The applicant has provided a set of landscape and
architectural standards to ensure that development
of the site maintains a consistent level of quality.
Conformity with the lanscape and architechural
standards will be required of all future development
of the site.
Water and Sewer Availability
Water and sewer service will be available from the
Rancho California Water District upon completion of
financial arrangements between the property owner
and the District.
Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realianments
The formation of Assessment District 155 included
a realignment of the right of way for the future
extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road.
Since the centerline of the right of way constituted
the boundary between properties, the realignment
resulting in changes to property boundaries. The
subject parcel map was affected by a realignment
resulted in changes to property boundaries. The
subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of
Winchester Road at the intersection with Avenida de
Venta. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal
descriptions of the property at the time of
recordation of the map, Staff has required that the
applicant and other affected property owners
eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line
adjustments, street vacations, and offers of
rededication reflecting the new alignment of
Winchester Road and the resulting changes in
property boundaries. These requirements shall be
completed prior to map recordation.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 6
Lot Size
All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre
and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of
7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All
lots are over 100 feet wide and meet the minimum
width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are
available.
Access
All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for
public dedication. Access to the site is taken from
Diaz Road and from the future extension of
Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets
"A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct
access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road.
Archaeological Resources
The site of Parcel Map No. 24085 contains a
recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is
believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square
meters, part of which is outside of the subject
property. During an archaeological surface survey of
the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of
basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and
metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones,
and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed.
The recommendations of the Archaeological
Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of
the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site. The
resulting information shall be used to determine what
additional measures may need to be implemented to
preserve cultural resources prior to grading. The
Archaeological Assessment also includes the
recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted
S~STAFF~T~24085 7
for any future grading activities, These
recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions
of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. In addition,
a Native American representative shall be present
during the archaeological excavation and also during
grading.
Fossil Resources
The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba
Formation. In accordance with the recommendation
of the San Bernardino County Museum, the
subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor
grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered
during grading, prepare a report of findings, and
provide for preservation and curation of recovered
specimens.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN,
SWAP AND ZONNING
CONSISTENCY:
Parcel Map No. 24085 is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light
industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the
requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service
Commercial Zone. The project is consistent with
existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the
vicinity, and there is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistant with the Future General
Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24085
indicates that the project will not have any impacts
on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a
level of insignificance, and Staff recommends
adoption of a Negative Neclaration.
FINDINGS:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
S\STAFFRPT\24085 8
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and exising land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot, access, and density,
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 9
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
10.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
11.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
make the following recommendation to the City
Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel
Map No. 24085; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative
Parcel Map No.24085 based on the analysis
contained herein and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Surrounding Zoning
D. Tentative Parcel Map 24085
vgw
S\STAFFRPT\24085 10
RESOLUTION NO. 91-102
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 57 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF
DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF
WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL 909-120-022.
WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No.
24085 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on
October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
S~STAFFRPT~24085 11
'a)
There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan,
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map
No. 24085 proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time,
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
S\STAFFRPT\24085 12
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a) That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will
S\STAFFRPT%24085 13
be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and exising land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuarations, access, and
density.
S~STAFFRPT\24085 14
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public hearlth, safety and
general welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2_,. Environmental Comoliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
S\STAFFBPT~24085 15
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that
the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 24085 for the subdivision of a 72.6 acre
parcel into 57 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future
extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-022 subject
to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4._,.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21 st day of October, 1991.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\STAFFRPT~24085 16
July 3, 1991
City of Temecula
Engineering Department
43180 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92592
SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability
Parcel Map 24085
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer
service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and the property owner.
Currently, RCWD has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal
Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check
submittals will be made to RCWD.
Water availability would be contingent Upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Manager of Development Engineering
SB:SD:ajwI16
cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
\
INI~TIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
I Background / \,
/ \
1. Name of Proponent: \\, NBS Lowrv
/ \\ /
2. Address and Phone '\,, 27403 Ynez Road,/Suite 209
Number of Proponent: \ Temecula. CA 92390
676-6225
3. Date of EnVironmental '\
Assessment: ",,, August 21 i"-1991
\
4. Agency Requiring '\ \,
Assessment: ",, CITY OF TEMECULA
5. Name of Proposal, ",,,
if applicable: \- Parcel MaD NOS. 24085 and'24086
I \,,, .
,\ ,/ . ',,
6. Location of Proposal: , Sour estev o az Road bou tied
/ \ hw rl f D~ n
, bv the future extension of Winchester)
/ ROad on the northwesterly and
/ sodthwesterlv sides of the site.
\
II Environmental linDacts '\,,
\
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
'\ Yq~ Maybe N_.9o
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in \,
changes in geologic substructures? X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
X
SL~bstantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
S~STAFFBPT~24085
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
4065 COUNTY CIRCLE DR. RIVERSIDE, CA. 92503 (Mailing Address - P.O. 8ox 7600 92515-7600)
September 17, 1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
TEMECULA, CA 92590
AI'rN: Scott Wright:
PaE: PARCEL MAP N0. 24085: BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3
PARCEL MAP N0. 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS, RIVeSIDE COUNTY,
C~j, IF~3RNIA.
(57 lots)
OF
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No.
24065 and recommends:
A water system shall be installed according to plans and
specifications as approved by the water company and the
Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the
water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a
minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along
with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of
valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and
the size of the main at the 3unction of the new system to
the existing system. The plans shall comply In all respects
with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and
Safety'Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22,
Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of Callfornfa, when
applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and water company with the following
certification: "I certify that the design of the water
system in Parcel Map No. 24085, ls in accordance with the
water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water
District and that the water services, storage, and
distribution system will be adequate to provide water
service to such Parcel Map"
CIty of Temecula
Page Two
Atthi %Birdirk Wright
S~,ptember 17, 1991
This certification does not constitute a guarantee that
it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific
quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any
other purpose", This certification shall be signed by a
resDonslble official of the water company.
This subdivision has a statement from the Rancho California
Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and
every lot ~n the subdivision on demand provldlng
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed wlth the
subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements
to be made prior to the recordation of the final map.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water
DIstrict and shall be connected to the sewers of the
Dl~trlct. The sewer system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as approved by the District, the
City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted
in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the C~ty
of Temecula. The prints shall show the ~nternal
diameter, locatlon of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and
.~oint specifications and the size of the sewers at the
sunorion of the new system to the exlsting system. A single
plat Indicating location of sewer lines and water lines
shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The
plans shall be slgned by a registered englneer and the sewer
district with the following certification: "[ certify that
the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map NO. 240~5 is in
accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the
Eastern Municipal Water DIstrict and that the waste dlsposal
system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed parcel
:IiVE:I iDE county
PLAnnin DEP :I nlEn
October 16, 1989
Schaefer Dtxon Associates
23 Mauchly
Irvtne, CA 92718
Attention:
Hr. Paul Davis
Mr. Nicholas F. Selmeczy
Mr. Mtchael L. Leonard, St.
SUBJECT:
Seismic-Geologic/Liquefaction Hazard
ProJect No. 9R-4332C
Tentative Parcel Naps 24085 and 24086
APN: 909-120-020,022
County Geologtc Report No. 627
Rancho California Area
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entttled 'Report
on Geotechntcal Investigation, Assessment District No. 15S, Parcel Hap 24085,
24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, RIverside County, CA,' dated
June 7, 1989 and your responses to County Geologic Revtew, dated August 15,
1989 and September 21, 1989.
It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were
entitled 1.) 'Preliminary Geotechnical Znvesttgattono Proposed
[ndustrtal/Commerctal Site, ~est of Cherry Street and Diaz Road, A.O. No. 155,
Rancho California, Riverside County, CA' by Leighton and Associates, dated June
23, 1986, and 2.) 'Engineering Geologtc Investigation of Faulting and
Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, AO No. 155,
Rancho California, RIverside County, CA,' by Letghton and Associates, dated
August 18, 1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for
ground ftssurlng tn the area, which occurred in late 1987. [t is understood
that your report now supercedes these prevtous reports for the subject
property·
Your report detemined that:
The surface trace of a previously unmapped, through going fault extends
northwest-southeast across the center of the property· A short branch
of this fault trends rare northerly, coincident with a strong
photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are
delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89, in
your report.
2. These faults are considered to be active in accordance with State of
California, Division of Mines and Gdulogy criteria.
3. The Wtllard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly
portion of the site are judged to be pre-Holocene in age.
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619~ 342-8277
Schaefer Dixon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989
The Whtttter-Elsinore fault zone is considered capable of the highest
ground motions at the site. A lO0-year probable magnitude earthquake
of 6.3 on this fault would result in a peak horizontal ground
acceleration of 0.41g at the site.
Ltquefiable and mrglnally ltqueftable zones are present in the
lower-lying portion of the site, below a depth of approximately 15
fee~. The ltquefiable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical
Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89.
Surface subsidence my be induced by liquefaction and the settlement is
estimated to be in the range of 0.1 inch to 1.4 inches, however
reduction of bearing capacity for shallow spread footings is not
anticipated. The potential for lateral spreading is considered low
based on the present geometry of the Murrieta Creek Channel relative to
the llquefiable zones at the site.
7. The potential for selches, earthquake-induced flooding and lurching is
considered to be extremely low at this site.
8. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property is a
shallow, surficial failure.
Ground ~lssurtng will most likely occur along the establish traces of
historic and Holocene fault displacements. It is not expected that
ground fissures will occur in portions of the property away from
pre-extsttng Holocene faults.
Your report recommended that:
No habitable structures shall be placed acrossed the active (Holocene)
faults and ground fissures.
A Restricted Use Zone (R.U.Z.) shall be established to include the
observed faults, thetr tn-ltne projections and buffer zone. The total
width and extent of the R.U.Z. is shown on Plate 1, Geotechntcal Map,
revised 8-15-89/9-21-89.
The effects of soft liquefaction, including loss of beartng capacity,
surface subsidence and lateral spreading shall be re-evaluated for each
Individual structure on the site when grading end butldtng plans b~come
available.
The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be
delineated on the project grading plans. In eddttton, the disturbed
surftctal materials shall be completely remo~¶d during grading, in
conformance with standard earthwork practicer.
Schaefer Dixon Associates - 3 - October 16, 1989
Rec~m,~ndatlons for removing the uncontrolled fill from the exploratory
trenches, and for placement of structures adjacent to or astride any of
these trenches, should be specifically provided as part of the
geotechnical grading plan review report for the subject projects·
6. Final plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical
consultant prior to site construction.
It is our opinion that th~ report was prepared in a competent manner and
satisfies the additional information requested under the California
Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General
Plan. Final approval of the report is hereby given.
We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordatton of
Tentative Parcel Naps 24085 and 24086 and/or issuance any County permits
associated with this project:
The recommended Restricted Use Zone shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Nap,
revised 8-15-89/9-21-89 in the report shall be delineated on the
project maps and/or Environmental Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.). The
areas within the Rec~T6~nded Restricted Use Zone shall be labeled
· FAULT AND GROUND FISSURE HAZARD AREA."
2. The following notes shall be placed on the E.C.S. and/or Subdivision
maps: '
(a)
· The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground
fissures. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in
the Fault and Ground Fissure Hazard Area.'
(b)
"County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on
June 7, 1989 by $chafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the
Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern
are as follows: earthquake faulting, ftssuring and ground
subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench
backfill.'
3. The E.C,S. and/or project maps shall be submitted to the Planning
Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval,
4. The exploratory trench backfill shall be addressed by the project
geotechnical engineering prior to issuance of grading permits,
Liquefaction reports for tndhtdual structures shall be submitted to
the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval
prior to Plot Plan approval. ..
Schaefer Dtxon Associates - 4 - October 16, 1989
The r~c~ndattons made tn your report for mitigation of Seismic/geologic
hazards shall be adhered to tn the design and construction of this project.
Very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Roger S. S~/eeter - Planning Director
Engineering Geologist
CEG-1205
SAK:al
c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen
CDNG - Earl Hart
Building & Safety (2) - Nom Lostbom
John Chtu - Team I
September 6, 1989
OiPAllTMINTAI, LITTIll
COUNTY' OF RIVERSIDE
PLANNING DEPARTNENT
TO: John Chtu - Team 5
FROM: Steven A. Kupferran - Engineering Geologist
RE: Tentative Parcel Raps 24085 and 24086
Slope Stability Report No, 149
The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability at the
subject site:
"Slope Stability Assessment, Tentative Parcel Raps 24085, 24086, Rancho
California, RIverside County, CA," by Schaefer Dtxon Associates dated August
16, 1989.
This report determined that:
1. Tentative Parcel Rap 24085 will be graded with cut slopes ranging up to
..d fill s op.s .ppr. i.to,, 10 f.t high. .t
o n vertl ca1 ).
2. Tentative Parcel Rap 24086 wt1T be graded wtth 2:1 (H:V) cut and f111
slopes less than 30 feet high.
The Pauba formetton in the planned cut areas conststs prtmerlly of
moderately hard to hard, moderately fractured, locally frtable
sandstones and siltstones.
Proposed cut slopes made tn Pauba formation sediments, havtng
favorable-oriented bedded? planes, are expected to be grossly stable at
2:1 (H:V) to a mxtmum ght of 29 feet,
5. Surftctal erosion is possible in both cut and ftll slopes of granular
Pauba formtton mtertals.
Thts report recommended that:
1. C~t slope excavations should be observed ~rtng gradtng by the project
engineering geologist.
John Chtu
September 6, 198~
Drainage on cut and ft11 slopes shculd be dtrected away from the slope
face. Dratnage devtces should be constructed as per the Untfor~
Butldtng Code.
3. Proper landscaping should be established Immediately after construction
and rainrained.
4. Slope ash and topsot1 mtertals exposed tn cut slopes should be
removed and replaced with compacted f111 mtertals.
This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability
report. the recoemndattons rode tn thts report should be adhered to tn the
design and construction of this project.
SAK:al
FIRE DEPARTMENT
210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
~ ' (714) 657-3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
-June 5, 1991
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPT
PARCEL MAP 24085 AMD #4
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000
GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM
for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure.
Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"xP½"xP{") shall be located at each
street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction,
with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans
to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered
civil engineer, containing a Fire Department approval signature block,
and shall conform. to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire
flow. Once plans are signed by the local water company, the originals
shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building material being placed on an individual lot.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist
MEC/tm
f'l ~NDIO OFMCE
79-733 Courier Clu~ D~, Suite F. Imtio, CA 92201
(619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNING DIVISION
I"l TEMECULA OFFICE
4t002 C4zunff C~:nta D~i.~, Suite 225, Tern~ula, CA 923W
(714) 694-5070 · FA~ (714) 694-5076
r'~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th Start. Rivehide, CA 925Ol ~ ~ted on recyc/ed ~ap~
(714) 27~777 * FAX (714) ~7451
City of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7, 1990
-6- November 16, 1990
The applicant's engineer should contact the District's
Plan Check section to schedule a pre-design meeting
before the engineer starts detailed project design.
2 ·
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic
calculations should be submitted to the District via the
Transportation Department for review and approval prior
to recordation of the final map. Grading plans should be
approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to the
Subdivision section of this office at 714/275-1210.
Very truly yours,
c: NBS/Lowry
ZS:slw
KEr', ~ETH L. EDWARDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
November 16, 1990
City of Temecula
Post Office Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
Attn: Planning Department
Scott Wright
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re:
Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
1990
This is a proposal to divide 72.6 acres into commercial parcels
in the City of Temecula. The site is located west of Diaz Road
about 1100 feet south of Winchester Road.
This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and
approximately one half of the parcels are located within the
year flood plain limits of the creek.
100
The District is currently developing a final design for
improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven
member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors.
Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental
factors involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District
will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal
design of portions of this major regional flood control project
is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an
acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding
mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an
assessment district over the flood plain.
The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250
feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot
habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if
it is not needed. This is shown correctly on Amended Map No. 3.
This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the
southwest. Tentative Parcel Map 21383 is proposed in the
hillside area west of this property. This map shows that the
storm drain in Winchester Road would extend up th~ hill. Much of
the offsite runoff tributary to this site would then be collected
by the development of Parcel Map 21383 and conveyed to the storm
drain system. Should Parcel Map 21383 not be constructed,
adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect
all of the tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek.
The storm drain in Winchester Road is proposed to continue nort;
into Parcel Map 24086. Onsite flows are proposed to be collected
and conveyed to the Creek by several storm drain systems.
Clt of Temecu~a
~Three
Attn:k Scott Wright
September 17. 1991
\
\
\
\
\,
\
\
City of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
199o
-2- November 16, 1990
Following are the District's recommendations:
A portion of the proposed project is in a floodplain and
may affect "waters of the United States", "wetlands" or
"jurisdictional streambeds", therefore, in accordance
with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Program and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through
73) and County Ordinance No. 458:
A flood study consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross
sections, maps and other data should be prepared to
the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of
revising the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map of
the project site. The submittal of the study should
be concurrent with the initial submittal of the
related project improvement plans and final District
approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter
of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA.
A copy of appropriate correspondence and necessary
permits from those government agencies from which
approval is required by Federal or State law (such as
Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of Fish
and Game 1603 agreement) should be provided to the
District prior to the final District approval of the
project.
This parcel map is located within the limits of the
Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan for
which drainage fees have been adopted by the Board.
Drainage fees shall be paid as set forth under the
provisions of the "Rules and Regulations for
Administration of Area Drainage Plans", amended February
16, 1988:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Transportation
Commissioner as part of the filing for record of the
subdivision final map or parcel map, or if the
recording of a final parcel map is waived, drainage
fees shall be paid as a condition of the waiver prior
to recording a certificate of compliance evidencing
the waiver of the parcel map; or
City
Re:
of Temecula
Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
1990
-3- November 16, 1990
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a
required affidavit requesting deferment of the
payment of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the
Building Director at the time of issuance of a
grading permit or building permit for each approved
parcel, whichever may be first obtained after the
recording of the subdivision final map or parcel map;
provided however, this option to defer the fees may
not be exercised for any parcel where grading or
structures have been initiated on the parcel within
the prior 3 year period, or permits for either
activity have been issued on that parcel which remain
active.
Murrieta Creek Channel shouId be constructed through the
proposed project in conformance with the District's
approved design including habitat mitigation measures
which may be required by the various resource agencies.
In lieu of constructing the channel improvements the
applicant shall cooperate in the formation of and
participate in a financial mechanism such as a community
facilities district or an assessment district to pay for
the cos; of the District's proposed Murrieta Creek
Channel improvements.
The right of way for Murrieta Creek, including the area
required for habitat mitigation should be dedicated to
the District. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek
in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline.
This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each
side which will be returned if it is not needed.
This site also
the southwest.
adequate inlet
collect all of
Murrieta Creek.
receives offsite runoff from the hills to
Should Parcel Map 21383 not develop,
facilities will need to be constructed to
the tributary flows and convey them to
Pads on this site should be elevated 12 inches above the
100 year water surface elevation in Murrieta Creek.
Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right
of way should be contained within drainage easements
shown on the final map. A note should be added to the
final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings and obstructions".
City of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7, 1990
-4- November 16, 1990
Offsite drainage facilities should be located within
dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected
property owners. The documents should be recorded and a
copy submitted to the District prior to recordation of
the final map.
All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet.
The 10 year storm fiow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed.
1t.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should
designed to convey the tributary 100 year stor~ flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
12.
The property's street and lot grading should be designed
in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage area
and outlet points.
13.
An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on
District facilities or ~ithin District right of way. ~he
encroachment permit application should be processed and
approved concurrently with the improvement plans.
Prior t'o initiation of the final construction drawings
for those facilities required to be built as part of the
Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan, the
d~veloper should contact the Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District to ascertain the
terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection,
transfer of rights of way, project credit in lieu of fees
and reimbursement schedules which may apply. Title
reports and title insurance must be provided for all
right of way to be transferred to the District. The
developer should note that if the estimated cost for
required area drainage plan facilities exceeds the
required drainage fees and the developer wishes to
receive credit for reimbursement in excess of his fees,
the facilities will be constructed as a public works
contract. Scheduling for construction of these
facilities will be at the discretion of the District.
City
Re:
of Temecula
Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7, 1990
-5- November 16, 1990
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be
protected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows.
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities.
Development of this property should be coordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not
diverted from one watershed to another. This may require
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
offsite construction and grading.
Master Drainage Plan facilities to be constructed as part
of this development's improvement obligation are to be
inspected, operated and maintained by the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
The developer should enter into an agreement with the
District establishing the terms and conditions covering
their inspection, operation and maintenance.
Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to
be built with this tract must be performed by either the
County Transportation Department or the Flood Control
District. The engineer (owner) must request (in writing)
that one of these agencies accept the proposed storm
drain system. The request should note the tract number,
location, and briefly describe the system (sizes and
lengths). Request to the District should be addressed to
Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peairs,
Planning Engineer. If the District is willing to accept
the system, an agreement between the owner and the
District must be executed. A request to draw up an
agreement must be sent to the District to the attention
of Michael Rawson.
All flood control facilities should be constructed to
District standards. All facilities that the District
will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a
one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth"
of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through
1998.
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
24085
To create 57
parcels on a 72.6
acre site
909-120-022
Planning DeDartment
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule "E", unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 17
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to I and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
B. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated September 17,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated November 16, 1990,
a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated June 5, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined
in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached.
15. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 18
20.
21.
"County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on
June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the
Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as
follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence,
liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill."
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits,
an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development
and shall include the following:
(1) Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
(2)
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas
which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of
January through March.
(3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
(4) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall
excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests,
the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A
qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the
authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of
cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to
temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 20
22.
23.
24.
25.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor
grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow
recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding
property.
All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least
10 feet landscaped.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All laddscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection and certified
· in writing by the landscape architect.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study
is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required wall
shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Mitigation fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No.
663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the
payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the
fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County
ordinance or resolution.
S~STAFFRP~240e5 21
26.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to
attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel
Map No. 24085, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against
the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
27.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the
requirement to be installed underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
28. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by
all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall
make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's
shall be subject to the following conditions:
A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such
provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with
the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 2 2
29.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage
and facilities.
The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by
reference into the CC&R's.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to
a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly
reimbursed.
(1)
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the
City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the
Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building
permits.
(2)
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements
ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads,
drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the
issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the
right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have
any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in
the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses
of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of
said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate
under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all
owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet
changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall
permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale.
This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
S%STAFFRPT%24085 23
30.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
31.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of and
record all lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the
realignment of the future right of way of Winchester Road.
Deeartment of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Department of
Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
32.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 24
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which
is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements
of said section.
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement
plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within
a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101
(38'/50').
Diaz Road shall be improved or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101 (76'/100').
Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78').
Avenida de Ventas and Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street
improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within a 51' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County
Standard No. 111 (28'/39'),
If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient
public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved
and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be
constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60')
at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the event
the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as provided in
the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City for the acquisition of such easement at the developer's cost pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so
noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public
street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works.
S\STAFFI~T~24085 25
42. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated
or noticed on the final map.
Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior
to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as
appropriate.
B. Storm drain facilities.
C. Landscaping (street and parks).
D. Sewer and domestic water systems.
E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining development.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
S%STAFFRPT\24085 26
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety
Department.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the Department of Public Works.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and
shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall
also address setback requirements for fault line areas.
The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of
Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the
Department of Public Works.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 2 7
60.
On;site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
61.
A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for
the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property.
A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the recordation of the final map.
62.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final .map, along with
supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
63. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
64.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection' shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
65.
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of
map revision from FEMA.
66. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain,
67.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the
Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
68.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public
Works.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 28
69.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
70.
An application for Development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this
ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department
of Public Works.
71.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
72.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
right-of-way.
73.
The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limi{ed to,
specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and
clearance letters as requested.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
74.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
75.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
76.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer
shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of
S\STAFFRPT\24085 2 9
the bond shall be ~2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
77.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on
all interior public streets.
78.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be
provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required
to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
79.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Engineering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
80.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street
improvement plans.
81.
Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avertida
de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall
be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check
submittal.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 30
82.
The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and
construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz
Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals
shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
83.
The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to
contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road
to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland
overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass
corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
84.
"Prior to recordation of the Final Map, developer shall provide bus turnouts with
pedestrian entrances as approved by Riverside Transit Authority and the
Department of Public Works. Turnouts shall be shown on the Street
Improvement Plans."
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
85.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public
Works.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
86.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the
approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
87.
All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance.
88.
Stop signs shall be installed within the project site at the intersection of local
streets.
89.
Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent
to the project.
S\STAFFRPl~24085 3 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
NBS Lowry
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula. CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel MaD Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterly sides of the site.
Environmental Imoacts
(Explanati.ons of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yq~ Maybq N9
1. Earth.
a.
Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features? X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 32
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\$TAFFRPl~24085 33
.4.
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Yes Maybe NO
_ _ X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 34
10.
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
Yqi Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 35
11.
12.
13.
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes
X
Maybe
NO
X
X
X
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 36
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
fo Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
8 need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a.. Power or natural gas?
YeS Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT~24085
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
37
X
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 38
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of ti'me while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 39
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b,c.
1,d,
1.e.
1.f.
1.g.
Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and
fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut
and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which
consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential
on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All
cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of
Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will
be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability
Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable
to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing
landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope
Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the
subject parcel maps.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
Maybe, Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted.
The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be
mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation
whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding
disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water
run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces.
Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through
the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance
with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval.
No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage
improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in
erosion or siltation.
Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence,
and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology
Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of
bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re-
evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans
become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a
restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map.
The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault
S\STAFFRPT~24085 40
2.a,b,c.
3.8.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f,g.
3.h.
on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted
within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the
restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The
geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the
County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality
or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for
potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required
if necessary.
No, The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of
Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel
map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the
course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of
surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate
drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer.
No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters
to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 100 year flood
plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This
is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the
provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment
District 155.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water.
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant,
No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not
expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
S\STAFF~T~24085 41
3.i.
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a,b.
5.c.
6.8.
6.b.
9.a,b.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100
year flood plain elevation.
No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on
the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have
previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site.
Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species.
This is not considered a significant impact.
No. The site is not currently used as crop land.
No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any
indications of any species classified as rare or endangered.
Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which
provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional
terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non-
significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native
California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order
to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life
shall be a condition of approval.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during
grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant
because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses.
No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts,
and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or
required to provide adequate noise mitigation.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and
subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard
conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and
requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights.
No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of natural or non-renewable resources.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 42
10.a,b.
11,12.
13.a.
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of
the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development
of the site will help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to
existing and approved housing.
Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is
expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends
per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the
project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended
improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic
impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public
Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for
traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester
Road, and shall be included in the street improvemnt plans with the
second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a
Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic
signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road,
Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with
the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction
of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center
Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road
restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by
a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works.
No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate
off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed.
No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation
systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic.
No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of
circulation.
S\STAFFRPT%24085 43
13.f.
14.a-f.
15.a,b.
16.a-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a,b,c.
No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate
at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are
implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for
the proposed parcel map.
No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future
development will generate an increase in the need for public Services in
the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment
of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property
taxes will fund the additional public services.
No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand
for fuel or other energy sources.
No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or
service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new
or substantially altered utility systems.
Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the
Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel
improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the
County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by
the developer's participation in an assessment district.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views.
Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction
of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded
archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass
approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the
subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site
conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage,
fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles,
hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The
recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a
surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and
S\STAFFRPT~24085 44
significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to
determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether
measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural
resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment
includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any
future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated
as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In
addition, a Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
20.d.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
21 .a.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of
native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate
mitigations for potential b. iological impacts due to reduction of foraging
habitat.
21 .b,c.
No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be
adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the
traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel
map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
21 .d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards.
Environmental review of future development of the site will address any
potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 45
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
August 12, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT~24085 46
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of Approval
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 47
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
NBS Lowrv
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula, CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
6. Location of Proposal:
Environmental ImPacts
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel Mao Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterly sides of the site.
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Ye~ Maybe No
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features? X
S~STAFFF~T~24085 .cc 30
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .co 3 1
Plant
a.
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
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)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT%24085.cc 3 2
10.
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
'produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 33
11.
12.
13.
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yq~
X
Maybe
NO
X
X
X
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 34-
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Maybe
NQ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .cc
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
35
X
X
X
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFP~T~24085 .cc 3 6
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFI~T~24085.cc 37
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1 .a,b,c.
Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and
fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut
and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which
consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential
on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All
cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of
Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will
be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability
Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable
to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing
landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope
Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the
subject parcel maps.
1.d.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
1,6.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted.
The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be
mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation
whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding
disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water
run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces.
Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through
the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance
with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval.
1.f.
No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage
improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in
erosion or siltation.
1.g.
Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence,
and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology
Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of
bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re-
evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans
become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a
restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map.
The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault
on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted
within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the
S\STAFFRPT~24085,cc 38
2.a,b,c.
3.a,
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e,
3.f,g.
3.h.
restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The
geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the
County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality
or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for
potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required
if necessary.
No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of
Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel
map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the
course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of
surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate
drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer.
No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters
to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood
plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This
is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the
provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment
District 155.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water.
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant.
No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not
expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
3.i.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
S%STAFFI~T\24085 .cc 3 9
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a,b.
5.c.
6.8.
6.b.
9.a,b.
lO.a,b.
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 1 O0
year flood plain elevation.
No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on
the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have
previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site.
Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species.
This is not considered a significant impact.
No. The site is not currently used as crop land.
No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any
indications of any species classified as rare or endangered.
Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which
provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional
terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non-
significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native
California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order
to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life
shall be a condition of approval.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during
grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant
because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses.
No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts,
and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or
required to provide adequate noise mitigation.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and
subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard
conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and
requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights.
No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of natural or non-renewable resources.
No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous
S\STAFFRPT~24085.cc 40
11,12.
13.a.
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.d.
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of
the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development
of the site will help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to
existing and approved housing.
Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is
expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends
per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the
project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended
improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic
impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public
Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for
traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester
Road, and shall be included in the street improverant plans with the
second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a
Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic
signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road,
Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with
the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction
of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center
Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road
restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by
a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works.
No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate
off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed.
No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation
systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic.
No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of
circulation.
13.f.
No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate
S~STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 4 1
14.a-f.
15.a,b.
16.a-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a,b,c.
at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are
implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for
the proposed parcel map.
No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future
development will generate an increase in the need for public services in
the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment
of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property
taxes will fund the additional public services.
No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand
for fuel or other energy sources.
No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or
service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new
or substantially altered utility systems.
Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the
Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel
improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the
County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by
the developer's participation in an assessment district.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views.
Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction
of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded
archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass
approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the
subject property, During an archaeological surface survey of the site
conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage,
fragmented manos and metates, fire-affected rocks, pestles,
hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The
recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a
surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and
significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to
S~STAFFRPT\24085.cc 42
determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether
measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural
resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment
includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any
future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated
as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In
addition, a Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
20.d.
21 .a.
21 .b,c.
21 .d.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of
native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate
mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging
habitat.
No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be
adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the
traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel
map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards.
Environmental review of future development of the site will address any
potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 43
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
August 12, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPl~24085.CC 44
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
// ;
//
I
:
e
/
/
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
.LI
/
SWAP
MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
e
Jr
ZONE MAP
e
CASE NO.
C.C. DATE
't
I-
Z
LU
I--
l: ': {
,I
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:Tentative Parcel Mao No. 24085
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Condition of Aooroval
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Condition No. 25
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Condition No. N/A
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Condition No. 76
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Condition No. 49
Public Facility
(Library)
Condition No. N/A
Fire Protection
Condition No. 12
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition No. 71
S\STAFFRPT\24085.ec 41
ITEM 13
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ('/</
FINANCE OFFICER~
CITY MANAGER '
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 25, 1991
Parcel Map No. 24086
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Debbie Ubnoske
APPLICANT INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No.
24086; and
ADOPT Resolution 91-_ approving Tentative Parcel
Map No. 24086 based on the analysis contained in
the staff report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
NBS/Lowry
To create 49 parcels on a 69.7 acre site
Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future
extension of Winchester Road
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, M-SC
S\STAFFRPT\240~6 .CC
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC
Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC
Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC
Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not Requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Murrieta Creek
West: Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Gross Site Area:
Net Site Area:
No. of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Earthwork:
69.7 acres
53.3 acres
49
1.09 acres
Cut -- 349,000
yards
Fill = 349,000
yards
cubic
cubic
BACKGROUND:
The proposed parcel map was given a recommendation of approval by the Planning
Commission on October 21, 1991. The project was originally submitted to the
County in November of 1988. The project was transferred to the City in April of
1991 where it has undergone additional review.
The Planning Commission changed a condition of approval for the project relative to
bus turnouts.
At the Planning Commission meeting, concern was expressed by the City of Murrieta
relative to potential impacts. The Planning Commission expressed their desire to work
with the City of Murrieta, however, the projects could not be continued indefinitely.
The City of Murrieta is still several months away from a circulation plan which could
address their issues.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.CC 2
Additional issue areas contained within the Analysis Section of the Planning
Commission Agenda Report dated October 21, 1991 are as follows:
Fault Hazards, Liquefaction Potential, Flood Hazard, Drainage, Grading, Biological
Impacts, Landscape and Architectural Standards, Water and Sewer Availability, Lot
Line Adjustments and Street Realignments, lot size, Access, Archaeological Resources
and Fossil Resources.
GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY:
Parcel Map No. 24086 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the
site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conform,s to the requirements of the
MSC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. There is a reasonable probability that
the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that the project is
consistent with existing land uses and approved subdivisions in the vicinity.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24086 indicates that the project will not
have any impact on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of
insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration.
FINDINGS:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A
Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the
General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercia-
industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use
designation, the Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with,
the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is
consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
SXSTAFFRPTX24086.CC 3
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Minutes dated 10/21/91
Planning Commission Staff Report 10/7/91
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086
S\STAFFRPT~24086. CC 5
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24086 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE PARCEL INTO 49 PARCELS AT
THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE
FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOWS PARCEL 909-120-020.
WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No.
24086 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on
October 21, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
~E(;TION 1. FindingS. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the
following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a) There is a reasonable probability that the land
S~STAFFRPT~24086 .CC 6
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking
other actions, including the issuance of building permits,
pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map
No. 24086 proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
SXSTAFFRFI'X24086.CC 7
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a) That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will
be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of
S~STAFFRFl~24086 .CC 8
competent jurisdiction.
(2) The City Council in approving the proposed Tentative
Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project, A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
Cm
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Comoliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTIQN 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Parcel Map No.
27086 for the subdivision of a 69.7 acre parcel into 49 parcels located at the
westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and
known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-020 subject to the following conditions:
S\STAFFRFl~24086.CC 10
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
~ECTION 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
,1991.
RONALDJPARKS
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the
__ day of , 1991 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRPT'~24086,CC I 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
oarcels on a 69.7 acre site
Assessor's Parcel No.:
24086
To
909-120-020
create 49
Planning Deoartment
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to
S~TAFFRPT~24086 .CC '[ 2
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
b. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated June 13, 1991,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated November 16, 1990,
a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated June 5, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined
in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
California Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
S~STAFFRPT~24086 .CC 3, 3
17.
18.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of alt slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are
the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS)
shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified
environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the
City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded
with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety.
19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
20.
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor
Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan."
"Archaeological and paleontological monitoring during grading is
required, and summary report shall be submitted to the Planning
Department prior to issuance of building permits."
"Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek.
Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the
conditions of approval."
"The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map
includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human
occupancy are allowed."
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
1)
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits,
an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development
and shall include the following:
1. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
S\STAFFRP'I~,24086.CC '[ 4
21.
22.
23.
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probability
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall
excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site, Based on the results of these tests,
the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A
qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the
authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of
cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to
temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor
grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow
recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding
property.
S\STAFFRF~24086.CC l, 5
c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least
10 feet landscaped.
24.
25.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection, and certified
in writing by the landscape architect.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study
is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required
walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Mitigation fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No.
663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the
payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the
fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County
ordinance or resolution.
26.
27.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City'of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to
attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel
Map No. 24086, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against
the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the
requirement to be installed underground.
S~STAFFPJPT~24086.CC ]. 6
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
28.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the
right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have
any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in
the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses
of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of
said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate
under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all
owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet
changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall
permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale.
This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
29.
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) Shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by
all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall
make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's
shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such
provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with
the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage
and facilities.
The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by
reference into the CC&R's.
S\STAFFRFl~24086 .CC 1 ?
30.
31.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to
a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly
reimbursed.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the
City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the
Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building
permits.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements
ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads,
drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the
issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of lot
line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment
of the future right-of-way of Winchester Road.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
Deeartment of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
S\STAFFRPT~240~6 .CC 18
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 Department of
Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
33.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
34.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which
is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements
of said section.
35.
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet half street improvements plus
one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a
65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101
(38'/50').
36.
Diaz Road shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101 (76'/100').
37. Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
S\STAFFP, P~240~6. CC ], 9
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78').
Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one
12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 51 foot
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39').
If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient
public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved
and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be
constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B (32'/60'),
at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works.
A standard knuckle shall be constructed within the land division per Riverside
County Standard No. 801.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the event
the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as provided in
the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City for the acquisition of such easement at the developer's cost pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so
noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public
street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated
or noticed on the final map.
Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior
to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works.
47. The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
S\STAFFRF~240~6.CC 2 0
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as
appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping (street and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with A.D. 155 and adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety
Department.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
54.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
S~STAFFRPT~24086.CC 2 ~.
55.
56.
57.
58,
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
as approved by the Department of Public Works.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and
shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall
also address setback requirements for fault line areas.
The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of
Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the
Department of Public Works.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for
the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property.
A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the recordation of the final map.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with
supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
65. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
S~STAFFP, PT~24086.CC 2 2
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
66.
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths, Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of
map revision from FEMA.
67.
The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
68.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the
Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
69.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public
Works.
70.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
71,
An application for development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this
ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department
of Public Works.
72.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
73.
All conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District letter dated November 16, 1990, shall be complied with.
74. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
S\STAFFRPT\240~6.CC 2 3
right-of-way.
75.
The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to,
specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and
clearance letters as requested.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
76.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
77.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
78.
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 Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer
shall post 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. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
79.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on
all interior public streets.
S\STAFFRFT~.086.CC 2 4
80. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction,
81.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Engineering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
82.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street
improvement plans.
83.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Winchester
Road North at Diaz Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans
with the second plan check submittal,
84.
The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to
contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road
to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland
overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the Western bypass
corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
85.
The subdivider shall execute a reimbursement agreement for the design and
construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz
Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals
shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
86.
"Prior to recordation of the Final Map, developer shall provide bus turnouts with
pedestrian entrances as approved by Riverside Transit Authority and the
Department of Public Works. Turnouts shall be shown on the Street
Improvement Plans."
SXSTAFFRPT~24086.CC 2 5
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
87.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public
Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
88.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the
approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
89.
All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance.
90. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site of the intersection of local
streets.
91. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent
to the project.
S%STAFFRPT~,2~086 .CC 2 6
PARCEL MAPS 24086
side of Diaz Road, north of the future extensionerly
Winchester Roa~.
PLANNIN~ COMMISSION MINUTE8
OCTOBER 21, 1991
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
9:00 P.M. and recommends that the City Council Adopt the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086 and AdoPt
Resolution 91-(next) approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
24086, adding Transportation Condition 86, seconded by
COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:I COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
CHAIRMAN HOAGL~ND requested that in the overall staff report we
urge the City Council to continue to work with the City of Murrieta
on traffic issues.
12. PARCEL MAP 25139
12.1
Proposal to create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a
97 acre site in the M-SC zone. Located on the westerly
side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of
Winchester Road.
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to continue Parcel Map 25139 for
two weeks to look at the cut area on the westerly slope
edge where the existing chaparral is and including
modification to Condition 84 to refer to Diaz Road as
opposed to Winchester Road. DOUG aTEWART suggested
having the applicant stake the upper boundaries of that
tract so that the Commission could see where it falls on
existing terrain. The applicant concurred with the
request. COMMISSIONER BLAIR seconded the motion.
The applicant provided the Commission with a picture of
the boundaries.
AYES: 4
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i
COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
13. PARCEL MAP 25408
13.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in the M-SC zone. Located on the
'~' ~ ~ ~. southwest of the future
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.:
Parcel Map No. 24086
Prepared By:
Scott Wright
Recommendation:
1. ADOPT the
negative declaration; and
2. ADOPT Resolution
No. 91- recommending
approval of Parcel Map
No. 24086
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Rancho California City Center Association No. I
REPRESENTATIVE:
NBS/Lowry
PROPOSAL:
To create 49 parcels on a 69.7 acre site
LOCATION:
Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future
extension of Winchester Road
EXISTING ZONING:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial, M-SC
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not Requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Murrieta Creek
Vacant
S\STAFFRPT~24088 .PM 1
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Gross Site Area:
Net Site Area:
No. of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Earthwork:
69.7 acres
53.3 acres
49
1.09 acres
Cut = 349,000
yards
Fill = 349,000
yards
cubic
cubic
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 was submitted to
the County on November 22, 1988. The application
was continued at the Land Development Committee
(LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending
submittal of paleontological and biological surveys,
additional grading information, geology and
liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a
traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No.
24086 at four subsequent meetings, pending
clearance from the County Geologist and the County
Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological
report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional
information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of
the biological survey.
Parcel Map No. 24086 was transmitted to the City
on April 11, 1990. City staff requested a copy of
the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a
traffic study, an archeology report, information
regarding property boundaries and the alignment of
Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture
standards.
The proposal is to create 49 parcels with an average
parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with
a gross area of 69.7 acres. There is an open space
area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use
zone recommended in the geologic report. The
easterly side of the site in Murrieta Creek comprises
a channel easement and a flood control easement to
the County of Riverside.
S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 2
ANALYSIS:
Traffic Imoacts
Future development of the site of Parcel Map No.
24086 is expected to generate 5,150 vehicle trip
ends per day. The traffic study prepared in
conjunction with the project determined that
projected future traffic based on existing traffic,
project generated traffic, and traffic generated by
other growth in the area will result in a peak hour
Level of Service D or better at all intersections within
the scope of the traffic study if recommended
improvements are implemented. The
recommendation include contributing to the
extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at
certain intersection contributing to the signalization
of other intersection, providing a signing and striping
plan, and contributing to the construction of the
Overland overcrossing and the restriping of
Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements
are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval.
Fault Hazards
The site is traversed by a potentially active fault
which was previously unmapped. The geologic
report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map
defines a fault zone with two branches and
recommends the establishment of a restricted use
zone to include observed faults, their in-line
projections, and a buffer zone. The restricted use
zone is shown on the tentative parcel map as an
open space area 150 feet in width. No habitable
structure shall be constructed within either branch of
the restricted use zone.
Liauefaction Potential
Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion
of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface
subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4
inches. The geologic report recommends that the
effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing
capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading
be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the
S\STAFFRPT%24086.PM 3
site when grading and building plans become
available. Soil reports addressing the issues
delineated above shall be a condition of approval of
the subject parcel map and of any future
development proposals on the site.
Flood Hazard
Approximately one half of the proposed parcels are
located within the 100 year flood plain limits of
Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project
from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the
conditions of approval (see County Flood Control
District letter of November 16, 1990).
Drainaae
The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta
CreekFFemecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and
payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are
required to drain toward adjacent streets or an
adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer.
Parcel Map No. 24086 is located adjacent to and
upslope from the site. If development of the subject
property occurs before development of the site of
Parcel Map No. 24086 adequate inlet facilities shall
be constructed to collect all tributary flows and
convey them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading
shall be designed to penetrate existing tributary
drainage areas and outlet points, and development of
the subject and adjacent properties shall be
coordinated to ensure that water courses remain
unobstructed and that stormwaters are not diverted
from one watershed to another. The site, including
each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected
from 100 year tributary storm flows.
Gradina
Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic
yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be less than 30
feet in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high.
S~STAFFRPT\24086.PM 4
Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation
which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut of
fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2: 1. The slope
stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut
slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of
29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope
faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes.
The recommendations of the slope stability report
shall be included in the conditions of approval.
Biological ImDacts
Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of
the presence of any plant or animal species classified
as rare or endangered. The project will involve the
loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of
birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an
incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant
impact which is mitigated by the retention of an
open space park area in the larger restrict use zone.
Further mitigations may be required by State and
Federal resource agencies relative to channel
improvements for Murrieta Creek. The use of native
California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will
enhance reoccupation of the bird community.
Landscaoe and Architectural Standards
The applicant has provided a set of landscape and
architectural standards to ensure that development
of the site maintains a consistent level of quality.
Conformity with the landscape and architectural
standards will be required of all future development
of the site.
Water and Sewer Availability
Water and sewer service will be available from the
Rancho California Water District upon completion of
financial arrangements between the property owner
and the District.
S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 5
Lot Line Adiustments and Street Realignments
The formation of Assessment District 155 included
a realignment of the right of way for the future
extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road,
Since the centerline of the right of way constituted
the boundary between properties, the realignment
which resulted in changes to property boundaries.
The subject parcel map was affected by a
realignment which resulted in changes to property
boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by
a realignment of Winchester Road at the intersection
with Avenida de Venta. In order to prevent
discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property
at the time of recordation, staff has required that the
applicant and other affected property owners
eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line
adjustments, street vacations, and offers of
rededication reflecting the new alignment of
Winchester Road and the resulting changes in
property boundaries. These requirements shall be
completed prior to map recordation.
Lot Size
All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre
and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of
7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All
lots are over 100 feet wide and meet the minimum
width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are
available.
Access
All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for
public dedication. Access to the site is taken from
Diaz Road and from the future extension of
Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets
"A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct
access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road.
S\STAFFRPT%24086.PM 6
Archaeological Resources
The site of Parcel Map No. 24086 contains a
recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is
believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square
meters, part of which is out site of the subject
property. During an archaeological surface survey of
the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of
basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and
metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones,
and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed.
The recommendations of the Archaeological
Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of
the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site. The
resulting information shall be used to determine
whether the site is a unique resource for the area
and whether measures to preserve the site or
salvage some percentage of the cultural resources
should be implemented. The Archaeological
Assessment also includes the recommendation that
an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading
activities. These recommendations shall be
incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel
Map No. 24086. In addition, a Native American
representative shall be present during the
archaelologaical excavation and also during grading.
Fossil Resources
The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba
Formation. In accordance with the recommendation
of the San Bernardino County Museum, the
subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor
grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered
during grading, prepare a report of finding, and
provide for preservation and curation of recovered
specimens.
S\STAFFRPT\24088.PM 7
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
Parcel Map No. 24086 is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light
industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the
requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service
Commercial Zone. There is a reasonable probability
that the project will be consistent with the future
General Plan in that the project is consistant with a
existing land uses and approved subdivisions in the
vicinity.
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24086
indicates that the project will not have any impacts
on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a
level of insignificance, and Staff recommends
adoption of a Negative Declaration.
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 8 .
10.
11.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density,
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 9
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
make the following recommendation to the City
Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel
Map No. 24086; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative
Parcel Map No.24086 based on the analysis
contained herein and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4,
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086
vgw
S%STAFFRP'I~24086,PM 10
RESOLUTION NO. 91-103
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 24086 TO SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 49 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF
DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF
WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL 909-120-020.
WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No.
24086 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on
October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Fin(;linfia. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
S\STAFFBPT~24088.PM 11
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map
No. 24086 proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
S~STAFFRPT~24088.PM I 2
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a) That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will
S\STAFFRP'T%24086.Rvl I 3
be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is
consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial
Land Use designation, the Manufacturing-
Service Commercial Zone, and existing land
uses in the vicinity.
Ce
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivisions in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E".
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 14
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
Initial Study prepared for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities in that all
parcels have adequate southerly exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental ComPliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
S\STAFFRPT~24088.PM 15
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that
the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 27086 for the subdivision of a 69.7 acre
parcel into 49 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future
extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-020 subject
to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 1991.
JOHN E. HOAGLANO
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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\STAFFRPT~Z4086.PM 16
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
24086
To create 49
parcels on a 69.7
acre site
909-120-020
Plannine Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
S\STAFFRPT~24088.PM 17
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to I and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
b. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated June 13, 1991,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated November 16, 1990,
a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated June 5, 1991, a copy of which is
attached,
The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined
in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
California Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 18
16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
17.
18.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are
the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS)
shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified
environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the
City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded
with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety.
19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
20.
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor
Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan."
"Archaeological and paleontological monitoring during grading is
required, and summary report shall be submitted to the Planning
Department prior to issuance of building permits."
"Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek.
Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the
conditions of approval."
"The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map
includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human
occupancy are allowed."
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
1)
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permitS,
an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development
and shall include the following:
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 19
21.
22.
23.
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probability
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall
excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth,
spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests,
the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A
qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the
authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of
cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to
temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor
grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow
recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding
property.
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 20
c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least
10 feet landscaped.
24.
25.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection, and certified
in writing by the landscape architect.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study
is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required
walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Mitigation fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No.
663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the
payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the
fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County
ordinance or resolution.
26.
27.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to
attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel
Map No. 24086, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against
the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the
requirement to be installed underground.
S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 2 1
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
28.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the
right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have
any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in
the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses
of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of
said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate
under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all
owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet
changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall
permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale.
This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
29.
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by
all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall
make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's
shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such
provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with
the final map, A recorded copy shall be provided to the City,
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage
and facilities.
The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by
reference into the CC&R's.
S\STAFFRPT\2408e,PM 22
30.
31.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to
a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly
reimbursed.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the
City. Such proof of this' maintenance shall be submitted to the
Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building
permits.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements
ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads,
drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the
issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of lot
line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment
of the future right-of-way of Winchester Road.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
S%STAFFRPT%24088.PM 23
Deoartment of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Department of
Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
32.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
33.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
34.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which
is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements
of said section.
35.
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet half street improvements plus
one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a
65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101
(38'/50').
36.
Diaz Road shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101 (76'/100').
S\STAFFRPT~24086 ,PM 24
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78').
Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one
12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 51 foot
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39').
If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient
public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved
and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be
constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B (32'/60'),
at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works.
A standard knuckle shall be constructed within the land division per Riverside
County Standard No. 801.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the event
the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as provided in
the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the
City for the acquisition of such easement at the developer's cost pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so
noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public
street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated
or noticed on the final map.
Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior
to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs
first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road,
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc,, shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works.
S~STAFFRPT~24086.PM 25
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as
appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping (street and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with A.D. 155 and adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety
Department.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 26
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the Department of Public Works.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and
shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall
also address setback requirements for fault line areas.
The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of
Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the
Department of Public Works.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for
the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property.
A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the recordation of the final map,
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with
supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 27
65.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
inc!uding enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
66.
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of
map revision from FEMA.
67.
The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
68.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the
Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
69.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public
Works.
70.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
71.
An application for development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this
ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department
of Public Works.
72.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
73.
All conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District letter dated November 16, 1990, shall be complied with.
S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 28
74.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
right-of-way.
75.
The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to,
specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and
clearance letters as requested.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
76.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
77.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
78,
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 Negative Declaration for the project.
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building
permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute 'the
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer
shall post 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. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of
those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such
fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to
protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of
any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic
mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
79.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on
all interior public streets.
S~STAFFRPT~24088 .PM 29
80.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction.
81.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Engineering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
82.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street
improvement plans.
83.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Winchester
Road North at Diaz Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans
with the second plan check submittal.
84.
The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to
contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road
to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland
overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the Western bypass
corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
85.
The subdivider shall execute a reimbursement agreement for the design and
construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz
Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals
shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the
subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
recordation.
86.
"Prior to recordation of the Final Map, developer shall provide bus turnouts with
pedestrian entrances as approved by Riverside Transit Authority and the
Department of Public Works. Turnouts shall be shown on the Street
Improvement Plans."
S\STAFFRPT%24086.PM 30
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
87.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public
Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
88.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the
approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
89.
All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance.
90.
Stop signs shall be installed within the project site of the intersection of local
streets.
91.
Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent
to the project.
S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 3 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
NBS Lowrv
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula, CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21. 1991
II
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterly sides of the site.
Environmental linDacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets,)
Yq~ Maybe NO
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features? X
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 3 2
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique .geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT~24086,PM 33
-4.
Plant
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
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)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~240Se.PM 34
-8.
10.
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
.Light and Glare. Wild the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 3 5
11.
12.
13.
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yqi Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT~24Oae.PM 36
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes Maybe NQ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
37
X
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT~24086.PM 38
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Ye~ Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 39
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b,c.
1.d.
1.e.
1.f.
1.g.
Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and
fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut
and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which
consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential
on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All
cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of
Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will
be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability
Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable
to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing
landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope
Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the
subject parcel maps.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted.
The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be
mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation
whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding
disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water
run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces.
~,ppropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through
~e Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance
with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval.
No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage
improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in
erosion or siltation.
Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence,
and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology
Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of
bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re-
evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans
become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a
restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map.
The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault
S~STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 40
2.a,b,c.
3.b.
3.c.
3,d.
3.6.
3.f,g.
3.h.
on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted
within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the
restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The
geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the
County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval,
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality
or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for
potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required
if necessary.
No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of
Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel
map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the
course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek,
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of
surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate
drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer.
No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters
to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood
plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This
is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the
provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment
District 155.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water,
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant,
No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not
expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters.
No, The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 41
3.i.
4.a,b,
4.co
4.d.
5.a,b.
5,c,
6,8,
6.b.
9.a,b.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 1 O0
year flood plain elevation,
No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on
the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have
previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site,
Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species.
This is not considered a significant impact.
No. The site is not currently used as crop land.
No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any
indications of any species classified as rare or endangered.
Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which
provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional
terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non-
significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native
California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order
to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life
shall be a condition of approval,
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during
grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant
because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses.
No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts,
and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or
required to provide adequate noise mitigation.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and
subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard
conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and
requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights.
No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of natural or non-renewable resources.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM at2
10.a,b,
11,12.
13.a,
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of
the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development
of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to
existing and approved housing.
Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is
expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends
per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the
project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended
improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic
impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public
Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for
traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester
Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the
second plan check submittal, The developer shall execute a
Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic
signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road,
Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with
the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction
of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center
Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road
restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by
a focused traffic analysis approved by the Department of Public Works.
No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate
off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed.
No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation
systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic.
No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of
circulation.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 43
13.f.
14.a-f,
15.a,b.
16.a-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18,
19.
20.a,b,c.
No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate
at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are
implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for
the proposed parcel map.
No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future
development will generate an increase in the need for public services in
the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment
of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property
taxes will fund the additional public services.
No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand
for fuel or other energy sources.
No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or
service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new
or substantially altered utility systems.
Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the
Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel
improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the
County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by
the developer's participation in an assessment district.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views.
Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction
of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded
archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass
approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the
subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site
conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage,
fragmented manos and roerates, fire-affected rocks, pestles,
hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The
recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a
surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and
S~STAFFRPT~24088 ,PM 44
20.d.
21 .a.
21 .b,c.
21 .d.
significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to
determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether
measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural
resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment
includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any
future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated
as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In
addition, a Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of
native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate
mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging
habitat.
No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be
adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the
traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel
map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards.
Environmental review of future development of the site will address any
potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required.
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 45
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
August 12, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT~24088.PM 46
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fqq
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of ADDrOv81
Condition No.
Condition No,
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
Condition No.
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 47
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Backaround
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:.
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
NBS Lowrv
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula. CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
II
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterly sides of the site,
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Yei Maybe NO
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
X
S\STAFFRIr~240~6.CC 2 7
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
mOiStUFe, Or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S;STAFFRFl~24086.CC 2 8
Plant
a.
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
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)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
uRique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
YeS Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .CC 2 9
10.
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use, Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~7~086.CC 3 0
11.
12.
13.
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yqi Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086.CC 3 I
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
32
X
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Y~i Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFP, PT~240~6.CC 3 3
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yqi Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRFI~24086.CC 3 4
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b,c.
1.d.
1.e.
1,f.
1.g,
Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and
fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut
and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which
consists of sandstone and siltstone, Mitigation of liquefaction potential
on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All
cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of
Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will
be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability
Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable
to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing
landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope
Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the
subject parcel maps.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted.
The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be
mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation
whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding
disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water
run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces.
Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through
the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance
with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval.
No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage
improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in
erosion or siltation.
Yes, Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence,
and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology
Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of
bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re-
evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans
become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a
restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map.
The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault
S\STAFFRFFX24086.CC 3 5
2.a,b,c.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e,
3.f,g.
3.h.
on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted
within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the
restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The
geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the
County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality
or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for
potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required
if necessary.
No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of
Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel
map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the
course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of
surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate
drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer.
No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters
to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 100 year flood
plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This
is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the
provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment
District 155.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water.
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant.
No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not
expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
S\STAFFRF~24086.CC 3 6
3.i.
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a,b.
5.c.
6.8.
6.b.
9.a,b.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100
year flood plain elevation.
No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on
the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have
previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site.
Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species.
This is not considered a significant impact.
No. The site is not currently used as crop land.
No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any
indications of any species classified as rare or endangered.
Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which
provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional
terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non-
significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native
California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order
to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life
shall be a condition of approval.
Yes, The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during
grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant
because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses,
No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts,
and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or
required to provide adequate noise mitigation.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and
subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard
conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and
requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights.
No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of natural or non-renewable resources.
SXSTAFFRPTX24086.CC 3 7
lO.a,b.
11,12.
13.a,
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of
the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development
of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to
existing and approved housing.
Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is
expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends
per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the
project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended
improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic
impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public
Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for
traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester
Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the
second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a
Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic
signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road,
Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with
the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction
of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center
Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road
restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by
a focused traffic analysis approved by the Department of Public Works.
No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate
off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed.
No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation
systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic.
No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of
circulation.
S~STAFFRPT~24086.CC 3 8
13.f.
14.a-f.
15.a,b.
16.a-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a,b,c.
No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate
at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are
implemented, The street improvements will be conditions of approval for
the proposed parcel map.
No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future
development will generate an increase in the need for public services in
the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment
of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property
taxes will fund the additional public services.
No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand
for fuel or other energy sources.
No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or
service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new
or substantially altered utility systems,
Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the
Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel
improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the
County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by
the developer's participation in an assessment district.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views.
Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction
of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded
archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass
approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the
subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site
conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage,
fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles,
hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The
recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a
surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and
S\STAFFRPT~240~6.CC 3 9
20.d.
21 .a.
21 .b,c.
21 .d.
significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to
determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether
measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural
resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment
includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any
future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated
as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In
addition, a Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of
native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate
mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging
habitat.
No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be
adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the
traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel
map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards.
Environmental review of future development of the site will address any
potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required.
S\8TAFFRFI~240~6.CC 4 0
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
August 12. 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT~24086.CC 4 ].
CITY OF TEMECULA )
/ .- /
SITE ,
./
../
VICINITY MAP
r
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
/I
CITY OF TEMECULA )
RLI
SWAP MAP
//
//
ZONE
MAP
r
CASE NO.
C.C. DATE
h
!I!1,
5' '7
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of Aooroval
Condition No. 25
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 78
Condition No. 50
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 12
Condition No. 72
S\STAFFRPT\24086.CC 4 2
ITEM 14
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Single Family Residential (minimum one
acre parcels)
Single Family Residential {minimum one
acre parcels)
Single Family Residential (minimum one
acre parcels)
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Total Land Area:
No. of Proposed Lots:
Min. Residential Lot Size:
Avg. Residential Lot Size:
SWAP Designation:
20 acres
34
21,780 sq.ft.
25,650 sq.ft.
2-5 DU/AC
BACKGROUND
The City Planning Commission, at their meeting of October 7, 1991 conducted a Public
Hearing for Tentative Tract Map No. 25892.
After closing the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission voted 3-2 recommending the City
Council deny the Tentative Map as proposed.
In their recommendation for denial, the Commission cited the following
concerns/considerations:
Grading impacts of the project and the elimination of significant terrain necessary to
achieve the map design and residential density proposed. It was the Commission's
determination that the tentative map as designed proposed grading and land form
alteration that would likely be inconsistent with the City's Future General Plan.
It was further determined that land use and residential density proposed by Tentative
Map No. 25892 would likely be inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use density
eventually adopted for the project site, The design of the tentative map represents a
significant alteration to the existing large lot, rural development characteristic of the
project' site vicinity.
Circulation plans for the project were also found likely inconsistent with the future
General Plan in that the project's proposed internal circulation system may set
precedent for development of similar small isolated road patterns. It was the
Commission's determination that the project was likely premature considering the
existing circulation system in the vicinity and would be detrimental to development of
an area-wide road system needed to serve not only this project, but the entire area
generally southwest of Pauba and Margarita Road, as well.
The project, as designed, may result in significant adverse impacts to development of
the City's future General Plan drair~ge element. The tentative map design does not
address possible or likely area*wide drainage plans necessary to mitigate drainage
concerns in the project vicinity.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TT 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY A'I'TORNEY
~:11
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 26, 1991
Tentative Tract No. 25892
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SWAP DESIGNATION:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Charles D. Ray
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
Map No. 25892
denying Tentative Tract
David Pearson
Richard Masyczek
Subdivide approximately 20 acres into 34 single family
residential lots.
South side of Pauba Road, between Ynez Road and
Margarita Road.
R-R (Rural Residential)
2-5 DU/AC
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-R (Rural Residential)
R-R (Rural Residential)
R-R (Rural Residential)
R-R {Rural Residential)
Not Applicable
Vacant
S/STAFFRPT\25892TT
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TT 4
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The foregoing concerns, enumerated by the City Planning Commission, are forwarded to the
Council for their consideration of this project's design merits, and its likely compatability with
the City's future General Plan.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT Resolution 91- Denying Tentative Tract Map
No. 25892 Based on the Analysis and Findings contained
in this City Council staff report, incorporating the Planning
Commissions 10/7/91 findings for denial.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution denying Tentative Tract Map No.
25892 - page 4
Planning Commission minutes dated 10/7/91 -
page 10
Planning Commission Staff Report dated 10/7/91 -
page 11
Development Fee Checklist - page 12
S/STAFFRPT\25892.TT 3
Case No,:
Recommendation: 1.
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 16, 1991
Tentative Tract Map No. 25892
Prepared By: Oliver Mujica
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the
Negative Declaration for
Tentative Tract Map No. 25892; and
2. ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
recommending approval of
Tentative Tract Map No. 25892.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SWAP DESIGNATION:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
David Pearson
Richard Masyczek
Subdivide approximately 20 acres into 34 single
family residential lots.
South side of Pauba Road, between Ynez Road and
Margarita Road.
R-R (Rural Residential)
2-5 DU/AC
North:
South: R-R
East: R-R
West: R-R
Not Applicable
Vacant
R-R (Rural Residential)
(Rural Residential)
(Rural Residential)
(Rural Residential)
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 20 ACRE PARCEL INTO 34 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PAUBA
ROAD BETWEEN YNEZ AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-090-005.
WHEREAS, David Pearson filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract Map on
October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to speak in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission Hearing the Commission
recommended denial of said Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered said Tentative Tract Map on November
26, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council denied said
Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings.
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan wsthin thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3)
The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (heroinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Ran for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the SWAP land use density
ranges recommended for the subject site. However, the SWAP designation for the
property in question and proposed Tentative Tract Map (heroinafter referred to as the
"Property") is likely inconsistent with the City's future General Plan, to wit:
A. The City Council finds, in denying the application that:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 25892
proposed will not be consistent with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
The map does not respect physical site terrain limitations, nor is it
sensitive to adjacent rural development patterns.
(2)
There is reasonable probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan. If approved, the Tentative Map
will set precedent in allowable densities and map designs for the project
area. The project will likely adversely impact development of the
General Plan circulation and drainage systems.
(3)
The proposed Tentative Tract Map is not reasonable and beneficial at
this time as it does not provide a logical transition to adjacent large lot
residential development and may result in significant adverse impacts as
delineated in Section 4.H. below.
S~STAFF.PT~2Se92,TT 6 .i
4. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, a subdivision may be denied
if any of the following findings are made:
That the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is not consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the type
of development.
That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements is
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
likely to cause serious public health problems.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or
use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be
approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be
provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record
or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.
The City Council in denying the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the
following findings, to wit:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be inconsistent
with the General Plan being prepared at this time.
(a)
The project proposes mass grading and elimination of existing
significant topographic features to achieve the map design and
residential density proposed. The proposed map design is
incongruous with existing physical site limitations. Grading
techniques proposed will likely conflict with those allowed by the
City's future General Plan.
(2)
There is a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately
inconsistent with the.,plan.
S%STAFFRPT%25892.TT 7
(a)
Approval of the project will set precedent in residential densities
allowed in the immediate vicinity. If approved, the map design
also encourages like subdivision design incorporating mass
grading of significant topographic features, Further, the project
potentially impacts current off-site drainage area patterns and
may significantly impede development of an overall circulation
plan to serve the project vicinity.
(3)
The site is not suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms
of the size and shape of the lot configurations, access, and density.
(a)
The project, as designed, requires mass grading of the site and
destruction of significant natural terrain features evident at the
proposal location. The project site consists of hilly terrain
adjacent to Pauba Road to the north, tailing off into a deep ravine
to the south.
(4)
All lots do not have acceptable access to existing and proposed
dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic.
(a)
The subdivision accesses Pauba Road, an improved dedicated
City right of way. The design of the map itself, however,
discourages development of area-wide circulation systems. The
tentative map proposes isolated subdivision of property with
limited street improvements designed to serve only those lots
internal to the subdivision. Approval of the tentative map will
significantly reduce potential alternative circulation system
configurations connecting the project site with surrounding
properties. Development pressures in the vicinity of this proposal
indicate the need for design and construction of an area wide
road system.
(5)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
SECTION 2.
The City of Temecula City Council hereby denies Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 for
the subdivision of a 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots located generally between
Ynez and Margarita Roads, on the south side of Pauba Road, also known as Assessor Parcel
No. 945-090-005.
S%STAFFRPT\25892.TT 8
DENIED AND ADOPTED this , 1991
RONALD Jo PARKS
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 8th day of January, 1991 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES
NOES
ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TT 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OF
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TT 10
PLA~FNXNG COIO~XENXON KINUTEE
Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
OCTOBER 7o 1991
23125, seconded
AYES:
4 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey,
Ford,
NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Hoagland
COMMISSIONER EO&GLAND declared a five minute recess. The meeting
reconvened at 7:30 P.M.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND opened the public hearing on Item No. 13.
The applicant requested that the item be postponed to later in the
public hearing to allow for his consultant to arrive.
TENTATIVE TRACT RAP NO. 25692
Proposal to sub-divide 20 acres into 34 single family
residential lots. Located on the south side of Pauba Road
between Ynez and Margarita Roads.
CHARLES RAY provided the staff report.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:40
P.M.
RICHARD RASYCZEH, 25262 Madrone, Murrieta, representing
the applicant, concurred with the staff report; however,
expressed a concern with Condition 49 requiring that
CC&R's be provided to maintain slopes and common open
space. He stated that there were some common drainage
areas, which the applicant was requesting TCSD maintain.
Mr. Masyczeh requested deleting Condition 49 and replace
with a condition that TCSD maintain the drainage areas
and that adequate warning be given to the property owners
for the maintenance of these areas.
CHAIRMAN NOAGLAND asked if TCSD would be interested in
maintaining these drainage areas.
GARY KING advised that the TCSD was not interested in the
applicants request to amend Condition 49.
DAVE ASMUM, 40521 Calle Cansions, Temecula, spoke in favor
of the request.
RALPH NAVARRO, 30418 Colina Verde, Temecula, spoke in
favor of the request.
TPCMIN10/07/91 -7- 10/06/91
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE2 OCTOBER 7, 1991
NOEL PAINE, 30222 Corte Cantero, Temecula, spoke in favor
of the request.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he felt there were some
design issues that needed to be addressed before
approving the request.
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND stated that he would find it
inappropriate to approve this map as part of an area that
looks like approximately 220 acres with no coordinated
circulation pattern. He stated that he felt that the
developments should follow a circulation plan for the
entire area.
COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he felt the topography
should also be looked at based on the fact that the
project bisects a natural drainage course.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she would feel more
comfortable addressing this plan in areas such as this, in
keeping with the general plan.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at
8:00 P.M. and continue off calendar Tentative Tract Map
No. 25892, to allow the applicant to work with staff and
address the issue of maintenance of large slopes along the
creek, coordination of a drainage plan for this area, the
coordination of a circulation plan for this property and
properties between Santiago and Pauba Roads, and amount
of major slopes and pad sizes related to the project
setting a minimum size for a pad, using 10,000 as a
reasonable pad to lot size (specifically looking at Lot 2)
seconded by CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND for discussion.
DOUG STEWART questioned if the Commission was requesting
'that the applicant redesign the drainage plan.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF suggested that staff work with the
applicant to see that the drainage flows in that area.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that due to the fact that the
Commission has expressed a number of concerns regarding
this project, which appears to be in conflict with the
future general plan, she would not be in favor of a
continuation at this time.
TPCMIN10/07/91 -8- 10/08/91
PLANNING COMMIBSION MZNUTES
-/
OCTOBER 7o lggl
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that until there is a general
plan that clearly delineates what the City is going to
do, he cannot support going forward with this project.
AYES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford
NOES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to deny Tentative Tract Map No.
25892 based on the probable inconsistency with the
future general plan, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
JOB~ CAVANAUGH requested more specific findings on the
probably inconsistencies.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY outlined circulation, land use, grading
and drainage.
AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland
NOES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND clarified that the motion was a
recommendation to the City Council.
7. PARCEL HAP NO. 25059 MINOR CHANGE NO. I
Proposal to modify or delete engineering conditions.
Project located at Ridge Park Drive, south west side
approximately 70 feet east of its intersection with
Rancho California Road.
RICHARD AYALAprovided the staff report.
-CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:10 P.M.
ANTHONYPOLO, Avalon Consultants, P.O. Box 2497, Temecula,
representing the applicant, concurred with the staff
report.
COMMISSIONER FORD questioned if the language in Conditions
40, 41 and 45 shouldn't read "as necessary" rather than
"as warranted".
ROBERT RIGHBTTI stated that staff would be relying on
traffic studies for justification of the traffic signals
and the proper terminology is "as warranted".
TPCMIN10/07/91 -9- 10/08/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
OF
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25892TT 11
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City of Temecula Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Planning Director
October 7, 1991
Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 (TTM 25892);
Subdivision of 20 acres into 34 single
family residential lots.
The Planning Commission continued the Public Hearing for TTM 25892 from the Commission meeting
of September 16, 1991 to their meeting of October 7, 1991 in order to provide the Commission
adequate time to review the proposed map design. Copies of the Tentative Map were provided to the
Commission at the meeting of September 16, 1991. Additional information regarding land uses
adjacent to this project is attached hereto.
Recommendation: 1.
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract
Map No. 25892; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
Map No. 25892.
recommending approval of Tentative Tract
klb
CITY OF TEMECULA )
e
~',,~,\
\
· , )~,
/~,/
,/
AS
C E
EXHIBIT NO. ~
J'.C. DAT, e~>"'/"~//
CITY OF TEMECULA )
//
II
II
II
"'JI
.. iL...---.'\
./' II
fl
e
e
· . ',,/~. =
//
//
r
CASE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
e
· . ~.
//
//
/
NO
EXHIBIT NO.
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Total Land Area:
No. of Proposed Lots:
Min. Residential Lot Size:
Avg. Residential Lot Size:
SWAP Designation:
20 acres
34
21,780 sq.ft.
25,650 sq.ft.
2-5 DU/AC
On March 1, 1990, the applicant filed Tentative
Tract Map No. 25892 and Change of Zone No. 5736
to the Riverside County Planning Department.
Change of Zone No. 5736 was a request to change
the zoning designation of the subject property from
R-R (Rural Residential - 20,000 sq. ft. minimum) to
R-1 (Single Family Residential 7,200 sq. ft.
minimum); and, Tentative Tract Map No, 25892
proposed to subdivide the subject 20 acre property
in 37 single family residential lots.
The project was reviewed by the Riverside County
Land Division Committee (LDC) March 29, 1990.
The LDC requested the following items:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Paleontological Survey
Biological Survey
Slope Stability Report
Traffic Study
Design Manual
Archaeological Survey
Slope Analysis
Subsequently, this project was transferred to the
City of Temecula on April 24, 1990.
On April 24, 1991, this project was reviewed by the
Preliminary Development Review Committee (Pre-
DRC) in order to informally evaluate the project and
address any possible concerns, as well as suggest
possible modifications. The issues raised by the Pre-
DRC irtcluded the following:
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
1. Density
2. Erosion Control
3. Grading
4. Drainage
5. Slope Stability
Subsequent to the Pre-DRC meeting, Staff met with
the applicant to discuss the Planning staff's concerns
and the required supplemental material in order to
address the Pre-DRC's concerns.
After dicussing the project with the staff, the
applicant decided to withdraw the application for
Change of Zone No. 5736; reduce the number of
residential lots from 37 to 34; provide a minimum lot
size of 21,780 square feet; eliminate an interior loop
street design; and reduce the amount of grading.
On July 18, 1991, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892
was reviewed by the Formal Development Review
Committee; and, it was determined that the project,
as designed, can be adequately conditioned to
mitigate the DRC's concerns. The DRC has
forwarded a recommendation of approval subject to
conditions.
As noted above, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892
proposes to subdivide the subject 20 acre parcel into
34 single family residential lots. The proposed
subdivision has been designed in accordance with
the standards of the R-R (Rural Residential - 20,000
square foot minimum) zone, as well as Ordinance
Nos. 348 and 460.
Traffic Impacts
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
this project and has determined that the proposed
project will have a minimal impact to the existing
road system and there will be no adverse unmitigable
significant traffic impacts resulting from the
development of this proposed project.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 3
Land Use and Zoning
The subject site is currently vacant. Surrounding
land uses include single family residential homes to
the west and south (1/2 and 1 acre lots); to the
north is Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320,
which is proposing 7,200 square foot minimum lot
sizes; and to the east is the Paloma Del Sol Specific
Plan area.
Access and Circulation
Pauba Road will be improved along the subject site
with a half width street. Access from Pauba Road
will be provided by Streets "A" and "B", which have
a sixty (60') foot right-of-way; and are cul-de-sac
streets. The circulation design has been approved by
both the Traffic Engineering Department and the
Riverside County Fire Department.
Grading and Landform Alteration
The project site is located within a fairly prominent
natural hillside area of Temecula. However, the
mass grading effort was designed to adhere to the
gross natural topography of the site in its original
condition. While substantial grading and
recontouring of this site, which includes 171,898
cubic yards of excavation and 171,532 cubic yards
of fill will occur in the immediate area, the overall
plan is intended to promote preservation of site
topography. It should be noted that a recommended
condition of approval has been included to require
that all slopes over five (5') feet in height shall be
landscaped immediately upon the completion of
grading and shall be maintained by the homeowner's
association.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 4
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
The proposed project density of is consistent
with the SWAP Land Use Designation of 2-5
DU/AC. In addition, Staff finds it probable
that this project will be consistent with the
new General Plan when it is adopted since the
proposed subdivision is consistent with the
existing zoning and surrounding
developments.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: An Initial Study was performed for this project which
determined that although the proposed project could have
a significant effect on the environment, no significant
impact would result to the natural or built environment in
the City because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and
a Negative Declaration has been recommended for
adoption.
FINDINGS: 1.
The proposed Tract Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding residential developments.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that the project is consistent with
surrounding developments.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning for
· he site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
A.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 6
10.
11.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and the subdivision has
been designed to the standards of the R-R
(Rural Residential) zone.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic,
access is provided from Pauba Road.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps,
exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 7
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative
Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No.
25892; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25892.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. SWAP Map
D. Tentative Tract Map
Large Scale Plans
S\STAFFRPT~25892 .TTM 8
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892 TO SUBDIVIDE A 20
ACRE PARCEL INTO 34 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOTS LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-090-004 AND 005.
WHEREAS, David Pearson filed Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract
Map on September 16, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity
to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, atthe conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findinos. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other'actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 9
(a)
There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the
SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the
Government Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including the
issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of
the following:
(a)
There is reasonable probability that Tentative
Tract Map No. 25892 proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 10
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
'Within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 11
alternate easements for access or for use will
be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findings, to
wit.'
a)
The proposed Tract Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
b)
c)
d)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding residential developments.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that the project is consistent with
surrounding developments.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning for
the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
A.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 12
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and the subdivision has
been design to the standards of the R-R (Rural
Residential) zone.
f)
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic,
access is provided from Pauba Road.
i)
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps,
exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 13
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Tract
Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Comoliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 for the subdivision of a 20 acre parcel
into 34 single family residential lots located on Pauba Road and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 945-090-004 and 005 subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 1991.
JOHN HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 16th day of September, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 14
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No:
25892
Project Description: Subdivide 20 Acres
into 34 Single Family Residential Lots.
Planning Department
Assessor's Parcel No.: 945-090-004 and 005
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule B, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date by the City Council, unless extended as provided by Ordinance
460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the
requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance
460.
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the City Engineer and
two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address
the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map
boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
S\STAFFRPT~25892,TTM 15
10.
11.
12.
13.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and Public Works Department for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill
slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 or as approved by the City
Engineer.
b. Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code. An erosion control landscaping plan
demonstrating methods of erosion protection for these slopes shall be prepared
by a qualified professional and shall be submitted to the City Planning
Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated April 29, 1991,
a copy of which is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
14. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-R (Rural Residential ~ 20,000 square
foot minimum) zone.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 16
15.
16.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided
with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of
Building and Safety.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are
the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS)
shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified
environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the
City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded
with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety.
17. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
18.
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory
recommendations."
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
If the project is to be phased, prior to the issuance of grading
permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a
guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual
phases of development and shall include the following:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probability
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. Areas of terr~orary grading outside of a particular phase.
S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 17
19.
20.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and
exceeding ten (10) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded
incorporating the following grading techniques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to
the angle of the natural terrain.
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall
reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal
length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved
in a continuous, undulating fashion.
The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building
and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have
recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance
responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of
Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Detailed common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall
be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of
development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape
architect, and shall provide for the following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 18
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape
elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and
specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees
planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Pauba Road. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the
perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading down from
the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for maintenance
aCCeSS.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project. The focal
points shall be identified on the plans submitted for approval by
the Planning Department.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right-
of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans
and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
10.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit
within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest
provides evidence of compliance with public facility financing measures.
A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited
with the City as mitigation for public library development.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 19
21.
One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of 8 x
13 inches by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and
material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers'
brochures). Indicate on the board the name, address and phone
numbers of both the sample board preparer and the project
applicant, tract number, and the manufacturer and product
numbers where possible (trade names also acceptable).
One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent
the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color
and materials board. The written color and material descriptions
shall be located on the elevation.
Six (6) copies of each of glossy photographic color prints (size 8
x 10 inches) of both color and materials board and colored
architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body review
and agency distribution. All writing must be legible.
Said plot plan shall require the approval of the Planning Director prior to
the issuance of any building permits for lots included within the plot
plan. The submittal of plot plans prior to the issuance of building permits
may be phased provided:
A separate plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for each phase, which shall be accompanied by
appropriate filing fees.
Each individual plot plan shall be approved by the Planning
Director prior to the issuance of building permits for lots included
within that plot plan.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director
and the Director of Building and Safety.
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 2 1
22.
23.
24.
25.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study
is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required
walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that
ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be sul~erseded by the provisions of a
Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation
Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to
attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Tract
Map No. 25892, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against
the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall at
least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an
agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code
Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required
for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the
developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property
interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of
these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provided. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in
the residence.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 22
DEPARTMENTAL
REPORTS
33.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as
mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the
time of payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County
deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
Riverside County Department of Public Health
34.
A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as
approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints
of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a
minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original
drawing to the County surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe
diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and
the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system.
The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22,
Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of
the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a
registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "1
certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 25892 is in
accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California
Water District and that the water service, storage, and distribution system will
be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map." This certification
does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such tract map at
any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other
purpose". This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the
water company. The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office
to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final
map.
35.
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing
to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand
providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider.
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the
recordation of the final map.
36.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be
connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed
according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the
sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing,
to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 24
26.
Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
27.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
28.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the
check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void
by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
Riverside County Fire Department
29.
Schedule "A" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2")
located one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet apart
in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from
a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20
PSI.
30.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire
Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer,
containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and shall conform to
hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed
by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire
Department for signature.
31.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
32.
All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as
described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles
or shakes shall have a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation.-
S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 23
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration,
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
42. As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
Parks and Recreation Department;
US Department of Fish and Wildlife; and
Metropolitan Water District
43.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
44.
Pauba Road shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 102 (64'/88').
45.
Street "A" and "B" shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete
pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section
A (40'/60').
46. Cul-de-sac geometrics shall be installed per Riverside County Standard No. 800.
47.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Pauba Road and so noted on the final
map with the exception of street intersections as approved by the City
Engineer.
48.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805. -'
S\STAFFRPT~25892 .TTM 2 6
49.
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by
all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall
make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The
CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's
shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such
provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with
the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of slope and drainage areas
within the subdivision.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to
a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly
reimbursed.
All parkways, open areas, drainage areas and landscaping shall be
permanently maintained by homeowner's association or other
means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance
shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior
to issuance of building permits.
50.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 27
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks along Pauba Road, drive approaches, street
Fights, signing, striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping (street).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line.
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall'address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 28
60.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. All
drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
61.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
62.
If required after approval of the final drainage report, a drainage easement shall
be obtained from the affected property owners for the release or concentrated
or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property.
63.
All lots containing storm drains carrying water from public streets shall contain
a dedicated easement for storm drain purposes and provide for an access road
to the storm drain outlet.
64.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
65.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the
Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
66. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
67.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
68.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already cre~'ited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
69.
If any work is to be performed within the Metropolitan Water District Right-of-
Way, the developer shall submit a copy of the grading plan to the MWD for
review and approval. -
S\STAFFBPT~25892.TTM 29
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
70.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
71.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
72.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for, or install, road improvements and public
facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and
public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of
payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district
has not been finally established by the date on which developer requests its
building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall
execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has
been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement,
developer shall post 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.
Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees
in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the
amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive
any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection
of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; Provided that
developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic
impact fee, and the amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
73.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on
all interior public streets.
74.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 30
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
David Pearson
41593 Winchester Road, Suite 101
Temecula. CA 92390
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
(714) 694-1111
August 20. 1991
II
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
S\STAFFRPT~25892 .TTM
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Tentative Tract MaD No. 25892
South Side of Pauba Road, between
Ynez and Maroarita Roads
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? __ __
b, Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or modi-
31
X
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
Yes Maybe
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
X
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
X
The creation of objectionable
odors?
X
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
X
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
X
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
X
S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 32
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters? X
-4.
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
X
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity? X
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or Iround waters?
X
Yes Maybe
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
X
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
X
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
X
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
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
X
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
X
S\STAFFRPT~25892,TTM 33
d. Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop? _ _ X
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
X
X
X
10.
S\STAFFRPT~25892 .TTM
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
34
Yes Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
X
11.
12.
13.
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
X
X
X
X
14.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? __
Public Services. Will the proposal have
35
Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
15.
16.
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?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
'a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
Yes Maybe ~
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 36
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities? __
X
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TrM 37
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A 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.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 38
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1 .c-d.
1.6.
1.f.
No. The project site will be graded as part of a mass grading effort.
There will be substantial grading for this project, which includes
171,898 cubic yards of excavation and 171,532 cubic yards of fill.
However, a conceptual mass grading plan for the project was reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer and designed in accordance with
Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval include mitigation
measures in regards to grading. Therefore, the proposed project will not
create an unstable earth condition or change the geologic substructure.
Yes. The proposed development disrupts the soil profile and results in
soil displacement, compaction, and overcovering. However, a slope
stability report was prepared for this project, in which specific
recommendation were made in order to develop the project. Therefore,
this impact is not considered significant, due to the fact that the
Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures in regards to all
grading.
Yes. The project site is located within a fairly prominent natural hillside
of Temecula. However, the mass grading effort was designed to adhere
to the gross natural topography of the site in its original condition. While
substantial grading and recontouring of this site, which includes 171,898
c.y. of excavation and 171,532 c.y. of fill, will occur in the immediate
area, the overall plan is intended to promote preservation of site
topography. Therefore, this impact is not considered significant.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted
and the proposed drainage facilities are constructed. The wind erosion
impact is considered significant but will be mitigated through the use of
watering trucks and erosion control planting of disturbed areas after
grading. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to
be approved by the City Engineer and designed in accordance with
Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. Therefore, this
impact is not considered to be significant, due to the fact that
appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project.
No. The project site is'not adjacent to any creek or stream bed.
Therefore, a significant impact will not occur.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 39
1.g.
Air
2.a.
2.b,c.
Water
3.a,d.
3.b.
3.c.
Maybe. The subject site is not located within a subsidence or
liquefaction zone and is not subject to liquefaction and subsidence by the
Riverside County General Plan. However, to mitigate any potential
hazards, a geological report will be prepared prior to any construction of
the property. The report will include mitigation measures. Therefore,
this impact is not considered to be significant.
Maybe. The proposed project consisting of 34 residential units will
generate an increase in vehicle trips to the site. The increased vehicle
trips will increase the carbon monoxide emissions and particulates in the
area. However, since the ambient air quality in the project vicinity is
currently very good due to the local wind patterns, this potential impact
is not considered significant. The proposed project will not by itself
deteriorate the local area's or regional air quality, but will add to the
cumulative impact on air quality due to the substantial growth in the
area.
No. The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors or alter
the area's climate.
No. The proposed project will not impact any body of water.
Yes. The proposed project will increase the amount of impermeable
surfaces on the site and the existing drainage pattern will be altered.
However, water will be channeled to drainage easements and streets
through drainage facilities and control devices which will have to be
approved by the City Engineer and designed in accordance with
Temecula's Standards and the Conditions of Approval. Therefore, this
impact is not considered to be significant since apprcoriate mitigation
measures have been implemented with the project.
No. Flood waters will continue to be directed to the streets and flood
channels, However, in order to mitigate the downstream impacts
brought about by runoff and the proposed drainage facilities, the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (the
District) has indicated that the project will be required to pay a flood
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 4(~
3.e.
3.f.
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
Vegetation
4.a,c.
4.b.
4.d.
mitigation charge (Area Drainage Plan fee), which has been included as
a Condition of Approval. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be
significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented
with the project. Drainage plans for the site will have to meet the
requirements of the City's Engineer.
Yes. During construction, the proposed project will increase turbidity in
local surface waters. This impact is temporary and is not considered
significant. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements and streets, which will have to be approved by the
City Engineer. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant
since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
project.
No. The proposed project will not alter the rate of flow of ground water.
No. Although the proposed project will increase the amount of
impermeable surfaces on the site, the addition of irrigation for the
landscape areas will help to off-set any loss of water absorbed into the
ground. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant.
No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the public water
supply.
Maybe. Conditions of Approval are included for this project which
require proper design and installation of drainage conveyance devices.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since
appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project.
Yes. The proposed project involves a mass grading of the subject site
which will eliminate all of the existing native plants; and the proposal
includes landscaping and erosion control which will be designed to City
standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant
since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
project.
No. No sensitive vegetational associations or species were identified on-
site.
No. No agricultural production occurred on-site.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 41
Wildlife
5.a,c.
5.b.
No.
Maybe.
A survey for Stephen's Kangaroo Rat prepared for this
project analyzed biologic resources on-site. In that no
individuals of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat were found there
is no occupied habitat within the bounds of the tract map.
Implementation of the tract as proposed will not result in a
taking nor would it result in any adverse effect on the
species or on the species' habitat. In that surrounding
lands to the north, south, east and west have previously
been developed at urban levels of use or are presently being
developed at such levels of use, preservation of this site as
a reserve is inappropriate. In addition, the site is now
isolated from all other known colonies by impassable
residential and other barriers and reinvasion of the site is
virtually impossible. Implementation of the project as
proposed will not have a significant effect and no mitigation
other than payment of fees under the Stephen's Kangaroo
Rat Fee Ordinance is required.
Noise
6.a-b.
No. A noise assessment was prepared for this project.
Analysis indicates that the project site is exposed to significant levels of
noise as a result of traffic on Pauba and Margarita Roads. However, it
is concluded that the project design, as recommended herein, will
comply with the interior noise exposure standard placed on residential
construction by the County of Riverside and the State's noise insulation
standards.
It is further recommended that the final engineering design of the project
be reviewed by a recognized acoustical engineer to ensure compliance
with the County's noise standards.
Light and Glare
Land Use
Yes. However, the project has been conditioned to comply with
applicable lighting standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered
to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been
implemented with the project.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 42
8. No. Project is consistent with both the zoning designation and the
Southwest Area Community Plan.
Natural Resources
9.a-b.
No, This project itself will not significantly increase the rate of use of
natural resources. Construction materials and petroleum products will
be used extensively to support the specific plan project overall.
Risk of Upset
10.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not promote a risk of explosion or release
hazardous substances nor will it interfere with emergency response plan
or an emergency evaluation plan.
Population
11.
Yes. Although the project proposes to increase the density to 102 lots,
the proposed project is consistent with the City Land Use Designation
which allows a maximum of 283 lots (according to SWAP). Therefore,
this impact is not considered to be significant.
Housing
12.
No. Since the proposed project creates housing, the proposed land use
will not create a demand for additional housing.
Transportation/Circulation
13.a. Yes.
13.b-e. No.
13.f. -Maybe.
The Traffic Study which was prepared for the proposed
project has addressed potential traffic impacts and has
concluded that the cumulative impacts will not be
significant. In addition, appropriate mitigation measures
have been implemented through the Conditions of
Approval.
Public Services
14.a-e. Yes.
14.f. No.
The proposed project will have significant adverse effect
effect on public services. However, these impacts are not
considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation
measures have been implemented through the Conditions
of Approval.-
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 43
Energy
15.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not result in the substantial use or
increase in demand of fuel or energy.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. The proposed project might require the use of utilities but will not
require substantial alteration to the existing system.
Human Health
17.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not have significant adverse effect on
human health.
Aesthetics
18.
No. Because the proposed project has been designed to be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood, there will be no significant impact
on aesthetics.
Recreation
19.
Yes. The proposed project will result in an impact upon existing
recreational opportunities. However, the proposed project provides
adequate recreational facilities for the subject residents and appropriate
Quimby fees will be paid. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be
significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented
with the project.
Cultural Resources
20.a-d. No impact.
Mandatorv Findines of Significance
21 .a.
Maybe. The proposed project may have a significant impact on plant or
wildlife species. However, the project is located within an area
designated by the Riverside County as habitat for the endangered
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, the project will be subject to mitigation fees for
the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan. In addition,
during grading activities, a qualified paleontologist shall be present.
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM ~,at
21 .b.
21 .c.
21 .d.
Maybe. The proposed project may have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. However,
no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation measures are followed.
Maybe. The proposed project may have impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable which may have environmental
effects. However, no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation
measures are followed.
No. The proposed project will not have impacts which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 45
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
X
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
August 20. 1991
Date
Oliver Mujica, Senior Planner
For CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 46
September 11, 1991
EVELOPMENT ' .RpORAT|0N
pRESIDENT
U.S. REP. OFFICE: GUAM OFFICE:
PO. BOX 3093
City of Temecula Planning Dept.
c/o Ms. Debbie Ubnoski
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Ms. Ubnoski:
I'm of the understanding that you are recently in charge (on behalf
of the City) of processing a Tentative Tract Map on which I would
like to comment. The subject property is known as proposed
Tentative Tract 25892 (approximately 20 acres fronting Pauba Road;
Southwest corner of Pauba and Margarita Roads).
My family and I own two homes and eight parcels of property in the
immediate vicinity comprising approximately 37 acres of land. We
personally constructed our two homes of approximately 4,000 square
feet each with the finest of architecture and material in mind.
These homes are presently situated on lots approved for the same
density (1/2 acre) at the Tentative Tract Map stage that Mr.
Pearson's Tentative Tract Map 25892 proposes.
I have reviewed Map 25892 and find it to be well planned in terms
of lotting layout, street configuration and surrounding land uses.
This project certainly provides a compatible "upper-end" transition
between Santiago Rancho and Los Ranchitos to the South and the
Paloma Del Sol project and the school facilities to the North. I
certainly-envision nice custom homes on lots not too large to
maintain, occupied with families eager to locate in the center of
our fine community.
In short, I str~tK31y s,~Dport the adoption of Tentative Tract Map
25892 a 111 be in attendan on September 16, 1991 at 6:00 p.m.
to v alize the same.
Y urs trul;,
Noel Pai
JUDY ROSEN & aSSOCiATES
September 11, 1991
city of Temecula Planning Dept.
c/o Ms. Debbie Ubnoske
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Ms. Ubnoske:
Please allow me to respond to the notice recently sent to me
regarding proposed Tentative Tract Map # 25892.
I presently own a one acre parcel immediately to the south of the
subject property. My current intentions are to construct my
personal residence approximately 4 - 5,000 square feet in size.
Behind my property is Santiago Ranches with its large custom homes.
I perceive this proposed development as being consistent with not
only the Swap Map, but also with the existing development in our
area. It is important to the homeowners in our community to
maintain our exclusivity.
This project should offer its own community environment because of
its size, number of lots and location. Mr. Pearson's project
provides an appropriate transition between the activities at
Margarita and Pauba Roads and my immediate area.
Finally, Mr. Pearson's project receives my full support because of
its well-planned community of 1/2 acre lots. I believe this will
be an asset to our r~g~^- b~,,~e of the rural setting for large
custom homes it provides while allowing for parcel sizes a
homeowner can reasonably be expected to fully maintain.
Yours truly,
Dave Asmus
4|877 ENTERPRISE CiRClE NORTH · SUITE IO0 · TEMECUIA. CA 92390
7~4/676-2135 · FAX 714/694-0344
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
S/STAFFRPT\25892TT 12
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: TM 25892
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of AoDroval
Condition No. 22
Condition No. 26
Condition No. 72
Condition No. 52
Condition No. 20.b.
Condition No. 33
Condition No. 68
S\STAFFRPT%25892.TT
ITEM 15
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Attorney
November 26, 1991
Item No. 3 - Pulte Homes vs City of Temecula (A challenge to the
City's Sphere of Influence northeast of the present City boundary)
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
BACKGROUND:
City Clerk June S. Greek
Consider approval of Settlement Agreement
The staff will finalize the staff report on this item and
forward it to you under separate cover.
JSG
APPROVAL:
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Officialc~
November 26, 1991
Building and Safety October Activity Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
DISCUSSION:
Building activity continues to decline as reflected by the decline in the number of
building related permits issued this past month. You will note the monthly valuation
and fee collection totals are higher than the previous month as a result of a
combination of general permit issuance and several large and moderately sized
projects being permitted.
The following is an Update of projects of special note that staff is currently involved
with:
NEW CONSTRUCTION
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems
Paradise Chevrolet
General Dynamics
Commerce National Bank
Primadonna's Restaurant
Main Street Emporium
Soup Exchange
K-Mart
Jefferson Creek
Costco
85% Com
35% Com
95% Com
45% Corn
90% Corn
99% Corn
60% Corn
99% Corn
99% Corn
75% Corn
>lete
}lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
~lete
Building and Safety October Activity Report
November 26, 1991
Page 2
OFFICE, OFFICE/WAREHOUSE SPACE
Ballatore Building
Hawthorne Park - 13 Buildings
Valley Medical Center
40,000 Sq. Ft.
400,000 Sq. Ft.
36,0OO Sq. Ft.
30% Occupied
20% Occupied
85% Occupied
v:~wp\agende,rep\cccml 126.rpt
This
Month
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY
Monthly Activity Report For: October, 1991
Last Month
This Last Last
Fiscal Fiscal Calendar
Year Yr/Date Yr/Date
PLANS CHECKED:
Residential 4 I 18 53
Commercial I 1 17 66
Indust./Warehouse 0 0 I 1
Others 0 2 10 46
TOTAL: 5 4 46 166
PERMITS ISSUED:
BUILDING 87 102 414 597
Value 8,171,809 3,096,447 22,161,632 13,374,466
Fees 31,103 24,174 118,477 121,792
ELECTRICAL 52 69 278 310
Fees 7,095 4,703 25,181 29,490
PLUMBING 34 52 200 196
Fees 3,613 4,799 24,338 16,960
MECHANICAL 28 43 152 122
Fees 1,326 2,232 11,487 7,484
TOTAL PERMITS: 201 266 1,044 1,225
TOTAL FEES: 43,137 35,908 179,483 175,726
THIS MONTHS NO. OF NO/UNITS PLAN CHECK PERHIT
PERMITS: PERMITS YR/DATE FEES FEES
SINGLE FAMILY I 62 1,009 1,768
DUPLEX 0 0 0 0
MULTI-FAMILY 0 0 0 0
COMMERCIAL 8 12 11,575 22,979
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0
RELOCATE/DEMO 4 5 0 240
SWIMMING POOLS 9 34 1893
SIGNS 11 31 368 670
OTHER 54 105 753 3,373
ALTER/ADD
TO DWELLING 22 115 1,025 1,858
TO COMMERCIAL 1i 70 5,641 10,356
TO INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0
TOTAL: 120 434 ~20,371 43,I37
BUILDING VALUATION
This
Calandar
Yr/Date
33
78
5
40
156
1350
93,039,351
445,237
887
78,295
673
79,101
550
36,215
3,460
638,785
TOTAL VALU;LTION
FEES
2,777 260,951
0. O0 0
0.00 0
34,5540 5,775,527
0 0
240 0
1,893 89,450
1,038 23,124
4,126 I68,42l
2,883 101,614
15,997 1,752,722
0 0
63,508 8,I71,809
his Fiscal Year to Date: $22,161,632 This Calendar Year to Date: $93,039,351
Last Fiscal Year to Date: $13,374,466 Last Calendar Year to Date:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER~
CITY MANAGER'7~-
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DAVID F. DIXON
NOVEMBER 15, 1991
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
Community Services Department
The first Community Workshop for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan was held on
October 28, 1991 at Vail Elementary School. Approximately 100 attendees provided
input concerning parks and recreation facilities, recreation programs, multi-use trails,
and operations. A second workshop will be scheduled in December.
The Sports Park Restroom/Snack Bar Project is under construction. The concrete slab
is poured and the four foot masonry inspection passed on November 14, 1991. This
project is scheduled to be completed by the end of December.
The City sponsored its first Haunted House program in the Old Town area on October
30 and 31, 1991. Approximately 2,000 people dared to enter the hideous chambers
of the house. The event was co-sponsored by KRTM radio, which assisted greatly in
publicizing the event.
Statements of Qualifications (SOQ's) were submitted to the City to provide
architectural services for the Community Recreation Center project. The SOQ's will
be evaluated by a selection committee and narrowed to the top firms. These finalists
will be invited to participate in an oral interview process. Council Action concerning
this issue is scheduled for December 17.
Community Services is planning a Breakfast with Santa program that will be held at
Sam Hicks Monument Park. This event is still in the planning stages and more
information will be forthcoming.
The Commissioners Cup for the Temecula Valley Soccer Association is scheduled for
the weekends of December 7 & 8, and 14 & 15. It is anticipated that approximately
8,000 people will attend this event at the Rancho California Sports Park.
Staff is currently providing the necessary information to the Californian to prepare the
Winter/Spring Community Services Recreation Brochure. This recreation brochure will
be bull< mailed to every resident in the City.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Manager/City Council
Planning Department '~
November 26, 1991
Monthly Report
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Discussion:
Caseload Activity:
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
Receive and File
The following is a summary of Planning Department's caseload and project
activity for the month of November:
The department received applications for 43 administrative cases and 5 public hearing cases;
following is a breakdown of case type for public hearing items:
* Plot Plans (4)
* Extension of TimeTract (1)
Onooino Proiects:
General Plan: A public workshop/town hall meeting was held on October 29, 1991 at Vail
Elementary School. About 45 people in a discussion about the City's previously identified
opportunities and constraints.
Old Town Boundan/ExPansion: A non-public hearing on the expansion was held November
12, 1991 by the City Council. Staff will notify all property owners within the proposed
expansion area for a public hearing before the Council in December. Included in the public
noticing, is the opportunity to protest the proposed expansion.
Directional Sian Ordinance: Approved by the City Council on October 22, 1991. Staff is
currently reviewing the alternate ways to implement the program.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~__
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City CounciUCity Manager
Department of Public Works
November 26, 1991
Public Works Monthly Activity Report (October)
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Monthly Activity Report (October) for the
Department of Public Works.
pwOl'~s~d~s,~l126~moscuptlO 112091
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD NOVEMBER 12, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:47
PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS:
PM.
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
Mu~oz
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field and June S.
Greek, City Clerk.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, introduced Bob K:ast, newly appointed as the
City's Maintenance Superintendent. Mr. Kast briefly thanked the City for their confidence in
appointing him and outlined his primary objectives.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Birdsall requested the removal of Item No. 3 from the Consent Calendar.
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Moore to approve Consent Calendar
Items 1 and 2.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Minutes
1.1
1.2
5 DIRECTORS:
0 DIRECTORS:
0 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
Mu~oz
None
None
Approve the minutes of October 8, 1991.
Approve the minutes of October 22, 1991.
4/Minutes/111291 - 1 - 11 / 19/91
CSD Minutes
2.
November 12, 1991
Phase I end Phase II - Soorts Park Ballfield Liahting Project - ComDletion
2.1 Accept Phase I and Phase II of the Sports Park Ballfield Lighting Project
as 100% complete.
2.2 Authorize final retention payment to Assured Electrical Contractors,
contract No. 0137 and No. 0207, to be released pursuant to Section 9-
3.1 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction.
Authorize recordation of the Notice of Completion.
2.3
Award of Bid - Recreation Brochures
Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, introduced the staff report.
Director Birdsall asked if advertising would be included in the Recreation Brochure. Mr.
Nelson reported that no advertising would be included in the brochure.
Director Birdsall suggested that volunteers distribute these brochures to the apartment
complexes so that the recreation programs are better advertised to all citizens in the
community.
Director Lindemans asked that programs for teenagers be addressed in the January 6th
issue.
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Moore to award a contract to
the Californian to produce two (2) issues of the Community Services Recreation
Brochure.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:- 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
Mu~oz
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
General Manager Dixon stated that programs for teenagers will be addressed in the January
issue of the Recreation Brochure and a work plan will be brought back before the Board on
November 26, 1991 to address the concerns voiced by the community.
4/Minutes/111291 -2- 11/19/91
CSD Minutes November 12, 1991
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
President Mufioz asked that a staff member be assigned to talk with youth at the Yellow Brick
Road Arcade to see what programs would be of interest to them.
Director Parks asked staff to give an accounting of things the City has already done to
address youth needs in the community. He also asked staff to address the suggestion of a
temporary facility for the Community Recreation Center.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Moore, seconded by Director Parks to adjourn at 9:04 PM. The
motion was unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
J. Sal Mur~oz, President
June S. Greek, City ClerkrrCSD Secretary
ITEM 2
ITEM 3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Temecula Community Services District
General Manager
November 26, 1991
Item No. 3 - Comprehensive Overview of Goals for Youth and
Teen Programs
PREPARED BY:
City Clerk June S. Greek
BACKGROUND: The staff will finalize the staff report on this item and
forward it to you under separate cover.
JSG
ITEM NO. 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/Board of Directors
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
November 26, 1991
SUBJECT:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991 and the Statement
of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three
Months Ended September 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and file the Combining
Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991 and the Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September
30, 1991.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the Temecula Community Services District for the three months ended
September 30, 1991.
P~ease see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1991
III '~)
E o
0
(J
<
~ O
0
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AGENDA
ITEM NO. 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD NOVEMBER 12, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 12:35 AM.
PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz,
Parks, Moore
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director David F. Dixon, General Counsel Scott F. Field and
Agency Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Member Parks, seconded by Member Mu~oz to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
1.1 Approve the minutes of October 8, 1991.
1.2 Approve the minutes of October 22, 1991.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 MEMBERS:
NOES: 0 MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 MEMBERS:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Moore
None
None
Executive Director Dixon addressed the request that staff inform the public regarding the
purpose of the Redevelopment Agency. He reported that this was addressed two or three
months ago, however time could be set aside in December to do so again. He also suggested
working with the media to give people a better understanding of the functions of the
Redevelopment Agency.
GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT
None given.
4\RDAM]N\IlI291 -1- 11/19/91
Temecula Redevelopmont Agoncy Minutes November 12. 1991
AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
Member Birdsall stated the Agency needs to address the meeting schedule in December, since
one of the regular meetings fall on December 24, 1991, Christmas Eve.
Member Lindemans requested that taxes for citizens involved in CSD 161 and CSD 159 be
addressed. He also requested staff look into State Flood Control funds to assist people in
these districts.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Parks, seconded by Member Birdsall to adjourn at 9:13 PM to a
meeting on November 26, 1991 at 7:00 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community Center.
The motion was unanimously carried.
Peg Moore, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
4\RI)AMIN\III291 -2- 11/19/91
ITEM NO. 2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
November 26, 1991
SUBJECT:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991 and the Statement
of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three
Months Ended September 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members receive and file the Combining
Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991 and the Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September
30, 1991.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the Redevelopment Agency for the three months ended September 30,
1991.
Please see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1991
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1991
E
Z
<
Z
c~ ~
15274. Responses to Revenue Shortfalls.
(a) CEQA does not apply to actions taken prior to January 1, 1982, by a public
agency.
(1) To implement the transition from the property taxation system in effect prior to
June 1, 1978, to the system provided for the Article XIII A of the California Constitution
(Proposition 13), or
(2) To respond to a reduction in federal funds.
(b) This exemption is limited to projects directly undertaken by any public agency
and to proiects which are supported in whole or in part through contracts, grants, subsidies,
loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies where the projects:
(1) Initiateorincreasefees, rates, orchargeschargedforanyexistingpublicservice,
program, or activity, or
(2) Reduce or eliminate the availability of an existing public service program, or
activity, or
(3) Close publicly owned or operated facilities, cr
(4) Reduce or eliminate the availability of an existing publicly owned transit service,
program, or activity.
15275. Specified Mass Transit Projects.
CEQA does not apply to the following mass transit projects:
(a) The institution or increase of passenger or commuter service on rail lines or high-
occupancy vehicle lanes already in use, including the modernization of existing stations and
parking facilities;
(b) Facility extensions not to exceed four miles in length which are required for
transfer of passengers from or to exclusive public mass transit guideway or busway public
transit services.
15276. State and Regional Transportation Improvement Programs.
CEOAdoesnotapplytothedevelopmentoradoptionofare~ionalt~'ansportationimprovement
program or the state transpcrta~on improvement program. Individual proiects developed pursuant
to these programs shall remain subject to CEQA.
15277. Projects Located Outside California.
CEQA does not apply to any project or portion thereof located outside of California which
will be subject to environmental impact review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 or pursuant to a law of that state requiring preparation of a document containing
essentially the same points of analysis as in an environmental impact statement prepared
underthe National Environmenta~ Policy Act of 1969. Any emissions ordischarges that would
have a significant effect on the environment in the State of California are subject to C EQA where
a California public agency has authority over the emissions or discharges.
Article 19. Categorical Exemptions
15300; Categorical Exemptions.
Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code requires these guidelines to inlcude a list of
ciasses of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment
and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEOA.
In response to that mandate, the Secretary for Resources has found that the following
classes of projects listed in this article do not have a significant effect on the environment, and
they are declared to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of
environmental documents.
99
15300.1. 'ation to Ministerial Projects.
Section 2~u80 ofthe Public Resources Code exempts from the application of CEQA
those projects over which public agencies exercise only ministeriai authority. Since ministerial
projects are already exempt, Categorical Exemptions should be applied only where a project
is not ministerial under a public agency's statutes and ordinances. The inclusion of activities
which may be ministerial within the classes and examples contained in this article shall not be
construed as a finding by the Secretary for Resources that such activity is discretionary.
15300.2. Exceptions.
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the
project is to be Iocated--a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment
may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are
considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental
resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially
adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
(b) Cumulative impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the
cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, overtime is significant--
for example, annual additions to an existing building under Class 1.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where
there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment
due to unusual circumstances.
15300.3. Revisions to List of Categorical Exemptions.
Any public agency may, at any time, request that a new class of Categorical Exem ptions
be added, or an existing one amended or deleted. This request must be made in writing to the
Office of Planning and Research and shall contain detailed information to support the request,
The granting of such request shall be by amendment to these guidelines.
15300.4. Application by Public Agencies.
Each public agency shall, in the course of establishing its own procedures, list those
specific activities which fall within each of the exempt classes, subject to the qualification that
theselistsmustbeconsistentwithboththeletterandtheintentexpressedinthectasses. Public
agencies may omit from their implementing procedures classes and examples that do not apply
to their activities, but they may not require EIRs for projects described in the classes and
examples in this article except under the provisions of Section 15300.2.
15301. Existing Facilities,
Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing
public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features,
involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing, including but not
limited to:
(a) Interiororexterioralterationsinvolvingsuchthingsasinteriorpartitions,plumbing,
and electrical conveyances;
(b) Existing facilities of both investor and publicly-owned utilities used to provide
electric power, natural gas, sewerage, or other public utility services;
(c) Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails,
and similar facilities except where the activity will involve removal of a scenic resource including
a stand of trees, a rock outcropping, or an historic building;
(d) Restoration or rehabilitation of deteriorated or damaged structures, facilities, or
mechanical equipment to meet current standards of public health and safety, unless it is
determined that the damage was substantial and resulted from an environmental hazard such
as earthquake, landslide, or flood;
100
· the
ent
are
~tal
de
-ils,
ng
or
is
ch
(el Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an
increase of more than:
(1) 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square
feet, whichever is less; or
(2) 10,000 square' feet if:
(A) The project is in an area where all public services and facilities are available to
allow for maximum development permissible in the General Ran and
(B) The area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive.
(f) Addition of safety or health protection devices for use during construction of or
in conjunction with existing structures, facilities, or mechanical equipment, or topographical
features including navigational devices;
(g) New copy on existing on and off-premise signs;
(h) Maintenance of existing landscaping, native growth, and water supply reservoirs
(excluding the use of economic poisons, as defined in Division 7. Chapter 2, California
Agricultural Code);
(i) Maintenance of fish screens, fish ladders, wildlife habitat areas, affiticial wildlife
waterway devices, streamflows, springs and waterholes, and stream channels (clearing of
debris) to protect fish and wildlife resources;
(j) Fish stocking by the California Department of Fish and Game;
(k) Division of existing multiple family rental units into condominiums;
(I) Demolition and removal of individual small structures listed in this subsection
except where the structures are of historical, archaeological, or architectural significance:
(1) Single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such
units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be demolished under this
exemption.
(2) Aparlments, duplexes, and similar structures, with no more than four dwelling units if
not in conjunction with the demolition of two or more such structures. In urbanized areas, this
exemption applies to single apartments, duplexes, and similar structures designed for not more than
six dwelling units if not demolished in conjuction with the demolition of two or more such structures.
(3) Stores, motels, offices, restuarants, and similar small commercial structures if de-
signed for an occupant load of 30 persons or less, if not constructed in conju nction with the demo lition
oftwoormoresuch structures. In urbanized areas, the exemption alsoappliestocommemialbuildings
on sites zoned for such use, if designed for an occupant load of 30 persons or less if not demolished
in conjunction with the demolition of four or more such structures.
(4) Accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swim-
ming pools, and fences.
(m) Minor repairs and alterations to existing dams and appurtenant structures under
the supervision of the Department of Water Resources.
(n) Conversion of a single family residence to office use.
(o) The conversion of existing commercial units in one structure from single to
condominium type ownership.
15302. Replacement or Reconstruction.
Class 2 consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities
where the new stature will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have
substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, including but not limited to:
(a) Replacement or reconstruction of existing schools and hospitals to provide
earthquake resistant structures which do not increase capacity more than 50 percent;
(b) Replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the
same size, purpose, and capacity.
(c) Replacementorreconstructionofexistingutilitysystemsand/orfacilitiesinvolving
negligible or no expansion of capacity.
101
(d) Conversion of overhead electric utility u, stribution system facilities to unde
ground including connection to existing overhead electric utility distribution lines where th
surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding.
15303. New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
Class 3 consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facil~es c
structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversic
of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifactjons are made in
ex~edor of the structure. The numbers of structures described in this section are the maximur
allowable on any legat parcel or to be associated with a proiect within a two-year pedod. Example
of this exemption include but are not limited to:
(a) Single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more suc
units. In urbanizedareas, uptothree sing~e-familyresidencesmaybeconstructedorconver~e
under this exemption.
(b) Apa~ments, duplexes, and similar structures, with no more than four dweElin
units if not in conjunction with the building or conversion of two or more such structures.
urbanized areas, exemption applies to single apa~ments, duplexes, and similar structure
designed for not more than six dwelling units if not constructed in conjunction with the buildin
or conversion of two or more such structures.
(c) Stores, motels, offices, restaurants, and similar small commercial structures nc
involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, if designed for an occupant Ioa
of 30 persons or less if not constructed in conjunction with the building of two or more such structure!
in urbanized areas, the exemption a~so applies to commercial buildings on sites zoned for such us~
if designed for an occupant load of 30 persons or less if not constructed in conjuction with the buildin
of four or more such structures and if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardo~
substances.
(d) Water main, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility extensions of reasonabi
Tength to serve such construction.
(e) Accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carpods, patios, swirr
ming pools, and fences.
15304. Minor Alterations to Land.
Class 4 consists of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water, anc
or vegetation which do not involve removal of mature, scenic trees except for forestry an
agricuEtrual purposes. Examples include but are not limited to:
(a) Grading on ~and with a slope of ~ess than 10 percent, except that grading sha
not be exempt in a waterway, in any wetland, in an officially designated (by federal, state, c
local government action) scenic area, or in officialy mapped areas of geologic hazard.
(b) New gardening or landscaping.
(c) Filling of earth into previously excavated land with material compatible with th
natural features of the site.
(d) Minor alterations in land, water, and vegetation on existing officially designate
wildlife management areas or fish production facilities which result in improvement of habitE
for fish and wildlife resources or greater fish production.
(e) Minor temporary use of land having negligible or no permanent effects on th
environment, inlcuding carnivals, sales of Christmas trees, etc.
(f) Minor trenching and backfilling where the surface is restored.
(g) Maintenance dredging where the spoil is deposited in a spoil area authorized b
all applicable state and federal regulatory agencies,
(h) The creation of bicycle lanes on existing rights-of-way.
102
15305. Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations.
Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average
slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but
not fimited to:
(a) Minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and set back variances not resulting in the
creation of any new parcel;
(b) Issuance of minor encroachment permits;
(c) Reversion to acreage in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.
15306. Information Collection.
Class 6 consists of basic data collection, research, experimental management, and
resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an
environmental resource. These may be strictly for information gathering purposes, or as part
of a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded.
15307. Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural
Resources.
Class 7 consists of actions taken by regu~atory agencies as authorized by state law or local
ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of a natural resource where the
regutatoryprocessinvolvesproceduresforprctectionoftheenvironment. Examplesincludebutare
not limited to wildlife preservation activities of the State Department of Rsh and Game. Construction
activities are not included in this exemption.
15308. Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environ-
merit.
Class 8 consists of actions taken by regulator,/agencies, as authorized by state or local
ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environ-
ment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment.
Construction activities and relaxation of standards allowing environmental degradation are not
included in this exemption.
15309. Inspections.
Class 9 consists of activities limited entirely to inspections, to check for performance of
an operation, or quality, health, or safety of a project, inlcidng related activities such as
inspection for possible mislabeling, misrepresentation, or adulteration of products.
1531 O. Loans.
Class 10 consists of loans made by the Department of Veterans Affairs under the
Veterans Farm and Home Purchase Act of 1943, mortgages for the puchase of existing
structures where the loan will not be used for new construction and the purchase of such
mortgages by financial institutions. Class 10 includes but is not limited to the following
examples:
(a) Loans made by the Department of Veterans Affairs under the Vetrans Farm and
Home Purchase Act of 1943.
(b) Purchases of mortgages from banks and mortgage companies by the Public
Employees Retirement System and by the State Teachers Retirement System.
5311. Acessory Structures.
Class 11 consistsofconstruction,orreplacementofminorstructuresaccessoryto(appurtenant
to) existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, including but not limited to:
(a) On-premise signs;
(b) Small parking lots;
103
":L-.-- - -----'
(c) Pla,-~ment of seasonal or temporary use item.~ ^, ~ch as lifeguard towers, mobile
food units, pertab. astrooms, or similar items in generally th ame locations from time to time
in publicly owned parks, stadiums, or other facilities disigned for public use.
15312. Surplus Government Property Sales.
Class 12 consists of sales of surplus government proper'b/except for parcels of land
located in an area of statewide, regional, or areawide concern identified in Section 15206(b)(4).
However, even if the surplus property to be sold is located in any of those areas, its sale is
exempt if:
(a) The property does not have significant values for wildlife habitat or other
environmental purposes, and
(b) Any of the following conditions exist:
(1) The property is of such size, shape, or inaccessibility that it is incapable of
independent development or use; or
(2) The property to be sold would qualify for an exemption under any other class of
categorical exemption in these guidelines; or
(3) The use of the property and adjacent property has not changed since the time
of purchase by the public agency.
15313. Acquisition of Lands for Wildlife Conservation Purposes.
Class 13 consists of the acquisition of lands for fish and wildlife conservation purposes
including preservation of fish and wildlife habitat, establishing ecological reserves under Fish
and Game Code Section 1580, and preserving access to public lands and waters where the
purpose of the acquistion is to preserve the land in its natural condition.
15314. Minor Additions to Schools.
Class 14 consists of minor additions to existing schools within existing school grounds where
the addition does not increase original student capacity by more than 25% or ten classrooms,
whichever is less. The addition of portable classrooms is included in this exemption.
15315. Minor Land Divisions.
Class 15 consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential,
commercial, or industrial use into four orfewer parcels when the division is in conformance with
the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access
to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division
of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and the parcel does not have an average slope
greater than 20 percent.
15316. Transfer of Ownership of Land in Order to Create Parks.
Class 16 consists of the acquisition or sale of land in order to establish a park where the
land is in a natural condition or contains historic sites or archaelogicai sites and either:
(a) The management plan for the park has not been prepared, or
(b) The management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition or
preserve the historical or archaeological site. CEQA will apply when a management plan is
proposed that will change the area from its natural condition or sign ificantly change the historic
or archaeological site.
15317. Open Space Contracts or Easements.
Class 17 consists of the establishment of agricultural preserves, the making and renewing of
open space contracts under the Williamson Act, or the acceptance of easements or fee interests in
order to maintain the open space character of the area. The cancel latjon of such preserves, contracts,
interests, or easements is not included and will normally be an action subject to the CEQA process.
'e
~S
)fi
)e
~e
or
is
-ic
15318. Designation of Wilderness Areas.
Class 18 consists of the desi 'tion wilderness areas under the Califor ' Wilderness
System.
15319. Annexations of Existing Facilities and Lots for Exempt Facili-
ties.
Class 19 consists of only the following annexations:
(a) Annexations to a city or special distdct of areas containing existing public or pdvate
structures developed to the density allowed by the current zoning or pre-zoning of either the gaining
or losing governmental agency whichever is more restrictive, provided, however, that the extension
of utility services to the existing facilities would have a capacity to serve only the existing facilities.
(b) Annexations of individual small parcels of the minimum size for facilities
exempted by Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
15320. Changes in Organization of Local Agencies.
Class 20 consists of changes in the organization or reorganization of local governmental
agencies where the changes do not change the geographical area in which previously existing
powers are exercised. Examples include but are not limited to: (a) Establishment of a subsidiary district.
(b) Consolidation of two or more districts having identical powers.
(c) Merger with a city of a district lying entirely within the boundaries of the city.
15321. Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies. Class 2t consists of:
(a) Actions by regulatory agencies to enforce or revoke a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use issued, adopted, or prescribed by the regu latory agency
or enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective, administered or adopted by the
regulatory agency. Such actions include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) The direct referral of a violation of lease, permit, license, ceritificate, or entitle-
ment fdr use or of a general rule, standard, or objective to the Attorney General, District
Attorney, or City Attorney as appropriate, for judicial enforcement.
(2) The adoption of an administrative decision or order enforcing or revoking the
lease, permit, license, certificate, or entitlement for use or enforcing the general rule, standard,
or objective.
(b) Law enforcement activities by peace officers acting under any law that provides
a criminal sanction.
(c) Construction activities undertaken by the public agency taking the enforcement
or revocation action are not included in this exemption.
15322. Educational or Training Programs Involving No Physical
Changes.
Class 22 consists of the adoption, alteration, or termination of educational or training programs
which involve no physical alteration in the area affected or which involve physical changes only in the
interior of existing school or training structures. Examples include but are not limited to: (a) Development of or changes in curriculum or training methods.
(b) Changes in the grade structure in a school which do not result in changes in
student transportation.
15323. Normal Operations of Facilities for Public Gatherings.
Class 23 consists of the normal operations of existing facilities for public gatherings for
which the facilities were designed, where there is a past history of the facility being used for the
same or similar kind of purpose. For the purposes of this section, "past history" shall mean that
105
(b) Operation of the generr" '] facilities will not change the flow re' ' *~e in the
affected stream, canal, or pipeline inck._,ng but not limited to:
(1) Rate and volume of flow,
(2) Temperature,
(3) Amounts of dissolved oxygen to a degree that could adversely affect aquatic life, and
(4) Timing of release.
(c) New power' lines to connect the generating facilities to existing power lines will
not exceed one mile in length if located on a new right of way and will not be located adjacent
to a wild or scenic river.
(d) Repair or reconstruction of the diversion structure will not raise the normal
maximum surface elevation of the impoundment.
(e) There will be no significant upstream or downstream passage of fish affected by
the project.
(f) The discharge from the power house will not be located more than 300 feet from
the toe of the diversion structure.
(g) The project will not cause violations of applicable state or federal water quality
standards.
(h) The project will not entail any construction on or alteration of a site included in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and
(i) Construction will not occur in the vicinity of any rare or endangered species.
15329. Cogeneration Projects at Existing Facilities.
Class 29 consists of the instafiation of cogeneration equipment with a capacity of 50
megawatts or less at existing facilities meeting the conditions described in this section.
(a) At existing industrial facilities, the installation of cogeneration facilities will be
exempt where it will:
(1) Result in no net increases in air emissions from the industrial facility, or will
produce emissions Tower than the amount that would require review under the new source
review rules applicabie in the county, and
(2) Comply with all applicable state, federal, and local air quality laws.
(b) At commercial and industrial facilities, the installation of cogeneration facilities
will be exempt if the installation will:
(1) Meet all the criteria descril}ed in Subsection (a),
(2) Result in no noticeable increase in noise to nearby residential structures,
(3) Be contiguous to other commercial or institutional structures.
Article 20. Definitions
15350. General.
The definitions contained in this article apply to terms used throughout the guidelines
unless a term is otherwise defined in a particular section.
15351. Applicant.
"Applicant' means a person who proposes to cam/out a project which needs a lease, permit,
license, certificate, or other entitlement for use or financial assistance from one or more public agencies
when that person applies for the governmental approval or assistance.
15352. Approval.
(a) "Approval" means the decision by a public agency which commits the agency to a
deft nite course of action in regard to a project intended to be carded out by any person. The exact date
of approval of any project is a matter determined by each public agency according to its rules,
107