HomeMy WebLinkAbout121091 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA TEMPORARY COMMUNITY CENTER - 27475 COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE
DECEMBER 10, 1991 - 7:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 PM Main Conference Room -Temecula City Hall, 43174
: Busine,~s Park Drive, Closed session. pursuant to Government Code Section No.
54956.9(b) regarding potential litigation.
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 91-44
Resolution: No. 91-118
CALL TO ORDER:
Invocation
Pastor Simmons - Foursquare Church
Flag Salute
Councilmember Lindemans
ROLL CALL:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muf~oz, Parks
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Award of Bike Safety Poster Contest Winners
Presentation of National AAA Award for Pedestrian Safety
Presentation by the Temecula Town Association
Presentation of Cable Television Grants - Jones Intercable
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
n(~ listed on the Agenda or on the consent Calendar, a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address,
For all other agenda items a "Request To Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
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
1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of November 19, 1991 as mailed.
2.2 Approve the minutes of November 25, 1991 as mailed.
2.3 Approve the minutes of November 26, 1991 as mailed.
3
Resolution AoDroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
4
Cancellation of the ReGular City Council Meeting Scheduled December 24, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of December 24, 1991 and
reschedule it to take place on December 17, 1991.
5.1
5.2
Award of Bids - City Vehicles
RECOMMENDATION:
Award the bids to purchase three (3) vehicles for Public Works.
Increase the Fiscal Year 1991-1992 Budget for vehicles by $16,500.
6
Resolution UrGinG the Establishment of a School of Law at The University of California
- Riverside
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SCHOOL OF LAWTO BE LOCATED
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT RIVERSIDE
7
Revised Vesting Final Tract MaD No. 23267-4
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-4, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
8
Vesting Final Tract MaD No. 26861-1
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861-1 subject to the Conditions
of Approval.
9
Authorization to Purchase Prooertv at Sixth and Front Streets
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1
Authorize staff to conduct detailed negotiations and execute all
necessary documents to purchase the vacant lot at the northeast corner
of the intersection at Sixth and Front Streets at a price not to exceed
$917,100, plus the customary buyer's share of closing costs.
9.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE
$925,000 FOR THE PURCHASE OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-023-
020.
2lagend all 21091 3 12105/91
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
10
Ordinance Adopting Standard Drawincls for Public Works Construction
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9143
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
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the
approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the
projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences
delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing.
11
Change of Zone 5631 - Tentative MaD No. 25320 - Bedford Properties
(Continued from the meeting of November 12, 1991)
Property located north of Pauba Road, between Ynez Road and Margarita Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Continue the Public Hearing to the meeting of January 14, 1991.
12
Parcel MaD 24085 - Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
(Continued from the meeting of November 26, 1991 )
73 acre site located on the westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension
of Winchester Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
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 PARCEL
LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE
EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-120-022.
13
Parcel MaD 24086 - Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
(Continued from the meeting of November 26, 1991)
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 NO. 909-120-020
14
Adoption of an Adult Business Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING
CHAPTER FIVE TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE
REGULATIONS OF ADULT BUSINESSES
15 Parcel MaD 25139 - 50 Center City Associates
A 97 acre site located west of Diaz Road and south of Cherry Street
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139.
15.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 66 PARCELS AND A 6.8 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED
SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND
SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF CHERRY STREET AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-018
16
Parcel MaD 25408 - PhilliD T. See
A 36 acre site located southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road,
southwest of Diaz Road,
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408.
16.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO SUBDIVIDE A 36.2 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 20 PARCELS AND A 6.52 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE
EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-120-026.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
17 Election of Mayor
At this time the Mayor will entertain motions from the City Councilmembers to select
the Mayor to preside until the end of calendar year 1992,
18 Election of Mayor PrO Tempore
At this time the Mayor will entertain motions from the City Councilmembers to select
the Mayor Pro Tempore who will assume the duties of the Mayor in the Mayor's
absence and will hold this office until the end of calendar year 1991.
19
20
21
Adiustment of City Council Compensation (Pursuant to Government Code Section No.
36516)
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1
Consider increasing the compensation by five percent (5%) for each of
the last two years.
Appointment of Public Safety Commission Member
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Appoint a member to the Public Safety Commission for a term of three
(3) years.
APPOintment of Councilmembers to Various General Plan and Specific Plan Committees
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Appoint a member to serve on the following committees:
21.1.1
21.1.2
21.1.3
General Plan Technical Subcommittee Selection Committee
Old Town Specific Plan Selection Committee
Old Town Advisory Committee.
22
Chanaes in Policy Guidelines for Old Town Historic Review Board
RECOMMENDATION:
22,1 Direct staff to make revisions in adopted policy guidelines for the
Historic Review Board,
23
Acceptance of Offer of Dedication - Portion of Via Las Colinas
(Continued from the meeting of November 12, 1991)
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF A PORTION OF VIA LAS COLINAS
AND ACCEPTING SAME INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM
24
Status Report on French Valley AirPort
RECOMMENDATION:
24,1 Receive, discuss and file report.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: December 17, 1991,7:00 PM, Temporary Temecula Community
Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING - (To be held at 8:00)
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 91-02
Resolution: No. 91-13
President J. Sal Mu~ioz
DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Mu~oz
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should
present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state
your name and address for the record.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of November 26, 1991 as mailed.
2
Cancellation of Regular Meeting Scheduled December 24, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of December 24, 1991 and
reschedule the meeting to take place on December 17, 1991.
3
Election of President of the Temecula Community Services Board of Directors
At this time the President will entertain motions from the Board of Directors to select
the President to preside until the end of calendar year 1992.
4
Election of Vice President of the Temecula Community Services Board of Directors
At this time the Preside will entertain motions from the Board of Directors to select the
Vice President to preside until the end of calendar year 1992.
9 12/~619 1
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting December 17, 1991, 8:00 PM, Temporary
Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive,
Temecula, California
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 91-
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson Peg Moore presiding
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks,
Moore
PUBLIC COMMENT:
AGENCY BUSINESS
Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a
completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you
are called to speak, please come forward and state your name
and address for the record.
Minutes Of November 26, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of November 26, 1991
2
Cancellation of Rec~ular Meetincl of December 24. 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of December 24, 1991 and
reschedule the meeting to take place on December 17, 1991.
3
Election of Chairperson of the Temecula Redevelooment Aqencv
At this time the Chairperson will entertain motions from the Agency members to select
the Chairperson to preside until the end of calendar year 1992,
4
Election of Vice Chairperson of the Temecula RedeveloDment Aqencv
At this time the Chairperson will entertain motions from the Agency members to select
the Vice Chairperson to preside until the end of calendar year 1992.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting December 17, 8:00 PM, Temporary Temecula
Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula,
California
PROCLAMATIONS
AND
PRESENTATIONS
O NEWS
from the Auto Club
Automobile Club of SoUthern California · 2(::01 S. FlgueroQ Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007
CONTACT: CathyZaitz,(714)694-9403 FOR RELEASE: Immediately
Jeffrey Spring, (213) 741-4410
CITY {"IF TEMECULA HONORED FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
(TEMECULA, Calif., December 5, 1991) -- The City of Temecula has carned a
P¢cleswian Safety Citation for its outstanding pcdeswian safety accomplishments in the American
Automobile Associafion's (AAA) Pedestrian Protection Program, coordinated locally by the
Automobile Club of Southern California.
Cathy Zaitz, manager of the Auto Club's Temecula office, will present the award to the
Temccula City Council on Tuesday, December 10, during a 7 p.m. city council meeting at Temect~a
City Ha/l, 27475 Cornmere- Center Drive,
The City of Temecu/a competed among 424 cities with populations of 25,000 to 50,000. The
citation recognizes exceptional pedestrian safety programs. More than 2,400 cities and 27 states
nationwide participated in this year's progxam.
Elements evaluated in the competition include quality of school traffic safety programs,
maintenance of accident records, safety legislation, enforcement, traffic engineering and active public
information and education programs. "AAA evaluates a community's efforts to teach pedestrians
about the dangers of walking near tra.ffic and to help them learn important safety skills," explained
7~it~.
The Automobile Club of Southern California, the largest affiliate of the American Automobile
Association, has been giving members since 1900. Today, the Auto Club's 3.7 million members
benefit by the organization's emergency road service, public safety programs, travel planning,
highway and transportation safety programs, automotive t~sting and analysis, automobile and
homeowner~ insunnce and legislative advocacy.
- 30 -
The Automobile Club of 8outhorn California, a not-lot-profit organlzetlOn, s~rves Its more than 3,6 mtlllon member8 by Offering
not only a verlely el ssrvlcel to meet their motorInS tieida, but by assuming leadership In those flaldl of public ssrvic~ which
ere In the beet Interest of ths mMortng public and the community.
ITEM NO. 1
ITEM NO. 2
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD NOVEMBER 19, 1991
An adjourned regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:42 PM
in the Main Conference Room, City Hall, 43142 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Mayor Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Parks
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Muf~oz
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field, and City Clerk
June S. Greek.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Parks declared a recess to an executive session pursuant to Government Code Section
54956 (a), (b) and (c) to discuss Pulte Homes vs the City of Temecula and potential litigation.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:04 PM in regular session by Mayor Parks with all
Councilmembers present.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Lucille Murray, the Center for Life Enrichment
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Mu~oz.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Chris Proud, 44582 LaPaz Road, addressed the Council speaking in opposition to the
suggestion that a 9:00 PM curfew and $500. fine for violators be instituted in the City. In
response to Councilmember Lindemans, he said that a later curfew would be a better solution
for the young people who work evening jobs and have high school activities which do not end
until after nine or ten in the evening.
In response to a question from Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, he stated he thought the formation
of a Teen Council would be a good source for receiving input from the youth in the areas
regarding problems they face and programs which would be of interest and benefit to them.
He also said he would be willing to serve on a committee of this sort.
Minutes\11/19/91 -I- 11/25/91
City Council Minutes November 19, 1991
Sydney Vernon, 30268 Marsay Court, spoke in opposition to having several organizations,
such as the Boys and Girls Club and the Community Recreation Center Organization working
on the same type of project.
John Hunnemen, 39557 Del Val Drive, Murrieta, speaking as a private citizen, stated that he
has been discussing the lack of recreational facilities for 12 to 17 year old residents with the
public and particularly the young people. He asked the City Council to address the issues of
gangs, drugs and crime before there are more serious problems in these areas. He finalized
his remarks by commending the City's newly instituted Police Bicycle Officer program for its
effectiveness.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
Policy Direction to the Plannino Commission
Mayor Parks asked that the City Council come to some consensus on the guidelines
that will be presented to the Planning Commission at a joint meeting scheduled for
Monday, November, 25, 1991.
Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall stated that recent economic factors have changed some of the
initial direction given to the Commission and she believes that while the Council has
modified some of their actions as a result of these factors, they have not shared the
reasons for their decisions with the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Muf~oz stated he feels the Planning Commission has operated in an
exemplary manner and he believes the should be treated as an advisory body not as
a rubber stamp of the City Council.
Mayor Parks stated his concerns are that denials are being made without the
Commission explaining their reasons for voting for denial.
Councilmember Muf~oz stated he is concerned that the minutes may not be reflecting
the statements of the Planning Commissioners with regard to reasons for voting in a
specific way.
Councilmember Lindemans stated he believes individuals have every right to develop
their property and unless there are valid objections from the members of the
neighboring properties, or development can not be reasonable accomplished due to
ecological concerns, they should not be denied that right. He said he particularly
objects to decisions being made based upon matters of personal taste.
Mayor Parks said he has received complaints from project applicants that they have
been limited, by the Commission in making presentations and in giving rebuttals. He
added he feels the Planning Commission should serve as the primary body for
Minutes\Ill19/91 -2- 11/25/91
City Council Minutes November 19. 1991
conducting Public Hearings and at present the Council is having to hear too many
appeals.
Councilmember Moore stated she feels that the City Council is receiving many more
public comments during public hearings than the Commission. She said her concerns
are that the minutes of the Commission do not reflect enough attention to public input.
Councilmember Muftoz said he would like the Commission to be more responsive to
the wishes of the public.
Councilmember Lindemans stated that as elected officials, it is the City Council's
responsibility to know and to serve the will of the public and the Planning Commission
has the responsibility to advise the Council on planning and land use matters.
City Manager David Dixon suggested that the role of staff also be discussed during the
meeting of November 25, 1991. He asked that the City Council consider direction to
staff for dealing with administrative procedures.
Mayor Parks asked if the Planning Commission has been given opportunities to attend
educational meetings and seminars for Commissioners. Planning Director Gary
Thornhill responded that the Commissioners attend the League of California Cities
Planning Commissioner's Workshops annually and are encouraged to attend other
meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall suggested that the Planning staff might make an effort to
standardize the first 10 or 20 conditions contained in Conditions of Approval. She felt
it would be helpful to know where to look numerically for a specific condition.
Mayor Parks expressed his belief that "personal attacks" have no place in official
meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall questioned if having a strong personal interest in a project,
even if it was not of a financial nature, could be a reason for abstaining on a matter.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that to abstain on those grounds would cause a
serious problem since it, in fact, would affect the quorum and would constitute a "no"
vote.
Mayor Parks said he would like to have the Planning Commission "buy into" the City
Councit's "fast tracking" programs for industrial growth within the community. He
expressed the concern that mixed messages are being sent to industrial developers
interested in the area.
City Manager Dixon advised that in most cases the Planning Commission has done a
fine job in helping expedite projects such as the ACS, Professional Hospital Supply and
Costco developments. He added it is very important that on the occasions when this
does not happen, the reasons need to be investigated to determine how to correct
such situations.
Minutes\ 11/19/91 -3- 11/25/91
CiW Council Minutes November 19, 1991
Larry Markham, Markham and Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, stated that in the
ACS situation, the problems were in the transition of the project from the County of
Riverside to the City of Temecula. He said when the project came into the hands of
the current City staff, it was handled very expeditiously. He also observed that the
City gets excellent citizen participation but that applicants are not given adequate time
to make presentations before the Planning Commission. Mr. Markham advised the
Council of the need for establishing architectural guidelines to help avoid the problem
of subjective opinions, based on personal taste, being used to make decisions.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Dixon reported that staff will make a presentation at the next regular Council
meeting addressing an action plan for programs directed to young adults in the community.
He also advised that Dr. Novatney of the Temecula Unified School District has asked to have
a joint meeting of the School Board and City Council scheduled.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
City Attorney Scott Field advised that the Pulte Homes vs the City of Temecula case is
nearing a possible settlement and will be appearing on an agenda in the next few weeks.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Mur~oz stated the RTA Route 23 figures show a ridership in excess of 1,000
for the month of October and he asked that the Council give some thought to ways to
enhance the service.
Mayor Parks said he has issued a complaint to staff regarding the quality of the video
coverage of the City Council meetings and that staff is following up on this with the video
recording company and the cable operator.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Lindamans, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall to adjourn
at 8:45 PM to a meeting to be held jointly with the Planning Commission on Monday,
November 25, 1991 at 7:00 PM in the Main Conference Room, City Hall, 43174 Business
Park Drive. The motion was unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
Minutes\l 1/19/91 -4- 11/25/91
MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
AND THE TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD NOVEMBER 25, 1991
A joint meeting of the Temecula City Council and the Temecula Planning Commission was
called to order in the Main Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive
at 7:04 PM, Mayor Ronald J. Parks presiding.
ROLL CALL
Temecula City Council
PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Mur~oz, Parks
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Temecula Planninq Commission
PRESENT: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Ford, Hoagland, Chiniaeff
ABSENT: I COMMISSIONERS: Blair
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field, Planning
Director Gary Thornhilt and City Clerk June S. Greek.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Karel Lindemans.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mary Porter, 41479 Chenin Blanc, addressed the Council and Commission regarding the Buie
Corporation Development at Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway. She expressed
concern that unrestricted apartments are to be developed at that site, contrary to the original
plans which called for senior citizen units.
Planning Director Gary Thornhill stated that the apartment units proposed are age restricted
units per the original specific plan.
Sydney Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, encouraged the Council and Commission to approve
a policy adopting and adhering to strict development time lines.
Minutes\l\9\90 -1- 12/03/91
City Council Minutes January 9, 1990
COUNCIL BUSINESS
City Council Policy Direction to Plannine Commission
Mayor Parks opened the discussion by explaining the intended purpose of the joint
meeting. He stated the City Council is concerned that the reasons for the Planning
Commission's denial of various projects is not always explained.
Commissioner Ford asked that specific examples of this happening be given to the
Commission.
Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that when new information comes up during the
Planning Commission public hearings, the staff can not always anticipate what the
Planning Commission's concerns will be, therefore the Commission may as a result of
that new information make findings which are not consistent with the staff's original
recommendation.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall addressed the recent economic impacts on the community and
stated that she feels the City Council has changed their stance on some development
issues as a result of the need to help stimulate growth. She gave the example of
possibly requiring less in the way of esthetics.
Councilmember Mu~ioz said he would like to see that all parties concerned in a Public
Hearing are given adequate time to present their cases. He also said he is anxious to
see an explanation of the reasons for voting against certain projects reflected in the
Commission's minutes.
Mayor Parks advised that the concern of the City Council is that ample time be given
to applicants after a Public Hearing has been closed to public comment, particularly to
rebut any new information which comes up during the Commission's questioning of
staff.
Commissioner Chiniaeff said he feels the Commission is charged with the duty of
making decisions based on good planning, which is the same in a good or a bad
economy.
Commissioner Fahey stated the Commissioners feel they were given their direction
from the Council at the time they were interviewed for positions on the Planning
Commission. As a result of that direction, she said the Commission has attempted to
be very consistent in their decisions, particularly since the General Plan has not yet
been adopted. She also felt that the staff needs to do a better job of communicating
the Commission's actions and reasons to the Council through staff reports.
Minutes\l \9\90 *2- 12/03/91
Citv Council Minutes January 9. 1990
Councilmember Moore requested that the Commissioners give specific reasons for the
record when they abstain from voting on any matter.
Councilmember Mur~oz asked if there is a reason why Commissioners can not attend
a City Council meeting when the Council is holding a Public Hearing on a matter
appealing a Commission decision or one that by law is required for the Council to hear.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that there is no legal impediment to having a member
or members of the Planning Commission in attendance at City Council meetings.
Mayor Parks outlined his concerns that the applicants and the City Council need to
know why the Planning Commission is reversing staff recommendations. He also said
that he has been receiving complaints that there have been "personal attacks" made
on individuals appearing before the Commission.
City Clerk June Greek, explained the City Council's adopted policy regarding minutes
and strongly urged the Commission to reread the policy as it relates to stating reasons
for casting negative votes.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall asked to clarify statements she made regarding the present
economy causing changes in the way projects are approved. She said she did not
mean to imply that any of the basic considerations should be eliminated.
Commissioner Fahey said the Commission tries to give general findings for all projects.
She said she feels perhaps the findings might be too general. She also expressed
concern that there has been a problem for the Commission created by the turnover in
staff as a result of phasing out consultants and adding new City staff.
Commissioner Chiniaeff said many policies are being set during general discussion, and
he also said the Planning Commission wished to place importance on the standards
being set without the benefit of a General Plan. He stressed that the Commission is
trying to do their best in the absence of that important planning tool.
Commissioner Ford said this is a constantly changing process and a time in which both
the Commission and the staff are growing in their working relationships. He added
that the Commission would like to see more input from the other City departments for
projects containing slopes, parks, etc. He spoke in favor of the Commission trying to
assist in the preparation of more accurate minutes.
Planning Director Thornhill, stated that the staff and some members of the Commission
are very concerned with the lack of a General Plan, having to work with the County's
ordinance, and having to make changes to the process.
Commissioner Chiniaeff added that the City is fortunate to have the expertise it has
on the Commission and they have often been able to provide assistance to City staff
as a result of their expertise.
Minutes\ 1 \9\90 -3- 12/03/91
CiW Council Minutes January 9. 1990
Chairman Hoagland stated the Commission is attempting to improve projects submitted
to them because they believe this is their charge from the City Council.
Councilmember Lindemans left the meeting at 8:00 PM.
Permit Process Streamlininq
Mayor Parks opened the discussion by advising the Commission that the Council is
anxious to have the Commission share in designing a more efficient process for
processing various permits.
Commissioner Chiniaeff said he feels the Commission should not be given direction to
approve something without doing their complete job of review.
City Manager David Dixon stated it is not staff's intention to dictate to the Commission
and they do not wish to see any lowering of the City's high standards.
Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report and referred to materials
handed out to the Commission and Council which described the present approval
process. He advised that the process at the present time does not allow staff to
approve plot plans in the framework of environmental review. He also suggested that
projects which require Negative Declarations or that require Categorical Exemptions
under the state law, might be considered for staff approval. He stated that Conditional
Use Permits only requiring a change of use are still having to be heard by the Planning
Commission. He itemized the following areas for discussion:
Conditional Use Permits
Mr. Thornhill suggested that Plot Plans of 5,000 to 10,000 square feet, that do not
require environmental review could be delegated to staff for review and approval.
Mayor Parks asked to see a percentage of case load that projects of this description
represent.
Substantial Conformance
Mr. Thornhill added that projects that require a finding of substantial conformance is
also a matter that might now be given to staff for approval.
Commissioner Hoagland said this is an area that the Commission specifically
requested the opportunity to see, at an earlier point, when the City was being staffed
completely by consultants.
Minutes\l \9\90 -4- 12/03/91
City Council Minutes Jenuan/9, 1990
Parking Adjustments
Mr. Thornhill recommended that parking adjustments could be approved at the Director
level on simple adjustments.
Small Parcel Maos
Director Thornhill suggested small Parcel Maps of four lots or less could also be
handled administratively.
Change of Use
Minor CUP's
Mr. Thornhill said this recommendation would cover use permits similar to that of a
Day Care Facility.
Time Extensions
Reversion to Acreaae
Certificates of Compliance
Variances or Modifications
Mr. Thornhill said this recommendation is not for true variances which require a Public
Hearing but for modifications which do not require necessary findings.
Councilmember Muf~oz said the complaints he has heard about the time required for
processing have had to do with the time it takes to have projects processed by City
staff prior to these matters going to the Commission or the City Council.
Director Thornhill explained that this type of complaint is a result of staff not having
the authority to approve anything administratively and therefore time is taken up in
placing these minor matters on agendas and doing all of the necessary staff reports in
preparation for an agenda. He advised Councilmember Mur~oz that the projects which
must go to the City Council are Zone Changes, Changes to the General Plan and
Specific Plans and or Development Agreements.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that Plot Plans could be handled administratively by
by the staff in the case of small plans and the Planning Commission in the case of
larger Plot Plans.
Larry Markham, Markham and Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, addressed the
Council and Commissioners regarding the need to allow staff to approve Substantial
Conformance items and permit revisions.
Minutes\l \9\90 -5- 12/03/91
City Council Minutes JanMew 9. 1990
Mayor Parks asked the Planning Commission if they felt comfortable giving some of
this responsibility to the Planning staff. The general indication from the Planning
Commissioners was that they would like to have this matter placed on their agenda for
further discussion.
Councilmember Mufloz, requested that staff make a policy statement that projects will
not be allowed to be side-tracked by staff for any reason.
City Manager Dixon stated that nothing will be ever be allowed to sit on an employees
desk during vacations or any other absences.
Commissioner Hoagland stated that standards of performance need to be established,
specifically that developers need to be given realistic time frames for expected
completion of the process.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall suggested the creation of a pamphlet to give to developers
which outlines normal expected time frames for various projects.
Commissioner Ford asked if there are also responsibilities that can be reassigned from
the City Council to the Planning Commission. He questioned if the Council is willing
to relinquish some of their current authority to the Planning Commission to assist in
the processing of projects in a timely manner.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Dixon reported that staff is currently engaged in a study of fees and charges
for development impacts.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
City Attorney Field asked that the Council adjourn to an Executive Session at 5:30 PM on
December 10, 1991.
COMMISSION REPORTS
Chairman Hoagland expressed the Planning Commissions appreciation for the time the City
Council has devoted to this joint meeting.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Moore said she is concerned about the City not conditioning projects to
require the completion of roads prior to the beginning of the project development. She also
stated she would like to see Conditional Use Permits reviewed for appropriateness of use.
Minutes\ 1 \9\90 -6- 12/03/91
City Council Minutes Jenuarv 9. 1990
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to adjourn at
9:00 PM to an Executive Session to be held on December 10, 1991 at 5:30 PM in the Main
Conference Room at City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, followed by the regular City
Council meeting to be held at 7:00 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475
Commerce Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried with
Councilmember Lindemans absent.
It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Ford to adjourn to a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on December 2, 1991, at 6:00 PM in
the Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula California. The motion was
unanimously carried with Commissioner Blair absent.
RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JOHN E. HOAGLAND, CHAIRMAN
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
Minutes\ 1 \9\90 -7- 12/03/91
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD NOVEMBER 26, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:35 PM in the Main
Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Mayor Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT 3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore
Mufloz, Parks
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott F. Field and City Clerk June S. Greek.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Pro Tern Birdsall declared a recess at 5:36 PM to an executive session pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(b) and (c) regarding Potential Litigation.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:02 PM in regular session by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall.
PRESENT 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Mufloz
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott F. Field and Recording Secretary Susan W. Jones.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Ron Bolt, Peoples Church of the Valley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Moore.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall proclaimed November 24th - December 1 st as "1991 California Family
Week".
Mayor Pro Tern Birdsall proclaimed the month of November, 1991 "National Hospice Month".
Hinutes\11\26\91 -1- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26.1991
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Margaret Benzango, 41498 Avenida Barca, presented the City Council with information
regarding the "Friday Night Live" program. She explained this program is designed to prevent
alcohol and drug use among teenagers.
Cynthia Bonner, 30955 Corte Arroyo Vista, addressed the Council in opposition to the street
closure on Avenida de la Reina. She stated that by blocking this street, the problem has been
diverted to other areas of the neighborhood, and asked that the Council seek other
alternatives.
Jennifer Wilson, 41513 Avenida De La Reina, a 16-year old high school student, spoke in
opposition to the street closure.
Margaret Fultz, 31408 Corte San Leandro, spoke in opposition to the closure of Avenida De
La Reina, stating that blocking an access in and out of the neighborhood creates a safety
problem.
Frank Dichiera, 31005 Calle Aragon, addressed the Council in favor of the closure of Avenida
de la Reina.
Mikken de Sanchez, 31418 Corte Sonora, addressed the Council in opposition to the closure
of Avenida de la Reina.
Todd LiPetri, 41663 Avenida de la Reina, spoke in favor of making the closure at Avenida de
la Reina a permanent solution.
Laura Haskell, 31271 Corte Alhambra, addressed the Council in opposition to the closure of
Avenida de la Reina.
Marry Rauscher, 31257 Corte Alhambra, spoke in opposition to the closure of Avenida de la
Reina and stated that if this street is not re-opened prior to Christmas Vacation, this matter
would be pursued through legal means.
David Servetter, 31365 Paseo Goleta, representing SAS (Street Access Solutions), addressed
the Council in opposition to the street closure on Avenida de la Reina, requesting that this
street be re-opened prior to Christmas Vacation. He stated other solutions should be
researched that would better serve the entire neighborhood, such as, speed bumps, 25 mph
speed limit, "Children at Play" signs and road closure signs between the hours of 6:00 am and
4:00 pm.
Melinda Rauscher, 31257 Corte Alhambra, SAS Representative, spoke in opposition to the
street closure at Avenida de la Reina.
Ron Roberts, 31257 Corte Alhambra, SAS, addressed the Council in opposition to the street
closure at Avenida de la Reina.
Ninutes\11\26\91 -2- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26.1991
Lisa Vitucci, 31130 Corte Arroyo Vista, addressed the Council in favor of the closure of
Avenida de la Reina.
Mary Ann Gordon, 31290 Corte Alhambra, SAS, spoke in opposition to the street closure at
Avenida de la Reina.
Anthony Bergeron, 31300 Corte Alhambra, SAS, spoke in opposition to the street closure at
Avenida de la Reina.
Elmer Juliano, 31220 Corte Alhambra, SAS, addressed the Council in opposition to the
closure of Avenida de la Reina.
John Dedovesh, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, suggested a solution to this problem may be found
in suspending all parking permits for students who receive speeding violations.
Heidi Ponecca, 31260 Corte Alhambra, SAS, addressed the Council in opposition to the street
closure at Avenida de la Reina.
Rita Hernandez, 31149 Corte Alhambra, addressed the Council in favor of the closure of
Avenida de la Reina.
Kathy Fuentes, 30980 Corte Arroyo Vista, asked that the City Council serve the majority of
the people and find a solution that would benefit the entire neighborhood. She spoke in
opposition to the street closure at Avenida de la Reina.
Jerry Ohliviler, 31280 Corte Alhambra, spoke in opposition to the closure at Avenida de la
Reina.
Jean Masek, 31368 Corte Sonora, spoke in opposition to the closure at Avenida de la Reina.
She also asked if the high school tennis courts are available for public use, and if not are
public tennis courts going to be made available.
Aisha, Albia and Ahjile Miller, P.O. Box 1377, Lake Elsinore, addressed the City Council asking
that the City protect the environment, specifically the animals and trees. Ms. Miller asked
that no further building or pouring of concrete be allowed in the City of Temecula.
RECESS
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall called a recess at 8:00 PM to accommodate the previously scheduled
Community Services Meeting. The meeting was reconvened following the Community
Services District Meeting at 8:11 PM.
Ninutes\11\26\91 -]- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26, 1991
6. Renewal of City Liability Insurance
6.1
Approve renewal of contract with Insurance Company of the West to
provide General Liability, Excess Liability and Public Officials Errors and
Omission coverage.
7. Final Parcel Mao No. 26852
7.1
Approve Final Parcel Map No. 26852 subject to the Conditions of
Approval contained in the staff report.
Memorandum of Understandino with Bedford Prooerties - Reoarding Series II Bonds for
CFD 88-12
8.1
Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a Memorandum of
Understanding with Bedford Properties concerning the sale of bonds in
excess of e 19,000,000.
9. Adoorion of Standard Drawinos for Public Works Construction
9.1
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 9143
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
10. Ordinance Aoorovino Zone Chanoe No. 5470
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 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 940-310-020 AND 021
Hinutes\11\26\~1 -5- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes
PUBLIC HEARINGS
November 26. 1991
11. Rot Plan No. 239 - Aoolicant Rancho California Water District Headauarters
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Councilmember Muf~oz asked if landscaping on this site would include drought tolerant
plants.
Mayor Pro Tern Birdsall opened the public hearing at 8:52 PM.
Bob Lemons, Rancho California Water District, said that drought tolerant landscaping
would be used. He stated the applicant concurs with the conditions of approval, but
explained that the Water District does have some statutory exemptions and will be
working with staff during the permit process.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall closed the public hearing at 8:58 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Mur~oz to
approve staff recommendations as follows:
11.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239
11.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-116
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 TWO-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
EMPLOYEENISITOR 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.)
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Hfnutes\11\26\f1 -6- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26.1991
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, requested that Items No. 12 and 13 be discussed
concurrently.
12. Parcel Mao No. 24085 - Aoolicant Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
13. Parcel Mao 24086 - Aoolicant Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
Director of Planning Gary Thornhill introduced the staff report.
Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works, recommended the following modifications to the
conditions of approval:
Parcel Mao No. 24085, Condition No. 54 should read, "or as approved by the City
Engineer".
Condition Nos. 82 and 83 should read, "prior to issuance of building permit".
Parcel Mao No. 24086, Condition No. 55 should read, "or as approved by the City
Engineer".
Conditions No. 84 and 85 should read, "prior to issuance of building permit".
Councilmember Muf~oz asked for an explanation of the concerns of the City of
Murrieta, stating that we should be sensitive to the concerns of surrounding neighbors.
Gary Thornhill explained this was a transfer case from the County, and Murrieta's
concerns were relative to circulation.
Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works, stated that a continuance was requested until the
City of Murrieta developed a circulation plan, and it was determined that this would
be an unreasonable delay.
City Manager Dixon stated he discussed the problem with the City Manager of
Murrieta, Jack Smith, and as soon as Murrieta hires a Traffic Engineer, the two cities
will meet and discuss mutual concerns.
Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall called a brief recess to change the tape at 9:09 PM. The
meeting was reconvened at 9:10 PM.
Councilmember Lindemans expressed concerns regarding these projects, stating that
too much industrial property is available at this time and without the Overland
Overpass, access to this property would be inadequate. He requested this matter be
tabled until the City's Master Plan is completed.
Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:15 PM for Item 12 and 13.
Minutes\11\26\91 '7' 12/02/91
City Council Minutes
14.
November 26. 1991
Dean Allen, Johnson + Johnson, stated the applicant concurs with the conditions of
approval. He stated that to provide the for industry to move to this community, space
must be available. He stated financing will come from Assessment District 155 and
the Council will be approached with a proposal for an additional assessment district.
He stated this project would contribute to the Overland Overcrossing at the time
building permits are issued.
Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing at 9:20 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Mufloz to
approve staff recommendations on Items No. 12 and 13.
Councilmember Lindemans asked what would be involved in post-poning this item until
after the master plan is developed in four months. Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning,
stated complications may exist regarding application of completeness and requested
that if it is the desire of Council, this matter be continued for two weeks to research
the impacts and liabilities which might be a result of tabling these projects.
Councilmember Moore withdrew her motion, Councilmember Mu~oz withdrew his
second, with the understanding this item would be continued for two weeks.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mur~oz to
reopen the public hearing on Items No. 12 and 13 at 9:34 PM.
Dean Allen, representing the applicant, stated he would be in favor of continuing these
items for two weeks.
It was moved by Councilmember Mur~oz, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
continue Items 12 and 13 to the meeting of December 1 O, 1991.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Mu~oz
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
Tentative Tract Mao No. 25892 - AoDlicant David Pearson
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:45 PM.
N.J. Paine, 30222 Conte Contera, addressed the Council in support of applicant David
Pearson, and requested that Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 be approved.
Ninutes\11\26\91 -8- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26.1991
David Asmus, 40521 Calle Cancion, spoke in support of the project, stating it will
provide much needed 1/2 acre lots in the City.
Richard Masyczek, 25262 Madrone, Murrieta, representing the applicant, stated this
project is consistent with existing zoning, SWAP, and all City codes and standards.
David Pearson, 41593 Winchester Road, applicant, stated this project has been in
process for 3 1/2 years and is consistent with existing zoning of R-R. He stated many
studies have been performed for this project, archeology, biology, traffic, etc. He
stated 1/2 acre lots are a needed commodity in this community.
Mayor Pro Tem closed the Public hearing at 9:57 PM.
Councilmember Muftoz stated he feels the Planning Commission has received more
input on this project and feels the City should support their decision of denial. He
stated he is concerned about increasing density within the City.
Councilmember Moore said this is not a zone change since the property is already R-R
(Rural Residential). She stated the concerns of the Planning Commission dealt with
interior traffic circulation as well as flood control. She added her concerns have been
addressed after discussing this matter with staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall stated she feels 1/2 acre parcels are a recognized larger unit
and would support approving this project.
Councilmember Lindemans stated that since their are no objections to this project, he
does not a problem with approval.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 and adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-117
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892 TO SUBDIVIDE A 20 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 34 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON PAUBA
ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOWS PARCEL NO. 9045-090-004 AND 005
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore
NOES:
1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
Ninutes\11\Z6\f1 -9- 12/02/~1
City Council Minutes November 26.1991
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to extend
the meeting until 10:30 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Mayor Parks absent.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall called a brief recess at 10:09 PM to change the tape. The meeting
was reconvened at 10:10 PM.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
15. Pulte Homes vs City of Temecule (e challenoe to the Citv's Sohere of Influence
northeast of oresent City boundary)
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
remove this item from the agenda.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Dixon reported the School Board would like to have a joint meeting with the City
Council, and requested the Council check their calendar for available dates.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
City Attorney Field requested the Council adjourn to an executive session on December 1 O,
1991 at 5:30 PM, City Hall.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Lindemans reported that he and Councilmember Mu~oz are working with staff
on the assessments for citizens in the Martinique, Portafino and Rouripaugh Tracts. He also
requested that citizens living in those tracts send him a copy of their tax bills.
He further reported that Councilmember Birdsall and he are working on a committee for
promotional media and will bring a report to the Council on December 17, 1991.
Hinutes\11\26\91 -10- 12/02/91
City Council Minutes November 26. 1991
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to adjourn
at 10:21 PM to an Executive Session on December 10, 1991 at 5:30 PM at City Hall, regular
meeting to begin at 7:00 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community Center. The motion was
unanimously carried with Mayor Parks absent.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Ninutes\11\26\91 -11- 12/02/91
ITEM NO. 3
RESOLIYrION 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
$318,246.01
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOFrED, this 10th day of December, 1991.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Resos 223
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
11/22/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/27/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
12/02/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/21/91 PAYROLL
$59,564.58
$153,445.50
$12,363.83
$92,872.10
TOTAL LiST OF DEMANDS FOR THE 12/10/91 COUNCIL MEETING:
$318,246.01
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
001 GENERAL
016 RDA
019 TCSD
021 CIP
029 TCSD (CIP)
TOTAL BY FUND:
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
MARY JAN ,,~HE!RY, FIRAN E OFFICER,
I, ~,,/~. , 1Z :i/ ' ~ ~ ._
MARK OCHEN~I:~J KO, ASSISTANT CiTY MANAGER
$234,854.63
$126.50
$53,106.88
$18,508.00
$318.246.01
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
Chec~ Date Vendor Name
lnvoic~ Date P/O Date Descri:tion Gross Discount Net
000075~ 08/09/9! NATIONAL NATIONAL LEASUE OF CITIES
OBOgg! 0B/09/9I OB/09/gl ANNUAL CONFERENCE 295.00 0.00 295.00
Check Totals: 295,00 0.00 2?5.00
I0104/~I NEET.JOH JOHN ? NEET~ MAI
100491 10/04/91 10/0i/91 JULY SERVICES 3,200.00 0.00 3.200.00
082691 10/04/7! 10/04/91 AUGUST SERVICES 3,000.00 0.00
073091 10/04/91 10/04/91 JULY SERVICES 1!500.00 0.00 1.500,00
Check Totals: 7,700.00 0.00 7,700.00
00008550 1!/!9/91 IMS-2 INTERNATIONAL MAILING SYSTEMS
111091 11/19/91 10/19/91PUSTA6E 2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
Check Totals: 2.000.00 0.00 2,000.00
00008531 11/20/91PETTYC PETTY CASH
111591 11/20/91 1!/15/91REI~110119-11112 299.35 O.OO 299.~5
Check Totals: 299.55 Q.O0 299.~5
00005532 !I/20/9! COO CALIFORNIA BUILD!NO OFFICIALS
111491 11/14/91 11/14/91 DISASTER DANABE ASSESSNENT TR I55.00 0.00 Ij5.00
00008535 1!/22/71 ALLIED ALLIED SARRIDAOE
118850-00 11/07/91 10980
Check Totals:
I0/16/91 SIGNS & MATERIALS AS NEEDED
155.00 0.00 1:5.00
!02.74 0.00 102.74
Check Totals:
00008534 11/22/91 BEDFORD BEDFORD PROPERTIES. INC.
11/05/91 11/05/91 11/05/91 OVERPAYMENT FOR APPLIC./27325
102.74 0.00 102.74
42~.00 0.00 42~.00
Check Totals: 425.00 0.00 423.00
00008535 1!122t9! BENEFIT BENEFIT AMERICA
i./nA/ot 11/20/~! 11/20/91 NOV. .c, REIMBURSEMENTS 1,188.45 O.OO !.!SS.45
00008536 11/22/9! CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
00153 11107191 10&2~
Check Totals:
07!01/91 INVITATIONS FOR PROPOS/NOV.
1~188,45 O.O0 1.188.45
1!.62 0,00 11.62
Chec~ Totals:
00009557 1!/22/9! CHEVRON CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.
I02891 ID/2BI91 10/2B/91 7920772253/AUB. SEPT,
11.~2 O.O0 1!.a2
525.82 0.00 525.82
Check Totals:
OO00855B 11/22/9~ COUNTCLE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
11/18/91 11/iB/91 11/18/91 NOTICE OF ENVIRON/&TH STREET
525.82 0.00 325.82
25.00 0.00 25.00
25.00 0.00 25.00
Check Totals:
00008559 11/22/91 FORD FORD, SHARON
112291 11/22/91 10/22/91 SO1 CONIRACT CLASS/CALLIB. II 16B.00 0.00 !68.00
Check Totals:
00/06/~1 RENTAL PASERS/NOV.
]?/01/91PASER RENTAL/NOV.
~%7/t5/~1PASER RENTAL/NOV.
I0/07/9! PAEER RENTALS/NOVEMBER
00008540 11/22/91 GETPAGED GET PAGED
0~%360-!N !!/10/71 024~
0~65601N 11128/9! 0228
0~%360I~- !I/21/71 0217
OB9656O!N2 1!/!019~ lOSS7
168.00 0.00 168.00
12.50 0.00 !2.50
150.00 0.00 !50.00
37.50 0.00 37.50
12,50 O.O0 ~2.50
Check Totals: 212.50 0,00 212.50
Check Date VenDor NoDe
Invoice Date P/O Date Descri:tion 8ross Discount Net
00008541 11/22/91 GRAY BAR 8RAY BAR ELECTRIC
159-217525 11113191 11044 I0/!4/91 PH0NES FOR CITY HALL 12.66 0.00 12
00008542 11122191HAFEL!TH THOMAS HAFELI
111291 11112191
Check Totals: 12.66
11/12/91 EXPENSE REIMB/NEC AMERICA 1,390.29
0.00 12.66
0.OO 1,3V0.29
Check Totals: 1,590.29 0.00 1,~90.29
00008543 II/22/91 INS INTERNATIONAL HAILING SYS.
666054 !0/03/91 I0103191 METER RENTALIll/I-I/S1/91 209.95 0.00 209.95
00008544 11122191 K,R.T.M.N.R./.N.
Check Totals: 20935
11/18/91 PUBLICITY FOR HAUNTED HOUSE 200.00
0,00 209,95
0,00 200.00
Check Totals: 200.00 0.00 200.00
00008545 II/22/91 LIBERTY LIBERTY AUTO CENTER
2243 !0/!5/91 11051 10/08/91 MAINT.CITY VEHICLES;BLDG&SFTY 21.19 O.OO 21.19
2017 10115/9! 11051 10/09/91 ~AINT.CITY VEHICLES;BLOO&SFTY 21.19 0.00 21.19
2244 10/15/91 11051 10108191 MAINT.CITY VEHICLES;BLOO&SFTY 21.19 0.00 21.19
2246 10/15/91 11051 10/0e/91 MAINT.CIIY VEHICLES;BLOOiSFTY 21.19 0.00 21.19
2245 I0/15/91 11051 I0/08/91 MAINT.CITY VEHICLES:BtDS&SFTY 21.!9 0.00 21.19
Check Totals:
00008546 11/22RI LOTDIND LOT 9 INDUSTRIAL LTD
111391 11/13/91 11/13/91 REFUND INSPECTION FEES
105.95 0.00 105.95
113.80 0.00 113.80
Check Totals:
00008547 11122191NARILYN8 MARILYN'8 COFFEE SERVICE
1819 11/12/91 11063 IO/01/V1 COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
1844 11118191 11043 10/01/9! COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
113.80 0,00 113.
88.80 0,00 88.80
4~.60 0,00 4160
Check Totals:
00008548 11122191HOOAVRAN LORRI ANN MCOAVRAN
103191 10/31/91 10/31/91 10/1-10/31 MILEAGE REIHB.
132.40 0.00 !32.40
164,45 0.00 164.45
00008549 11122191MEGAFOOO NEBA FOODS
111291 11/12/91
.Check Totals:
11/12/91 FEED NEEDY FAMILIES
164,45 0.00 !64.45
650.OO 0,00 650.00
Check Totals: 650,00 0,00 650,OO
00008550 11/22/91 NELSON 8HAMN NELSON
11105191 10/25/91 10125191 EXPENSE REIMB/OCT. 37,5,I 0.00 37.53
Check Totals: 37,53 0,00 37.53
00008551 11122/91NRPA NRPA
111591 11/15/91 11121/91 NANABEMENT ASSIST COURSE VIDE 40.00 O.OO 40.00
40.00 0,00 40.OO
Check Totals:
00008552 11122191 PERS PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIUM)
2MEDC.S& 11/07/~1 11/07/91 Nor Payroll, 11/07 164.00 0.00 164.00
2HEDC.S8 11/21/~1 11121/91 Nor. Payroll! 11/21 164.00 0.00 164.00
112191 I1/21i91 11/21/91 INSURANCE PREMIUm/NOVEMBER 17,514.90 0.90 17,514.'
Chock Totals:
00008553 11/22/91PERSRETI PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
2PEER.59 i1/21/9I !1/21/91 Nor. Payroll. !1/21
17,842.90 0.00 I7.842.90
5~ ~7 0,00 ~=~ 1v
Check
Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date
Description
112191 11/21/91
11721/91 PERU RETIREMENT/I!/21/Bi
00008554 11/22/91 POLL
102391
Check Totals:
ANDRE' VAN DER POEL
i0/2U91 11115191 MILEAGEIIOI2-10/25
00008555 !I/22/91 QUALITY
0408
0610-CR
0410
Check Totals:
QUALITY TONER SUPPLY
II/08/9I 11044 11/07/91 RECHARGE 5 TUNER CARTRIDGES
11121/91 11044 11/07/91 CREDIT MEMO
I1/11/91 11046 ll/07/tl RECHARBE 5 TUNER CARTRIDSES
00008554 11/22/91SCACEO S.C.A.C,E.O,
Ii/19/91 11/19/91
Check Totals:
11/i9191 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP
00008557 11/22/91 SIRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
4273 !I/04/9! 10745
4275-1 11/21/91 10850
Check Totals:
08/22/91SUS.CARDS;ENU1NEERIN6 DEPT,
09/10/91 BUSINESS CRRDS
Check Totals:
00008558 11/22/91 SO CAL-2 SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,
7419C 10/31/9t 10/51/91 714-345-7419/0CT. CHBS,
7425C 10/51/91 IOI~IR1 714-345-7425/0CT CH6S
34370 10/31/91 10/31R1 714-5494437/0CT. CHSS
00008541 iI/22RI SOUTNCEU SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
857685490 10/31R1 10/04/91
801008~420 10/30/91 10/30/91
2084~45410 I0/50/91 10/30/91
5084045310 10151R1 I0151/91
856806630 11/04/91 11/04/91
880829440 10/IB/91 10/IB/91
170120120 10/19/91 !0/19/~1
2030054240 !0/!8191 10/18/91
208452!01~ !0/19/91 10/19/91
B814825~ !0/23/91 10/23/91
2085430100 10/19/91 10/19/91
86851780 I0/29/91 10129191
17012628U 10/29/91 10/29/91
3090202700 10/29/91 !0/29/91
1050184440 10/18/91 10/18/~1
208~469570 10/30/~1 lO/50RL
308517478~ 10151/91 11/01/91
5085176770 10/31/91 10/31/91
2083449400 10/50/91 10/30/91
857371160 I0/25/91 I0/23/91
31!34660 t0/08/91 10/08/91
20356540 10/51/91 10/51/91
105186020 !0/31!~I 10/~!/91
:08446~880 10151/91 10/~1/9!
2~R45~5~59 10/31/91 10/31/9!
2084565690 i0/5I/9! 10/51/91
857590540 !0/31/91
855721550 10/51/91
Check Totals:
55771260500020004/10/2-11/4
5377815210401000419130-10130
5377800140102000019130-10/~0
5,I7780618110~0007191~0-10/51
5777545480203000911014-11/4
6677795944205000919118-10119
46774060677020000/911U-10/19
6677795991302000319118-10/18
6677405104002000819118-10119
697747816510200021912~-10123
66775850~0002000119118-10119
5111905~)01020005/9/27-10/29
51779051802010004/W27-10/29
5177905010102000U9127-1012~
647779580800400019118-10118
5U78006659030007191~0-10150
54778286505020000/10/1-11/I
54778286)0~02000211011-1111
5U7BOOa2ISO2000UB/30-10/30
497747801070200041912~-10123
597780254140300019110-10/B
4317077158~0219130-101~1
4377077515702/9/30-10/51
~3770775!5902/9/50-10/3!
457707751600219130-10/~I
~57707751620219/30-10151
10/51/91 4U707752480119130-10151
I0/31/~14U70775%902/9/30-!0/31
Gross
~2,550.20
12,805.~7
44.31
49.00
49.00-
245,00
245.00
25.00
25,00
58.79
58.79
77.58
59.38
57.04
52.78
169,20
864.93
318.!5
9.30
9.90
62,44
228.56
251.16
234.85
251.88
216.69
274.05
75,41
9,00
9.12
9.50
9.00
9.00
40.54
52.81
14.64
36.31
34.93
56.:7
87.44
33.34
Discount
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
D.O0
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
O.O0
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net
12.550.2~
12.803.37
44.5!
44.51
4%00
49.00-
245.00
245.00
25,00
25.00
58.79
38,79
77.58
59.38
57.04
52.7B
169.20
9.90
818.!3
9.30
9.90
62.44
228,56
251.1~
234,B5
251.88
216.69
274.05
69.65
75.61
tOO
9.12
9.30
9,00
9,00
40.~6
52.81
34.64
56.:I
14,95
87.44
Check Date Vendor Naee
Invoica Data P/O Date Description Dross Discount Net
8685179D 10/51/91 10151191 457707752700219150-10151 26.15 O.O0
85bTISO7D iOISiRI 10131/91 45770775542021~/30-1015l 55.34 0.00
10518569D 10151191 I0/51/91 457707755470219150-10151 111.60 O,O0 I11.~
85762004D 10/51/91 10/31/91 45"7707755490119130-10151 18.~2 O,OO 18.72
.......... Check.Totals:
00008582 11122191 STATECON STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND
111591 11/15/91 11/15/91 ADDIT. DEPOSIT/LOI ANNUAL PRE
00008585 11/22191 STEFFENS SUE STEFFEN
111591 11/15/91 11118191
5,456.19 0.00 5,456.19
5,975,66 0.00 5,975.66
Check Totals: 5,973.66 O.O0 5,975.66
REIN8. FOR SUPPLIES 57.14 0.00 57.14
00008584 11/22191 TEN PIPE TE~ECULA VALLEY PIPE
17774 10/21/91 10574 08/20/91
16915 10/01/91 10574 08120191
16945 10/02/91 10574 08120/91
I7455 10/10/91 10574 08/20/91
17501 10/10/91 10574 08/20/91
17394 10/15/91 10574 0812019l
17408 10115191 10574 08120191
17545 10117191 10574 08120191
17811 10/82/91 10574 08120191
1836& 10/50/91 10574 08/20/91
18978 10/02/91 10867 0912~191
Check Totals: 37,14 0.00 57.14
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCGD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRI6ATION PARTS;TCSD REPAIRS
IRRIGATION PARTSITCGD REPAIRS
RATCHET PIPE CUTTER;SHOVEL
100.69 0.00 100.69
7.56 0.00 7.56
4.09 0.00 4,09
2.87 0.00 2.87
1.11 0.00 1.11
5.50 0.00 5.50
5,46 0.00 5.48
10.57 0.00 10.57
11,52 0.00 11.52
52.33 0.00 32,$3
46.20 0.00 4h,20
00008565 11/22/91 WIHBF. RLY WINDERLY, VALERIE G,
112091 ii/20191 11/20/91
Check Totals: 225.50 0.00 225.
REIHB. FOR NEDICAL EXPENSE 58.35 0.00 58.55
000085~6 11/22/91 ZINNERLE STEVE HNNERLE
111891 11/18/91
11/08/91
Check Totals:
NILEA6E REINBIOCT,
58,:5 0.00 58.35
19.95 0.00 19,95
00008567 i2110/91CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
508511023 10119191 11045 10119191
30851107 10/31/91 10976 10/16/91
508511051 10/51/91 10965 10/08/91
Check Totals:
SPRAY NIVES;NR6TA & AVE.BARCA
RBOVE NEEDS & DERRIS;SPT-PRK
ELECTRICAL RERV.8PORTS PARK
19.93 0.00 !195
105.45 0.00 105.45
300.00 0.00 500.00
828.00 0.00 828.00
000085~8 12/10/91 SIDNKNIK SIgN XWIK
015494 11108/91 104~
07/16/91
Check Totals: 1,2II.45 0.00 1,251.45
VEHICLE SEALS AND LETTERING 1,411.49 0.00 iJ11.49
Check Totals:
1!411.49 0.00 1,411,49
Report Totals:
59,564.58 0.00 5%564.58
Check Date Vendor NaQe
Invoice Date P/O 5ate Decor/orion
000085?: 11,"2719i APPLEONE APPLE ONE
1591500 11120191 11075 ll/OSlgl TEMP:ACCTG.CLERK:!!/12-Ii/15
00008571 11127/91 CADET
CAOET UNIFORM
I1/22/91 10625
Check Totals:
08/09/91 UNIFORM SUPPLY/
Check Totals:
00008572 11/27/9I CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LANOSCAPE
308511114 ll/14R1 10975 10/11/91LSR.& NTRLS;RCHO CAL.RD.MEDNS
00008575 Ii/27/9! CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
06349/0720 !i/19/91 10625
01429/9067 I1/2!/91 10626
Check Totals:
07/0!/91 LEGAL NOTIOES/II/15/9!
07/01/91 LEGAL NOTICES/11/20/91
Check Totals:
OODOB574 11/27/91 CAMPSELL CAMPBELLS LIGHTING. £1SN/ELEC
11175 11/15/91 0277 10/00/91 REPLACE LAMPS;BALLASTS:SPT.PK
Check Totals:
00008575 1!/27/9! ~?TTrnR~ CITICORP NORTH AM::'CA
GI28697 11/21/91 0285 07/0!/91 PHONE SYSTEM/DEC.
00008576 11/27/91 CHSI
G71291
Check Totals:
CA. MUNICIPAL STATISTICS, INC
10/01/91 10525 07/01/91DEBT.STMNT;STAT.SEC.CAFR 6.50
Check Totals:
00008577 1!/27/91CO~PUALE COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS. INC.
OOOgq~c-!~ 10/01/91 11082 10/01/91 FIRE ALARM ~DNITORIN~/JUL-SEP
100191 10/01/0i 11082 10/01/91 FiRE ALARMMONITOrING/OCT-DEC
0000857:~ t, ..... DA',%!N DAVLIN
-c *~.,-, 11058
o.-~..~: 10/1B/~I 10/01/9!
11/19/91 10942 09/27/91
Check TotaXe:
AUDIO PROD.9/30/91:PREES CONF
TAPINS/NOV 4,18
Check Totals:
0000857~ 11/27/9! FLOWER FLOW~ CORRAL
112G91 11/26/91 11/26/91 FLOWERS
00008580 11/27/91 ~TEBILL 6TE
162-5595 !0/~1/91 10/31/~1
1~2-~052D 10/51/91 10/31/91
ag5-O559D 10/28/91 10/28/91
690-23090 10/28/91 10/28/9!
Check Totals:
714-162-5595 OCT SERVICES
WATTS LINEIOCT/714-162-5052
714-695-~539/0CT/~ATTS LINE
714-~9%2509/0CT/WATTS LINE
~k ~ n~r.~in. T 0 AS HAFELI
ll2(cl Ii,'20/~I
11120/91
Check Totals:
~kEASE SE!MD.
00008582 ~ ,
'!'27'?i HiNDE~L
Check Totai~:
HiNDEELiTER, rjE LLAMAS & ASSO
iI/07.1~! 0~07 l/A1/o~ SALES T:~ AIJDIT ~ D'TA ~*~P
Discount
Net
~0~.00 0.00
504.00 O.O0 SOLO0
22.00 0.00 22.00
22.00 O.O0 22.00
295.00 0.00 295.00
295.00 O.O0 2?5.00
!50.87 O.OO 150.87
5~.44 0.00 5~.4~
IB4.:l O.O0 184.51
574.76 0.00 574.76
574.76 0.00 574.76
1,427.57 O.O0 1.~27.57
1,427.57 0.00 1.427.57
350,00 0.00 550.00
550.00 0.00 550.00
155.00 O.OO 155.00
t55.00 0.00 1:5.00
270.00 O.O0 270.00
75.00 0,00 75.00
2BO.O0 0.00 2~0.00
555.00 0.00 555.00
~5.57 O.O0 &3.57
63.57 0.00 63,57
507.24 O.O0 507.24
5.698.84 O.OO
195,47 O.OO i95.47
195.31 0.00 !95.51
4.5%.B6 0.00 4,596.86
40,15 0.00 4C.I~
40.i~ O.OO 40.!5
900.00 C,OO ~00,00
C~ec~ Oa;e Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description 8ross Oiscount
Check Totals: 900.00 0.00 '?('0,"
0C'80E583 .... ~ I{MA ICMA
112691 ../26~?. 11/22/9I PREMIUM/NOVEMBER 10,147.51 0.00 I0.!47.31
00008584 11/27/91 INLAND-2 INLAND EMPIRE
112791 11/27/9!
Check Totals: !0!i47.31 0.00 !0,147.~I
11/27/91 DEPOSIT/SHOWCASE 500.00 0.00 500.00
C~ec~ Totals: 500.00
00008585 11/27/9! tNTERTEC INTERTECH TELECOMHUNICATIONS
104477 !0125/91 11075 10/25/91 PAYPHONES;INSTALL;CITY HALL 614.10
O.O0 500.00
0.00 614.10
Check Totals:
00008586 I!/27/91 ~ENSENTE ~ENSEN TEST EQUIPMENT
562669401 1!/06/~I 10954 09/20/91 CIRCUIT TESTER;MIRROR;STS
~14.10 0.00 614.10
607.81 O.O0 607.81
Check Totals:
00008587 11/27/91KIOSPART kIDS PARTIES,ETC.
112591 11/25/91 11125191 CLOWNS FOR MOMMY & ME
607.81 0.00 607.81
45.00 0,00 45.0'3
00008588 11/27/91L&NFERTI L & ~ FERTILIZER
56119 !0130/9! 10818
Check Totals: 45.00
0~/I7/91SERV.ON ANT 626:OlL:LABR:TCS8 251,59
0.00 45.00
Chec~ Totals: 251.~9
0000858? 11/27/~I LIBERTY LIBERTY AUTO CENTER
2342 i1/15/91 10988 10/08/91 SERV.OF CITY VEHICLES:TCSO 21.!9
0.00 251.39
0.00 21.Ie
Check Totals:
0000590 11/27/91LOTgIND LOT 9 INDUSTRIAL LTO
ll!~ql !I/19/9! !!/19/9! REFUNO/DUPLICATE PLANS
21.19 0.00 21.19
i90.00 0.00 1~0,00
Check Totals:
00008591 ii/27/91 LUNCH&ST LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
112191 !!/21/~I 11/2181 10 OINNERS COUNCIL
I12~9! !1/25/~! 11/25191 LUNCHES FOR NEETINS
c)000~592 !I/27/91 MCCANN
0229
Ch~ck Totals:
MCCANN PRINTING S~VICES
10/28/91 11064 lO/Ol/gl NOVENBER NEWSLETTER;
190.00 0.00 !96.00
lO0.O0 O.OO !00.00
52.00 0.00 52.00
152.00 0.00 152.00
355.58 O.OO 555.5~
00008593 11/27/91MECHAN BILL ~ECHAN
110671 11/06/V1
Check Totals:
ll/O&/gl CONSULTINS SERVICES/DECENDER
I55.58 0.00 55.58
3,500.00 O.O0 3.500.00
Check Totals:
00008594 !I/27/91PACIFICC PACIFIC DESIGN CONCEPTS
1847 i1/13/91 10870 09/16/01 IRON NTN. FORTE; PLIERS
5,500.00 0.00 3,500.00
14&.59 0.00 146.59
00008595 I1/Z7/9! FETROLAN PETROLANE
485812 !Iy20/9! 10965
Check Totals:
10/21/91 FUEL PROPANE/NOV.
146.59 0.00 !46,5~
,'.I>""~=~' F'ETTYC ~':TTv CASH
'.'~'~'~;~c !I/27/91 ,~ .
!!/25/91
Chec~ Totals:
11/25/91 PETTY CASH/IO/28-11/20
278.49 0.00 278,4g
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Daecriotion Sro~s Discount Net
Che~k T~tals: 2%,i~ ~.(<, ZTS.!~
00008597 I!/27/91 PROPERTY PROPERTY DATA SERVICES
I0517I 10/51/01 0258 07/01/91 ASSESSMENTS/OCT SERVICES 180.00 0.00 !DO.CO
Check Totals:
000085?8 11/27/gi RAN-lEO RAN-TEO RUBBER STAMP MFG
005250 !I/14/?l II037 lO/S1/?! NAMEPLATES & HOLDERS:ODD
180.00 O.OD 180,00
I2L21 0.00 125.11
Check Totals: 125.2!
00008599 II/OY/gl REGENTS REGENTS OF UNIV. OF CALIF.
112591 11125/~I 11/25/91 REGISTRATION FEE/CON REDEV.SY I00.00
0.00 125.2!
0.00 100.00
Check Totals: 100.00 0.00 I00.00
00008600 11/27/9I RIVERDID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
10217%0 11/19/91 11067 1I/0S/91 PENDEFLEX FOLDERS 2~0.12 0.00 270.12
I02174-0 Ii/20/~1 11052 10/2~/9! OFFICE SUPPL!ESFTOSD 59.25 0.00 5.23
Check Totals: "Q ~ 0.00 549.C5
00008601 !!/27/9! ROWLEY CATHERINE RONLEY
1'~°° 11/29/91 /~/o, PAYMENT 801 CLASS TAP/)ALLET 288.00 O.O0 2BS.O0
00008602 1!/27/9i SiRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
¢480 11/21/91 11055
4447 11/19/9I II02B
Check Totals:
11/05/91 BUSINESS CARDS;PUB.WORKS
10/29/91 5-COLOR BUS.CARDS:TODD
288.00 0.00 288.00
28.77 0.00 ~o 7~
38.79 0.00 38.79
Check Totals:
00008603 1!/27/9I STOFFELS BIOFFEL'S FLORIST
I0/28/91 11021 I0/2B/91 CENTER PIECE FOR SENIOR PARTY
O.OQ 67.56
0.00 75.45
Check Totals: 75.45
"' """ , S~.L uA2' SULLIVAN PUBLICATIONS iNC
U,v!~U~,,,i 11/27'?i I, ,
5702 11/081~I 10883 09/19/gi MASTER MAPS:CDPiES~FR.~EPT. 995.~1
0.0'.) '~ ~'
Cnec~ Totaia: 995.9!
r)OOQS~O.= ',~'~' T.', ~,.'.: TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE
170~6 ~!'12/9! 11079 1!;12/9! IRRIGATION & MISC. EGUIF'.CSD 12.59
O,OO ;95 %
0.00 12,57
0000860~ !1/27/7! UBNOSKEO UBNOSKE, DEBBIE
110891 II/08/91
Check Totals: 52.59 LOg 52.5?
II/08/91 TRAVEL REINS. 44.12 0.00 44.12
00008607 !i/27/91 UNITED UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
2UNIT.DO
2UNIT.52
2UNIT.53 I0/10/~I
2UNIT.40
2UNIT.O4 10/24/9I
2UNIT.DS t!/07/91
2UNIT.DS iI/21Y~I
Check Totals: 44.12 0.00 44.I2
09/12191 Normal PayrollJ/12
09i26/?1 Normal Payroll,g/26
!0/10/71 Normal hyrol,10/lO
06/;0/01 Normal Pavroli,U20
i0/24/~1 Normal Pay, 10/24
11107/91 Nor Pavrolh 11/07
11/2!/9! Ncr. Parrot1.1!/2!
20.00 0.00 20.00
20.00 0.00 20.00
20.00 0.00 20.00
20.00 0.00 20.00
20.00 O.OO 20.00
20.00 9.00 20.00
20.00 D.OO
Che'.i. 7suais;
v,,u.. LO, =iF ... ~.
'.1..'20/91 ii.20/::i LONG TE~M D!SABIL!Tf, :Q','.
NO.O0 ","' .... ',
'..~98.23 C'.OO , ~,~c. '-
Z'.e:k 'stEle: :.??S.:: ,1.0(~ :.NS,ZT
lnvolce Date R/O Bate DescrZBtion Gross Discount Net
12/10/?! ALLCITY ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
1156 iI/i8771 0293 I0108/91 TRAFFIC CONTROL/II/3-11/16 5,770.54 0.00 5,772.
80008~I0 ..... "/~I ALLIED ~.,E~ BARRICADE
!I~945-00 1!/!5/91 10980
10/16t91
Check Totals: 5,770.34 0.00 5,77~.3~
SI6NS & NATERIAJ. S AS NEEDES 59.65 0.00 3%65
O0008~ii 12/I0/9~ AZTECTEC AZTEC TECH. CORP.
22336 iI/041~i llOOa I0/1~/~i
Check Totals: ~.65 0.00 ~?.65
40' STORAGE UNIT:PUB.WORKS 5,045.~4 0.00 5,041.~4
Check Totais: 5!045.9& 0.00 3!OC.9A
OOO08&12 I2/10/91 BURXE!W~ BURKE! WILLIANS & BORERSEN
07408 10/31/9! I0/31/~I RDA OCT SERVICES 126.50 0.00 126.50
07412 I0/3!/91 10/31/91 GENERAL/OCTOBER SERVICES 2.607.B8 0.00 2.607.88
07411 10/51/9! 10/31/91 GENERAL/OCT SERVICES 3,150.00 0.00 L150.O0
07407 !O/~i/?l I0/51/91 PROFESSIONAL SERV./OCT. 10!667,70 0.00 I0,~67.70
Check Totals: 16,552.08
000086!: 12/10/9I GEOTECHN GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONRENTAL
9~99 11/I5191 02q0 10/01/~1PRELI~.!NVESTISAT!ON 5PRT PRK 2,540.00
1485 11/15/~1 02~5 I0/01/91ENVIRDN~NTL ASSESSMNT:6TR ST 3,~50.00
I~S4 11/15/91 02~ IOfOl/91 RECO~PACTiON TEST:SPORTS PART 1,550.00
148~ 1!/!5/91 10890 09/2519l OPTICAL SOIL&SAND TEST;VET.PK 150.00
0.00 16,552.08
0.00 2.340.00
O.OO Z.?50.OO
O.OO 1.550.00
0.00 !50.00
000¢0614 12110191BILL!S-I C. ~. '~AX' BILLIS
2435 11/01/91 11/01/91
2610 11/0!/91 !liOIRI
CMDC 11/01/91 11101/9!
C~SEPT 1!/01/81 11/01191
JRNZ:5 !i/01/91 1!701/~I
100191 iOlO!/~l 0266 10101/~I
Check Totals: 7,790.00
DEBIT HE~O/ADJUSTNENT 950.94
CREDIT NERO/NO NAY 1911 25LTO-
CREDIT ~E~D/WC DOT. I~71 IS&.BS-
CREDIT ~ENO/WC SEPT 176.SO-
CREDIT ME~O/WC JUNE/JULY 507'40-
TRAFFIC ENOIN/SEPT SERVICES B.475.00
0.00 7.790.00
0.00 950.
0.00 25L70-
0.00 I2~.85-
0.00 17~.30-
O.O~ .,.;,.~,-
O.O0 8.475.00
Check Totals:
000086!5 12/10/~i LAUREEN LAUSSEN & LAURSEN ELECTRICAL
51B? Iii!~/9! CD57 09/0~t91RANC~O CA RD LIGHT REPAIR
3189-1 11/14191 0292 10/24/91ANENO.COI257~ELECT.SPT.PARK
Check Totals:
0000861~ 12/10/91 MAWRCONS NAHR CONSTRUCTION CO
112~1 1112~1~1 0289 10101/91 SPORTS PRLCONSESSION PROJECT
Check Totals:
0000~6!7 !2/10/~! )AURICE ~AURIOE PRINTERS QUICK PRINT
25160 !!/17/~1 I!018 0~101/91 PRINTING OF THE CAFR
8,561.69
L~O0,OO
1!115.87
4,715.87
15~990.00
1L990.00
1,352.26
0.00 E.561.69
0.00 :,~00.00
O.O0 1.!15.87
0,00 4,715.87
0.00 15.990,00
0.00 lLB~O.OO
0.00 1.352.26
00008618 12/I0/91N B S N B S I LOWRY
RIOlO68jMB !0,'25f9! 10871
Check Totals:
09/25/~! PREPARE STANDARD DRA~INGS;P.K
Check Totals:
";r"=~" 39/03~oI INSTALL ~ MAINT.ZSU~E:CO~FUT
~: ....~: 10796
1,g52.2&
2.500.00
2.700.G0
O.O0 1,552.26
O.O0 2,500.00
0.~0
0.00
Check Totals: 2.700.00 0.00 2.70¢.00
)(,c,c, E629 lz,'io/?l RA~TEK RA~TEK
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description Gross Discount Net
~'~ I0/31/91 .... 1D/14/91 STREET MAINT/I0/22/~i 2,466.71 ¢.C: 2,4oi.72
$S~a I1118191 0282 10/14/9! STREET MAiNT/NOV.T/8 3.86j. OT O.OC
~G:7 ll/iS/Di 02D2 10/14/91 STREET MAINT/I1/4-11/8 4,872.37 0.00 4.~?:.:T
Check Totals:
0000862I 12/10/91 ROSE PURKISS ROSE
6595 lO/~l/gI 0!75 06/~0/9I DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLRN 1~,121.20 0.00 15.121.20
Check Totals: la,121.20 ~.O(. I~,!21.2~
00008622 12/I0/91 SHERIFF COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
103191 i0/31/~/1 10/31/~1 AUG.SEPT!OCT.,IGICYCLE PATROL ~!277.50 O.O0 ~.27T.SD
100591 !0/05/~I I0/05/~I OCT 5 DUI PATROL 287.83 O,O0 28743
O000SaZ3 I2/10/71STARLITE STARLITE
11/07/91 11005
1012~!~!
Checl~ Totals: 6,565.13
FLOOD LIGHTS:TRAFFIC GUARDS 8.523.0~
0.01)
O.OD 8,523.03
Checx Totals: 8 ~'~ r] 0.00 S.525.03
00008624 12/!0/9i SYSTEM SYSTEM SOURCE. INC.
5085~ 10/23/91 10863 09/!9/91 NEAT KNIFE 550.19 0.00 350.17
50841 I0/!8/~I 10~18 08/06/91 TACKBOARD,FILES,PANELS,ETC. 1~1.~3 0.00
5083? 10/18/91 10618 08/06/~1 TACKBOARD.FILES.PANELS.ETC. 502.12 0.00 502.12
5~S~S 10118/91 106i8 08/06/~1 TACKBOARD!FILES!PANELS.ETC. 250.!I 0.00 250.11
50919 !1107191 10753 0810?/II TAYLOR LOVESEAT:CITY HALL h21B.T9 0.00 1~218.79
508~9OR 10/18/91 10~18 08/0~R1 CREDIT NENO/SALES TAX INC. 6.5~- O.O0 6.59-
Check Totals:
00008625 I2/I0,'?i TEMECULA TEMECULA CREEK INN
112&91 11/26/91 I1/2~/~1 CATERING CONFERENCE
2.47&.25 0.00 2.476.25
i!02&.12 0.00 h026.12
Check Totals:
12.'lO/ql TO-MA:EN TO'~A.: ENGINEERING
12064-CR 10/02/91 11/26/91 CREDIT MENO/LATE CNAREES
!2139-CR 11/0B/~1 11/08/91 CREDIT NE)IO/LATE CHARGES
12064 10/02/~I 10/02/~I PREPARE CONST. EASEMENTS CFD
"'~q Ii/08/91 1!I08/91DQCDA~P CONST. cAecw=t~T rcn
1.026.12 0.00 1.025.12
24.89- 0.00 24.89-
79.91- O.OO 7%91-
822.14 O.O0 822.1~
1,175.91 O.OO 1.175.91
0000S~2T 12,;10/'~i WESTERNR WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL
11/18/91 11/18/91 11/18/91
Check Totals:
MEMBERSHIP DUES 1971t1992
1.8~5.25 0.00 ' ~' '~
7,i68.00 O.O0 7,1~8.00
00008628 12/10i91 WHITECAP WHITE CAP
F115078 lliO&/g! 11022 lO/2Blgl
F1!5079 1!/0~/91 11023 !0/28191
0003577 10131/?! i0131/91
Check Totals:
ENERBENCY TOOLS & SUPPLIES
EMERGENCY TOOLS & EOUIPNENT
CREDIT ~ENO/~ARCN
Check Totals:
7468.00 0.00 7!168.00
462.27 0.00 462.27
660.84 0.00 660.84
74.74- 0.00 74.74-
1!048.37 0.00 1.048.37
Report Totals:
!53.445.50 0.00 155.445.50
DaL~ Vendor Na~e
Invoice Da~ P/a Oa~e ~escriotion Gross giscount ~:
20FC~.58 11107191 I1107/~1 Nor Payroll, LilOJ 528,80 0.06 528,8
2DFC~.5~ II/2~/?I Ii121/~I Nor. Pa~rolh 1t/21 555.45 0.00 C55,~:
112191 i!12U~! I!/2U9! SAL~NCE OF NOVENtER PRE~IU~ 29.~0 0.00 2~.~{
Check T~tais: 1,115.85
I0/01/9~ 0263 0B/26f~1 INSTALL.& MATRLS:STORAGE SYST !1.250.00
0.00 1.t11.81
0,00 11.250.00
Cnec~ Totals: 11,250,00 0.00 11,250.00
Report Totals: !2,5~5.85 0.00 12~5~Z.85
ITEM NO. 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
December 10, 1991
Cancellation of the Regular City Council Meeting of December 24, 1991
City Clerk June Greek
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council officially cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of December
24, 1991 and reschedule it to take place on December 17, 1991.
DISCUSSION:
Chapter 2.04 of the City's Municipal Code requires regular City Council meetings to
be held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. This year the fourth
Tuesday falls on Christmas Eve. It is therefore recommended that the meeting be
canceled by minute order and that the second meeting of the month be held on
Tuesday, December 17, 1991.
ITEM NO. 5
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
December 10, 1991
Award of Vehicle Bids
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Award the bids to purchase three (3) vehicles for Public Works.
2. Increase the Fiscal Year 1991-92 Budget for vehicles by $16,500.
DISCUSSION: In accordance with the City's purchasing ordinance, we
advertised for bids on three (3) vehicles for Public Works. The lowest responsible bids
for each vehicle is as follows:
Type of Vehicle ~ Dealer
Chevrolet S10, Extended Cab, 4 Wheel Paradise Chevrolet
Drive Pickup Truck
Chevrolet, V-6 Utility Vehicle
Chevrolet, One Ton, Flat Bed Truck
Paradise Chevrolet
Schumacher Auto Sales
Price
$15,746
$19,109
821,119
Paradise Chevrolet and Schumacher Auto Sales are both located in Temecula.
FISCAL IMPACT: The balance in the budget for non departmental vehicles ~s
$40,000. The budget requires a $16,500 transfer from the unreserved general fund
balance for the purchase of these vehicles.
ITEM NO. 6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER /~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
City Clerk
December 10, 1991
Resolution Urging the Establishment of a School of Law at the
University of California at Riverside
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO 91-
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SCHOOL
OF LAW TO BE LOCATED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
AT RIVERSIDE
BACKGROUND:
In response to a request from UCR LAW an Inland Empire support group created for
the purpose of promoting the establishment of a law school at UCR, the attached
resolution has been prepared for your consideration.
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMEaNT OF A
SCHOOL OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALHPORNIA AT
RIVERSIDE
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula is served by the University of California at
Riverside; and
WHEREAS, the University of California has traditionally been a leader in
providing education for professional persons in the State of California; and
WHEREAS, there is a current need for a publicly funded law school in
Southern California to augment the existing four law schools of the University
system; and
WHEREAS, the University of California at Riverside provides the best
location for a law school because of its appeal to under-represented students and
students coming from a lower socioeeonomie segment of society; and
WHEREAS, the University of California can logically accommodate a
new law school; and
WHEREAS, there is strong community support for the law school,
which support is an important ingredient to the success of such a school.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Temecula
respectfully urges University of Califomia President David Gardener and the Regents
of the University of California to take all steps necessa.ty for the establishment of a
law school at the University of Riverside.
2~Reso8\222
Resolution No. 91-
Page 2
SECTION 2.
Resolution.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of December, 1991.
ATFEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 10th
day of December, 1991 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
'JCR',,,, LAW
P.O. Box 1299, Riverside, CA 92502 · (714) 682-5550 FAX (7141 781-4012
JAMES D. WARD
Chair
LORRAINE B. SHOAF
Executive Director
July 24, 1991
City of Temecula
June Greek, Clerk
P. O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
UCR LAW is an Inland Empire support group which has been created
for the purpose of promoting the establishment of a law school at
the University of California, Riverside. I am writing at this time
to request a resolution of support from you for a law school at
UCR.
Superior and Municipal Court judges in Riverside and San Bernardino
counties have endorsed the idea of a UCR law school as have the
district attorneys, public defenders, county counsels and city
attorneys. The Inland Empire is in need of well-trained lawyers,
particularly in the area of public service law. As major county
seats within ten miles of each other, the cities of Riverside and
San Bernardino are in a unique position to offer special programs
and internships in the area of public law.
Enclosed is the UCR LAW position paper, a partial list of those
organizations and leaders in higher education who have officially
endorsed a law school at UCR, and a sample resolution which could
serve as a guideline. We hope that you will join with us in
support of a UCR law school. In order to be included in our
official list of supporting organizations, your resolution should
be received by this office no later than September 30, 1991. If
there are any questions, please feel free to call us at (714) 682-
5550.
Sincerely,
James D. Ward
Chair
Lorraine B. Shoaf
Executive Director
P.O. Box 1299, Riverside, CA 9251~2 · 17141 682-5550 FAX{714)781-4012
J~,MES D ~RD
LI)RRMx. E B SHOAF
The Case for a Law School at UCR
The University of California has assumed a major responsibility for professianal education in
this state and yet is not fulfilling that role in the education of California lawyers. Enrollment
in the law schools at the UC campuses has lagged behind overall enrollment of the university
by a substantial margin. The University provides enrollment for only approximately 18% of
the law students in ABA accredited schools in Southern California. Obviously, the percentage
is lower if the State accredited and unaccredited schools are counted. As a result, most
students who want a legal education must seek it fram private schools. Since space in the
University system is limited, only a small percentage of students who apply can be admitted.
UCLA regularly turns away significant numbers of well-qualified students.
The UC system has four law schools - three of them are located in Northern California,
despite the fact that the bulk of the lawyers and the general population of the state is located
in the south. The Inland Empire area of Southern California is projected to have a population
of over 3 million people by the turn of the century, and yet there are no ABA accredited law
schools in the area.
The University of California, in its four schools, provides a quality education for lawyers.
This is demonstrated by the stature of the law schools and by the passing rate for the bar exam
of graduates from UC schools. California has several fine private law schools that also do an
excellent job of educating lawyers. There are a number of unaccredited schools which,
although quite expensive for students, frequently do not give the education needed to pass the
bar examination. With the UC system failing to provide enough spaces for law students in
Southern California, those students must turn to expensive and sometimes inferior schools for
an education.
Of the sixteen ABA accredited law schools, only two are located any significant distance from
the ocean, and neady all are located in major metropolitan areas. There is a great need for
a publicly funded law school in an inland area which will be available to a different socio-
economic strata of students and under-represented students. The affordability of housing near
a law school is a real factor for a great many students. The University of California at
Riverside could provide the perfect location to satisfy all of the needs set forth above.
UCR is favored by its location in another way. Riverside is a county seat and San Bernardino,
also a county seat, is only 10 miles away. This gives immediate access to numerous public law
offices in the two counties and provides an opportunity for clinical programs, internships, etc.,
for the law school People operating in the public law sector feel that law schools generally
need to provide an atmosphere of encouragement to get students into their area of the law.
A law school at UCR couldprovide assistance in that regard. The judges of Riverside and San
Bernardino and the justices of the Court of Appeal in San Bernardino support a law school
at UCR because they know that their courts can provide programs which will benefit both the
courts and a new law school.
A select committee appointed by UC President David Gardner recently released a report entitled
"Analysis of Graduate Legal Education at the University of California." The committee found
that the UC system shouM enroll more law students tO remedy a shortage of minority and
public service attorneys in the state. Tills report is a blueprint for a law school in the Inland
Empire area.
UCR, as one of the fastest growing campuses in the county, is ready for and needs an anchor
professional school. It has the site available. Plans are being prepared for the possible
inclusion of a courtroom of the Tmventy-l~rst Century as focal point of the new building.
There is overwhelming evidence of support from the community. Dozens of governmental
entities, chambers of commerce, civic groups, school boards, universities, lawyers,
organizations, and others have passed resolutions and sent letters in support of the idea.
It is undoubtedly true that California has more than enough law schools in sheer number and
many argue that it has more lawyers than it needs. The fact remains, however, that there is
a crying need for quality legal education and well-trained lawyers. The University of
California shouM be doing its usual efficient job of providing that sort of quality education
through a public institution. The best place to locate a new law school is at the university
campus in Riverside.
LORRMNE B SHOAF
C_
RO. Bo,~ 1299. River%ide. CA 92502 · 1714~682-5550 FAX (7141 781-4012
ENDORSEMENTS
Desert Bar Association (Palm Desert)
Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce
High Desert Bar Association (Victoryilia)
Inland Empire Latino Lawyers Association, Inc.
Monday Morning Group
Palm Springs Unified School District Board of Education
Redlands City Council
Riverside City Attorney, County Counsel, District Attorney,
Public Defender
Riverside City Council
Riverside Community College District, Board of Trustees
Riverside County Bar Association
Riverside County Board of Education
Riverside County Board of Supervisors
Riverside Municipal and Superior Court Judges
Riverside Unified School District Board of Education
San Bernardino City Attorney, County Counsel, District
Attorney, Public Defender
San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce
San Bernardino City Unified School District Board
of Education
San Bernardino County Bar Association
San Bernardino Superior Court Judges
Southwest Riverside County Bar Association (Temecula)
UCR Alumni Association
George E. Brown, Jr., Congressman
Dr. Dale S. Holmes, superintendent, Riverside County
Office of Education
Dr. Charles lane, president, Riverside Community College
Dr. John Brooks Slaughter, president, Occidental College
Dr. Russell Tuck, president, California Baptist College
7/91
ITEM NO. 7
~o~
ciTY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER /l[~,?
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
,~epartment of Public Works
December 10, 1991
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-u,
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
RECOMMENDATION:
That City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract
Map No. 23267-4, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
DISCUSSION:
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267 was originally approved by the Riverside County
Planning Commission on October 19, 1988, and the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors on October 25, 1988. Change of Zone No. 5150 was also approved by the
County Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. However, the zone change was
not given a second reading and therefore was not officially adopted, at that time.
Following incorporation of the City, Presley Homes of San Diego submitted a revised
map for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, along with Change of Zone No. 5,
which is identical to the original Change of Zone No. 5150.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267 and Change of Zone No. 5, with an
Addendure to Environmental Impact Report No. 281, was approved by the City
Planning Commission on April 1, 1991, and the City Council on May 14, 1991. A
second reading of Zone Change No. 5 was approved on May 28, 1991.
Revised Vesting Final Tract No. 23267-4 contains 33 residential lots, one open space
lot {Lot No. 35 ), and a 1 acre park site {Lot No. 34). The site is approximately 8.20
gross acres. The tract is located on the south side of Highway 79 between Pala Road
and Margarita Road.
ENG\T23267-4. STF 1
The following fees have been paid (or deferred) for Revised Vesting Final Tract No.
23267-4:
* Fire Mitigation Fees (Deferred to Building Permits)
* Traffic Signal Mitigation (Deferred to Building Permits)
* Stephen's K-Rat Fees (at Grading Permits)
$ 13,200.00
$ 4,950.00
$ 15,990.00
The following bonds have been posted for Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No.
23267-~:
Faithful Labor and
Performance Materials
Streets and Drainage $ 327,000 $ 163.500
Water 130,500 65,250
Sewer 76,500 38,250
Survey Monuments $ 11,650
SUMMARY:
Staff Recommends that the City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract Map
No. 23267-u~, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
TN:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
Development Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Department Staff Report
dated April 1, 1991
Conditions of Approval
TCSD Agreement
Fees and Securities Report
ENC\T23267-~. STF 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-~,
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 24
See TCSD Letter
Dated 9-30-91
Condition No. 54
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No. 42
Fire Mitigation
See Fire Department
Letter Dated 1-29-91
Flood Control
(ADP)
RSA Fees
Condition No. 49
N/A
ENG\T23267-4.STF
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
REVISED VESTING TRACT MAP NO. 23267-4
IMPROVEMENTS
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
TOTAL
DATE: November 4, 1991
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR
SECURITY SECURITY
$ 327,000.00 $ 163,500.00
$ 130,500.00 $ 65,250.00
$ 76,500.00 $ 38,250.00
$ 534,000.00 $ 267,000.00
*~intenance Retention (10'4 for one year)
*(or Bonds if work is c0mpietad)
$ 53,400.00
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees
$
$
$
$
$
$
11,650.00
-0-
-0-
4,950.00
-0-
-0-
Planning Fee
Quimby Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Plan Check Fee Due
Inspection Fee Due
Monument Inspection Fee
Fee Paid To Date {Credit)
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
136.00
-0-
8.00
23.166.30
20,510.48
583.00
44,403.78
-0-
ENG\T23267-4.STF
s ~ 92590
Ronald J. Parks
Patrlcla H. Sirdull
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel F. Llndemans
Councllmer'nl:>ef
Peg
J. Sal Mu~oz
David F. DIxon
C~7 Manager
1714) 694-1~8¢
FAX (7141 894-1~
September 30, 1991
Ray Casey
Presley of San Diego
15090 Avenue of Science, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92128
RE: TRACT MAP NO. 23267 AND 26861 CLEARANCE AS TO PARK
LAND DEDICATION AND/OR IN LIEU FEES.
Dear Mr. Casey:
TCSD Staff has reviewed the conditions as set forth in the County of
Riverside/City of Temecula Conditions of Approval and recommend that
the City Council APPROVE Tract No. 23267 and 26861 subject to the
developer or his assignee entering into an agreement with The Temecula
Community Services District to conform to the following:
Neighborhood Park "A' which consists of a One acre park located
within Sub Tract No. 23267-4 shall be developed to TCSD
standards and the attached conceptual design prior to the
issuance of the 50th building permit.
Neighborhood Park "B" located within Sub Tract No. 23267-2
consists of an approximate 2.9 acre reservoir which the developer
has agreed to drain and level to be contiguous with the remaining
6.3 acres of proposed park land to meet his current Quimby
Requirement and to allow for a total land dedication within this
tract of approximately 9.2 acres. The total 9.2 acres shail be
developed to TCSD standards and the attached conceptual design
prior to issuance of the 5Oth building permit for Tracts No.
23267ol,2, and 3.
To date, all known interior slope areas are hereby conditioned to
be maintained by an established Home Owners Association (HOA).
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the
TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards an
completion of the application process.
Should you have further questions my telephone number is (714) 694-
6480.
Applicant or his assignee agrees to the aforementioned conditions as
signified below.
']~f/¢~ ~ Data '
Applicant
Yours truly,
CITY F TE A
evelopment Services Administrator
CITY OF TEMFCULA )
THE MEADOWS
SP 219
VA
t
HAWI~
$1e
/
TRACT NO. 2:5267-4
CROSBY, HEAD, BENTON & ASSOCTATES APRZL, 1989
I~II:H:I ~,II:l
If| If: ti|
"I ,~: ,. ,.>
lit. II:i
TItACT N~.
Case
Recommendation:
STAFF REPORT o PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 1, 1991
Revised Vestin9 Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Forward the following recommendations to the
City Council:
1. RECOMMEND adoption of the addendurn to
EIR No. 281 for Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267: and
2. ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLI CANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
]~ROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Presley of San Diego
Crosby Mead Benton ~, Associates
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 is a
proposal to subdivide 189.0 acres of land it, to 601
residential Iota with approximately 57.8 acres of
open space. This project is being processed
concurrently with Change of Zone No. 5.
South side of Highway 79 between Pala Road and
Margarita Road.
R-R (Rural Residential)
North: R-A-5
South: A-1-10
East: SP
West: R - R
| ResidentialAgricultural,
5 Acre Minimum)
(Light Agricultural, 10
Acre Minimum)
(Specific Plan 217, Red
Hawk )
( Rural Residential)
A: \VTM23267 1
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
A :\VTM23267
R-3 (General Residential)
R-u, (Planned Residential)
R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone.
Residential Developments)
1~.68 acre~
57.8 acres
Vacant/Graded Land
North:
South:
East:
West:
Low Density Single Family
Existing Sod Farm
Vacant/Single Family
Tract Under Construction
Vacant
Single Family
Total Lots: 601
Total Acres: 189
Min. Lot Size: o,,500 sq.ft.
Density: 3.19 DU/AC
On March 18. 1991, the Planning Commission
continued this item in order to allow Staff the
opportunity to provide additional information
regarding open space maintenance.
The subject property was originally a portion of the
Old Vail Ranch. It is located along the south side of
Highway 79 between Pale and Margarita Roads. The
original application, Change of Zone No. 5150 was a
request to change the zoning on 221.2 acres of land
from R-R I Rural Residential), and R-5 (Open Area
Combining Zone). This zone change was approved
by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors on
October 20, 1988. However, due to an oversight by
the County, the zone change was never given a
second reading and, therefore, was never officially
adopted. The applicant submitted a new
application, Change of Zone No. 5, to the City of
Temacula Planning Department on September 24,
1990.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 was
submitted to the City of Temecula on December 21.
1990.
On January 17, 1991, this project was reviewed by
the Preliminary Development Review Committee
(Pre-DRC) in order to informally evaluate the
project and address any concerns, as well as
suggesting possible modifications. The comments
by the Pre-DRC included the following:
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
Open Space Maintenance
Traffic Impacts
Access/Circulation
Subsequent to the Pre-DRC meeting, Staff met with
the applicant to discuss possible design
modifications in order to address the Pre-DRC's
Concerns.
On March 7, 1991, Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 was reviewed at a Formal
Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting;
and, it was determined that Revised Vestin9
Tentative Tract No. 23267 met the DRC's concerns.
This tract includes 189 acres of land with proposed
R-~ and R-5 zoning, This subdivision contains 601
single family lots with 57.8 acres of open space.
The minimum lot size is ~,,500 square feet. The open
space acreage contains 33.9 acres consisting of the
Temacula Creek Flood Channel, which may have as
joint use as a park in the future, two (2)
neighborhood parks totaling 10.2 acres, and an 11.8
acre preserve for native vegetation and the original
adobe ranch house.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 is
situated along Highway 79 and will incorporate a 20
foot buffer between Highway 79 and the subject
tract. The subject site along Highway 79 consists
of approximately 1~8 single family lots with a
minimum lot size of ~,500 square feet. The applicant
is also proposing a one acre neighborhood park ( Lot
605) for this section of the project. This area is
proposed to be zoned R-~ and R-5.
The entire tract is bisected by the Tamecula Creek
( Lot 601~ ) which consists of approximately 33.9 acres
and is zoned R-5. Subsequently, the possibillty
exists for the creek to be used by future residents
as · regional park, but the joint use as a flood
control system and perk must be discussed and
developed by and between the City and the
Riverside County Flood Control District.
A: \VTM23267 3
A :\VTM23267
The area south of the Temecula Creek is also zoned
R-~ and R-5 and consists of 453 single family lots
well over ~,500 square feet. This portion of the
project is also incorporating a 10.7 acre regional
park and a 1.1 acre lot for the old historic adobe
house ( Lot 603 and 609). In addition, the applicant
is also providing a 9.1 acre neighborhood park I Lot
602) and may incorporate the existing secondary
treated water reservoir for the adjacent sod farm
into the park design. The secondary treated water
is to be upgraded to tertiary treated in the near
future.
The revised map was submitted in order to change
the grade of the development and to change the cul-
de-sacs designed off of "S" Street in order to create
a more efficient design. The revised map is not
proposing any major circulation or lot changes.
Instead, the revised map will aid to eliminate the
need for a Home Owners Association {HOA).
Currently the applicant is working with the CSD in
order to determine the maintenance of the proposed
open space lots and down slopes at property lines.
OPen Space
The Temecula Community Service District has been
in direct contact with the applicant in regards to the
proposed open space maintenance issue, and has
determined that the following dedicated lots are
acceptable for City maintenance by means of an
irrevocable easement deed:
Lot No. 606
Lot No. 607
Lot No. 608
Lot No. 610
Lot No. 611
Lot No. 612
As for the well sites (Lots 185 and 57~). the
Community Service District recommends that these
well sites be dedicated to the serving water district
by means of a grant deed.
Traffic Impacts
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
and accepted the findings and mitigation measures
as specified in the traffic impact analysis prepared
for revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
and has determined that the proposed project will
have an impact to the existing road system.
However, given the proposed mitigation measures.
there will be no adverse unmitigable significant
traffic impacts resulting from the development of
this proposed project.
Access and Circulation
The portion of the project that abuts Highway 79
will have vehicular access via "A" Street la 100~
street) which in term has access to Highway 79.
Additional access to the northern portion of the
project will be provided by "B" Street {an 82' street
with a 15' bike lane) which runs parallel to the
Temecula Creek. Internal, 66s and 60~ wide streets
will provide access through this portion of the
project.
Access to the portion of the project south of the
Temecula Creek will be provided by Loma Lynda
Road (a 66' street) which has access to Pale Road (a
110' street), In addition, Via Cordoba (a 66' street)
will provide access to the southeast portion of the
project which will integrate with the existing Red
Hawk Development. Internal 66~ and 60~ wide
streets will provide access through this portion of
the project.
Both the Engineering and Traffic Engineering Staff,
as well as the Planning Department Staff, have
determined that the applicant~s proposed access and
circulation are acceptable.
Grading
The majority of the area south of Temecula Creek
has been mass graded with some major
infrastructure already being completed within the
proposed street sections. The 10, 7 acre open space
is mostly sloping hillside and very little grading will
occur within this area. The area north of Temecula
Creek is rather flat and will require minimal grading
for the project development.
A: \VTM23267 ' 5
I
GENERAL PLAN/SWAP
CONSISTENCY AND
COMPATIBILITY:
A: \VTM23267 '
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 has an
acreage density of 3.2 units per acre. However,
SWAP designates the entire flood control channel as
recreational open space and therefore, this area is
not included in the 2 to 5 unit per acre area. The
portion of the map north of the flood channel
maintains an average density of LI.8 units per gross
acre. The area south of the channel maintains an
average density of LI.0 dwelling units per gross
acre. These densities conform to SWAP. This
project does conform to the surrounding land uses
in the area. The two approved specific plans to the
east and south contain similar residential densities
and minimum lot sizes as the subject property.
These projects were approved under the plan
previous to SWAP which allowed a slightly higher
density. In addition, they contain over 6,000
housing units with similar characteristics to the
proposed subject property, These plans have
average densities between 5 and 6 DU/AC. The
applicant is proposing to have an average density of
only u, units/acre, The properties to the west are
currently designated for commercial in SWAP, along
with the land along the south side of Highway 79
between the subject site and Margarita Road. Staff
feels that by breaking the commercial strip along
the highway with residential, the commercial will be
concentrated at the corner of Margarita and
Highway 79 where it is more desirable. Another
specific plan, Murdy Ranch, is directly west of the
subject site and it contains similar residential
densities. The properties to the north are
designated commercial in SWAP along Highway 79
and existing low density rural residential beyond
ISantlago Estates). Staff feels that there will be no
significant impact from the higher density
residential along the south side of Highway 79 due
to the physical break of the roadway and the
commercial barrier along the north side of Highway
79. To provide a barrier to noise for the proposed
development along the highway, Staff will require a
significant landscaped buffer of 20 feet minimum.
Therefore, Staff feels that the proposed
development is logical and is consistent with the
type of residential development that is found in the
area.
6
In conclusion, the proposed Revised Vestina
Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will like,) b~
consistent with the future adopted General Plan for
the City of Temecula. This proposal is a logicat
extension of residential development in the area and
with the implementation of traffic mitigation
measures for the development, there will be no
significant impact on the surroundin9 area,
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 was completed
on the subject property for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267. The report indicated a number of
mitigation measures that must be implemented in
order to reduce the impact of the project below a
level of significance. These mitigation measures
included a new ~l-lane bridge on Pala Road over
Temecula Creek, the channellzatlon of Temecula
Creek, and several other significant measures that
have not currently ben implemented. Therefore,
Planning Staff recommends that an addendure to
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 be adopted.
A copy of which is attached.
FINDINGS:
The proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation.
The proposed density of 3.19 units per acre
is within the range of the SWAP designation
of 2-5 units per acre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zoning,
existing land uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R-u, and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temecula Creek are substantially larger than
~, 500 square feet and abut specific plan are'-
such as Red Hawk, Vall Ranch and Murdy
Ranch. which in term are similar in density
and design.
A:\VTM23267 7
A :\VTM23267
The lot design and internal street IP\,o~,~
acceptabl~ to the City F,~:,r.n,~
Engineering Departments. All lots conform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will be
provided to every lot. The legal owner of
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for
street improvements on Pala Road and
Highway 79, and four (u,) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City~s
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in _the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
It is unlikely that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substantial
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan. Surrounding
zoning, existing land uses, and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EIR No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No, 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts,
The proposed project makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
10.
11.
12.
13.
The project meets the requirement~ of
Ordinance 3u, 8 and 460 in that atl lots conform
to the minimum size and dimension
requirements of the zoning code and abut
upon dedicated street.
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks in that it provides
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10.7 acre
preserve for native vegetation.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval, the Planning Department Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND adoption of the addendum to
No. 281 for Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vestin9 Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267.
RA:ks
Attachments:
Resolution ( Revised VTM No. 23267 )
Conditions of Approval
IRevised VTM No. 23267)
Addendure to EIR No. 281
Exhibits
Map No.
A :\VTM23267 9
ATT,~.CH~~r ~l I
RESOLUTION ?~(J. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANF~fNU COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECO~',.JENDING APPROVAL OF
REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23267
TO SUBDIVIDE A 189 ACRE ~"~RCEL INTO 601 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 5 OPEN SPACE LOT5
LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79
BETWEEN PALA AND MARGAR ITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR~S PARCEL NO. 926-016-002, 003, 012, 017,
AND 025.
WHEREAS, Presley of San Diego filed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 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 Plannln9 Commission considered said Revised Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on April 1, 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 Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECT ION I. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
_ Flndlnqs.
makes the following fli~ngs:
A. Pursuant to Covernment 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
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if ell 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 approvlng projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of buildinn
permits, each of the following:
A:\VTM23267
10
There i~ a reasonable probability thPt th~
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal bein9
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.
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. I hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecule 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 Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map and is
consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section
65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
I1) The city is proceedin9 in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
12) 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:
There is reasonable probability that Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will be
consistent with the general plan propose,
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
There is little or no probability of substantia:
detriment to or Interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action Is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: \VTM23267 11
Th{' propnS~d USe or action compile.. ,~.lh all
oth~: ;,; i';r ,~t~t~ requirem~rlts of star, I ,,,.
local ordinances.
D. ( 1 ) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordina,,, No.
460. no subdivision may be approved unless the following findh~,.is are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is c~,,~..l~tent
with applicable general and specific I~l-ns.
b)
That the design or improvement ~1 the
proposed land division is consist,s~l with
applicable general and specific plan~.
c).
That the site of the proposed land dtvl,lon is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land dlvlklon is
physically suitable for the proposed d-nsity
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not Ilkely to
cause substantial environmental dan~u~e-or
substantially and unavoidably injur, 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 problem,.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not c~mflict
with easements. acquired by the Pul>lic 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 b~
substantially equivalent to ones Previously
acquired by the public. This suhaection
shall apply only to easements of rec~rd or tn
easements established by judgment ol a cour
of competent jurisdiction.
12 ) The Planning Commission in recommending gPprovzl
of the proposed Tentative Tract Map. makes the followin9 findh~ s to
wit:
A :\VTM23267
f?
A: \VTM23267
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
The proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designatlorl.
The proposed density of 3.19 units per acre
is within the range of the SWAP designation
of 2-5 units per acre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zonin9,
existing land uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R 4 and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temecula Creek are substantially larger than
u,, 500 square feet and abut specific plan areas
such as Red Hawk, Vail Ranch and Murdy
Ranch, which in term are similar in density
and design.
The lot design and internal street layout are
acceptable to the City Planning and
Engineering Departments. All Iotsconform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will bn
provided to every lot. The legal owner of
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for
street improvements on Pale Road and
Highway 79, and four {q) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the Cityis
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
13
It ._ ~,dik,ly that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substar~ttal
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan. Surrounding
zoning, existing land uses. and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
h)
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EIR No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No. 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts.
i)
The proposed project makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
j)
The project meets the requirements _ of
Ordinance 348 and ~,60 in that all lots conform
to the minimum size and dimension
requirements of the zoning code and abut
upon dedicated street.
k)
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks In that it provides
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10.7 acre
preserve for native vegetation.
I)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare.
mJ
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 Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
A :\VTM23267
SECTION 2. EnvironmentaL_C_o_mpliance.
The County of Riverside Board of Supervisors certified EIR No. 281 in
conjunction with the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts. An addendure to EIR No. 281 is hereby
recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 for the subdivision of a 189 act-
parcel into 601 single family residential lots and S open space lots located along the
south side of Highway 79 between Pale and Margarita Roads and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 926-016-002,003, 012,017 and 025 subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment III, attached hereto,
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, he;~
on the 1st day of April, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: \VTM23267' 15
ATTACHMENT II
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Project Description: Revision to VTM 23267 to allow
for 2 additional lots and 7 open space lots to be
maintained by TCSD
Assessor's Parcel No.: 926-160-2, 3, 12 and 17 and
a portion of 926-160-01
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance q60, Schedule A, 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.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance q60 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.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities,
etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the lar, r'
division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall b,
submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space arep
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular acce~,,
to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent
purpose of the subdivision approval.
A maintenance district shall be established for maintenance of Lots __ Open
Space, the .developer/applicant shall pay for all costs relating to establishment
of the district.
A:\VTM23267 16
10.~
11.
12.
13.
15.
Delete Riverside County Condition No. 181d).
Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5 shall be
approved by the City Council and shall be effective. Lots created by this land
div~slon shall be ;n co~jormance with the development standards of the zone
ultimately applied to the property.
/
Prior to recordation of the final map, the project site shall be annexed into the
Temecula Community Service Distict (TCSD).
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 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 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. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated January 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.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern
Municipal Water District tranamittal dated March 8, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
16. 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-~ I Planned Residential) 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.
A :\VTM23267 17
17.
18.
19.
20.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all stopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those ope~ ~,, .
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordatlon of the final maD, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
IECS) 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.
The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty |30) miles of Mount PaiDmar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology, PaiDmar Observatory outdoor lighting
policy.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
I1)
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.
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscap.
elements shall include earth bermlng, 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
Highway 79 and Lime Street. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed
on the perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading dowr,
from the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for
maintenance access.
A:\VTM23267
18
II
Landscaping plans sh_~I' ;;~rnrporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal ,>,,;,~fs within the project.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road
right-of-way. they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-
way.
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.
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:
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.
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
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 adjust·
to the angle of the natural terrain.
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded forn
shall reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curv.~
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of t~-
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizont~'
length. the horizontal contours of the slope shall he
curved in a continuous. undulating fashion.
A:\VTM23267
19
(
21.
22.
Prior to the issuance of g~pH;nc] permits. the developer shRII
provide evidence to the 17)irectot' of Building ahd Safer) I. hb'. ail
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:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential
Iot/unlt 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.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Buildihg
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical
engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be
applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce
ambient interior noise levels to ~5 Ldn,
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivision~s approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal,
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
'The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant i Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal,
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within thr.
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
A:\VTM23267 20
23.
25.
26.
g. All street side yard setback:_~ shah be a minimum of ten (10) fr rf
All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
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.
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 superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No, 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit to the
Planning Director an agreement with the Community Services District which
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider has satisfied
Quimby Act requirements in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No.
u,60. The agreement shall be approved by the City Council prior to the
recordatlon of the final map.
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 Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, which action is brought within thL
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 661199. 37 . Th,
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,
A :\VTM23267 21
27.
The developer shah make a good faith effori to acquire the required o~f-~h
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so. the developeF 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 GGu,62 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.
28.
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. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
29.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
30.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions I CC~,R's ) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract
maps. The CC~,R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining
the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, all buildings
in common open areas, and all interior slopes.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner'a 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 t~
maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such
entity shall operate under recorded CCSRms which shall include compulsory
membership of ell owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of
assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services.
Recorded CCSR's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions requireu
by the City as Conditions of Approval, The developer shall submit evidenc~
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 tc
the City for public purposes.
32.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or lot, either ~ 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas
facilities, or |2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities.
-~' A: \VTM23267 22
Maintenance for all landscaped and oppn areas, including parkways, shall hP
provided for in the CC~,R's.
Within forty-eight (~,8) hours of the approval of this project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to th-_ Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Eight Hundred,
Seventy-Five Dollars 15875.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty
Dollar {$850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Came
Code Section 711.u, ld)13) plus the Twenty-Five Dollar l$25.00) County
administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination
required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and lu, Cal. Code of
Regulations 1509~. If within such forty-eight ~8) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check
required above, the approval for the project granted hereln shall be void by
reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Cede Section 711 .u,{ c) .
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.
35.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
36.
The final map shall be prepared by · licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. q60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rencho California Water District:
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department:
Engineering Department;
Riverllde County Health Department:
CATV I~ranchise;
US Army Corps of Engineers: ~"'
US Fish and Wildlife; and
California State Department of Fish and Game.
A :\VTM23267
38.
39.
Street "T" shall be improved with U~LI feet of asphalt concretP p;,vernemt nr
bonds for the street improvements may be posted. within the dedicated right.-
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103. Section A I~u,'/66').
Street "DD" and "FF" shall be improved with I~u. 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. 103, Section
A (~u,'/60') with 3 foot wide utility easements.
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 66u.62.5. which shall
be at no cost to the City.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeinS 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.
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department 8 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 subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan t~
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Buildin..)
Cede. Chapter 70. and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2q" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A :\VTM23267 2q.
A drainage study shall be submitt.-, '.-, *'~d approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be in,".~ H.,i ~ required by the City Eng,r~e~ .
Portions of the site are in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undeterrnined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans. this project shall comply with the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining'~'letter o'6t~'
map revision from FEMA for the affected areas.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CAT~ Franchises of
I
the Intent to Dave op. Conduit shall be installed to CATV"~t~ndards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
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.
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 permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the following
right-of-way:
State Hiqhway 79
51.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within
its right-of-way.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
52.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Ci,."
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Fin~
Soils Report addressing compaction end site conditions.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
53.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb an,s
gutter. A.C. pavement, sidewalk. drive approaches. parkway trees anr~
street lights on all interior public streets.
A :\VTM23267 25
Developer shall pay any napital fe.- f ,' ~ '~ '! !mprovements and public facilities
imposed upon the property o; ~lrcU, 't . ir~ctuding that for traffic ar,c
facility mitigation as required under the FIR/Negative Declaration for the
project. in the amount in effect at th~ time of payment of the fee. If an interin
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. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated lassumin9 benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enqineerinq Department
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
56.
55. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for Loma Linda Road. "DD" Street. and
"S" Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for all internal streets with q0 feet or less of curb
separation and can, be shown on the street improvement plans.
57. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by s registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer and CalTrans for State Route 79 South,
"A" Street, and "B" Street, and shall be included In the street improvement
plans. Condition 132 of the County Road letter dated October 7, 1988 shall be
deleted.
58.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
and CalTrans for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
59.
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 detou:
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
All on-site signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signin~
and striping plans.
A:\VTM23267 ' 26
61.
in the event that the required imp,'o~ ~, 'nt~ on-St-at~Rl~te?9~J~uthlrrci4~f~a
Rca~ for the Pala Road reaticJn~,L'_.~. -~_,d the bridqe over lemecula (. I ~c; are
not completed b*/-A-sltssrnentgii~l~et ~53 prior to the issuance of certificate
of occupancy, the developer shall be required to enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the City of Temecula for the construction of the necessary
improvements bwsed-on-the. The developer's percent of contribution toward
the facilities within the reimbursement aqreement shall be as per the approved
Traffic Study. Construction of necessary improvements shall be based upon
the following dwelling unit occupancy levels (Amended per Planning
Commission March 18, 3993 ):
A. For unit one hundred and one 1101 ) or more:
A 750 foot minimum right turn lane with an adequate transition
for east bound travel on State Route 79 South for Pa)a Road shall
be designed and constructed to ColTtans specifications and
requirements and shall be approved by ColTtans and the City
Engineer.
Multi-way stop controls shall be designed and installed, when
warranted and approved by ColTtans, at the north bound and
south bound on and off ramps of Interstate-15 and State Route 79
South.
B. For unit two hundred and forty 12~0) or more:
A minimum ~50 foot north bound left turn lane with transition and
a minimum 125 foot north bound right turn lane with transition on
Pala Road at State Route 79 South shall be designed and
constructed to ColTtans and City requirements and
specifications, and shall be approved by ColTtans and the City
Engineer.
t.- ....~'~e~lefelope'~Jhett-ente'4frtrsrregPeeme~t'wK+r~ht4}~tTtor
reimbtn~emen t -tv ~.hr (:;4t~-ff~wr eth er-d e~e~opmef~t~ ~ri~hl n- th -
impact - m'er -fol- - costs - ~ d- ~ - e~t errt - ~ ~ -p r oj%-,ctJ *
C. For unit five hundred and eleven 1511 ) or more:
The signal at the intersection of State Route 79 South and Pala
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The
signal shall be installed and operational, as warranted. per th~
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by ColTtans and the City Engineer.
A: \VTM23267
27
]he signal at the intersection of State Routt 7~ 5u~lh and
Interstate 15 north bound and south bound on and off ramps
shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The signal
shell be installed and operational. as warranted, per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
CalTrans and the City Engineer.
The signal at the intersection of Rainbow Canyon Road and Pala
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The
signal shall be installed and operational. as warranted. per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by the City Engineer. Bssed-~n-tl're-add~-rrd~rrr~e~er
dlrted--Febrtrm-y-~--~Jg~-~rorn--OaRo~frke--El~gif~eerir~Jr-~Pris
dee/depmer~t'--shaH--corrtribute--r'Jgr-~.oward --these--reedwa)~
impf-~v~'nent~sts-=. IAmended per Planning Commission March
18, 1991. )
Full road improvements, including all required signing and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Interstate 15 to Pala Road
shall be in place in accordance with CalTrans requirements as
approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
Full road improvements, including all required signing and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Pala Road to Margarlta
Road shall be in place in accordance with CalTrans requirements
as approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
Realignment of Pala Road with State Route 79 South iF
conjunction with the construction of a multi-lane bridge across
the Temecula Creek.
The Pala Road Bridge over the Temecula Creek shall be
designed, constructed and operational as approved by the City
Engineer. T~n~s-~drrelopment-sh~l--cm~'6~r-t~war~-~
constructiort-coats-af--this-brh~t-,-~as~l-uparr~ne~:tdendtrf,
Design and construction of dual left turn capabilities at the south
bound Interstate 15 off ramp at State Route 79 South in
accordance with CalTrans requirements and specifications and as
approved by CalTrans.
The signal at the intersection of Loam Linda and Pala Road shall
be installed and operational. as warranted, per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
the City Engineer.
A: \VTM23267 28
10.
The signal at the irtp:-cprtlnn nr State Route 79 South and "A"
Street shall be desic/~ed by a registered Civil Engineer. lh~
signal shall be installed and operational, as warranted, per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by CalTrans and the Cit. y Engineer.
Design and construction of a dual right turn lane for east bound
travel on State Route 79 South at Pala Road and a dual left turn
lane for north bound travel on Pala Road at State Route 79 South
in accordance with CalTrans and City requirements and
specifications as approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
Department of Buildlnq and Safety
62.
Submit approved Tentative Tract Map to the Department of Building and
Safety for addressing and street name review.
63.
School fees shall be paid to Temecula Unified School District Prior to permit
issuance.
Lighting on site pool area and recreation area shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance t655.
65.
Submit pool plans to Riverside County Health Department for review prior to
structural plan review by the Department of Building and Safety.
66.
Pool excavation area shall be fenced immediately the same day as excavation
is complete. All plumbing trenches shall be fenced,
Obtain clearances from land Use and from Building and Safety Departments.
68. Provide a geological report at time of submittal for plan review.
A :\VTM23267 29
pLANNING & ENG|~EERING
46-209 OAS|S STREET. SUITE
INDIO. CA
(6[9))42-8886
FIRE [1t l"%1~1\11 "' ]
~r~ COC,rcr,~ ..... - '-E
PLANNING & ENGINEER
3760 12TH STREET
RIVERSIDE CA ~ZSOI
1714) 787.6606
DATE:
ATTN:
RE:
January 29, 1991
City of Tomerule
Planning Department
Tract No. 23267
With respect to the conditions of approval for the ·bore referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule A fire protection ·pproved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½")
lot·ted one ·t each street intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet
apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot front·go more than 165
feet from a hydrant. Hinimum fire flow shall be XO00 GPH for 2 hours
duration at 20 PSI.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans
to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by · registered
civil engineer, containing I Fire Department approval signature block,
and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire
flow. Once plans art signed by the local vatmr company, the originals
shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature.
· he 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.
Prior to the recordargon of the final map, the applicant/developer shall
provide alternate or secondary access as approved by the City of Tsmecuals-
Engineering Department.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordargon of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the City of Tomerule, · 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 s written agreement with the City deferring
said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
RE: TR 23267
Page 2
All questions regarding the meaning ef c~:.d~ticns shall be re£e:~,- ~
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Laura Cabral, F~re Safety Specialist
Eastern Municipal Water District
|,;
March 8, 1991
Richard Ayala
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43180 Business Park Drive
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92390
Subject: Tentative Parcel Map No. 23267
Dear Hr. Ayala:
As requested, we have reviewed the subject project and offer the following
comments:
Sanitary Sewer
The subject project is tributary to the Dtstrtct's Rancho California Regiona1
Water Reclamation Facility, via a sewer system to be constructed by Assessmen
District No. 159. The developer is expected to submit a proposed conceptual
plan of sanitary sewer service to the Dtstrtct's Customer Service and Planning
Departments for review and approval. This plan shall provide for a system
of gravity-flow sewerlines located within road right-of-way according to EMWD
standards.
It must be understood that the available capacity of the Distrtct's sewer syste.-.
are continually changing due to development within the District. As such,
service will be provided based on the timing of the subject project, the servicP
agreement with the District, and the status of the Dtstrict's permit ~o operatp-
Shodld you have any questions regarding these coffments, please contact Rut..
Newsham or me at {714) 766-1850,
Sincerelym
HAS:RN:lp
cc: John Fricker, EHWD
Presley of .San Diego, 15010 Avenue of Science, Ste, 200, San Diego, CA 921:
91-240
7/M
ATTACHMENT II
ADDENDUM TO ENV)RONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) No. 281 in conjunction with the approval of Change of Zone No. 5150 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23267 and 23299. The EIR included mitigation
measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 which supersedes Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23299 has 87 fewer residential units than Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299 and
therefore, will generate less traffic and result in reduced impacts to the environment
and to public services and utilities. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 will
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts. The Conditions of
Approval are adequate to mitigate any potential impacts regarding drainage and non-
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 1516~ of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendure
has been prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there
have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant
effects not previously discussed or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation
measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant
rmpacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A:\5.CZ 1~.
'~,.. ~INKS 'r SUBMI'FTAL TO TIlE !IOAfiD OF SUPEhvI~,UHS
"~,~-/~' COUNTYOFRIVERSIDE. STATE OF CAUFORNIA
FROM: THE PLANNING DEPARTHENT SUBMITtALDATE: October 2.0, lg88
SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE 5150, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 23299,
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267 - THOTEM A~ERICA CORP. - FirstsSupervisorS
District - Rancho California Area - 221 Acres,596 Lots,232 Condominium Units
RECOMMENDE-DMOTION: Schedule A - CHANGE OF ZONE from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5
The Planning Conmission and Staff Reco~nend:
CERTIFICATION of Environmental Impact Report No. 281 based on the
finding that the Environmental Impact Report is an accurate, objective
and complete document which complies with the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Riverside County Rules to Implement CEQA; and
APPROVAL of CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5
in accordance with Exhibit 2, based upon the findings and con-
clusions incorporated in the Planning Conmission minutes dated
OCTOBER 19, 1988; and
APPROVAL of VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT' NO. 23267, NiENDED NO. 2 subject
to the attached conditions, based on the findings and conclusions
incorporated in the Planning Conmission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988;
and
APPROVAL of VESTI'NG TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23299 subject to the attached
cond~s, based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the
Planning Conmission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988.
PJ4:rs .
10.-16-68
Roge)r~t~ete~in~gDirector
· . Tel. ,;;: · !,. ~.-. Depls. Commenls DIll.
AGENDAr;
7' " " ~*'
.,. Zoning Area: Rancho California I~IARGE OF ZONE I10. 5150
First, Supervtsorial Dtstrtct VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. Z3Z67
E.I.R:' No. 281 VF. STIIIG 'IT. IITATXVE TRACT RO. Z3Z99
: Regtonal Team No. I Planning Commission: 10-19-88
, Agenda Item No. 1-6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUNNING DEPARTNENT
STAFF REPORT
1. Applicant:
2, Engineer/Rap.:
~l. Type of Request:
_ O
0
Location:
Extstfng Zoning:
Setrounding Zontng:
Extstfng Land Use:
'Surrounding Land Use:
Comprehens(ve.General Plan
Designation:
Land Dtvisfon Data:
11. Agency Rec~,,,~ndatJons:
12. Letters:
13. Sphere of Xnfluence:
Thotem Amertcan Corporation
RanPac Engineering
Change of zone from R-R to R-3, R-4 and
R-S, 232 untt condomintum project and a
schedule "A" subdivision.
Sout~ of Hlghway 79, Nest of Hargartta
Road.
R-R
R-Ro A-I-IO, R-A-21~, R-A-5
Generally vacant, a couple of residences
and structures, horse and cattle
grazing.
Scattered sJngle family residences, a
horse ranch, a turf ram and vacant
land.
Land Use: Category I - II
Oenstty: 2-20 d~e111ng untts per acre
Total Acreage: 221.2
VTR 23267 VTR 23299
Total Lots: 601Sgle Fam, 232 Units
DU Per Acre: 3,01 du/ac 16,02 du/ac
Proposed Ntn, Lot Size: 4500 sq, it,
See Letters dated:
VTR 23267 VTR 23299 CZ 5150
Road 10-07-88 10-11-88 ~
Health: 09-12-88 8-29-88 no con~nent
Flood: 10-18-88 10-18-88 4-18-88 (Adds',
Fire: 09-09-88 8-24-88 no coffinant P.~
Opposing/Supporting: None received 1
Not wtthin a Ctty Sphere
ANALTSIS:
ProJect Description
Change of Zone No. 5150 ts a request to change the zontng on 221.2 acres of
land 1~ the Rancho Caltforota area from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5. Vesttng
Tentathe Tract IIo. 2329g seeks to establish a 232 unit condomlntum project on
14.3 acres of the overall stte. Vesting Tentattve Tract 23267 seeks to
DIAllIE OF ZONE R0. 5150
VESTIRG TUITAIlVE TRACT RO. 23267
VESTING TERTAIlVE TRACT I). 23299
Staff R~port
Page 2
subdivide the remaining acreage into 601 single family residential lots with a
minimum size of 4500 square feet, two well site lots, and 4 open space lots
totaling 57.9- acres. Two of the open space lots are *heighborhood arks
totaling ID.2 acres. One open space lot includes Temecula Creek and wilt be
made into a regional park totaling 35.9 acres. ~The remaining open space lot of
11.8 acres wil) preserve an existing adobe house and some native vegetative
areas, ;
The project s,t. is located south of .,ghway Road.
This site used to be a part of the Old Vail Ranch. r h ~?~; used
for horse and cattle grazing, and contains a couple of single family residences
and assorted related structures. Surrounding land uses include vacant land to
the east, but which has had two specific plans approved on it (S.P. 217-Red
Hawk and S.P. 223-Vatl Ranch}. The area to the north of Highway 79 shows
single family residential dwellings on relatively large lots, A horse ranch
and turf farm are located to the west along Pala Road. The turf farm is
currently under Agricultural Preserve contract (lemecula No. 2). However, this
Agricultural Preserve Contract had a notice of non-renewal filed on it on
September 20, 1979, so the Agriculture Preserve Contract is due to expire on
January 1, lgBg.
/
Zoning found in the surrounding area currently includes R-R to the north, east,
south and west, A-1-I0 to the east and south, and R-A-2~ and R-A-5 to the
north.
General Plan Coaststency/Canpattbiltty
The project site ts located within the Southwest Territory Land Use Planning
Area, Just to the south of the Rancho CaltforntaFFemecula subarea. Policies
within the Rancho Californta/Temecula subarea call for Cote ory I and II land
Uses within the 1-15 corridor, transittoning to Category Ill land uses on the
eastern end. lhese policies can be extrapolated down to apply to the proposed
project's location.
Category I and II land uses now exist to the south of Highway 79 and west of
Pala Road Road. This trend towards urban development has been established in
the area south of Highway 79, and is continuing to be extended through the
approval of several specific plans in the area. Two specific plans adjoin the
project site to the east. The Redhawk Specific Plan (S.P. 217) was a proved by
the Board of Supervisors on October 6, 1988. This specific plan c l~s for a
a
mixed use development with residential densities ranging from 2 to 14 dwelling
..its r ;cKc ec l s ciflc la. allo.s u. to
Vail ~11an (S.~. 223) adjoins the project on the and
northeast
was also a proved by the Board of Supervisors on October 6, 1988. This
specific pVan has approved 2,431 dwelling units with a density range of 2 to 20
du/acre. The turf farm to the southwest also has a specific plan currently
being processed on it (S.P. 228, Murphy Ranch) but is in the inttlal stages.
C]~JMGE OF ZORE IKI. 5150
YESTIll; I'I~ATIVE 11MCT RO, 23267
VLr$TIRG 'I~*NTATIVE TRACT II0, Z3Z99
S!aff Report
Page 3
Category I and II levels of services and facilities are currently at the site
or will be extended to the site through the Rancho village Assessment District,
of which this project will participate. Vesting Tentative Tract 23267 has an
everall density of 3.01 dwelling units per acre and so falls within Category II
densities. Vesting Tentative Tract 23229 has a proposed density of 16.02
dwelling units per acre and so is within Category I densities. The proposed
tracts are considered compatible with existing area development and with
projects approved in the area. The pro osals are therefore found to be
consistent with the Comprehensive General"~lan.
T~e proposed zone change application proposes zoning which is consistent with
the land uses proposed under the two Vesting Tentative Tracts. The zone change
request is therefore considered consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan.
Design Considerations
lhe proposed tentative tracts have been designed in accordance with their
respective residential development standards, and all other pertinent standards
of Ordinances 348 and 460. The applicant is requesting the waiver of lot
length to width ratio requirements on a number of lot~ within Vesting Tentative
Tract No. 23267. This request is necessary due to design and or physical
constraints associated with the site. Staff feels this requested waiver is
acceptable.
Due to the tract's vesting status, additional materials were submitted for
review in accordance with Ordinance 460. All submitted materials were found to
be adequate. These plans will be implemented through the conditions of
approval.
Architectural elevations and materials were submitted in conjunction with
Vesting Tract 23299. These items were reviewed and approved and will be
implemented through the conditions of approval.
As ts the appltcant*s option, a design manual addressing architecture.
landscaping, irrigation, and fencing was submitted with Vesting Tract 23267.
These development guidelines will be Implemented through an Ordinance No. 348,
Section 18.30 plan plan which will need to be submitted and approved by the
Planning Oepart~ent prior to the issuance of any building permits.
(~ARGE OF ZORE RO, 5150
V!~TIRG TERTATIVE !1ACT WO. 23267
YE,%'TIRG I~RTATIYE TRACT RO, 23299
Staff IL~port
l
Pge4
Envln~m~ntal Review
In accordance with the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), Environmental Impact Report No, 281 was prepared tn connection with the
proposed project. All significant effects of the project on the environment
and measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen such effects have been
evaluated In accordance with the Riverside County Rules to Implement CEQA. The
following Findtngs and Statements of Overriding Consideration are based upon
that Environmental Impact Report.
I. Avoided Impacts and Zmpacts mitigated to 'an Insignificant level
Seismic ~!fety
a. Potential %mpact: The site could be subjected to seismic event hazards
Such as groundshaking, ground rupture, and liquefaction, The Waldomar
fault is located on-site along the western most edge. This fault
could have a highest magnitude of 7.0 on the Richter scale during a
seismic event. A moderate to high liquefaction potential exists near
Temocula Creek.
,.
Required Nitigation: A fifty (50) foot setback area will be placed on
either side of the Waldomar Fault. with no structure for human
occupancy allowed within the setback. Design of the structures on the
d n Ordinance and shall be designed to
withstand earthshaking frem the maximum credible earthquake that can
be expected, Liquefaction hazard can be mitigated by over-excavation
and replacement of recompacted fill,
c. Finding: All potential seismic impacts can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
Slopes and Erosions
a. Potential Impact: Erosion hazard and slope instability will increase
during grading, 5tltatton of the reservoir and drainages my occur.
Hitigatton: All grading activities will be in conformance with all
County grading standards. All county erosion control practices shall
be adhered to including slope planting and sandbagging. A desiltation
basin will be provided in the open space area to reduce stltation of
the creek during times of peak run-off.
c. Findin: Potential impacts can be mitigated to a
tnsignV tcance.
f
level of
CHARGE OF 2~0RE R0. 5150'
VE~TZRG TERTATIVIr TRACT MOo 23267
YESTIRG TEXTATIVE TRACT RO. Z3299
Staff Report
Page S
Flooding
Potential Impacts: Increased runoff potentJa] through construction of
impervious surfaces, potential impacts to downstream · properties
through the concentration and diversion of storm flows. Potential
tmpacts to areas of development wtthtn the 100 year floodplain.
Mitigation: Temecula Creek will be improved through the Rancho
Villages Assessment Dlstrtct o~ which this project ts a part.
Improvements to Temecula Creek tnclude'a 400 foot wide, soft bottomed
channel wtth concrete sides. All areas within the 100 year floodplain
will be removed from said floodplaln through improvement of Temecu]a
Creek. A drainage channel and box culvert will convey storm flows
under State Htghway 79. In addition, all requirements found tn the
Count~ Flood Control District shall be adhered to.
c. Findlng: All potential flooding tmpacts can be mitigated to a level of
Insignificance,
Nots~ ,/
aim
Potential Impacts: Notse from Htthway 79 wtll tmpact the site, with
noise rojected to be 74.8 dB A} at a distance of 100 feet from the
centerl~ne of Highway 79. The entire area of residential development
north of Temecula could experience noise levels tn excess of 65 dB(A).
Hittgation: Landscaping and block walls w111 be used tn areas adjacent
to roadwa s. A six foot high or higher decorathe block wall and
earthen gem will be required along Highway 79, adjacent to the
project site. Interior noise hvels can be reduced to under 45 dB(A)
through use of double glazed windows, mechanical ventilation and
mandato_ry atr conditioning units. In addltton Title 24 standards will
be complied rlth,
c. Ftndin: The potential notse tmpact can be mitigated to a level of
tnstgnlf cance,
Water Quality
a. Potential Impacts: A potential siltation of natural drainages and
Temecula Creek may occur during ratny periods. Pollutants from street
runoff could enter waterways. Introduction of impervious surfaces
could slow any recharge of groundwater in the area.
CI/RJIGE OF-ZIIE RO, 5150
~*STING TERTATIVE TRACT ~0. 23267
tESTlimB TERTATIVE TRACT RO, 23299
Staff Report
Page 6
b. Mitigation: Compliance with County Grading standards, including the
use of sand bagging and deslltatlon basins during rainy weather will
be utilized. The project is retaining many draina · areas and slopes
tO act as natural filtering systems for street runo~f.
c. Finding: Potential impacts can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
Vegetatfon/1~ildlife
Potential Impacts: Sensitive species occurring on site include
Blackshoulder kite, Coopers Hawk, Northern Harrier, and Nevin's
Barberry. In i
addit on, the San Diego Horned Lizard has a high
probability of occurring on site. Potential impacts to these
sensitive species may occur with development of this project. lhe
ripartan area within Temecula Creek will be disturbed upon improvement
of the Temecula Creek Channel, with the loss of four (4) acres of
unconsolidated ripartan scrub.
Mitigation: The ripartan area will be disturbed through the
improvement of the Temecula Creek Channer by the Rancho Villages
Assessment District· Approximately 24.5 acres of rtparian habitat
will be removed along the length of the Creek· The biological
enhancement program associated with the creek improvement will
t
establish 70 acres of revttalized habitat, which will off-se any
initial loss of riparian habitat· The subject property is part of the
Rancho Villages Assessment District and will participate in the
program.
lhe rtpartan area near the existing reservoir will be retained in an
open space lot. The project has designated approximately SB acres of
open space, which will he]p mitigate impacts to the existing sensitive
bird species and which will preserve most of the inland sage scrub
plant community found on site. Of the two existing specimens of
Nevtn's Barberry found on site, one will be preserved within the open
A horticulturist will also take cuttings of
space area. professlonal
the Nevtn's Barberry found adjacent to the existing residence and
replant these tn the Open Space area near the other Nevtn's Barberry.
~rgtn areas of designated open space will be planted with native and
drought tolerant vegetation, including large trees to provide perching
opportunities for raptors· After channelizatton of the Temecula
Creek, this area will be retained as Open Space, with suttable habitat
for the San Diego Horned lizard thereby existing.
alNIGE OF ZORE RO, 5150
VESTIRG .TE](TATIVE TRACT RO, 23267
YESTIllS TENTATIVE 1RACT NO, 23299
Staff Report
Page 7
c, Findings: Potential impacts to sensitive biological species can be
mitigated to a level of insignificance,
Enerqy Resources
Potentia] Impacts: Short term energy use wi']] occur during
construction with the use of fuels by construction equipment.
Long-tem energy use wt]] occur through home heating and ]ighttng and
automobile fuel use, Energy consumption after buildout wl]] be the
loTTowing: ..
1. Gasoltne- 522 vehicle gallons per day.
2. Natural Gas - 30,392 cubic feet per day.
3. Electricity - 13,811 kilowatt - hours per day,
Nttigatton: A Class I bicycle trail will be provided adjacent to the
proposed channel. Title 24 energy conservation practices will be
Incorporated into the design and development of the houses.
Findings: Potential energy impacts will be 'mitigated to a level Of
insignificance. ,'
Scenic Highways
Potential Impacts: Highway 79 is an eligible scenic highway.
Developmentof the proposed project could impact the scenic quality of
the area.
b. Nittgatton: Landscaped entry nodes will be provided throughout the
~ ro ect and a landscaped buffer strip will be built adjacent to
~igtway 79. Landscape plans will be reviewed by the Planning
Department to ensure adequacy.
c. Findings: lie potential impacts to the eligible scenic highway are
mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Archaeological Resources
Potential impacts: A site of prehistoric Indian Habitation is found on
the north stde of Temecula Creek on the first stream terrace. The
extsttng historic two story adobe "wtnter rosldence" of Walter Vat1 Is
also located on site, DIsturbance of these sttes could impact these
resources,
b. Prior to any disturbance on site, a qualified Archaeologist shall
review the registered Indian site and collect any date as necessary.
CHARGE OF 2)DRE NO. 5150
YE_~TIIIG TTXTATIVE ]IML'T frO. 23267
YESTZNG TEffTATIVE TRACT I0o 23299
Data collection methods shall tnclude test bortngs and excavations as
found necessary by the archaeologist and as approved by the Planning
Department. Re existing adobe house on stte will be preserved on so
no impacts will occur.
c. Findings: A1T archaeological impacts can be avotded or mitigated to an
Insignificant level.
PaleontoTony
Potential Impact: Project site ts located near Pauba formation land
which is kno~ to produce significant paleontological resources.
Potential impacts may occur during grading and trenching.
b. Mitigation/4easures: A qualified paleontologist shall be consulted
prior to any grading and shall monitor the grading activity.
Significant finds shall be identified, itemized and conclusions
presented by the qualified paleontologist.
c. Findings: Any Paleontologtcal impacts can be avoided or mitigated to a
level of insignificance. ,'
Circulation
a. Potential Impacts: the proposed project combined will generate 7,392
trip ends per day.
b. Htttgatfon: All internal street systems will be put in place by the
developer of this project. Major circulation roads in the area will
be improved by the Rancho Vtliages Assessment District, by which this
project will participate. Roads to be improved include Highway 7g to
a 142 foot R.O.W. stx lane road, Margartta Road south of Highway 79 to
a 134/100 foot R.O.W. arterial, and Pale Road south of Highway 79 to a
110 foot R.O.W. arterial. A bike land is also being provided adjacent
to Temecula Creek.
c. Traffic impacts can be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Water and Sever
a. Potential Impacts: l~e proposed project wtll have an estimated daily
water consumption of 547,800 gallons per day, with the creation of
273.900 gallons of wasteater,
b. Hfttgation: Roncho California Water District and Eastern ~untctpal
Water District have expressed a positive ability to serve the proposed
CILMJIGE OF ZONE NO, 5150
IESTIIIG TEMTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267
IfESTZIIG TE]ITAT[VE TRACT NO. 23299
project. Pipeltne facilities will be installed through the Rancho
Villages Assessrent District, by which this project will participate.
Water conserving methods will be included in the development of the
roJect in accordance with Title 24. In addition, drought tolerant
Vandscaping and automatic irrigation systems will be provided in the
project,
c. Finding: Impacts to water and sewer service~ are not considered
significant.
Fire
a. Potential Impact: Development of this project will incrementally
increase demand for fire services.
Mitigation: The project shall comply with all applicable fire
prevent)on and emergency response provisions contained in Riverside
County Ordinances. In addition, the developer will pay $400.00 per
unit to go toward fire protection impacts.
c. Findtng: Impacts to fire services can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
Shertff Service
Potential Impacts: Oevelopment of this project will add an estimated
1743 people to the area, which will have an Incremental impact on the
need for police services.
Mitigation: Crime prevention methods will be designed into the
development of this project. Hartpower increases are at the discretion
of the Board of Supervisors, however, this project pay county wide
mitigation fee of which a portion can go toward adding additional
police protection.
c. Finding: Potential impacts to police services can be mitigated to ·
level of Insignificance.
School s
a. Potential Impacts: Oevelopment of this project will generate an
estimated total of 450 new students.
b. Mitigation: The project developer will be required to pay school
mitigation fees ¶n accordance with State Law.
(~qNGE OF/])RE NO. 5150
VESTIRG TEXTATIVE TllAL'T llO. 23267
VF. STING TENTATIVE TRACT gO. Z3Z99
Staff Report
Page I0 .
c. Findtrig: Xmpacts to schools can be mitigated to a level of
Insignificance.
Parks and Recreation
a. Potential Impacts: The state Qutmby Act requtres 3 acres of park site
~ one thousand people, Development of this project would require
acres of park stte.
Mitigation: The proposed project ~tll provide'two parks totalling 10.Z
acres of land. An approximately 1.0 acre park site is located in the
northern portion of the project site and a 9.2 acre park site is
located in the southern ttp. In addition, a 35,9 acre ragtonal park
ts being proposed by the Rancho Villages Assessment District for the
Temecula Creek area, This ragtonal park wtll tnclude equestrian
trails and bike paths. Another 11,8 acres of Open Space area which
Includes the 'old adobe structure" ts proposed,.
Finding: Provision of the two park sites totalling 10.2 acres and with
the proposed regional parks, impacts to park and recreation services
are mitigated to a level of insignificance. .'
Utilities
Potential Impacts: Incremental increase in demand for utility
services. Temporary creation of dust and noise from construction of
utility lines.
H!tfgation: The developer wi)l be required to extend all utilities as
necessary. Dust shall be controlled during construction activity
through the use of watering trucks. Vegetation losses will be
replaced with appropriate planrings in areas damaged by trenching.
Sandbagging shall be used to prevent runoff.
c. Findin s: Impacts to utilities can be mitigated to a level of
lnslgnTftcance,
Solid Waste
Potential impacts: This project wtll create 19,626 pounds of solid
waste per day, Adequate capacity is currently available to handle
this need,
b, Mitigation: No mitigation required,
(3lARGE OF ZI3RE R0. 5150
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT RO, 23267
YESTIm TERTAT/VE TRACT I0. 23299
Staff Report
Page 11
c. Finding: There will be no significant impact to solid waste
facilities.
LIbraries
a, Potential impacts: Oevelopnent of this project wt]1 have an
Incremental impact on library services.
b, Mitigation: The developer will be required to pay $100.00 per untt
mitigation fee, "
c, Finding: Library tmpacts can be mitigated to a leve~ of
Insignificance,
Health Services
a, Potential impacts: Oevelopment of this project will have an
incremental increase in demand for health service, Current and
planned facilities tn the area appear capable of meettng &ny
additional demand, ..
b, Hlttgatton: No mitigation required
c, Finding: There ts no significant tmpact to health services,
Airports
a, Potential Impacts: Htntmal tmpact to area airports ts anticipated,
b, Htttgatton: No mitigation required,
c, Ftndtng: There ts no significant ~mpact to area airports,
Dtsaster Preparedness
a, Potential Impacts: Mtntmal impacts to
Preparedness ts anticipated,
the Count~'s Dtsaster
b, Mitigation: No m~tigatton required,
c. FInding: There are no significant impacts
Preparedness,
toward Disaster
131AJIGEOF~IIERO. 5150
¥ESTilIGTE31TAT|VE11UkCTRO. 23267
¥F. STXI~TEXlTATiVEI~.~TRO. 23299
Staff Report
Page 12
Ftscal Zmpacts
Potential Impacts: The fisca] study found within the EIR states that
the enttre project will have a net positive impact to the County of
approximately $56,008 annually.
b. HIttgation: No mitigation proposed.
c. Finding: No significant ftscal negative ftscal impact will occur.
~R(13ECT ALt tk/IAT/VES
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines require
the consideration of alternatives to the proposed project. Three alternatives
were considered within thts EIR. These are the 'No Pro~ect Alternative', the
'Oecreased Scope Alternative'. and the 'Increased Scope Alternative.'
No
Project Alternative
Analysis: The No ProJect Alternative would allow the land to remain in
non-intensive uses such as the existin horse and,* cattle ranch and the
existing limited residential uses of t~e property owner and workers. Given
this.scenario. none of the impacts of the proposed project would occur.
The No Project Alternative is considered the environmentally superior
a3ternative due to the least environmental impacts. Impacts associated
with seismic safety. grading, noise, air quality, water quality, loss of
Agricultural land. vegetation and wildlife, energy resources, public
services and utilities. and traffic would not occur or would be
substantially less.
Reasons for ReJection of No ProJect Alternative: This alternative would
negate the benefits associated with development of the 600 detached
230 condom ntum untts. These units are proposed to
dwelling units and
reflect anticipated market needs and public demand by providing detached
dNe111ng units that wtll be marketable withtn the region. Long-term use of
the site is not considered economically feasible end ts not mandated by the
General Plan. in 11ght of the approved urban land uses tn the nea~
vtctnity continued intensive agricultural uses could lead to
tncompat;b!lity of land uses.
Qi/UI3E OF ZDNE RO. 5150
VESTING 11]ITATIYE llAL'T 10. 23267
¥ESTZRG TERTATZVE TRACT R0. 23299
surf Re or
Page 13 ,
Decreased Scope Alternative
Analysts: Thts alternative will assume the ropetry ts developed'out
accordance krlth the existing R-R zone (Rurar Residential). With the
property developed at one dwelling unit per ~ acre, this alternative
addresses development of SSO dweIHng units.
Development of this stte under the Decreased Scope Alternative NOuld have
I ac~s on set sm~c safety, AIr Quallty, Water Quallty, Energy Resources
Public Servtces and Utilities, and Traffic that would be less than
proposed project. Potential impacts upon Slopes and Erosion, Flooding,
Nots,, Agricultural Resources, Vegetation and Wildlife, Archaeological
Resources, and Paleontologtcal Resources would be about the same.
Zncreased ~mpact to Water Quality might be expected due to use of septic
systems.
Reasons for Rejection of the Decreased Scope Alternative: Although the
Decreased Scope Alternative contains Incrementally reduced impacts tn
certain above mentioned areas, ttts not considered to be significantly
'environmentally supeHor' to the current development proposal. The
ellm~natlon Of the smaller lot product tnhtblts the provision of homes
w~thln a more affordable range. The costs of roadway Improvements as weT1
as costs associated w~th water, sewer and flood control facilities are not
proportionately decreased under this alternative, making the' project
economically difficult. For these reasons, the Reduced Scope Alternative
was rejected.
Zncreased Scope Alternative
Analys'is: The Increased Scope AlternaUve would assume building out the
project stte wtth multi-family dwelHng units at a density of 12-14
dwelHng untts per acre. Mtth this sort of denstry, more than 3,000
dwelHng units could be built.
The 1noreased Scope Alternative muld have greater Impacts upon Seismic
Safety, Slopes and Erosion, Floodtn , Noise, AIr qualltyo Mater Quality,
Energy Resources, Land Use, Public Servtces and Utilities, and Traffic.
Tmpacts on Agrfcultural Resources, Vegetation and Htldltfe, Archaeological
Resources, and Paleontologtcal Resources would be about the same.
rapacts
setsmtc sa ety, and publ¶c services and facilities. Land use confltc[-
between suc an tntense project and surrounding approve4 land uses could b~
significant. Because all Impacts under this alternative are either equal
to, or greater than, the proposed project, this alternatty, Is
CHARGE OF ZORE llO, 5150
YESTING TENTATIVE 1RACr NO. 23267
Yr~TI!IG TEITATzVE 11uiL-'r I10. 23299
St. aft Re~
Page %4
environmentally tnferior than the proposed project. For these reasons,
this alternative was rejected.
III. Rejected Conditions of Approval
The conditions of approval or the proJect's design include'all recommended
mitigation measures set forth tn Environmental Impact Report No. 281, except
that measure which requires a regional application and is beyond the scope of
the individual developer. This measure is the requirement of park and ride
facilities in the area to mitigate energy impacts.
IV. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts and Project Benefits
ProJect Benefits:
Development of the project as proposed will provide the following benefits to
the region:
1) Improved Traffic Circulation: Traffic circulation will be improved in the
project area by the project's inclusion within the Rancho Villages
Assessment District. Improvements include widening of Rancho California
Road to a 142 foot R.O.W., making it a six lane expressway, improving
Hargarita Road to a 134 foot arterial, and improvement of Pale Road to
fOOt R.O.W.
2) Improved Flood Control: Participation of this project site in the Rancho
Villages Assessment District will go towards improvement of Temecula Creek
tnto a 400 foot wide, soft bottomed, concrete sided channel.
3)
Provision of Active Recreat¶onal Open Space: The roJect is proposing two
neighborhood park sites totalling 10.Z acres along wtth providing an 11.8
acre Open Space/Regional Park. Participation of this project in the Rancho
Vtllages Assesmet Distdct also w111 see the Temecula Creek Channel area
developed into a 35.9 acre open space area and regional park, with
equestrian trails and bicycle paths included. ~hlle the neighborhood park
sites are being developed primarily for the residents of the project, the
amount of park acreage far exceeds that amount which would be required under
the qutmby Act, end, along with the ragtonal parks, can be utt1$zed by
residents already In the comnun¶ty,
Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts:
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 identified the following significant
unavoidable adverse impacts.
DIAJ~E OF Z!3ME RO, 5150
YESTIll; IERIATIVE TRACT RO, 23267
VE~mAIG TEITATIVE TRACi' NO, 23299
Staff Report
Page 15
Air Qualtty:
Potential [mpacts: Vehicle exhaust mission and dust during construction
will contribute to air qualtty reductions in the area on a short-term
baste, The long-term impacts will be increased motor vehicle missions by
more people being dram tnto the area and from Increased power plant
emissions due to the demand for electricity and natura~ gas.
Required Htttqatton: Water trucks will beused to reduce dust. On-site
parks will create on-site trip de~ttnaUons, . A Class I bike trail ts
included In the Regional Park. Tttle Z4 'standards wtll be adhered to
durtng construction. Transit facilities such as benches, shelters, and
turnouts wtll be designed tnto development of the parks to facilitate any
future mass transit systen.
Unavoidable Adverse Impact: A temporary degradation of air quality will
result in the project vicinity during construction activity with an overall
significant incremental regional degradation due to project implementation.
Overrtdinq Ftndtnq: The public benefits of the proposed project in terms of
public improvements to road and flood facilities and by the development of
neighborhood and regtonal parks out~etgh the project's adverse tmpact upon
air quaTtty.
Agriculture
Potential Impacts: Development of the proposed project will result in loss
of current agricultural uses and the loss of 27 acres of prime agricultural
land (Class % and I! soils).
b, Ntttqatton: No mitigation measure available to mitigate these impacts.
c. Unavoidable Adverse Zmpact: Loss of 27 acres of prime farm land
considered cumulatively significant.
Overriding Ftndlnq: Agricultural production in this area ts becoming, or
has become, economicall infeasible. Continued use of the land for
agricultural practices could lead to land use tncompatibilities in light of
approved and existing projects in the area. The project benefits
substantially outweigh the unavoidable adverse impact caused by the loss of
these prime soils.
CIINIGE OF ZOIIE R0. 5150
VF.~TIIIG TENTATIVE IRACT R0. 23267
VESTING TENTATIVE ~ R0. 23299
Staff Report
Page 16
~INDINGS:
Change of Zone rio. 5150 seeks to change the zoning on 221.2 acres from R-R
to R-3, R-4 and R-5.
2. Vesting Tentative Tract No, 23299 seeks to create 232 condomtntum units on
14.3 acres of the site. ;.
3. Vesttng Tentative Tract No. 23267 seeks to create 601 single famtly lots
and 4 open space lots on the remainder.of the site.
4. The site is located south of HIghway 79 and liest of Rargarita Road.
5. The project site is currently used for horse and cattJe grazing. A couple
of residences and assorted related structures are found on site.
Surrounding Land Uses tnclude s¶ngle family residences, a horse ranch, a
turf farm and vacant land.
7. Surrounding zoning includes R-R, A-1-10, R-A-2~ and' R-A-5.
,.
8. The project site lies adjacent to two approved specific plans (S.P. 217
Redhawk and 5.P. 223 - Vat1 Ranch). These speclftc plans are located to
the east and south of the project site,
9. The turf ram located to the southwest currently has a specific plan being
processed on tt (S.P. 228 - I~rphy Ranch).
10, The agricultural preserve contract on the adjoining turf fam (Temecula
No. 2}, will expire on January 1, lgBg.
11. The project site is located vlthin the Southwest Territory Land Use
Planning Area. ~
Environmental Zmpact Report No. 281 yes prepared for the proposed project.
Findings, MItt atton Measures and Statenents of Overriding ConstderaUon
are found in ghls staff report on pages 4 through 15 and are incorporated
here by reference.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed zone change and vesting tentative tracts are consistent with
the pollctes of the Comprehensive General Plan.
2. The proposals are compatible ~lth area development and zontng.
DIAJIGE OF ZINIE RO. 5150
VESTIJIG TE31TATIYE 1RAL'T NO. 23267
VE_%ql~I~ I~ITAT/¥E 111AET ROo 23299
3. The project conforms to all appllcable county ordinances.
4. Overriding findings necessary to approve this project are found within the
scarf report.
RECIIOqENDATIORS:
CERTIFICATION of Environmental Impact Report No. 281 based ~n the finding that
the Environmental Impact Report is an accurate, objective and complete document
1 n d
APPROVAL of CHARGE OF ZONE R0. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5 tn accordance
w~'flrh"~'Tibtt 2; and
APPIIOVAL of ¥F. Sll!IG TE31TATIVE 111ACT RO. 23267, MIERDE/) NO. 2, subject to the
~ns of approval; and,
APfitOVAL of VEST/RG TENTATIVE 11~ACTRO. 23Z99, subject to the conditions of
approv'~Tand in accordance with Exhibit A, Amended No. 21 and based upon the
findings and conclusions Incorporated in this staff report.
GN:sc
10112/88
· I CZ~5'f5OIVTR 23299/VTR 2326~
LAND USE
,',,
/i
VAC.
./'
HORSE
RANCH'
,,MAP
'\ VAC.
~,.
.. \
tOM & LINOA i.
TURF FARM
MAP IF't41
v
VAC.
App. MR. BRIAN HAYWOOO ~ ·
Ute R-R TO R-4, R-2, AND R-5
Area TEMECULA RANCHO Sup. Dist. 1
Sec. T. 8S.,R.2W A~etsor's Bk. g26 Pg. 16
ula on ~ EXPWY VARIABLE
· ~1~ ,
: '~ ~ Rd. Bk:~.56A0afe 3/17/88 ~own By SS
I"- ~200' ~E~iD~ COU~ ~NING DEP~RTMENT ,o scaLE
~ CZ 515U~ v ~, ~
R-A-2 112
R-A-5
RmR -
A-1-1
0
.. A-1-10
I)i \
App, MR, BRIAN HAYWOOD
Use R-R TO R-4, R-J, AND R-5
Area TEMECULA RANCHO Sup.~st. 1
P A
Rd. Bk.~.56A ~te 3117188 ~own By SS
~ I% ~2oo' ~/DE CO~ ~AN~/N6
o~
0 ~
ITEM NO. 8
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
RI~'P..~SIDE: COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Attention: Regional Tea No.
Area: ~A/F_/~D
have revtewed this case and have the following comments:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the
property the project ts considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should compl~ with all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the
natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions in order' to maintain the natural
drainage patterms of the area and to prevent flood.damage to new buildings.
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, "All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of
]8 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion projection shall be provided
for mobfie home supports.'
This project is in the
dra4nage plan fees shall be paid
regul.ations.
Area
in accordance with the applicable riles an,!
The proposed zoning ts coaslstent with existing flood hazards. Some fl~,.
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to th~
tmplted density.
The Otstrtct's report dated
ts still current for this project
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
attached comments appl~.
Ver~ trul~ yours,
KENNETH L. ED~/ARDS
gtneer
April 5, 1988
Boa~ of Dill-tin3:
Rid;ed D. Sbffey
James A. Dtrby
St. Vice PmsidenL
Rilpb Dally
l)eug Kulbeq
Jou A. Lmud|u
Jeffrey L. Mblder
T, C, Rowe
Officers:
Siam T. Mills
GeneraJ Manager
Phillip k Forbes
DirKmr d Finance -
'/~asu~r
Narman L Thomas
Di~cuw of Eng~r, eeria~
Timtuna R. Nlesodiester
Dbt, ewr d Operadens
B~rbara J. Reed
Did. clot of Admi.lel~,b-. ·
DLm. k'~ S~!m-y
Ruean and Tucker
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Eamon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, California 92501-3657
Subject: Water Availability
Reference: Change of Zone 5150
Vesting Tract 23267
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced
property is located within the boundaries of Rancho
California Water District. Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and the property owner.
water availability would.be contingent upon the
property owner signing an ~gency Agreement which
assigns water management rights, if any, to RC~
Sites for additional water production facilities may
be required within the proposed development depending
upon the level of 1noreased demand created by the
proposal.
If RCWD can be of further service to you, please
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
RAWCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Senga P. Doherty
Engineering Services Representative
FOll/dpmll3
L
RANCHO CALIFORNIA W-ATER DISTB;
28061 DIAZ ROAD - POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECULA. CA 92-q90-0174 · {714| 678-4101 - FAX {714} ,,
R|VERSiD[ COUNTY PLANNING OEPARTHENT
SLIDIVZSION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTAT/V[ TRACT NO. 23267
DATE:
JU4L'XG~ NO. Z
EXPIRES:
$TANOARD CONDIT]ONS
The subdivider shall defend, tndemntf , end hold hemless the County of
RIversides tel agents, officers, and employees frm lAY Cllt;, Iceton, or
proceeding against the County of Riverside or Its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval o the County
of Riverside, 1as advisory agencies, appeal beards or 1egt21attvl bedy
concerning Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267, whtch actton Is b ought
about w~thin the ttme period provtdad for tn Collfornta Government Code
Section 66499.37. The County of RIverside will pr0mptly notify the
subdivider of any such claim. action, or proceeding against t e County of
RIverside and will coo rate full tn the defense. If the County falls to_
promptly neatly the su~htder o~Yany such clltm, actton, or proceeding or
fatls to coop. rate fully In tM defense, the subetvtder shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defends Indemnify, or hold himless the E
County of Rherstde.
4. The final map shell be prepared by · licensed land surveyor subject to all
the requirecanto of the State of California Subcltvtslon Kip Act and
tn
Ord inca460.
S. The subdhfder shell subeft me copy of e sells .port to the Riverside
County $urve~or'l Office end t~ copies to the Departmet of Butldtng and
Safety. 1hi re rt shell address the so 11 slobtilt4. end geological
t t
condie one of T~:slto.
6. If any gredtn! ts proposed, the subdhtder shall satate one prtnt of
comprehensive gradtrig plea to the Department Of Building led Safety. The
plan shell comply~tth the Untfom heldtrig Code, Chapter 70, el amended
by Ordinance 457 end is Baybe additionally protided for tn these
conditions of approval.
provided by Ordinance 460.
2. The tenterlye subdivision shill compT vtth the State of California
Sutxltvtston Pap Act and to ll1 the re ~rements of Ordinance 460, Schedule
A. anTass modified by the conditions ~tsted baler.
3. Thts condltlonally e proved tentative nap will expire eke years after the
County of RIverside ~lrd of Supervisors approve1 date, unless extended as
VESTING 191TAT~T IIMT I10. 23267 Aml. I!
Condltiem ef Jq;nwel
Page ! ~
7. A gradtog permit shall be obtained frm the Department of Building and
Safety prtor to cameotenant of any gredlng outside of county maintained
road right of as Jr.
8. Any dellnquefit property taxes shall be patd prior to rocordation of the
final nap.
~e subdivider shall comply vith the street improvement recon~nendattons
outltned tn the Riverside CountJr Road Department's letter dated 10-07-88,
e copJr of vhtch ts attached.
Legal access as requtred by Ordinance 460 shall be provtded from the tract
map boundary to I CountJr maintained road.
M1 road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall .
coottone in force until the overofng body accepts or abandons such
offers. AI1 dedications shall be frel from a11 encumbrances as approved
b the Road Camtssfoner. Street names shell be subject to approvll of
~tCe Roadcomtsstoner.
Easments, ~hen required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be sho~ on the final map tf they are located
within the land division boundary. AI1 offers of dedication and
conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as d~rected by the County
SurveyOr.
liter and sewrage disposal facilities shall be instolled in accordance
vlth the provisions set forth tn the Riverside County Health IMpartmnt's
lettordatml g-12-88, I copy of~hich ts attached.
The subdtfider shell comply vfth the flood control recamendattons
eatlined by the ittversfde Count flood Control Nstrlct's letfor dated
10-)8-88 I copy of tthi'ch fs ottochad. If the land division lies
vlthfn ae edophd flood control drainage erel pursuant to Section 10.25 of
Ordinance s~011 appro rtato fee for the construction of ares dratnage
fmctltUes t8 coTlec by u~ Road Commissioner. (Amended st P.C. on
10'19-~
The subdivider shell c ly with the fire Improvement recomaendattons
outllned fsthe Count~F°Fe~ro d
Ikrshsl'e letter sled g-g-88, s copy of vhtch
is eftached.
Subdtvtslom phasing. Including any proposed comon open space ares
Improvement phutng. tf applicable, shall be subject to Planntng
Departmental;rural. My Iropased phasing shall profide for adequate
vehicular access to all loto In each phase. and she. substantially
confore to the triter and purpose of the subdivision approve1.
~-7. Lob cream bJr this subdivision shell comply vith the follovrlng:
CadStrees of Apprwal
Page 3 '
L
l&
a. All lots shall have a atntmum stze of 4500 square feet net.
b. Grade~ but gndlvelo ed lind shill be mtntatned tn I vend-free
caMfelon end shal~ be either planted vtth tntertm landsca ~ng or
revlded vith other eroston control measures Is Ipproved C; the
glrector Of Building and Safety, '
Prior to RECOROATION. of the fine1 map the fellertrig conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the recorderIon of the final mp the applicant shall submtt
witten clearances to the lherstde ~ounty Road and Survey DepartshenS
that all pertinent requirements outltned tn the attached approve1
letters frm the fellertrig agencteI hive been met:
County Flood Control County n
County Parks DepertNnt
b. Prtor to the recordallen of the ftnel mp, (:hinge of Zone No. 5150
shall he epproved by the Board of Supervisors led shill be effective.
Lots created by this lind division shall be tn conromance ~th the
develoFment standards of the zone ultlmetaly applted to the property.
Prior to racerditto, of the ftnal mp, the project site shall be
annexed Into C.S.A. 143.
Prior to recondition of the fins1 mp, the subdhtder shill convey to
the Court fee stmpla tttTe, to all cannon or camon open space areas,
free ahOY clear of all 1tens, texas, assessment, leaSeS recorded and
race ed) I d easements, except those easements which T, the sole
~scre~oe ~ the County ire acceptable. As a condition precedent-t4-
the Coun~lcceptfng Stele to such areas, the subdhtder shell subeta-
the fo11~t documents to the Planning De ertmnt for revtev, whtch-~
documents Ih~l be lub3ect to the lpprevll o; that departeerie and the
Office of ale County Counsel:
1) A dechratlon of covenants, conditions Ind restrictions; and
2) A s.mp. 1 documnt cony, tng tltle to the purchaser of in
Jndlvldu:T lot or unit whf:~ provides that the declaration of
covenants, conditions aM restrictions t8 tncorperatsd theretn by
reference.
The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions suMtreed
for revtme shell a) profide for a tsm of 60 ars, (b O,o~tde for
It3TZal TE]iTR!I~ TUG 10. Z32S7 And. f!
Cuedtitans ef Peprwal
Page 4
ods~,; or each Individual let or ball end (C) conbin Lhw fullwing
- ilrsvhfonl verk*t4m.
any proviSIon in this Declaration to
the fellertrig provision shall apply:
The ochers' association estsbllshed heretn if
domnt, ~ttvated, by fncorl~ratlon or other~dsa st the
reqaast County of RIverside, Ind the pro o~ners*
issoctatton uncondttfonalTy accept frm
RIverside, ups County's demand, tttlo to all
the 'cmnon particularly described
attached hereto decision to reWIre
propert mmers' and thl decision
Issoct~{io~ uncondl Iccept tttll
sial1 be at the sole :relish of the
of
of
of the
that the
*COmmon ires~
RIverside,
the event that the lrno, or thereof,
wrttten consent of the fie
Ifverstcfe or the Count),*s
omers* association shall have
each tndtvtdull Tot or us1
of any such
maintenance assessment.
be prior to all other 1I;
assessmat or other dec creating
coeve~Ki to the ash the association.
h
thereafter shall sen su 'conmen s all manage and
co~tlnoousTy maintstn such Shill not sell or
trialfir such cannon area, IbSlnt the prier
of the County of
tn
· -1nitrest. The propert
to ISSlII the 0~11rI o~
fensenable cost of
hive the right to 11an
ills In the infant of s
lien, once crested, shall
to the notice of
assessment lion.
Thtl Decllretlon be
m- refrmalbsent
of lag of the
1
Coimt.~'$ St · nilrest. A IN
cOeSt~llred ~ttale tf tt affects
mintshanoi of *careen arel:.
y* amended
1or nitten consent
RIverside or the
Shill be
extlnt, usage or
the event any conflict betwen this Dec' tfon and the
Arttcles the enl, or the srt~ o~ers'
Keg; In~, thfs ton shall
control
Onca approveNit the declaration of covenants, conditions and
restrictions shall be recorded at the sama tfma that the ftnal map is
reardad.
VESTING T~TATiV~TRK'rlO. 232S7 kd. ;!
Coeclttlees of Alamo1
Page S
The developer shall be responsible for mint,nonce and upkeep of all
slopes. landscaped areas and Irrl itSon steams until such ttme as
those operations ere the responsSgllttles of other part es as
t approved
by the Platetag DIrector.
Prtor to recorderton of the ftnel mp, an Environmental Constraints
Sheet (ECS) shell be prepared !n conjunction With the ftnal map to
delineate identified environmetal concerns and shill be per~anentl
ftled w4th the office of the County Surveyor. A copy of t I [Ca she1{
h
be transmitted to the P1lnntng Oeplrb~ent for raytaw and approval.
The spproved ECS shall be forwarded vtth coptes of the recorded ftnal
map to the Planning Department and the Departmot of Su~ldtng and
Safer.
The entice appearing (n Section 6.e. of Ordinance He. 625, the
RIverside County Itght-to-Fsm Ordinance, shill be pllced on the
Environmental Constraints Sheet, With this tract Identified theretn,
In the manner prevfded tn satd hctton g.l., el betrig locited partly -
f
or ~olly Within, or within 300 feet o , land zoned for prteertly
agriculture1 purposes b~ the betJr of Riveraide.
h. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints
Sheet: 'hang), Environmotel Impact Report No. 28Z was prepared for
thts property sad te on f41e at the RIverside County Planntng
Department."
The E.C.S. notes found tn the letter from the Coon Deologtst dated
October tZ, 1988, e copy of uhlch Is attached, shallt~r4 placed o the
n
Envtrormental Constraints Sheet.
Prtor to the issuance of 6RN)IN6 PERMITS the telInning conditions shell be
setter¶adz
a. Prior te the tssusaco of grading pomtts detetled can open apace
area landscaping nd Irrigation plans she, be auheitted for PlenninR
Department epprovd fort he phase of davelemonS tn process. The
1am simll be cert~ffed b~ · landscape architect, led shall provide
For thefollmdn9.
1. Peanet eutmatlc Irrigation systems shell be Installed on sll
landscapad areas requiring err gotten.
Perbays and landscaped buildtog setbacks shall be landscaped to
and 1men trots tn conjunction vtth
greed cover, shrubS aM spec
h
eaander4ng sidmlks, bent cs and other
ITSTZNG TDfTAT~VE 1tACT nO. 13ZS7 ~ld. f!
Coedlttom ef A~wwal
Pip 6 '
3. Landscaping plans shall Incorporate the use of spsctmen accent
trees at key vtsull focal pOintS wtthtn the project.
4. t~ere street trees cannot be pllnted vtthtn rt hi-of-ray of
interior streets and project parkwa~ due to Insufficient r~ad
rtght-of-vly, the~ shill be planted outstdl of the r~ad
right-4f-ey.
5. tJndscapfng plans shall IncorpOrate native and drought tolerant
pTants~bere appropriate.
6. AII existtrig spactmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
the sha~l note those to be removed, rilecared and/or retained.
a d sub ect property shall be shove on the proJect°s gradtrig plans
n
7. All trees shall be etaImam double staked. Iliakit end/or sloe
graying trees shall be steel staked.
b. AnY oak tms removed vtth four 4) inch or larger trunk diameters
s sil be replaced on e ten (l&) to one (l)
basis as approved by the
Plhannlng Olrector. Replacement trees shall be noted o~ spproved
landscaping plans.
Prior to the tssuance of gradtrig pOmtts, a btolo 1ca1 resource
pr?tectlon lie shall be prepared b a quillfled biologist detailing
nethods o~ protecting the stgno~ficlnt beelogical resources and
1epicmutation of biological adtl Itto~ measures as found tn County
EnvironsInto1 Impact Report Re. Ill. Important resources tncluda the
Heytea krberr~ found on stte. This plan shall be sainttied to the
Plann|ng Department for revtev and approval.
d. Derl.q mile activities, a qualified biologist shall be rotsteed by
tbed~ve~opar~ monitor the grads g activities and to see that the
n
ap ved btol 1ca1 resovm protection plan t8 Implemented. Proof of
~norsldp~all be admitted to the Deparlmnt of Delldiet and
Safe prior to the issuance of tmlldlng purEtie. The biologist s a
h.v: .., be,, or ...rt gr.din,,f
order to laplesser the biological resource protection plan.
e. Prior to Sssuance of fading mite, in tn depth surve~ of the
extsttn ArchaeologScd sFtes shl~ be undertaken by I qua!tiled
ArcbiOlogist. 1~ta suwey shall tnclude eta collection, t~bt
Investigation, a report prepared by the Archaeologist shall ·
sutmlttod to the Placate DepOrtment and the Archaeological Research
Unit at tatklversttaref ~allfornIe of RIverside, for revtev and a
VeSTZIG 1TITATI~ TIkCT IO. Z!H7 And.
Coedltlms of Appeal
Page 7
detestnation of camp]attunes. Following approvll of the report. the
Plenntng Oeparbnent ~411 1save Clearance for the release of grading
pearls.
f. If any archaeological resources' ira uncovered dartfig grading
1
act vietea or trenching, a11 activities shall cease s~d an
archaeologist shall be consulted.
archieologl. st shill be adhered
g. The old adobe structure found within Open Space lot 603 shall be
preserved.
h. All existing native spectnln trees on the subject property shell be
pre erved ,herever feasible. ihere they cannot be preserved they
shall be relocated or replaced with specimen trees as epproved by the
Pllnntng Director. Rapelement trees shall be noted on approved
landscaping plans.
1. Grading plans abel1 conform to Board adopted Hillside Development
Standards: A11 cut and/or ftll slopes, or Individual cce~tnatlons
thereof, which exceed ton feet in vertical height shill be modified by
in tppreprtate cabrealign of I apeeta1 terracing (borichint) plan,
Increased slope ratio (I.e., 3:! retaining walls, and/or slope
pllntlng combined ~th Irrigation. ~{1 drtvM~s shill not lxc ed I
I
fifteen pertset grade.
J. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungrsded natural tarrite and
exceeding tea ([0) feet in verttcll betthe shall be contour-graded
Incorporating the following grading techniques:
1) The an le of the raded slope shall be greduolly adjusted to the
angle :~ the nlture~ terrain.
2) Angullr form shall be discouraged. The graded foe shill reflect
the nabare1 raided to.lie.
3) 1he tel and top of dopes shill be rounded with curves uith
r de designed e pe on to the total bel ht of the slopes
4) hre cut or f111 ale S exceed 300 feat In horizontal length, the
horizontal contours arthe slope shill be curved in · continuous,
undulatlng fashion.
k. Prtor to the issuance of grading permitS, the developer shall provide
evidence to the Director of Building and bronx that Ill adjacent
off-site mnuflcturld l]o I hive recorded slope talents led that
slope lintentice respmstb~tttes hive bee assigned II ippreved by
the DIrector of klldlng Ind SirefT,
VF. STINS TGfTATIYE 11tACT I0. 23267
Conditions of Apprmml
Pap 8
1. Prtor to the tssuance of grading pemlts, a qualified Paleontologist
shall be retained by the developer for consultation end conKent on the
proposed grading wtth respect to potential peleontoTogtcal tapsets.
SMvld the poleontoTogfst find the potential fs high for tropics to
significant resources, e ire-grade meeting between the paleontologist
and the excavation end gridin contractor shell he arranged. Vhen
necessary, the paleontologist or representative shill have the
authority to tempofurl1 divert, redlrect or halt grading acttvtty to
allaM reCOvery Of foSSt~S.
Prtor to the tssuance of BUILDING PERNITS the follwtng conditions shall
be satisfied:
a. Re tailIdiot poredis shell be tssued by the County of RIverside for
aeF residential lot/unit withtn the project tmvndary unit1 the
developor's ouccessor's-tn-tnterest provtdes evtdence of cam 1tines
adth ftnenctn measures. A cash sum of onl-~undred
inca public factllty c~n:
dollars ($100)per lo untt shell be deposited with the Riverside
nay Departmat o~/ klldtng f
and Safety es mitigatIOn or public
iT°ibrary developneat.
b. Prior to the submittal of tatlding plans to the Departmat of htldln
and Safety an acoustical study shall he performed b~ in acousttce~
engineer to establish appre rtato mitigatIOn assures that shall he
ap !fed to Individual dv, lFi units wtthtn the subdivision to reduce
aPeCleat Interior noise levelangle 4S I. dn end exterior noise levels to
iS Ldn.
c. MI street lights and other outdoor 11ghtln shall he shmm o~
electrical plans submitted to the De arrant of tdtldtng and Safety
for plan deck approve1 and sha~l cmply vlth the requirements of
Riverside County Ordinance No. dis and the RIverside County
Comprehensive hMrll Plan,
· d. Prior to tenants of tmtldtn! remits, detotled lark site end rtpirtin
irma aleveT_nigeria 1ins shall hefsubedttod to the Plansing Departmat
for approval. T~else plans shall confoe vlth guidelines found in the
apprevnd dnsl anvil (Exhibit !1), The perks shall Include acttug
recreational ~aeeturel such as p cnfc tables, barbecue areas, tot lots,
etc. Recomendattons found in the litter frm George Balierie of the
Cmmty Paris Department, a of vhlch t8 shell be
Includnd In the design of the p~r~ attached,
and OIm Spice Arias.
o. Dave]upset of this project shell conform to the rectumauditions round
In County Geolngic Report No. 488.
Conditties W P~reval .
f. For the security and safety of future residents, the following crtme
p. reventton leaserex shall be considered during site and buildtrig lemur
aoslgu. I
I. Pro~r lighting !n one arias;
b. VIsibility of doors lad v4ndovs trial the street Ind between
klldtngs; ·
c. Fe~ctng heights and mtertils;
d. Adequate off-street parking; and
e. A clearly understood method of street numbering to facilitate
emrgency resinrise.
Prior to the issuance of bulldtn mils, coq)p_stto landscaping and
g' Irrigation p]ans shall be subnile:3 ~r Planntng copartmnt appro el. -
The plans shall address all areas and aspects of the tract requ
landscaping end Irrigation tO be tnstlllld tnclud¶n , but not
re, larkdy p luring, street trees, slope llntTn , and tndlvt~al
treat 3are landscaping, and Shall confern tO tr~ ltlr~'*rdS set forth
tn the tract's approvod DestUn Yengel ((xhtblt n).
h. Reef-taunted mchantcel aqutFmnt shall not be perutiled within the
suNfvilton, however solar' equt nt or In other ene.rg~ saving
device shill be periltrial Idth PI~MnIng buplr~ilnt ipprovll.
t. All. front 3fires shall be protided vlth landscaping and automatic
Irrigation.
A plat plan shall be submitted to the Planning De rimeat rsuent to
Secttel 18.30 of Ordinance No, )48 accompanied by airappliCable
filing fees, as e plot plan that Is not subject to the collfornta
Envirometal Quality Act te not transetttod to any governrental
ageaq other than the Mvorstde County Planning Oelartmnt, The plot
de shill ensure the conformrice of the find site dovololxant Vtth
[~trlct'I appreved Design lineal ([xhtbit fi), and sial1 conlath the
fol outrig elmhis:
I. A final stte plan sholdn the lots building footprints, all
setbacks, fences and/or v1~1,, and Moor plan and elevation
asstFeents to Individual lots.
Z. One (I) color lad intertall sample beere (maxIM stze of 8 X 13
tmhes by 3/8 tnch thick) containing rattle color, texture and
intertel switches or Fhot rsphs ~vhtcli me3f be free suppliers'
brochures). Zndlcatl oo the°~are the ellis address ami phone
fiSTIN TDiTAT~VE 13UICT I0. 23267 Amd. f!
Condittoe of Approval
Page lO
nabera of beth the sample board prepafar and the product
3. One ( ) CoO of the arch¶lecture1 elevltlons colored to represent
h e]ec~Ycolor combinations, vtth s~nbols kayed to the color
ins
end materials beard. The erieten color and rotorill discripe(arts
shall be touted on the elevation.
SIx 6) co Sos of each of glossy photograph¶c color prints (size 8
4. x bo h ,for ,nd .,,,ls bo,rd ,., . ored
1
architectural e ovations for parmnenZ flltng~ hearing body revtev
end agenc~ distribution. All ~ttln9 ~st be legible.
Satd plot pTae shall require the approve1 of the PTlnnlng Dtrector
prtor to the IsSuance of any butld~ng pem~ts for lots tncluded wtthtn
the lot plea. The submittal of Iot planc prior to the issuance of
butldTngparmtts me~ be phased provided:
z. A separate plot plan shell be submitted to the Plennang Department
for eac~ phase, which shall be accompanied b~ appropriate f11~ng
2. Each Individual plot plea shell be epprovnd b~ the Planning
Director tier to the souante o
included v~thte ~ f building permits for lots
that plot plan.
k. A fencing plan shell be subriffled for PTannlng Department approval.
This plan shell be fn substantial cOnformrico vath the Design ~nuel
([xhlblt Iq end tab fete account In7 recoanendstions of the required
no~so stud),.
Pr?or to the Issuing of OCCUPANCY PENalT$ the following conditions shell
be satisfied:
All landscaping and trrJgatioe abel1' be instolled fe accordance vtth
approvnd plies prior to the issuance of occupanCy paroles. If
seasonal c~.litlees do net pratt pleatin , tataria landscaping and
erosJoe control measures shall be ettltz:f Is approved b7 the Planning
Oftactor and the Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to occupancy, yells and fences the11 be festallad in accordance
with app~vnd plans.
c. Notwithstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical stud
ts required for riotee attenuation purposes, the he1 hie of
requtrtd ells shall be datemined b~ the ecoustlca~ study where
applicable.
VESTING T~TAT!VE
Canallain ef AI;rlffel
d. Prior to occupancy, the no! hborhood ark stte isaac!sled v4th that
phase Of dlvlloFeent shs~l be dlvlF:ped tn iccordancl w spprovecl
plans.
e. Prior to occupancy, the wll silt open space lots associated vtth that
base of davalo nt shill be traproved tn accordance vtth the Oestgn
~lnual (Exhibit H~and approved Landscaping Plans.
6N: sc ~ bc
10/1~/88
taRDy D. Stamen
liverside County Iqannlng CA)mission
4090 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Re: Tract 14up 23267 - Amend
Schadute A - Team I
Ladies and Gentle. n:
With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tongsgive land
division map, the had Department raceamends that the landdivider provide the
following street improvement plans and/or read dedications in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and Bierside County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461). _
It Is understood that the ton*olive rap correctly shins acceptable centstithe
prattles, ill existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate Q'I, and that their amissIon or unacclptablltty amy require the rap
I for further consideration. Thnse Ordinances and the following
to ha resuh- tied
conditions ire essential parts end m reelrement occurring in ONE is is binding
as though occurring in a11. They ere Intendnd to be complementar~ and to
I
describe the conditions for · ceq;leto design of the Imllrevement. A11 quest one
regarding the tree amenleg of the conditions shall be referred to the ROad
CommlssioMr:s Office.
1. The landdivider shell protect downstream properties from damages
caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, I.e., concentra-
tion of diversion of time. Protection shell be raftdad by
cons,rye, in; adequate drainage feeill,ins InoledVn~ enlarging
exlltl facilities or b/licerio a drainage easement or by
both. nX11 ere{note assails she{1 be shotit no the find amp
and noted as follows: 'Drainage Easement - no belldante
· e~structlonse or eecroiclanents b land f1115 ire ·1loved% The
protection sial1 be as apprevnd ~y tJa Road Department.
The landdivider shill acce t and preterIT dispose of all offsite
dralMge fiewing onto or ~rocgll the site, Za the event the
Road Cama~ssioner peaIts the use of strata for drainage
IN eat the rovlslons of ~rtlcle X! of Ordinance No. 4~0
~]r~lppl7. S~uld the ;anti,Ins agend the street
upoctt/or the use of streets be prehlbftnd for drainage
purpose, the subdivider shell preyIda ida;aiD drainage
fatill,Ins as apprevwd b), the Road Departmet.
· act MOF 13267 - Mend
3. at]or drainage is InvoJved on this Tenddivision and its resolution
shall be as approved by the Road Departanna.
4. "An $tret abel1 be laproved within the dedicated right of Wal in
Iccordlnce with County Standard MO. ZOl, (7E'/~OO).
age Street (Jam Avenue) shell be froproved within the dealfelled
right of W In accordance with Modified Count~ $tandlrd Me. lot
(H'182'),
· S' Street and "C" Street (south of Creek Lane) shell be improved
r n
within the dedicated right of way in icon dance with Con ty
Standard Me. X03e Section A, (44'/66').
7. The renalwing interior streets shill be improved within the
dad catad ri ht of way
ZIo,, A. i. accord....tth co.. su.dard No. to4.
8. 1he landdivider shall cmply with the Callruns recomendations as
eatlined fn their letter dated alrch 30, ~g88 (I copy of uhlch Is
attached)e .prior to the recordsaloe of the flat rap.
11~ landdivider shall provide etllit~ clearance free Rancho Callt-
otals altar District prior to the recordallen of the final rap.
A copy of the final sap shall be submitted to Celtruns, DIstrict 08,
Post Office DOE Z310 Sen krnardinoo California gZ403& Attention:
Pro]oct Developant for reeled and approval prior to recordalien.
XZ* The mxIma cantorline gradJet shall not exceed iSS,
Z2. 1he sinJess centerlice radii sha~l be 300* or aS epproved b~ the
Road DeFiant,
1ocetod
v~th centrote curb and gutter
notch up asphalt concrete
Tract 14ap 23267
h~teber 7. iNI
~.e 3
paving; reconstruction; or resvrfacfng of existing paving as
datemined b~ Coltraps within a 7Z foot half width dedicated right
of ~q in accordance with State Standard Ilo. A2-8.
All driveways shell conform to the applicable Riverside County
Standards and shill be shown On the street I rovemint plieS. A
miRIam of four fat of fell height curb shalm~ be constructed
batean drlve~ys.
k~en blockwalls are required to he constructed on top of 11o a, a
debris rataattaR wall shall he constructed St the street rfgCt of
May line to prevent silting of sidewalks as appreved b~ the Road
Commissioner.
The miniram garage setback shall be 30 feat meaiured from the face
Of curb.
TLTe
· T' Sires shell be Improved with 34 feet of asphalt concrete
pavement within I 4g foot pert width dedicated rf ht of ely in
accordance v~th Count/Standard No. 103, Section ~. (2 '/33').
Concrete sidewalks shell be conserected throughout the landdivision
tn accordance ~lth Count/Standard he. 400 and 401 {curb sldevaTk).
k access road (Tacated Nr~ of Tamowls Creek along the extension
of els Streets James Avenue to the east) to the nearest paved read
maintained by the Count/shall be constructed within the public
rfg~.t of wfn accordance with County Standard No. lOS, Sacira
I, (32'/60'5 at a grade and alignmat as approved by the bad n
Commissioner, This fs acetsar/for circulation purposes.
Primary and secondary access roads (at the 1scations of Lone Lfnda
Street end the extension of Pert Avanue~ aS" Street) to the nearest
paved rod mintsfRed I~y the Count/shell be constructed vtthin the
1it right of m In mariaall v4lt.
'l~SZfs ,. (3F.'/;)-at e I, da and allies, as approved ~ the
Road C:mefssioner, This fl 'also nucessar/for clroelition purposes.
Trsc~ Kip 23267 - Amend
t~4r 1, 1908
21. Prior to the recordatfon of the final map, the devehper shall
deposit with the RIverside Countl Road Department, I cash sum of
$150.OOper lot Is mltlgatlo6 for trifflc lithe11 Ices. Should
the developer choose to defer the time of eJnuenttm~e mal enter Into
e krltten agreement with the County deferrln9 slid peteeat to the
tim of !ssulnce of a talldiet pemlt.
Improvement plans shall be lash upon a centerline profile extending
a einfmum of 300feat beyond the project Ix)undlrils It I grade end
alignment is approvod by the RIverside ClNn Raid Camlistener.
Coalition of road Improvements does not tiptoe acceptance for
rainfinance b7 CountT.
23. Lqectrlcal and conmJnlcetfonl trenches Shill be provided In
~ccordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
Aspbaltic mulslon (fog see1) shall be appI!H not less than
fifteen deTs following placement of the liphilt lurflclng and Shill
be Ip lied at I rite of 0.0S gillon per swirl yard. Asphalt
amllT~n shill conform to Sections 370 39 led 14 of the State
Standard Specifications.
Standard cul-de-sacs end Imuckhs and off-set col-de-sloe shill be
conserected throughout the lenddivision.
26, Cor~er cutlacks tn conference with Count7 Standard No. 805 sh~11
n
M shoe on the ft el mp end offered for dedication.
27. Lot ICCeSI shall be restricted on Still lilthas7 7t, "A" Sirefit and
· 10 St at (~aes Avenue) and so noted on the fine1 rap. r
Landdhtato~s creating cut or f111 slopel edJlcent to the streets
shall provide erosion cantrole light distance control led ll0pt
elsemintS IS Illproved b7 the Raid Departmet.
MI centerline Intersections shall be et 900 with · manlie 50'
tangent muured free floe line,
30. 1he street deaf n end leanant concept of this project abel1 be
coordinated all hncho Villages ~leSSaent District #Z9 e
end T
Z3OS3.
ctolNr ~,
a~ S
Street lighting shall be rtqulred tn accordance with Ordinance 460
and 461 throughout the subdivision. The County Service Area (CSA)
Administrator datemines whether this propose1 qualifies under an
existing usessment district or not. if not. the land or, or shill
file an application with LAFCO for annexation Into or creation of
· 'Lf bring Assessment District' In accordance with Governmental
Code ~ on SSO00.
I
be tim res nslblllty of the applicant. Traffic sTgnlng and
striping s~·11 be done b), County forces with ·11 tncurrml costs
Imm b.y the applicant.
GH:Tb
Ve~17 7ours, 4
'~o:dH~Tvtlton Englnlllf~~r
County of Riyerside
DAT~
September 12, 1981
~uviroumental BeElib Servetea
Znviromental Health Sereices has rained Tract lisp 23267,
a-ended No. 2 dated Septabet 6, 1988. Our current
coBerie v111 remln as etated in our letter dated april 12, 1988.
COUNTY oF i IVERSIDE . "' 'J--
DEPARTMENTof HEALTH '
· ,,,,~e,,,,,e MIV~3~IDE: COUNTY PLANNING DEPT. RIVEI:ISIDECOUNTY
?.~ee~,.,e, 4080 Lemon Street PLANNING C;EPARTM-'NT
~'~./ :Riverside. CA else,1
Attn: Oreg Neal
lqZ! Tract Hap 23287; That portsen of Parcel I. 3.3 and 4 of
Parcel Hap legg3 recorded in Book 134. Pages 13 through 18
of Parcel Naps In Riverside County. California.
(~Sl Lots)
Oentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative Hap
He. ~3367 and recomaends that:
a water system shall be installed accordin9 to
plans and specification as approved by the water
cospony and the Health Department. Permanent
prindts of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in triplicate. wash a minimum scale
not lees than one inch equals 300 feet. along wash
the original driving to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter.
location of valves and fire hydrants; paps and
Joint specifications, and the siam of the main
at tam Junetim of the new system to the
aimtinS systmm, The plans shall comply in
all respects with Div. g, Part l, Chapter ? of
the California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title ]Z. Chapter 16. and Oeneral
Order No. 10B of the Public Utilities Centslion of the
State of California. vhen applicable.
......... -4,
J&fet7
.e
g
................ h Locke
...... ' DfJtrict
:liVEdSiDE coun;--,,l
PLArlIli~O DE A CIi1EI1L
t rvioe - lath l. Devidoou
County Aviation
Comlssloner Iresson
RIVERSIDE C"~:
IN.ANNIN~3 DEPA.q~
Miter
!psl I/ater
(f. Edison
-if. Gas
Jone
perfatten 18
n High 5cho~1
'er of Comerco
rks
irEStiM IF. ACT 23267 - (re-z) - I.A.
- Theten Anticon Co,. - t~ncho
- bathe hi/fouls Ares -/Star
hpetvieo~eZ Dbtrtct - Sough of !LIbya:
- I~edule A - 193.? ,roe into ,6
- Concurrent C/net CZ 5150. Y%l 23299
Hod It0 - A.F. gZS-160-0i0 to 013; L~
tZfp0ide00Z-003
eeee described shove, sisal with the etgeched etee up. A bad
· merinO hos been testerlynX7 orbedaXed for AptiX 28, lieS. If it
'ea So to pnbl~a hearSuS. ·
· reeoemndtg/ous ere rqueeted prior to AprLX l&t ltSI in ordeg thet u~
· f- the stuff report for thfJ pertieuXmr ate.
e~ question rulerdieS tkb lime pZesee do mot hesitate go tostecg
1363
.... Yeetee~ Tract 232IT.should he required to emma to on eppropritge
.... slencTwhidm provides Imrk mmd re~restioe serftees. Annexsties rill
· mitilste Weeto of increased population to be soL'we and fete (perk
developmHmnt), shall he used to squire mud develop s perk site.
Hm~aet, Vsllrr-Vide Recrestiou mud '-
DSst~,
· r. 9~ FLOOR 48-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM
Riverside County Planning Dept.
Page Two
Attn: Ores Noel
Aprzi 12, Ig88 '
The plins shell be signed by s registered engineer and
vatfir company with the relieving certificetion:
certify that the design of the voter system in Tract
Map 23267 is in accordance with the valor system
expansion plans of the Rancho California Voter District
and that the voter service.storage and distribution
system viii be adsquote to provide valor service to
such tract. This certification does not constitute 8
gulrsntee that it viii supply valor to such tract at
any specific quantities, flows or pressures for tire
protection or any other purpose". This certification
shall be liVned by a responsible official of the water
company. ;bg_B&!al_!M!~_~! IV~B~Id_~g_~bR_CgVD~
~B_~hg_£~gV!!~_[g£_~b!_£1Sg£d!&lgO_gL_~bl.[~Oli_~lg-
3'his Department has m statement from the Rancho California
Voter District &aresing to lerve domestic visor to each lid
every iot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed v~th the
subdivider. It viii be necessary for the financial
arrangements to be made przor to the recordsfish of the
final nip.
This Department his
~ater District agreeing to allow the subdivision sew&go
system to be connected to the severs of the District. The
sever system Ihlil be instilled according to piano lid
speciflcatlons as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the'
plans of the sever system shall be submitted in triplicate.
along with the original driving, to the County Surveyor. The
prints sh~ll show the internal pipe diameter, location
manholeas cmpiete profiles, pipe and Joint specificsrich,
maul the size of the mowers it the Junction of the new sys~0~
to the existing system. k single pitt tndiclttng location
of tower lines tad viter lines shill be · portion of the
sewage plane and profiles. ~he plane shall be signed by a
registered engineer and the sewer district with the
telloving certifications '! certify thlk the design of the
sever system in Tract Nip 23aS7 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion pllns of the Eastern Municipal Water
DisLrtct sad that the vests disposal system II adequate st
this t/me to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed
tract."
Riverside County Planning
Page Throe
A~'A~: Greg Neml
April 12, 1988
Ze~Viat,ggg_tbl_£eSS£gl&tgn_g(_&bl~g~Ol1_gl9.
viii be necessary for financial.arrangements Lo be made
przor to the recordsSign of the final map.
It viII be necessary for the annexation proceedxngs to be
completely finmiized prior to recordsties of the final map.
San~tarian
rnvIronmental Health Services
SH:tac
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
October 18, 1988
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attentions Regional Team No. l
Greg ieal
Ladies and Gentlemane
Rat Vesting Tract 23267
Amended No, 2
This is · proposal to divide approximately 194 acres for single
family housing in the Temecula area. The site is located along
both sides of Temecula Creek about 1200 feet west of MarSatire
Road,
This project is located on the floor of Temecula Valley and is
subject to bothriverino ~lowe from Temeculo Creek and.sheeting
offsets storm ~a~s from two other sources. The main course of
Temecula Creek flo~l through the center of the tract. Storm
water ~rom · 800 acre watershed to the north traverses the north-
ern half of this project. Duo to poorly defined drainage pat-
terns, it is probable that large amounts of storm water emanating
from tributaries north of Tamscull Creek and from fir to the east
may sheet west, generally parallel to Temecula Creek, and across
the site. Unless those storm fio~o are dealt with by upstream
development in the watershed, the developer will have to con-
struct drainage facilities to protect this project.
Onsets storm r~moff is proposed to be conveyed vie both streets
and storm drains to Temecula Creek Channel, Several acres of
entire area at t~ southeastern tract boundary is proposed to be
diverted to the Nighboring develolment. The applicant (Thetam
America Corp,) lms sulmitted documentation that the developer to
east (Oreat American Development Co.) plane to accept this run-
off. A decit sho~ing evidence of this agreement should be
submitted t~ the District for review prior to rooordation of the
final map,
IS9. The District's interest in the con-
figureteen of the main channel is limited to its adequacy as a
flood protsctic~ facility. It should be noted that the present
design does not mils for habitat mitigation within the channel,
nor does it sl~ee/fically provide for Joint usa of the facility
(e.g., equestrian or bicycle trails)° A change in channel con-
figuration Or right of way width may require redosign of this
proposal,
Riverside County
Planning Department
Res Vesting Tract 23267
Amended No. 2
-2- October %8, 1988
The developer's Exhibit *So proposes to collect storm flows from
the g00 acre canyon at De Petrels Road and convey them to
Te·ecula Creek in · trapezoidal channel. Two collection dikes
are proposed on t, he east side of Margarita Road to capture storm
flo~s traveling parallel to Temecula Creek. These flo~s would
combine with the northern stream Just north of Highway 79.
Following are the District*s reconnendationst
1. Temecula Creek Channel should be constructed throught
this tract as shown on the tentative map.
Both Temecula Creek Channel and the drainage facilities
proposed to convey storm flows from the north and east
should be built to District standards. Some of these
facilities are proposed to be constructed by Assessment
District 159. If these have not been installed by the
time grading permits ·re requested, it will be necessary
for this tract to construct drainage structures necessary-
to protect it from tributary lO0-year storm flows.
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be sub-
mitted to the District sad County for review sad approval
prior to recordation of th· final map.
A portion of the proposed project is in a flood plain and
may affect "waters of the United Starale, 'wetlands" or
"Jurisdictional 8tremubedl", therefore, in accordance
with th· requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Progrsm sad Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through
73) sad County Ordinance No. 4SIt
A flood s~udy consisting of KEC-2 calculations, cross
sections, asps and other data should be prep·red to
the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEHA) and the District for the purpose of
raising the effective Flood Insurance lute Map of
LbsproJect site. The submittal of the study should
be ~on~urrent with the initial submittal of the
related project isprovement plans sad final District
approval viII not be given until · Conditional Letter
of Hap Revision (CLOMA) has been received from FEMA.
be
A a~pyof appropriate correspondence end neoessarY
permits from those government agencies from which
approval is required by Federal or lute law (such as
,C~dr~Oa;: v-n insets 404 ermit or Department of Fish
16093 agresment~ should be provided
to
District prior to the final District approval of the
R~verside County
Planning Department
Re· Vesting Treat 23267
Asended No. 2
-3- October 18, 1988
Onsits drainage facilities located outside of road right
of way should be contained within drainage easements
shown on l~s final map. A note should be added to the
final map stating, 'Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings and obstructions'.
off·its drainage facilities should be located within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property owners. The documents should be
recorded and s copy submitted to the District prior to
retardation of the final map.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergenc~ sacape should also be provided.
The property*s street and lot grading should be designed
in s sannar that perpetuates the existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage
area, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, s
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or
diverted stem flows. A copy of the recorded drainage
easement should be submitted to the District for review.
prior to the retardation of the final map.
Development of ehee property should be coordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
v~tsrcourses remain ~nobstructed and stormwaters are not
diverted free one watershed to another, This may require
the construelion of temporary drainage facilities of
offsite construction and grading,
A copy oft he improvement plans, grading plans and final
map alan·with supporting hydrais·is and hydraulic
calculations should be submitted to the District via the
Road Depart·ant for review and approval prior to
retardation of the final map. Grading plans should be
approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Res Vesting Tract 23267
Amended ~o, 2
-4- October 18, 1988
Guestions concerning this matter may be referred to Bob Cullon of
this off~ce at 714/787-2333,
Very truly yours,
~ ~IqI~ETH L. EDWAIctDS
ccs RANPAC
BCsbab
h.u~&tq~m~ofa
t'9-Sl
4GIQLi!m:m$1tmLeuIIIIL
It~CA~I
(714) 717..i,6~
AT'Dh
GIgGIft. At
TILAC3' 23267 - A,HZ~ED 12
seth respect to the mendirises of approval for the above reformneed land division,
the Ftrn Department recommends the following fire protest/on measures be provided
in accordance with giverside County Ordinances and/or rocogutssd fire protectlee
utahdeEd·:
FI]t/PROTF~IOR
Schedule ,&e fire protection approved standard ftra hydrants, (6wn&"x2J") Zetatad
sue ae each street l·tersecttoe and spaced no sore than 330 feet apart Ln any
directfoe, with us portion of any lot frontage sore than 165 feet from · hydrant.
Kentuna fire floe shall be lO00 GPK for 2 hours duration at 20 PSi.
Appl/cunt;de~LZopmr shall furnish one espy of the valor eyeton plane to the Fire
Departseat far review. Plane thttl confore to fire hydra·e types, locstio· and
opecLug. and, the gymtee eRaIt soot the fire floe requiresants. Plane shall be
$tlaed/appro~ed by · registered civil engineer and the local water company with
the following certificateoat el meretry that the deella of the water eyeten 10
tu accordance nith the requiresonto prescribed by the liveraide County rite
DeparUmne.n
11o requited enter eyetee, including fire hydra·to, shell be installed and accepted
by the appealfiats sorer agency prior co any coubuattble building uterlal be/el
placed on an individual lot.
Prior to tho recordaeLoa of the final sop, the epplieaae/devoloper shall provide
kiterunts or secondary access as approved by the County bad Departstent.
HITIGATIOil
Prior to tbs retardation of the fLeet sop. the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Fire Department, · each am of 0&00.00 per lee/unit el sttilarson
for fire protectin impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
paysout. beltha soy enter into a written agreesone with the County deferring said
paFMnt to the that of issuance of a build/rig porter.
AIX questions tegatdint ths meaning of conditions shall be referred to the
Planning and Engineering staff.
ChLaf Fire DepsrCseut PZsnnar
Tales, lianainS Officer
4
iVEq3iDE COUIl u
PLAIIlliilG
October :Z, 1988
Mr. Warren L. Shefling
Job o.
~ncho C/11fornti Area
Gentlemen:
Ve have revte~ed your report entitled *Fault Hazard and Preltmloary
GeotecMIcal investigation, 24Z~ Acres, Southwest of the intersection of
Kargarita Road and State Xfghwly 79, Itancho California, Rherstde County, CAt*
,,..d to s.,..,.,,.,.,. r.,,.,,..
YNr reimrt dstarMned that:
]. Exploretar7 fault trenches ],3 end 4 exposed fault offsets associated
vlth the active Vtldomar flult. The lecatton of thts fault ts sho~m on
Plate ~A, hotechntcel Map of your report.
l'ae setsale data for the tlslnore (Waldotar fault) Fault Zone located
De stta Is as fellwee
RaztH Probable Earthquake -7.0
Utlckar lieintrude)
Peak EreEnd AcceTeretton - 0.639
0ursUm of ltronl I!ottoe - 30 seconds
3. The se~tlemnt otenttal under setsmtc loadtrig for the on-stta and
kedrockaltari&Vs ts mderate to ver~ lee, respecthely.
4o The imteattel for 11qulflCtfOn 1l considered high tn the larger
drainage cmrses rlthtn hubs end Wolf Valleys on the site.
LI eflctloe my occur In the fom of differential aettlemnt, sand
ladle, sad hterel spreading.
e LEMON ~E-ro P FI.OOR
II~I~SIDF.. QM.EOfU~ 925(21
(711) 7874181
OASIS STNEET, ROOM 3o4
INDIO, CALIFORNIA
(61 l) 342-e,~
Highland Sells [riginsuring
October IZ, 1988
S. A minor lindsiIde area my be located at the centrll portion of the
site, shown on Plate IA, GeotachntcaT Hap.
The alluvial soils generally ere considered to have o lay expansion
· potamain1. The slitatones vtthin the Pauba formSton on llta can be
eoderetaTy to hfghT~ expansive.
The fIN grained alluvta1 soils in the major drainage courses ira
genera11~ coopresslblo fn the upper five feet.
The currut area dealUnited as the 100.year floodplain for ~amecula
Creek exceeds the seismic-Induced flood 1nundalton are that would
a
result during instantaneous failure of Skinner or Vail Itesarvotrs.
Ont~ the toast erel of Pauba Valley would be affactad.
Ground itssure development tS considered a significant hazard wtthln
the so~thnst portton of the stte, due to the presence of active
faulting in thts area.
Your report racemended that:
1. A SO foot sotlack zone free beth stdes of the Utldowr Fault Zone is
required far human occupanCy structures. This setback ts designated on_
Plate IA, Seatschines1 Hap.
The following t111 mitigate the liquefaction potamain1 on this stte:
a. A coalacted f111 set Ilong with a gravel blanket and additional
footing reinforcement sheold be used for structures.
b. Structure1 setbacks from tops of f111 slopes toeing into
hl
11qsefactfon prone areas sou d be used.
c. Lateral spreading hazards slang Pouba Creek ere mitt tied by the
placmentofLowL4nds Drive end the J0Ofootwtde lutldtng
Setback area. Thts affects Lots 490-503
d. 6rudJn item Tamecalm Creek will Involve the placement of upwards
of lS Foet:Pcoepactsdf111 overt hue. SOfnet Of recoanended
o11uvlal ranevils, fn order to ooorl~ e11afnots the potsntis1 for
liefaction Induced loss of herIn or lind bulls.
e. In order to reduce e 111 ht pOlllbtTI of lltorll spreadin ilo
TeaKarl C~elk for LotS ~60, lel, 17~-t[76 IIS,
tnd iNl either the building setback shoo{d be Increased to tvlce
taste befit or post-tonslonod slabs Ind additional foundaSia
alaSant for lots
3. Alleyto1 ells should be overexcavated fn the 1mr r axistin dretnage
and calVeel ireas to I minimum depth of S foot. ~:re feasible total
removal Of lOOse IIIUVlll 80111 to bedreck tl moanended. As an
alternative, settlemat armaments and monitoring oat be used In the
area with thfc~ ellavia.
Highland SotlS [ntngeertng - 3 - October 12, lg88
4. Additional Investigation of the possible landslide located at the
central portion of the site is recoe~ended prtor tO Site grading.
The SO foot humn occupancy setback t~ the northeast and the property
bounds tO the southvest of the located active fault vt11 BittRain the
portenttel ha,are Of ground fissure development on the stte.
It ls ovr optnine thlt the report YeS prepared tn I competent manner consistent
~th the present 'stste-o~-the-art' end satisfies the requireNots of the
A1 tst-Prtolo Special Studtea Zones Act, the associated RIverside County
O:~vtnance No. 547, and additional Informlion requtred under the California
EnvironmenLo1 Quality Act raytar. Final approval of this report ts hereby
Riven.
Me recon~end that the folioring conditions be satisfied before rotordating of
the ftnal parcel mp or County poreits associated vtth thts project:
The *Fault Hazard Zone' sho~ on Plate ]A, (Gagtechnical flap) fn your
report shall be delineated on the Environmental Constraints Sheet
([.C.S.), and the area tn between the setback 1toes shill be Tubeled
· Fault Hazard Area.u
2. A note shill be placed on the E.C.S. ststtng:
*Thts property Is affected by earth eke faulting. Structures for
human occupanc~ shall not be 111ove~uln the Fault Hazard Area. Thts
constraint affects parcels 490 through S04, 602 and dO3.'
3. Notes shall be placed o~ the final land division mp stating:
· County Geolo tc Report fig. 488 was prepared for this property on
(a) Februar~ 3, 3988, and ts on the Rtve stde County Planntn
file at r ,g
De rtmnt. Spooffie 1tom Of concern tn this report are as
fo~lmes: active earthquake faulting, liquefaction, ground
fissures, lendsliding, seismic induced flooding, end uncoepacted
trench beckfill.·
(b) 'This property ts affected by earthquake faulttn . Structures
for humneccvpanc1 shell not be I11oued tn the 1lult Hazard
Are. The constraint effects parcels 490 through S04t 602 and
fig, as lh~m on the Icenape log Envtronmntll Constraints
Sheet, the or~gtnal otahlcb~s on file st the office of the
Riverside County Surveyor.
A copy of the final mp and Environmotel Conatrafnto Sheet shall be
submitted to the PTenning Departaunt Engineering GenTgRist for flyfew
end apprnvsl.
Htghlind Soils [nlngeerlng - 4 - October ZZ, 1988
The exploratory trenches ere beckfilled. tat not co,~acted, end Shall
be Collected under the direction of the project eotechnJcel Ingtnoer
tf enl structures ore contemplated for constructTon over eny porttons
ef t~ese trenches.
Very truly yours.
SAKes1
C;oCo
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTRENT
Roger S. Streeter - Plnfng D4 ector
Itanpec - Dan Olllom
1346 - brl Hart
htTdlng & Safety - Nora Lostbom (2)
Grog Nee1 - Teem ~
RECEIVEDNOV 8 1989
RiVE:DiDE COUEi,
PLanninG DEPARCfilEi
November 2,1989
Geo Soils, Znc.
575! Palmar Way, Suite D
Carlshad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Robert G. Crfsman
Mr. Paul L. t4cC1ay
E. Hetca e
Hr. Timothy If
SUBJECT:
A1qulst-Prtolo Spectal Studtes Zone
N. O. 9g4-SD
Tentative Tract 23267
APN: 926-016-002,003,010,011,012,013
County GeoTogtc Report No. 488 (update)
Rencho California Area
Gentlemen:
have revtewed your report entitled "Fault Invest1 atfon, Tract 23267, OTd
Vat1 Ranch, RIverside County, CA," dated August 24, 1989.
Your report datemined that:
1. The Wtldomar fault, as previous1 Identified by HIghland Sotls
Engineering, ts not present on t~e project stte.
2. The fault contacts Indicated by HIghland Sotll Enginefirth are actually
erostonal/strattgraphlc contacts produced by deposition o~ recent
a11uvtum or colluvtum agetnst bedrock of the Paube fomatton along the
margtn of the Wolf Valley a11uvte1 platn.
3. There Is a lack of geomorphlc expression characteristics of faulting on
the site.
4. Rased on eertal photographs, the active trace of the Wtldomar fauTt,
northwest of Pauba Valley, appears to bend eastyard tn Pauba Valley and
die out east of the project site.
Your report recon~nended that there ts no need to place any fault related
setback or restriction tn the study area.
4080 LEMON STREET, 9T" FLOOR 46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOu t~? ~
:: Geo Soils. Inc.' - 2- ' November 2. 1989 I
[t ts our optnton that the report was prepared tn a competent manner consistent
with the present "state-of*the-art" and satisfies the requirements of the
Alqutst-Prlolo Specta| Studtea Zones Act and the associated RIverside County
Ordinance No. 547. final approval of this report is hereby gtven.
We recommend Chat the following condttlon be satisfied before tssuance of any
County pemt ts associated wtth thts project:
Uncompacted exploratory trench backft11 shall be addressed by the ProJect
Geotechntcal Engineer prtor to Issuance of project gridtrig permtts.
[t should be noted that County Geologtc Report No. 488 entttled "Fault Hazard
and Preliminary Geotechntcal Znvesttgatton, 242~ acres, Southwest of the
t.t.rs.ctto. of ,o.d ..d St.t..,gh..y 79. ,..cho C.,tfor.t..
Riverside County, dated February 3, 1988 was previously prepared for this
property. Your report now supercedes only the fault setback aspects of that
report.
Very t~uly yours,
SAK:rd
c.c. Crosby, Heed, linton & Assoc. -Engtneer
CDII; - Earl Hart
Butldtng i Safety - Norm Lostbom (2)
Pllnntng Team 1. Klm Johnson
INTIII-OIPARTMINTAL Ll'rrllt
COUNTY OF RIVERBIDE
October 7, 1988
m:
Greg Heal, Plenntn Department
George HellIris, Cllllf Park Planner
SLeJ[CT: 17 23267,23299 Old Yatl Ranch, [Zl 281
The County Parks Department hal revteved the above referenced document and
offers the foil·wing recommendations.
Perks and Recreation
Our department supports the extension of I regional open space/natural green
belt along the Tencull Creek. This Is consistent vtth other splctftc plans
end development along this creek. Our department will require in offer of
dedication of this area be rode to the Parks Department on the final tract
raps. {Haglone1 Park 'A'.)
legtonal Perk 'l'tl actually · local park and ts located tn 0 strategic
Irestalon to serve ·l a cmnunlty park. It does not qualify el a regional park
ires due to Its limited SIZe; however, the historic adobe contained vtthtn
this area cam be successfully preserved with · corn·unity park setting end
Interpreted.
O~erall, the perks contained within this develoiaent show a lack of large
sparta ftllds capable of Iccomodattng organized sports activities and this
need to be examined.
Caanuntty and neighborhood parks should be developed to the satisfaction of
the local county s~vlcl are· (CSA).
le~.reetlon Tr·lll
bglonal Plrk "A" ale the Tencull Creek correctly Identified the need for a
rlmry equestrian t~l ·1 shm. The tr·ll Toe·lion and davelolaent should
C l~countarll~ncl&rdl.
As Indicated, on the attached exhibit No. 1., a Class ! blcJ~le lane needs to
be protided for ·tong the Teemcull Creek. This should be developed to county
n
sis dards and have connecting access to local street Class ZZ btc~cle lanes.
4
fir. Grq lies1, Planning Departant
On the attached exhtbJt No. 1, provision for access to the Teaecule Creek by o
secondary rtdtng end hiking trail must be incorporated into the project. This
vtll utilize the proposed reinforced concrete b~x culvert under State
HIghway 7l end provide access to the trails In the creek for residents to the
north of this project. Thts access/secondary troll should be developed to a
alntEaVldth lZ feet and to county atandarda.
clearance. (See attached detalr.)
Cultural/HIstoric Resources
me proposed stta of the Old Vail Ranch project ta in on extremely sensitive
area for cultural resources. in the thorough cultural resources assessment he
prepared, archaeologist Christopher Drover discusses the htstorlc taD-story
adobe Vail Ranch House end a large LetsenD |ndfen archaeological site.
The Parks Departeent's Htstory Otvtston cmmends Renpac Engineering
Corporation for Its sensitive consideration of these culture1 resources tn the
[IR. ke concur vtth the roposed mitigation measures of recovering artliners
ira the archaeological atlas and mklng these available to the publlc tnen
IntarpretJve center, and preserving the Vail Ranch House through
rehabilitation and adopttun reuse. A library, Comunft~ center, smll museme
or restaurant weld e11 be eppro rfata vies for the house, as vould
centt,,ed residential use tf prepare; mintstried.
In addition to the etttgatlen measures sentinned tn the [IR, the Parks
Department requesta fUll-time monitoring by a qualified archaeologist durtn
the grading process. This fs essential due to the extreme likelihoed o~
unknwn archaeological resources existtag on the site.
If any historic resources surface, Dtana Setder, Htstor7 Divtston D!rKtor,
should be nottfted st (714)787-2HI. Should yon have questions regarding
perks, recreation, or trail altars, please contact me or Hare Braver of this
departBefit.
G8/1 0186
c: Pnal learn, Director, Perks Department Sm Ferd, DeFer7 Director, Parks Departant
Diana Seider, Rlltor~ Divtalon DIrector, Parks Department
Nsrc Iramr, Asstalent Planner, Parks Deportant
February 2t, iris
neeanne
!ulXdLuS end Safety
hrveTor - Dot Dude
bed Deportmat
!oaXth - h~phLuche
rice ProtoctLo~
Flood Control D/otr/ct
Yleb & GiBe
LUCO, I lalalay
U.I. PoetaX Service - lath Z. Davidann
Rancl~o Calff. Nater
Eastern Municipal Water
Southern Callf. Edison
Southern CIllf. Gas
General TelepJone
Dept. of Transportation 18
Teencola Elem~
[lstnore Union Htgh School
Teencola Chamber of Cameron
Ha. Palmar
Stirre Club
ValleyWide Parks
RiVERSiDE councu
PL
Arming DEPARCIilEI1.
County Avtatton
Cmisstonlr Iresson
RIVERSID'= C."': ?t~'Y
pLANNING DEPA-=''~
VESTING TIIACT 23267 - (to-Z) - Z.A. 325A~
-111oteniaerScau CoT1;. -bAthe Pacific
-Sancho California &roe - First
SupervSeorlol District - South of ItSbray
79 end east of HatStrite load - I-I
- lobeduse A - 193,7 ecru into 596
- Canontrout Cooeo CZ 5150, Tell 13199 -
Hod 120 - A.P, 926-160-0t0 to 0131
926-016-002-003
County Plrks
lleaee taylor the cole described abevet elanS vitb the attached cell nap. A Lend
D/vieloo Coasttree matinS has bean teutativet7 achedaXed for AprSZ 28, till. It it
clears, it ell1 then In to pubXic hutinS, ·
Tour coneonto and recoumndetious ere toqueteed prior to April 1i, 1918 in order that ve
nay bsclude ibm in the egoIf report foe this particular use.
!honed yon have any quellions relied/hi the- items plasma do not heeLtote to contact
Glee Nee1 at 717-1363
lisanor
Teethe heat 23267.ebould be required to mmon to an appropriate
eloneyvhieh provides park end recreation meETLace. Annexation vtlt
eSCalate tepeeto of beteased paparation to be served and fete (park
development), th811 be used to Icebe end develop · park site,
llJjJg pr4-t ham a aZ
4080 LEMON STREET. 0~ FLOOR 4&209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304
· RlVi:,~mut: UUUNTy
"LANNING DEPARTMENT
October 18, 1981
Nr. Rtchard HscHott~, Supervising Planner
Riverside County PlenntnO 0spartaante
4080 Lemon 8t~reet~, II~ Floor
RIverside, CA 12601
9UBJECT: Vest. trig Tentat. tve Tract HaD Number 23267
Oear Hr.
The f0110wtn8 8~rtze8 our ftndtnge regarding the ftecal
tapact analysts for t~he project tdent~tfted abeve. The
appendix at~tached 8ueearizee the basic aeeum~t~ton8 used tn
the analysts, PTeeee nots thlZ these results reflect t~he
current Teve18 of . 8ervtce provided by t~he Country based on
Fiscal Year 1981 - 1817 actual coet~8 (per CSptt~8 factore)
end Departmental end Audtt~r-Cont~roller revtew of olMrat~1one
end factllt~y coats for services reviewed using case et~udy
inelyete. 8taff t4 the Grout~h Fiscal Zmpect~ Teek Force end
DepartJeente ere current~ly reviewing 8errice levels provided
end t~he need t~ 1norease ~he levels of 8ervtce. Current'
ftndtnge are that extet~tng 11ve18 of service are not
adequate ins oat cane. 8heuld the desired level of service
be u~lltzed in t~e fiscal analysts performed, tt~ Nould
849ntftcant~1y netsue the cee~e aeeoctat~ed v~th thee
developments.
C(XMTY FUND
(Ollerat~ione and
Maintenance)
FISCAL It!PACT
AFTER BUILDOUT
CUIiULATZV9 FZSCAL
ZHPACT AT 8UZLIX)UT
Country General
Fire
Free Ltbrsry
($09,811)
($10,380)
(8328)
(818,426)
($20,720)
9URTOTALCClMTY (S60,200)
($39,904)
Road Fund 88,330 919,460
(873,790)
(824,3")
RabettT.-~mbtM~/~!mb!~m~wCentt
408tt~e~S'J~L~ · LIIH.q. OGR · IIIV~I~e.~~I · C/IQ~'/4S~
The follcxetng special circumstances apply 14 ~ht8 project:
1. The 9valeper 88e~.nPttone included 8 factor of 2.1
persons per dwelltag unit. CAO staff ut411zed · fee%or of
2.69 pare·hi I)er household. which t8 closer to the
countywide average for ~hts type of unit.
Z. CAO atoll he8 reviewed library costs with Ltbrsry
personnel and incorporated actual operations end maintenance
cast8 into the analysts. Using Library staff estimates of
W cost8 of provIding the current level of service,
c~stdertng the increase tn population, this project should
result tn one-tie captie1 fsctllty costs of $76,263
(library apace, volumes) end ongotng annual operation· and
saintchance coet~ of 114,694. Ltbrery staff hal Indicated
Wet the current level of earvice 48 not adequate.
3. Floc~lContr01 staff hie Indicated that flc~l contro]
facilities constructed within Zone 7 are unlikely to be
sufficiently fun~ for maintenance coats. Current
estimate8 Indicate ~het funding short·gee should occur for
W next ten years. Suggested Btttgattorl measures Include ·
cash deposit by ~he project developer or use of in
ana88ment mechanism. The ~unt of deposit ~ld be
clet4rmtned by · present value analysts end pro3eet timing.
The coat of maintaining flood control facilities will
not be known until finat deetgn phases. when facility mode
have been fully Identified. FIOCH:I ~trol staff w~11,
therefore, condition project approve1· to ~denttfy · means
~ financing fectltty maintenance end 'operation (If
necessary) prtor to recorderton of subdivisions.
bed on tJ~e analysts and assuming that the average sales
price of the unite will be 8142.688, overall Vesting
Tentative Tract 23267 w~11 have 8 negative fiscal Impact at
I)utlclcxjt. of 824,3.. After Ilu~ldout. this project will have
in annual negative fi·¢·1 tWect to the County of 173,970 st
curren~ levels of service.
Znl~t·i Review By:
Review A~rOveHtBy:
ATTACHMENT III
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) No. 281 in conjunction with the approval of Change of Zone No. 5150 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23267 and 23299. The EIR included mitigation
measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 which supersedes Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23299 has 87 fewer residential units than Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299 and
therefore, will generate less traffic and result in reduced impacts to the environment
and to public services and utilities. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 will
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts. The Conditions of
Approval are adequate to mitigate any potential impacts regarding drainage and non-
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 1516u, of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendure
has been prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there
have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant
effects not previously discussed or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation
measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant
impacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A: \VTM23267 30
CITY OF TEMECULA )
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
,/ SP ZC
S P ZONE
r ~-z,~.s"
C ZONE MAP ) A E
P.O. D T
CITY OF TEMECULA )
THE MEADOWS
S 2~9 t ~
VA
HAWI,
/
SWAP
MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATi .~_/~--~, i ~
EXI"II!ilT
CASE # .,,F,/..,,o ~.~ z-~ :
,lieelgiN;
d
<1:
I-
Z
Z
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
December 10, 1991
Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861-1
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council APPROVE Final Vesting Tract Map No. 26861-1 subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
DISCUSSION:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 was approved by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission on May 20, 1991, and the City of Temecula City Council on July
2, 1991.
Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861-1 is a 3~ unit single family detached condominium
development on approximately 3.46 acres located on the south side of Highway 79
between Pala Road and Margarita Road. Lots 2 through 6 total approximately 11.22
acres, thus the total site is roughly 14.68 acres. The site is currently vacant and
has been graded. The applicant is Presley of San Diego.
The following fees have been paid lot deferred) for Tract Map No. 26861-1:
* Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees
* Fire Mitigation Fees
* Stephen's K-Rat Fees {at Crading Permit)
$ 5,100.00
$ 13,600.00
$ 28,626.00
ENG\T26861-1 .STF 1
The following bonds have been posted for Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861-1:
Faithful Labor and
Performance Materials
Streets & Drainage $ 41,000.00
Water 63,000.00
Sewer '0-
Survey Monuments
$ 9,500.00
$ 20,500.00
31,500.00
-0-
S U MMA R Y:
Staff recommends that the City Council APPROVE Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861 -
1 subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
TN:ks
Attachments: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Development Checklist
Fees and Securities Report
Location Map
Copy of Final Map
Planning Staff Report
ENC\T26861-1 .STF ]Z
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Tract Map No. 26861-1
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
{ K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 20
Condition No. 21
Condition No. u,7
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No. 51
Fire Mitigation
Condition No. 12
Flood Control
(ADP)
Riverside Service Area
(RSA)
Condition No. 68
N/A
ENG\T26861-I.STF 3
Ronald J. Parks
Mayor
Patricia H. Birdsall
Mayor Pro Tern
K~rel E lindernans
CouncllmemDer
Peg Moore
Cour~cl~memDer
J. Sal Mufioz
CouncdmemOer
David E DixOn
Oty Manager
(714) 694-1989
FAX (714} 694-1999
Ci_ty of Temecula
/./~'l:lusiness Park Drive ,Temecula, California 92390
July 11. 1991
Mr. Raymond A. Casey
Presley of San Diego
15010 Avenue of Science, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92128
SUBJECT: Final Conditions of Approval
For Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861
Dear Mr. Casey:
On July 2, 1991, the City of Temecula Planning Commission approved
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 subject to the enclosed Conditions
of Approval. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 is a proposal to
develop 142 single family detached condomlnium units on approximately 14
acres located on the south side of Highway 79 between Pala Road and
Margarita Road.
This approval is effective until July 2, 1993 unless extended in accordance
with Ordinance Li60, Section 8.u,. Written request for a time extension must
be submitted to the City of Temecula a minimum of 30 days prior to the
expiration date.
If you have any further questions regarding this subject, please contact
the Planning Department at (714) 69~-6~,00.
Sincerely,
Richard A'
Case Planner
Gary Thornhill
Planning Director
RA/GT:ks
CC:
Engineering Department
Fire Department
Case File
PLN~N I NG\ TH26861 \k s
ATTACHMENT I I
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861
Project Description: Development of 1~,2 sinqle
family condominium units on approximately 1LL 68
acres of land situated south of Hiqhway 79 between
Pala Road and Marqarita Road.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 926-016-025
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance ~,60, Schedule A, 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 conditlonally approved vesting tentative tract map will expire two years
after the approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance ~,60. The
expiration date is July 2, 1993.
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.
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.
10.
11.
12.
13.
15.
16.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5 shall be
approved by the City Council and shall be effective. Lots created by this land
division shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zone
ultimately applied to the property.
A maintenance district shall be established for maintenance along Highway 79,
the developer/applicant shall pay for all costs relating to establishment of the
district.
A Homoowners Association shall be established for maintenance of Open
Space/Common Area and the developer/applicant shall pay for all costs
relating to establishment of the Homeowners Association.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department~s transmittal dated January 2LL
1991, a copy of which is attached.
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 R-3 {General Residential ) 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.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
(1)
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for
the following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
A:26861-~.R.~"M~ 2
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape
elements shall include earth betruing, 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
Highway 79, "A" Street, and Via Rio Temecula. Wooden fencing
shall not be allowed on the perimeter of the project. All lots with
slopes leading down from the lot shall be provided with gates in
the wall for maintenance access.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road
right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-d-
way.
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.
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:
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.
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
A:26861-AR.V~ 3
37.
18.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, 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:
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.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical
engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be
applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce
ambient interior noise levels to u,5 Ldn.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivision~s approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant [Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal,
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
g. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten 110) feet.
A:26861-~R.VTM~ 4
h. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
19.
20.
22.
23.
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.
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 superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the subdivider shall submit to the Planning
Director an agreement with the Community Services District which
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider has satisfied
Quimby Act requirements in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No.
~,60. The agreement shall be approved by the City Council.
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 Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in California Government Code Section 66~,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 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,
Prior to occupancy of Phase One, the construction of the recreation area shall
be completed.
A:26861-~R.Fl~ 5
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 inte
an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code
Section 66u,62 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 developerrs cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
25.
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. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
26.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCSR's') shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract
maps. The CCF, R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining
the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, all buildings
in common open areas, and all interior slopes.
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 CCE, 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 CCF, 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.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or lot, either ( 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas and
facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities.
A:26861-)R.V~ 6
30.
The front yard landscaping shall be maintained by the Homoowners Association
and shall be identified in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC~,R~s).
31.
Maintenance for all exterior walls, landscaped and open areas, including
parkways, shall be provided for in the CCSR~s.
32.
Within forty-eight (0,8) hours of the approval of this 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 Eight Hundred,
Seventy-Five Dollars ($875.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty
Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Came
Code Section 711.0,(d)(3) 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 10, Cal. Code of
Regulations 15090,. If within such forty-eight (0,8) 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 Game Code Section 711.0,{c).
Engineerinq 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.
33.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
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. 0,60,
PRIOR TO RECORD~T4eN OF THE FINAL MAP:
35,. As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality;
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;
36.
37.
38.
39.
CalTrans; 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.
B, C, D, E, F, and G Streets shall be private streets and shall be improved
with 33 feet of asphalt concrete pavement including rolled curb, or bonds for
the street improvements may be posted, 5 foot utility easements shall be
dedicated running parallel on both sides of street. A 5 foot sidewalk shall be
constructed on one side minimum of all private streets.
Dedication shall be made or shown to exist to provide for a 71 foot half street
right-d-way for State Highway Route 79 (lq2' right-of-way).
Construct half street improvements in a 39 foot dedicated right-of-way plus
one 12-foot lane, er bends for the street improvements may be posted, in
accordance with County Standard No. 111 {78'/56' ). The improvements for
street "A" may be phased per the approved phasing plan and as directed by
the City Engineer.
In the event that State Highway 79 is not constructed by Assessment District
159 prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for Phase One, the
developer shall design and construct a deceleration lane west of Street "A"
and an acceleration lane east of Street "A", per CalTrans standards. State
Highway 79 improvements shall be bonded for prior to Final Map.
"A" Street access shall be limited to right turning movements in and right
turning movements out only. There shall be no left turns permitted and no
provision for such movements shall be provided for on Highway 79 South.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Highway 79 and so noted on the final
map with the exception of approved public road connections as approved by
the City Engineer.
Dedicate a 38 foot minimum easement for public utilities and emergency
vehicles access for all private streets and drives.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
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:26861-~R.VTM~ 8
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCF, R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CCF, 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 CCF, R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The
CCF, R's shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The CCF, R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CCF, 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 CCF, RIs and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owneris
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 CCF, R's shall provide for the effective establishment. operation,
management, use. repair and maintenance of all common areas and
facilities.
The CCF, R's shall provide that the property shall be developed.
operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CCF, RIs shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CCF, R's. then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform. at the owneris sole expense, any maintenance required
thereon by the CCF, 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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further
subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or
numbered lots.
ii.
All parkways, open 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.
iii.
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 CCF, 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.
/~:26861-AR.VTM~ 9
51.
S2.
S3.
SU...
SS.
The developer, or the developer*s successor, shall execute a current Public
F~lttties Agreement with the City of Temecula which provides for the payment
of the sum of money per residential unit then established by Resolution of the
City Council, prior to the issuance of any building permits for any individual
lots.
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, street lights, signing,
striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping.
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. 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.
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.
56. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0,50 percent.
57.
Street improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives
shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
58.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2u," x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
59.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
60.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
61.
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.
62.
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."
63.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with
supporting hydrolegic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
The subdivider 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. u,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.
65.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
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.
67.
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 ElR/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
A:26861-~R.V~ 11
this Agreement, ~Developer shall poet a bond to secure payment of the Public
Facility Fee, 'The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 a 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 GRADING PERMITS:
68.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plen 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.
69.
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the following
right-d-way:
State Hiqhway 79
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.
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 affect 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 a square foot, not to
excaed $10.000. O.ve,op.r und.rstands that said A?;;;..;?., m.y r.qulr. th.
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated g 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.
~:2sa6~-aa.wM~ 12
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
72.
Construct all street improvements as conditioned, including but not limited to,
curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees
and street lights on all interior private and public streets.
73.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than lu, 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
9u, of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION:
75.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Traffic
Engineer, and approved by the City Engineer, for State Route 79 and "A"
Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
76.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design criteria.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
77.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered
Traffic Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure
and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City
Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
78.
All signing and striping shall be installed per the City requirements and the
approved signing and striping plan.
79. A stop sign shall be installed at the following location:
"A" Street at State Hiqhway No. 79
80.
A secondary paved access road shall be constructed with a 28' minimum width
of asphalt concrete pavement within the dedicated right-d-way, in accordance
with CalTrans and Riverside County standards, to the intersection of SR 79
and Lime Street or SR79 and Margarita Road to facilitate left turning
movements on to and from SR79.
81.
The developer shall contribute 50 percent (50%) of the cost for design and
construction of the signal at the intersection of State Route 79 South and Lime
Street minus the assessed traffic signal mitigation fee.
/h26861-/~.~"M'~ 13
Department of Buildinq and Safety
82. Submit approved Tentative Tract Map to the Department of Building and
Safety for addressing and street name review.
8:3. School fees shall be paid to Temecula Unified School District prior to permit
issuance.
8~,. Lighting on site pool area and recreation area shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance #655.
85. Submit pool plans to Riverside County Health Department for review prior to
structural plan review by the Department of Building and Safety.
86. Pool excavation area shall be fenced immediately the same day as excavation
is complete. All plumbing trenches shall be fenced.
87. Obtain clearances from Land Use and from Building and Safety Departments.
88. Provide a geological report at time of submittal for plan review.
26861 -AR. ~ 14
MINUTE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
DATE:
July 5, 1991
TO:
Gary Thornhill
City of Temecula Planning Department
MEETING OF: July 2, 1991
AGENDA ITEM
No.: Item 10
SUBJECT:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861
The motion was made by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore
to approve staff recommendation with the modification in the conditions of approval to
remove "exterior building walls as well as" from Condition No. 30 and to add "exterior
walls" to Condition No. 31.
10.1
Adopt the addendum to EIR No. 281 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
26861.
10.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-70
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
26861 TO DEVELOP A 14.68 ACRE PARCEL INTO 142 SINGLE FAMILY
DETACHED CONDO MINIUM UNITS LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTH
SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 BETWEEN PALA AND MARGARITA ROADS
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-016-925
The motion was carried by the following vote:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY,
under penalty of perjury, the forgoing to be the official action taken by the City Council at the
above meeting.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 5th day of July, 1991.
[SEAL]
ITEM NO. 9
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Councilmembers
Marl~,~(~chenduszko,
December 10, 1991
Assistant City Manager
AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE SIXTH AND FRONT STREET
PROPERTY
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1)
The City Council authorize staff to conduct detailed negotiations and execute
all necessary documents to purchase the vacant lot at the northeast corner of
the intersection at Sixth and Front Streets at a price not to exceed $917, 100,
plus the customary buyer's share of closing costs;
2)
Adopt a resolution entitled Resolution 91 -_ amending the Fiscal Year 1991-92
budget to appropriate $925,000 for the purchase of Assessor's Parcel Number
922-023-020.
STAFF REPORT:
Staff recommends the purchase of this approximate 61,000 square foot parcel. The
authorization should include approval of a purchase price not to exceed $917,100,
plus the customary buyer's share of closing costs. The City will condition the
purchase of the property with full releases relating to toxins and other conditions as
appropriate. It is also recommended that a deposit of $5,000 be put into escrow and
that if escrow cannot be closed due to the circumstances beyond the City's control,
the seller will return the deposit to the City upon demand. Staff will use a local
Temecula escrow company.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This purchase is part of the Redevelopment portion of the Capital Improvement Plan
for 1991-92. The property will cost no more than $917,100, and will be repaid by
redevelopment agency tax increment bond proceeds.
Attachment: Resolution
a:staffrnar.2
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE FISCAL
YEAR 1991-92 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE $925,000
FOR TIlE PURCHASE OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER 922-023-020
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
SECTION 1. That the FY 1991-92 Annual Budget of the City of Temecula is hereby
amended to appropriate $925,000.00 from Unreserved Fund Balance to Account No. 001-199-
120-44-5700 for the purchase of land.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED, this 10th day of December, 1991.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
4/Resos224
ITEM NO. 10
ORDINANCE NO. 91-43
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-codified 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. 91-43 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of November, 1991, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
of __, 1991, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
5/ords91-43 -2-
EXHIBIT "A"
PROPOSED LETTER TO THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
To Developer, Engineer, or Contractor
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
The City of Temecula has assembled Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction and
adopted the drawings by City Council as Ordinance 91-
The Standard Drawings will become effective January 10, 1992, and will be available for
purchase at the City of Temecula Public Works Counter for $17.50 per set, or $.25 per single
sheet.
To minimize any fiscal impact, projects or developments will be reviewed per the following
guidelines:
1. Existing projects or developments with plans submitted prior to January 1 O, 1992 and
signed by the City Engineer prior to March 1, 1992, shall be constructed utilizing the
standards to which they were designed.
2. Projects or developments existing and under construction shall continue to be
constructed utilizing the standards to which they were designed.
3. Projects or developments with plans submitted after January 10, 1992 shall be
designed and constructed utilizing the City of Temecula Standards.
4. Projects or developments with plans which may have been submitted prior to
January 10, 1992, and have not been signed by the City Engineer prior to March 1,
1992, shall be designed and constructed utilizing the City of Temecula Standards.
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Mike Wolff, Senior Public Works
Inspector, at (714) 694-6411.
Sincerely,
Tim D. Serlet
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
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:
"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 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."
"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."
S\STAFFRPT\24085 19
ITEM NO. 11
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Planning Department
MEMORANDUM
December 10, 1991
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 were previously before the City
Council on October 8, 1991 and November 12, 1991. These items were continued both times at the
applicants' request.
The applicant is once again requesting a continuance to the January 14, 1991 City Council meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council continue Change of Zone No.
5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 at the request of
the applicant.
bert c'Reirt , aWilliam cFrost c ssoci8tes
PROFESBI,ZjINAL ENGINEERS PLANNEF~S & SURVE"rORS
J.N. 25800
December 3, 1991
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City. Council
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Subject: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25320
Dear Mayor Parks and Councilmembers:
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25320 is scheduled for hearing before the City Council on
December 10, 1991. On behalf of Bedford Development Company, we respectfully request
that this item be continued to the January 14, 1992 meeting to allow the City time to
complete its independent appraisal of the property and determine the appropriate course
of action.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Robert B. Kemble
Director of Planning
Temecula Regional Office
CC:
June Greek - City Clerk
Gary Thornhill - Planning Director
Csaba Ko - Bedford Development Company
RBK:dd
ITEM NO. 12
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council, City Manager
Planning Department
December 10, 1991
Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
The above projects were continued from the November 26, 1991 City Council meeting in order to allow
staff the opportunity to review the projects relative to the time constraints mandated under the Permit
Streamlining Act (ACT). Both of the projects were submitted to the County of Riverside in November of
1988. There is no record in either of the project files which would indicate a determination of complete
or incompleteness which is required by the ACT within 30 days of the application submittal. The only
action the County rendered was Land Development Committee (LoD.C.) hearings requesting additional
information.
An application is automatically deemed complete if the project proponent is not notified of a determination
of incompleteness within that 30 day time period. After the application is deemed complete, the lead
agency has 180 days to take an action (approve or deny) on a proposal.
The two projects were transferred to the City of Temecula in April of 1990. At that point Staff continued
to request some of the information that the County had asked for and in addition, information that the
City Staff deemed important. As a result of the applicants response time in submitting some of the
information (archaeology, revised slope stability) the projects did not go to a public hearing until October,
1991.
As a result of the period of time involved with the processing of this application of Staff recommends that
the City Council take action at tonights public hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council;
vgw 1.
ADOPT the Negative Declarations for Tentative Parcel Maps
24085 and 24086 and;
APPROVE Resolution 91-_ approving Tentative Parcel Maps
24085 based on the analysis contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the Conditions of Approval
APPROVE Resolution 91-_ approving Tentative Parcel Maps
24086 based on the analysis contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the Conditions of Approval
S\PLANNING\24085-2zL086
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
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
10.
11.
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.
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.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. 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.
4.
3.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval TPM 24085
Planning Commission Minutes dated 10/21/91.
Planning Commission Staff Report 10/07/91
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Surrounding Zoning
D. Tentative Parcel Map 24085
S\STAFFRPT~24085,cc 4
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:
SECTION 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:
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\STAI:FRPT~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 8
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 3. 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 ,co 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
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.
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 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 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\STAFFRPT~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 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.'"
"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. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
21.
22.
23.
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,ce 1 ~t
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\STAFFRPT~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
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.
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.
Department 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.
40.
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 22
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 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 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 2 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTEB8
OCTOBER 2l, 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
3.0.1
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 MAPB 24086
PC/v~IO/'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:
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:
Vacailt
S\STAFFRPT\24085 I
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:
72.6 acres
55.9 acres
57
0,98 acres
Cut = 363,000
yards
Fill = 363,000
yards
cubic
cubic
BACKGROUND:
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.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
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 ImOacts
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
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 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
Creek/Temecula 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\STAFFRPT~24085 4
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. 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.
Bioloeical Imoacts
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
Landscape 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 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
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\STAFFf~T~24085 7
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN,
SWAP AND ZONNING
CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
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.
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.
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.
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 hea ring, 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 1 I
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
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 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 1 at
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 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\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 21st 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: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\STAFFRPT~24085 16
Water
July 3, 1991
City of Temecula
Engineering Department
43180 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92592
SUI~IEC'~F: 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:ajw116
cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician
Background
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
\
INFEIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
/
/
Name of Proponent:
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment: '\,
Agency Requiring '\
Assessment: "\
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
/
Environmental linDacts
NBS Lowry
'\\ 27403 Ynez Road,/Suite 209 \, Temecula. CA 92390
(~1'4) 676-6225
August 21 ."1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
\.
Parcel Mao Nos. 24085 and 24086
\\
'\,, S~)uthwesterlv of Diaz Road boun~ed
\by the future extension of Winchester~
/ Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterly sides of the site.
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
/
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
Yes Maybe No
X _ _
Disruptions, displacements. compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
X
S~bstantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
S~STAFFRPl'~24085
COUNTY OF RIVEREIDE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
4065 COUNTY CIRCLE OR. RIVERSIDe., CA. 92503 (Miilin~ Address - P.O. Box 7600 92515-7600}
FAX (TI4} 3S&.4S21
.September 17, 1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
TEMECULA, CA 92590
ATTN: Scott Wright:
RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 24085: BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF
PARCEL MAP N0. 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS, RlVra~SlDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA.
(57 lots)
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No.
24085 and recommends:
A water system shall be installed according to plans and
specifications as approved by the water company and the
Health Department. Permanent prlnts of the plans of the
water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a
m~nzmum scale not less than one lnch equals 200 feet, along
with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The
prlnts shall show the internal pipe diameter, locatlon of
valves and fire hydrants; pipe and aolnt specifications, and
the size of the main at the 3unction of the new system to
the existing system. The plans shall comply zn all respects
wzth Div, 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and
Safety'Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22,
Chapter 18, and General Order No. 103 of the Public
Utzlities 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, is in accordance wlth 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".
C~ty of Temecula
Page Two
Atti~ !?l:;jtt Wright
Sr, ptember 17, 1991
This certification does not constitute a guarantee that
it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any smeclflc
quantities, fiow~ or pressures for fire protection or any
other Ourpose", Thl~ certlflcatxon shall be signed bv
resoonsxble official of the water company, Ih~_,R!AR~_.~J!~t._h~
~.~ s~_.. ~.._~%_._~..L.~.Q..L.~.. ~h~__E~_~U_e.~.L__f-~_.3=b.e._C~t~ r ~_~.~ On.
~he.~ ~ na i..._~
This subdivision has a statement from the Rancho Cal~fornia
Water D~strlct agreeing to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand provld~ng
satisfactory f~nanclal arrangements are completed w~th the
subdivider, It w~ll be necessary for flnanclai arrangement~
to be made prior to the recordatlon of the f~nal map,
This subdivision ~s within the Eastern Municipal Water
D~strict and shall be connected to the ~ewers of the
DIstrict, 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 ~ubmltted
~n triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City
of Temecula, The prints shall show the ~nternal plpe
diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, p~pe and
3o~nt specificat~ons and the size of the sewers at the
Junction of the new system to the existing system, A s~ngle
plat Indicating location of ~ewer lines and water l~nes
shall be a portion of the sewage plans and prof~le~. The
plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer
district with the following certification: "l certify that
the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map NO, 24085 ~s ~n
accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the
Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal
~ystem is adequate at this time to treat the antlc~pated
wastes from the proposed parcel map,"
:iiVE:i)iDE county
PL nn;n6 DEhtRClTIEnC
October 16, 1989
Schaefer Dixon Associates
23 Mauchly
Irvlne, CA 92718
Attention:
Mr. Paul Davis
Mr. Nicholas F. Selmeczy
Mr. Michael L. Leonard, Sr.
SUBJECT:
Seismic-Geologic/Liquefaction Hazard
Project No. 9R-4332C
Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086
APN: 909-120-020,022
County Geologic Report No. 627
Rancho California Area
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entitled 'Report
on GaDtechnical Investigation, Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085,
24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated
June 7, 1989 and your responses to County Geologic Review, dated August 15,
1989 and September 21, 1989.
It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were
entitled 1.) 'Preliminary GaDtechnical Investigation, Proposed
Industrial/Commercial Site, West of Cherry Street and Olaz Road, A.D. No. 155,
Rancho California, Riverside County, CA' by Leighton and Associates, dated June
23, 1986, and 2.) "Engineering Geologic Investigation of Faulting and
Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, AO No. 155,
Rancho California, Riverside County, CA,' by Leighton and Associates, dated
August 18, 1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for
ground ftssuring in the area, which occurred in late 1987. It is understood
that your report now supercedes these previous reports for the subject
property.
Your report detemlned 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 more northerly, coincident with a strong
photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are
delineated on Plate 1, Geotechntcal 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 Hines and G~ulogy criteria.
3. The Willard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly
portion of the site are Judged to be pre-Holocene in age.
4080 LEMON STREET, 9"' FLOOR
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92201
(619~ 342-8277
Schaefer Dtxon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989
The Whittter-Elstnore fault zone is considered capable of the highest
ground motions at the site, A ZOO-year probable magnitude earthquake
of 6,3 on this fault would result In a peak horizontal ground
acceleration of 0,41g at the stte.
Ltquefiable and marginally 11queftable zones are present tn the
lower-lying portton of the site, below a depth of approximately 15
feeS. The 11quellable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical
~ap, revtsed 8-15-89/9-21-89.
Surface subsidence may be tnduced 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 Murrteta Creek Channel relative to
the liqueftable 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, surftcial failure.
Ground Ttssuring 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-exlsting 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, their ln-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 soil liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity,
surface subsidence and lateral spreading shall be re-evaluated for each
Individual structure on the stte when gradtng and butldtng plans b~come
available.
The napped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be
deltnelted on the project gradtrig plans. In addition, the disturbed
surftclal materials shall be completely remo~!d during grading, in
conformmnce with standard earthwork precttcer.
Schaefer Dixon Associates - 3 - October 16, 1989
Recomnendations 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 recomend 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 B-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 Recomnended 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 Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the
Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern
are as follows: earthquake faulting, flssuring and ground
subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench
backfill.'
3. The E.C.S. and/or project maps shall be sulmttted to the Planning
Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval,
4. The exploratory trench beckfill shall be addressed by the project
geotechntcal engineering prior to Issuance of grading permits.
Liquefaction reports for individual structures sbell be submitted to
the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval
prior to Plot Plan approval. ..
Schaefer Dixon Associates - 4 - October 16, 1989 -..
The reconrnendatlons made in your report for mitigation of Seismic/geologic
hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project.
Very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Roger S. S/~/eeter - Planning Dt,rector
StYyen .A, Kupferman ' .'
Engineering Geologist ,~/
CEG-1205
SAK:al
c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen
CDMG - Earl Hart
Building & Safety (2) - Norm Lostbom
John Chtu - Team I
September 6, 1989
DIleA~ITMeNTAL LITTIll
COUNTY' DF RIVERSIDE
PLANNING DEPARTNENT
FROM:
RE:
John Chtu - Team 5
Steven A. Kupfennan - Engineering Geologist
Tentative Parcel Maps 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 Maps 24085, 24086, Rancho
California, Riverside County, CA,' by Schaefer 0txon Associates dated August
16, 1989.
This report determined that:
Tentative Parcel Map 24085 will be graded with cut slopes ranging up to
25 feet high and ftll slopes approximately 10 feet high, both at 2:1
(horizontal: vertical).
Tentative Parcel Map 24086 wilT be graded with 2:1 (H:V) cut and fill
slopes less than 30 feet high.
The Pauba fonmtton in the planned cut ares consists primarily of
moderately hard to hard, moderately fractured, locally friable
sandstones and siltstones.
Proposed cut slopes made in Pauba fornatton sediments, having
fa.rabl.-orl.nt, bedd ..V ,1...s. are .xpect be grossly stable at
2:1 (H:V) to a maxtmm ght of 29 feet.
5. Surftcial erosion is possible in both cut and fill slopes of granular
Pauba forration materials.
This report recommended that:
1. Cut slope excavations should be observed during grading by the project
engineering geologist·
John C~tu
September 6, 1989
Dralnage on cut and f111 slopes should be dlrectnd a~ey froe the slope
face, Dratnage devtces should be constructed as per the Untfom
Bu41d(ng Code,
3. Proper landscaping should be establ(shed 1minedlately after construction
and mtntatned.
4. Slope ~ash and topsot1 mtertals exposed tn cut slopes should be
removed and replaced ~!th compacted f111 materials,
This report satisfies the General Plan reclutrement for · slope stability
report. the recoeaendatlons made In this report should be adhered to in the
destgn and construction of this project.
SAK:al
FIRF, 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 TEPLECULA
PLANNING DEPT
PARCEL MAP 24085 AMD
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"x2½"x21") 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
MEG / tm
PLANNING DIVISION
f'l RIVERSLDE OFF1CE
3760 12th Sob:t, Ri,,~ni&,, CA 92501
(714) 2754777 * FAX (714) 369.7451
f'l TEMNCULA OFFICE
41002 Coun~ G:nm. Drln, Suite 225, Tem~:ula. CA 92390
(714) 694-5070 '* FAX (714) 694-5076
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.
22.
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,
o Civil Engineer
~ · NBS/Lowry
ZS:slw
RECE!VE_P,, ':""
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
November 16, 1990
City of Temecuia
Post Office Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
Attn: Planning Department
Scott Wright
Ladies and Gentlemen:
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.
_/
~eptem~ber 17, 1991
\1
\
~.c__o._r....d_~.LQn_...LD_f_.... ~_h_~._ ..L.~ n__a._l_._ .~..~7~..
\
\
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be
compietely final.ized prior to recordatlon of the final map.
Sincer~ly, \,
~nvltonment~it~°~rvlc,,
SM:dr
City of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
~990
-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 of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
~990
-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 should 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 receives offsite runoff from the hills to
the southwest. Should Parcel Map 21383 not develop,
adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to
collect all of the tributary flows and convey them to
Murrieta Creek.
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 faciiities 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 shouId be graded to drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet.
10.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is e×ceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed.
11.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should ats~ 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. The
encroachment permit application should be processed and
approved concurrently with the improvement plans.
Prior to 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
developer 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 of Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 24085
Amended No. 3
Dated August 7,
1990
-5- November 16, 1990
15. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shali be
protected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows.
]6. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities.
17.
18.
9.
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 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.
S%8TAFFRPT%24Oe5 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 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 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
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 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.
S\STAFFRPT\24085 2 1
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 22
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\STAI:FRPT~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.
Department 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~STAFFFIPT\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.
8%STAFFRPT%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%STAFFRPl~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 provide~J 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 27
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.
73.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
right-of-way.
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:
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 29
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 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.
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\STAFFRPT~2408S 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:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Parcel MaD Nos. 24085 and 24086
Location of Proposal:
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
· southwesterly sides of the site.
Environmental Impacts
(Explanati.ons 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
X
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
S%STAFFRPT%24085 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~24085 33
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 NQ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPl~24085 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
8n 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
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\STAFFRPl~24085 3 6
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?
Yqi 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?
Y~i Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFF~240eS 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?
Yq~ Maybe No
X
X
X
B _ X
S~STAFFRP~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.b.
3.d.
3.9.
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~STAFFRPT~24085 4 1
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
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 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.
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\STAFFR-°T~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.
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 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 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.
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.
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 Lowry
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula, CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
II
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086
Location of Proposal:
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.)
YeS Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
X
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
S\STAFFRPT~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.cc 3 1
Plant
e.
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)?
be
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.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?
X
Maybe
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?
Yqi Maybe NO
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~STAFFRPT~24085.cc 36
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?
Yq~ Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT\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 An 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.e.
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\STAFFF~T%24085.cc 38
2.a,b,c.
3,a,
3.b.
3,c,
3.d.
3,8,
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 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.
3.i.
No. Prior to recordat'ion of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
S%STAFFRPT~24085 .cc 39
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a,b.
5.c.
6.a.
6.b.
9.a,b.
10.a,b.
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.
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 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 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 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
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.
X
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
August 12, 1991
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT~24085 .ce 44
CITY OF TEMECULA )
e
,
/
/
./'
VICINITY MAP
r
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
.LI
SWAP MAP
CA~E NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
e
e
./'
ZONE MAP
CASE NO. ~'~
C.C. DATE
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
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. 25
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 76
Condition No. 49
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 12
Condition No. 71
S\STAFFRPT\24085.Gc 41
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
ITEM NO. 14
ITEM NO. 13
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY r/ ';'/
FINANCE OFFICEF~
CITY MANAGER '
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:
ADQPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No.
24086; and
EXISTING ZONING:
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, MoSC
S~STAFFRPT~24116 .CC 1,
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\STAFFRFI'~40~6.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
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.
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.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1.
2.
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.
S\STAFFRF~240~6.CC 4
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\STAFFRFI~24{j~6.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 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 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:
SECTION 1. Findines. 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\STAFFRPTX24086.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.
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\STAFFRPTN24086.CC ~
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,
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.
SECTION 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\STAFFRPT~240~6 .CC ~ 0
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~STAFFP, PT~240~6.CC ~. 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
parcels on a 69.7 acre site
Assessor's Parcel No.:
24086
To
909-120-020
create 49
Planning 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.
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\STAFFP, F~24086 .CC 12
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.
16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
S\STAFFRF~24086.CC 13
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:
1. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
S\STAI~FRpT~240~6.CC 14
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~STAFFRPT~24086 .CC ~, 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\STAFFRPTX24086 .CC I 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',STAFFRPT',24086.CC ], ?
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).
Deoartment of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this
S\STAFFRPTX24iJ6.CC ]. 8
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\STAFFRPT~24086.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~STAFFRPT~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\STAFFP, FI~240~6,CC 2 1
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\STAFFRPTX240~6.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~STAFFRPT~24086.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."
SXSTAFFRFT~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\STAFlUU'TU4086.CC 26
PARCEL KAPS 24085
-1., ..;.,:.;%%~. ~..~,:7,~,%..9.c:c..,,:o. ci.:' / indust.-:,.1 p.rc.,.. on
side of Diaz Road no:'e west
w,-chest.r Noad. ' r, of ~. f%%%%%' t%% n% o n of'rl'
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
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 HOAGLAND 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 HAP 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 STEWART 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
~- ~ ~4~ ~, southwest of the future
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.:
Prepared By:
Recommendation:
Parcel Map No. 24086
Scott Wright
1. ADOPT the
negative declaration; and
2. ADOPT Resolution
No. 91- recommending
approval of Parcel Map
No. 24086
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
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercialM-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC
Not Requested
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Murrieta Creek
Vacant
S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM
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~24088 .PM 2
ANALYSIS:
Traffic Impacts
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\STAFFRPl'~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).
Drainace
The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta
Creek/Temecuia 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 linDacts
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.
Landscape 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 Adjustments 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.
Lgt 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-i~ffected rocks, pestles, hammerstones,
and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed.
The recommendations of the Archaeological
Assessment are to conduct 8 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~24086.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~24088 .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\STAFF~T~24086.PM I 0
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. 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%24086.RVI 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~24086.PM 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~24Oee.PM 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
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.
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 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\STAFFRPT~24Oe6.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. 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\STAFFI~'I~24Oe6.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
Planning 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 I 7
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%STAFF~°T~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\STAI:FF~T~24088 .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~24088 ,PM 2 2
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~24086 .PM 2 3
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;
CaITrans; 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.Pf~A 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 2 6
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.
mSTAFFRPT%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; 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~STAFFRPT~24088 ,PM ~) 9
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~240ee.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 Lowry
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula. CA 92390
(714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
II
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
6. Location of Proposal:
Environmental Impacts
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.
(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?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
Ye~ Maybe No
X
X
X
S\STAFFI!>T~24088 .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?
Yqi Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 33
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~24086.PM 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:
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~STAFFN:rI~24086.PM 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
8n 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~24088 .PM 3 6
14.
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b, Police protection?
c. Schools?
d $
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
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?
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?
Maybe
NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFt~T%24086.PM
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
37
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?
Y~S Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPl~24086 .PM 3 8
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?
Y~ Mavbq N0
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.
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~24086 .PM 40
2.a,b,c.
3.a.
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\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 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~24086 .PM 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 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 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\STAFFRPl~24086,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-
ticant 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~240ee.PM 46
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Feq
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.
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
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 MaD Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
bv the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterly and
southwesterIv sides of the site.
Environmental ImPacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe NQ
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\STAFFRPTX24086.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,
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~ST^FBm~24086.CC 2 8
Cm
Plant
8.
C m
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 N0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
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 NQ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S',,STAFFRFI'~14086.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?
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~STAF~.CC 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 governmentalservices:
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
X
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
32
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
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?
Yq6 Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFP, PTX~086.CC 3 4
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.
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
S\STAFFRPT~24086.CC ;3 5
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.
~STAFFRPT~6.CC 36
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~STAFFRPl~24C~6.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 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
8\STAFFRFI'~24096.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~STAFFRFI~24086.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 1
CITY OF TEMECULA )
/
/5/ \\\:
SITE_.
//~
./
/
//
.//~
: //
./
./
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE L~ "7/ql
CITY OF TEMECULA )
\ /
//
RLI
SWAP MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
ZONE MAP
CASE NO,
C.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.:Tentative Parcel MaD 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 Approval
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
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY '.
FINANCE OFFICEI~z~----~
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
December 10, 1991
Adult Business Ordinance
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
Oliver Mujica
1. ADOPT Ordinance No. 91-XX entitled:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 5 TO THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE REGUI. A TIONS
OF ADULT BUSINESSES."
City of Temecula
An Ordinance establishing regulations for the establishment and
operation of Adult Businesses.
City Wide
On October 9, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-
18, "an interim urgency ordinance relating to adult businesses
and requiring a permit". The City Council also directed the
Planning Department Staff to prepare a permanent ordinance
establishing regulations for adult businesses due to the
inadequacy of Riverside County Ordinance NO. 348, as it relates
to such uses.
Pursuant to this direction, the Planning Staff, in collaboration
with the City Attorney, has prepared the attached "Draft"
Ordinance which includes the following main components:
S\STAFFRPT\FORM-1 1
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Adult Businesses are permitted only in the C-1/C-P zoning
districts, subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit.
Adult Businesses shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive uses (i.e. residential developments, churches,
schools, parks, etc.).
Adult Businesses shall not be located within 200 feet of
another adult business.
Exhibit "A" graphically illustrates the current zoning districts that
permit adult businesses; and, Exhibit "B" graphically illustrates
the zoning districts that the Planning Staff is proposing to allow
adult businesses subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit.
On October 21, 1991, the Planning Commission considered this
ordinance and forwarded a recommendation of approval by a
vote of 5-0.
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City
Council:
1. ADOPT Ordinance No. 91-XX entitled:
",AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADDING CH,APTER 5 TO THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE REGULATIONS
OF ADULT BUSINESSES."
Attachments:
Ordinance No. 91-XX
Exhibit "A" - Current Zoning Districts
Exhibit "B" - Proposed Zoning Districts
Public Hearing Notice
Planning Commission Resolution No. 91 -XX,
Recommending Approval of Adult Business Ordinance
Planning Commission Staff Report
(Dated October 21, 1991)
Planning Commission Minutes
(Dated October 21, 1991)
ORDINANCE NO. 9~.-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING PORTIONS
OF THE NON-CODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDI-
NANCE'S AND ADDING CHAPTER 5.05 TO THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE
REGULATION OF ADULT BUSINESS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN 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 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 deci-
sions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the follow-
ing requirements are met:
(a) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with
the preparation of the general plan.
(b) The planning agency finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, each of the following:
(l)
There is reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being consid-
ered or studied or which will be studied
within a reasonable time;
(2)
There is little or no probability of substan-
tial 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.
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
1
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 land use regulations are consistent with
the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of
the Government Code, to wit:
(a)
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with
the preparation of the general plan.
(b)
The city council finds, in adopting land use regu-
lations pursuant to this title, each of the fol-
lowing:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that Ordi-
nance No. 91- 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 substan-
tial 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.
WHEREAS, studies conducted in various communities in
other jurisdictions have demonstrated that the proximity and
concentration of adult businesses adjacent to residential,
religious, educational, or other adult businesses can cause other
businesses and residents to move elsewhere. Adult businesses are
linked to increases in crime rates in areas surrounding such
businesses and such businesses may adversely affect the public
health, safety, and welfare of citizens; and
WHEREAS, adult uses are recognized as having serious
objectionable operational characteristics, particularly when
several of them are concentrated under certain circumstances or
located in direct proximity to residential neighborhoods, thereby
having a deleterious effect upon the adjacent areas. Special
regulation of these areas is necessary to ensure that these
adverse effects will not contribute to the blighting or downgrad-
ing of the surrounding neighborhood. The primary control or
regulation is for the purpose of preventing the concentration or
2
location of these uses in a manner that would create such adverse
effects; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance
provides a sufficient number of locations within the City in
which all of the types of businesses regulated by this Ordinance
be conducted. The location and design standards established by
this Ordinance do not unreasonably restrict the development of
adult-oriented businesses; and
WHEREAS, permitting and/or licensing is a legitimate
and reasonable means of accountability to ensure that operators
of sexually oriented business comply with reasonable regulations
and to ensure that operators do not knowingly allow their estab-
lishments to be used as places of illegal sexual activity or
solicitation.
SECTION 2. City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by
reference portions of the non-codified Riverside County Ordi-
nance. On the effective date of this Ordinance, the following
provisions of the non-codified Riverside County Ordinances, which
City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted, are hereby repealed:
(A) Ordinance No. 627 relating to picture arcades.
SECTION 3. Chapter 5.05 is hereby added to the
Temecula Municipal Code, which shall read as follows:
"CHAPTER 5.05
ADULT BUSINESSES
5.05.002 Purpose and Intent. It is purpose and intent of this
Ordinance to provide for the comprehensive and orderly regulation
of adult businesses. It is recognized that these establishments
by their very nature may have serious objectionable operational
characteristics which, when concentrated, can have a deleterious
effect upon areas. In order to protect and preserve the public
health, safety and welfare of the citizenry, especially including
minors, special regulation of the time, place and manner of the
operation and location of these establishments is necessary. The
provisions Of this Ordinance have neither the purpose nor effect
of imposing a limitation or restriction on the content of any
commutative materials, including sexually oriented materials.
5.05.004 Definitions. The following words and phrases shall,
for the purposes of this chapter, be defined as follows, unless
it is clearly apparent from the context that another meaning is
intended.
(a) "Adult Bookstore" means a commercial establishment
which, as one of its principal business purposes,
3
(b)
(c)
offers for sale or rental for any form of consid-
eration any one or more of the following:
(1)
Books, magazines, periodicals, or other
printed matter, or photographs, films, motion
picture, video cassettes or video reproduc-
tions, slides, or other visual representa-
tions which depict or describe "specified
sexual activities" or "specified anatomical
areas"; instruments, devices, or parapherna-
lia which are designed for use is connection
with "specified sexual activities" a commer-
cial establishment may have other principal
business purposes that do not involve the
offering for sale or rental material depict-
ing or describing "specified sexual activi-
ties" or "specified anatomical ares" still be
categorized as Adult Book Store or Adult
Video Store. Such other business purposes
will not serve to exempt to serve such com-
mercial establishments from being categorized
as an Adult Bookstore or Adult Video Store so
long as one of its principal purposes is the
offering for sale or rental for consideration
the specified materials which depict or de-
scribe "specified sexual activities" or
"specified anatomical areas."
"Adult business" means a business which is con-
ducted exclusively for the patronage of adults and
as to which minors are specifically excluded from
patronage, either by law and/or by the operators
of such businesses. "Adult business" also means
and includes any adult arcade, adult bookstore,
adult cabaret, adult hotel or motel, adult the-
ater, adult model studio, body painting studio,
massage parlor and any other business involving
"specified sexual activities" or display or "spec-
ified anatomical areas."
"Adult cabaret" means any nightclub, bar, restau-
rant, or similar establishment which is distin-
guished or characterized by its emphasis in the
entertainment presented on:
(1)
Live performances which is distinguished or
characterized by an emphasis on specified
sexual activities or specified anatomical
area; and/or
(2) Films, motion pictures, video cassettes,
slides or other photographic reproductions
whose dominant or predominant character and
theme is the depiction of specified sexual
activities or specified anatomical areas for
the observation by patrons.
(d)
"Adult hotel/motel" means a hotel, or similar
commercial establishment which:
(1) Offers accommodations to the public for any
form of consideration;
(2)
Provides patrons with close circuit televi-
sion transmissions, films, motion pictures,
video cassettes, slides, or other photograph-
ic reproductions which are characterized by
the depiction or description of "specified
sexual activities" or "specified anatomical
areas;" and has a sign visible for the public
right of way which advertises the availabili-
ty of this adult type of photographic repro-
ductions; or
(3) Offers a sleeping room for rent for a period
of time that is less than ten (10) hours; or
(4)
Allows a tenant or occupant of a sleeping
room to sub-rent the room for a period of
time that is less than ten (10) hours.
(e) "Adult model studio" means any establishment open to
the public where for any form of consideration of
gratuity, human models who display specified anatomical
areas are provided to be observed, sketched, drawn,
painted, sculpted, photographed, or otherwise depicted
by persons other than the proprietor paying such con-
sideration or gratuity. This provision shall not apply
to any school of art, a firm which operated by an
individual, firm association, partnership, corporation
or institution which meets the requirements established
in the Education Code of the State of California of the
issuance or conferring of a diploma.
(f)
"Adult picture arcade" means any place to which
the public is permitted or invited wherein coin or
token-operated, or electronically, electrically,
or mechanically controlled still or motion picture
machines, projectors, or other image producing
devices are maintained to show images to five or
fewer persons per machine, at any one time, and
where the emphasis of the images so displayed is
on depiction of specified sexual activities or
specified anatomical areas.
5
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
(1)
"Adult theater" means a theater, concert hall,
auditorium or similar establishment, either indoor
or outdoor in nature, which presents live enter-
tainment, films, motion pictures, slide photo-
graphs, video cassettes or similar photographic
reproductions which are distinguished or charac-
terized by their emphasis on matter depicting,
describing or relating to specified sexual activi-
ty or specified anatomical areas.
"Body painting studio" means any establishment or
business which provides the service of applying
paint or any other substance, whether transparent
or not, to or on the human body when such body is
wholly or partially nude in terms of specified
anatomical areas.
"Escort" means a person who, for consideration,
agrees or offers to act as a companion, guide or
date for another person, or who agrees or offers
to privately model lingerie or to privately per-
form a strip tease for another person.
"Escort Agency" means any person or business asso-
ciation who furnishes, offers to furnish, or ad-
vertises to furnish escorts as one of its primary
business purposes for a fee, tip, or other consid-
eration.
"Establishment" means and includes any of the
following:
(1) The opening or commencement of any sexually
oriented business;
(2)
The conversion of an existing business,
whether or not a sexually oriented business,
to any sexually oriented business;
(3)
The additions of any sexually oriented busi-
ness to any other existing sexually business;
or
(4) The relocation of any sexually oriented busi-
ness.
"Massage parlor" means any place where for any
form of consideration or gratuity, massage, alco-
hol rub, administration of fomentations, electric
or magnetic treatments, or any other treatment of
manipulation of the human body occurs.
(m)
(n)
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
"Material relative to adult businesses" means and
includes but is not limited to accessories, books,
magazines, photographs, prints, drawings, paint-
ings, motion pictures and pamphlets or any combi-
nation thereof.
"permittee" means a person in whose name a permit
to operate an adult business has been issued as
well as the individuals listed as an applicant on
the application for a permit.
"Person" means an individual, proprietorship,
partnership, corporation, association, or other
legal entity.
"Sexual Encounter/Rap Center" means any business
or commercial enterprise that, as one of its pri-
mary business purposes, offers any form of consid-
eration: 1) physical contact in the form of wres-
tling or tumbling between persons of the opposite
sex~ or 2) activities between male and female
persons and/or persons of the same sex when one or
more of the persons is in a state of nudity or
semi-nudity.
"Specified anatomical areas" means and includes
any of the following:
(1)
Less than complete and opaquely covered human
genitals, pubic region, buttocks, anus or
female breasts below a point above the top of
the areola; or
(2)
Human male genitals in a discernible turgid
state, even if completely or opaquely cov-
ered.
"Specified sexual activities" means and includes
any of the following:
(1)
The fondling or touching of human genitals,
public regions, buttocks, anus or female
breasts, or
(2)
Sex acts, normal or perverted, actual or
simulated, including intercourse, oral copu-
lation, or sodomy; or
(3) Masturbation, actual or simulated; or
7
(4)
Excretory functions as part of, or in connec-
tion with, any of the activities set forth in
subsections 1 through 3 of this section; or
(5) Human genitals in a state of sexual
stimulation or arousal.
(s) "Transfer of ownership or control" of an adult
business means and includes any of the following:
(1) The sale, lease, or sub-lease of a business;
(2)
The transfer of securities which constitute a
controlling interest in the business, whether
by sale, exchange or other similar means; or
(3)
The establishment of a trust, gift or other
similar legal device which transfers the
ownership or control of the business, except
for transfer by bequest or other operation of
law upon the death of the person possessing
the ownership or control.
5.05.006 Restricted to commercial Zones. Notwithstanding any
provision to the contrary in this Chapter, no adult business
shall be established, expanded or conducted except in a C-1/CP
zone and then shall conform to all regulations contained in this
Chapter.
5.05.008 Conditional Use Permit. No adult business shall be
opened, established or relocated except upon the granting of a
conditional use permit therefore in accordance with Section 18.28
of Ordinance No. 348 of the Non-Codified codes of the County of
Riverside as adopted by the City of Temecula pursuant to Ordi-
nance No. 90-04 and Section 1 thereof, in addition to an Adult
Business Permit required by this Chapter. The requirements of
Ordinance 348 and of this Chapter first shall be construed in a
manner to make them compatible. Where there is a conflict in
provisions between the two, the provisions of this Chapter shall
control.
5.05.010 Operational Criteria. In addition to the base zone
requirements governing use pursuant to Section 5.05.006 the
following additional requirements shall be satisfied by adult
businesses. such additional requirements shall be included in
any approved Conditional Use Permit.
(a) Locational Standards.
(1) No adult business shall be located within one
thousand (1,000) feet of:
Any residential use, whether inside or
outside of the Temecula City limits;
Any church, chapel, or similar regular
place of worship, whether inside or
outside of the Temecula City limits;
Any school or day care establishment,
public or private, park or playground,
whether inside or outside of the
Temecula city limits;
Any retirement home or convalescent
hospital, whether inside or outside
the Temecula City limits;
of
(2)
(3)
(5)
Any recreational facility, such as game
arcade, bowling alley, skateboard rink,
skating rink, or similar area where
minors regularly congregate, whether
inside or outside of the Temecula City
limits;
City Hall, City Offices, and other pub-
lic buildings;
Libraries, whether inside or outside of
the Temecula City limits.
An adult business may not be operated within
two hundred (200') feet of another adult
business, whether within or outside of the
Temecula City limits.
An adult business may not be operated in the
same building, structure, or portion thereof,
containing another adult business.
For purposes of this Ordinance, all distance
shall be measured in a straight line, without
regard for intervening structures, from the
nearest property line for which the adult
business will be located to the nearest prop-
erty line of a use or district listed above.
For purposes of subsection (2) of this sec-
tion, the distance between any two adult
businesses shall be measured in a straight
line, without regard to intervening struc-
tures or objects, from the closest exterior
9
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
wall of the structure in which each business
is located.
A person may not operate an adult business without
a valid permit, issued by the City for the partic-
ular type of business.
Said use shall have a separate business entrance
adjacent to the required parking area. Additional
off-street parking facilities may be required if
deemed necessary by the City.
The city Planning Commission shall review and
approve all signing and architectural graphics.
Maximum occupancy load, fire exits, aisles and
fire equipment shall be regulated, designed and
provided in accordance with the Fire Department
and building regulations and standards adopted by
the City of Temecula.
No adult business shall be operated in any manner
that permits the observation of any material de-
picting, describing or relating to specified sexu-
al activities or specified anatomical areas from
any public way or from any location outside the
building or area of such establishment. This
provision shall apply to any display, decoration,
sign, show window or other opening.
Lighting in Parking Lots. Lighting shall be re-
quired which is designed to illuminate all off-
street parking areas serving such use for the
purpose of increasing the personal safety of store
patrons and reducing the incidents of vandalism
and theft. Said lighting shall be shown on the
required plot plans and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Community Develop-
ment.
Amplified Sound. No loudspeakers or sound equip-
ment shall be used by an adult business for the
amplification of sound to a level discernible by
the public beyond the walls of the building in
which such use is conducted or which violates any
noise restrictions as may be adopted by the City
of Temecula.
The building entrance to an adult business shall
be clearly and legibly posted by a notice indicat-
ing that minors are precluded from entering the
premises. Said notice shall be constructed and
10
posted to the satisfaction of the Planning Direc-
tor.
(j) Picture Arcades.
No picture arcade shall be maintained or
operated unless the complete interior of the
picture arcade is visible upon entrance to
such picture arcade. No partially or fully
enclosed booths or partially or fully con-
cealed booths shall be maintained. Notwith-
standing this Ordinance, any picture arcade
lawfully in existence prior to the adoption
of this subsection shall conform to the pro-
vision of this subsection within three (3)
months of the effective date of this Section.
This subsection shall also be applicable to
any picture arcade which is not open for
business prior to the date that this section
takes effect.
(2)
Minimum Lighting. No person shall operate a
picture arcade unless a light level of not
less that two (2) foot candles at floor level
is maintained in every portion of said estab-
lishment to which the public is admitted.
(3)
Wall and Partition Construction. No person
shall operate a picture arcade unless any
wall or partition which is situated so as to
create a room or enclosure in which any image
producing device is located is constructed of
not less than 1-hour fire resistive material.
(4)
Minimum Aisle Width. No person shall operate
a picture arcade in which the width of the
aisles in any room where an image producing
device is located is less than forty-two (42)
inches.
(5)
Minimum Doorways. No person shall operate a
picture arcade unless there are no fewer than
two (2) doorways of a width no less than
thirty-six (36) inches which provide ingress
or egress from any room from which an image
producing device is located; provided, howev-
er, that one (1) doorway shall be sufficient
in the event the fire marshal should so de-
termine. The doorway or doorways shall be
unlocked during business hours.
ll
(6)
Lighted Exit Signs. No person shall operate
a picture arcade unless over every doorway
which provides egress from any room in which
an image producing device is located, an
internally illuminated exit sign with letters
of at least five (5) inches in height is
maintained.
(7)
Maximum, Occupancy Load. No person shall
operate a picture arcade in which the number
of persons in any room or partitioned portion
of a room where an image producing device is
located exceeds one (1) person per thirty
(30) square feet. The maximum occupancy
permitted in any room or partitioned portion
of a room in which an image producing device
is located shall be conspicuously posted by
the operator and shall remain posted at the
entrance to said room.
(8)
Maximum Number Of Devices. No person shall
operate a picture arcade in which the number
of image producing devices exceeds the maxi-
mum occupancy load permitted in any room or
partitioned portion of a room in which an
image producing device is located.
(k) Adult Motels.
(1)
Evidence that a sleeping room is in a hotel,
motel or a similar commercial establishment
has been rented and vacated two (2) or more
times in a period of time that is less than
ten (10) hours creates a rebuttable
presumption that the establishment is an
adult motel as that term is defined in this
Chapter.
(2)
A person is in violation of the provisions of
this Chapter if, as a person in control of a
sleeping room in a hotel, motel, or similar
commercial establishment that does not have
an adult business permit, he/she rents or
sub-rents a sleeping room to that person and,
within ten (10) hours from the time the room
is rented, he/she rents or sub-rents the same
sleeping room again.
(3)
For purposes of sub-section (2) of this sec-
tion, the term "rent" or "sub-rent" means the
act of permitting a room to be occupied.
12
5.05.012 Adult Business Conditional Use Permit.
Application for conditional use permit for an
adult business shall be accompanied by:
(1) A statement that the site of the proposed
business is not located:
Within one thousand (1,000) feet of any
district, structure or boundary as de-
fined in Section 5.05.010;
Within two hundred (200) feet of another
adult businesses, whether within or
outside of the Temecula City limits.
(2)
A scale map or drawing accurately depicting
land uses within a radius of one thousand
(1,000) feet of the exterior boundaries of
the property on which the adult business is
proposed to be operated.
5.05.014 Issuance of Adult Business Permit. An applicant for
the operation of an adult businesses must obtain an adult busi-
ness permit in addition to a conditional use permit. Such adult
business permit shall be non-transferable and must be renewed on
an annual basis on the anniversary date of the original applica-
tion. The permit obtained is not transferable and a new permit
must be obtained if the business is leased, sold or otherwise
transferred for any reason.
Applicants for such permits shall file a written,
signed and verified application or renewal application on a form
provided by the Community Development Department.
(1) The name and permanent address of applicant.
(2)
The name and business address of the appli-
cant. If the applicant is a corporation, the
name shall be exactly as set forth in its
Articles of Incorporation and the applicant
shall show the name and residence address of
each of the officers, directors and each
stockholder owning no less than twenty-five
percent (25%) of the stock of the corpora-
tion. If the applicant is a partnership, the
application shall show the name and residence
address of each of the members, including
limited partners;
(3) A detailed description of the manner of pro-
viding proposed entertainment, including type
13
(c)
(d)
of entertainment and the number of persons
engaged in the entertainment;
(4) Hours of operation;
(5)
A location, address and floor plan showing
where the specific entertainment uses are
proposed to be conducted within the building;
(6)
The name or names of the person or persons
having the management or supervision of
applicant's business and of any entertain-
ment;
(7)
A statement of the nature and character of
applicant's business if any, to be carried on
in conjunction with such entertainment; and
(8)
For a renewal application, applicant in addi-
tion shall indicate any changes since the
filing of the initial application.
All applications for a permit or renewal shall be
filed with the City Police Department on forms
prescribed by the Police Department. Each appli-
cation determined by resolution of the City Coun-
cil shall be accompanied by a non-refundable fee
for filing or renewal determined by resolution of
the City Council, which fees will be used to de-
fray the costs of investigation, inspection and
processing of such applicants.
After an investigation, the Police Chief shall
approve the issuance of a permit or renewal unless
he finds one or more of the following to be true:
(1)
That the building, structure, equipment and
location used by the business for which a
permit is required herein does not comply
with the requirements and standards of the
health, zoning, fire and safety laws of the
State of California and of the City of
Temecula;
(2)
That the applicant, his or her employee,
agent, partner, director, officer, stockhold-
er or manager has knowingly made any false,
misleading or fraudulent statement of materi-
al fact in the application for a permit, or
in any report or record required to be filed
with the Police Department, Sheriff or other
department of the City;
14
(3)
That the applicant has had any type of adult
business permit revoked by any public entity
within two (2) years of the date of the ap-
plication;
(4)
That on the date that the business for which
a permit is required herein commences, and
thereafter, there will be no responsible per-
son on the premises to act as manage at all
times during which the business is open;
(5)
That the applicant has not shown how the on-
premises manager will prevent the business
from being used as a place where prostitu-
tion, assignation Or any lewd act could oc-
cur;
(6) That a conditional use permit has not been
granted for the use; or
(7) That an applicant is under eighteen (18)
years of age.
5.05.016 Decision of Police Chief. The decision of the Police
Chief regarding a permit application shall be issued within 45
days of the date of the filing of the application unless he has
set the matter for hearing before the City Council. Such hearing
must be held and a decision rendered within sixty (60) days from
the date of the application, unless the matter is continued at
the request of the applicant. No application for a permit shall
be denied without giving the applicant an opportunity for a
hearing before the City Council.
5.05.018 InsPection. An applicant, or permittee shall permit
representatives of the Sheriff's Department, Health Department,
Fire Department, Code Enforcement, Planning Department, or other
City Departments or Agencies to inspect the premises of an adult
business for the purpose of insuring compliance with the law, at
any time it is occupied or opened for business. A person who
operates an adult business or his agent or employee is in viola-
tion of the provisions of this section if he/she refuses to
permit such lawful inspection of the premises at any time it is
occupied or opened for business.
5.05.020 Suspension or Revocation of Permit. After an investi-
gation, notice and hearing, the Police Chief shall suspend or
revoke and existing adult business permit, as shall be found
necessary to assure the preservation of the public health and
safety, if the evidence presented establishes that one or more of
the following conditions exist:
15
(1)
The building, structure, equipment and loca-
tion used by the business fails to comply
with the requirements or fails to meet the
standards of the health, zoning, fire and
safety laws of the State of California, or of
the ordinances of the City of Temecula;
(2)
The permittee, his or her employee, agent,
partner, director, officer, stockholder or
manager has knowingly made any false, mis-
leading or fraudulent statement of material
facts in the application for a permit, or in
any report or record required to be filed
with the Police, Sheriff or other department
of the City;
The permittee has had any type of adult busi-
ness permit revoked by any public entity
within two (2) years of the date the permit
was issued;
(4)
There was not a responsible person on the
premises to act as a manager at all times
which the business was opened;
(5)
That the permittee, manager or any agent or
employee of the permittee or manager has been
convicted in a court of competent jurisdic-
tion in conjunction with or as a result of
the operation of the subject adult business
and after the date of issuance of the condi-
tional use permit for said business;
(6)
A picture arcade has been used as a place
where sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copu-
lation, masturbation, prostitution, assigna-
tion or other lewd acts occur or have oc-
curred;
(7)
The permittee, his or her employee, agent,
partner, director, officer, stockholder or
manager has violated any provision of this
Ordinance; or
(8) The conditional use permit for the use has
been suspended or revoked.
5.05.022 Transfer of Permit. A permittee shall not transfer an
Adult Business Permit to another, nor shall a permittee operate
an adult business under the authority of a permit at any place
other than the address designated in the application.
16
5.05.024 Time Limits for Action of a Conditional Use Permit. An
application for a conditional use permit shall be reviewed and
acted upon in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 348
and the California Government Code.
5.05.026 Suspension and Revocation of a Conditional Use Permit.
In addition to the grounds set forth at Section 18.31 of Ordi-
nance No. 348, the City Council may suspend or revoke any condi-
tional use permit if it is found that any of the following
conditions exist in addition to the criteria set forth in this
Ordinance:
(a)
The operations conducted by the permittee does not
comply with all applicable laws, including, but
not limited to, the City's building, health,
zoning and fire ordinances and this Ordinance;
(b)
That the approved use has been expanded without
City Council approval; that the approved use has
been partially or wholly converted to another
adult business without City Council approval; that
the conditional use permit has not been utilized
within six months of its issuance; or
(c)
The Adult Business Permit has been suspended or
revoked.
5.05.028 Regulations Non-Exclusive. The regulations set forth
in this Chapter are not intended to be exclusive and compliance
therewith shall not excuse noncompliance with any other regula-
tions pertaining to the operation of adult businesses as adopted
by the City Council of the City of Temecula.
5.05.030 violations/Penalties. Any firm, corporation or person,
whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwise, violating or
causing the violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction
thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not more than one
thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than
six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Any
violation of the provisions of this Chapter which is committed
and continues from day-to-day, constitutes a separate offense for
each and every date during which such violation is committed or
continued.
5.05.032 Public Nuisance. In addition to the penalties set
forth at Section 5.05.030 above, any adult business which is
operating in violation of this chapter or any provision thereof
shall constitute a public nuisance and, as such, may be abated or
enjoined from further operation.
17
5.05,034 Conflictin~ Ordinances Repealed. All ordinances or
parts of ordinances, or regulations in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed."
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion of this Ordinance is,
for any reason held to be invalid, or unconstitutional by a court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City
Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would
have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sen-
tence, clause, phrase, work or portion thereof regardless of
whether such other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase,
word or portion thereof regardless of whether such other section,
be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adop-
tion of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as
required by law.
SECTION 6. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE. The City Council
hereby finds that this project does not have a potential for
causing a significant affect on the environment. Therefore, the
project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
under Section 15061(b)(3).
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in
full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The
City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated
posting places.
1991.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
RONALD J. PARK, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
18
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 91- was
duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the __day of ,
1991, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and
passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
day of , 1991, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCI I/MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY
19
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B'
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
Notice of Public Hearing
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the CITY' COUNCIL to consider the matter(s)
described below.
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental
Action:
PH-96
City of Temecula
City Wide
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula adding
Chapter 5 to the Temeeula Municipal Code Pertaining to the
Regulations of Adult Businesses.
Categorically Exempt (Seaion 1S061 .b.3)
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before the hearing(s) or may appear and
be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you
challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondences delivered to the
City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing(s). The proposed project application(s) may be viewed at
the public information counter, Temecula Planning Department, 43174 Business Park Drive, Monday
through Friday from 9:00 AM until 4:00 PM. Questions concerning the project(s) may be addressed to
John Meyer, City of Temecula Planning Deparunent (714)694-6400.
PLACE OF HEARING
DATE OF HEARING
TIME OF HEARING
Tempoearv Temecula Community Center
27475 Commerce Center Drive
Tuesday. December 10. 1991
7:00 PM
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 91-__
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OFTEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT THE ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain
portions of the non-codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No.
348 ("Land Use Code"); and
WHEREAS, such regulations do not contain adequate provisions for the
establishment and operational criteria for adult businesses; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula desires to regulate the establishment
and operation of adult businesses and to protect the health, quality of life, and the
environment of the residents of Temecula; and
WHEREAS, public hearing was conducted on October 21, 1991, at which
time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hail,
County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula
Valley Chamber of Commerce;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1o That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
hereby finds that the proposed Adult Business Ordinance will provide for the
establishment of regulations for adult businesses in a fair and equitable manner.
SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
further finds that the proposed Adult Business Ordinance is necessary to bring about
eventual conformity with its land use plans.
SECTION 3. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the proposed Adult Business
Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference and
marked Exhibit "A" and dated October 21, 1991 for identification.
A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN
D-SIGN-A
PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 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 21st day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 21, 1991
Case No.: Adult Business Ordinance
Prepared By: Oliver Mujica
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT Resolution No. P.C.
91- recommending adoption
of the Adult Business Ordinance.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
City of Temecula
PROPOSAL:
An Ordinance establishing regulations for the establishment
and operation of adult businesses.
LOCATION:
City Wide
BACKGROUND:
On October 9, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance
No. 90-18, "an interim urgency ordinance relating to adult
businesses and requiring a permit". Through the adoption
of Ordinance No. 91-XX on October 8, 1991, the City
Council approved the final extension of the urgency
ordinance, to October 9, 1992.
The purpose for preparing the proposed Directional Sign
Ordinance is due to the inadequacy of the County
Ordinance No. 348 as it relates to adult businesses. Based
on the concern of the City Council, the Planning
Department Staff was directed to prepare an Adult
Business Ordinance which establishes regulations for the
establishment and operational standards for adult
businesses.
Exhibit "A" graphically presents the zoning districts that
currently permit adult businesses, pursuant to Ordinance
No. 348.
A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN
~DISCU~SION:
Preparatory to drafting an Adult Business Ordinance, Staff
conducted background research into a number of areas
related to adult businesses in the community and prepared
a summary report, which has been attached for the
Planning Commission's review. This summary report
analyzed the following: 1 ) existing conditions, such as the
current urgency ordinance, existing adult businesses and
current zoning requirements; 2) recent court decisions; 3)
adult business regulations adopted by other selected
California cities; and 4) key issues to address in the adult
business ordinance.
In order to provide the City of Temecula with specific and
complete standards for regulating adult businesses, Staff
has prepared the attached Ordinance which includes, in
summary, the following main components:
Adult businesses are permitted in the C-1/C-P zoning
districts, subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit.
Adult businesses shall not be located within 1,000
feet of sensitive uses (i.e. residential, churches,
schools, parks, etc.).
Adult businesses shall not be located within 200 feet
of another adult business.
CONCLUSION:
As noted above, the proposed Adult Business Ordinance
provides the City with the standards to thoroughly review
an applicant's proposal as well as providing the necessary
control measures needed to ensure the public safety; to
provide organization; and control the overall quality and
number of such businesses.
Exhibit "B" graphically presents the Planning Staff's
recommendation regarding the zoning districts that should
conditionally permit adult businesses.
The new Adult Business Ordinance will serve as interim
regulations until the City's Zoning Development Code is
prepared and adopted. This ordinance could be
incorporated and/or modified into the final Zoning
Development Code.
A;DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN*A
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN
AND SWAP
CONSISTENCY:
This Ordinance does not have a potential for causing a
significant affect on the environment. Therefore, Staff has
determined that the project is exempt from CEQA under
Section 15061 (b)(3).
The proposed Adult Business Ordinance is necessary
to bring about eventual conformity with the City's
future Land Use Plan.
There is reasonable probability that the proposed
Adult Business Ordinance will be consistent with the
City's future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with the
goals and/or policies of the City's future General
Plan.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future General
Plan, if the proposed policies are ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that
policies will be adopted for the new General Plan.
Therefore, it is likely that the City will consider these
policies during their preparation of the General Plan.
The proposed Adult Business Ordinance is consistent with
SWAP. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this
Ordinance will be consistent with the new General Plan
when it is adopted.
A:[:)IRECTIONAL SIGN
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91 -
recommending adoption of the Adult Business
Ordinance.
OM:ks
Attachments:
Resolution
"Draft" Ordinance
Exhibit "A" Current Zoning Districts
Exhibit "B" Proposed Zoning Districts
Adult Business Ordinance - Summary Report
A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN
D-SIGN-A
' WILLDANASSOCIATES [] EF
Professional Co,qsu,tt,,ng Services S~nce 1¢64
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
September 3, 1991
Adult Business Ordinance - Summary Report
As part of the proposed work program for the preparation of the Adult Business Ordinance,
this memorandum is intended to summarize the preliminary findings of our research; transmit
our recommendations; and transmit the "'Draft" Adult Business Ordinance for your review and
comments.
INTRODUCTION
On October 9, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-18, "an interim urgency
ordinance relating to adult businesses and requiring a permit"', in order to allow the City staff
the opportunity to prepare permanent adult business regulations. This urgency ordinance is
due to expire on October 9, 1991. However, an extension of the urgency ordinance will be
processed for adoption prior to it's expiration, via the City Council at a public hearing. Such
an action by the City Council will extend the urgency ordinance to October 9, 1992.
The new Adult Business Ordinance will serve as interim regulations until the City's Zoning
Development Code is prepared and adopted. At that time, this ordinance will be incorporated
and/or modified into the final Zoning Development Code.
Preparatory to drafting an adult business ordinance, we conducted background research into
a number of areas related to adult business in the community, including:
Analyzing existing conditions. This section will discuss the current ugency
ordinance, existing adult businesses and current zoning requirements.
Analyzing recent court decisions. This section will discuss recent court
decisions about adult businesses which could affect Temecula's future
regulations.
ES0 HOS=,TALITY L;,NE · SUITE 400 · SAN BERNARDINO, CALr-'ORNi;, 92408 · (714) 824-2143 · FAX [714) 888-51C7
Analyzing secondary impacts of adult businesses. This section will identifying
other potential secondary impacts of adult businesses within the community,
including economic effects on surrounding properties.
Analyzing other ordinances. This section will discuss adult business regulations
adopted by other selected California cities.
Analyzing significant adult business issues. This section will discuss the
constitutional right of adult businesses to exist, dispersed vs. concentrated
IocationaI criteria and availability of sufficient land.
Identifying key issues. This section will discuss key issues to address in the
adult business ordinance, including type of adult businesses to be regulated,
identification of appropriate zoning districts, conditional use permit provisions,
and Iocational criteria, design and performance standards, amortization, as well
as specific recommendations.
Summarizing recommendations. The conclusion of this memorandum will
summarize our recommendations for the proposed adult business ordinance.
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize our initial findings with respect to the
above areas, which will set the stage for adult business regulations in Temecula. This memo
will make recommendations as to the nature and content of Temecula's proposed Adult
Business Ordinance.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Adult BusineSS Ureencv Ordinance
At the present time, new adult businesses are permitted in Temecula, pursuant to City
Ordinance No. 90-18. This Urgency Ordinance was adopted following recent court decisions
affecting local regulation of adult business operations and due to the City's concerns regarding
these particular types of uses. The urgency ordinance allows the City of Temecula sufficient
time to prepare permanent adult business regulations.
Existinc3 Adult Businesses
Research was completed in August 1991, with the aid of the City's Code Enforcement Officer
(Allen Marshall) regarding the number, type and location of existing adult businesses; and it
was concluded that there are not any adult businesses existing in the City of Temecula.
Current ZoninQ Requirements
Current City zoning requirements (which have been adopted by the adult business urgency
ordinance) permits adult businesses to locate in the C-1/C-P (General Commercial) zoning
district, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission. The C-1/C-P District has been established to accomodate a full range of stores,
offices, personal and business establishments in the central portion of Temecula to serve City-
wide and regional needs.
Adult businesses are defined by Section 2 of Ordinance No. 90-18 to include the following:
1) adult bookstore; 2) adult cabaret; 3) adult hotel/motel; 4) adult picture arcade; 5) adult
theater; 6) body painting studio; and 7) massage parlor. In addition to obtaining a conditional
use permit, Ordinance No. 90-18 provides operational criteria in addition to the base zone
requirements governing use and minimum development standards.
In regards to existing adult businesses with the City, Section 9 of Ordinance 90-18 states,
"This ordinance does not apply to adult businesses operating on the date of adoption".
However, according to Section 18.8 (d) of Zoning Ordinance NO. 348, which governs non-
conforming uses, allows non-conforming uses to remain indefinitely without future
amortization so long as such uses are not enlarged or extended and so long as they do not
cease operations for more than one year.
SUMMARY OF RECENT COURT DECISIONS
Several recent court decisions directly impact the ways in which local governments can
regulate adult businesses. This section of the memorandum provides a brief overview of our
understanding of relevant cases relating to the regulations of adult uses. It should be noted,
however, that the City Attorney should prepare an interpretation or specific legal opinion for
the City of Temecula regarding this issue.
Two key Supreme court decisions regarding adult businesses include Younq v. American Mini
Theaters (1976) and City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters (1986). The Younq decision upheld
the right of the City of Detroit to regulate the location of adult businesses within the
community, noting that the City's desire to preserve the quality of life is important. Detroit's
ordinance required a minimum distance of 1,000 feet between adult businesses and 500 feet
between adult businesses and residential areas. The Rent0n decision, ten years later,
reaffirmed the basic tenents of the Young case in terms of allowing communities to regulate
adult businesses. Important concepts emanating from the Renton decision include the right
of adult businesses to exist as a constitutional right of free expression and that any local
regulation must be "content neutral" in nature. The term "content neutral" means that
regulations cannot dictate the type of information disseminated at adult business operations.
However, localities may regulate the time, place and manner of adult businesses with the
express purpose of mitigating negative secondary impacts associated with adult businesses.
Negative secondary impacts typically include an increase in criminal activity, lowering of
property values in the immediate vicinity of adult businesses and a lowering of trading
patterns near adult businesses.
A source book consulted for this study, Time, Place and Manner Requlation of Business
Activity, notes that a 1968 Supreme Court decision, United States v. O'Brlen, establishes a
four-part test to justify the legitimacy of governmental regulation as related to businesses or
acdvhies where potential First Amendment (free speech) issues may be involved.
If it is within the constitutional power of the government.
2. If it furthers an important or substantial governmental interest.
3
3. If the governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression.
ff the incidental restriction on First Amendment freedoms is no greater than
essential to the furtherance of that interest.
Any future adult business regulations drafted by the City of Temecula must meet the above
test.
Two other Southern California lower Court rulings further help define the limits of local
agencies to regulate adult businesses. These cases are Walnut Properties, Inc. v. City of
Whittier (1988) and City of Stanton v. Cox (1989). Both cases speak to the issue of the
restrictivehess of local adult business ordinances in terms of the number of sites made
available in which to locate adult businesses in light of location criteria established by
ordinance. In both instances, local regulations were invafidated by the courts with the
findings that local ordinances were overly restrictive, allowing only a handful of sites in each
community in which an adult business could be situated. Instead, the courts mandated that
local adult business regulations must provide an "adequate" number of adult business sites.
No firm standard exists for defining an adequate number of sites - it must be determined on
a community-by-community basis.
SECONDARY IMPACTS OF ADUI T BUSINESSES
Economic Impacts
Conclusions drawn from various research indicates the following about economic impacts of
adult businesses:
Adult businesses detract from the desirability and fivability of adjacent
neighborhoods. Negative secondary impacts found by a number of
communities include a decline in residential rents and property values for
properties adjacent to adult businesses.
Negative economic impacts were also found for commercial properties adjacent
to adult businesses. Most impacted were neighborhood retail stores, which
reported difficulty in retaining employees, reduced patronage and higher tenant
turnover. Less impacted commercial businesses are more "regional" in nature.
Summary of Other Surveys
As part of our initial research, previous adult business studies completed by other jurisdictions
have been reviewed. These include studies performed by the City of Phoenix, City of Los
Angeles and City of Indianapolis, Indiana. Following is a synopsis of these studies.
City of Phoenix
The Phoenix study was completed in May of 1979. The study examined the relationship
between adult businesses and criminal activity. Three neighborhoods within the community
(the stud';' areas) were selected, all of which contained one or more adult businesses. For
4
comparison, three other neighborhoods were chosen (the control areas) which contained no
adult businesses. Reports of criminal activity were gathered for both areas and compared.
The results of the study show a statistical link between the presence of adult businesses and
arrests for sexual crimes. The study also reported that the presence of adult businesses
results in a lowering of the desirability and livability of an impacted neighborhood.
City of Los AnOeles
The Los Angeles City Planning Department conducted a comprehensive study of adult
businesses with the City of Los Angeles in 1977. A primary purpose of the study was to
ascertain the effects of concentrating adult businesses with specific geographic areas as an
alternative to allowing them to disperse throughout the City.
The study concluded that a link did exist between a concentration of adult businesses and
incidents of crime in the Hollywood area. The Los Angeles Planning Department also
contacted a number of local realtors, brokers, appraisers and lenders with respect to their
opinions and experiences with regard to the effects of adult businesses on adjacent property
values. Those experts surveyed generally concluded that adult businesses exert a negative
economic impact on surrounding properties and residences, The Los Angeles report did not
find, however, a direct link between the presence of adult businesses and a lowering of
assessed valuations on adjacent properties.
City of Indianapolis
Results of a 1984 adult business study completed by the City of Indianapolis essentially
confirm that of the previous two studies: an increase in sex-related crimes in neighborhoods
which contained at least one adult business as opposed to other neighborhoods with no adult
businesses.
SUMMARY OF OTHER ORDINANCES
We have reviewed adult business ordinances recently enacted or proposed by the
Communities of Chino, Uptand, Rancho Cucamonga, La Verne and San Bernardino County.
Each of the ordinances were examined in terms of the type and range of adult businesses
regulated, zoning districts in which adult businesses are allowed, Iocational requirements
imposed by the public agencies, design and performance criteria required, amortization
requirements for non-conforming adult businesses and any other relevant features of the
ordinance.
ORDINANCE PROVISIONS
Our analysis of ordinance provisions is as foIIows.
Uses Requlated
Adult businesses regulated by a majority of ordinances surveyed included adult bookstores,
adult cabarets, adult motion picture theaters, massage studios and adult arcades, One
ordinance, San Bernardino County, contains no specific listing of regulated uses. Chino and
5
Upland ordinances regulate all of the uses enumerated above. plus encounter centers,
modeling studios, adult hotels and motels, and sexual novelty stores.
Allowed Zonino Districts
The most common allowed zoning districts for adult uses appear to be more intense
commercial districts, typically General Commercial. Upland allows adult uses in specified
industrial zones. La Verne allows such uses only in Industrial and Business Park districts.
Three of the communities require conditional use permits.
Locational Standards
All of the ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot distance between adult uses and other
adult businesses.
Four of the five ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot separation between adult uses and:
schools
parks, playgrounds, recreational areas
churches, chapels, funeral parlors
NOTE:
La Verne's draft ordinance requires a minimum 500 foot separation for the
above uses.
Two of the five ordinances require a minimum 500 foot separation between adult uses and
residential uses and residentially-zoned property (Upland and La Verne). the remaining three
ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot separation.
Two other interesting requirements are noted:
La Verne's draft ordinance limits adult uses to one such use per premise or
building.
Upland requires a minimum 250 foot separation between adult businesses and
the sale of alcoholic beverages.
Desiqn and Performance Standards
Commonalities between four of the ordinances surveyed (San Bernardino County has
established no design or performance criteria) include;
No publicly visible explicit signs (3 of 4 ordinances).
No loudspeakers (4 of 4 ordinances).
No interior views of adult uses from public areas (4 of 4).
Posting of "NO Minors Allowed" sign (3 of 4).
Lighting of parking areas (2 of 4).
Individual use entrances for adult use (2 of 4).
Amortization
Three of the five ordinances (Rancho Cucamonga, La Verne and San Bernardino County) have
no, or very liberal, amortization clauses.
Chino's ordinance requires a one-year amortization schedule for non-conforming adult
businesses.
Upland's ordinance mandates a three-year amortization schedule.
Other Features
Other features of potential significance found in the ordinance survey include:
·
Special administrative permit, with specific findings, to be made by the City of
Upland for all new adult businesses.
A late-night business permit is required by La Verne for adult uses open
between midnight and 6 a.m.
La Verne also requires all adult businesses be kept in clean and orderly manner.
In Willdan's initial research, it became abundantly clear that adult businesses have a legitimate
right to exist, protected as a constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. However,
there is also ample legal precedent for a local community to regulate such adult businesses,
so that the community's health, safety and welfare is also protected. Care must be taken that
any regulatory ordinance. be content-neutral in character, only regulating the time, place and
manner of adult businesses so that negative secondary impacts associated with an adult
business can be controlled. The term "content-neutral" means that any land use regulation
should not dictate or regulate the content of materials sold or activities which take place
within adult businesses. This is considered by the Supreme Court as an infringement on First
Amendment/free speech rights.
Dispersed vs. Concentrated Locational Criteria
Given that local governments can only regulate, not prohibit, adult businesses, two primary
methods have evolved over the past twenty years in terms of adult business regulation. The
concentrated approach was pioneered by the City of Boston. Essentially, the Boston
Municipal Code as amended to allow adult businesses within a specific geographic portion of
the community. Adult businesses were excluded from all other parts of town.
Constitutional Riqht to Exist
Several preliminary issues have been identified as a result of this initial study, which are
described below.
SIGN/F/CANT ADULT BUSINESS ISSUES
The disl~ersedmodel of adult businesses is closely associated with the City of Detroit, which
involves deliberately spreading out adult businesses throughout a city to avoid a concentration
in anyone sector. To accomplish this, minimum distances between adult businesses and
similar uses and other sensitive uses have been enacted. This model was upheld in the Younq
vs. American Mini-Theatre (1976) Supreme Court decision and has been used as the basis of
the five local ordinances analyzed in this report.
Availability of Sufficient Land
A key issue is the acceptability of local adult business regulations is the provision of sufficient
quantities of appropriately-zoned land within which adult businesses can locate. This is
especially critical if a dispersed regularcry model is chosen. Depending on the number of
sensitive uses identified in an ordinance and the minimum distance requirements incorporated
in the ordinance, it is conceivable that few candidate sites would remain which could
accommodate an adult business. In this instance, it is possible that a court would overturn
such an ordinance. Whatever ordinance is finally adopted for Ontario, it must contain
sufficient lands for adult operations. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules to
quantify what constitutes sufficient lands.
R_;COMMI_;NDA TION$
This section of the report will identify key issues to address in the new Adult Business
Ordinance.
Tyoe of Adult BusineSSeS to be Reoulated
As noted above, Temecula currently regulates the following adult businesses; adult
bookstores, adult cabarets, adult hotels/motels, adult picture arcades, adult theaters, body
painting studios and massage parlors.
The adult businesses that are regulated by other local communities include all of the above,
plus the following; sexual encounter/rap centers, escort services and adult video stores.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the adult businesses currently regulated in
Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained and that this list be expanded to include the above
mentioned uses. It is also recommended that accupressure clinics be regulated as adult
businesses, based upon input from various Police Departments and the fact that they are not
currently regulated as medical or professional services by the State of California. The
definitions of the additional uses have been included in the "Draft" Adult Business Ordinance.
Identification of APDrooriate Zonina Districts
As noted above, adult businesses are permitted to locate in the C-11C-P (General Commercial)
zoning district, subject to the approval of a :.onditional Use Permit. Since the C-1/C-P zone
is intended to provide the general commercial land uses within the City, this zoning district
would be the logical area to allow adult businesses. In addition, the conditional use permit
process allows the City the opportunity to review such uses on a case-by-case basis.
8
Recommendation: It is recommended that the zoning requirements currently regulated in
Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained.
Conditional Use Permit Provisions
As does Temecula (currently under Ordinance No. 90-18), three of the four local communities
surveyed require the issuance of Conditional Use Permits for adult businesses: San Bernardino
County, Rancho Cucamonga and La Verne. Chino does not require a CUP.
Conditional Use Permits are typically required for certain specified land uses which, for various
reasons, necessitate an extra level of review. Before a CUP may be granted, a public hearing
must be held by the Planning Commission.
A recent Court of Appeals decision, Peoole v. Library One (1991), upheld the right of local
communities to require Conditional Use Permits for adult businesses. However, it was held
that the Los Angeles County Code was invalid since the code did not specify a time limit for
denial or approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Conditional Use Permit requirement currently
regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained. It is also recommended that specific time
limits for approval or denial of the application should be included as part of the new ordinance.
Locational Criteria
There are three (3) approaches to regulate the location of adult businesses: a concentrated
approach, a dispersed approach and a combined approach.
Concentrated Approach
This method was pioneered by the City of Boston in the 1960's, which permits adult
businesses within a single geographic area of the City and prohibits them elsewhere in the
community. The City's intent is to protect residential neighborhoods while allowing sufficient
sites for adult businesses to locate within the City. The City also provided funding for
infrastructure and related public improvements Within the adult business area to improve its
visual appearance.
Advantages to a concentrated approach include: 1) a high degree of protection for the
remaining non-adult business neighborhoods; 2) simplified ordinance administration since
minimal Iocational criteria are needed; and 3) potentially sufficient adult business sites,
depending upon the size of the adult business zone established by the City.
Disadvantages of the approach are two-fold: 1 ) it is difficult to select a single area as the adult
business district; and 2) the City might be viewed as encouraging such uses.
Dispersed Approach
The City of Detroit was the first to use the dispersed approach toward adult businesses by
requiring adult businesses to be spread throughout the community rather than be grouped
9
together. Detroit's ordinance mandates a minimum distance ( 1,000 feet) between adult uses.
This zoning approach was held constitutional in the YounQ v. American Mini Theaters decision
in 1976, The ordinance's intent was to reverse a "skid row" development trend in areas of
the community by limiting those uses that the City administrators determined to be
contributory toward that trend.
Advantages of the dispersed approach are that: 1 ) it has already passed constitutional muster;
2) with proper controls on the exterior appearance of adult businesses, they could be blended
into the neighborhood fabric; 3) limiting the number of adult businesses in a given area will
significantly reduce incidents of crime and lowered property values; and 4) this approach has
been successfully used by many other communitite$ across the nation.
The primary disadvantage of the dispersed model is the need to devise a proper balance
between limiting the number of potential sites for adult uses without over-restricting sites.
Combined Approach
Most recently, courts have approved an adult business regulation approach which combines
the best features of both the concentrated and dispersed systems. This approach includes
concentrating adult businesses within a limited number of zoning districts, combined with
dispersing them within those permitted districts by specifying minimum distances between
adult businesses and other sensitive uses. The combined approach is recognized by several
recent court decisions, including S & G News v. City of Southaate (1986), 5297 Pulaski
HiQhway v. Town of Perrvville (1987) and International Food and Beveraaes Systems v. Ft.
Lauderdale, and others.
Advantages and disadvantages to the combined approach are essentially the same as the
dispersed approach. Care must be taken to allow sufficient sites for future adult businesses
to locate in the community.
Recommendation: The Combined Approach is recommended as the basis for the future
Temecula ordinance. A Combined Approach, which essentially involves dispersion, can
provide:
A court-approved, content-neutral method for regulating adult business
locations.
Locational standards to protect sensitive uses, such as schools, parks,
playgrounds and the like.
· Maintenance of property values near adult businesses.
· Control of crime-related secondary effects of adult uses.
Appropriate design standards to treat the exterior appearance of adult uses so
that these uses can be integrated with surrounding buildings.
10
It is also recommended that the new ordinance include a provision for a 1,000 feet minimum
distance requirement between adult businesses and sensitive uses, such as residential areas,
parks, schools, playgrounds, churches and other recreational uses frequented by minor. In
addition, a 200 foot minimum distance requirement between adult businesses should be
included.
Desjan and Performance Standards
Under Ordinance No. 90-18, Temecula has design and performance standards for the
following items; signing and graphics, limiting interior views into adult businesses from public
areas, lighting, amplified sound, posting of signs at adult business entrances to prohibit
patronage by minors, interior construction requirements and maximum occupancy permitted.
These design and performance standards are typical for all cities that regulate adult
businesses.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the design and performance standards currently
regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained.
Amortization
Adult businesses enacted by surrounding communities contain relatively liberal attitudes
towards amortization of non-conforming adult uses. One community (Chino) establishes a
specific time frame for ordinance conformity, which is three (3) years.
Since there are not any existing adult businesses currently within the City of Temecula,
amortization is not an issue.
Recommendation: No additional amortization provisions are recommended to be included in
the proposed ordinance.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
The following is a list of the recommendations made regarding the content of Temecula's
proposed Adult Business Ordinance:
1. Expand the type of adult businesses regulated.
2. Conditionally permit new adult businesses in the C-1/C-P District.
m
Establish specific time frames for approving or denying adult business
Conditional Use Permit applications.
Implement a "Combined Approach" towards the location of adult businesses to
include minimum distance criteria between adult businesses and sensitive uses;
and a distance requirement between adult businesses.
5. Include design and performance standards.
11
6. Maintain current City policy toward amortization.
As indicated in my previous memorandum, dated August 19, 1991, it is anticipated that this
item will be scheduled for the Planning Commission public hearing of October 7, 1991.
Therefore, I would appreciate receiving your comments prior to September 13, 1991, in order
to complete the "Draft" Planning Commission staff report and revised "Draft" Adult Business
Ordinance for your review prior to September 20, 1991.
Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact
me directly.
ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft Adult Business Ordinance
cc: John Cavanaugh
John Meyer
Ross Gellet
12
PI.~,NNXNG CONNXBBXON aINUTEe OCTOBER 21, 1W91
~ULX
RI
42701
4;
Temec
the
WOU
th
radj
of/
lr
NO
ADULT BUBINE88 ORDINANCE
7.1 Proposal for an ordinance to regulate Adult Business
within Temecula City Limits.
OLIVER MUJICA presented the staff report·
-7-
10~Z3/91
PLANNING COMMI821ON MINUTw-8
OCTOBER 21, 1991
CHAIRMAN NOAGLaND questioned what if an adult business
came in and applied for a permit and a church comes in
and rents space in the same facility and is within 1000
feet.
JOKN CAVANAUGB advised that legally speaking you cannot
prohibit the adult use from being established where it
was originally approved.
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND suggested that (D) on page 14 of the
ordinance should be revised as well as (6) on page 16.
JOBNCAVANAUGB revised (D) to read "...permit or renewal
unless"; and (6) to read "A picture arcade".
COMMISSIONER FaBBY moved to close the public hearing at
8:00 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. P.C. 91-(next~
recommending adoption of the Adult Business Ordinance.
JOHN CAVANAUGH advised that a recent case law requires
that all C.U.P.s must have a time limitation for being
enacted upon. Mr. Cavanaugh suggested the following
wording be added to the ordinance under time limitation
"An application for a C.U.P. shall be reviewed and
enacted upon within 60 days from the date the application
was deemed complete." COMMISSIONER CBINIAEFF suggested
making it 90 days and seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Chiniaeff,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONER FORDasked that the Commissioners receive a
copy of the map plotting the sensitive areas.
JOHN CAVl%NAUGB advised that the plotting of these areas
will have to be done before the ordinance is adopted by
the City Council.
PCM~/IO/21/91 --8 -- 10/23/91
II
, !
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B'
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
Ui
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
,.=.':1
:111 li
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B'
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
/
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
F
W
0
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
W
0
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT 'A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
/,~/ /~
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
;t//
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT 'A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
®/
W
I-
0
®/
W
0
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "A"
CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS
1
W
W
ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS
ITEM NO. 16
ITEM NO. 15
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM;
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
December 10, 1991
Parcel Map No. 25139
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Debbie Ubnoske
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map
25139
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving Parcel
Map No. 25139 based on the analysis contained
in the staff report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
50 Center City Associates
Alba Engineering
To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space area on
a 97.3 acre site.
Southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and
southeasterly of the future extension of Cherry Street,
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
North: SP
South: M-SC
East: M-SC
West: R-A-20
(Specific Plan)
(Manufacturing-Service
Commercial)
(Manufacturing-Service
Commercial)
(Residential Agricultural-20
acre minimum lot size)
S%STAFFRPT/25139-PM.CC 1
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:
Number of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Area of Open Space:
Cut and Fill Figures:
97.3 acres
66
.98 acre
6.8 acres
Cut 1,430,000 cubic yards
Fill 880,000 cubic yards
BACKGROUND
Tentative Parcel Map 25139 was submitted to the County of Riverside on August 15, 1989.
The case was subsequently transmitted to the City of Temecula on April 18, 1990. City staff
requested a traffic study, landscape and architecture standards, an updated letter from the
County Flood Control District, and information regarding slope stability, soil export,
archaeological resources, property boundaries, and the alignment of Winchester Road.
Tentative Parcel Map 25139 was continued from the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission
meeting to the October 21, 1991 meeting and subsequently to the November 4, 1991
meeting. At the October 21, 1991 meeting, staff noted that a letter had been received from
the City of Murrieta requesting a continuance to allow their staff time to work with the City
of Temecula on generating traffic studies to deal with regional circulation problems. While the
commissioners expressed concerns relative to taking an action on this map without input from
the City of Murrieta, they also felt that this map needed to move forward. The staff indicated
to the commissioners that the city of Temecula is planning on going out with a request for
qualifications on certain issues relative to the Western Transportation Corridor that affect the
city of Temecula. This would provide an opportunity for the city of Murrieta to join Temecula
in this study to determine how the Western Transportation Corridor could affect their
circulation.
An additional concern of the Commission at the October 21, 1991 meeting was the amount
of cut area on the westerly slope edge of the project. Staff suggested the applicant stake the
upper boundaries of the map so the Commission could see where it falls relative to the
existing terrain. The Commission recommended the map be continued to the November 4,
1991 meeting to allow the commissioners an opportunity to view the cut areas on the site.
At the November 4, 1991 meeting, it was determined that the cut areas were acceptable and
would be properly mitigated.
The Commission voted 4-0 to approve Parcel Map 25139 with Commissioner Chiniaeff
abstaining due to a conflict of interest.
At the October 21,1991 Planning Commission meeting, the following conditions were added
and amended:
Added:
"The developer shall provide bus turn-outs with pedestrian entrances as approved by the
Riverside Transit Authority and the Department of Public Works. Turn-outs shall be shown
on the street improvement plans."
Amended:
Condition No, 84 to read "Diaz Road at Cherry Street."
At the November 4, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, the following conditions were
added:
"Applicant shall re-locate and transplant all specimen oak trees. A qualified arborist shall
prepare a report outlining the relocation and replanting procedures. In the event the trees do
not survive transplanting, the applicant shall be required to replant ten 24" box oak trees for
every one lost."
"The subdivider shall submit two (2) 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" by 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. Slope disturbance and grading shall be
limited to an approximate vertical elevation of 1,230 feet and as approved by the Department
of Public Works."
"Prior to designing any plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements
prior to recordation."
SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. There is
a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that
the project is consistent with existing and approved developments and subdivisions in the
area.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25139 indicates that the project will not result in
any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and a
Negative Declaration is recommended.
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 3
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 subdivision's in the vicinity.
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms
to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E.
m
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lots, 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 southern
exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which
are open to, and 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.
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 this application and herein incorporated by reference.
S%STAFFRPT\25139-PM. CC 4
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map
25139; and
2. ADOPT Resolution 91- approving Parcel Map
25139 based on the analysis contained herein.
vgw
Attachments:
1. Resolution - page 6
2. Conditions of Approval - Parcel Map 25139 - page 11
3. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 4, 1991 - page 12
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 21, 1991 - page 13
5, Planning Commission Minutes dated October 7, 1991 - page 14
6. Memorandum Report dated November 4, 1991 - page 15
7. Memorandum Report dated October 21, 1991 - page 16
8. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 7, 1991 - page 17
9. Initial Study - page -18
10. Exhibits - page - 19
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP Map
c. Surrounding Zoning
d. Parcel Map 25139
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-__
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PI~4.CC 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 66 PARCELS AND A
6.8 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED SOUTHERWESTERLY
OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND
SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF CHERRY
STREET AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-
018.
WHEREAS, 50 Center City Association filed Parcel Map No. 25139 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 November
4, 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;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Parcel
Map on December 10, 1991, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition to said Parcel Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and
Staff Report regarding the Parcel 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 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:
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 7
A. 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 Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set
forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan.
Be
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:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map No. 25139 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 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
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC ~
specific plans.
Be
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
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.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
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 competent jurisdiction.
The City Council in approving the proposed Parcel Map No., makes the following
findings, to wit:
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 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.
S\STAFFRPT\25139*PM,CC 9
SECTION 3.
Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Parcel Map No. 25139 for the
subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel into 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space area located
southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and southeasterly of the future extension
of Cherry Street and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-I 20-018 subject to the following
conditions:
SECTION 4.
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of December, 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 10th day of December, 1991 by
the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
S/STAFFRPT\25139*FM,CC 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFFRPT\25139-RM.CC 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139
Project Description: To create 66 parcels and
a 6,8 open space acre on a 97.3 acre site
Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-026
Plannino 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.
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.
S\S%25139.TPM 19
8. 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:
a. 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. A detailed landscaping and irrigation
plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the City
Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
10.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated November 13,
1990, a copy of which is attached.
11.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated July 9, 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 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
12.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated August 27, 1991, a copy of which
is attached.
13.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittals dated July 20, 1988 (revised November 3, 1989) and
January 18, 1989 (revised November 3, 1989), which are attached.
14.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated November 20, 1989, a copy of which is
attached.
15. 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 M-SC 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.
16.
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.
s~s\2s~ 3S.TPM 20
17.
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.
18. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
19.
"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 site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map
includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human
occupancy 8r6 allowed."
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
(1)
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the
following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
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.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
S\S\25139.TPM 2 1
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.
Applicant shall relocate and transplant all specimen oak trees. A
qualified arborist shall prepare a report outlining the relocation and
replanting procedures. In the event the trees do not survive
transplanting, the applicant shall be required to replant ten 24"
box oak trees for every on lost. (Added at the November 4, 1991
Planning Commission meeting.)
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
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:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process. Cut
slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after
grading.
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.
20.
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.
S~S\25139.TPM 22
21.
22.
23.
24.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CAoRIV 237 and shall
excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter subsurface 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. A 100% surface collection, mapping,
soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping a 3 to 5 cubic meters of
excavation shall be conducted at archaeological site WSP-1 in order to
determine the extent and significance of the site and whether further testing
and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the
Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number
shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet.
Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist
shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a
report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found,
a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading
permits.
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 of the map 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 twenty five (25) feet
with at least 10 feet landscaped.
Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted
to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources
encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of
recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
S~S~2S~39.T,M 23
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.
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.
25.
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.
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. 25139, 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,(excepting electrical lines rated 33kv
or greater), 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.
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.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas 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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further
subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered
lots.
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.
29.
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
s\s~2s~ 3e.~.M 25
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.
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).
DePartment 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 appropriate staff
person of the Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all
existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may
require the project to be resubmitted for further review.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
31.
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;
S\S\2513S.TPM 26
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; 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
Department of Public Works.
Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and street vacations
shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Departments of Planning
and Public Works. Additional property for Parcel 1 must be legally obtained and
boundary adjusted to proposed centerline of Cherry Street.
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.
Diaz Road shall be improved with 76 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. 101, (100'/76').
Via Industria shall be improved with 64 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, (88'/64).
Streets "A," "B," "C" and "D" shall be improved with 56 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. 111,
Section (78'/56').
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement
plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted,
within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101, Section (100'/76').
Cherry Street shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus
one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within
a 54 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111,
(78'/56').
s~s~2s~ 39.?.M 27
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
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.
Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street
shall limit access to joint use access driveways.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Diaz Road and Winchester Road and so
noted on the final map with the exception of Public Street Intersections and
driveway openings as approved by the Department of Public Works and as
shown on the Tentative Map.
Cul de sacs shall be designed and constructed per County Standard No 800A.
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. Provisions shall also be made to provide
for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department
of Public Works.
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.
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, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic
signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
s\s~2s~ 39.~'PM 28
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
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 developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the requirements 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
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).
S~S\2513S.TPM 29
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) 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. Slope disturbance and grading shall be limited to an
approximate vertical elevation of 1,230 feet and as approved by the
Department of Public Works. (Added at the November 4, 1991 Planning
Commission meeting.)
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 (2) 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.
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.
s~s~2s~ 39.~rPM 30
68.
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 Ordinance 91-12 of the City of
Temecula and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within
a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from
FEMA.
69. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
70.
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:
71.
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.
72.
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.
73. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District letter dated July 9, 1991, shall be complied with.
74.
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.
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.
76.
During grading, the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering
Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not
differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by
Leighton and Associates dated November 17, 1988. If geologic conditions
differ from those assumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope.
8\S~25139.TPM 3 1
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
77.
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.
78.
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.
79.
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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of
the security 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:
80.
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.
81.
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.
82.
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\S%25139.TPM 32
TranspOrtation Enaineering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
83.
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.
84.
Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Winchester Road North at Diaz Road, Via Industria at Cherry Street and Diaz
Road at Cherry Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans
with the second plan check. (Added at the October 21, 1991 Planning
Commission meeting.)
85.
"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 Plan." (Added at the October 21, 1991 Planning Commission
meeting.)
86.
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.
87.
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.
88.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements prior to recordation. (Added at the November 4,
1991 Planning Commission meeting.)
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
89.
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.
S\S\25139.TPM 33
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
90.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing
and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
91.
All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate sight distance.
92.
Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersections of
local streets.
93.
Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent
to the project.
/ COUNTTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPAR MENT OF HEALTH
RECEIVEL] ,,. ,: ':
November 13. 1990
CITY OF TEMECULA
43180 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
TEMECULA. CA 93390
A'.IN: S~E JIANNINO
PJE: PARCEL MAP NO. Z5139: PORTION PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP
NO. 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY.
(64 LOTS)
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD N0.
25139 and recommends that:
A water system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as approved by the water
company and the Health DepaFtment. Permanent
prints of the plans of the water system shall be
submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not
less than one inch equals E00 feet, along with the
or~Qlnal drawing to the County Surveyor. The prints
shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of
valves and fire hydrants: pipe and 3oint
sDeciflcations, and the size of the main at the
3unction of the new system to the exlstinq 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, T~tle
22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the
Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California. when applicable. ~l'ne plans shall be
s~gned by a reqistered engineer and water company
with the following certiflcation: "I certify that
the design of the water system in Parcel MaD 35139
is in accordance w~th the water system expansion
Dlins of the Rancho Callfornza Water District and
that the water service, storage, and distribution
system will be adequate to provide water service to
such Parcel Map"
City of Temecula
Page Two
Attn: Steve Jiannxno
November 13, 1990
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
responsible official of the water company,
~..f~.~l~.e~. to The County Survevor's
!~_a.~_..~Q_~_e_e~3~lg_~___~o ~h~__£~quest for the
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 providin~
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.
This subdivision is within the Rancho California Water
D~strict and shall be connected to the sewers of the
District. The sewer system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as aDproved 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 p~pe diameter,
locatlon of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and 3aint
spec~flcatlons and the size of the sewers at the 3unction of
the new system to the existing system. A slngle plat
Indicating locatlon of sewer lines and water lines shall be
a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall
be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district
with the following certification: "I certify that the
desiqn of the sewer system in Parcel No. 25139 is in
accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the
Rancho California Water District and that the waste disposal
system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed parcel map,"
City of Temecula
Pa0e Three
Attn: Steve Jlannlno
November 13. 1990
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be
completely f~nal~zed prior to recordatlon of the final maD.
nvironmental Health Specialist IV
SM:dr
KENNETH L EDWARDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92502
JUly 9, 1991
City of temecula
City Hall
43180 Business Park Dr., Ste.
Temecula, California 92390
200
Attention: Planning Department
Steve Jiannino
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
This is a proposal to divide 97.3 acres into commercial parcels
located south of the intersection of Diaz Road and Cherry Street.
This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and approxi-
mately one half of the parcels are located within the lO0 year flood
plain limits of the creek.
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 factor 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 property is also affected by the runoff which approaches it
from the hills to the southwest. High, steep cut slopes up to 115
feet are proposed here which intersect flows from several canyons.
These canyons can produce debris laden flows which must be safely
and reliably collected and conveyed down the steep slopes to ensure
protection of the proposed project. The collection/conveyance
system for these slopes as proposed is not sufficient to meet the
District's concerns.
of Temecula
Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
are the District's
health ~c s,~fety:
~'ecc!nmen~t 1 ons
affec~ "~aters '~ ~he bn,ted States",
d~ct~on3' str'elmOeds" , therefore, ~n 3c.sor~ance
recu-reme,-ts sf Lhe Nations~ f~ood insurance
a='&Led ;~u~at':,ns (~4 .?~R, 2a/%s ~9 thrOuch
2-d~r~ance ~'- 458:
~ flood study consisting of HEr-2 calculatnons. cr-,.zss
sect c~ s. ma~s anQ other data s~ould De arepared to the
~.~: ~a t: st; of t;~e Federal Emergenc~ 24ana~emer~ Agency
(;EHA) and the O:strnct for the purpose of revising the
effec:.ze Flood Zns~rance Rate Nap of the pra2ec~ site.
The subm-ttal of the study should be concurrent with the
-n~[',a~ submittal of the re~ated project ~mpro~emen~
plans and fins! D~strict approval will not be given
un:iq a Conditional Letter of Nap Revision ('2LONR) has
been received from FENA.
~ cop? of appropriate correspondence and recessar.,
permits from those government agencies from wh~cr,
proval ~s required by Federal or State law (such as
Corps of Engineers 404 permlt or Department of
.Same 1603 agreement) should be provided to the
pr;.Dr to the f: ~ Oistr;ct approval ^¢ :he e~'~-~
Th;s parcel map is located w~th~n the !~m!ts of the
Murr-~eta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Dralnage Plan
~rannage ~ees have been adopted Dy ~he ~Dard. 2r'a;r~=ae
si:a!' De paid as set forth under the pro.:s:~ns
'Ru~es and Regulations for Administration of Area
Plans", amended Febr~;~ry 16, 1988:
Drainage fees shall be pa;c to the Transpcrtaz'..:'
missloner as part of the f,l:ng for record af :no s~bc -
vision final map or parcel maD, or !f the rec2rJ:.-.g .'-Jr
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be
as a condition of the waiver prlor to recordlz-,g
t~ficate of ccmp'%ance e,!oenc!n9 the ~a~,,,er of tr, e
sateel map; or
_ ~> of Temecu 1 a
Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
At the oDtieP of tne !3rid di,/:der, ,;Don f~!~ng a re-
quired sff~,dav~t~ ,equest~ng defermerit of ~ne
fee~, :he draln~ge fees may De pa~d ~c th~ Bu~!d~q~
~u'i~n~ pe,m~t for- each aDproved parse], wh,cne,,.a.-
be ~:r-st ~D:a'ned after the recording of ~ne
= fin! map Dr' parce! maD: provided howe,or, th:s .:2: sr
tc ae~er th9 fees may act D9 e~erslsed for
Dircel w-~hln :r:e prior ~ year pe-~ud, or Defmn:o
e~her act~'z~%y have been ~asued on ~ha% ~arcel
,ema::' act'.e,
2"off Zo '.~lt,a:!c:: of the f!na] ConstrucE:or] ,trawlfigs for
tr'cse fac,?ities required t,o De built as part cf the
Murr~eta ,2ree!,-/'~emecula Valley Area Orannage Plan, Zhe
cevelaper should contact the Pi','ers:de :purity Flood Control
and Water Conservation D~str~ot to ascertain :ins terms and
scqC.t~ons cf destgn, cons:ru:tion, ;napcotton, transfer of
,'ghts of waV, Oroject c~edit in l~eu of fees and reimburse-
me't ~.:.P:edule~ wn~c:n may appl>. Title reports and t~tle
!ns.~ra'me 'rust be pro/]ded for al~ right of way tc be
=.a~se~ tc t~e '?istr!ct. The defe!,sper s o d note ti:at
the estimated cost for required area dra!nage ~!an
tea e-,beeds the required drainage fees and :r.e cece!s~:er
w!shes tO receive credit for reimaursement ]n e:~cess
~ the faci]~+;es ~i11 be constructed as 3 pubq~c
c,cntract. Scheduling for ConStruCtiOn Of ~hese
~.:?~ se at the discretion of the Ofstrict.
',ur-~e:a Creek C~anne! should De constr'ucteC tnroug: ~re
;.rcposeU project in conformsrice w~th the Oistrct's
2es~]n <ncluding hab,tat mitigation measures
r~qulred by the various resource agencies. in l~eu o
constructing the channel ~mprovemen%s the appl;sa::t s'-',ai~
cooperate in the formation of and participate
mechanism such as a community facilities d~str's: or
assessment distr~ct tc pay far the cost of the Distri_t's
proposed Murrieta Creek Channel ~mprovements,
The r'gnt of way for Nutriots Creek, including %he area
-squired For habitat m~tigation should be decorated to: tr, e
2'stic=. The right cf ~ay needed for Murr~eta Cree~
Ch:s area ~s 250 fee~ each side of the center]~ne. Th s
.nc]uces a 50-fop% habitat mntiga~on strip on each
wrl:sh will De returned :f :t :s not needed.
S,ty of Temecula
Pet Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
4 July 9, !991
'4.
The facilities collecting
.ut slopes from the nnl:s tc the scutt~west should
s:gnea us:rig ~he 2,~str:ct'~ Drainage Sta~ar,js
Slopes. dated November ~. '93E'. ~raS attached qece:c.
Pads on this s',te shall be e!eva:ed a m~n~mjm
l)r. site dra!nage ~aa~l~L]es iotatoG o~,ts]~_e sf ,'sac ,1~-~. 3:
l',e = ~ r',~l rnas. s. note shcb l d Se a~ed ~s tr:.2 f ~ ,,~ map
starred, 'O~a: :aZe easernertz snam ~ De hop! f: ee cf buildlngs
Offsets drainage fac:l~t~es should be located w~th~n dedi-
cated drainage easements obtained from the affected property
owner(s). Document(sl should be recorded aRC a copy subm~t-
ted to the Eistr~ct pr~or tc reccrdat~on of the final map.
AI' lots should be ,graded to dra~n to the adjacent st,-ee: :-
an adequate cutlet.
The !0 year storm flow should be conteared ~ithin the c~r:.
and the 100 2ear storm flow should be contained
street r~ght of way. When e~ther of these cr~ter:a
e.,:eeded, addat:oral drainage faci!itles shou!~
led.
Z:ra~nage facilities outletting sump conditions
dee'gred to convey the tributary 100 year
Addit;oral emergency escape st, pule also De
~e
TRe property's street and lot grading should be Ges!gned :r
a manner that perpetuates the e~ist~ng natura~ drainage
patterns with respect to tributary drainage area a,",c cu~:e~
points.
An encroachment permit should be obtained for- any work on
District facilities or within D~Str:Ct right of way. The
ensroachment permit appl~catlcn should be ~rocesse~ and
approves concurrent~ with the improvement plans.
l= the tract ~s built in phases, each phase shall se p"j"'-
tested fr.om the ~ in !00 year tributary storm flows.
Cot/cf Temecula
Re: Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
5 july 9, 199~
15
21
Temporary erosion cznCr-s: measures should be ~mpiemen:ec
immediately following r.aug~ gradl~,g %e ~re~ant Oep,sslt!on
debt s onto dcwnstream propertoes or :zr'a!nage fac:'%t:es.
Development of this property s!-:ou]C De cocr:~lna:.e3
development of zdJacert properties to ensure that
:,}k~r.:e~ r'ema~n ur, bbsLr'uc%ed and s%ormwa~ers are
=rcm ':':e wa:er-s~-ed %0 another. Th!s may require
st r~c~ -,:n ~f temporat 2 dra'~nage fac~:: t~es ,at ::~f5
:.~,spectlon and maintenance of the storm drain s/s%em to oe
:,,~:lt w:t,~ th~s t~ac: must be performed by e:the~' the Cou~t/
','a:~pb:'ta~_:on Depot ~,T~ent oF Che :Iaoa .Sor:tru~ D:sLriC:.
T~e e~g:~eer (owner) must re~es: ~n wr~:~nS) that one of
:hess agencies accept ~he proposed Storm dr'a;n system. The
request should note the trac~ number, location, and briefly
descr :be ~he syst. em (oozes and lengths). Request :o the
DisLc~c% shc,~d be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief
Engineer, A~%n: Frank J. Peaits, Chief of P~anr, in9 Division.
:f ~he Dds~r~c: is wi~1~ng to accep~ ~he system, an agree-
ment between ~he owner and ~he D~s~r~c: mus~ be e,ecuted.
reaues~ ~o draw dp an agreement mus~ be sent to ~he ::s~. 5:
~o ~he attention of N~chael D. ~awson.
AI: ~nooa control facilities shsu!d be ccnstructes ts C-s-
~r~c~ standards. AI! facilities tbat the Distrod: ,~:'~
a~s~me ~or malntenance wil~ require the payment oF a one
:mme maintenance charge equal to the "present worth ~
ma%r~tenance costs from the time of acceptance ~hrc,~gr, 199e.
The iQpticant's engineer should contact the
:her;, section to schedule a pro-design meet:tog before
en,]~leer starts detai~ed proSect design.
If this project will disturb five or more acres cr is par:
of a larger project that will disturb five or more acses
will require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources ,2ontr-sl
Board. Clearance for grading or recordat~on will t~ct be
given until the project has been granted a permit or ~s
shown to be exempt.
: CL, DZ of the improvement plans, grading p]ans and f no! :T~3:
a:cn~ w~th support3ng hydrolog~c and hydraulic 3aIc:~at'c~s
~hal~ be submitted to the Distci:t via the Transportatop-
Department for review prior to reocrdat:on cf the f -:&i r:,~g.
Grad~qg slaps should be approved pr~r to :ssuan:e 2f ,gr'~!-
'r-~ per~:ts.
'-%) of Temecula
Parcel Map 25139
Amended No. 3
Effective July 29, I79!, 3e~- C'rdinanse ~7~,. all subm:t~als
~ha! m :,e Gate stamped Dy ?~e eng:neer ar.d s~bmitted 3: ,-ec~i,
~c :,r:e F'~>od ,C~ntrc. l D:stric~t a!or~g w~th a c, empletec P~oDd
Cof~,rc.: Zmprovement S,gst Sheet arid t. he app,-oprmaz. e p~an
3t~ec,~ fee.
S~e=~,,',,s ,,cI~se~,~9 %h~s matter may be referred t.'s Z,.ll/ C~m;th of
,:: ,~, E~%g~neer~ng
Ben~or Civil Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE pROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
AUGUST 27, 19~b
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
INDIO. CA 92201
(619) 342-8886
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 IZTH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(714) 275-4777
TO:
CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTN:
RE:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PARCEL MAP 25139
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
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
hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure.
Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2-2~") 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 conform to fire hydrant types, location
and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall
be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company
with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system
is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Dept."
The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
ml
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
RiVERSiDE COUnt,u
PL, nnin( DEP, ARC IEI C
July 20, 1988
(Revised November 3, 1989)
Leighton and Associates
27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109
Rancho California, California 92390
Attention: Mr. Mark Bergman
Mr. Daniel Chu
SUBJECT:
Liquefaction Hazard
Project No. 118602325-02
Tentative Parcel Map 25139
APN: 909-120-018
County Geologic Report No. 527
Rancho California Area
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed your report entitled "Phase I Preliminary Geotechnical
Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential for Parcel Map 21502, Rancho California,
Riverside County, CA," dated June 23, 1988.
Your report determined that the potential for liquefaction exists on the site
for an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude and horizontal ground acceleration of 0.369.
The site is within one mile of the Wildomar fault. The zone of liquefaction is
shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map of your report.
Your report recommended that one of the following alternatives should be
considered.
Placement of fill (approximately 10 feet in thickness total to an
approximate elevation of 1,033 feet m.s.1) on Lots 48 through 51 {
Tentative Parcel Map 21502} to increase the overburden pressure. Based
on the preliminary plans, the remaining lots identified as in the
liquefiable zone will have between 15 feet to 28 feet of fill placed.
This appears to be of adequate depth for mitigating the liquefaction
potential.
Densification of the alluvium between 20 feet to 40 feet of the
subsurface cohesionless material to at least 92 percent relative
compaction as determined by ASDTM D1557-78, by vibroflotation dynamic
compaction, or other techniques.
3. Placement of the structures on piles to bypass the liquefiable zone.
4. Utilizing post tensioned slabs for the proposed structures.
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
Leighton and Associates - 2 - July 20, 1988
(Revised November 3, 1989)
Alternatives i and 2 will reduce the potential for liquefaction of the
cohesionless material found in borings B-4 and B-5. Alternatives 3 and 4 will
not mitigate the liquefaction potential, but will allow measures for mitigation
should liquefaction occur.
It is our opinion that the 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 note be placed on the Parcel Map prior to its
recordation: "County Geologic Report No. 527 was prepared for this property on
June 23, 1988 by Leighton and Associates and is on file at the Riverside County
Planning Department. The specific items of interest are liquefaction and
seismic design of structures. These items affect Parcels i through g, 18
through 40, and 46 through 53."
The recommendations made in your report for mitigation of liquefaction
potential shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project.
Very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Roger S. Streeter - Planning Director
/
Steven A. Kupferman
Engineering Geologist .
CEG-1205 ~
SAK:al
c.c. Rancon Corp.
Norm Lostbom - Building & Safety (2)
Planning Team 1 - John Chiu
::IiVE::i)iDE countv,
PLAnninG DEPA::ICl;IEnC
January 18, 1989
(Revised November 3, 1989)
Leighton and Associates
27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109
Rancho California, CA 92390
Attention: Mr. Mark Bergmann
Mr. Daniel Chu
SUBJECT:
Fault Hazard-CEQA
Project No. 11860325-02
Tentative Parcel Map 25139
APN: 909-120-018
County Geologic Report No.
Rancho California Area
527 F
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the fault hazard aspects of your report entitled "Geotechnical
Report for a Phase II Fissure and Subsidence Investigation and Phase III
Geotechnical Investigation for Parcel Map No. 21507, Rancho California,
Riverside County, CA," dated August 29, 1988, your revised report dated
November 17, 1988, and your response to County review dated November 17, 1988.
Your report determined that:
A previously unmapped, active branch of the Elsinore fault zone was
encountered in exploratory trenches excavated on this project. This branch
is tentatively being called the "Murrieta Creek Fault." Therefore, the
possibility of damage due to ground rupture is high in the vicinity of this
fault.
The Willard Branch of the Elsinore Fault Zone transects the extreme western
portion of the property in a northeasterly to southwesterly direction and
was determined to be potentially active or Pre-Holocene.
A peak bedrock acceleration of 0.61g could occur at the site should a
magnitude 6.0 earthquake occur along the Wildomar fault, located 3200 feet
northeast.
4. No landslide deposits were encountered nor are any ancient landslides known
to exist at the site.
5. The eastern one-third of the site is located within the 100 year flood
plain.
6. The possibility of seiches, tsunamis and inundation due to failure of large
water storage facilities is considered very low.
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46'209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
Leighton and Associates - 2 - January 19, 1989
(Revised November 3, 1989}
A zone of open fissuring approximately 20 feet wide was observed within
the alluvium in the exploratory trenching. The potential for fissuring
and ground subsidence due to ground water withdrawal is considered to
be high in the vicinity of the "Murrieta Creek fault."
Your report recommended that:
A fault and fissure setback zone should be established along the active
trace of the "Murrieta Creek fault" encountered on the site. The
setback zone should be established 50 feet from the furthest limits of
faulting. Within the fault setback zone, structures for human
occupancy may not be constructed. The location of the fault setback
zone is shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate I in your November 17,
1988 report.
A monitoring program has been initiated at the site to evaluate the
amount of ground movement associated with subsidence and possible
variations in the depth to groundwater. The readings from this
monitoring program will continue to be taken on a weekly basis until
such time that site construction and development precludes procurring
additional data, or the readings remain substantially unchanged.
Proposed structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should be
constructed with post-tensioned floor slabs to help mitigate potential
problems with ground cracking. The post-tensioned slabs should be
constructed in accordance with the recommendations of a qualified
structural engineer. The engineer should design the slabs to withstand
a I inch differential settlement in 5 horizontal feet. In addition,
all building pads within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should have
a 5 foot minimum fill below the pad. All cut lots and all fill lots
with less than 5 feet of fill will need to be overexcavated and
recompacted to provide the 5 foot minimum. This special foundation
zone is shown on the Geotechnical Maps, Plate I in your report.
4. All surface runoff should be collected and directed offsite.
Uncompacted, exploratory trench backfill should be completely removed
and recompacted prior to placement of fills, where exposed at the pad
finished grade or within 10 feet in depth from the pad finished grade
to the top of the trenches.
It is our opinion that the 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.
We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before final
recordation of the map or issuance of any County permits associated with this
project:
Leighton and Associates - 3 - January 19, 1989
{Revised November 3, 1989}
The Recommended Fault Setback Limits shown on the Geotechnical Map,
Plate 1 in the report shall be delineated on the Environmental
Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.). The areas within the Recommended Fault
Setback Limits shall be labeled "FAULT HAZARD AREA."
2. The following notes be placed on the E.C.S.:
(A)
"This property is affected by earthquake faulting· Structures
for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault Hazard
Area. This constraint affects parcel numbers 8, 9, 10, 18, 19,
39, 40, 46 and 47."
(b)
"County Geologic Report No. 527F was prepared for this property
on November 17, 1988 by Leighton and Associates, and is on file
at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of
concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and
ground subsidence, seismic design of structures, flooding, and
uncompacted trench backfill."
Notes 2{a} and 2{b} above shall also be placed on the final Parcel Map
with the following addition to Note No. 2{a} "...as shown on the
accompanying Environmental Constraints Sheet, the original of which is
on file at the office of the Riverside County Surveyor."
A copy of the final map and Environmental Constraints Sheet shall be
submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review
and approval.
The recommendations n~de in your report shall be adhered to in the design and
construction of this project.
Very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~nt~ineering Geolo~Ist 7
CEG-1205
SAK:al
c.c. Diaz Road Investors c/o Rancon Corp.
Greiner Engineering - Merl Schultz
Earl Hart - CDMG
Building & Safety - Norm Lostbom {2}
Board of Directors:
James A. Darby
President
Jeffrey L. Minklet
Sr. vice President
Ralph Daily
Doug Kulberg
Jon A. Lundin
T. C. Rowe
Richard D. Steffey
Officers:
John F. Hennigar
General Manager
Phillip L Forbes
Director of Finance-
Thomas R. MeAljester
Director of Operations
& Maintenance
Edward P. Lemons
Director of Engmeenng
Linda M. Fregoso
Dmtrict Secretary
McCormick & Kidman
Legal Counsel
November 20, 1989
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, California 92501-3657
Subject: Water Availability
Reference: Parcel Map 25139
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced
property is located within the boundaries of Rancho
California Water District. Water service,
therefore, would be available upon completion of
financial arrangements (including all in-tract
facilities) between RCWD and the property owner.
Currently, the District 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 Rancho California Water
District.
Water availability would be contingent upon the
property owner signing an Agency Agreement which
assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
If you have anyquestions, please contact Senga
Doherty at (714) 676-4101.
Very truly yours,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon
Engineering Manager
F012B/jkth332f
Attachment
cc: Senga Doherty
R A N C H O C A L I F O R N I A W A T E R D I S T R I C' T
28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TENIECULA. CA 92390-0174 · (714) 676-4101 · FAX t714) 676-.~6[5
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
NOVEMBER 4, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25139-FM.CC 12
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
November 4, 1991
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND declared a recess
reconvened at 7:10 P.M.
6. PARCEL MAP 25139
at 7:00 P.M. The meeting
e6
Proposal to create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a
97 acre site in the M-SC Zone. Located west of Diaz Road
and South of Cherry Street.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stepped down due to a conflict of
interest.
DEBBIE UBNOSKE presented the staff report.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND advised that he had received a letter
from Murrieta's City Manager, requesting that the
Commission continue this item to allow their City time to
perform traffi~ studies.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDOpened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M.
MAX URESOL, 9968 Hybrid Street, San Diego, representing
the applicant, indicated the applicant's concurrence with
the staff report; however, requested modification to.
Condition 21, Line 3, adding "at the discretion of the
archeologist, a Native American be present".
COMMISSIONER FORD advised that he had met with the
applicant and reviewed the grading that he had questioned
during the previous hearing for this item. Mr. Ford
questioned staff whether some of the roads had been down
graded to 45 mph due to the road radius not being
standard.
DOUG STEWART stated that he was not aware that the design
specifications of the roads required a compromise in
speed volumes.
COMMI88IONER FORD also requested that staff condition the
applicant on the following:
1) That any oak trees lost as a result of development be
replaced at a 10:1 ratio.
2) Work with the map on an approximate 1230 elevation on
the base line topo.
3)
That staff work with the applicant to create right
in/right out only access at some of the driveways on
the circulation road.
TPCMINll/4/91 -5- 11/6/91
PLAI~qlNG COMMI821ON MINUTES
November 4, 1991
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
7:25 P.M. and recommend that the City Council AdoPt the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139 and Adopt
Resolution No. 91- [next) approving Tentative Parcel Map
No. 25139 subject to the Conditions of Approval along
with the modifications to the Condition for the oak trees
as follows, "Prior to the issuance of grading permits,
applicant shall relocate and transplant all specimen oak
trees. A qualified arborist shall prepare a report
outlining the relocation and replanting procedures. In
the event the trees do not survive transplanting, the
applicant shall be required to replant ten 24" box oak
trees for every one lost", staff to work with map on the
1230 elevation on the base line topo, and condition added
by transportation department at the previous hearing as
follows, "Prior to recordation of the final map,
developer shall provide bus turnouts with pedestrian
entrance.", seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY, who
questioned the'condition for right in/right out only
access on the circulation road. Commissioner Ford asked
for staff's comments.
ROBERT RIGHETTI stated that the applicant is required to
prepare a stripping plan that will be directed by the
transportation department and if the Commission wants"
staff to keep that in mind, they can do that; however,
staff would hesitate to set specifics at this time. Mr.
Righetti added that staff is trying to incorporate shared
driveways.
MAX URESOL concurred with the changes to the
modifications to the conditions.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i
PARCEL MAP 2S408
COMMISSIONERS:
Chiniaeff
7.7 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in the M-SC zone.
DEBBIE UBNOSKE presented the staff report.
COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he would recommend the same
modifications as previously stated on Item 6.
TPCMINll/4/91 -6- 11/6/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
OCTOBER 21, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM,CC I 3
PL:s,.NNXNO COMMIBSION MINUTE8
OCTOBER
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-[Dext) 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 HOAGLAND 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 HAP 25139
12.1
Proposal to create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a
97 acre site in the M-SO 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 STEWART 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 BLaXR seconded the motion.
The applicant provided the Commission with a picture of
%he boundaries.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:I
PARCEL HAP 25408
COMMISSIONERS:
Chiniaeff
13.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in the M-SC zone. Located on the
southwesterly side of Diaz Road, southwest of the future
extension of Winchester Road.
PCMNI0/St/gt -- 13 -- 10/23/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 14
COMMZBBZON MZNUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991
of Oiaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester
Road.
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05
P.M.
COMMISSIONER BLAXR moved to continue Parcel Map 24085 to
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
10. PARCEL HAP 24086
10.1 Proposal to create 49 commercial/industrial parcels on a
70 acre site in M-SC zone. Located on the westerly side
of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester
Road.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05
P.M.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 24086 to
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER F~alEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:I COMMISSIONERS:
Chiniaeff
PARCEL HAP 25139
11.1 Proposal to create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a
97 acre site in M-SC zone. Located west of Diaz Road and
south of Cherry Street.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAMD opened the public hearing at 7:05
P.M.
TPCMIN10/07/91 -12- 10/08/91
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 199~
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25139 to
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
12. PARCEL MAP 25408
12.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels
36 acre site in M-SC zone. Located southwesterly of
future extension'of Winchester Road.
CMAIPa(AN BOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05
P.M.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25408
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
on a
to
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND re-opened the public hearing on Item No. 13 at
8:40 P.M.
KEITH MCCANN JR., 43121 Margarita, Temecula, applicant,
advised that after communication with the City Attorney's
office, he has been advised that the enforcement of the
CC&R'e and release thereof is a civil matter to be
addressed by the property owner and the Homeowner's
Association. Mr. McCann stated that it was a concern
of the HOA that being released from the CC&R's would set
some sort of precedent; the CC&R's provide for this with
the requirement of 51% approval of the homeowners.
BARRY BERNELL, 3242 Haliday Street, Santa Ana,
representing the applicant, explained the request for
changing the designation of this property. Mr. Bernell
advised that the original expectation of the area was
large lots, very rural; however, in 1980 the county
TPCMIN10/07/91 -13- 10/08/91
ATFACHMENT NO. 6
MEMORANDUM REPORT
DATED
NOVEMBER 4, 1991
S\STAFFRFr\25139-PM.CC 15
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
November 4, 1991
Tentative Parcel Map 25139
The Planning Commission continued these items from the October 21,1991 Planning Commission meeting.
The item was continued in order to allow the Commissioners an opportunity to review the existing grading
and chapparel relative to the proposed parcel lines. The applicant has staked the upper boundaries of the
site in order to allow the requested visualization.
Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the
following recommendation to the City Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139;
and
ADOPT Resolution 91-__ approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
25139 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
vgw
S\MEMOS\GAR\25139TPM. MEM
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
MEMORANDUM REPORT
DATED
OCTOBER 21, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25139-RM.CC 16
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
October 21, 1991
Parcel Map 25139
The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991.
However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested
a continuance to review the maps and provide comments.
Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make
the following recommendation to the City Council:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139;
and
ADOPT Resolution 91 -_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
25139 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
vgw
S\MEMOS%GAR\26139PM.MEM
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 17
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.: Parcel Map 25139
Prepared By: Scott Wright
Recommendation:
Adopt the Negative
Declaration; and
Adopt Resolution 91-
recommending approval of
Tentative Parcel Map
25139
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
50 Center City Associates
REPRESENTATIVE:
Alba Engineering
PROPOSAL:
To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space area
on a 97.3 acre site.
LOCATION:
Southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road
and southeasterly of the future extension of Cherry
Street.
EXISTING ZONING:
Manufacturing - Service Commercial (M-SC)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Specific Plan, (SP)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-
SC)
Residential Agricultural (R-A-20)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
S\S\25139.TPM
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Murrieta Creek
West: Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Gross site area:
No. of Parcels:
Average Parcel size:
Area of Open Space:
Cut and Fill Figures:
Cut =
Fill =
97.3 acres
66
0.98 acre
6.8 acres
1,430,000 cubic yards
880,000 cubic yards
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Parcel Map 25139 was submitted to the
County on August 15, 1989. The County Land
Development Committee (CLDC) reviewed the
application on September 21, 1989 and requested
clearance letters for the paleontology survey and the
geology and liquefaction reports as well as
clarification of the site's status as an agricultural
preserve. The LDC continued the case on November
2, 1989 pending receipt of updated clearance letters
for the biology, geology, and liquefaction reports and
the need for additional information regarding the
flood plain, slopes, agricultural preserve, review of
the design manual, and a redesign to address
concerns of the County Flood Control District.
The file was transmitted to the City on April 18,
1990. City staff requested a traffic study, landscape
and architecture standards, an updated letter from
the County Flood Control District, and information
regarding slope stability, soil export, archaeological
resources, property boundaries, and the alignment of
Winchester Road.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposal is to create 66 parcels between 0.51
acre and 3.7 acres in size with an average parcel size
of 0.98 acre. There will be an undisturbed 6.8 acre
open space on the southwesterly side of the site in
order to retain some hillside chaparral habitat.
Parcels 58 through 66 will involve substantial cuts
into the hillside and will be separated from the open
space area by slopes over 100 feet high with a slope
S\S\25139.TPM 2
ratio of 1.5:1. The site is traversed by a fault
setback zone within which no structures for human
occupancy will be allowed. The easterly side of the
site lies within the Murrieta Creek Channel and is
indicated as a channel easement to the County of
Riverside.
ANALYSIS:
Gradin<3 and Slooe Stability
The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut
and 880,000 cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1
cut slopes up to 120 feet high. The project will
involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil
from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for
Parcel Map 25139 that information regarding the
number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination
point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading
plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and haul
route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance
of grading permits. The final disposition of the
export soil will be subject to environmental review in
conjunction with the project which will use the
export soil as fill.
The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this
project states that the cut slopes will be stable under
normal and seismic conditions, provided they are free
of adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope
Stability Analysis includes recommendations that an
engineering geologist conduct geological mapping
during grading to verify that the soils and geologic
conditions encountered do not differ significantly
from those assumed in the Slope Stability Analysis.
If significant differences are encountered, buttressing
may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill
slopes should be provided with appropriate surface
drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after
grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and
bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope.
The recommendations of the Slope Stability Analysis
shall be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map
25139.
S\S\25139.TPM 3
Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site.
However, with the absence of policy relative to
grading, Staff's recommendation is to condition the
map in such a way as to initiate the greatest extent
possible, grading impaction mitigation measures
relative to grading are determined in the Conditions
of Approval.
With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan
effort will most likely include policies relative to
grading.
Flood Hazards
A portion of the site is located in the 1 O0 year flood
plain. Measures to remove the project from the 1 O0
year flood plain are listed in the conditions of
approval (see County Flood Control District letter of
July 9, 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. On-
site grading shall be designed to perpetuate existing
tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and
development of the subject and adjacent properties
shall be coordinated to ensure that watercourses
remain unobstructed and that storm waters 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. Off-
site drainage facilities shall be located within
dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property owner(s). Said easements shall be
recorded and a copy submitted to the Flood Control
District prior to map recordation. Drainage facilities
collecting and conveying flows down the steep cut
slopes shall be designed in accordance with the
District's Drainage Standards for high cut slopes
dated November 8, 1990.
S\S\25139.TPM
Geologic and Liauefaction Hazards
A fault hazard and subsidence investigation was
prepared for an earlier parcel map application on the
subject property. The report determined that the site
is traversed by an active branch of the Elsinore Fault,
and that the possibility of ground rupture is high in
the vicinity of the fault. The potential for fissuring
and ground subsidence due to water withdrawal are
high in the vicinity of the fault. There is also a
potentially active Pre-Holocene fault which transects
the extreme western portion of the site which will be
maintained as open space. The report recommended
a fault and fissure setback zone along the active
trace of the branch of the Elsinore Fault in which no
structures for human occupancy will be allowed.
Other recommendations included continuation of a
program to monitor ground movement associated
with subsidence and use of at least 5 feet of
recompacted fill and post-tensioned slabs for all
structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone.
The liquefaction report prepared for an earlier parcel
map on the site determined that the potential for
liquefaction exists on the site. The reports
recommendations included placement of fill on the
lots susceptible to liquefaction or densification of
subsurface alluvium to at least 92% relative
compaction.
The Riverside County Geologist reviewed both
reports and found that they satisfy the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act and
County General Plan Policies regarding geological
hazards. The recommendations of the reports shall
be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139.
Traffic and Circulation
Future development of the site is expected to
generate 5, 180 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
S\S\25139.TPM 5
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 intersections and 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 Winchester Road to six lanes. These
improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of
Approval.
Additionally, this project, along with PM 25408, will
be constructing the first portion of the western
bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at
Douglas Avenue. This portion of the proposed
alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and
approved by the City's Department of Public Work
and found acceptable.
Access
Access to the site will be taken from Winchester
Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will
have frontage on and take access from dedicated
streets. Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz
Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit
access to joint use access driveways.
Parcel Size and Dimensions
Development standards in the M-SC Zone require a
minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an
average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are
available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels
range from 0.51 acre to 1.37 acres and have an
average lot widths of over 1 O0 feet.
S\S\25139.TPM 6
Fossil Resources
The site is located on the fossilferous 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.
Archaeological Resources
The site of Parcel Map 25139 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 metates,
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 should be implemented to
preserve cultural resources. 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 25139. In addition, a Native American
representative shall be present during the
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
S\S\25139.TPM 7
The property in question also contains another site
(WSP-1) which contains a 3/4 circle rock enclosure.
The site is possibly a late period campsite. A 100%
surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and
subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters
of earth is recommended. In this case, testing
procedures are likely to constitute final mitigation.
BioloGical Imoacts
A biological survey of the site found no sensitive
plant species. Two sensitive bird species were
observed or detected on the site: the Long-eared
Owl and the Grasshopper Sparrow. Neither bird had
an official status as a sensitive species, but both
were listed by experts as declining species. The
Grasshopper Sparrow will be impacted by a
reduction in foraging habitat which is considered a
non-significant but incrementally adverse impact.
Impacts on the Long-eared Owl are more difficult to
assess. Recommended measures to reduce habitat
impacts are maintenance of an undisturbed open
space area on the western side of the site and
enhancement of Murrieta Creek riparian corridor by
planting Cottonwood and Sycamore trees adjacent to
Diaz Road. The tentative map indicates an open
space area on the western side of the site. The
recommended planting of Cottonwood and Sycamore
trees adjacent to Diaz Road may conflict with the
need to use more drought resistant, low maintenance
type of vegetation with less invasive root systems
which would be less detrimental to public
improvements. Appropriate alternatives to
cottonwood or sycamore trees should be identified
and planted.
Water and Sewer Availability
A will serve letter from the Rancho Water District
indicates that water and sewer service are available
to the site upon completion of financial arrangements
and satisfaction of the District's other requirements.
S\S\25139.TPM 8
Aqricultural Preserve Status
The site is designated as an Agricultural Preserve.
Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act would
normally preclude approval of a parcel map creating
parcels of insufficient size for agricultural use.
However, Section 66474.4 (d.3.) exempts lands
subject to a Notice of Non-Renewal indicating that
the Agricultural Preserve contract is due to expire
within three years. The County Assessor's Office
has informed City Staff that a Notice of Non-
Renewal indicates that the contract for the property
in question is due to expire on January 1, 1992.
The same exemption is provided in Section 7.1
(H.3.b) of Ordinance 460.
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
resulted in changes to property boundaries. The
subject Parcel Map was affected by a realignment of
Winchester Road adjacent to Tentative Parcel Maps
25408 and 24086. In order to prevent discrepancies
in the legal descriptions of the property at the item
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
must be completed prior to map recordation.
S\S\25139.TPM 9
SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND
ZONING CONSISTENCY: The proposed parcels conform to the development
standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is
consistent with the SWAP designation of Light
Industrial. There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the future General
Plan in that the project is consistent with existing
and approved developments and subdivisions in the
area.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25139
indicates that the project will not result in any
environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to
a level of insignificance, and a Negative Declaration
is recommended.
FINDINGS:
m
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 subdivision's in the vicinity.
S\S\25139.TPM 10
10.
11.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. 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 lots, 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 southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and 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 this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
S\S\25139.TPM 11
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
make the following recommendation to the City
Council:
Adopt the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map
25139; and
Adopt Resolution 91 - approving Parcel Map
25139 based on the findings contained herein
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits:
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Tentative Parcel Map 25408
S\S\25139.TPM 12
RESOLUTION NO. 91-106
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO SUBDIVIDE A
97.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 66 PARCELS AND A 6.8 ACRE
OPEN SPACE ACRE LOCATED SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE
FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
909-120-018
WHEREAS, 50 Century City Associates filed Tentative Parcel Map No.
25139 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel
Map on November 4, 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 Tentative 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.
S\S\2513S.TPM 13
(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 Tentative 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 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
Parcel Map No. 25139 proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
S\S\25139 .TPM 14
(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\S\25139.TPM 15
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 Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a)
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.
b)
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.
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 in that
the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map
is consistent with existing and approved uses
and subdivision's in the vicinity.
d)
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E.
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lots, access, and density.
s~s~2s~ 39.~Pu 16
f)
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.
g)
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 southern exposure.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are
open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic.
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.
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)
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel
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 granted.
S\S\25139.TPM 17
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 for the subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel
into 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space parcel located southwesterly of the future
extension of Diaz Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-018 subject to
the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 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:
0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\S\25139.TPM 18
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
INITIAL STUDY
S\STAFFRPT\25139-PM.CC 18
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
BackGround
1. Name of Proponent: Alba EnGineering
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent: 9968 Hibert Street. San Diego
(619) 549-3303
3. Date of Environmental
Assessment: August 21.1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable: Parcel Map 25139
6. Location of Proposal: Southwest corner of Cherry Street and
Diaz Road
II Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe No
1. 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 __
d. The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features? __ __ X
S\S\25139,TPM 3B
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?
Cm
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\S\25139,TPM 36
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
S~S\25139.TPM 37
d. Substantial reduction in acreage
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
of any agricultural crop?
Yes Maybe No
X
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?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
_ w X
S\S\25139.TPM 38
10.
11.
12.
13.
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?
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?
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?
Yes Maybe N__o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\S%25139.TPM 39
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?
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\S%25139.TPM dfO
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?
Cm
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~s~2s~ 39,3'Pu 41
Yes Maybe No
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?
X
X
X
X
S\S\2S139.TPM 42
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b,c.
Yes. The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and 880,000
cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1 cut slopes up to 120 feet high.
The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that
the cut slopes will be stable against deep-seated failure, arcuate failure
under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of
adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope Stability Analysis
includes recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct
geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic
conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in
the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are encountered,
buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes
should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as
soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch
and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope.
The project will involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil from
the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25139 that
information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the
destination point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading plan for
the recipient site shall be submitted and haul route permit obtained from
the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the
export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with
the project which will use the export soil as fill.
1.d.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
1.8.
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 retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and
use of watering trucks and landscaping 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. The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that
would be impacted by deposition or erosion as a result of this project.
Drainage improvements and landscaping will prevent soil erosion.
S%S\25139.TPM 43
1.g.
2.a,b,c.
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f,g.
Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and the site is
traversed by an earthquake fault. Liquefaction mitigation measures were
described above in item lb. 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.
Groundshaking hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
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 run-off. 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 course and flow of floodwaters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface run-off 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.
S\S\25139.TPM 44
3.h.
3.i.
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a,b.
5.c.
6.8.
6.b.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed Parcel Map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision form the Federal Emergency
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements 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.
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.
Maybe, Three grasshopper sparrows and evidence of breeding by the
Iong-eared owl were observed on the site during the biological survey of
the site. Although neither species had any official status when the
biology report was written, they have been listed by the Audobon
Society as declining species. The recommended mitigation is to retain
an intact open area on the west side of the site. The Tentative Parcel
Map shows a 6.8 acre open space area on the west side of the site.
Yes. The project will involve a los 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 which will be mitigated by the measures described
above in section 5b.
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 proposals will be reviewed for potential noise
impacts and land uses which generate severe noise 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 rapor lights.
S\S\25139.TPM 45
8. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
9.a,b.
10.a,b.
11,12.
13.a,d.
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.f.
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
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 is expected to generate
approximately 5, 180 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of
a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of
circulation. The purpose of the by pass road is to relieve congestion on
existing streets. 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, and Via Industria will help to mitigate
traffic impacts on Winchester Road approaching I-15. Recommended
improvements include the extension of Diaz Road to the City limits,
traffic signals at the intersections of Winchester Road and Enterprise
Circle, Winchester Road and Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street,
Diaz Road and Winchester Road north, and "A" Street and Diaz Road.
These improvements shall be Conditions of Approval.
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 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. Parcels fronting on Winchester Road, Diaz
Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use
driveways.
S\S\25139,TPM 46
14.a.-f.
15.a,b.
16.a.-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a,b,c.
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. Fire impact
mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and 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 Parcel 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.
No. The proposed Parcel Map 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 lay outs.
Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Map 25139 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
S\S\25139.TPM 47
20.d.
21 .a.
21 .b,c.
21 .d.
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 25139. In addition, a Native
American representative shall be present during the archaeological
excavation and also during grading.
The property in question also contains another site (WSP-1) which
contain a 3/4 circle rock enclosure. The site is possibly a late period
campsite. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and
subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters of earth are
recommended. In this case, testing procedures are likely to constitute
final mitigation.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction or foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The 6.8 acres of
undisturbed open space on the westerly side of the site 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\S\25139.TPM 4E}
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
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\S%25139 .TPM 49
ATTACHMENT 10
EXHIBITS
S\STAFFRPT\2513S-FM.CC 19
//
CITY OF TEMECULA )
\k/'/'
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
RLI
SWAP MAP
CAS.
P.C. DATE~O-7*-~'T'
CITY OF TEMECULA )'
m,.¢~c ..
I
\
t~ , ,z,,,,, >,
...\... '~.. x,~ ~./"~
//
/
/
ZONE MAP
CASE NO. ~ '~'~-'1 J
C.C. DATE
!J i~ J'i ji i~ ;!
-"*' I ;~ '~
i li~
I ,,
I
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: PARCEL MAP NO. 25139
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Condition of ApProval
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Condition No. 26
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Condition No. N/A
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Condition No. 75
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Condition No. 52
Public Facility
(Library)
Condition No. N/A
Fire Protection
Condition No. 12
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition No. 74
S\PLANNING\25139-CC.PM
APPROM
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
December 10, 1991
Parcel Map No. 25408
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Debbie Ubnoske
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No,
25408.
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving Parcel Map
25408 based on the analysis contained in the staff report
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Phillip T. See
Greiner, Inc.
To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2
acre site in the M-SC zone.
West side of Diaz Road and southwesterly of the future
extension of Winchester Road.
M-SC
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
North: M-SC
South: M-SC
East: M-SC
West: R-A~20
Not Requested
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
(Residential Agriculture, 20 acre
minimum ot size)
Vacant
5%STAFFRPT%25~OB-PMCC
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS
Gross Site Area:
Number of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Area of Open Space:
Cut and Fill Figures:
36.21 acres
20
1.18 acres
6.52 acres
Cut 1,800,000 cubic yards
Fill 500,000 cubic yards
BACKGROUND
Tentative Parcel Map 25408 was submitted to the County of Riverside on November 14,
1989. The map was subsequently transmitted to the City of Temecula on May 1,1990. City
staff requested a traffic study and information regarding property boundaries, the alignment
of Winchester Road, slope stability, soil export, archaeological resources, and landscape and
architecture standards.
Tentative Parcel Map 25408 was continued from the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission
meeting to the October 21, 1991 meeting and subsequently to the November 4, 1991
meeting. At the October 21, 1991 meeting, staff noted that a letter had been received from
the City of Murrieta requesting a continuance to allow their staff time to work with the City
of Temecula on generating traffic studies to deal with regional circulation problems. While the
commissioners expressed concerns relative to taking an action on this map without input from
the City of Murrieta, they also felt that this map needed to move forward. The staff indicated
to the commissioners that the city of Temecula is planning on going out with a request for
qualifications on certain issues relative to the Western Transportation Corridor that affect the
city of Temecula. This would provide an opportunity for the city of Murrieta to join Temecula
in this study to determine how the Western Transportation Corridor could affect their
circulation.
An additional concern of the Commission at the October 21, 1991 meeting was the amount
of cut area on the westerly slope edge of the project. Staff suggested the applicant stake the
upper boundaries of the map so the Commission could see where it falls relative to the
existing terrain. The Commission recommended the map be continued to the November 4,
1991 meeting to allow the commissioners an opportunity to view the cut areas on the site.
At the November 4, 1991 meeting, it was determined that the cut areas were acceptable and
would be properly mitigated.
The Commission voted 4-0 to approve Parcel Map 25408 with Commission Chiniaeff
abstaining due to a conflict of interest.
At the October 21, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, the following condition was added:
"The developer shall provide bus turn-outs with pedestrian entrances as approved by the
Riverside Transit Authority and the Department of Public Works. Turn-outs shall be shown
on the street improvement plans."
At the November 4, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, the following conditions were
added:
"Applicant shall re-locate and transplant all specimen oak trees. A qualified arborist shall
prepare a report outlining the relocation and replanting procedures. In the event the trees do
not survive transplanting, the applicant shall be required to replant ten 24" box oak trees for
every one lost."
"The subdivider shall submit two (2) 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" by 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. Slope disturbance and grading shall be
limited to an approximate vertical elevation of 1,230 feet and as approved by the Department
of Public Works."
"Prior to designing any plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements
prior to recordation."
SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. There is
a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the Future General Plan in that
the project is consistent with existing development and approved subdivisions in the area.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25408 indicates that the project will not result in
any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance and a
Negative Declaration is recommended.
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 Future
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 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 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.
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 southern
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.
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 this application and herein incorporated by reference.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map
25408;
ADOPT Resolution 91- approving Parcel Map
25408 based on the analysis contained herein.
vgw
S/STAFFRPT%25408-P/VI.CC 4
Attachments:
1. Resolution - page 6
2. Conditions of Approval - Parcel Map 25408 - page 11
3. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 4, 1991 - page 12
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 21, 1991 - page 13
5. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 7, 1991 - page 14
6. Memorandum dated November 4, 1991 - page 15
7. Memorandum Report dated October 21, 1991 - page 16
8. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 7, 1991 - page 17
9. Initial Study - page 18
10. Exhibits - page 19
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP Map
c. Surrounding Zoning
d. Parcel Map 25408
S%STAFFRPT~'25408'RM'CC 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -_
S'iSTAFFRPT25408-FhM.CC 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 36.2 ACRE PARCEL INTO 20 PARCELS AND A
6.52 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE
OF DIAZ ROAD AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE
EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-026.
WHEREAS, Philip T. See filed Parcel Map No. 25408 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 November
4, 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;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Parcel
Map on December 10, 1991, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition to said Parcel Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and
Staff Report regarding the Parcel 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 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:
S%STAFFRPT!25408-PMCC 7
m
The city is aroceeding 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 Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set
forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan.
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:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel Map No. 25408 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.
4. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
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.
G m
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
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 competent jurisdiction.
The City Council in approving the proposed Parcel Map No., makes the following
findings, to wit:
SECTION 2.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map proposed is compatible
with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
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.
S!STAFFRPT\25408*PMCC 9
SECTION 3o
Conditions,
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Parcel Map No. 25408 for the
subdivision of a 36.2 acre parcel into 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area located on
the west side of Diaz Road and southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road and
known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-026,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 10th day of December, 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 10th day of December, 1991 by
the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
S%STAFFRPT\25408-PM.CC I 0
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S/STAFFRPT\25~OB-PMCC 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No, 25408
Project Description: To create 20 parcels and
a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2 acre
site
Assessods Parcel No.: 909-120-026
Planning 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.
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.
S\Staffrl~t\25408.PM 17
8. 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.
a. 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. A detailed landscaping and irrigation
plan, prepared by a qualified professional, 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 March 21, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control Oistrict's letter dated May 1, 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 August 27, 1991, a copy of which
is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the San
Bernardino County Museum transmittal dated December 11, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologists letter of April 12, 1990.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated November 14, 1989, a copy of which is
attached.
16. 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 M-S-C 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, as soon as possible after grading.
S\StaffrDt\25408PM 18
17.
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.
18.
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, A CA-RIV number shall be assigned and
shown on the environmental constraints sheet."
20.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
(1)
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the
following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
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.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 19
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.
Applicant shall relocate and transplant all specimen oak trees. A
qualified arborist shall prepare a report outlining the relocation and
replanting procedures. In the event the trees do not survive
transplanting, the applicant shall be required to replant ten 24"
box oak trees for every one lost. (Added at the November 4,
1991 Planning Commision meeting.)
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
Any oak trees removed with four (4) inches or larger trunk
diameters shall be replaced on a ten (10) to one (1) basis as
approved by the Planning Director. Replacement tress shall be
noted on approved landscaping plans.
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:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process. Cut
slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after
grading.
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.
S',Staffrl~t\25408 .PM 20
21.
22.
23.
24.
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 present 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 grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct
a 100% surface collection of archaeological site WSP-2, soils testing,
subsurface testing and mapping, and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation in order
to determine the extent and significant of the site and whether further testing
and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the
Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number
shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet.
Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist
shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a
report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found,
a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading
permits.
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 twenty five (25) feet
with at least 10 feet landscaped,
Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted
to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources
encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of
recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance.
S\Staffrpt\2~;408,PM 2 1
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 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.
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.
26.
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.
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. 25408, 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.
28.
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 33 kv or greater shall be exempted from the
requirement to be installed underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
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
S\Steffrpt%25408.PM 22
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 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 no! 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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further
subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered
lots.
All parkways, open 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.
S~lStaffrPt\25408,PM 23
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.
30.
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.
31.
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).
Department 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 appropriate staff
person of the Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all
existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may
require the project to be resubmitted for further review.
S\Staffrl~t\25408 ,PM 24
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:
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
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; 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
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.
Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and Street Vacations
shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Department of Public
Works.
Via Industria shall be improved with 64 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, (88'/64').
Calle Consumidor shall be improved with 56 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. 111, (78'/56'),
Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement
plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted,
within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard
No. 101, (100'/76').
Parcels 1, 5, 6 and 11 shall take access from Calle Consumidor.
Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use access driveways
as approved by the Department of Public Works.
S%Staffrpt\25408,PM 25
41.
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.
42.
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.
43.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and so noted on the
final map with the exception of one driveway opening as shown on the
Tentative Map and public street intersections as approved by the Department
of Public Works.
44.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
45.
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.
46.
Private drainage easements for cross lot drainage shall be required and shall be
delineated or noticed on the final map. Provisions shall also be made to provide
for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department
of Public Works.
47.
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.
48.
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).
S\Staffrpt%25408 .PM 2 5
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines.
49.
The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining developments.
50.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by
the Department of Public Works.
51.
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.
52. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety
Department.
53.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
54.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
55.
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.
56. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
57.
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).
58.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) 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. Slope disturbance and grading shall be limited to an
approximate vertical elevation of 1,230 feet and as approved by the
Department of Public Works. (Added at the November 4, 1991 Planning
Commission meeting.)
S\StaffrDt\25408.PM 27
59.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
60.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department
of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
61.
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.
62.
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."
63.
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.
64.
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.
65.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
66.
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.
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.
S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 28
70.
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.
71. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District letter dated May 1, 1990, shall be complied with.
72.
During grading the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering
Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not
differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by
Leighton and Associates March 8, 1990. If geologic conditions differ from
those assumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
73.
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.
74.
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.
75.
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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of
the security 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.
S\Staffrpt'125408,pM 29
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
76.
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.
77.
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.
78.
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 En~3jneering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
79.
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.
80.
Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Winchester Road at Calle Consumidor and Via Industria at Calle Consumidor,
and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan
check submittal.
81.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements. (Added at the November 4, 1991 Planning
Commission meeting.)
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
S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 30
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
Improvements Plans." (Added at the November 4, 1991 Planning Commission
meeting.)
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 THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
86.
All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing
and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the
approved focused traffic analysis.
87.
88.
All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and
adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance.
Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersection of
local streets.
S\Steffrpt\254OB.PM
COUNTY
DEPAItT xI EXT
HEALTtI
4065 COUNTY CIRCLE
COUNTY PLANNING DEPT. ' MAR gg 1990 ~"
408t3 Lemon :Street
Slverslde. CA 92502
ATTN: John Chiu
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNLNG DFPARTMENT
RE: Parcel HaD 25408: Parcel I of Parcel Map 6861. &s shown
bY mad on file lnbooK 30. PaQe 75 and 76. of Parcel Maps.
records of Riverside, CA
~23 iotsl
C&IA ILAICA
NIMET
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD No.
25408. and recommends that:
A water system shall be installed accordxna to
olans and sDeclflcatlon as aDDroved 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. aloha with
the orlQlnal drawlno to the County Surveyor.
The Drlnts shall show the ~nternal DIne diameter.
location of valves and fire hydrants: D1De and
nolnt sDeclflcatlons, and the size of the main
at the nunct~on of the new system to the
exlstxna system. The plans shall coldly in all
respects with Dlv. 5. Part 1. Chanter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code. Callfornla
Administrative Code. TItle 22. Chanter 16. and {~enerai
Order No, 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of California. when applicable. The Dlans sha!l
be slangd bY a realstered enalneeF and water comDanv
with the followlno certification: "I certifv that the
~eszan of the water system in Parcel MaD 25400 ~s ~n
accordance with the water system expansion Plans of the
Rancho California Water Dlstr~ct and that the water
service. storaoe and distribution system w~ll be
adequate to provide water service to such parcel.
~lverslde County Planning
Pace Two
ATTN: John Chlu
March 2i. 1990
Dept,
This certification does not constitute a Guarantee
that it will SUDDiV water to such Darce[ mad at any
~DeClflC aUantitles, flows or Dressures for fire
Drotection Or any other murDose", This certification
shall be si~ned by a responsible official of the water
companY, The p~ans m~t ~_s~.~_~o the ~Qun~_
~urvevor s Office to__~evie~_~...!.~_~_~_~.~_
to t~e requ~ for
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California
Water District a~reeinG to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand Drovldl~o
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subdivider, It will be necessary for financial arranoements
to be made prior to the recordatlon of the final maD,
This subdivision is within the Rancho California Water
District and shall be connected to the sewers of the
District, The sewer system shall be installed according to
Dtans and specifications as aDDroved 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 drawlno, to the County
Surveyor, The prints shall show the internal Dime
diameter, locatlom of manholes, complete proflies, bide
and ~oint sDecificatlons and the size of the sewers at
the ~unction of the new system to the existing system,
A single plat ~ndlcatin~ location of sewer lines and
water lines shall be a portion of the sewaoe plans and
Drofile~, The Dlans ~hall be sl~ned by a registered
enolneer and the sewer district with the following
certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer
system In Parcel MaD 25408 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion Dlans of the Rancho California Water
E~lstrlct and that the waste disposal system ~s adequate at
this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the DroDoseo
oarcel maD.
R~vers~de County Flannlna DePt.
Paae Three
ATTN: John Chlu
Ma~ch 2i. !990
The olan~ must be ~ubmx[!_ed_,~Q the CpuntV
Clfflce to revle~ at lea~_.t_wg~.e_eks~r~or ,tO ~h~
request for ~ber_ecor~a~!QD~_Qf
It will be necessary for financial arranoements to be
completely fInallzed prior to recordatlon of the final
maD.
Sincerely.
.H.S. IV
Envxronmental Health Serv~ce~
SM: wd 1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVERSFOE. CALIFORNIA 92~O2
May 1, 1990
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No. 5
John Chiu
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Parcel Map 25408
Amended No. 1
This is a proposal to divide 40 acres for manufacturing and com-
mercial use in the Murrieta area. The site is located on the
northwest corner of Winchester Road and Calle Consumidor.
The site lies at the base of steep hills. Several natural water-
courses are tributary to the southwest property line. The
developer proposes to collect offsite flows tributary to Lot 8 in
a storm drain. The storm drain as proposed would need to be con-
structed to Murrieta Creek by this development or by Assessment
District 155.
Storm flows tributary to Lot 6 and Lot 7 would be collected in
storm drains and outletted to the street. This conflicts with
the approved Assessment District 155 storm drain plans which
would convey the offsite runoff to the storm drain in Calle
Consumidor. The assessment district plans will need to be amen-
ded to reflect this map. A storm drain in Winchester Road would
collect the street flows and outlet to Murrieta Creek.
Grading shown on the tentative map would require a considerable
amount of offsite grading on adjacent properties. The grading
proposed does not agree with the approved Assessment District 155
plans.
Following are the District's recommendations:
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 provi-
sions 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
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Parcel Map 25408
Amended No. 1
-2- May 1, 1990
At the Option Of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting deferment of the payment
of fees, ~he drainage fees may be paid to the Build-
ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading
permit or building permit for each approved parcel,
whichever may be first obtained after the recording
of the subdivision final map Or parcel map; provided
however, this option to defer the fees may not be
exercised for any parcel where grading or structures
have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3
year period, or permits for either activity have been
issued on that parcel which remain active.
Provisions should be made to collect the 100 year offsite
runoff tributary to the site and, with onsite runoff,
safely convey it to Murrieta Creek. This should be done
by either this development or by amended Assessment
DiStrict 155.
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be
submitted to the District and County for review and
approval prior to recordation of the final map. In this
case, this will probably be a property owners
association.
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, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, a
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or di-
verted storm flows. A copy of the recorded drainage
easement should be submitted to the District for review
prior to the recordation of the final map.
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and ~he 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.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Parcel Map 25408
Amended No. 1
-3- May 1, 1990
8. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet.
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.
10.
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".
11.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be submitted to the District via the
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 Kris Flanigan
of this Office at 714/787-2333.
c: Greiner Engineering
r~ery. truly you s,
IOHN
:enior Civil Engineer
KF:pln
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
INDIO, CA 92201
(619) 342-8886
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
A|TGU,qT 27, lqql
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 12TH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(714) 275-4777
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PARCEL MAP 25408
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
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"x2~"x2F') 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 - ~
Laura Cabtel, Fire Safety Specialist
DATE:
TO:
RiVE:e)iDE COU~;'
.0ve er 21. 1989PLAnnin6 DEPA=I filEn
ASseSsor f ' ~ ~;~Conmlissioner Turner
Building and Safety - a d Us "~
Building and Safety ~n ~3L~ i Temecula Town Association
- fading Temecula Chamber of Connerce
Surveyor - Ken Teich DEC i l i96 San Bernardino Museum
Road Department
Health o Ralph Luchs i~!VERS2DE Cj~UNI~
Fire Protection ~(~!N,~ ~P~ql'MENT
Flood Control District
Fish & Gan~
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services
County Superintendent of Schools
Rancho California Water District
Southern California Edison - Doug Davies
Southern California Gas
Temecula Union School District
Elsinore Union High School District
UCR - ARU
Cormunity Plans
PARCEL MAP 25408 - (Tm 5) - E.A. 34500 -
Philip T. See - Greinter, Inc., Merle G.
Schulze - Temecula/Rancho California Area
- First Supervisorial District S of
Cherry St., W of Murrieta Creek - M-SC
Zone - 34.94 Acres into 23
commercial/industrial lots - Schedule E -
No Waiver - Mod 119 - A.P. 909-120-026
Please review the case described abo~e. along with the a~a~l)ed case map. A Land
Division Conmnittee meet)~J l~a.s ,be~ ten~tlvely scheduled-fo~ December 14, 1989. If it
clears, it will then go to pUblic hearing.
~ .
Your comments and recon~endat~ns are requested prior tO December 14, 1989 in order that
we may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarqing this item, please do not hesitate to contact
John Chiu at 787-6356.
Planner
COMMENTS:
The parcel is located on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. Construction excavation
will impact nonrenewable paleontologlc resources.
The developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a program
to mitigate impacts to paleontologic resources. This program should include:
(1 ) monitoring of excavation by a qualified paleontologic monitor; (2) preparation of
recovered specimens, including sediment processing for small vertebrate fossils; (3)
curation of specimens into an established repository; and (4) a report of findings with
PLEASE l~ilnl(anga
me and title
Dr. Allan D. 6riesemer, Museums Director
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787'6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342'8277
RIVERSIDE ~,;,';,,',,.
DA?g: April ~2,
INTER-DEImARTMENTAL, LETTER
1990
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TO: Devin Strand - Team 5
FROM: Steve A. Kupferman - Engineering GeologistS,'----
RE: Tentative Parcel Map 25408
Slope Stability Report No. 230
The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability
at the subject site:
"GeotechnicalAnalysis of Slope Stability, Tentative Parcel Map No.
25408, ±40 Acre Site, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Development,
Winchester Road, Temecula, Riverside County, CA," by Leighton and
Associates, dated March 8, 1990, and Response to County Review
Letter, by Leighton and Associates, dated April 5, 1990.
This report determined that:
1. Cut and fill slopes are planned at 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical) with maximum heights of 20 and 80 feet,
respectively.
2. Fill and fill-over-cut slopes will be stable
against both deep-seated failure and su~ficial
failure.
Proposed cut slopes will expose fanglomerate facies
of the Pauba formation.
4. Proposed cut slopes should be grossly and
surficially stable under both static and seismic
conditions.
This report recommended that:
Cut slopes shall be mapped by an engineering
geologist during grading to verify the soil and
geologic conditions.
Cut and fill slopes shall be provided with
appropriate surface drainage features and
landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation as soon
as possible after grading.
Berms shall be provided at the top of fill slopes
and brow ditches shall be constructed at the top of
cut slopes.
4. Lot drainage shall be directed such that surface
runoff on the slope face is minimized.
The outer portion of fill slopes shall be either
overbuilt by 2 feet (minimum) and trimmed back to
the finished slope or compacted in increments of 5
feet (maximum) by a sheepsfoot roller as the fill
is placed and then trackwalked to achieve the final
configuration.
This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope
stability report. The recommendations made in this report shall be
adhered to in the design and construction of this project.
SAK:kcb
/@
Board of Directors:
James A. Darby
President
Jeffrey L. Minklet
St. Vice President
Ralph Daily
Doug Kulberg
Jon A. Lundin
T. C. Rowe
Richard D. Steffey
Officers:
John F. Hennigar
General Manager
Phillip L Forbes
Director of Finance-
Treasurer
Thomas R, McAliester
Director of Operations
& Maintenance
Edward P. Lemons
Director of Engineenng
Linda M. Fregoso
District Secretary
McCormick & Kidman
Legal Counsel
November 14, 1989
Riverside County Division of
Environmental Health
Land Use Section
Post Office Box 1370
Riverside, California 92502
Subject: Water and Sewer Availability
Re: Parcel No. 25408
Gentlemen:,
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located
within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water
and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of
financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner.
Currently, the District has an inter-agency agreement with
Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your
area. A/I plan check submittals will be made to Rancho California
Water District.
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
Senga Doheny at (714) 676-4101.
Very truly yours,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
~'~e'~'/Steve Brannon, P.E.
Engineering Manager
SB:jkm227
cc: Senga Doherty
R A N C H O C A L I F O R N I A W A T E R D I S T R I C
28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMEC['I,A. CA 92:t9o-0174 · i714) 676-4101 . FAX 1714) 676-0t3:
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
NOVEMBER 4, 1991
S%STAFFRPT\25408-PMCC 12
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
November 4, 1991
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
7:25 P.M. and recommend that the City Council ~opt the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139 and Adopt
Resolution No. 91- Xnext) approving Tentative Parcel Map
No. 25139 subject to the Conditions of Approval along
with the modifications to the Condition for the oak trees
as follows, "Prior to the issuance of grading permits,
applicant shall relocate and transplant all specimen oak
trees. A qualified arborist shall prepare a report
outlining the relocation and replanting procedures. In
the event the trees do not survive transplanting, the
applicant shall be required to replant ten 24" box oak
trees for every one lost", staff to work with map on the
1230 elevation on the base line topo, and condition added
by transportation department at the previous hearing as
follows, "Prior to recordation of the final map,
developer shall provide bus turnouts with pedestrian
entrance.", seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY, who
questioned the'condition for right in/right out only
access on the circulation road. Commissioner Ford asked
for staff's comments.
ROBERT RIGHETTI stated that the applicant is required to
prepare a stripping plan that will be directed by the
transportation department and if the Commission wants'
staff to keep that in mind, they can do that; however,
staff would hesitate to set specifics at this time. Mr.
Righetti added that staff is trying to incorporate shared
driveways.
MAX ~RESOL concurred with the changes to the
modifications to the conditions.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COMMISSIONERS:
PARCEL MAP 25408
Chiniaeff
7.7 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in the M-SC zone.
DEBBIE UBNOSKE preseated the staff report.
COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he would recommend the same
modifications as previously stated on Item 6.
TPCMINll/4/91 -6- 11/6/91
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 November 4, 1991
CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDopened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M.
ED BEECH, 44601 Harvey Way, Hemet, representing the
applicant, concurred with the modifications to the
Conditions of Approval.
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
7:25 P.M. and recommend that the City Council Adopt the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408 and Adopt
Resolution No. 91- [next] approving Tentative Parcel Map
No. 25408 subject to the Conditions of Approval along
with the modifications to the Condition for the oak trees
as follows, "Prior to the issuance of grading permits,
applicant shall relocate and transplant all specimen oak
trees. A qualified arborist shall prepare a report
outlining the relocation and replanting procedures. In
the event the trees do not survive transplanting, the
applicant shall be required to replant ten 24" box oak
trees for every'one lost", staff to work with map on the
1230 elevation on the base line topo, and condition added
by transportation department at the previous hearing as
follows, "Prior to recordation of the final map,
developer shall provide bus turnouts with pedestrian
entrances.". Seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDadvised that he had received the letter
from the City of Murrieta requesting that the City of
Temecula Planning Commission continue their action on
these two items and although the Commission did not
postpone their action, it was not meant to mean that the
City of Temecula was going to ignore it's neighboring
communities to the North; however, this map has been in
process for quite some time and the letter from Murrieta
was rather open ended without any real definite time
frames for the completion of their traffic studies and
therefore the Planning Commission could not support any
further continuance. Chairman Hoagland added that the
action was a recommendation to the City Council.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND asked that staff present the following two items
together:
TPCMINll/4/91 -7- 11/6/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
OCTOBER 21, 1991
S!STAFFRPT/25408-PMCC 13
PLAIq~qZNG COMMZBaZON NZNUTg8
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 HOAGLAND 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 HAP 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 STEWART 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. COMMIBOIONER BLAIR seconded the motion.
The applicant provided the Commission with a picture of
%he boundaries.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:I
PARCEL MAP 25408
COMMISSIONERS:
Chiniaeff
13.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in the M-SC zone. Located on the
southwesterly side of Diaz Road, southwest of the future
extension of Winchester Road.
PCMNIO/2I/9Z -- 13 -- 10/23/91
PLANNZNG COMXZSSZON MZNUTES
O~TOBER 21, 1991
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to continue Parcel Map 25408 for
two weeks to look at the cut area on the westerly slope
edge where the existing chaparral is and have the
applicant stake the upper boundaries of the tract for the
Commissions review. The applicant concurred with the
request. COMMISSIONER FAHEY seconded the motion.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Moagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF returned to his seat.
CHAIRMAN MOAGLANDtook action on the following two items together.
14. EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22761
14.1 Proposal for second Extension of Time for a 50 lot
residential subdivision on 16.7 acres. Located on the
west side of Ynez Road, North of Pierce Lane.
15. EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22762
15,1
Proposal for second Extension of Time for a 80 lot
residential subdivision on 28 acres. Located on the west
side of Tetra Vista Road, south of Ynez Road.
CHAZRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:20 P.M.
DENMY HILBERT, 43180 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
representing the applicant, stated that they were in the
process of completing the erosion control plan and
concurred with the recommendation for continuance.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Extension of Time
for Tentative Tract No. 22761 and Tentative Tract No.
22762 and continue the public hearing until November 4,
1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey,
Ford, Chiniaeff,
Moagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
16. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2682e/CHANGE OF 2ONE NO. 13
16.1 Proposal to change zone from R-R to R-1 and a proposal to
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S/STAFFRPT!25408-PM.CC 14
PLANN~N~ COMM~HSZON MINUTE8 OCTOBER 7, 199~
COMIISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25139 to
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
12. PARCEL MAP 25408
12.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a
36 acre site in M-SC zone. Located southwesterly of
future extension of Winchester Road.
CHAIRM~al HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05
P.M.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25408 to
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND re-opened the public hearing on
8:40 P.M.
Item No. 13 at
KEITH McCAIrN JR., 43121 Margarita, Temecula, applicant,
advised that after communication with the City Attorney's
office, he has been advised that the enforcement of the
CC&R's and release thereof is a civil matter to be
addressed by the property owner and the Homeowner's
Association. Mar. McCann stated that it was a concern
of the MOA that being released from the CC&R's would set
some sort of precedent; the CC&R's provide for this with
the requirement of 51% approval of the homeowners.
BARRY BERNELL, 3242 Hallday Street, Santa Ana,
representing the applicant, explained the request for
changing the designation of this property. Mr. Bernell
advised that the original expectation of the area was
large lots, very rural; however, in 1980 the county
TPCMIN10/07/91 -13- 10/08/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
MEMORANDUM
DATED
NOVEMBER 4, 1991
S/STAFFRPT\25408-Pr, q. CC 15
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
November 4, 1991
Tentative Parcel Map 25408
The Planning Commission continued these items from the October 21,1991 Planning Commission meeting.
The item was continued in order to allow the Commissioners an opportunity to review the existing grading
and chapparel relative to the proposed parcel lines. The applicant has staked the upper boundaries of the
site in order to allow the requested visualization.
Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the
following recommendation to the City Council:
ADQPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408;
and
ADOPT Resolution 91-__ approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
25408 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
vgw
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
MEMORANDUM
DATED
OCTOBER 21, 1991
S\STAFFRPT%25408-PMCC 16
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
October 21, 1991
Parcel Map 25408
The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991.
However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested
a continuance to review the maps and provide comments.
Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make
the following recommendation to the City Council:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408;
and
ADOPT Resolution 91 -_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No.
25408 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Al~proval.
vgw
S~MEMOS/GAR/25408PM,MEM
ATTACHMENT NO. S
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED
OCTOBER 7, 1991
S\STAFFRPT\25408-PM.CC 17
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 7, 1991
Case No.:
Parcel Map 25408
Prepared By:
Scott Wright
Recommendation:
ADOPT the negative declaration;
and
ADOPT Resolution 91 -
recommending approval of Parcel
Map No. 25408
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Phillip T. See
REPRESENTATIVE:
Greiner, Inc.
PROPOSAL:
To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space
area on a 36.2 acre site in the Manufacturing-Service
Commercial Zone
LOCATION:
West of Diaz Road, and southwesterly of the future
extension of Winchester Road
EXISTING ZONING:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-
SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-
SC)
Residential Agriculture, 20 acre
minimum (R-A-20)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
S\Steffrpt\25408 .PM
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant
Gross Site Area:
Net Site Area:
No. of Parcels:
Average Parcel Size:
Area of Open Space:
Cut:
Fill =
36.21 acres
23.68 acres
20
1.18 acres
6.52 acres
1,800,000 cubic yards
500,000 cubic yards
Tentative Parcel Map 25408 was submitted to the
County on November 14, 1989. The application
was reviewed by the County Land Development
Committee on December 12, 1989 and was
continued pending submittal of the following
information: a traffic study, biological and
paleontological surveys, soil and liquefaction reports,
a slope stability report, and a Planned Industrial
Development design manual.
Parcel Map 25408 was transmitted to the City on
May 1, 1990. City staff requested a traffic study
and information regarding property boundaries, the
alignment of Winchester Road, slope stability, soil
export, archaeological resources, and landscape and
architecture standards.
The proposal is to create 20 parcels ranging in size
from 0.95 acre to 1.39 acres with a total gross area
of 36.21 acres. The site is zoned M-SC,
Manufacturing * Service Commercial. A 6.52 acre
area located in the southwesterly portion of the site
will be maintained as an open space area comprising
some undisturbed land and some 1.5:1 cut slopes 80
to 100 feet in height.
Gradinq
The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of
cut, 500,000 cubic yards of fill and 1,300,000 cubic
yards of soil export. The Engineering Department
S\Staffrpt%25408.PM 2
ITEM NO. 18
Conditions of Approval include the requirement to
obtain a haul route permit and provide information
regarding truck loads, the proposed haul route,
destination site and stockpile permits and/or
approved grading plan at the recipient site with the
property owner's permission. These requirements
shall be satisfied prior to issuance of grading permits.
Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site.
However, with the absence of policy relative to
grading, Staff's recommendation is to condition the
map in such a way as to mitigate, the greatest
extent possible, grading impacts of this project.
Mitigation measures relative to grading are contained
in the project Conditions of Approval.
With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan
effort will most likely include policies relative to
grading.
Slope Stability
The cut slopes at the southwesterly side of the site
are indicated on the tentative map with slope ratios
of 1.5:1. The revised slope stability analysis
prepared for this project states that the cut slopes
will be stable under normal and seismic conditions,
provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions.
The revised slope stability analysis included
recommendations that an engineering geologist
conduct geological mapping during grading to verify
that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do
not differ significantly from those assumed in the
slope stability analysis. If significant differences are
encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize
the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided
with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as
soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map
shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot
intervals in the cut slope. The recommendations of
the slope stability analysis are Conditions of
Approval for the Tentative Parcel Map
Traffic and Circulation
Future development of the site is expected to
generate 1,730 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 intersections and 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 Winchester Road to six lanes. These
improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of
Approval.
Additionally, this project, along with PM 25139, will
be constructing the first portion of the western
bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at
Douglas Avenue, This portion of the proposed
alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and
approved by the City's Department of Public Works
and found acceptable.
Access
Access to the site will be taken from Winchester
Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will
have frontage on and take access from dedicated
streets. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit
access to joint use access driveways as approved by
the Department of Public Works.
S\Staffrpt',25408,PM ~e
Parcel Size and Dimensions
Development standards in the M-SC zone require a
minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an
average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are
available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels
range from 0.95 acre to 1.41 acres and have
average lot widths of over 100 feet.
DrainaGe
The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta
Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and
drainage fees shall be paid. All lots shall be graded
to drain to the street or an adequate outlet as
approved by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities
must be designed to covey 100 year storm flows,
including 1 O0 year storm runoff tributary to the site,
to Murrieta Creek. Street and lot grading will
perpetuate existing natural drainage patterns.
Evidence of a viable drainage facility maintenance
mechanism must be submitted to the County Flood
Control District prior to final map recordation.
Fossil and Cultural Resources
The archaeological assessment states that the site
has low potential to be a small food processing site
which could address limited archaeological research
questions and recommends a 100% surface
collection, soils testing, subsurface testing and
mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation.
The site is located on the fossiliferous Pauba
Formation. In accordance with the recommendation
of the San Bernardino County Museum, the
subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to provide
monitoring during excavation as well as recovery,
reporting, and preservation of specimens found
during grading.
S'~Staffrpt/25408.pM 5
SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN
AND ZONING
CONSISTENCY:
Water and Sewer Availability
The Rancho California Water District has an
interagency agreement with the Eastern Municipal
Water District to provide sewer service to the area in
which the site is located.
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 RealiQnments
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
resulted in changes to property boundaries. The
subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of
Winchester Road. 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
must be met prior to final map recordation.
The proposed parcels conform to the development
standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is
consistent with the Light Industrial Land Use
Designation in which the site is located. There is a
reasonable probability that the project will be
consistent with the Future General Plan in that the
project is consistent with existing development and
approved subdivisions in the area.
S\Staffrpt\25408PM 7
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25408
indicates that the project will not result in any
environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to
a level of insignificance and a Negative Declaration
in recommended.
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 Future
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 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 to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E.
m
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\SteffrDt\25408 ,PM 8
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
10.
11.
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 southern 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 this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission make the following
recommendation to the City Council:
1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for
Parcel Map 25408; and
Adopt Resolution 91- approving
Parcel Map 25408 based on the finding
contained herein and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
S\Staffrpt\25408 PM 9
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Zoning Map
D, Tentative Parcel Map 25408
S\Staffrpt\25408pM 10
RESOLUTION NO. 91-107
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO SUBDIVIDE A
36.21 ACRE PARCEL INTO 20 PARCELS AND A 6.52
ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED WEST OF DIAZ ROAD
SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF
WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 909-120-026
WHEREAS, Phillip T. See filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel
Map on November 4, 1991, at which time interested 3ersons had an opportunity to
testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Tentative Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Finding~i. 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.
S\Staffr~t\25408,PM 11
(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 Tentative 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 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
Parcel Map No, 25408 proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time,
S'/Staffrlat\25408PM 12
(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\25408PM 13
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 Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a)
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 Future
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 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 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.
S\Staffrpt/25408,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 southern 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 this applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel
Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
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.
S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 15
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 for the subdivision of a 36.2 acre parcel
into 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area located west of Diaz Road, and
southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 909-120-026 subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 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:
0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\StaffrPt\25z~08,PM 16
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
INITIAL STUDY
S'STAFFRPTI25408'PM.CC 18
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Backaround
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
Environmental ImPacts
Greiner Engineedna
28481 Rancho California Road #101
Temecula, CA 92591
(714) 676-8277
August 21, 1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel MaD 25408
Southwesterly of the future extension
of Winchester Road
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe N__o
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
X
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
S\Staffrpt\Z5408.PM 32
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/2S408.PM 33
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
S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 34
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?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S/Staffrpt/25408.PM 35
10.
11.
12.
13.
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?
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?
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present pa~erns 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?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 3 6
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S/Steffrpt/25408 .PM
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
37
X
X
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
S\Staffrpt/25408.PM 38
Yes Maybe No
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?
X
X
X
X
S\Steffrpt\25408PM 39
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b,c
Yes. The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of cut and 500,000
cubic yard of fill and will create 80-1 O0 foot high 1.5:1 cut slopes in the
southwesterly portion of the site.
The Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the
proposed cut slopes will be stable against deep seated failure, arcuate
failure under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of
adverse geologic conditions. The Analysis recommends that an
engineering geologist conduct geological mapping of the slopes during
grading to verify that soils and geological conditions encountered during
grading do not significantly differ from the assumptions of the Slope
Stability Analysis. If significant differences are found, buttressing may
be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided
with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped with drought tolerant
vegetation as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map
indicates bench drains at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. All fill slopes
have a slope ratio of 2:1 and should be stable due to their limited
height.
The project will involve exporting 1,300,000 cubic yards of earth from
the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25408 that
information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the
destination point, and a stock pile permit or an approved grading plan for
the recipient site shall be submitted and a haul route permit obtained
from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition
of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction
with the project which will use the export soil as fill.
1.d.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
1.e,
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 retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and
use of watering trucks and landscaping 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.
S'lStatfrpt%25408.PM 40
1.f.
1.g.
2.a,b,c.
3.a,c,d,i.
3.b.
3.e,
3.f,g.
3.h.
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
5.a.
No, The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that
would be impacted by deposition or erosion. Drainage improvements
and landscaping will prevent soil erosion.
No. The site is not located in a fault hazard zone or an area susceptible
to liquefaction. Hazards due to groundshaking associated with a nearby
fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
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 the climate.
No. There are no currents or bodies of water on the site. The site is not
located in a flood plain. Therefore there will be no impact on the
direction of water currents or flood waters or the amount of water in any
water body. Neither people nor property will be exposed to flood
hazards.
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.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water.
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant.
No. Excavation is not expected to encounter groundwater. There will
be no impact to the direction or flow of groundwater.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
No. The only plant specimen on the site worthy of note in the biological
report is an engelmann oak. The oak tree shall be preserved, relocated,
or replaced at a 10 to I ratio or as approved by the Planning Director.
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. No evidence of rare or endangered species was found on the site.
SIISta~fr~t/25408PM 41
5.b.
5.c.
6.a.
6.b.
9.a,b.
10.a,b.
Maybe. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the
presence of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist
recommended that a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain
if they inhabit the site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required
prior to issuance of grading permits. If any stephen kangaroo rats are
found, a lO(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to
issuance of grading permits.
Yes. The project will result in loss of grass land and chaparral which
typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows, rabbits,
gophers, ground squirrels, and reptiles.
The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the survey was a golden
eagle soaring high above the site. The biologist recommended that a
portion of the site abutting the upslope chaparral be maintained in a
natural state in order to preserve some foraging habitat. Part of the open
space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a
natural condition.
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 proposals will be reviewed for potential noise
impacts and land uses which generate severe noise 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 rapor 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
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
S/Staffrpt\25408.PM 42
11,12.
13.a,d,
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.f.
14.a.-f.
15.a,b.
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 is expected to generate
approximately 1,730 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of
a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of
circulation. The purpose of the by-pass road is to relieve congestion on
existing streets. 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 recommendations of the traffic
study are incorporated as conditions of approval.
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 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. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit
access to joint use driveways.
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. Fire impact
mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and 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.
16.a.-f.
17.a,b.
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.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards.
S/Staffrpt/25408 PM 43
18.
19.
20.a,b,c.
20.d.
21 .a.
21 .b,c.
No. The proposed Parcel Map 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 lay outs.
Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site contains a lithic scatter encompassing approximately
200 square meters which yielded a projectile point and 6 pieces of basalt
debitages during the archaeological survey. The Archaeological
Assessments states that the site has low potential to be a small food
processing site which could address limited archaeological research
questions and recommends a 100% surface collection, soils testing,
subsurface testing and mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation.
These procedures are expected to constitute final mitigation and shall be
incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25408.
No. There are no existing religious or sacred uses of the site or in the
vicinity.
No. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the presence
of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist recommended that
a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain if they inhabit the
site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required prior to issuance
of grading permits. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a)
permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading
permits. Payment of kangaroo rat habitant mitigation fees is a Condition
of Approval for the proposed parcel map. The project will result in loss
of grass land and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for
raptors, sparrows and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed
during the survey was a golden eagle soaring high above the site. The
biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the upslope
chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some
foregoing habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly
side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition.
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.
SI, SteffrDt!25408.PM 44
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\25408 .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*
ticant 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.
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
SI, StaffrPt\25~'OB.PM 46
A'I'FACHMENT NO. 10
EXHIBITS
S'STAFFRPT/25408-PM.CC 19
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SITE--,
/~,
/
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
,.,./
RLI
SWAP MAP
"~
CASE NO-?
P.C. DATE
e
CITY OF TEMECULA )
· \,,: u
""2'~ n
\
-- /
./'
CASE NO. p't,1 Z-~,-~o~
C.C. DATE
ZONE MAP
Z
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: PARCEL MAP NO. 25408
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 Aol)roval
Condition No, 26
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 75
Condition No. 51
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 12
Condition No. 70
S\PLANNING\254OB-CC .PM
ITEM NO. 17
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
December 10, 1991
Election of Mayor
PREPARED BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION:
calendar year 1992.
Conduct election of Mayor to preside until the end of
BACKGROUND: The City Council selects a member to serve as Mayor
annually. This office is assumed at the first meeting of the City Council in January
and the newly elected Mayor presides through the calendar year of 1992.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
December 10, 1991
Election of Mayor Pro Tempore
June S. Greek, City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct election of Mayor Pro Tempore to preside until the
end of calendar year 1992.
BACKGROUND: The City Council selects a member to serve as Mayor Pro
Tempore annually. This office is assumed at the first meeting of the City Council in
January and the newly elected Mayor Pro Tempore presides through the calendar year
of 1992.
ITEM NO. 19
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Council/City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
DATE:
December 3, 1991
SUBJECT: Council Compensation
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider increasing its compensation
by five percent (5%) for each of the last two years.
DISCUSSION: Government Code Section 36516 establishes Council
compensation for general law cities according to the size of the city. For Temecula,
this amounts to $300.00 per year. This compensation was established pursuant to
Ordinance at the time of incorporation.
Section 36516 permits the Council to increase its compensation by 5% per year. No
adjustment was made last year, and Council could increase its compensation for the
1993 year by 5% for 1990, plus 5% for 1991, amounting to a total compensation
of 8330.75 per month.
Accordingly, it is recommended that Council provide direction to Staff regarding
whether an ordinance should be prepared increasing the compensation pursuant to
Section 36516.
ATTACHMENTS: - Government Code Section 36516
§ 36514 GOVERNMENT OF CITIES
Section 36514 as it existed before that date; and any past or future
payment of compensation pursuant thereto is hereby confirmed,
validated, and declared legally effective.
The provisions of this section shall be alternative to those of Section
36516.
Added Stars 1st Ex Sess 1966 ch 12 8 2, effective April 11, 1966.
Former Sections: Former 8 36514, relating to salaries of city councilmen, was added by Stats
1965 ch 286 8 2 and repealed by Stab 1st Ex Seas 1966 ch 12 8 1, effective April 11, 1966.
Original 8 36514, relating to compensation of councilmen (based on Stars 1883 ch 49 § 855 p
268, as amended by Stab 1909 ch 100 8 I p 148, Stars 1931 ch 132 86 p 190, Stats 1933 ch
516 § 8 p 1322, Stats 1941 ch 130 8 1 p 1177), w~ added by Stars 1949 ch 79 8 1, amended
by Stats 1957 ch 1362 8 1, Stars 1963 ch 1998 8 1, and repealed by Stab 1965 ch 286 8 1.
Collateral References:
Cal Jur 2d Municipal Corporations 8 343.
McKinney's Cal Dig Municipal Corporations 8 305(1).
56 Am Jut 2d Municipal Corporations, Counties, and Other Political Subdivisions
§8 258 et seq.
Attorney General's Opinions:
44 Ops Atty Gen 170 (prohibition against city council, that has declared itself to be
governing board of redevelopment agency, increasing compensation of its mem-
bers for service as members of such agency).
§ 36514.5. Expenses of councilmen
City councilmen may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses
incurred in the performance of official duties.
Added Stars 1st Ex Sess 1966 ch 12 8 3, effective April 11, 1966.
Collateral References:
Cal Jur 2d Municipal Corporations 8 343.
§ 36515, Compensation of councilman filling vacancy
The compensation of a city councilman appointed or elected to fill a
vacancy is the same as that payable to the member whose office was
vacated,
Added Stats 1949 ch 79 8 I.
Prior Law: Based on Stats 1883 ch 49 8 855 p 268, as amended by Stats 1909 ch 100 8 I p
148, Stats 1931 ch 132 8 6 p 190, Stars 1933 ch 516 8 8 p 1322, Stats 1941 ch 130 8 I p 1177.
Collateral References:
Cal Jur 2d Municipal Corporations 8 343.
McKinney's Cal Dig Municipal Corporations 8§ 299, 302.
56 Am Jur 2d Municipal Corporations, Counties, and Other Political Subdivisions
8§ 258 et seq.
§ 36516. Compensation of councilmen under ordlnan~
A city council may enact an ordinance providing that each member of
380
the city cout
determined 13
(a) In cities
including onl
(b) In cities
two hundred
(c) In cities
two hundred
(d) In cities
three hundr~
(e) Cities ov
250,000, fou
(f) Cities o'
month.
For the pur
the estimate
In a city c
provicl~-d in
minet y t'
of Finance
Streets and
Compensati
provided i~
affirmative
any munici
Added Slats I'
1st Ex Se~ 19
81.
Prior La~,: Ba
148, Stab 193
1963 Am
may be
council
1963 Ar~
stagger
fords
1965 Atr
decred
elector
1966
'~ An
f luture
~nned,
Section
d by Stars
, 1966.
19 § 855 p
s 1933 ch
amended
6§t.
sions
~.penses
fill a
C Was
~O0§lp
I p 11~7.
ions
,bcr of
OFFICERS § 36S16
the city council shall receive a salary, the amount of which shall be
determined by the following schedule:
(a) In cities up to and including 35,000 in population, up to and
including one hundred fifty dollars ($150) per month;
(b) In cities over 35,000 up to and including 50,000 in population,
two hundred dollars ($200) per month;
(c) In cities over 50,000 up to and including 75,000 in population,
two hundred fifty dollars ($250) per month.
(d) In cities over 75,000 up to and including 150,000 in population,
three hundred dollars ($300) per month.
(e) Cities over 150,000 population up to and including a population of
250,000, four hundred dollars ($400) per month.
(f) Cities over 250,000 population, five hundred dollars ($500) per
month.
For the purposes of this section the population shall be determined by
the estimates of population made by the Department of Finance.
In a city changing from a lower to a higher population group as
provided in this section, the amount of compensation shall be deter-
mined by the latest estimate of population made by the Department
of Finance or as provided in Sections 2107, 2107.1 and 2107.2 of the
Streets and Highways Code.
Compensation of councilmen may be increased beyond the amount
provided in this section or decreased below such amount by an
affirmative vote by the majority of the electors of the city voting at
any municipal election.
Added Slats 1949 ch 79 § 1; Amended Stars 1963 ch 1998 § 2; Slats 1965 ch 286 § 3; Slats
1st Ex Sess 1966 ch 12 §4, effective April 11, 1966; Slats 1968 ch 642 § 1; Stab 1972 eh 591
Prior Law: Based on Slats 1883 ch 49 § 855 p 268, as amended by Stab 1909 ch 100 § I p
148, Slats 1931 ch 132 § 6 p 190, Slats 1933 ch 516 § 8 p 1322, Slats 1941 ch 130 § I p 1177.
Amendments:
1963 Amendment: Prior to 1963 the section read: "Compensation of councilmen
may be increased or diminished at any general election, in the same manner as it
was originally established. A change in compensation does not apply to a
councilman during his term of office."
1963 Amendment added "; however, the prohibition hereln expressed shall not
prevent the adjustment of the compensation of all members of a council serving
staggered terms whenever one or more members of such council becomes eligible
for a ~hry increase by virtue of his beginning a new term of oflice."
1965 Amendment: Substituted "beyond the mount provided in Section 36514 or
decreased below such amount by an affirmative vote by the majority of the
electors of the city voting at any municipal election" for "or diminished at any
general election, in the same manner as it was originally established" after "be
increased."
1966 Amendment: Amended the section to read as at present except for the
amendments of 1968 and 1972.
1968 Amendment: Added "or as provided in Sections 2107, 2107.1 and 2107,2 of
the Streets and Highways Code" in the third paragraph.
381
ITEM NO. 20
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
December 10, 1991
Appointment to the Public Safety Commission
June Greek, City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint a member to the Public Safety Commission for a term of three (3) years.
BACKGROUND:
The City Clerk placed display advertisements in two publications, the Californian and
the Press Enterprise, during the week of October 28, 1991 to advise the public of the
vacancy on the Public Safety Commission. Applications were accepted through
November 15, 1991 and copies of the applications received were sent to the Ad Hoc
Committee members for their review.
Councilmembers Lindemans and Mu~oz have completed their review of the
applications and Councilmember Lindemans recommends the appointment of non
Perry; Councilmember Mu~oz recommends the appointment of Deborah Holliday to
serve a three-year term to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Joseph
Schneider.
Staff is attaching copies of all of the applications submitted for the review of the
Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
Applications received
40945 County Center Dr., Suite C
Temecula, CA 92591
(714) 676-5090
cc: June Greek
November 13, 1991
City Council
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, Ca. 92590
Dear Councilmembers,
The Chamber of Commerce would like to endorse Mr. Ron Perry
as a candidate for the open position on the Public Safety
Commission.
Mr. Perry has served on the Chamber of Commerce board since 1989
and is active in community affairs. With his commitment and
desire to assist with the Public Safety officials and commission,
we believe he would be a great asset and recommend him highly.
If you need further information, please do not hesitate to call
me at the Chamber of Commerce, 676-5090.
Sincerely,
Allan R. McDonald, President
Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce
RECENT BIOGRAPHY OF RONALD C. PERRY
A native of California, Ron Perry graduated from California State
University at Long Beach, in June of 1966, with a Bachelor of Science
Degree in Marketing. Upon college graduation he enlisted in the
United States Navy where he was commissioned as a Naval Officer and
then graduated from United States Naval Air Training Command where he
received wings as a Naval Aviator, He performed the duties of supply
officer in every command with which he was attached. He served a tour
in Viet Nam as a fighter pilot, flying off the aircraft carrier USS
Enterprise, and was honorably discharged in April, 1972.
He immediately pursued a career in real estate by joining the firm of
Rancho Consultants Company, Inc. (Rancon) as a salesman specializing
in Rancho California-Temecula properties. From January 1, 1975 to
December 31, 1975 he represented Rancon real estate securities to
security broker-dealer firms statewide, In August of 1978 Ron ]eft
Rancho Consultants Company, Inc. to purchase a retail western store in
Temecula, which he renamed the "The Bull Pen". He operated this
retail business until sold in 1983. Concurrenty, from 1978 to 1983,
Pen was an active member of the Riverside County Sheriff's Posse. In
February, 1980, while operating the western store, he opened a Radio
Shack Dealer store, Butterfield Electronics, Inc., in Temecula, which
he operates today as the CEO.
Ron Perry has served as a director for the Temecula Valley Chamber of
Commerce for three years, as president of the Ranthe Temecula Business
Exchange, and as president of Rancho California Caballeros. He is a
principal officer of the Catalina lsland Masonic Lodge in Temecu]a as
well as a founder and director of the Golden Triangle Amateur Radio
CIub serving the Temecu]a, Murrieta, Wildomar and Lake EIsinore areas.
As Emergency Coordinator of TemecuIa Valley for the Radio Amateur
Civil Emergency Services (RACES) Ron was instrumental in forming the
volunteer Police Au×illiary to provide emergency communications for
the Temecula Police department when needed. He is currently working
on a more e×tensive emergency communication system for the Temecula
Fire Department, who would act as lead agency during major or minor
disasters.
Ron Perry believes that his background gives him some insight on the
operations and problems of public service agencies as well as the
ability to interface with the general public. Pen would like the
opportunity to serve the City of Temecu]a as a Public Safety
Commissioner.
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE:
NAME:
Rita Victoria Hernandez
HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE:
(71~ 676-5655 --
OCCUPATION:
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
Graduate Washington Irving H.S. - ~ew ~ork
College classes
SAFETY COMMISSION
YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA:
2yr ~ mo
at E1 Camino College, Torrance CA - no degree
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: {Professional, technical, community, service):
V~llages II Homeowners Association, Bird:bright of Temecula
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIF!C (Use additional paper if
necessa~f):
Involvement in my community has always been a top priority
and very ~mportan~ to me. I expect to reside in Temecula for many years
and am very ~nterested in its growth and developant. I believe this
commission is a vital part of this city.
I am aware that there are probably many people with degrees after their
name but being an intelligent, agress~ve ~ndividual, I have no doubt that
I can hold my own quite well. BESIDES, its time to have a woman on boar~.
I understand ~at any or all information on ~is form may be verified. I consent to ~e release of ~is
information for publici~ purposes.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
PLEASE NOTE: Applications will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies.
Return to: City Clerk'e Office, 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/forns/COM-001
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO · t~)
sERvE. ~1~c; ~
NAME: YEARS RESIDENT
:~a6a ~_/a~ ,~, OFTEMECULA:
0 E PHONE:LO~ _ ~ WORK PHONE:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: -
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if
neceaaary):
Re~rn to: Ci~ Clerk's Office, 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/forrns/COM-OO1
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COM"".SSION ON WHICH YOU W.SH TO SERVE:
NAME:
HOME PHONE: L
YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA: ,..R Lr~.
WORK PHONE:
OCCUPATION: OL,~C"'~(3F' O~' ~LLlO,5,tO,~ CL~
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGrOUND/DEGrEES:
LIST ANY RIV[RSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY 6OMMI~EE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: {Professional, technical, communi~, se~ice):
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION, BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper
I understand ~at any or all information on ~is form may be verified. I consent to ~e release of
information for publici~ purposes.
SIGNATURE: ~J~rC~r~. b~DATE: ~ ~'1 ~qq %
PLEASE NOTE: Applicatio ill nsideration of future vacancies.
Return to: City Clerk's Office, 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/forms/COM-OO1
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO ~ OT~,,~
sE.vE: , b
NAME: YEARS RESIDEN
OF TEMECULA: ~
WORK PHONS:G,~g,~I )L~
p
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: ~, ~
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: :
, .: .... :,,: =
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: IProfessional, technical, community, service): :-
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO S E ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION.' BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if
I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this
information for publicity purposes.
J
SIGNATURE://Y~C~ '
PLEASE NOTE: A~Pplications will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies.
Return to: City Clerk's Office. 43172 Business Park Drive. Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/formsiC OM-OO 1
TEMECULA, CA. 92390
t714) 676-4303
~mmce'norF1~
;ITY OF TEMECULA
~R APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
uirement: Resident of City of Temecula '*, -
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE:
HOME PHONE:
7r~- ~Yra
OCCUPATION:
~Y_EARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA:
WORK PHONE:
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMI~Et OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: ~ - "' ' .
· . - :~ :x--,; ..-;, - .
· ':?; :'..: i/'Co ,-~ ~--; '-':<:,<~ !--;~'-': ~: --:4 -
OR~AMIZAT[O~$ TO ~HIGH YO~ aitO~: {Pro~,a$ionaL t,chnical. commune. a~ic~h
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY .YOU
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE' SPECIFIC (Use' additional paper if
PLEASE NOTE: Applications will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies.
Return to: City Clerk's Office, 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/forms/COM-OO1
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE: ~.~ ~ ..~'Jr-y
NAME: ~_~/~A7 ~>, ~L~ ~J~r~J YEARS RESIDENT
OF TEMECULA:
HOME PHONE: &7"7 &~'~ ?
OCCUPATION: ,~/4"/"0 fi'> ~ "X , 3 6 ~ '~_-,~- ~ ~ ~.-~.
EMPLOYER/ADDRESS:~(~'7~5- ~//~J ~_~=~ ~ d~,
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
f
WORK PHONE:
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
:.-' ~: h !:- : - '.. ': .... ~: .
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. ' BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if
I understand that any or all information on ~is form may be verified. I consent to ~e release of this
information for publici~ purposes.
PL~SE NOTE: Applications will be kept on file for consideration of ~re vacancies.
Return to: Cj~ Clerk's Office, 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989
2/for~ns/CObt-001
CITY OF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION
Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecula
COMM,SSIO. ON WHIC. YOU W,SH TO SE.VE
NAME:
Ho ~y~:~_
OF TEMECULA:
WORK PHONE:
OCCUPATION:
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES:
LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH
YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE:
ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service):
BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU
BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if
necessary):
I understand that any or all ' formation on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this
information for oses.
Return to: Ci erk':s/~Pf~licati°ns n file for consideration of futur'v/ac~a/nncies.
..
2/forms/COM-O01 '
WAYNE A. HINGE
29846 CORTE CASTILLE
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA,
714-699-8693
CA. 92591
11/12/91
HIGHLIGHTS OF QUALIFICATION5
EMPLOYED BY TEXACO INC. 22 YEARS
RETIRED 12/1/88
PROMOTED TO TEXACO SAFETY DEPT. 3/72
TEXACO'S SAFETY DEPT. 7 YEARS
SUPERVISOR OF TRAINING FOR 10 YEARS
INTERACTED WITH UPPER LEVELS OF MANAGEMENT.
CREATED OVER 35 TRAINING AND PR VIDEOS
HOLDS LA. COUNTY STEAM ENGINEERS LICENSE
As SAFETY INSPECTOR, WORKED WITH CONTRACTORS AND FEDERAL 0SHA
OFFICIALS. SET UP AND CONDUCTED CLASSES ON RESPIRATORY
PROTECTION AND LATER PRODUCED A VIDEO ON THE SUBJECT.
MADE THREE FIRE FIGHTING VIDEOS.
IN 1982 WAS PROMOTED TO LOS ANGELES PLANT SUPERVISOR OF
TRAINING. TRAINED ALL NEw EMPLOYEES IN SAFETY PROCEDURES AND
PLANT OPERATIONS. CLASS INCLUDED DAY TO DAY SAFETY PRACTICES
AND AN EIGHT HOUR COURSE ON FIRST AID, PLUS A FOUR HOUR
COURSE ON CPR.
IN 1987 DELIVERED A PAPER AT A CONFERENCE IN NEw YORK CITY
AT A CONVENTION OF PROCESS SIMULATORS ON HOW TO DEVELOP
QUALITY CONTROL TEACHING NEW EMPLOYEES HOW A DISTRIBUTION
PROCESS CONTROL LOOP SYSTEM WORKS AND IT'S BUILT IN SAFETY
GUARDS,
OVER THE TIME PERIOD OF MY CAREER AT TEXACO, I ATTENDED
NUMEROUS COMPANY SANCTIONED SAFETY SEMINARS AND CONVENTIONS.
DURING THIS TIME I STUDIED FOR AND PASSED THE TEST TO BE
LICENSED AS A STEAM ENGINEER IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES.
ITEM NO. 21
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
December 10, 1991
Appointment of Councilmembers to serve on Committees
PREPARED BY: John R. Meyer
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council appoint a member
to serve on the following committees:
1. General Plan Technical Subcommittee Selection
Committee.
2. Old Town Specific Plan Selection Committee
3. Old Town Advisory Committee
DISCUSSION
The following is a brief description of the roles and responsibilities of each of the
proposed assignments.
GENERAL PLAN TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEE SELECTION COMMITTEE
Together with a Planning Commissioner and Staff, the Councilmember will recommend
to the City Council appointments to the five Technical Subcommittees. The
subcommittees will focus on Land Use, Circulation, Economic Development, Growth
Management, and Urban Design. The Technical Committees will meet twice at key
points in the General Plan's preparation to provide direction and expertise in the
MEYERJR\SELECT
subcommittee's area of focus as well as review and critique the draft General Plan
elements and EIR.
The City Council will be requested to submit one nominee for each subcommittee to
be evaluated by the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee will then make
a final recommendation to the Council for its consideration. The nominees should
have expertise and interest in the area of focus and be a resident, property owner or
business representative within the Community. The nominees should be given to the
Selection Committee no later than December 17th, 1991.
OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SELECTION COMMITTEE
Together with a Planning Commissioner, a member of the Old Town Local Review
Board and staff, the Councilmember will review proposals and sit on an interview
panel to select the consultant for preparation of the Old Town Specific Plan. Staff has
narrowed the field to six consultants who will submit proposals to the Selection
Committee by December 19, 1991. Interviews are tentatively scheduled for the week
of January 6, 1992.
OLD TOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The Old Town Advisory Committee will provide direction and input to the Consultant
in the preparation of the Old Town Specific Plan. A meeting schedule has not yet
been established. Other members of this committee will include representatives from
the Planning Commission, Local Review Board, Temecula Town Association, Old
Town Merchants Association, Economic Development Corporation, and a citizen-at-
large.
vgw
MEYERJR\SELECT
ITEM NO. 22
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
City Clerk
December 10, 1991
Changes in Policy Guidelines for Old Town Historic Review Board
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss amendments to policy guidelines and direct staff to make desired changes.
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council meeting held November 12, 1991, Council appointed five (5)
regular members and one (1) alternate member to serve on the Old Town Historic
Review Board. At that meeting, staff was instructed to place the matter of changes
to the policy guidelines on a future agenda.
The policies, adopted on August 13, 1991 for operation of this committee, do not
contain provisions to deal with the duties or term of office of the alternate member.
Staff will be happy to prepare the amended policy guidelines to reflect the Council's
desires.
ATTACHMENT:
Operational Guidelines for Historic Review Committee
Pro. //003 Admin
Date 8/13/91
Dept. City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
Policies and Procedures
Old Town Temecula Historic
Review Committee Operational Guidelines
The City Council of the City of Temecula, recognizing the benefit to the community in
establishing a committee to review proposed new developments in the Historic Preservation
District, hereby establishes the Old Town Temecula Historic Review Committee.
This committee will be charged to serve as a sub-committee working directly with the Planning
Commission. It will review the design, authenticity of architectural style and appropriateness
to the area and consistency to the Specific Plan for all proposed developments within the
boundaries of the Temecula Historic District.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Number of Members.
This committee shall consist of five (5) members.
Ouali~cations, No member of any committee shall be a City employee, nor shall
any person be a member of more than one commission or committee at any one time.
No person shall be eligible for appointment for more than two full consecutive terms (six
(6) years).
Members: Appointment and Removal. Members ofthiscommitteeshallbeappointed
by the City Council of the City of Temecula, subject to the approval of a four-fifths
(4/5ths) majority of the City Council.
A majority of the Council may remove an appointee for good cause. The chairperson
and Recording Secretary of this Committee shall be selected by a majority of the
membership of the Committee.
Term~ The term of each committee member shall be three (3) years with staggered
terms. Initially, all five members may be selected at one time. In order to achieve
staggered terms, one member shall be appointed to a term of three (3) years; two for
terms of two (2) years; and two for terms of one (1) year. Said terms to be determined
by drawing of lots. At the completion of any term, a commission member may be
reappointed pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Policy and Procedure.
Policies andProcedures
Administrative Pro. ~X)3
8/13/91
Page 2
Vacancies. Vacancies on this Committee will be filled pursuant to the procedures
established in Administrative Policy No.//002, approved by the City Council June 12,
1991.
Meetings/Ouorums. The meetings of this Committee with be on an "as needed" basis
and at the specific request of the Director of Planning. A quorum of three members shall
be required for the transaction of any business. The Committee Chairperson or his/her
designee shall attend and report the Committee recommendations to the Planning
Commission at their next regularly scheduled meeting.
Absence from meetings. Should any member be absent from any three (3)
consecutive meetings of the Committee without excuse acceptable to the City Council,
that member shall vacate his/her seat on the Committee. The vacancy shall be filled in
the same manner as any other vacancy.
Compensation. Unless otherwise required by law, committee members shall receive
no compensation.
ITEM NO. 23
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~, ·
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
December 10, 1991
Offer of Dedication of a Portion of Via Las
Acceptance in the City Maintained Street System
Colinas and
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY
PURPOSES AND ACCEPTING INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM,
A PORTION OF VIA LA$ COLINAS
and direct the Public Works Department to pursue an easement across Parcel No. 2 (vacant
parcel east of the Medical Plaza) for emergency vehicles.
BACKGROUND:
At the regular City Council Meeting of November 12, 1991, the Council expressed concern
over the lack of a secondary access for those developments fronting Via Las Colinas and
continued this item to allow Staff to explore the possibility of obtaining an easement for
emergency access across Parcel I of Parcel Map 13466. The owner of Parcel 1, in obtaining
refinancing for his development, was required by the lender to provide publicly-maintained
public street access to his parcel. If this requirement cannot be met, the terms of the loan
allow the lender, at the expense of the lendee, to take whatever action necessary to fulfill the
access requirement, and possibly call the loan.
The owners of Parcel 1 (Medical Plan) do not feel they have an obligation to provide
secondary access through an easement for emergency vehicles and were not willing to grant
an easement. The Public Works Staff and the Fire Department researched the conditions of
approval of the underlying Parcel Map (PM 13466), along with the corresponding Plot Plans
for the Medical Plaza (PP8208) and the Apartment Complex (PP9195) and found them to be
in conformance with the minimum requirements for secondary access under the existing
ordinances. These developments were conditioned and constructed under the requirements
of County Ordinance 460, which is currently being used by the City of Temecula to condition
developments. Section 3.8(E) of County Ordinance 460 states:
"When a lot includes an access strip, the access strip shall be not less than 30
feet in width. In no case shall the length of the access strip exceed 660 feet.
When the access portion abuts a dead-end street or cul-de-sac, the combined
length of the street and the access strip shall be no more than 1320 feet in
length in a Nonhazardous Fire Area and 660 feet in a Hazardous Fire Area."
The existing accesses to both the Medical Plaza and the Apartment Complex meet this
minimum requirement and would not be required to install a secondary access. However, in
response to Council concerns, the Staff has approached the owners of Parcel 2, and they
have expressed a willingness to negotiate an easement/lease across their property for the use
of emergency vehicles.
On March 18, 1980, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Parcel Map 13466,
but did not accept offers of dedication to public use for street and public utility purposes over
Lots "A" through "E", inclusive. Under provisions of Section 66477.2 of the Government
Code, these offers remain open. The dedication of abutters' rights of access along the
Rancho California Road frontage was accepted by the Board of Supervisors, and limits
vehicular access to Via Las Colinas only. Improvements along the Via Las Colinas frontage
of Parcel I of said Parcel Map 13466 were completed under conditions of approval for Plot
Plan 8208. The County approved these improvements and issued Certificates of Occupancy
in 1986-87. Neither the acceptance of the dedication nor the acceptance into the road-
maintained system was pursued at that time.
The portion of Via Las Colinas fronting Parcel 1 is constructed to public standards. The
fronting parcel on the opposite side of Via Las Colinas was previously accepted into the
County-Maintained Road System. The remainder of this street lacks full street improvements
and would not be acceptable as a publicly maintained street at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 91-
Exhibit "A" - Map
Exhibit "B" - Legal Description
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR
STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES AND
ACCEPTING INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET
SYSTEM, A PORTION OF VIA LAS COLINAS
WHEREAS, that portion of Via Las Colinas as depicted in Exhibit "A" attached hereto,
has been offered for dedication of the City;
WHEREAS, the legal description of that portion of Via Las Colinas is set forth in
Exhibit B, attached hemto;
WItEREAS, that portion of Via Las Colinas has been constructed to City standards and
the associated warranty and maintenance periods have expired;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City of Temecula accepts the offer of dedication of that portion
of Via Las Colinas.
SECTION 2. That the portion of Via Las Colinas is accepted into the City maintained
street system.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this .. of
,1991.
ATTEST:
Ronald I. Parks, Mayor
]une S. Greek, City Clerk
5ireso218
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. __ 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.
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
E X H I,tS_I3'
EXHiBiT "B"
That parcel of land within the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California,
described as follows:
Lot C in Parcel Map No. 13466, as recorded in Book 26 of Parcel Maps, at
pages 68 and 69, in the office of the County Recorder, County of Riverside
(Portion of Via Las Colinas)
EXHIBIT 'B" pwol\egdrpt~1112\colinas 110491
ITEM NO. 24
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
BACKGROUND:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
December 10, 1991
Item No. 24 - Status Report on French Valley Airport
City Clerk June S. Greek
Review, receive and file report
The staff will finalize the staff report on this item and
forward it to you under separate cover.
JSG
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD NOVEMBER 26, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:11
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS:
PM.
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
Parks
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott F. Field and Recording Secretary Susan W. Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
John Dedovesch, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, addressed the Board of Director regarding the lack
of parks on the North side of town and requested that funds not be expended to expand the
Sports Park.
Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, stated that staff is now exploring possible
acquisition of land in the immediate vicinity of the Winchester Collection homes.
CSD BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve the
minutes of the meeting of November 12, 1991 as mailed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~ioz
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Parks
Hearing no objection, President Muf~oz reordered the agenda to hear Item No. 3, to
accommodate citizens waiting to hear this item.
3. Comprehensive Overview of Goals for Youth and Teen Proarams
Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, presented the staff report.
Catherine Arriola, 29830 Corte Castille, suggested that the "Big Sister and Big Brother
Program", be instituted in the Teen Programs. She volunteered to research this matter
and volunteer in any way needed. She also suggested that a teen confidential phone
4/Minutes/081391
CSD Minutes
November 26, 1991
line be installed, with volunteers trained by Family Counselors. She suggested that the
community be inundated with public service announcements advertising the teen
center.
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Moore to approve the
Youth/Teen Multi-Point Action Plan to address the current recreation needs of youth
ages 7 through 18, and to approve an additional position of Recreation Coordinator.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
None
Parks
Discussion of Lease of ProDarty for use as Temporary Senior Center end for Youth
Proorams
Director Lindemans announced that work is being done on a Senior Center and if
everything goes well, it may be open before Christmas.
Combinino Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues and Exoenditures and Chanoes
in Fund Balance for Period Endina SePtember 30.1991
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to receive and file
report.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Parks
GENERAL MANAGER'$ REPORT
None given.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT
Shawn Nelson reported that the second community workshop on the Parks and Recreation
Master Plan, is schedule for Thursday, December 5, 1991 at 7:00 PM at Vail Elementary
School, and encouraged interested citizens to attend.
4/Minutes/081391 -2- 12/02/91
CSD Minutes November 26.1991
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
Director Lindemans requested that the teen dance club at the south end of town be placed
on a future agenda for review.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Moore, seconded by Director Lindemans to adjourn at 8:48 PM.
The motion was unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, TCSD Secretary
J. Sal Mu~oz, President
4/MinuteslOB1391 -3- 12/O2/91
ITEM NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: General Manager
DATE: December 10, 1991
SUBJECT: Cancellation of the Regular Community Services District Meeting of
December 24, 1991
PREPARED BY: City Clerk/District Secretary June Greek
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Community Services District officially cancel the regularly scheduled meeting
of December 24, 1991 and reschedule it to take place on December 17, 1991.
DISCUSSION:
Chapter 2.04 of the City's Municipal Code requires regular Community Services
District meetings to be held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. This
year the fourth Tuesday falls on Christmas Eve. It is therefore recommended that the
meeting be canceled by minute order and that the second meeting of the month be
held on Tuesday, December 17, 1991.
ITEM NO. 3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
General Manager
December 10, 1991
Election of President
PREPARED BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk/District Secretary
RECOMMENDATION:
calendar year 1992.
Conduct election of President to preside until the end of
BACKGROUND: The Community Services District Board of Directors selects
a member to serve as Mayor annually. This office is assumed at the first meeting of
the Community Services District in January and the newly elected President presides
through the calendar year of 1992.
ITEM NO. 4
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
General Manager
December 10, 1991
Election of Vice President
PREPARED BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk/District Secretary
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct election of Vice President to preside until the end
of calendar year 1992,
BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services District selects a
member to serve as Vice President annually. This office is assumed at the first
meeting of the City Council in January and the newly elected Vice President presides
through the calendar year of 1992.
TEMECULA
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 10:21 PM.
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS:
Also present were Executive Director David F. Dixon,
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz,
Moore
Parks
Assistant City Manager Mark
Ochenduszko, General Counsel Scott F. Field and Recording Secretary Susan W. Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Member Birdsall, seconded by Member Lindemans to approve the
minutes of the meeting of November 12, 1991 as mailed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 MEMBERS:
NOES: 0 MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Moore
None
Parks
Combinina Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues and Exoenditures and Chanaes
in Fund Balance for Period Endina September 30, 1991
It was moved by Member Lindemans, seconded by Member Birdsall to receive and file
report.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 MEMBERS:
NOES: 0 MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 1 MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Moore
None
Parks
4\RDAM/N\II2691 -1- 12/02/91
Temecula Redevelopment Agency Minutes
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None given.
November 26, 1991
GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT
None given.
AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Birdsall, seconded by Member Lindemans to adjourn at 10:24 PM
to a meeting on December 1 O, 1991 at 7:00 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community
Center. The motion was unanimously carried with Member Parks absent.
Peg Moore, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
4\RDAMINXlI2691 -2- 12/02/91
ITEM NO. 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Redevelopment Agency
Executive Director
December 10, 1991
Cancellation of the Regular Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting
of December 24, 1991
PREPARED BY: City Clerk/Redevelopment Agency Secretary June Greek
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Redevelopment Agency officially cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of
December 24, 1991 and reschedule it to take place on December 17, 1991.
DISCUSSION:
Chapter 2.04 of the City's Municipal Code requires regular Redevelopment Agency
meetings to be held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. This year the
fourth Tuesday falls on Christmas Eve. It is therefore recommended that the meeting
be canceled by minute order and that the second meeting of the month be held on
Tuesday, December 17, 1991.
ITEM NO. 3
APPROVAL R~
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
calendar year 1992.
BACKGROUND:
Chairperson annually.
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Redevelopment Agency
Executive Director
December 10, 1991
Election of Chairperson
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Redevelopment Agency Secretary
Conduct election of Chairperson to preside until the end of
Redevelopment Agency in January and the newly elected
through the calendar year of 1992.
The Redevelopment Agency selects a member to serve as
This office is assumed at the first meeting of the
Chairperson presides
ITEM NO. 4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Redevelopment Agency
Executive Director
December 10, 1991
Election of Vice Chairperson
PREPARED BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk/Redevelopment Agency Secretary
RECOMMENDATION: ConductelectionofViceChairpersontopresideuntiltheend
of calendar year 1992.
BACKGROUND: The Temecula Redevelopment Agency selects a member to
serve as Vice Chairperson annually. This office is assumed at the first meeting of the
City Council in January and the newly elected Vice Chairperson presides through the
calendar year of 1992.