HomeMy WebLinkAbout051292 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 PUJOL STREET
MAY 12, 1992 - 7:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 pm- Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b)
to discuss potential litigation.
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will
determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00
PM and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 92-11
Resolution: No. 92-36
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding
Invocation
Pastor Gary Ruly, HIS Church Christian Center
Rag Salute
Councilmember Moore
ROLL CALL:
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Transit Appreciation Day
Presentation of a Check to City for Youth Activities
PUBLIC FORUM
This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the
meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a
period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with
an opportunity to discuss topics of interest with the Council. The members of the City
Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is
prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any
matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak on any matter which is nO1;
listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with
the City Clerk.
2/ageadd061292
06~7~2
leeeel
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
3
4
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of April 28, 1992.
Resolution AoorovincJ List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Aoorove Subdivision AcJreement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-1
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time for Tract Map No. 23371-1;
4.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
21agende/OE 1282
2 06~7~2
5
6
8
9
Aoorove Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-2
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
5.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
ADDrOVe Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-3
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
6.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Aoorove Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-4
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
7.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
ADDrOVe Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-5
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve the replacement subdivision improvement agreement and 18-
month extension of time.
Parcel MaD No. 26766
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 26766 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
2legenddOE 1292 3 05/07/~2
10
Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Approve the attached Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement and authorize
the Mayor to execute the agreement.
11
Settlement of Disoute Between City and County Regarding Development ADDliCatiOn
Fees Received by County for Permits from December 1.1989 throuah June 30.1990
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the Settlement Agreement
regarding Development Application Fees received by the County for the
period from December 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 subject to
approval by the City Manager and City Attorney as to the final form of
the Agreement.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
12 Second Readina of Ordinance Approve Zone Chanoe 13
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-09
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 13,
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R 2 112 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL, 2 112 ACRE
LOT SIZE MINIMUM) TO R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ON PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SERAPHINA ROAD AND RITA
WAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 914-260-039 THROUGH
046
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.
2legendNOB 1292 4 06/07/92
13 MitiQated Neqative Declaration and Condemnation of Prooertv - (AP #921-300-006)
14
15
(Continued from the Meeting of 2/24/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
13.2
13.3
Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment
(EA) Number 8;
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FINDING
AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC
PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTENANT THERETO
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD, EAST
OF STONEWOOD ROAD, WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
Advance $1,300,000 from the Development Impact Fees Fund to the
Capital Projects Fund and appropriate $1,300,000 in Account 021 -165-
624-44-5700 for the purchase of this property. Authorize repayment
of the Development Impact Fees from CFD 88-12 Bond Proceeds once
the bonds are issued.
Aooroval Authority for Subdivision and Land Use Aoolication Ordinance
(Continued from the Meeting of 4/14/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 90-19 AND ESTABLISHING DECISION-MAKING
AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
ChanQe of Zone No. 5361- Tentative Tract No. 25320 - Bedford Properties
(Continued from the meeting of 4/14/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Continue Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320 to June 9, 1992.
21NendaA)61292 6 06/07/92
16
AOOeal NO. 24 (Aooeal of Planninc~ Commission Denial of Plot Plan No. 8839. Revised
No. 1, Amended No. 2
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1
Deny Appeal No. 24;
16.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY PLOT
PLAN NO. 8839 REVISED NO. 1, AMENDED NO. 2, CHANGING USES ON THE
SECOND FLOOR FROM 5,413 SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE TO A 780 SQUARE
FOOT BEAUTY SHOP, 2,961 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AND 1,672
SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE, AND A REDUCTION IN REQUIRED OFF-STREET
PARKING ON PROPERTY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 922-024-027
COUNCIL BUSINESS
17 Adoption of Negative Declaration - Marc~arita Road Extension
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment
Number 10, the proposed extension of Margarita Road between
Winchester Road and Solana Way.
18 Maintenance of Streets Not Within the Maintained Road System
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1
Receive and provide staff direction.
19
Ordinance Amendinc~ County Ordinance No. 630 - Animal Regulations
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1
Read by title only and introduce 'an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AUTHORIZING THE SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED, NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED
ANIMALS
21egendM)61282 e 06/07/92
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: May 26, 1992, 7:00 PM, TemeCula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California
21eOendaA)61292 7 06/07/92
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING - (To be held at 8:00)
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
PUBLIC HEARINGS
President Ronald J. Parks
DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks
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.
Approve the minutes of April 28, 1992.
2
Proposed Vacation of Easements and Transfer Of Slope Maintenance to the Villaqes
Homeowner's Association
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT REGARDING VACATION OF
THE SLOPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS OVER PORTION OF TRACT NOS.
207354, 20735-6, 21082-4 AND 21082
ADJOURNMENT:
21agendN061292
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
Next regular meeting: May 26, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community
Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
8 06/08182
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
,
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Chairperson J. Sal Mu~oz presiding
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
Mu~oz
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.
2
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of April 28, 1992.
Old Town RedeveloDment Advisory Committee Bylaws
RECOMMENDATION:
2.2 Adopt the By-laws of the Old Town
Committee.
Redevelopment
Advisory
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: May 26, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
21aOendNO61292 ~ 06/08/92
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
The City of Temecula
PROCLAMATION
WBEREAS, the nation is celebrating National Transportation Week from May 11 - 15,
1992; and
WHEREAS, transit is a vital component of the fabric of society both nationally and in
Riverside County; and
WBEREAS, transit helps conserve energy, reduce pollution, and relieve congestion; and
WHEREAS, transit provides mobility for all, including the young, old, disabled and
poor who depend upon it; and
WHEREAS, the Riverside Transit Agency is providing safe, clean, efficient and
effective service for the people of Temecula;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Patficia H. Birdsall, on behalf of the City Council of the City
of Temecula, hereby proclaim Wednesday, May 13, 1992 as
TRANSIT APPRECIATION DAY
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this 12th day of May, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor Pro Tem
June S. Greek, City Clerk
April 13, 1992
Mayor Patrim Birdsall
city of Temecu
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92593
Dear Mayor Birdsall:
This year the transit industry will again celebrate Transit Appreciation Day on May 13, 1992, as a
highlight of National Transportation Week, May 11-15, 1992.
This day of celebration was established four years ago by the United States Conference of Mayors,
The National League of Cities and the American Public Transit Association to focus attention on
public transit in general by honoring transit systems and employees who each day provide safe,
efficient and courteous public transportation services to their communities throughout North
America.
On behalf of the RTA Board of Directors and staff, i would like to invite you to join us at our
Transit A reciation Day breakfast which will be held on Wednesday, May 13, 1992, from 7:00
a.m. to 9:~ a.m. at our agency, 1825 Third Street, in Riverside. ff you can attend, please contact
our marketing deparunent to confirm your attendance by April 24, 1992.
Additionally, we are re, questing that your city council proclaim Wednesday, May 13, as Transit
Appreciation Day in Temecula. Enclosed is a sample proclamation.
We would appreciate your mailing the proclamation to RTA so that we can display it to our
employees when we recognize them on this special day.
I hope we can count on the support of your city to make this event a great success. Please let me
know if we can provide any further information about this event
Sincerely,
Susan J. Hafner ~'~
SJH:sda
Enclosure "
oc: CityClerk
ITEM
1
ITEM
2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD APRIL 28, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:30 P.M. in the
Temecula Community Center, 28818 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Patricia H.
Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Parks, Birdsall
ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore, Mu~oz
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott C. Field, and City Clerk
June Greek.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Birdsall declared a recess to an executive session pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9 (b) and (c), potential litigation at 5:35 P.M.
Mayor Birdsall reconvened the City Council Meeting at 7:05 P.M. with Councilmembers Moore
and Mu~oz absent.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Roger Sowder, Oa~k Springs Presbyterian Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the pledge of allegiance by Mayor Pro Tem Karel Lindemans.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Birdsall proclaimed May to be Temecula Library Month and presented the proclamation
to Grace Mellman and Librarian Beth Ziegler.
Mayor Birdsall proclaimed May, 1992 to be Water Awareness Month and presented the
proclamation to Donna Powers of the Rancho California Water District.
Mayor Birdsall proclaimed May 13, 1992 to be Day of the Teacher and presented the
proclamation to Dick Gale, President of the Temecula Valley Teachers Association.
Councilmember Mu~oz arrived at 7:15 P.M.
Min~042892 - 1 - 05/06/92
City Council Minutes April 28, 1992
PUBLIC FORUM
Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, Temecula, expressed concern regarding comments made
by a school district representative at the City Council meeting of April 14, 1992, advising that
public hearings would be held prior to the purchase of any land to be used as a bus storage
and maintenance facility. Ms. Vernon referred to an article in the Californian newspaper after
that meeting advising that the school district had entered into escrow on the purchase of a
piece of property off of Winchester Road and the bus storage and maintenance facility will be
built immediately.
Mayor Birdsall advised that there is an action item on the agenda to appoint two members of
the Council to work with the school district on this very important issue.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Birdsall announced the removal of Item No. 15 from the agenda at the request of staff
and that it would be continued to the meeting of May 28, 1992.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
Consent Calendar Items I - 14, and 16 - 18.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES::
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Mufioz, Parks, Birdsall
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
Standarl;J Ordinance Adoption Procedure
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes;
2.1
2.2
2.3
Approve the minutes of April 6, 1992.
Approve the minutes of April 9, 1992.
Approve the minutes of April 14, 1992·
Min~042892 -2- 05106192
City Council Minutes April 28.1992
Resolution ADDrOving List of Demands
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of General Municipal Election
4.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3,
1992, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO
GENERAL LAW CITIES.
Resolution AdoPting ReGulations for Candidates Statements to be Submitted to the
Voters at an Election
5.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE
OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE
VOTERS AT AN ELECTION
Resolution of SuDoOrt - FriCav Western Days in .Temecula
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
DECLARING WESTERN DAYS IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
OF TEMECULA
Min\O42892 -3- 05/06192
City Council Mi,nutes April 28.1992
Commu~qitv Development Block Grant Fund Balance
7.1 Approve the use of the remaining FY 1989-90 Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds for Temecula Senior Center improvements.
City Tret~surer's Report of March 31, 1991
8.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of March 31, 1992.
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bonds and Materials and Labor Bonds in Tract
No. 199;39-1
9.1
9.2
Authorize the release of street, and sewer and water system Faithful
Performance Warranty Bonds, and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No.
19939-1;
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
10.
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bonds and Materials and Labor Bonds in Tract
No. 199;~9-2
10.1
Authorize the release of street, and sewer and water system Faithful
Performance Warranty Bonds, and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No.
19939-2;
10.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
11.
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bonds and Materials and Labor Bonds in Tract
No. 19939-F
11.1
Authorize the: release of street, and sewer and water system Faithful
Performance Warranty Bonds, and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No.
19939-F;
11.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
12.
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bonds and Subdivision Monumentation Bonds
in Tract No. 21561
12.1
Authorize the release of street, and sewer and water system Faithful
Performance Warranty Bonds, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in
Tract No. 21561;
Min~042892 -4- 05/06/92
City Council Minutes APril 28, 1992
12.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
13. Release Faithful Performence Warranty Bonds, Material and Labor Bonds and
Subdivision Monumentation Bonds in Tract No. 22208
13.1
Authorize the release of street, and sewer and water system Faithful
Performance Warranty Bonds, Material and Labor Bonds, and
Subdivision Monumentorion Bond in Tract No. 22208;
13.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
14.
Authorize Reduction in Bond Amounts for Tract MaD No. 21760
14.1 Authorize the reduction in street, sewer and water Faithful Performance
Bond amounts;
14.2 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and
Eighteen Month Extension of Time;
14.3 Accept the Faithful Performance Bonds in the reduced amounts;
14.4 Direct the City Council to so notify the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
16.
Contract Aoreement for Street Address Numberina
16.1 Approve the contract agreement with Bruce Stewart to provide address
numbering services on an as-needed basis.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
17. Second Reading of Sign ReQulations and Use of Outdoor AdvertisinQ DiSplayS
17.1 Read by title only and approve an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CALIFORNIA, PERTAINING TO SIGN REGULATIONS AND ESTABLISHING
REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING DISPLAYS
Min~042892 -5- 05/06192
Citv Council IV~nutes April 28.1992
18.
Second :; Readina of Ordinance ADDrOving Soecific Plan 2 19 - Zone Change No. 18
18.1
Read by title' only and approve an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-08
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 18
(~HANGING THE ZONE FROM R-A-2 1/2 {RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, 2-1/2
ACRE LOT SIZE MINIMUM) TO S-P {SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED
ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND DE PORTOLA
ROAD
PUBLIC HEARINGS
19.
Vesting ;Tentative Tract 23372. Buie Margarita Villaae
Councilmember Mur~oz stepped down due to a conflict of interest.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M.
David Michael, 30300 Churchill Court, Temecula, representing the Villages
Homeowners Association, thanked everyone for their efforts in resolving the clean-up
of the LOng Valley Wash.
Mayor Birdsall closed the public hearing at 7:35 P.M.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
approve staff recommendation 19.1, 19.2, 19.3 and 19.4 as follows:
19.1
19.2
Approve the Stipulation and Order providing for the clean-up of the Long
Valley Wash by the Buie Corporation;
Reaffirm Environmental Assessment No. 32547 for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23372;
Min%042892 -6- 05/06192
City Council Minutes
19.3
19.4
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-33
Aoril 28, 1992
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA',
CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23372 TO SUBDIVIDE 46.9 ACRES INTO A 66 LOT
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED NORTHERLY OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PAROEL NO. 923-210-014
Approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23372, based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report,
and subject to the Attached Conditions of Approval.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3
NOES: 0
ABSTAIN: 1
ABSENT: 1
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Parks, Birdsall
None
Mu~oz
Moore
20.
Vesting Tentative Tract 23373, Buie Maroarita VillaQe
Councilmember Mu~oz stepped down due to a conflict of interest.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans to
approve staff recommendation 20.1, 20.2, 20.3 and 20.4 as follows:
20.1 Approve the Stipulation and Order providing for the clean-up of the Long
Valley Wash by the Buie Corporation;
20.2 Reaffirm Environmental Assessment No. 32547 for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23373;
Min\042892 -7- 05/O6/92
Citv Council Minutes April 26.1992
20.3
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
20.4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23373 TO SUBDIVIDE 29.3 ACRES INTO A 7 LOTS
WITH 348 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND I COMMERCIAL LOT LOCATED AT
THE NORTHWEST. CORNER OF RANCH CALIFORNIA AND MEADOWS
PARKWAY AND KNOWS AS ASSESSORS
PARCEL NO. 923-210-014.
Approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23372, based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report,
and subject to the Attached Conditions of Approval.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Parks, Birdsall
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
21.
Conditi~pnal Use Permit No. 19 - Teen Aae Dance Club
Gary Thornhill presented the staff report and advised that after the applicant reviewed
the revised conditions, they expressed some concerns about the requirement to
remove the sign. He added that after discussion with the City Attorney, staff would
recommend that the condition referring to "free night" not be gender specific or not
be allowed.
City Manager David Dixon expressed concern with the 2:00 A.M. closing time and
asked that the Council consider 1:00 A.M. at the latest. Mr. Dixon also referred to the
most recent shooting incident at the Valley Beat, which was a result of the "free pass"
and asked that the Council approve the recommendation for no free passes.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:45 P.M.
Charles Mitich, 28822 Front Street, Temecula, applicant and owner of the Valley Beat
stated that he agreed to all the conditions except the removal of the sign and the 1:00
A.M. dosing, which he felt would adversely affect his business.
Min\042892 -8- 05/06192
City Council Minutes April 28.1992
Autumn Sheppard, 31377 Bandan Court, Temecula, spoke in support of the dance
club's appeal to teenagers who have had nowhere to go in Temecula for recreation.
Stony Mitich, 28822 Front Street, Temecula, addressed staff's recommendation to
close at 1:00 A.M. by stating that the teenagers would be leaving the dance club and
going to a private party which would run on later than the 2:00 A.M. closing of the
dance club.
Chief of Police Rick Sayre requested that specific conditions be added to ensure proper
lighting in the facility and that identification of employees be given to the police
department.
Gary Thornhill advised that in the original Conditions of Approval there were two
conditions relating to interior lighting and the prohibition of alcoholic beverages that
should be included in the C.U.P. resolution.
It was moved by Councilmember Muftoz, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
approve staff recommendation as follows: with the removal of Condition No. 14,
modification of Condition No. 15 to read "Permittee shall not issue free entrance to
attendees", and the addition of conditions requested by the Police Chief relating to
interior lighting, prohibition of alcoholic beverages, and reporting identities of the Clubs
employees to the Police Department.
21.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 19 TO PERMIT
OPERATION OF A YOUNG ADULT CLUB IN AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED
AT 28822 FRONT STREET
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
Mayor Birdsall declared a recess at 8:05 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:20 P.M.
Min%042892 -9- 05/06/92
Citv Council Minutes
COUNCIL BUSINESS
Aoril 28.1992
22.
0rdinan~e Aoorovina Zone. Change No. 13
Director of Planning Thornhill summarized the staff report.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approvei staff recommendation as follows:
22.1
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-09
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 13,
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R 2 112 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL, 2 1/2 ACRE
I~OT SIZE MINIMUM) TO R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ON PROPERTY
I, OCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SERAPHINA ROAD AND RITA
WAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 914-260-039 THROUGH
046.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: ,~ 0
ABSENT: 1
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
23.
24.
Amended Condition of Aooroval Tract MaD 26521, Greentree Lane
23.1 , Review the Amended Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map
26521 (Greentree Lane) and modify, if necessary.
Director of Public Works Serlet presented the staff report.
Councilmember Parks stated that the Council elected to keep the original conditions
of the tract intact requiring the applicant to provide 28' street widths.
0rdinan~e Establishino Filing Fee for City Councilmanic Elections
City Clerk June Greek summarized the staff report.
Min\042892 -10- 05/06192
City Council Minutes April 28, 1992
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A FILING FEE TO DEFRAY, IN PART, THE COST
TO THE CITY OF PROCESSING NOMINATION PAPERS FOR COUNCILMANIC
ELECTIONS.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
25.
Appointment of Old Town Temecula Specific Ran Steering Committee
Planning Director Thornhill summarized the staff report. The appointed members are
as follows:
Peg Moore - Councilmember
Linda Fahey- Planning Commissioner
Larry Markham - Old Town Local Review Board
Charlene Danielson - Economic Development Corporation
Susan Bridges - Temecula Town Association
Bonnie Reed - Old Town Temecula Merchants Association
Bill Harker - Citizen At Large
Christina Grina - Citizen At Large
Helga Berger - Citizen At Large
Laverne Parker - Citizen At Large
Steve Sander - Citizen At Large
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
25.1 Confirm the membership of an Old Town Specific Plan Steering
Committee (OTSC).
Min~042892 - 11 - 05/O6/92
City Council Minutes
The motion was carried as follows:
26.
27.
April 28, 1992
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
Assessment District 92-01
City Manager David Dixon summarized the staff report.
It was lmoved by Council,member Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
26.1 Authorize the City Manager to assemble a financing team for a special
assessment district.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
Joint SChool Board/City Council Meetina Regarding School District Facilities
(RequeSted by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans)
27.1 Select two Councilmembers to represent the City at the joint City of
Temecula/Temecula Valley Unified School District School Facilities
Meeting.
City Manager David Dixon summarized the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans suggested that there be a list of specific items to discuss.
City Manager David Dixon asked that each Councilmember make a list of questions and
topics they would like to see discussed and submit them to the City Manager's office.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:03 P.M.
Sidney Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, Temecula, stated that he felt the Water District
should be involved in the committee as well.
Min~042892 - 12- 05/06/92
City Council Minutes April 28, 1992
Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans nominated Councilmember Mu~oz as a member of the ad-
hoc committee. The nomination was seconded by Councilmember Parks and the
motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Moore absent.
Councilmember Parks nominated Mayor Birdsall as a member of the ad-hoc committee.
The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans and the motion was
unanimously carried with Councilmember Moore absent.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Dixon announced a press conference will be held May 6th at the Doubletree
Hotel, 10:30 A.M., to introduce the City's Public Relations Program. City Manager Dixon
asked that the Council meet on Tuesday, 5:00 P.M., at City Hall to preview the Public
Relations Program.
City Manager Dixon advised that Assessment District CFD 88-12 was presented to the
County Debt Advisory Committee and it was approved.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
None given.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans advised that he had visited the little boy who was allegedly beaten
by students at the elementary school and requested that the City Police Department conduct
a full investigation of the incident.
City Manager Dixon indicated that an investigation had already begun.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to adjourn
at 9:26 PM to a special meeting on Tuesday, May 5th, 5:00 P.M., City Hall, to preview the
Public Relations program. The motion was unanimously carried.
The next regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula will be held on Tuesday,
May 12, 1992, 7:00 P.M., Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Min~O42892
-13- 05/O6192
ITEM NO. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
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 amount of
$4,065,251.38
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOFrED, this 12th day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Rcsos 253
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing ResolUtion No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecuh on the 12th day of May, 1992 by the following roll call vote.
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
0 COUNCILIVI~,,MBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
253
Crl'Y OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
4/24/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
04/27/92 TOTALCHECK RUN:
05/01/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
04/23/92 TOTAL PAYROLL:
$`3,601,21 0.56
$28,055.44
$93,514.32
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 5/12/92 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
014
016
019
021
029
PAYROLL:
001
019
GENERAL
COMMUNI~'Y DEV. BLOCK CRANT (CDBG)
REDEVEL(:)PMENT AGENCY FUND (RDA)
TCSD
CAPITAL PROJECTS-CITY
CAPITAL PROJECTS-TCSD
GENERAL(PAYROLL)
TCSD (PAYROLL)
TOTAL BY FUND:
PREPARED BY KARMA MCIN41'YRE
$,101,821.88
$10,054.95
$`3,550,573.17
$76,962.75
$1,227.49
$,31,096.82
$74,594.05
$18,920.24
$`3,971,737.56
$93,514.32
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
Check Date Vendor
Invoice
00009952 04115/92 CSMFO
041592
Nile
Date P/O Date Descrintion Sross Discount Net
' .....~'_.."::ETT:~'~ .......... ~ ....................
CA SO OF MUNI FIN OFFICERS
04115192. 04101192 LEBISLATIVE 8EMINARISI41MJ~NO 100.00 0.00 100.~0
Check Totals:
00009t55 0~121192 8PDNJ:Clt SECURITY PACIFXC NATL lANK
047t92 OaRI;92 04/~1192 CA¶HTFR C~rr F~q AP TITL~
100.00 0.00 100.00
~,500,57!=!7 0.00 ~,50~57~-~7
Check Totals:
0000995~ 04/221V2-CACUR~FORNIA-CURVESrINC
H22f2 H/22R2 041221~2 RDA 6RANTISEI~IC RETRDFITTN6
~,500,573.17 0.00 3,500,573.17
50,000.00 0.00 50~000.00
00009958 04124192 ASCO~
779626
Cheer Totals~
ASCO~ HASLER MAILIlel 8YSTEIqS
04101/92 04101192'741121 12106-12130
50,000,00 . 0.00 50,000.00--
15.00 0.00 15.00
00009959 04/24192 C,E.P,D, C,E,P,D,
041492 ...~04114/9.2
Check Totals:
04/J.4192-CEP-D-CQNFERENCFJBI2,~--812B-,1S
15.00 0.00 15.00
.---675.00 O.O0 ..... 675.00
OOOO.60-04124192-CALIFORN-CALIFORNIAlt
0266107686 04106192 10938
266~07686 04106192 10941
Check Totals: 675.00 0.00 675.00
10102191 LEGAL NOTICES; PLANNING DEPT. 38,72 0,00 38,72
I0102191 LEGAL NOTICES; CITY CLERK 61.95 0,00 61.95
Check Totals:
00009961 04/24192 CALINS CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, INC
~10,18243---04108192 ~108192 PUBLIC OFFICIer SOWn
Check Totals:
00009962 04/24J~ ~APIDARR CABL-MARREII &
F91016 04109192 04109192 LIABILITY CLAIM
1346F91013 04115192 04115192 LIABILITY CLAIR
00009963 04124192 DAVLIM DAVLIN
8-9=23d65 M/D1/92-1124~
Check 1orals:
~!?~2-T~_P~ PARL~-LREC.-2110192
100.67 0.00 100,67
350,00 0.00. 350.00--.
350.00 O.O0
659,28 0.00 659.28
332.38 o.oo 332,38
991,66 0,00 991,66
11,34 -0,00 11,34-
Check Totals:
OQOQf9&4-Q4124~t2_DEP~QF~PNt.TIIENT-OF-.TDAN,~-QRTATI8::
121261 04101192 04101/92 SI6NAL iT!iT
11,34 O,O0 11,34
66.96 O,O0 66.96
Check Totals:
00009965 04~24~92 FOUNDATI THE FOUIID~TII)N FOR CALIFORNIA
042192 04121192 04121192 CONFESENCEINASTElaHI411192
66.96 O,OO 66.96 ....
12.50 0,00 12,50
Check Totals:
00009966 04124192 GETPAlED GET PAGED
0900321-in~041~/92-11441 ~/~tl.92-ADOUSTED-COST-OF-LOST-PABER
Check Totals:
--00009967-04/24/92 DAFELITH THOI~AS HAFELI
041792 04/17/92 04117t92 MILEABE REIMB
00009968 04124192 !ffiLIDAYI HOLIDAY INN
042392 0412)192
...... Check Totals:-
04123192 CCAC CDNFERENCEIHDTELI4127192
12,50 0.00 12,50
50,00 ~o00 50,00 ....
50,00 0,00 50.00
63.04 0.00 83.04
83,04 O,O0 ~4
78.40 0.00 78.40
Fiscal Year: 1992
Check Date Vendor Naee
Invoice Date P/O
Check Register
Date Description
Oros$
Discount
Station: ~,~: ':'
Net
Check Totals:
00009969 04124/92 LEAGUEOF LEASUE OF AHERICAN NHEBJEN"S
041692 041~61t2 --4)41~6192-KIT-ON NATIONAL D]E HONTH
78.40
O,O0 78.40
7,00 0,00 7,00
Check Totals:
O0~O~ZO-~i/-24/-t2.Jb,~maJb.~nt~nce Superinten~nts
041392 04113192 04113192 TIIININ6 CLASS!5117192
7.00 0.00 7,00
90,00 0,00 90.00
00009971 04124/92 ~EaIARUT EJIA, RUTH
042192 04121/92
00009972 04124192 EXICANO MEXlCNIO, FAITH
ChecL-To~als:
04121192 REFBID CLASS CANCELLED
Check Totals=
0410~192 RFFUHn C~AF~ cqNC;II;~
90.00
27.00
27,00
45,00
0.00 ........ 90,00 ....
O,O0 27.00
0,00 27,00
O. OO- 45.00~_.
04124/92-NM~C
041692
Check Totals:
MUNICIPAL-HGtILASSIST. OF S,C
04116192 04116192 HE~SERSHIP DUES
45.00 0,00 45,00
40,00 0,00 40.00
Che~k TotLisa
00009974 04124/92 NONCONST IffiN CONSTRUCTION CORP
042192 04121192 04115192 RE]I~, BUS]HESS LICENSE
40.00 ......... 0.00 ..... 40.00__
35.00 0.00 35.00
Check Totals:
00009975 04124192 OLSONIDO FINAL TOUCH HARLFT
--t---. 03aa/~=t2_oi/_our~ 0339 o?f~PRI)IffiTzOllLP~RAILJ~.ORJ:IT~ .....
.., 0~84/12-92 05101192 0339 02101192 PRONOTIONAL PRONRAH FOR CITY
040192 04101/92 11410 02101R2 CHARTS;NATT BOAROS;PROOUCTION
35.00 0,00 I5,00
12,839.~6 .............0,00 ....
1~750,00 0.00
89,43 0,00
.12,839,76
1,750.00
89.43
Check Totals:
00009976 04124192 OLSTENTE OLSTEH TEMPORARY SERVICES
0~320656 04101/92 11~98 0~117192 TE~-~DINAIIrI:,MONICEILE_3J.29
14,679.19 0,00
67,84 0,00
14~679.19
67,84_ ....
Check Totals:
0000e977 0&/.24/92 PFR-~RET1 eFRS FNPI nYFFS' RET. ZIFJDZT
2PEOR,76 04/23192
042192 04121192
OO009978 04124192 PETROUt pETROLliE
507R97 04/~0197 10995
50289O 0~/20192 10.5
04123192 Noreal P/R, 4123192
04/21/92 RE"FIREI~Elfi 414/92-4117192
Check Totals:
lO/tllDl FUEL (PRnPANF) TL~D TRUCK
10i2119L FUEL (PROPliE) TCSDTItUCK
67.84 0,00 67,84
253.17 O.O0 2~,17
12~735.02 0.00 12,735.02
12,998.19 0.00 12,988.19
~7.01 0.00 _27.01
59.42 O.O0 59.42
00009979 04/24192 POSTHAST liSTRASTER
9244623 04f01192
ChecL_Tokals:
04101192 924462 218192-03106192
86.43 0,00_ 86,4~ __
772,60 0,00 772,60
00009980 04124192 PROLOCK PRO LOCK & KEY
............... 3019 _ , .04101/9211444
Check Totals:
· 04/01/92 PROVIDE;INSTALL STRIE PLATE
772.60
65,00
Check Totals: 65.00
..... 00009981.04/24/92 RAN~CAL ..RII-CN._JANITORIAL .SUPPLY_ ....................................
5O69 04t01192 11421 03/20192 OPEN ACCOUNT;JANIT.SUPPLIES 16.15
0,00
0,00 .
0,00
0,00
772.60
65,00
65,00
16.15
......... Check Totals: 16.15 0.00 16.15
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register S~atXon:
Check Date Vendor
Invoice
Date
P/O
00009982 04/24192 SC SISNG SC SIGNS
RARCH 92 04101192 0355
FER*92 .... -04101/92 0]55
Date hscription Broil
02101/92 POSTING SIGNS;PUB.HEARING NTC
021OI~2-PQSTtlIG-~IBNS!PUB.HEARING NTC
Discount Net
45.00 0.00
585.00 ............ 0.00
4
595.00
0000~/83-04/2il92 SET~ITY.SFJ~URTTY PArlFTC ~TTONP
07813 04101192 04101P/2
08723 04104/92 , 04104/92
Check Totals:
479BO2000OO1078111130-Q3104
47~GO2000001087211UIR. 92 SN
Check Totals:
0000~984 04/24192 SKILLPAT S[ILLPATH, INC.
H1592 ~JlSl~ 04115R2 ~NTJ'RI6II6192IDS,C",BD
*~*' gheck'Totals:
00009985 04124192 SO [AL'2 .SO.CRIFORIilA TEL~IiDI~ CO,
34934360 04/08/92 04/08/92 714-349-3436/APR[~ BKLING
34574220 04/08/92 04/0B/92 714-34~-7422/APRK BZLL[N6
&~O.O0 0.00 ~0.00
2~4.19 Q,O0 2~4.19
~67.85 0.00 ~67.85
602,04 O.O0 602.04
297.11~ 0.0~ 797,a0
297.00 O,O0 297,00
50.83 0.00 50.83
77.47 0.00 77.47
0000~986 04124192 TARGET TARGET STORE
042092--04/20/r2
Check Totals: 128.30
~I20/.92_SI~PUES-ROTHBL~-.MY-ERAET-CL ....... -75.00 --
0.00 128.30
0.00 75.00 --
Check Totals:
00009967 04124/92 THORSGORALICIA THORSSORNE
041792 04117192 04117192 filLEASE REIROI4117192
75.00 O.O0 75.00
7.42 0.00 7.42
Ck-rk TOfalu
00009998 04/24/92 UKIGLUBE UNI6LODE BUTTERFIELD TRAVEL
042~92 04/23/92 04/23/92 A]RFARE/CTY CLRK HEETING/S006
00009989 04/24192 USC~ USCH
2PTRT,7~ _04123192
3PTRT.76 04123192
Check Totals:
04173/92 ~rle!
04/23/92 Norsal P/R, 4/23/92
7.?~ ._Q. O0 ~"'L-- -
138.00 O.OO 138.00
138.00 0.00 1~8.00
I7%71 o. Oo
122.71 O.O0 122.71
00009990 04124/92 NESTPUB
61782771
60591879 _
tIEST PUBUSHING CO~PANY
04/01/92 04101/92 PUK1CATIONS
041~I/-fi 0410119? PUBUCATTBIIS
245.42 .... 0.00___ .245J2___
64.76 O.O0 64.76
46,85_ __O.O0__ _46.85 ....
OOO09991-04124192JlISOMB_M[ZSDII,_BRAD
042192 04121192
Check IotaIs: 111.61 O.O0 111.61
04121192 REIRO.IBUSINGSS LICEI~ 35.00 O.O0 35.00
....................... Chect Totals: ......................... 35,00 .... 0.00 .... 35,00_..
00009992 04~24~92 XEROX-2 XEROX CORPORATION-BILLINS
53224574K 04101192 0327 01101/92 CREDIT HERO/OVER CH6 590.78- O.OO 590.78-
....... 957511512- 04101192 0327 OllOI/92-COPIER;~Ilfi..ETER-CHAR6ES ........ 2,958.11 ......... O.OO-, 2,958.11 .
Check Totals:
.... 00009993 04124/92 UNIGLOBE UNIGLQBE BUTTERFIELD TRAVEL
041792 04117192 04117192 TICICETS/ICNA CONFI4122-24/DD
............. Check Totals:
0000~94 05112192 NCTIGHEO JDHIt KCTIGHE i ASSDCIATES
920403CR 04/01/92 0296 10/24191STDY COST RECOVER PRO6. I~AR92
-- 920403 04116192 0296 10124191STDY COST RECOVERY PRO6. NAR
2,~77.33 0.00 2J77.3~
660.00 0.00 660,00
660,00 0.00 66U,uO
2,550.00' 0.00 2,550.00-
5,355.00 O.OO 5,355.00
Fiscal ~ear: 19~2 C~eck ~egiste~ Station:
Check Date Vendor Hue
Invoice Date P/Q Date
Description Gross
Discount Net
OOOO9995-~5ll2/-92-NEET,XQH4OHN~o-MEET,-~AI
041692 04/16/92
Check Totals:
04101/92 APPRAISAL FEE
2,805.00 0.00 2.805.00
5,500.00 0.00
00009996 05112192 IIUJ)AN
4004048
40041020
40040820
: [Imcl~Totals:
SILLDAN ASSOCIATES
04101192 04101192 DEBIT a/PLAN DIllIS
01:101192 0410)Jga-)E~!T ,qBO/JaLAN C~B&S
04101192 04101192 DEBIT HERD/PLAN CK/TE
5,501X.00 0.00 5,MO~O
2J87.~ 0.00 2J87.4!
270,04 0.00 270.04
2,7~.B5 0.00
ri-eck Totals:
-Re!mrt lotals:
5,571.~0 n. O0
3,601,210.56 O.O0 3,601,210.56
Report ~riter CHECK LIST1NG BY FUND
FUND CHECK NUHBER CHECK DATE
00! _nOOOtt52 -- 04115192
001 00009956 04124192
001 O000ftS9 04/24192
00! ~0099&~)-----04t24192
001 00009960 04/24/92
001 00009961 04124192
001 00009962 0412&192
001 00009964 04124192
00t 0000~965 041241~2
001 OO00V°,&7 011241~
001 00009968 04/24192
001 O000ttTO 04124/92
001 00009973 N/?Ue2
001 00009974 N!24192
001 00009t75 04124192
001 OOOOtt75 0e124192
001 0000~/75 04124192
001 0000t977 04124192
001 00009977 04124992
001 00009979 04124192
001 O0009tB1 04/24192
001 000099~__ ~124192
001 00009983 04124192
001 00009984 04/24192
001 00009985 04124192
001 OOOOtt85 04124192
001 00009987 04/24192
001 00009988 041241rt
001 O000tfS9 04124192
001 00009990 04124192
0(10(~DL
001 00009992 04/24/92
001 00009992 04/24/92
001--00009993
001 00009994 05/12/92
001 00009994 05112/92
001 0000tt96 0~/12/92
001 00009996 05/12/92
001
016 00009955 94121/92
016 0000~56 04122192
VENDOR HARE
016.--
019 00009963 04124192
· 019--00009966 .... -04124192
CA -SO -OF-ffiJMLFiN -OFF-ICERS
ASCOH HASLER NAILING SYSTENS
C.E.P.O.
CALIFORMION
CALIFORNIAN
CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES~ INC
CAP MAYHEM & CO_
DEPARTlENT OF TRANSPORTATION
THE FOUNOATIOU FOR CALIFDRIilA
THONAr~4IAFELI
HOLIDAY INN
Naintenance Superintendents
NIIMICIpal iqRIIT aqS]qT. OF
MOM C~ETRUCTION CORP
FINAL TOUCH MR[ET
FINR TOUCH NARtTT
FINAL TOUCH NARET
PERS E~PLOVEES' RETIREKENT
PF. RS-I~LOYEE~' RETZRENENT
POSTNASTER
RAR-CAL aANITURIAL SUPPLY
SC GI~NS
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL SAN
SKILLPATH, INC.
SD.C~LIFONNIA T~LFPHONE CU.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
ALICIA THORSBORIE
~I6LnRF I~rTERrI~ n TRAWt
USCN
EGT PUBLISHING CONPARY
WILSON, BRAD
XERDX CDRPORATIQW-BILLINS
XEROX CORPQRATIDM-BILLINS
ONIGLOE _BUTTERFIELD-3'RAVEL
,IOHM NCT[GHE & ~b'ICIATEG
,1DHN ~TIGHE & ~SDCIATES
DESCRIPTION AROU~
JOHN..P...MFET, NAT
NILLOAN ASSOCIATES
NILLOAN ASSOCIATES
-LEGISLATIVESENINARISI41~ND . -lOo.Oc
74112/12106-12130 15,0.:
CEPO CONFERENCEIGI23-BI2G OG ~75.0(
LErdkL-I)TICESFPLANNINS DEPT ........ 3~,7:
LEGAL MOTICES; CITY CLERK 61.9~
PUBLIC OFFICIAL BOND 350.00
LIABILITY CLAIN 991.~
SIONAL NAIliT 66.9~
CONFERENCEIMASTElaHI411192 12.5~
WILEAE--REIla i~.04
CCAC CONFERENSE/NOTEL/4/27/92 7G.44,
TRAINIll6 CLASS/5117/g2 ~O.OC
WFwBEI~IP
REINO. BUSINESS LICENSE 35.0C
PRONOTIONAL PROGRAR FOR CITY 1,750.0~
CHARTS;NATT-.BOAPJ)S;PRODUCTION---- 89.4:
PROMOTIONAL PROSRAN FOR CITY 12,8:I9.7~
RETIREKENT 4/4/92-4/17/92 10,2~9.54
NOrM1-PJRr-4/-23/92
9244b2 2/8/92-0~/06/92 716.8~
OPEN ACEOONT;~AMIT.SUPPLIES
POST-IIIG-.S]ONS;EULI4F. ARING*MTC--
4796020000010781/1/30-03/04
SENINAR/b/16/92/DS,CH,BB 297.0(
714~349--3436/-AP-RIL-BILLIMO
7i4-345-7422/APRIL BILLING 77.4;
NILEAGE REIHB/4/17/92
::=AIRFARE/£11CLItK_FflINO/SaJG. lx8.0(
Normal P/R, 4123192
PUBLICATIOE
REINO./BUSIMESS_LICENSE ~5.04
CREDIT IENO/OVER CHG ~80,7E
COPIER;NAINT.KETER CHARGES 2,958.11
llCETSIICfiA.CONF!4122--24100 .......... la~O.O(
STDY COST RECOVER PROS. NAR92 2,550.0(
STDY COST RECOVERY PROS. !tAR 5,355.0(
_. APPRAISALFEE ........ 5,500.0(
DEBIT KENOIPLAN CKITE 2,711.8:
DEBIT KENOIPLAN CK!8iS 2,657.4~
47,~93./:
SECURiTI-P-ACIF~C-NATL_BANK
CALIFORIIIA CURVE~, IMC
CASHIER £HECK FRSI..AILTi T_L[_ _ ___3., 500,57I
NOA 6RAMT/SEI~IC RETROFITTNS 50,000.04
.3,550,571.1:
DAVLIN
GET-PIlED
TAPE PARKS i REC. 2110192 11.3~
AD3USTED Cn_~qT-OF-LOST-PAGER .................. 50.04
019 00009969 04124192
019 00009971 04124192
019 00009972 04124192,,
019 0000997b 04/24/92
019 00009977 04/24/92
...... 019 0000997B .04/24192
019 00009979 04124192
019 00009980 04/24192
.----019--0000~83- 04/24192 .....
LEAGUE OF ANERICAN NHF. ELEN'S
NEalA, RUTH
KEIICANS, FAITH
DLSTEN TENPORARY SERVICES
PERS ENPLDYEES' RETTREKENT
PETROLANE
POSTNASTER
PRO LUCK i KEY
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
KIT DN NATIONAL BIE NONTH 7,C
REFUND CLASS CANCELLED 27.c
REFUND CLASS CANCELLED 45.C
TENP.CSD;NAINT,NORKER ME 3/29 67.8.
RETIREKENT 414192-4117192 -%465.45
FUEL (PROPANE)TCSD TRUCK 86.4:
924462 218192-03106192 53.7~
PROVIDE;INSTALL STRIKE PLATE 65.04
47980200000108721NAR. 92 SM
RepDrt ~riter
FUND CHECK NUHDER CHECK DATE
CHECK LISTINS DY FUND
VENDOR NAHE DESCRZPTION
AMOUNT
oDOOtgn/, 04/24/32 TARGET_STORE ...... SUPPLIES_MOTHERS DAY_CRAFT CL ....... 75,0~
00009989 04124192 USCM Normal P/R, 412~192 122.5S
...... 3.444,27
Check Date Vendor Nane
invoice Date PID
00010007 04127192 RANCHMTR RANCHD MATER
1046308526 02105192
1076000926 02105192
1076007816 02105192
1024500026 0;105192
1244600016 02119192
1117000926 02112192
1117025026 02112192
1117000326 02112192
1117000226 02112192
1117000126 02/12192
1150010126 0~119192
1160333116 0~!19192
0113202002 02112192
1240000226 02119192
013150111102119192
1240060026 02119192
124000970J 04102/92
011603643] 04102192
012401897a 04102192
012400020J 04102192
012401918~ 04102/92
012400090J 04/02192
012402500~ 04102192
012446500J 04102192
011050385~ 04102192
011050385K 04102192
010800151~ 04/02/92
010800151K 04102192
010770073] 04101192
010760009J 04102/92
010760009~ 04102t92
010463085~ 04102/92
010463085[ 04102192
010462000~ 04102192
010462000~ 04102192
010401080~ 04102192
010401080~ 04102192
010401069~ 04102192
010101069~ 04102192
0110503843 04102192
0110503848 04102192
011501500~ 04102192
011170001a 04102192
0II170002~ 04/02192
011170003K 04102192
011170250J 04102/92
011170405~ 04102192
011170405~ 04102192
012400015J 04102192
012400015K 04102192
011500101J 04102192
013121501~ 04/02/92
01~!21501~ 04102/92
010800012~ 041021~
01080001[ 04102192
0!2446000J 04/02/92
Date
02105192
02105192
02105192
02105192
02119192
02112192
02112192
02112192
02112/92
02112192
02119192
02119192
02112192
02119192
02119192
02/19192
04102192
04/02192
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04~02~92
04102192
04102192
04~02~92
04101192
04~02~92
04102192
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04102192
04102/92
04~02~92
04102/92
04102/92
04102192
04102192
04/02192
04102192
04102192
04~02~92
04102192
04102192
04/02t92
04102192
04~02~92
04/02192
Description
Gross
12110-01107192
I2111-01109192
12111-01109192
12109-01107192
12123191.01122192
12116191.01114192
12116191-01114192
12116191.01114192
1211&191.01114192
12116191.01114192
12119191-01117192
12119191-01117192
12117-1/14
12123191-01122192
12/23-1122
12123191.01122192
0124000970111122-2125
011603643111117-2120
012401897111122-212~
012400020211122-2125
012401918111122-2125
01240009021II22-212~
012402500111122-2125
012446500111122-212~
011050385211113-211~
01105038~212113-3117
0108000151111110-2112
0108001~1112112-3116
010770073212111-3112
01076000921119-2111
010760009212111-3112
01046308521117-217
01046308521217-3110
01046200021117-217
01046200021217-3110
01040108021117-217
01040108021217-3110
01040106921117-217
01040106921217-3110
01105038421211~-3117
0110503~4211113-2113
011501500212120412~
011170001211114-2113
011170002211114-2113
011170003211114-211~
011170250211114-2113
01117040511211~-3117
011170405111114-2113
01240001~21211~-312~
012400015211122-2125
011500101212120-~12~
013121501211122-2125
01312150!212125-3126
01080001212112-3116
010800001211117-2112
012446000U2125-~/25
293.30-
16L77-
522.20-
537.84-
256.45-
222.11-
173.17-
221.11-
116.10-
94.94-
410.70-
229.6F
74.10-
144.45-
99,95-
102.81-
64.00
38.92
31.68
78.49
706,88
23~.34
122.81
55.90
14.47
40.35
19.28
10.36
85.32
28.99
~28.74
78.91
24.87
30.13
4,61
11.05
10.70
11,05
12.39
92.29
57.91
236J2
187.74
292.09
198.18
9.59
68.11
31,70
56.10
202,73
80.03
35.62
60.33
91.10
28.08
Discount
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
0.00
O.O0
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
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
Net
293,-~-
522.20-
537.84-
256.45-
222.11-
173.17-
221.il-
116,10-
94.94-
410.70-
229.67-
74.10-
144.45-
99.95-
102.81-
64,00
40.52
38.92
31.68
78,49
706.88
238.34
122.81
55.90
14,47
l~.,d
10.36
85.32
28.~
128,74
78.91
24.87
4.&l
11.05
10.70
11.05
i2.39
92,29
57,91
236.12
187.74
292,09
198.18
9.59
6~.11
31.70
56.10
202.73
60.33
91.10
28,08
Fiscal Year: 19~2 gheck Register
Check Date Vendor Nan
Invoice Date PIG Date Description Gross Discount Net
0124460001C 04/02192 04/02/92 01244&000111122-2125 484.22 0.00 484.22
0115000100 04102192 04/02/92 0115000101211117-2120 252.31 0.00 252.31
011&033310 04115t92 04/02192 011~0~31112120-~!23 15,2& 0.00 15.2~
011&05~311C 04102192 04/02192 01160~311II117-2120 9,21 0.00 9.21
0124000020 04102192 04102192 012400002211122-2125 49.87 0.00 49.87
0124000021C 04102/92 04102192 01240002212125-3125 27,02 0.00 27.02
0115015001C 04t02/92 04102192 011501500211117-2120 31.&8 0.00
0111700090- 04102192 04102192 011170009211114-2113 47.23 0.00 47.23
011170009K 04102192 04102192 01117000921211~-3117 ~2.73 0.00 ~2.73
0124465001C 04t02192 04102192~ 012446500112125-3125 9.43- 0.00 9.43-
0111702501C 04102192 04/02192 011170250212113-~1i7 23.30- 0.00 23.30'-
0111700033 04102192 04~02~92 011170003212113-3117 ~.62- 0.00 3.~2-
0111700021C 04102192 04102/92 01117000221211~-3117 8,57- 0.00 8.57-
0111700011C 04t02192 04102192 01~70001212113-3117 7.58- 0.00 7,58-
010770073K 04102192 04/02192 010TIOOT3211R-2111 0.26- 0,00 0.26-
0107600770 04/02192 04102/92 01076007711119-2111 230.97 0.00 230.97
010245000~ 04f02192 04~02~92 01024500021117-216 137.15 0,00
010245000~ 04102192 04102/92 01024500021216-319 78.83 0.00 78,8~
0107600780 04/02192 04102/92 01076007811119-2111 192.49 O.OO 192.49
0124006003 041:02/92 04102/92 012400600212125-3125 23.75 0.00 23.75
012400600K 041!02/92 04/02/92 012400600211122'2125 45.14 0.00 45.14
0124007'320 04102/92 04102192 012400732211122-2125 97.46 0.00 97,46
0124007321C 04102192 04/02/92 012400732212125'3125 32.99 0.00 32.99
010&279003 04/02/92 04102/92 01062790021119-2111 27.54 0.00 27.54
010627900~ 04[02192 04/02/92 010627900212111-~112 b.55 0.00
0113202000 04/02/92 04/02/92 011320200211114-2114 1,045.62 0.00 ~045.62
011320200K 04/02192 04102t92 011320200212114-~118 452.40 0.00 452.40
011~200000 04/62192 04/02192 011320000212114-3118 16.~ 0.00
011320000K 04/02192 04102192 011320000211114-2114 39.2~ 0.00 39.23
0107600781C 041021f2 04/02192 010760078112111-3112 24.98- 0.00 24.~tt-
0107600771C 04fi)2/92 04102192 010760077112111-3112 24.98- 0.00 24.98-
0106272000 04/02192 04t02/92 01062720051119-2111 45.28 0.00 45.28
0106272001C 01102192 04/02/92 010627200312111-~112 11.97 0.00 11.97
010414511~ 04102/92 04102/92 01041451101117-217 17.11 0.00 17.11
010414511[ 04102/92 04/02/92 01041451101217-3110 6.95 0.00 6.95
0104040150 041021r2 04102/92 01040401511117-217 40.15 0.00 40.15
010404015~ 04102192 04102/92 01040401511217-~110 9.42 0.00 9.42
0115030100 041021~2 04102192 011503010111117-2120 50.90 0.00 50.90
01150~010~ 04102192 04102192 01150~010112120-312~ 27.10 0.00 27.10
Check Totals: 3,4~.95 0.00 3,433.95
00010009 04/27/92 SOCAEDST SINTHERll CALIF. EDISON
4307765063 04181192 04101192 2/29-3131 22.04 0.00 22.04
4~07753500 04101192 04101192 2/29-3131 19.68 0.00 19.68
4307753470 04101/92 04101192 2129-3/~1 83.66 0.00 83.66
430775270,T 04101192 04101/92 2129-~/51 25.00 0.00 25.00
4307753420 04101192 04101192 2/29-~131 26.24 0.00 26.24
430775161J 04101/92 04/01192 2/29-3131 25.~0 0.00 25.30
4307713830 04101192 04101/92 2129-3131 25.72 0.00 25.72
430775157,] 04101/92 04/01/92 2/29-~/~1 27.~6 0.00 27.36
4~077515G~ 04101/92 04101192 2/29-~I~1 28.64 0.00 28.64
4S0775159~ 04101/92 04/01/~2 2129-~/~1 28.85 0.00 28.85
430775160; 04101192 04/01/92 2129-3131 27.74 0.00 27.74
430775162~ 04/01/92 04/01192 2129-~/~I 27.90 0.00 27.90
4S0775185~ 04101/92 04101/92 2/29-3/~! 28.45 0.00 29.45
4~07752&9~ 04101/92 04/01/92 2129-3/31 2&.49 0.00 2&.49
430771467~ 04/01/~2 04101192 2/29-~/~1 15.68 0.00 15,6B
~,~,/~
Fiscal Year: 1992
Check
Date Vendor
Invoice Date
430776500j 04:101/92
430775105J 04:101192
4307714653 04J01192
430771466J 0&101192
430775&OOJ 0&101192
~07752003 04101192
Nale
PIO
Date
04101192 2/29-3131
04101192 2/29-3131
04101192 2129-~131
04101192 2/29-~!31
04101192 3101-~/31
04101192
Check Register
hscr~pt~on
Discount
27.23
49.99
26,16
14,27
3,320.36
8,177.92
Check Totals:
00010012 04127192 SOUTHCE) ~UTHEON CALIF EDISON
519050101~ 04103192 04~03~92 51TI905010102000312126-3130
538131120J 04107192 04107/92 313-411
538132104~ 04107192 04107192 313-411
5512&0500~ 041~192 04109192 315..413
&{)41110933 04116192 04116192 3/11-4110
&04117470~ 0411&192 04116192 3111-4110
· 551267901~ 04109192 04109192
597994083J 04115/92 04/15/92 3111-4/08
538061811~ 04/07/92 04/07/92 3/3-411
5960554233 04/15/92 04/15192 3110-.4/09
.V,82864043 04/08/92 04/08192 314-4/1
597992504J 04/15/92 04/15/92 3/11-4/08
5482665033 04108/92 04/08192 ~!04-04101
538006659J 04/07192 04/07/92 03/03-04101
5380062333 04/07/92 04107192 3/03-04/01
575650~34J 04/IS/92 04/13/~ 3/6-416
5711802~ 04/13/92 04/13/92
597993303~ 04/15/92 04115/92 3/11-4/08
575663~24~ 04/13/92 04/1~/92 ~!6-41&
519055796J 04/08/92 04/08/92 2/28-3/30
548286505,104/06/92 04/08/92 314-4/1
519050812~ 04103/92 04/03/92 2/28-3/30
5756567013 04/I~/92 04/13/92
598051021J 04/15/92 04/15/92 3/11-4/09
597992338~ 04/15/92 04/15192 03111-04/~
598025414~ 04/15/92 04/15/92 3110-4/09
597994085~ 04/15/92 04/15192 3/11-4/08
604111094J 04/1~/92 04/16/92 3111-4/10
6041102553 04/16192 04/1~/92 3/11-4/10
604117649J 04/16/92 04/16/92 3111-4/10
6041100113 04/16/92 04/16/92 3/11-4/10
577802489~ 04/13/92 04/13/92
577808742~ 04/13/92 04/13/92 3/09-4/06
577808740J 04/13192 04/13/92 3/9-4/6
538133201~ 04/07/92 04/07192 3/03-4/0I
538001401J 04107192 04/07/92 3/03-4/01
536509301~ 04/07/92 04/07/92 3/02-4/01
519051802~ 04/03/92 04/03/92 2/26-3/30
519059001J 04/031T2 04/03192 2/28-3/30
617816~1~ 04/01/92 04/01/92 2/2~-3/24
5941600803 04/15/92 04/15R2 3/10-4/08
5941~4505J 04/15/92 04/15/92 3/10-4/06
~941~2~0N 04/151~2 04/!5/92 3/10-4/08
&TBa~9414J 04/01/92 04/01/92 2/21-3/20
567551975J 04110/92 04/10/92 $/06-4/0~
12~054.70
7L 16
1,144.69
IJ25.57
8.70
9.00
9.00
8.79
27.00
2.47
B,74
6,40
8.48
8.78
8,76
9.30
9
8.40
40.55
9.38
8.AB
9.38
9,30
8.70
8,40
10.10
8,99
9.00
9.00
9.00
9,00
8.40
8.40
8.40
177.~3
311
19&.06
68.65
272
241.57
175.29
24&.23
166.~9
242.74
40,20
Check Totats:
00010013 04127192 STATECON STATE CONPENSATiON INS. FUND
4,622.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
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
0.00
0.~
0.00
O.O0
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
O.OO
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0,00
Statzon: :~6~
Net
27.23
14.27
~,~20.38
8,177.92
12~054.70
73.16
1,144.&9
1~125.57
8.70
9.00
9 .GO
B .79
27.00
2.47
9.00
8.74
8.40
8.48
8.78
8.78
9.30
9
4C
9
8.48
9.38
9
8,70
8.40
10.10
B .89
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
8.40
8.40
8.40
177.53
196.06
68.65
272.33
241.57
175.29
246.23
188.6~
4~,...,~
4,822.78
Fiscal year: 1992
Chec~
Date Vendor
Invoice ~ate
Name
P/O
5WKCL.71 05i12/92
5WKMA.71 0~!!2/92
3NKOT.71 03i12/92
~i[CL.72 03/16/92
3NKCL.7~ 03126192
~ilk'~.75 05i26/92
$NEOT.~ 0~/26192
Check Register
Date Descri=tion
0~I12/92 Normal Payroll
0~/12/92 Normal Payroll
03/12/92 Normal Payroll
0~/10/92 Void/~anual Check
0~/26/92 Normal P/R 5/26/92
05/26192 Normal PIR 5126192
05/26/92 Normal P/R ~/26/92
Check Totals:
Report Totals:
Discount
Station:
Net
265,42 0.00 2&3,42
~,007.B8 0.00 Z.007.88
725.09 0.00 725.09
10.&2 0.00 10.62
275.49 0.00 27'3.49
2,678.~8 0.00 2,678.38
795.1S 0.00 795,13
7,754.01
28,065.44
0.00 7,754.01
0.00 2B,065.44
Report Mriter CHECK LISTING ~Y FUND
FUND CHECK NUHBER
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013 -
001 00010013
001' 0001001:$
t)01 000104)1:$
001 00010013
001 00010013
001 00010013
0010001001:$
001 00010013
001 000104)13
001 00010013
001 0001001:$
001 00010013
001
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 0001004)7
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
019 00010007
CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAE
DESCRIPTION
04127/92
04127192
04127192
04127192
04/27192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127/92
04127192
04127/92
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04127192
STATE CDRPENSATZDN INS, FUND
STATE COMPElSAT/ON INS, FUND
STATE CORPENSATION INS. FUND
STAT~ COMPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CORPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE COMPENSATION INS, FUND
STATE CO liPEIISATIUN INS. FUI8)
STATE CO~PBSATION INS. FUND
STATE ~EIISATIUN IllS. FUND
STATE C~PEIISATION INS. FUND
STATE CO!~PBGATION INS. FUND
STATE COMPENSATION INS. F~
STATE CUNPBISATION INS. FIJ!I!)
STA~ CONPEN~TION INS. FUNS
STATE ~STION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATIUN INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND
Normal PIR :$126192
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR 3126192
VoidlRanual Check
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR M26192
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR :$126192
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR 3126192
Norul Payroll
Normal PIR 3126192
Normal Payroll
Normal PIR :$126192
Normal Payroll
Normal P/R 3126192
Noroal Payroll
04/27/92
04127/92
04127192
04/27/92
04/27192
04/27192
04/27192
04127192
04/27192
04127192
04127/92
04/27192
04/27192
04127192
04/27192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04/27192
04127192
04127192
04127192
04/27192
04/27R2
04127192
04/27192
04127/f2
04127192
04127/f2
04/27/92
04127/f2
04127/~
04/27/92
04127/~
04/27/9'2
RANCHO lATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCliO MATER
RANCHO WATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHD NATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RAMCHO MATER
RANCHD MATER
RANCHO MATER
R~CNO WATER
RANCHO WATER
RAWCHO WATER
RANCtlO WATER
RANCliO WATER
RANCHO WATER
RANCHD MATER
RANCHO WATER
RA~CHD MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
R~NCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
011170001211114-2115
12119191-01117192
011603331111117-2120
010760077112111-3112
011170009211114-2113
01076007711119-2111
01117000321211~-M17
011170405111114-2/1:$
013121501212125-3126
01046200021217-3110
01090001212112-$116
012400600212125-:$123
1212:$-1122
010627200:$1119-2111
012401918111122-2125
011050:$8421211:$-:$117
0104010&921117-217
01040401511117-217
12116191-01114192
0104&308521117-217
12123191-01122192
012400732211122-2125
011170003211114-2115
01040108021117-217
01041451101217-:$110
0108000151111110-2112
0124007:$2212125-:$125
011170250212113-3117
01160~1112120-~123
011170405112113-3117
01046200021117-217
01150010!212120-:$12:$
01024~00021117-216
011050;~85211113-2113
01160:$643111117-2120
0108000012!II17-2/12
A~OUNT
B3.62
1:$5.95
10.62
202.70
37.50
~70.7:
1.29.87
4.54
&52.4~
~O,6L
4.5~
996
349,t~
486,2~
5~240.01
2~6.1:
229
9,2:
24.9!
47.2:
~ 230. t:
68,1:
35,6:
30,1:
60,3:
2:$ ,7'.
99,9!
45,21
7B,4'
12,3*
10.7,
40.1
94.9
128,7
144,4
97,4
292,0
4,6
4~
2:.:
1:.-
24
"'~
55,9
4C.5
Re;oft ~iter
CNEC[ LISTING BY FUND
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHEC[ DATE VENDOR NAE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
019 00010007 '04127192 RANCHD MATER 01240002212125-3125
019 00010007 04/27/92 RANCHD MATER 12/10-01107192
/"019 00010007 0¢127192 RANCHO MATER 012446500112125"3125
019 00010007 04127192 RANClIO MATER 01046308521217-3110 7B.91
019 00010007 04127R2 RANCHO MATER 011170250211114-2113 19B.IS
019 00010007 04127/92 RAKCHO MATER 01170001212113-3117 7.5~-
019 00010007 - 04127192 RANCHO MATER 1211&R1-01114192 222,11-
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 12109-01107192 55'7.84*
019 00010007 0ql27t92 RAMCHO MATER 011050385212113-3117 14,47
019 00010007 041271t2 RAIlClIO MATER 01076000921119-2111 85.32
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCttB MATER 011~20200211/14-2/14 1,0~.&2
019 00010007 0(/27192 RANClIO MATER 12123191-011221¶2 102.81-
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 012~00015211122-2125 ~.10
019 00010007 0¢127192 RANCHO MATER 011170002212113-3117 R,57-
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATEE 012400090211122-2125 7~.8B
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 012402500111/22-2125 238.34
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHD MATER 01040108021217-3110 11,05
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 010~0106921217-3110 IL05
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 011170009212113-3117 32,73
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 12116191-0111~192 116.10-
019 00010007 04127R2 RAMCMO MATER 011501500211117-2120 31.bB
019 00010007 04127R2 RANCHO MATER 01244&000112/25-3125 28.0~
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 012400015212115-~125 31.70
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 0104145110/II7-217 17,11
019 00010007 04/27R2 RANCHO MATER 011050384211113-2113 92.2~
019 00010007 04/27/92 RANCHO MATER 12111-01109192 522.20
019 00010007 04127/92 RANCliO MATER 011320200212114-~118
~ 019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 012~&500111122-2125 122.81
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 012400&00211122-2125 45.14
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 012400020211122-2125
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 010800151112112-$11~ 1~,2B
0IV 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 0~2~000970111122-2125
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 12119191-01117192 410,7C'
019 00010007 04/27192 RANClIO MATER 0115000101211117-2120 252.31
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 011170002211114-2113 187.TI
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 010&27200~12111-~112 11,9;
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 1211&191-01114192 221.11
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 01062790021119-2111 27.5~
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 010770073211/9-2111 0.2~
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 010770073212111-3112 10.3~
019 00010007 04/27R2 RANCHO MATER 01150~010111117-2120 50.9(
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 12/17-1/14 74,1(
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 013121501211122-2125 80.0~
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 12/23191-01/221r2 25b.4~
019 00010007 04/27192 RNICHO MATER 011~20000212114-~118
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 011501500212120-3/23
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 12116191-01114192 17:,I'
019 00010007 04/271f2 RANCHO MATER 01040401511217-3110
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 011320000211114-2114 39.2*
019 00010007 04/27/f2" RANCHO MATER 010760078112111-3112 24,9
019 00010007 04/27192 RANCHO MATER 012446000111122-2125 4B~.2
01~ 00010007 04/27/92 RANCHO MATER 011503010112120-3/23 27,1
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 012400002211122-2125
~"" 019 00010007 04/27/f2 RANCHO MATER 0107b007811119-2111
019 00010007 04/27R2 RANCHO MATER 12111-01109192 1&5,7
019 00010007 04/27/92 RANCHO MATER 0102450002121b-319
019 00010007 04/27/92 RANCHO MATER 012qO1897111122-2125 3S.q
019 00010007 04127192 RANCHO MATER 0107&000921211!-3112 28.9
Report iriter CHECK LISTIN6 BY FUHD S~;isn:
FUND CHECK N~DER CHECK DATE VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
019 00010007 04127/92
019 00010009 04127192
019 00010009 04/27192
019 00010009 04127192
019 00010009 04127192
019 00010009 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127/92
019 00010012 04127/92
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127/92
019 00010012
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04/27192
019 00010012 04/27192
019 00010012 04/27192
019 00010012 04127182
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127/92
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127/92
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04/27192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04/27192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010012 04127192
019 00010013 04/27192
019 00010013 04/27/92
019 00010013 04/27/92
019 00010013 04/27/92
RAMCHO MATER
SOUTHERN CALIF. EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL]F. EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF. EDISON
SOUTHERIe CALIF, EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF. EDZSON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL]F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISOII
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN rilLIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAUF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
STATE C~PENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CDHPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE COHPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND
010627900212111-3112
2129-1111 ~41,19
1/01-~/~1
2129-3131
3111-4110 9,0~
310~-4101
~14-4/1 8.74
3/11-4/10
~110-4108 188.99
3110-4/09 10.10
315-418 8,79
5177905010102000~/2/284/38 73,16
;/04-04/01 8.48
2/26-~/24 241.57
3/11-4/10
03111-04/08 8.40
316-4/6
2/29-~/$0 68.65
$109-4106 8.40
~106-4106 40.20
3/11-4/0B 27.~
0~/0~-04101 8.78
~/11-410B 8.89
$/01-4/01 177.5~
~110-4109 9,00
2/28-3/30
3/11-410B 8.40
3/11-4/10 9.00
$/4-4/I 8.48
~/08-04/01 8.78
$/~-4/1 1,144.69
~/I1-4/10 9.00
3/02-4/01
~/~-4/1 2.47
2/264/$0
~/10-4/08 175.29
~19-416 8.40
3/11-4/0~ 8.70
316-416
2/2B-3/~0 272.~
2/214/20 242.74
3/5-411 6.70
~/3-4/1 1,125.57
$/11-4/10 9.00
3110-4/04 246.28
3/11-4/08 8.40
3/9-4/06 8,4C
~/0&-4/06
~16-41& 40.~
Normal Payroll
Norm;l P/R 3/26/92 461.00
Normal Payroll -~754.70
Norsa! P/R 3126/92 ~27.E5
019 22~825,~b
Fiscal Yesr: 1792 8hec~ Re;~ster 8~i~o~: ;~::
Check
Date Vendor
Invoice Date
;XKCL.71 Q;IZ2R2
$t[RA.71 0~/~2/92
~IKCL.72
31KCL.T~ 0Ii2&192
~IK~A,7$ 031261t2
~XtQT.73 e3/26/92
Date Descri~tiDn
0~112R2 Norlsl hyroll
0]112192 NQFItZ Payroll
0]/12192 Normal Payroll
0~/10192 VoidlRanBil Check
0S/26192 Norel PIR ~1261~2
0]126192 Norul PIR ~!2~192
0~/26192 Norill P/R ~12~R2
Check Totals=
Reeort Totals=
6ross
Discount
Net
2a5,42 0,00
3,O07.BB 0.00 S,007.B9
725.09 0.00 725.09
10.62 0.00 tO.&2
271.49 0.00
2,678.38 O.O0 2,679.38
795.13 0.00 795.I3
7,75L01
29,065.44
0.00 7,754.01
O.OO 28,065.44
Fiscal Year: 19~2
Check Date Vendor
lnvoice Date
3NKCL.71 03/12R2
3N~A.71 03/!2R2
3NKOT.7! 03112192
311~CL.72 03110R2
31ICL.73 03126192
~,73 031261~2
3~[0%73 031261~2
Chec~ Register
Name
P/D
Descrintion
05112R2 Normal Payroll
0~/12R2 Normal Payroll
03/12/~2 Normal Payroll
0~/10R2 VoLdl~anual Chect
031261~2 Normal PIR 3126192
031261"/2 Norell P/R 3126192
G~126192 Mormal PIR 3126192
Chec~ Totals:
Report Totals:
Discount
Net
263,42 O,O0 2~-~2
5,007.88 0.00 5.G aS
725.09 0.00 725.09
10.62 O.O0 10.62
275.49 0.00 273.49
2,678.38 0.00 2,678.38
795.15 0.00 795.1~
7,754.01
28,065.44
0.00 7,754.0i
0.00 28,065.44
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice D&te PIO Date Description 8ross
~00009997 04/29!92 BENEFIT BENEFIT AMERICA
042992 04129192 04/29t92 4115192 WED REIP~/& DEPD CARE 5,102.58 0.00 5,I02.58
Check Totals: 5,102.58 0.00 S.102.58
00009998 04/50R2 DICKNELL DICKNELL TRAVEL CENTER
H1~92 H/-t~/92-- Htt7Y92-CSFHO/NAY-4t~O.,-NO 256.00 ....... 0.00 ........... 25~.00
Check Totals: 25&.00 0.00 25&.00
O00e~tB~r-04R~!9~L-ffi~H&ST-BJNeH-&-ST'UFF CATERING
7G&421 H/22/92 1154~ 04122192 BOX LUNCHES;BENEFIT FAIR 11~,00 0,00 119.00
042992 ~4/29/92 04/29/92 CRC CD~NITTEE ~5.25 0.00 35.25
042-792 fi/27R2 09~27/:92 DINNER COUNCIL
---~O010014-04/.$O/92-INLANDB,t--INLAND-ENPIRE-BUSINESS-- --
O42492 04/24/92 04/25/92
Check Totals: 2~4.25 0.00 254.25
SEMINAR/NAY 15/LB~DU 158.00 0.00 158.00
._./---
----Check-Totals: ...........
O001001& 04/~0/92 INTERENA INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
045092 04/~0/92 04150192 iST GTR PR TAX
00010020 05/01192 ALLIED ALLIED BARRICADE
--122151-00-04/10t92--0~5E
122189-00 04114192 0559
122190-00 04/14R2 0~58
Check Totals:
-158.00 ...... 0.00 ......... !58.00
29.G& 0.00 29.Bb
29,86 0.00 29.G~
02tt3R2' BATTERIES-FDR-tARRICADS .............. 369.59 ............. 0~00
02/15/92 BATTERIES FOR BARRICADES 74.89 0.00
02113/92 BATTERIES FDR BARRICADES 29.09 0.00
Check Totals: 475.57
--12.00--
00010021 05/01192 AMERIRED AMERICAN RED CROSS
042192 04/2-t192 04121~92--ANNLIAL-MEETtNG-&~NNIVERSARY.
-- 369~59 ....
74.89
29.09
0.00 47~.57
0.00 ........ 12.00-- -
Check Totals:
--O001~022-05fQIt92-AREA-'D"-AREA-.D~-OFFICE.OFENERBENCy
042892 04/28192 04128/92 GENINARISI1U9210H
12.00 0.00 12.00
50.00 0.00 50.00
Check--Totals:
00010023 05/01/92 ARNA ARNA INTERNATIONAL
042392 04/23/92 04/2U92 ANNUAL mEMBERSHIP DUES 100.00
Check Totals: 100.00
00010024 05/01R2 BOYS&GIR BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF TEECULA
.... 042792---04/27192 04127t92-CSF-FUNDING -- - 20,000.00
50,00 .............
O.O0 lOO.O0
0.00 100.00
· 0.00 .... 20,000.00
Check Totals:
.... 00010025 05/01/92 CALIFORNCALIFORNIAN .......
42292 04/23/92 10941 10/02/91 LEGAL NOTICES; CITY CLERK
022992-2 04/01/92 10920 10/02/91ADV.EMPLOYNENT POSITIDNS~H.R.
................ 035192-I-- 04t01/92 10920 10/02t91ADV.E~LOYNENI POSITIONS~H.R.
20,000.00 0.00 20,000,00
26.53 0.00 26.55
52,4~ 0,00 52,4~
25.20 ................0.00 .......... 25.20
00010026 05/01192 CALNEST
0807~2A
Check Totals:
CAL NEST RENTAL CENTER
04/IA/~2 11499 05/5iI92 RENTAL DF ABUAR:C,I.P, POSTS
Check Totals:
00010027 0510!192 CAMPBELL CAMPBELLS LIGHTING, BIGN/ELEC
15855 04/0!I92 115&5 03102192 LIGHTS;SPORTS PARK:T~SD
13855-2 04f17/92 11550 04t!7t92 INSTALL LIBHTS~SPORTS PAR[
105,96 0,00 103.96
84.90 0.00 84.90
84.90 6.00 84,90
425.00 0.00 425,00
212.50 O.O0 212.56
Fiscal Year: 1992
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date PIO Date Description
Discount
Check Totals:
----00010028 05/0!!92 CHAPMAN--CHAPNAN.UNIVERSITY
042592 04125It2 04125192 CONFI61819212 P13LICE
6;7.50
456.00
0.00
0.00
436.00
Chec~
00010029 05/01/92 CITICORP CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
128697 05101192 0285 07101191 ;PHUNE SYSTEM
MAY GERV.
436.00
1,427,57
0.00
1,427.57
000100S0 05/01/92 COBB THE COBB GROUP
042092 0{120R2
Check Totals: 1,427.57
04.t20,'t2-SUBBGR]U-tON-RENBIAL~WRFt-PERF 61T5-7
0.00
0~00
1,427.57
Check Totals:
O0~)-*OOSi~5t01,~9~C-OPYL-INE-COPV-L-iN~CORPORATION
78065cr 04101192 11364 02124/92 CR~IT MEMO
78065 04101192 11564 02~24~92 CLEANING UNIT;FAX MACHINE
Check Totals:
000100~2 05/0~192 COUNTYPU COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIER
----~!83S0 .~ 03t~tt92 .... O;t-~IR2-CItI~DIT-ON-SUPPLIES ................. 4~.~2
144231 04/I0/92 ~340 03/03192 FOLDERS;GLUE STICKS~LCAD 57.45
14~2~0 04/10/92 125~8 03/05/92 PENS;PENCILS;PUSH PINS;SHEARS 151.B0
144257 04t11-192-t1~4~ .....031O3t92~OL~RS;EUE-SHG[S:Lc~-- '24i~68--
65.57 0.00 45.57
359.90- 0.00
420,92 0.00
B1.02 0.00
339.90-
420.92
B1.02
-0.00 .... 46.42-
0.00 57.45
0.00 i3!.B0
· ~0-- 241,68-- -
000100S3-05/01/92-DAVLIN---DAVLIN
042792 04/01/92 11297
Check Totals: 384.51 0.00 384.51
03131192 AUDIO TAPE;TRAFFIC COMM.MTGS, 1S0,00 0,00 l~U,uO
Check-Totals:--- --130.00
00010034 05/01!92 6LENNIES 6LENN[EB OFFICE PRODUCTS
105612-0 S411~192 11342
406828-G ~4t20192.-1t342
10SeSS-0 S4/17/92 11514
10~075-0 e4/02/92 114~6
10407g-0.---H/06/92-tl~2 -
105076-0 04/02/9'2 114S7
I0561~-0 H/1~/92 11342
t0307~-O--HtOl/92-!14~B .... O3/24/92-OFFICPSUPPL~EBr TCBD
106906 04117192 11507 04/10/92 ROLL FILES;PUBLIC WORKS
03/0Sl92 OPEN P,O. FOR NISC, ITENS
- 03t03R2-OPEN-P,-O.-FOR-HISC;-ITEMS
04/17192 NISC,ITENS;OPEN ACCOUNT
05/24t92 OFFICE SUPPLIES; TCSD
03tO3R2-OPEN-P,-O.--FOR-NISC~---]TEMS
03/24t92 0FFZCE SUPPLIES; TCSD
03/03192 OPEN P.O. FOR NISC. ITEMS
18.52
5,43.
131.99
57.87
-153.54
136.68
9.26
t09~02-
75.16
.0.00 .......... 130,00 ....
0.00 18,52
0,00 131,99
0.00 57.87
---0,-00 -*t5~.54 .....
0.00 136.&8
0.00 9.26
0;00 409.02---
O.O0 75,16
000100S5 05101192 BREEKHAR GREEK, HAROLD F.
040192 04106192 0~82
04106/92
000100~4 05/01R2 GTEBILL GTE
-- 1625595K .... 04116192 ........ 04116/92
1626043K 04/16/92 04116!92
69986~2K 04107192 04~07~92
...... 6990128K 04/25/92 04/25192
Check-Totals{-- 696,47 --0.00 696,47 ....
REVIEW LANDSCAPE PLANS 500.00 0,00 500,00
Check Totals: 500.00 0.00 500.00
714-162-55951APRIL-t6 BILL ........... S79.10 ............. 0.00
71FI62-6043/APRIL 16 BILL 5,241.06 0.00
7!4-699-86~2/APRIL 7 BILLING 17.48 0.00
714-69~0128/APRIL 25 BILL 570.75 0.00
Check Totals:
00010037 05/0!/92 HERITAEE HERITABE MOBILE HOME ESTATES
042292 04122192 04/22/92 REFUND OF ASSESSMENTS
4,208,39 0,00
5,255,84 0,00
379.10
~J41.06
17.48
570,75
4.2~ ~
5,255.84
" ' Check Totals: 5,255.84 0.00 5J55.84
Check )ate VenOor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description Gross Discount Net
00010038 05101/92 HORIZON HORIZON WATER
~-- 040192 04/01/92 04/01/92 WATER CHB
Check Totals:
00010039 05/01R2 INLANDCA INLAND CALL AMERICA
H1792 0~/17/92 0U01/9~118-4/I? )ELS
42.78 0.00 42,78
42.78 0,00 42.78
1:588.39 O.tX) ---1:588.39----
000~4(he510}/92-~1tI~ LANtER-VOICE-PRODUCTC
022277703 04/01/92 04101i92
Check Totals:
DESKTOP P148
1,588.39 0.00 1,588.39
128.00 0,00 128,00
, Chec-k--To~ats=
00010041 05101192 LEWISVLY LEWIS VALLEY CONTRACTORS INC,
5515 N101192 0152 031Ill92 RESTDRATIONiRE~VAL SEDIHENT
Check Totals:
00010042 05/01/92 LONGSORU LONGS DRUGS
--.-4179 ..... 04120t92 ~t488 04102192FtL~-PRINTIN6 ~CCOUNi;TCSD
t28.-0~
5,864.10
5,864.30
5.59
O,O0 128,00 .....
0,00 5,864.30
0,00 5,964.30
0.00 ........... 3,59
----O0010043-05/OtR2-NARIbYNS-NARILYNtS-COFFEE-GERVICE
2069
2034
2083
2021
2092
2105--
Check Totals:
04117192 11533 04117!92 COFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL
04/17/92 11533 04/17192 COFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL
04~-1-7t92-H5~3 04tt~t92-C~-gERVTcCEtCITV-HAL~
04/01/92 11413 03116192 COFFEE GUPPL!ES;CITY HALL
04120192 11533 04/17192 COFFEE SERVICE)CITY HALL
04127t9241~ 044~92-COFFEE-~RVtCE~CITY HAL~
O00&OO44-OS/OLL92~ISCO 'NISCO
00964537 04108192 11463
00964538 04108/92 11463
3.59 0.00 3.59
36.45 0.00 56.45
83,62 0.00 85.62
85,~1 0~00-- --'85191-----
97.43 0.00 97.43
76.27 0.00 76.27
---55.~6- 0~00-- 55,96
Check Totals: 435,64
04/02192 CERTIFIED TAPE;ORBANIZER;T,H. IB0.79
04/02/92 CERTIFIED TAPE;ORGANIZER)T,H. 269.27
0.00 435.64
0,00 180.79
0.00 269,27
Check IotaIs: 450,06
00010045 05/01/92 NATASSQC NAT'L AGSOC OF STATE FORESTER
277t 04101R2-t0822 09/O~91-~OO/S;SONG--GHEETS;PENCIL;FIRE ...... 576,46-
0.00 450.06
~,00 -576.46 .....
Check Totals: 576,46
O0(FDO4&-OSIO1R2-NODELCON-R4-NOBEL-COHPANy
1441 04101192 0276 10/09191RETENTIDNI11114191 DILLINS 7,055,00
0,00 576,46
0,00 7,055,00
Check-Totals: 7~055,00--
00010047 05/01/92 PAYLESS PAYLESS DRUB STORES
1501 M!23192 11031 10111191 FILM PROCESSING;S&S!24EXPOSUR 39,76
0,00 7,055,00-----
0.00 I9.76
00010048 05/01192 PETROLAN PETRDLANE
502891 05t20t92-10994.
Check Totals: 39,76 0,00 39,76
IO/21/91-FUEE--(PRDPANE)~B&S-TRUCK ............. 98.14 ............ -0.00 ............ 98.14 ....
Check Totals:
00010049 05101/92 PLANNING THE PLANNING CENTER
16085 04/01/~2 0375 0~/26172 A~END~ENT TO CDIO271
15960 04/01/92 0375 05126192 A~END~ENT TO CD~0271
15678 04t01t~2 0375 03/26/92 A~END~ENT TO COiC27i
98,14 0.00 98.14
20,004.36 0,00 20,004.~6
~'~ 4o~ o~ O.OO
4%398.C0 0.00
Check Totals:
99,896.29 0.00 99.99&.29
........ 000!005005101/92 PDSTHAST-POSTNASTER
Check Date VenOor
invoice Date
Name
P/O
Date Description
040392J 04/05/92
04/05/92 3107-41031924462
00010051 05/01/92 PROLOCK
2881
...................... Check-Totals: -
PRO LOCI & KEY
04114192 11461 04/01/92 CONNUNITY SERVICES;ACCOUNT
171.25
i71;25
3.23
Discount Net
0.00 171.25
--O~Oe- t7i;25-
0.00 3.25
Check Totals:
00010052 05101/92 gUALITY QUALITY TONER SUPPLY
t024-----~4123/92 11503 041OBt92-RECHARGE-TONER-CARTRI!IE~
1023 04109192 11503 04/09192 RECHARGE TONER CARTRIDGES
1022 04109192 11503 04109192 RECHARGE TONER CARTRIDGES
~.23 0.00 3.23
75.~ O~)O
150,00 0,00 150,00
294,00 0.00 294.00
00010053 05/01192 RAHSEY
qS~
Check Totals:
RANSEY BACKFLON & PLYSING
0410Y924145t.. O$t2$R~-~ACKFLOM-TEST.tNG;TCSD--
519.00
--1t5.00
0.00 519.00
· .00 ....... I15.00-
--.00010054-05101t92 RAN-CAL--RAN-CAL-4ANITORIAD-SUPP~Y-
5060
49G~L--
5101
5056
Check Totals: i15,00
04/07/92 10898 I0/01t91JANI.SUPPLIEE;PARK FACIL.TCSD 22,21
04117192 11421 05120192 OPEN A~OUNT;JANIT.SUPPLIE8 84,01
04t01t92-I0898 .... 1010119t- ~ANI.SUPPLIES;PAR~ FACI~,TCSD ........ 91.29 ......
04/21/92 10898 10/01t91 ~ANI.SUPPLIES;PARK FACIL.TCSD 35.70
04106192 10898 10/01t91 ~ANI,SUPPLIES;PARK FACIL,TCSD 25.73
0,00 115.00
0.00 22.21
0,00 84.01
-0.00 ....... 91.29
0.00 35.70
O.O0 25,73
RAN-TEC RUBBER STANP NFG
Check Totals: 258,94 0.00 258.94
00010055 05/01/92 RAN-TEC
--0~7272----04122t92-11482. .... 05t~I92--PINS FOR 8ADBES;NAt(EPL~TE---
--3t~46 ........... 0
~O01005&-OSIOII92--RANCHOB~*RANCHO-BL-UEPRtNT
41260 04121/92 11500
40836 04/03192 11300
41001
41047 04107/92 11500
Check Totals: 51,46 0.00 31.46
02111t92 BLUEPRINTS; ENGINEERING DEPT,
02/11192 BLUEPRINTS; ENGINEERING DEPT, 21.94
02~Itt92-KUEPRINTS;-ENGINEERING-])EPT, 1~22
02/11192 BLUEPRINTS; ENGINEERING DEPT, 8,78
0,00 3.71
0.00 21.94
0.00-- l~a2----
0,00 8,75
Check4otats:
00010057 05/01192 RAPECRIS RAPE CRISIS CENTER
042492-1 04124192 04/24192 CDB6 RECEIPIENT-SENIOR OUTRCH
Check Totals:
00010058 05/01/92 ROSE PURKISS ROSE
---&770-- 04/01192-0175. 06/50/9t-DEVELOPENT-OF-.~STER-PLAN
-53.&2 0,00 53,62 .....
2,999.95 0.00 2,999.95
2,999.95 0.00 2,999.95
---12,088,70 ---0.00- 12,088.70.--
Check Totals: 12,088,70 0,00 12,088,70
00010059--05101t92 SCHONACH 8CHUNACHER.-AUTO-SALE4.LEASIN ......................................................
040792 04/01192 11445 03/51192 STAKES FOR FLAT BED TRUCK 975.14 O,O0 975.14
--Check-Totals:
00010060 05/01/92 SECURITY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
0849K 04101192 04101192 3128 CHGS P~ 80.92
Check Totals: 80.92
00010061 05/01/72 SHELFHAS SHELF NASTER
.... 054944 04/24/92 11525 04/22/92 SHELVES FOR PLANNING ARCHIVES 50%7?
975,14 .................0.00
975.14 -
0.00 80.92
0.00 80.92
-0,00 5v~.77
.... 00010062 05/01!92 SiRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
Check Totals: 509.77 O,OO 50~.77
Check
Date Vendor
Invoice
5050
4992-
Name
Date P/O Date Description
04115/92 11485 04/02/92 INSPECIION RECORDS;~LDG.&SFTY
04127192 10928 10102/91 BUS.CARDS FOR NEW ENPLOYEES
.04t07R2-10928----~OtO2JqI-SUG;CARH-FOR.NEW-EHPt. OYEES
8ro55
48.66
38.79
2R;~7-
Check Totals:
000i007r-65t01/92 SO CAL 2 SD~C~FORNIA T~EPHGkr CO.
3457418K 04/08192 0410811'2 7143457418/SN HAR,L'HGS
3493439K 04/081~2 04108192
54934~7 04-/-~8/~2 04108192
3456005K 04~08~92 04108192
3457419K 04108192 04108192
2675312K----94/-0Hq2 04107192
3457425[ 04/08192 04108192
2874994 04/07192
2874641K 04107R2
2874840[ 04107R2
714,T493439RGINAR CHGS
714349H~r/E~AR;-CtIES
7145456005/DDINAR. CHGS
7143457419/TEINAR. CHGS
7142875~12/T:/~*,.~H-GiffiS
714~457425/~INAR CHGS
04107192 7142874994/SNINAR. CHGS
C~tO}tGH142674641tTS!~AR-CHSS.--
04/07/92 7142874840/TS/NARCH CHGS
116.22
41.49
58.60
266,70
44.39
46,44
66.49
152,75
0;75-
84.30
00010064 05/01/92 SOUTH~ED SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
665848059[ 04124192
6659480~5K-04t-24t92
6658480853 04/24/92
665848057~ H/24/92
665845056~-04t24R2
665848065K 04/24/92
66584RO61K 04/24/92
Check-4otats:
04124192 11120-4/17
04124t92--3t2H!17 --
04/24/92 3120-4/17
04/24R2 5/20-4/17
04-/-24t92-M2Hf~7
04124/92 M20-4117
04/24/92 M20-4/17
'82h24
6,012.46
257~9t
388,9~
899.79
706;80
71.62
473.50
00010065 05101192 SOUTHCOA SOUTH COAST A9HD
(~)92 .Ht-~/92
Check Totals:
04/-~eR2-I~OHFERENCE-/~AY 8/SN
8,790.91
10.00
Check Totals:
CO0~OOb6-05t0tR2-SPBNEC4t~ECUR~Y-PAC~FtC--N~TL--BAN~
H0192 04/01/92 04101192 NA~H BANK CHGG
10,00
27S.97
C~ck--Totals: 273~97
00010067 05/01192 SPEEDYOI SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
OBt9 04107192 11268 02104R2 REPAIR & HAINT.CITY VEHICLES 22,49
00985 04tt0192~t269 O-2/4)4t92-4~EPAIR-&N~T~C+TY--V~tC~ES' ~2~14-'-
0910 04108192 11254 02103192 REPAIR & ~AINT. VEHICLES; CSD ~2.14
Check--Totals: 9~r~77
00010068 05101/92 TEAHINC T.E.A.N.~ INC
041792 04/17/92 04117/92 CS FUNDING 7,151.56
Check Totals: 7,151.56
00010069 05101/t2 TENECOPI TENECULA COPIERS
--2465-- 041t4t92--ttSO9---04110t92-TONER'COLLECTION'UNH;FR,GEPT ........ 45~56
Check Totals:
....... 00010070 05t01/~2 TE~LITTL TEHECULA VALLEY LITTLE LEAGUE
04/27192 04/27/92 CSF FUND
.. Check Totats:
0001007! 05/01192 TOHARKSP TONARK GPORTS~ INC.
~N256~-~ 04/07/92 04/07/92 YNEZ CORRIDOR!~AR.
45.56
2,500.00
2,500.00
300.00
Discount
0.00
0,00
0.--00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.~
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
Net
45.66
~S.79
28.77-
II&.22
5~ .~
4i.49
'59;60 ---
266.70
44.59
4~44 -
66.49'
152.75
0.--7,',-
B~ .50
G21T24---
6,012.46
257,91
899.79
706;B0 ---
71.&2
473.50
8,790.91
10.0(~ .-
10.00
27~.97
27S~97 '
22.49
32;.t4 .
~2.14
7,151.5&
0,00
0;00 --
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
7,151,5&
45.36 -
45.$6
2,500.00
2,500.00
500.00
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register
Check Date VenOor Name
layDice Date P/O Date
00010072 05101192 UNITOG
-877t5.7-0424-04t~4192-1t180
877570410 04110/92 11180
877570417 Q4117192 11180
87-7-2-58H24~-92-1tt80
877257D410 04~10/92 11180
8772570417 04/17/92 11180
Check Totals: 300.00
UWITOG RENTAL SERVICE
12tt$1qt-UNIFORN-RENTALS;CONH,SERVICE ........ 12.~
12113191UNIFORN RENTALG;COH~.SERVICE 12,50
12113191UNIFORH RENTALS;CONH.SERVICE 12.50
12/-I$~FUNIFOR!~-RENTN=S;COffiI,SBWICE 12~50
12/15/91UNIFg!~ RENTALS;COffitSE~VICE 12.50
I2/I~RI UNIFO!~ RENTALS;COI~I.SENVICE 12.50
0,00 300.00
0.00 .....
0.00 12.5C
0.00 !2.50
0~-- ~2.~---
C.O0
0.00 ~2.50
Check Totals:
0001007~ 05/01/92 URBANDEC URBAN DECISION SYSTEN, INC.
112t~ ~ 04101/92 !0344----~/10/~1CE4;JI-1k%~RItA~DN
75.00 0.00 75.00
249.00 O.(X~ 249.00 ....
O00100~-0510tR2-WESTHtGHt~ERN-HZ~WAY4RODUCT8
212&07 0d!/24/t2 11464 03f31/92
Check Totals:
BARRICADES|BATTERIES;STENCIL
249.00
5~833.05
0.00 249,00
0.00 5.835,05
Check-Totals:
00010075 05101/92 NESTLUNG WESTERN LUNDER
986715 04110192 11465 03120192
.... ~86717----04110192-1t465--0;120192
986972 N/17192 11465 03120192
987077 04/21/92 11465 03/20192 MOODEN POSTS;CIP SIGHS
987078-----NI21/92 11465----03t20t~~-tooDEN-POSTS;C~tLStENS
987081 04121192 11465 03120/92 WOODEN POSTS~CIP SIGHS
987080 M/01192 11465 0M20/92 WOODEN POSTS;CIP SIGHS
98671~ 04110192-.114~5 .... 0Sl20192 WOODEN POSTS~CtP SION8
5,835.05 0.00- 5,835.05
MOODEN POSTS;CIP SIGNS
NOODEN-POSTS:CIP*SIONS
WOODEN POSTS;CIP SIGNS
~7.54 0.00 I17.54
- -10,56 ............ 0.00 ........... 10.56 ......
85.6~ 0.00 85.63
27.00 0.00 27.00
5.90 ......... OJ)O -,-5.90 .....
34.91 0.00 34.91
5.90- 0.00 5.90-
4.29 ........ ---O,OO &--~,- - -
4004233
Check Totals:
HILLDAN-.ASSOCIATE8
04101192 04101192 FED 18-HAR 1S/ENGINEERING
491.35 0.00 491,35
20,52~.86 0.00 20,521.86
Checb-Totals=--
00010077 05101192 WINDSOR111NDSOR PARTNERS-RANCNO IND
050192 0}101192 05101/92 HAY RENT
:; Check Totals:
00010078 05/01192 WINDSORC MINDSOR CONSTRUCTION
033192: 01t0~t92-11253
033192-2 04/17192 11521
OI~2Bt92-EICHANGE-DOORS4T-CITY-HALL--
04/17/t2 ADDITIONAL WORK ON BLDG.
20f52~,86 --0,00------20,523.86 .....
28,527.11 0.00 28,527.11
28,527.11 0.00 28,527.11
320.00 ............ 0,00-- 320,00
237.17 O.OO 2~7.37
-- -Check-Totals: 557.$7-
00010079 05101/92 ZINHERLE STEVE ZINHERLE
042892 04128192 04/28/92 filLEA6E REIHBI4122JI24 39.42
Check Totals: 39.42
00010080 051!2/92 CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
-3085204 --04101192.0252-----OGI28191-HA]NTENANCE*APRlE ................. 29,026,40
0.00 ......... 557.~7 ....
0.00 39.42
0.00 39.42
..... -0.00 .........29,026.40
Check Totals:
00010081 05!12!92 DEPHE~LT $IDEPARTHEHT OF HEALTH
~i,~ 04/21t92 019~ !0/01/91AN!~AL CO~TRCL!~ARC~
00010082 05/12/92 EGGHEAD
~41472
Check Totals:
[68REA~ DISCOUfiT SOFTWARE
04/01R2 11402 03/09!92 OUATTRO PRO UPGRADE
29,026.40
5,~7~.50
5,679.50
1,550.85
0.00 2%026.40
0.00 5,67%50
0.00
0,00 1,550.85
Check Date VenOor Name
!nvolcs Date ?/O Date Descriotion Bross Discount Net
Check lotale: 1,550.85 Q.QO !.550.~
0010083 05112R2 60LDENST 6OLDEN STATE TRADINB CC.
- 14&29 0q/02/9}-!142~ .03!16/92 lOS[STATION|PUB;WORKS 2,.755.52 0~00 ...... 2~755.52-
.--OOO{OOB4-05t12R2-IMSUPCO~NSUPCO
2880 04/23192 11515 03131/92
2805 0411~192 11481
00010085 05/12192 L&!iFERTI L & H FERTILIZER
&1~21
612~8 0q/21/92 11501
61242 MI21192 11500
2,755.52
Check Totals:
SIBNAL;LIBHI~SMITCH;PUB.HORKS 672.0~
~ISC.HARDIIARE!PUBLIC iOR~S 785.~1
Check lotale:
. 04VOg~2-OPENCCOUNTINtSC-rTOOLS 10~7
0~/$1192 CHAIMSAM BARIHANDLE TRIIINER 570.97
041041~2 HELETIREPLACE!IENT BL~E)P.N.
1,457.~4
0.00 2,755.52
O.O0 672.05
0.00 785.31
0.00 1,457.~4
O~OO 10~87
0.00 570.97
0.00 ~36.7B
00010086 05/12/92 NSNASSOC ltBH ASSOCIATES
PTEN9200,1--O~tOit92
Check Totals:
Oit0ttt2-B&N!24F$t4-CHGS-
1,0!5.62
---t-,022~27
0,00 !,O1La2
0~00
O00100BT-051-12t92-PETROLNI-PETROLANE-
195426 04117192 11344
Check Totals: 1,022.27
02/19/92 CONVERT TCSD FLATBED;PRDPANE 1,434.83
0.00 1,022.27
0.00 1,4~4.83
O00100BB 05112192 POLYCRAF POLYCRAFT INC.
~92 04/14/92 11S45
00010089 05/12/92 RAHTEK 'RANTEK
qO06 Oq/17R2431l ·
4020 01122/92 0~7!
Check-Totals;
0~/05/92 3' gECALS$ CITY SEAL
Check Totals:
O;/;~R2-STREET-t~INT-,NORK-ORDERS-ONLY
031~1192 STREET HAINT.MORK ORDERS ONLY
l,O01.&5
1,O01.&5
10,2;II.59
6,085.10
'0.00 t~434.8I ....
0.00 1,O01.&5
0.00 1,001.&5
O,O0 I0,2~1.59-.
0.00 6,085.10
Check-Totals:
00010090 05/12192 R3NDESIB .RaN DESIBN GROUP, INC.
q998 04101192 0~45 01/15/92 DESIBN DRANINGS; MRCH SERV.
Check Totals:
00010091 05/12/92 ROB~T~E ROBERT BUN, NH. FROST &
)-11059 04/01/~-0~2 01/02/92~OV~--91-~VICES
1-110~9-104/01/92 0~/01/92 NOV. SERVICES
1-11039-$ 04/08/92 O$B; ~/08/92 REI~SE~LESISTRE!'T/SIDENL[
16F~!6,69
31,01.82
31,096.82
~,000,00.--
72.51
227.t9
0~00 16,316.69 .....
0.00 ~i,096.B2
0.00 ~1,096.B2
0.00-- -I~000.00 .....
0.00 72.51
0.00 ~7.49
Check Totals:
1,S00.00
O.OO IJ00.00
.----Reeort-lotals:
---342,461.06
0.00 ..... )2,461.06
CHECK L!SIIN~ IY FUND
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHEGK DATE VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUN:
---40t---00009997 --04/29/92 -- GENEFIT-AMERICA .......
001 000099V8 04/50/92 NICKELL TRAVEL CENTER
001 00009999 04/30/92 LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
--001--.00009999----04t50192- .......... LONCH-&--STUFF-CATERtN6
001 00010014 04130192 INLAND EMPIRE BUSINESS
001 00010016 04/$0/92 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
001 00010020 0510-1-/~2 ALL~ED~ARP, ZCADE
001 00010021 05/011~2 AMERICAN RED CROSS
00I 00010022 05/0t!92 AREA "9" OFFICE OF EIIERGENCY
001 HOtO02; 05101192 ARNA-INTERNAT]UNAL
001 00010024 05/01192 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF TENECULA
001 00010025 05/01/92 CALIFORNIAN
001---*000t~025 0510~92. CALIFORNIAN
OOl 00010026 05/01192 CAL NEST RENTAL CENTER
001 00010028 05/01R2 CHAPflAN UNIVERSITY
00! 000-10029 0510tl92 CtIICORP--NORT!4-ANERTCA
001 00010030 05/0!/92 THE COBB GROUP
001 00010051 05/01192 COPY LINE CORPORATION
04)! 0001005~ 05101/92 COPY-LINE~:ORPORATIUN
001 000100~2 05/01/92 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
OOl 00010052 05101192 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
----001--00010052- ---05/01R2 .......... COUNTY-OF-RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
001 0001005~ 05/01/92 DAVLIN
001 00010034 05/01/92 6LENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
00~-000100~4 05t01R2-- GLENHIES-OFFiCE-PRODUCTS
001 000100;4 05/01/92 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
001 00010054 05/01/92 GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
OOt--OOOlO0;~ ..... 45101192 6TE--
001 00010056 05/01/92 ATE
001 O00100;& 05/01R2 ATE
001 000100~6.. 05101~92 ATE
001 000100~6 05/01/92 6TE
001 000100~ 05/01/92 INLAND CALL AMERICA
OOg---O00iO04O --0510t~92 LANIER--VOICE-PRODUCT5---.
001 00010041 05/01192 LENIS VALLEY CONTRACTORS INC,
001 00010045 05/01/92 ~RILYN'G COFFEE SERVICE
-- 001---000100~ ..... 05/0t/92 -- .NARILYN~S-COFFEE-SERVIC~
001 OO01OO4~ 05/01R2 MARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
001 00010044 05/01/92 HISCO
--001-00010045----05101192 NAT-q;.~SSOC-OF-STATE-FORESTER ....................
001 00010047 05101/92 PAYLESS DRUG STORES
001 OOOlOOqe 05/01/92 PETROLAE
00t--00010049----05/01R2 .THE--P~ANNING-CENTER
001 00010050 05101/r2 POSTfASTER
001 00010052 05101/92 OUALITY TONER SUPPLY
..... 001--00010054 .... 05101R2 RAN-CAL-~ANITORIAL SUPPLY-
001 00010055 05/01/92 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF6
001 00010056 05/0~/92 RANCHO BLUEPRINT
----00t-00010059 .... 05101192 ............ SCHUNACHER AUTO SALE---&-LEASIN ..............
...... 4115R2 NED.REINS/& DEPD CARE
CSFMD/NAY 4/N~,HO
BOX LUNCHES;BENEFIT FAIR
DINNER COUNCIL - - ~O.OC:
SEMINAR/MAY 15/LB,DU !5S.0C
1ST OTR PR TAX 2?,S!
BATTERIES--FOR*-BARRICADES
ANNUAL flEETING I ANNIVERSARY 12.0E
5EMINARIS!I~!921~H SO,Go
--ANNUAL--NENBERSHtP-DUES
CSF FUNDING
LEGAL NOTICES; CITY CLERK
---ADV,EMPLOYENT-POSITIONS;H,R,-
RENTAL OF AGUAR;C.I,P, POSTS
CUNFI61819212 POLICE
........ ;PHONE-SYGTEN--~AY-SERV, 1~427,5T
SUBSCRIPTION RENENALINRD PERF 6;.57
CLEANING UNI~;FAX HACHINE
CREDt-T-NENO ............ 33~.9C.
FOLDERS;GLUE STICKS;LEAD
CREDIT ON SUPPLIES 44.42
......... PENS;PENCILS;PUSH-PINS;SHEARS ........... 131.80
AUDIO TAPE;TRAFFIC C~M,MTGS, 130,0C
MISC,ITEHS;OPEN ACCOUNT
----OPEN-P.-O.--FOR--NISC-T-ITENS .... t8.52
ROLL FILES;PUbLIC NORKS 75,1~
OPEN P,O, FOR MISC. ITEMS lbB,2;
..... 714%99-8~2/APRIL--T-BtLLING--- ~ 17,4E:
714-69~-012B/APRIL 25 BILL 55.01
714-162-6043/APRIL 16 BILL
----714-&99-O1281--APRIL-25-BILL --~15,~
714-162-55951APRIL 16 BILL ~7~,1C
3/18-4/17 CALLS
DESKTOP. P14B--, 12B.0C.
RESTORATION;REMOVAL SEDIMENT
COFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL 1~1.8;
-COFFEE-SUPPUES;CZTY-HALL-
CDFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL
CERTIFIED TAPE;ORSANIZER;T.H, 450,0~
RUO[S;BONG SHEETS;PENCILIF]RE ......... 57&.4L
FIU~ PROCESSINB;B&S;24EXPOSUR
FUEL (PROPANE) BIG TRUCK 9B,lz
--AMENDRENT-TO-COl0271 ...... 99~896,2~
3/07-410~/924462 147.3~
RECHARGE TONER CARTRIDGES 519.0(
....... OPEN.ACCOUNT;aANXT.GUPPLIES ........... B4.0J
PINS FOR BADGES;NAMEPLATE 51.4~
BLUEPRINTS; ENGINEERING DEPT.
STAKES FOR-FLAT-BED TRUCb .......... 975,1;
2,575.2.
25;.L
001 000~0060 05101192
001 00010061 05/01/92
001 00010062 05/01R2
00! 000100~2 05101/?2
0G1 000!006~ 05/01/72
001 000100a: ~5t01R2
001 000100G3 05/0!/92
001 O00100&~ 05/01R2
0Ol 00010065 05/01R2
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SHELF MASTER
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEcJY
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALiFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALiFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE
3/2B CHGS PH BC,~:
SHELVES FOR PLANNING ARCHIVES 509.7'
INSPECTION RECORDS;BLDB.&SFTY 4~,~:
BUS.CARDS FOR flEW EHPLCYEES i7.5:
7143456005/DDIHAR. CHGE ~2~.7(
71434V34371GTtHAR, CH8S 5S.~(
7143457419/TEIHAR, CHSS 44.3c
7142875512/TS/HARCH CHGS
714$4~545~/JG/NAR CHGS 4~,4~
Report Writer
FUND CHECK NUM3ER CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAHE
CNECK LISTIN5 ~Y FUN~
DESCRIPTION
AMObl;T
001 O00100&S 05101/92-- SO.CALIFORNIA-TELEPHONE-CO, ........
001 00010063 05/01R2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
/"' 001 0001006; 05/011f2 GO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
O0)--~)OlOOH.. 05t0t~2 SOtJTHERN-CALIF-EDtSON--
001 00010064 05/01/t2 SOUTHERN CALF EDISON
001 OO010064 05/01R2 SOUTHERN CALF EDISON
001 O00M)O&5 05101192 SGUTH-COAST AOllD
001 00010066 05101R2 SECURITY PACIFIC MAlL BANK
!001 00010067 05101/f2 SPEEDY OIL CNAMBE
0CI ~,,0~0060 051011t2 I.E.A.H., INC
001 000100699 05/01R2 TEllECULA COPIERS
001 00010070 05/01R2 TEECULA VALLEY LITTLE LEAGUE
001 000~0071 05/0H~2 TOllARK SPORTS, INC.
001 00010073 05101/92 URBAN DECISION SYSTEN, INC.
001 00010074 05101/92 N~TERN HIGHMAY PRODUCTS
00! 000~00-75 05/0~-~2 WESTERN-L4JNBER
001 00010076 05/01/992 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
001 00010077 05101/92 WINDSOR PARTNERG-RANCHO IND
OOF--OO)X. O4flG 05/-0~2 WINDSOR-CONSTR~rT-~
001 00010078 05/01/~2 WINDSOR CONSTRUCTION
001 00010079 05/01R2 STEVE ZIlllrr.!;tLE
00! 000t0(01 05tl.21~2.-- lIMPARTNENT-OF-NEALTH-
001 00010082 05/12/t2 EBBHEAD DISCOUNT SOFTWARE
001 000100085 05/12/t2 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO.
.--00F-00010084 05tt2R2 INB~C~
001 00010084 05112/f2 INBUPCO
001 00010085 05/12/~ L & N FERTILIZER
-~-~! 00014)085 05112R2- -L-&--N-FERTILIZER
001 00010085 05/121t2 L & H FERTILIZER
O01 00010086 05/12/t2 NBM ASSOCIATES
O0t--O00NOGG 05/~21~ POI;YGRAF:PINC.
001 000100899 05/12/f2 RANTEK
001 000100991 05/12/f2 ROBERT BEIN, MR. FROST & ASSO
001
-714~457425/HOtllAR CHSS
7142874B41/TS/llAR CHBS
7142874840/TSINARCH CHGS
U20-4tt~--
11/20-4/17
U20-4/17
CONFERENC{-/NAY-BISH
MARCH BANK CUBS
REPAIR & HAINT.CZTY VEHICLES
C~UNDINC
-.
2.540.6
6,012.4
257 .E
5t,,6
7¥151.5
TONER COLLECTION UNIT;FR.DEPT
CBF FUND
YNEi
CENSUS INFORMATION
BARRICADES;BATTERIES;STENCIL
..... MOODEN-pusTB~CIp-r-~-IGNB.--
FEB 1B-NAR IUENGINEERING
HAY RENT
.... EXCHNIBE-t)OORS-AT~tTY-~LE
ADDITIONAL WORK ON SLOB,
NILEAGE REIHGI4122,4124
ANINAL-CONTROLtNARCH-992
QUATTRD PRO UPSRAGE
WORKSTATION;PUB,WORKS
--- SI~A~;L-tGHTI.,SWITCH;PUB~WORKG--
NISC,HARDWARE;PUBLIC WORKS
HELNET;~PLACEllENT BLADE;P,M.
CNAINGAW-DAR;HANDLE-TRtNMER
OPEN ACCOUNT)llISC.TOOLS
D&S 2/24,U4 CHBS
3"--DECALS;-CITY-SEAL-----
STREET NA]NT.NDRK ORDERS ONLY
NOV. SERVICES
45,~
2,500.0
~00.0
2499.0
5,BS5.0
~20.0
2,755,5
672.0
S$6.7
.570.~
107.B
1,001.a
16,716.e
72.5
24%788.6
-----0t4--00010046----05/011t2--
014 00010057 05/01192
R--,I-NDBEL-CONPAMY
RAPE CRISIS CENTER
RETENTIONtUII41991-DILL-ING
CDBG RECEIPIENT-GENIOR OUTRCH
7.fo55,~
2,999,~
014
10,054.g
019 0000991997 04/291t2 BENEFIT AMERICA 4/15R2 BED REINS/& DEPD CARE
0~g--t)000999999 04~S01f2-- --LUNCH-i--S)UFF-MTERING ............................ CRC-CONNITTEE
019 00010027 051011t2 CA~PDELLS LtBHTINB~ SIGN/ELEC LIGHTS;SPORTS PARK;TCSD
0199 00010027 05/01/f2 CAMPBELLS LIBHTINB~ SIBN/ELEC INSTALL LIGHTS;SPORTS PARK
0199--000100~4 .......05/01/t2 ............ BLENNIES-OFFICE PRODUCTS ........................ OFFICE-SUPPLIES)--TCSD
0199 000100~5 05/01/t2
019 00010037 05/01/92
----019--000100~8---.05t01R2
019 00010042 05101/92"
0199 00010050 05/01/f2
0199 00010051 05t01/992
0!99 00010053 05101t992
019 0001005( 05/01R2
019 00010058 05/01R2
017 00010063 05101/t2
0!9 00010063 05/01/992
0199 00010067 05/01/992
729J
'~5,2
425,0
212,5
3'02,5
GREEK, HAROLD F.
HERITAGE HODILE HOKE ESTATES
HORIZON-MATER
LONGS DRUGS
POSTllASTER
PRO LOCK & KEY
RAMSEY BACKFLOW & PLUMBING
RAN-CAL GANITDRIAL SUPPLY
PURKISS ROSE
SO.CALIFORNIA IELEPHDNE CO.
SO.CALIFORnIA TELEPHONE CO.
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
REVIEW LANDSCAPE PLANS
REFUND OF ASSESSENTG
............ WATERCHB
FIL~ PRINTING ACCOUNi;TCSD
3107-410319924462
CD~UNIiY SERVICES=ACCOUNT
BACKFLD~ TEST!NG:TCSD
jANI.SUPPLIES:PARK FAC!L.TCS
DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLAN
714345741BISN MAR.CHBS
7142874994tSNIMAR. CHBS
REPAIR & MAINT. VEHICLES: CSD
500.0
5:255,~
42,7
~.5
t~'~ ~
Report ~riter CHEC~ LISTING
FUND CHEC[ NUNBER CHEC[ DATE VENDOR NAHE DESCRTPT!ON
----OFt--Q0010072 05/01t92-- ~ITOG-RENTAL-SERVICE ---.UNIFORN-RENTALS|COI,IK,SERVtCE ..... 75.::-
019 00010087 05112/92 PETROLANE CONVERT TCSD FLATBED.:PROPANE
019
021 00010091 05112193 ROBERT-SE|N*rIIKr-FROST & ASSO ILr-]MBURSEABL*ES,,-STR~[TI$IDENL*K 227,!~
021 00010091 05/121~2 ROBERT BEIN~ I,IM, FROST & ASSO NOV, 91 SERVICES
021
1;227.4~
029 00010090 05112/92 RaM DESIGN 6ROUP~ INC. DES]ON DRAN]NBS; MARCH SERV, ~1~096,82
ITEM
NO.
4
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 12, 1992
SUBJECT:
Approve Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract
Map No. 23371-1
PREPARED BY: Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
I,
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City COuncil APPROVE the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time; and, DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
BACKGROUND;
The City Counq~il received and filed the map for Tract No. 23371-1 on March 27, 1990.
Subdivision Agreements and Surety Bonds were posted with the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors by:
Margarita Village Development Company
c/o The Buie Corporation
16935 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, sewer end water systems, and subdivision monumentation.
Accompanying the Subdivision Agreements were Surety Bonds, issued by Insurance Company
of the West as follows:
1. Bond No. 115 17 72 in the amount of $995,000 to cover street improvements.
2. Bond No. 115 17 72 in the amount of $345,500 to cover water system
improvements.
-1 - pw02%agdrpt%92%0512%23371-1 050192
3. Bond No. 115 17 72 in the amount of $119,000 to cover sewer system
improvements.
4. Bond No. 115 17 72 in the amounts of $497,500, $171,750, and $59,500,
respectively, to cover material and labor.
Bond NO. 115 17 71 in the amount of $21,000 to cover Subdivision Monumentation.
The City CounCil accepted substitute bonds on November 27, 1990, issued by Allied Mutual
Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 7900 534981 in the amount of $995,000 to cover street improvements.
Bond No. 7900 534981 in the amount of :$345,500 to cover water system
improvements.
3. Bond No. 7900 534981 in the amount of $119,000 to cover sewer system
improvements.
Bond No. 7900 534981 in the amounts of $497,500, $171,750, and $59,500
respectively, for material and labor.
Bond No. 7900 534982 in the amount :of $21,000 to cover subdivision
monumlsntation. ;
The current real estate market remains soft and the developer requests an extension of time.
The replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement would incorporate an 18-month
extension of time. The initial 18-month period ended on October 27, 1991 and the new
completion date would become March 27, 1993. The new agreement is on the approved City
standard form.
The affected streets, although not constructed at this d~ate, are a portion of Rancho California
Road and Meadows Parkway, and private streets (Royal Birkdale Drive, Temeku Drive, Tee
Drive, Cant. bury Court, and Flag Way).
Attachments:
Vicinity Map:
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
-2- pwO2~gdrpt~92\OS 12%23371-1 050192
! /
ITEM NO.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
D~en~ of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Approve Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract
Map No. 2:j371-2
PREPARED BY:
'J~!bert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City COuncil APPROVE the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time; and, DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council received and filed the map for Tract No. 23371-2 on May 29, 1990.
Subdivision A0reements and Surety Bonds were posted with the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors by:
Margarita Village Development Company
c/o The Buie Corporation
16935 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation.
Accompanying. the Subdivision Agreements were Surety Bonds, issued by Insurance Company
of the West as follows:
Bond NO. 115 17 79 in the amount of $180,000 to cover street improvements.
Bond NO. 115 17 79 in the amount of $47,000 to cover water system improvements.
Bond N0. 115 17 79 in the amount of $35,500 to cover sewer system improvements.
: -1- pwO2%agdrpt%92%0512~23371-2 050192
e
e
Bond N0. 115 17 79 in the amounts of $90,000, $23,500, and $17,750 respectively,
to cover material and labor.
Bond NO. 115 17 80 in the amount of $19,900 to cover sewer system improvements.
The City Council accepted substitute bonds on November 27, 1990, issued by Allied Mutual
Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 7900 534980 in the amount of $180,000 to cover street improvements.
Bond No. 7900 534980 in the amount of $47,000 to cover water system
improvements.
3. Bond No. 7900 534980 in the amount of: $35,500 to cover sewer system
improvements.
e
Bond No. 7900 534980 in the amounts of $90,000, $23,500, and $17,750
respectively for material and labor.
5. Bond No. 7900 534983 in the amount of $19,900 to cover subdivision
monumentation.
The current real estate market remains soft and the developer requests an extension of time.
The replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement would incorporate an 18-month
extension of time. The initial 18-month period ended on November 29, 1991 and the new
completion date would become May 29, 1993· The new agreement is on the approved City
standard form.
The affected streets, although not constructed at this date, are a portion of Rancho California
Road, end private streets (Pin Way, Par Way, Cascades Court, and Colonial Court).
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
-2- pwO2%agdrpt%92%O$12%23371-2 050192
II
II ~
/
/
,\
\
II
(~
\~\
J~
Jl
c
ITEM NO. 6
APPROVAL
cITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City CounCil/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Approve Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract
Map No. 23371-3
PREPARED BY: ;411~Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council APPROVE the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and
18-month extension of time, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
The City council approved the map for Tract No. 23371-3 on July 24, 1990. Subdivision
Agreements and Surety Bonds were posted with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by:
Margarita Village Development Company
c/o The Buie Corporation
16935 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation.
Accompanying the Subdivision Agreements were Surety Bonds, issued by Allied Mutual
Insurance Company as follows:
1. Bond No. 7900 532288 in the amount of $2,067,500 to cover street improvements.
Bond No. 7900 532288 in the amount of ~420,000 to cover water system
improvements.
3. Bond No. 7900 532288 in the amount of $482,000 to cover sewer system
improvements.
-1 - pwO2\agdrpt\92\0512%23371-3 050192
Bond No. 7900 532288 in the amounts of $1,033,750, $210,000 and $241,000,
respectively, to cover material and labor.
5. Bond No. 7900 532287 in the amount of $65,800 to cover Subdivision
Monumentation.
The current' real estate market remains soft and the developer requests an extension of time.
The replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement would incorporate an 18-month
extension of time. The initial 18-month period ended on January 24, 1992 and the new
completion date would become July 24, 1993.
The affected Streets are a portion of Rancho California Road, Margarita Road, and private
streets (Bunker Drive, Rough Way, Iron Circle, Balata Drive, Mashie Way, Fore Way,
Crystalaire Drive, and a portion of Honors Drive, Brassie Lane, Drive Lane and Vardon Drive).
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
-2- pwO2%agdrpt~2~O512%23371-3 050192
J
N II
N
,u,
I/
ITEM NO. 7
FINANCE OFFICER~
CITY MANAGER
TO.'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Approve SUbdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract
Map No. 23371-4
PREPARED BY: Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council APPROVE the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council approved the map for Tract No. 23371-4 on July 24, 1990. Subdivision
Agreements and Surety Bonds were posted with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by:
Margarita Village Development Company
c/o The Buie Corporation
16935 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation.
Accompanying the Subdivision Agreements were Surety Bonds, issued by Insurance Company
of the West aS follows:
1. Bond No. 7900 532469 in the amount of $647,500 to cover street improvements.
2. Bond No. 7900 532469 in the amount of $169,000 to cover water system
improvements.
3. Bond No. 7900 532469 in the amount of $188,000 to cover sewer system
improvements.
-1 - pwO2\elldrpt\92\O512\23371-4 050192
Bond No. 7900 532469 in the amounts of $323,750, $84,500 and $94,000,
respectively, to cover material and labor.
5. Bond No. 7900 532472 in the amount of $40,000 to cover Subdivision
Monumentation.
The current real estate market remains soft and the developer requests an extension of time.
The replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement would incorporate an 18-month
extension of time~ The initial 18-month period ended on January 24, 1992 and the new
completion date would become July 24, 1993.
The affected streets, although not constructed at this date, are all private streets (Eagle Court,
Putter Circle, Wedge Way and a portion of Niblick Road, Brassie Lane, Driver Lane, and
Vardon Drive).
Attachments:.
Vicinity Map
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
-2- pwO2~agdrpt%92%0512%233714 050192
II
It
\\
\\
O_
d~
\%
L!
F
I
I
/
T
ITEM NO. 8
APPROVAL.~~
TY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
De~ent of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Approve Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract
Map No. 23371-5
PREPARED BY:
Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council APPROVE the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and
18-month extension of time.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council approved the map for Tract No. 23371-5 on September 4, 1990.
Subdivision Agreements and Surety Bonds were posted with the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors by:
Margarita Village Development Company
c/o The Buie Corporation
16935 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation.
Accompanying the Subdivision Agreements were Surety Bonds, issued by Allied Mutual
Insurance Company as follows:
Bond No. 7900 532468 in the amount of $191,500 to cover street improvements.
Bond No.. 7900 532468 in the amount of $82,000 to cover water system
improvements.
3. Bond No. 7900 532468 in the amount of $80,000 to cover sewer system
improvements.
-1 - pwO2%egdrpt\92%0512%23371-5 050192
Bond No. 7900 532468 in the amounts of ~95,750, $41,000 and $40,000,
respectively, to cover material and labor.
5. Bond No. 7900 532471 in the amount of $30,000 to cover Subdivision
Monumentation.
The current real estate market remains soft and the developer requests an extension of time.
The replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement would incorporate an 18-month
extension of time. The initial 18-month period ended on March 4, 1992 and the new
completion date would become September 4, 1993.
The affected streets, although not constructed at this date, are all private streets (Spoon
Circle, Nassau Court, Dog Leg Circle, and a portion of=Niblick Road).
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
Subdivision Improvement Agreement
-2- pwO2%agclq3t~92%0512%23371-5 050192
II
II
-\
N
II
T
N
II I
7
'F
I
/
/
/
ITEM NO. 9
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '~'~[~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council / City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Parcel Map No. 26766
Kris Winchak
R ECOMMENDAT ION:
That the City Council APPROVE Parcel Map No. 26766 subject to the Conditions of
Approval.
DISCUSSION:
On January 2'6, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Tentative
Tract Nos. 22715 and 22716, within the boundaries of Specific Plan No. 199
I Margarita Village).
On April 17, 1991, the applicant filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 along with
Substantial Conformance No. 17, in order to process the requests
concurrently. Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 proposes to subdivide the subject 10. 81
acre site into one 11 ) single family residential parcel containing approximately 8,276
square feet {0.19 acres) and one { 1 ) open space parcel containing 10.62 acres. The
subject 10.81 acre site had been previously designated as an open space lot for Tract
No. 22715 within Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan No. 199. Through Planning
approval of Substantial Conformance No. 17, this allowed the exchange of one I1 )
dwelling of density from Planning Area 14 to Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan No.
199.
On May 9, I1991, Tentative iParcel Map No. 26766 was reviewed by the Formal
Development Review Committee; and, it was determined that the project, as
designed, Can be adequately conditioned to mitigate the DRCJs concerns. in
addition, the DRC determind that, combined with Substantial Conformance No. 17,
the project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199. The DRC had forwarded a
recommendation of approval subject to conditions. The City Planning Commission
approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 on May 20, 1991.
The following fees have been paid (or deferred) for Parcel Map No. 26766:
* Area Drainage Fees
* Fire Mitigation Fees
* Traffic Signal Mitigation
* StephenJs K-Rat Fees- |Must be paid)
1,980.41
400.00
150.00
21,079.50
The following bonds have been posted for Parcel Map No. 26766:
Faithful Other
Performance Bonds
L~abor and
Materials
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
Survey Monuments
SUMMARY:
$ -0- -0-
-0- -0-
-0- -0-
-0-
Staff recommends that City Council APPROVE Parcel Mop No. 26766, subject to the
Conditions ef Approval.
AC:mph
AttachmentS:
2.
3.
5.
6.
Development Fee Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Commission Staff RepoFt
Conditions of Approval
Fees and Securities Report
2
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Parcel Map No. 26766
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
FEe
Habitat ConServation Ran
I K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
{ Quimby )
Condition of Apl~roval
Condition No. 1 la.
Deleted as directed per
Planning Commission on 5120191
Public Facility
Condition No. 28
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No. 30
Fire Mitigation
Riverside County Fire Dept.
Letter Dated 9-1-87
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition No. 41
Public Library Mitigation
Condition No. 20a.
Regional Statistical Area
(RSA)
Per Development Agr==.-~ent
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the project will be consistant with the City*s General Plan once
adopted.
The project is a part of Specific Plan 199.
ATTACHMENT 2
LOCATION MAP
Location
Map
ATTACHMENT 3
COPY OF FINAL MAP
\
I
ATTACHMENT ~.
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 20, 1991
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766
Prepared By: Oliver Mujica
Recommendation: ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766.
APPLICATIIpN INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SWAP DESIGNATION:
SURROUND!ING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
BACKGROUND:
Bedford Properties
Robert Bein, William Frost 8; Associates
Subdivide 10.81 acres into one (1) single family
residential parcel and one (1) open space parcel.
South side of Rancho California Road, between
Butterfield Stage Road and Vintage Hills Drive.
Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village)
Specific Plan
North: SP 199
South: SP 199
East: SP 199
West: SP 199
Not applicable.
Model Home Parking Lot/Open Space
North: Single Family Residential
South: Single Family Residential
East: Single Family Residential
West: Single Family Residential
On January 26, 1988, the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors approved Tentative Tract Map Nos.
22715 and 22716, within the boundaries of Specific
Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village).
Tentative Tract Map No. 22715 created 109
residential lots, with a minimum lot size of 7,200
A: PM26766 I '~
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
square feet, and 3 open space lots totaling lu,.3
acres. Tentative Tract Map No. 22716 created 175
residential lots, with a minimum lot size of
square feet, and 2 open space lots totaling 1.6
aCreS.
On April 17, 1991, the applicant filed Tentative
Parcel Map No. 26766 alon9 with Substantial
Conformance No. 17, in order to process the
requests concurrently.
On.May 9, 1991, Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 was '
reviewed. by the Formal Development Review
Committee; and, it was determined that the project,
as designed, can be adequately conditioned to
mitigate the DRC's Concerns. In addition, the DRC
determined that, combined with Substantial
Conformance No. 17, the project is consistent with
Specific Plan No. 199. The DRC has forwarded a
recommendation of approval subject to conditions.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 proposes to
subdivide the subject 10.81 acre site into one (1)
single family residential parcel containing
approximately 8,276 square feet {0.19 acres) and
one (1) open space parcel containing 10.62 acres.
The proposed subdivision has been designed in
accordance with the standards of the proposed R-1
(One-Family Dwelling) zone, as well as Ordinance
Nos. 3~8 and 460.
The subject 10.81 acre site has been previously
designated as an open space lot for Tract No. 22715,
within Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan No. 199.
As mentioned in the Staff Report for Substantial
Conformance No. 17, the applicant is proposing to
exchange one (1) dwelling unit of density from
Planning Area 1L~ to Planning Area 13 of Specific
Plan No. 199. Consequently, the applicant has
submitted Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766.
P!annin9 Area lq encompasses Tract 22716 which is
comprised of five phases all of which are recorded
maps. The Specific Plan allows for 175 dwelling
units within Planning Area lu,. Planning Area 13
encompasses Tract 22715 in which all phases have
also been recorded. The Specific Plan allows for 109
dwelling units within Planning Area 13. The
dwelling unit count for these two planning areas
totals 28q.
A: PM26766 2
SPECIFIC PLAN/
GENERAL PLAN
CONSIST'IENCY:
ENV I RONMENTA L
DETERMI NATION:
FINDINGS:
As a part of the Comprehensive Landscape Plan for
Vintage Hills, Lot No. 1 (an approved buildable lot)
was extensively landscaped and dedicated to the
Homeowners Association as a community entry area
and is now designated as an unbuildabie lot. This
lot will remain as an open space/landscape feature of
the Vintage Hills community. The new dwellin9 unit
total for Planning Area 13 will be 110 units, and 17u,
units for Plannin9 Area 1~. The combined total for
the two areas has not changed. Therefore, Staff
has determined that the request exchange of one lot
between Planning Areas 13 and 1~ is in substantial
conformance with Specific Plan No. 199.
Combined with an approval of Substantial
Conformance No. 17, the proposed project is
consistent with the density and Land Use
designations of Planning Areas 13 and lu, of Specific
Plan No. 199. In addition, Staff finds it probable
that this project will be consistent with the new
General Plan when it is adopted.
This project is categorically exempt from
environmental review under Section 15315 of the
California Environmental Quality Act, which
includes minor land divisions.
The proposed Parcel Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, due to the fact that the project
involves only a minor division of land and is
Class 15 Categorically Exempt.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential development.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
A: PM26766 3
~'~,I
10.
11.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. 460,
Schedule A.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that. the project has
access to public roads and a specific plan will
be implemented with this project.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lot is large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Calle Reseca.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare·
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and her·in
incorporated by reference.
' A: PM26766 q
STAFF REC~)MMENDATION:
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
Parcel Map No. 26766.
approving Tentative
OM:ks
AttachmentS:
2.
3.
q.
ResOlution
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
Large Scale Plan
A: PM26766 5 '~
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVINC; TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 26766 TO SUBDIVIDE A 10.81 ACRE PARCEL
INTO TWO |2) PARCELS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA AND BUTTERFIELD
STAGE ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NOS. 946-170-017 AND 020.
WHEREAS, Tayco filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 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 May
20, 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
approved said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findincls. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty |30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a)
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.
~ A: PM26766 6
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, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Tomecula 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
pri~paration 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
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 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.
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. ( I i) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
~60, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
A: PM26766 7 "~
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
physical ly 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 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, due to the fact that the project
involves only a minor division of land and is
Class 15 Categorically Exempt.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surroundingcurrentresidentiai development.
A:PM26766
8
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. ~60,
Schedule A.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and a specific plan will
be implemented with this project.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lot is large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Calle Reseca.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
A: PM26766 9 ~
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby finds that
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 is categorically exempt from environmental review
under Section 15315 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 for the subdivision of a 10. 81 acre parcel into two ( 2 )
parcels located on the Southwest corner of Rancho California and Butterfield Stage
Roads subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of May, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHA I RMAN
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 20th day of May, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: PM26766 10
ATTACHMENT 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No:
Project Description:
Assessor~s Parcel No.:
26766
Subdivide 10.81 acres
into two (2) parcels.
9~6-170-017. 020
Planninq Department
1.
5:
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 conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date. unless extended as provided by Ordinance L~60.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordat(on of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance ~60 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road.
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.
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:
a. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) 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.
'~ A: PM26766 11
10.
11.
12.
13.
15.
Prior to recordslion Of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
office of the .City 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 ~ollowing note 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 recommendations.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit. the
applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by
paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should
Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat
Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. '663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the
Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or
resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temqtcula. 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. 26766, :which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Govermment Cede Section 66~99.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the Subdivider of any such claim. action. or proceeding
against 'the City of Tenecula 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.~ewer. and cable
TV Shall be provided for underground. with easements provided as required.
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provided. Telephone, cable TV. and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
Pfi~r-t~ ~ e.~. Jatlefr,ef-the-Fif~al-4Vlep=-the~!e~eteprer-hi'J assi~, ,co
cerd;erm-t~-the-l=m-tr! Jistfi~t -Qui,,4,,f-~rdieaece~,-t~l&s~
i~svmqce~-abui+dif~ p-, ,,,~. (Deleted by Planning Commission May 20. 1991 )
All Utilities. except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater. shall be installed
underground.
A: PM26766
12
16.'
17.
18.
19.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCF, R'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.
No lot 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 CCF, R's which shall include compulsory membership of all
owners of lots 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.
Every owner of a lot shall own as an appurtenance to such 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.
Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be
provided for in the CCF, R~s.
PriOr to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS. the following conditions shall be
sati sfi ed:
a. 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.
b. All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate. all required
elements from the subdivision's approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
c. All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant | Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
d. 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.
A: PM26766 * 13
Building separation between all buildings excluding fireplaces shall not
be less than ten ~ 10 ) feet.
f. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten {10) feet.
g. Front yard shall be provided with landscaping and manually operated
underground irrigation system.
Th developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep' of all slopes,
21. landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations
arethe responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
22. PriOr to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be t~atisfied:
a. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
23. Thi~ applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as set forth in
Specific Plan 199 and Tract Map No. 22715 as they relate to Tentative Parcel
Map No. 26766 and the development of Planning Area 1:3.
EnclineeHncl 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.
I{ is undirstood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, travels
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
25. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
SUbdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
RiverSide County Flood Control district;
City Of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department; '
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
A: PM26766 lq
27.
CATV Franchise: and
Parks and Recreation Department.
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.
28.
The developer, or the developer's successor, shall execute a current Public
Facilities 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.
29.
30.
31.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
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
with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
agreement
building permit.
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).
32.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property
line.
33.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two ( 2 ) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
35.
36.
37.
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.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the Cityms CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
~ A: PM26766 15
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
38. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and ~an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
39.
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.
~0. All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales
independent of any other lot.
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.
PRIOR T0 BUILDING PERMIT:
~2. 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
addressing compaction and site conditions.
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
griding plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF.OCCUPANCY:
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate. detours during construction.
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
If an interim
project, in the amotmt in effect at the time of payment of the fee.
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been fina y
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits ~lor
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 (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
A: PM26766 16 _~
0
!i
!l!J, 1 ~, II i I!! iI
, ]!L..mIL,! ~ .,, .
DATE:
PLAnninG DEPA rnEnC
RE:
TENTATIVE TRACT HAP NO. 227ii; .',;Z "'>. .-
E. A. NLNBER: '-I,.47
REGIONAL TEAM NO. !
Dear Applicant:
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors has taken the following action on the above
referenced tentative tract map at its regular meeting of januar,f 26, 19-8j .
XX APPROVED tentative map subject to the attached conditions.
DENIED tentative map based on attached findings.
APPROVED withdrawal of tentative map.
The tract map has been found to be cmsistent with all pertinent elements of the
Riverside County: General Plan and is in compliance with the California Environmentan
Quality Act of 19,70. ne pruject will not have a significant effect on the environment
and a Negative DeclaraJion has '~e dopted,
A conditionally ~ppr ~' :te~nta:~ract map shall expire .,--~ql~,,~months after the approval at
the Board of Superviso ' Hear. atn of which is shom~ ,.above, unless '~ithin that
period of time a fina "-- ..... ~)J~e_lLapproved and~{~ ',~th the County Reco~r.
Prior to the expiration d ~ -':' v~~e~i!~k~j~)Aj~'alPpl}..{~i' '~''" .:~n~ for an extensi~ of
'~' ' n h"' 'at," .
o..,....,.,o.,.:,,..., .,;0:,,%::.;::,:::..,,..
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Roger S. Streeter, Planning Director
R,1T.ifgs
S-Zi-~]:S
FILE- WHITE
F:.i.:he,: a.~c;:o'::, Supervisin.q Planner
APPLICANT - CANARY
ENGINEER- PINK
295-39 (p. ev. 1,0183}
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
,~,,p~TrTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPER'~ .... S
PINKS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FROM:The Planning Department SUBMITTAL DATE: December 16, 1987
SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE N0. 4982, TENTATIVE TRACT N0'S 22715 and
22716 - Robert Bein, Milljam Frost & Associates - First Supervisorial
District - Rancho California Area - 121.8 Acres - 289 Lots - Schedule A -
RECOMMENDEDMOTION: Zoning Request: Change of Zone from R-R to R-l,
R-2, and C-1/C-P.
The Planning Connission and Staff reconnend:
on the findings incorporated in the environmental
assessment and the conclusion that the.proposed project will not
have a s~gnificant effect on the environment; and
.~-
OENIAL of Change of Zone No. 4982 from R-R to R-l, R-2, and C-1/C-P
in accordance with Exhibit 2, based upon the findings and conclusions
incorporated in the Planning Comission minutes dated November 18, 1987;
and,
Lt°n n . Exhibit 4, based upon the findings and
conclusions incorporated in the Planntng Coanission minutes dated
November 18, 1987; and,
based on the findings and conclusions incorporated
in the Planning Connission minutes dated November 18, 1987; and,
APPROVAL of Tentative Tract No. 22716 subject to the attached
conditions, based on the findings and conclusions incorporated
in the Planning C~anission minutes dated November 18,.1987.
LL:me
12-16-87
Prey. AF. tel. Depts. Comments DLst. AGENDA NO.
RIVERSZDE COU~ PLANNZNG COHH[SSZON HINUTES
NOVE]'4BER 18, 1987---
(AGENDA XTEN 7~9 - REEL 961 - SIDE I - 2616-Efid; SXDE 2 - 000-200)
CHANGE OF ZONE 4982 - EA 31847 - Bein/Frost and Associates - Rancho California
Area - First SUpervisorial Dis rict - 121.8~ acres, south of Rancho California
Rdo between Ka"iser Parkway and~Butterfield Stage Rd - R-R to R-lo R-2 and
C-l/C-P, etc,
TRACT 22715 - EA 31847 - Bein/Frost and Associates - Rancho California Area -
First Supervt rial District - south of Rancho California Rd, between Kaiser
TRACT 22716 - EA 31847 - Bein/Frost and Assoc(ates - Rancho California Area -
First Supervtsorial District -south of Rancho California Rd, between Kaiser
Parkway and B = terfield Stage iM - 175 resident(a1 lots/2 open space lots -
48.5~ acres -.u~chedule A
The hearings were opened at 3:15 p,m. and closed at 3:30 p,m.
STAFF RECOI(qEIDATZON: Adopt(on of the negat(ve declarat(on for EA 31847,
dental of Charge of Zone Case 4982 from R-R to R-l, R-2 and C-l/C-P, but
approval of CVange of Zone Case 4982 from R-R to R-l, R-2, R-5 and C-1/C-P tn
accordance wi~h Exh(bit 4, and approval of TentattveTract Paps 22715 and
22716 subject to the proposed conditions. The project s(te was located within
Planning Area !13 of Specific Plan 199, which called for low density family
oriented hous~Rg, Staff felt the.proposed project ms consistent.with the
spec(fic plan'and compatible With the surrounding area, wh(ch conta(ned single
fmaily res(derces, a horse ranch, a substat(on, a v(neyard, and vacant lands,
Although star# supported the proposed zone change, they felt the open space
areas should te zoned R-5.
Hs. L(ktns reComended the following changes to the cond(ttons
Tract 22715:
19(a) - Amend to read "Prior to the (ssuance of build(rig permits" (nstead
of "Prior to the issuance of grading permits".
20(g) - Amend to read "All front yards shell he provided with landscaping
and manually operated permanent underground irrigation."
Tract 22716: ~ *'
Add Condition 17(f) to reid: All lots shall be graded so as to drain to a
comeon drainage swale located between the non-entry side of adjacent lots.
If dra(nage to both sides of a lot is proposed, each lot so graded shall be
pipes my be ut(ltzed as approved by the Director of Butlding and
Safety,
- Amend to read" rio to
prior to the issuance of grading permits).
21(g) - All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and manually
operated permanent underground irrigation.
4O
R]VERS]DE COUNTY PLANNING COHFIISSZON ~IffiJTES
~OVENBER 18, 1987.--
Cmmnissioner Purviance requested that consideration be given to a possible
review of Ordinance 348 as it related to the R-2 zone. He was particularly
concerned about the density allowed under this zone, and pointed out that it
allowed these very small lots without the controls provided under the R-6
zone. Even with the price control available to the County to make these homes
affordable to working people, the minimum lot size allowed under the R-6 zone
in the Norario Valley had been increased from 3600 to 5000 square feet. The
subject project proposed 4900 square foot lots and there was no price control
even though homes ware needed by working people in the Rancho California
area. Co,nissioner Purrlance was very concerned about the densities which had
been approved for these SpeCifiC plans, although he realized they appeared to
represent a cor~iment by the County.
Commissioner Purviance recommended that the areas proposed for C-1/C-P be
zoned C-P-S instead; although not officially designated as an eligible scenic
highway, Rancho California was currently a very scenic road which he felt
should be protected with the C-P-S zone. It was Commissioner Bresson's
understanding that the protection of scenic highways was limited to the
freeways. Commissioner Purviance agreed that Rancho California Road would
probably never be designated as a scenic highway. but he still felt it should
be protected*because of the existing scenic values.
Commissioner .Bresson referred to Co,~isstoner Purviance's comnents regarding
the R-2 and R-6 zones, and stated. he felt the selling price of the R-2 home
reflected the size of the lot; the R-1 lots would be priced higher than R-2
lots. He felt the R-2 homes would help Riverside County to meet the State
mandate for affordable housing. Commissioner Purviance requested the
applicant to furnish information on the selling prices of these homes.
Ken Cook, representing the applicant, advised they had not as yet established
prices for these homes, but there would be a significant difference between
the selling prices for the R-1 and R-2 homes. He thought in their current
sales program for an identical project, the homes were selling for
approximately $85,000. Commissioner Purviance did not feel this price was
affordable for working people.
Mr. Cook requested that Condition 18(a) for Tract 22716 be amended to read
· All dwellings shall be provided with roof gutters and downspouts where
necessary, to discharge runoff onto the dwelling's underlying property. He
thought this would address staff's concerns, but not require the downspouts
and gutters for all houses. Hr. Streeter referred to the field trip made by
the Cm~nission the previous week, which he felt clearly demonstrated that
water running of the caves needed to be controlled On the smaller lots the
water running off the caves. Commissioner Bresson stated he thought the
condition should not be changed.
Lee Johnson requested that the Road Department conditions be amended by adding
the requirewent for street lights in accordance with Ordinances 460 and 461,
41
RIVERSIDE COUIkTY PLANNING CONHISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 18, 1987-'
There being nO further testimony, the hearing was closed at 3:30 p.m.
FXNDINGS AND ~?NCLUSIONS: Change of Zone 4982 ts an application to change the
zoning on %2%~8 acres from R-R to R-1 on 61.5 acres, R-2 on 48.5 acres, and
C-1/C-P on 11;8 acres; Tentative Tract 22715 is an application to subdivide
6%.5 acres tn~o %%2 lots (109~restdential and 3 open space lots) for a density
of 2.47 dwell' ng units per acre; Tentative Tract 22716 is an application to
subdivide 48.5 acres into 177!1ots (175 residential and 2 open space lots) for
a density of 3.73 dwelling units per acre; the sub3ect site ts vacant, with
surrounding lknd uses betng stngle family residences, a horse ranch, a
substation, a:vtneyard and vacant land; the sub3ect site and a vast amount of
the surroundtag area are currently zoned R-R; other zoning designations
proximity to the site include R-l, A-1-10, A-2-10, R-A, R-A-2~and R-A-5; the
1 the P
project site fal s w~thin Margartta Village Specific 1an (Specific Plan
]99); and Ten-Jttve Tract 2275 ts located within Planning Area 13 designated
as low densit- family orient~ houstng (2-3 dwelltn units per acre with 106
· target" dwel~ trig units); Tentative Tract 22716 ts Tocated within Planning
Area 14 destgeated as medium to low denstry fmtly oriented houstng (3-8
dwelllng units r acre with t71 "target" dwelltrig units}; R-5 zoning is
reconmended ri ~oots 110, 111, and 112 within Teetative Tract 22715 and Lots
176 and 177 w'thin Tentative Tract 22716 to reflect tntended open space use;
and the 11.8 acre parcel in the northwest corner of the pro3ect site ts
located withtq Planning Area 19 designated as conwerctal. Conditions of
approval can ~dequately mitigate environmental concerns; the tentative tracts
are designed 'n conformance with specific plan standards and Ordinances 460
and 348; the 'ecmnded zoning is consistent with the specific plan; and the
proposed p~o~ect will not have a significant effect on the environment.
NOTION: Upon"motion by CommiSsioner Bresson. seconded by Co,,nissioner
Beadling and duly carried, the Commission racemended to the Board of
d
R-l, 'R-2 an C-t/C-P, but approval of
Change of Zone Case 4982 from R-R to R-l, R-2, R-5 and C-1IC-P in accordance
with Exhibit -, and approval 0fTentative Tract Maps 22715 and 22716 subject
to the proposed conditions, amended as follows, based on the above findings
and conclust6ns and the recomendattons of staff.
Tract 22715:" %
19(a) -/mend to read "PriOr to the issuance of'building pemits" instead
of::'"Prtorto the issuance of grading permits".
20(g) - Amend to read "All front yards shall be provided with landscaping
and manually operated permanent underground irrigation."
Tract 22716:
Add Condition 17(f) to read: Al1 lots shall be graded so as to drain to a
cormon drainage swale located between the non-entry side of adjacent lots.
If drainage to both sides Of a lot is proposed, each lot so graded shall be
provided with side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot.
Drainage p~pes my be utilized as approved by the Director of Building and
Safety.
42
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COI~ISSION RINUTES
NOVEHBER 18, 1987"
18(b) - Delete Entirely
- P r
20(a) Amend to road · rio to the issuance of building permits' (not
prior to the tssuance of grading permits).
21(g) - All front yards shall be provided w~th landscaping and manually
operated permanent underground irrigation,
Amend the Road Depar'ment conditions for beth tentative maPs by adding the
roquirement :for street lights in accordance w"ith Ordinances 460 and 461.
ROLL CALL VOTE RESULTED AS FOLLOkIS:
AYES: Comntsstoners Beadling, Donahoe, Smith and Bresson
NOES:
Comtsstoner Purvtance (felt the commercial zoning should be C-P-S
tnstead of C-l/C-P)
ABSENT: None
43
/
Zoning Area: iiRancho Ca1 ifornia
Supervisorial District: First
E.A. Number: 31847
Regional Team::No. One
CHAIIGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATZVETRACT NO, 22715
TERTATZVETRACTIIO, 22716
Planning Commission: 11-18-87
Agenda Item No. 7-9
1. Appl icant:
2. Type of Request:
3. Location:
4. Existing Land Use:
5. Surrounding Land Use:
6. Existing Zoning:
7. Surrounding Zoning:
Comprehensive General Plan
Designation:
9. Land Division Data:
lO.a. Agency Recommendations
RZVERSXDECOIJIr/PUIIIZlliDeRETIE~
STAFF IERIRT
Robert liein, Ntlliam Frost & Associates
Change .of zone from R-R to R-l, R-2 and
C-l/C-P, one R-1 subdivision, and one R-2
subdivision
Bordered by Rancho Ca1 ifornia Road,
Butterfield Stage Road, Rancho Vista Road,
and Kaiser Parkway
Graded and vacant land
Single family residential, horse
substation, vineyard, and vacant land
ranch
R,mmmmR
R-R, R-l, R-A, R-A-2Ii, R-A-5, A-1-10, and
A-2-10
Open Space/Cons: Specific Plan 199
(Iqargarita Village)
Total Acreage: 121,8 Acres
Total Lots: 289 Lots
284 Residential Lots
5 Open Space Lots
CHANGE OF ZONE NO, 4982
See letter dated:
Road: 8-24-87
Health: 8-21-87
Flood: 9-01-87
Fire: 9-01-87
TRACT 22715
See 1 etter dated:
Road: 9-01-87
Health: 8-21-87
k'lood: 9-15-87
Pire: 9-01-87
Mr. Palomar: 8-25-87
TRACT 22716
See letter dated:
Road: 9-01-87
Health: 8-21-87
Flood: 9-14-87
Fire: 9-01-87
Mr. Palomar: 8-25-87
CHANGE'OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 22716
Staff Report
Page 2
lO.b.Tract Data:
11. Letters:
12. Sphere ef Influence:
TRACT 22715
R-1 !tact
61,5 Acres
112 Total Lots
109 Residential Lots
3 Open Space Lots
2.47 Du/Ac
7200 sq. ft. mtn. lot stze
TRACT22716
e-2 Iract
48.5 Acres
177 Total Lots
175 Residential Lots
2 Open Space Lots
3.73 Du/ac
4900 sq. ft. m~n. lot s~ze
Opposing/Supporting: None as of thts wrttlng
Not wtth~n a ctty sphere
ANALYSIS
Pro~ectOesCrtptton
The appltcaAt ts proposing a change of zone and two Schedule "An subdivisions
on a 121.8 acre stte tn the Rancho Ca]tfornta area. Bordered by Rancho
California Road'to the north, Butterfte~d Stage Road to the east, Rancho Vtsta
Road to the south, and Katser Parkway to the wast, the enttre stte ts located
wtthtn the boundaries of Spectftc Plan 199 (Hargartta Vtlla e). Thts spectftc
plan was adopted by the Board of Supervtsore on AUgust 26, ~986.
Change of ~one No. 4982 ts an application to change the zontng on the 12i.8
acre stte from R-R (Rural-Residential) to R-1 (Stngle Famtly Residential) on
61.5 acres, R-2 (Hulttple Famtly Dwellings) on 48.5 acres, and C-1/C-P (General
Conrnerclal) on 11.8 acres. The 11;8 acre parcel proposed for co~nerctal
located tn the northwest corner of the project stte. Thts parcel was created
through Parcel Ip 22513 - a 'one-parcel" parcel map -whtch was approved at
Director's Heartng on June 19, 1987.
Tentative Tract No. 22715 ts proposed for~he 61.5 acre R-1 stte on the eastern
portton of'the project stte. The tract Is a Schedule 'A" subdivision, creattng
109 residential lots wtth a mtntmum lot stze of 7200 square feet. In addition,
three (3) open space lots are proposed, rangtrig tn s~ze from 2.8 acres of open
space to 11.5 acres of open space and park.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATTVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22716
Staff Report
Page 3
Tentative Tract No. 22716 ts proposed for the 48.5 ac~e R-2 stte located west
of Tract 22715. The tract ts a Schedule "A" subdivision, creattqg 175
residential lets wtth a mtntmum lot stze of 4900 square feet. in addition, two
(2) open lots are proposed for parks rangtng tn stze from ,4 ac~e to 1.2 acres.
Land Use/Zontlm
The stte ts part of the Ma'rgartta Vtllage Spectftc Plan (Specific Plan No.
199). The Spectfic Plan, whtch ts composed of rostdenttal and conznerctal land
uses Including recreational open space and coemuntty uses, Incorporates a la~Je
area generally north/northeasterlyy of the sub3ect property,
The subject stte ls currentl:y vacant, as are most of the properties that
surround the $tte, The 1,8 acre parcel tn the northwest corner of the stte has
.been graded as part of th underl~ytng Parcel Hap No, 22513, Some scattered
stngle famtl~y.restdences can ~e found outstde the Spectfic Plan boundar~y to the
northeast, southeast, and sOuthvest, In addition, single famtly homes (Tract
No, 20879), are under construction tnmedtatel~y north of the stte across Rencho
California Read, There ts also a lone horse ranch adjacent to the north, 'A
vtneyard can be found northeasterly of the project area, also along Rancho
California Road.
The .-sub3ect stte and--ad3otnlng properties to the south, west, north, and
northeast are zoned R-R. A-1-10 and R-A-2~ zontng can be found to the east,
along with R~I zontng to the'north, Other zontng designations tn proximity to
the proportly ire R-A, R-A-5 and A-2-10,
ilthtn Spectfic Plan 199, a total of 3,650 residential clwe111ng untts are
proposed on :~a 1275.5 acre ~tte. Already tracts and corresponding changes of
zone have beee approved. On the 283 acre stte ad3acent to the east, 459
lots and 327 R-2 lots are slated for develoment. Tentative Tracts 21672,
21673, 21674, and 21675, along with Change of Zone 4742, were approved by the
Board of SuFervtsors on March 31, 1987. The change of zone wtll change the
slte*s current R-R zontng to R-Z, 8-2, R-2-5000, and R-5.
Environmental.Analysts
%
Iqa;lor environmental tssues were anal~yzed and
withtn EnvirOnmental Impact; Report No, 202,
Spectfic P1an,i199, Acoustical analyses were
consequence
mitigation measures proposed
prepared tn conjunction wtth
prepared for each tract
to thts report. Ntttgatton to reduce notse levels wtll be
Incorporated 1n-product destgn and conditions of approval. The tntttal study
conducted for Environmental Assessment No. 31847 found that environmental
tssues assoclated wtth the proposed tracts and change of zone ere adequately
addressed tn the E.Z.R. and dtd not tndlcate additional environmental tmpacts.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22716
Staff Report
Page 4
TENTAT/VETRACTN0. 22715
Tentative TraCt No. 22715 is located within "Planning Area 13" of the t4argarlta
Village Specqftc Plan. "Planning Area 13" is designated as low density family
oriented housing. Based on 47.4 net acres and an assigned density range of 2
to 3 dwelling.units per acre, "Planning Area 13" is asstgned a total of 106
"target" dwelling untts,* not to exceed 142 dwelling units. (Note: The total
number of "target" dwelltrig units is based on the median density.)
Tentative Tract No. 22715 ts proposing 109 "R-l" residential lots, each a
mintmum of 7200 square feet. While the proposed tract exceeds the total number
of "target" dwelling untts for Planning Area 13 by 3 lots, it ~s well within
the parameters of the assigned density at 2.47 dwelling units per acre and well
under the maximum number of dwelling units for the category of land use.
The proposed tract will also provide 3 open space lots. Lot 110, with 3.1
acres, and Ldt 111, rith 2.8 acres, are dest hated as "open space", whereas Lot
112, with 11.5 acres, is designated as a par~ and open space. Lot 112 also
includes a 10' foot ride horse trail easement, as requtred by the Specific Plan.
The private comnon open space will be devoted to passive open space use. In a
family oriented area, such as Planntng Area 13, this my include facilities for
picntctng, chtldren's play areas, and small lot sports such as volleyball and
basketball. The exact design and layout of the open space facilities for
Tentative Tract No. 22715 ts being requested as part of the conditions of
approval.
TENTATZVETRACTNO. 22716
Tentative Tract No, 22716 ts located rithtn "Planning Area 14" of the ~rgartta
Village Spect:ftc Plan. "Planning Area 14" is designated as medium to low
denstry fam1'ly oriented houstng. Based on 38,1 net acres and an assigned
density range of 3 to 8 dwelltrig untts per acre, "Planning Area 14" is assigned
a total of 171 "target" dwelllng untts, not to exceed 305 dwelling units.
(Note: The total number of "target" dwelltng units ts based on median density.)
Tentative Tract No. 22716 is proposing 175 "R-2" residential lots. While the
proposed tract exceeds the total number of "target" dwelling units for Planning
3.73 ling units per acre and ~1~ under the maxtmum nu~er n
units for the category of land use.
The minimum lot size for the proposed tract is 4900 square feet. The maximum
lot size is 26,510 square feet. There are 6 different floor plans, with each
plan having 3 elevations and in some cases 4. The smallest house is 845 square
feet; the largest is 1636 square feet. The project is in conformance with
Ordinance 348 as it relates to development in the R-2 zone.
CHANGE OF ZOt{E NO. 4982
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22716
Staff Report
Page 5
In addition, Tentative Tract No. 22716 ts proposing 2 open space lots. Lot
176, vrlth .~ acres, and Lot 177, wtth 1.2 acres, are both designated as park
sttes. These park sttes wtl3~be devoted to passtve open space use. In a
family oftented area, such as:Planning Area 14, thts may tnclude facilities for
ptcntctng, ch ldren's p]ay areas, and small lot sports such as volleyball and
basketball. A 10 foot w~de:horse tratl easement ts also betrig provtded along
Rancho California Road at thereat of Lots 153, 154, 155, 156, and 157, as
required by the Specific Plan. The exact design and layout of the open space
facilities and horse trail easement for Tentative Tract No. 22716 are betng
requested as part of the conditions of approval.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
Change of Zone No. 4982 will provide the appropriate zoning designations on the
project sites to implement development of Tentative Tract Nos. 22715 and 22716.
opments) be placed on Lots 110, 111, and 112~Ith~n Tentative
Tract 22715 and Lots 176 and 177 withtn Tentative Tract 22716 to reflect the
tntended open space use; the remainder of those tracts to be zoned as
requested.
Ftnally, the. requested C-1/C-P zontng on the 11.8 acre parcel tn the northwest
comer of the;;proJect area is consistent wtth the Spectftc Plan. The stte ts
located wtthtn "Planning Area 19" whtch ts designated as a commercial site.
CONCt. USION
Spectftc Plat No. 199. Those projects found consistent wtth the Speclflc Pl'an
may be considered consistent With the General Plan. Zn addition, the proposed
project confo-ms to the applicable requirements of Ordinances 348 and 460. The
project ts cm~attble with area development.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22716
Staff Report
Page 6
FIMDINGS
1. Change of Zone No. 4982 is an application to chane the zontn 121.8
acres from R-R to R-1 on 61.5 acres, R-2 on 4~.5 acres, an) on
C-1/C-P on
11.8 acres. .
Tentative_Tract No. 22715 is an application to subdivide 61.5 acres into
112 Lots'~'(109 residential/3 open space) for a density of 2.47 dwelltng
units per acre.
Tentative Tract No, 22716 is an application to subdivide 48.5 acres into
177 lots (175 residential/2 open space) for a density of 3.73 dwelling
untt$ per acre,
'4,
The sub3ect site Is currently vacant with surrounding land uses being
stngle family residences, a horse ranch, a substation, a vineyard, and
vacant )and.
The subject site and a vast amount of the surrounding areas are currently
zoned R-R. Other zoning designations in proximity to the site include
R-l, A-1-10,'A-2-10, R-A, R~A-2~, and R-A-5.
The project site falls within the Nargartta Village Specific Plan area.
(Specific Plan No. 199),
Tentative .Tract No. 22715 is located within "Planning Area 13' designated
as low density family oriented housing (2-3 Du/Ac); 106 "target" dwelling
units.
Tentative Tract No. 22716 is located within "Planning Area 14" designated
as medium to low density family oriented housing (3-B Du/Ac); 171 "target"
dwelling units.
R-5 zoning ls recommended on Lots 110, 111, and 112 within Tentative Tract
No. 22715 and Lots 176 and 177 within Tentative Tract No. 22716 to reflect
intended open space use.
10. The 11..8 acre parcel in the northwest corner of project site is located
within 'Planning Area 19" designated as "conmnerctal".
CONCLUSIONS
1. Conditions of approval can adequately mitigate environmental concerns.
2. The tentative tracts are designed in conformance with Specific Plan
standards, Ordinance 460, and Ordinance 348.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 4982
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22716
Staff Report
Page 7
3. The recommend zontng ts consistent wtth the Spectftc Plan and applfcant's
request.
RECOII~ENDATTCiIS
ADOPTZON of ~he Negattve Dec1Bratton for Environmental Assessment No. 31847,
based upon !the findings' tn the initial study and the conclusion that the
p~oposed p~oject will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
DENIAL of Cha~ge of Zone No. 4982 from R-R to R-l, R-2, and C-l/C-P; but,
APPROVAL of Change of Zone No, 4982.from R-R to R-I, R-2, R-5, and C-1/C-P tn
accordance~th Exh~btt 4; and,
APPROVAL of'Tentative Tract No. 22715 and 22716, subJeCt to the attached
conditions and based upon the! findings and conclusions in the staff report.
LBL:me
11-4-87
DATE: ~uly 27; 1987
TO: Assessor -~
Building and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duda
\ Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
LAFCO. Doug Vterra
iV - iDE CC J/l ,u
PLAi riirIG
AUa 7:19 ?
,r.,NF. FSiD5 COt.'::'.',' ROAD
Dc_.PT. F'.:Y,N CHECK
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson
Rancho Caiif. Water
Southern Calff. Edison
Southern Calif. Gas
General Telephone
Temecula Chamber of Com~rce
Nt. Plaomar
Eastern Nunicipal Water "'
Regional Water Quality Control Bd ~9
Commissioner. Bresson
CHANGE OF ZONE 4982/TRACT 22715/TRACT.
22716 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 31847 - Robert
Betn, Wtlltam Frost & Assoc. - Rancho
California District -Ftrst Supervisortal
Dtstrtct- Rancho California Road between
MArgartta & Butterfield Stage Road - R-R
Zone - 121.8 Acres - (REQUEST To Change
Zone from R-R to R-l, R-2, & C-l/C-P) -
Concurrent Cases Tr. 22715 & Tr. 22716 -
· ' Nod 119 -A.P. 923-220-002 & 030
.o'- °~ ,- -~ r'~
Please review the case described above, aiong wtth the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled fer September 3, 1987. If tt
clears, it will then go to public hearing. - ......
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to August 20, 1987 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Lesley Linkins at 787-1363
Planner
COffi~ENTS:
DATE: SIGNATURE
PLEASE print name and title
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
4~209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INnIn CAm IFORNIA 92201
COUNTY PLANNING DE~T.
ATTN; Lasley Likins
8-21-87
Jim Gie~]ois, St. Sanitarian,
3Pmt°xTChang
r Zone 4982
Environmental Health Svcs Div
The Environmental Health Services Division has reviewed
Change of Zone 4982 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer
and water services are available in this area.
GEN. FOillid
RIV~RStD-= COUNTY,
PLANNING DF-.PARTMENT
KENN~r'H I_ El)WARDS
gNillr IN~INI:IR
1911 MARKLPT ITiiiEET
TIZ.I~NONs' (714) 717-:018
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention:
Area:
IIIVIRIIDI, CAIJleORNIA IllOt
Regional Team No. /
z.,.,'~;'~ /.,.,,/,: ~,.~
Me have reviewed t~ts case and have the following comments:
.;~.
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the
property the project is considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should comply with all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There ts adequate area outside of the
natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions tn order to maintain the natural
drainage batterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings.
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, "All new~
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of
18 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided
for mobtle home supports."
This project ts in the Area
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable rGles and
regulations,
The proposed zontng ts cohststent with existing flood hazards. Some flood
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the
tmplted d~nstty.
The Distrtct's report dated ts still current for this project.
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
The attached comments apply.
Very truly yours,
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
( )LASHUBA
)nior Civil Engineer
/
DATE:
I
DATE: July 27,1987
iVu bEDE COUrlr,u
PLArIRirlG DEP CBEfiC
TO: Assessor
Butldtng and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duda
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
~" Fire Protection ~
Rood Control Dtstrtct
Fish & Game
LAFCO Doug ¥terre
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson
Rancho Caltf. Water
Southern Calif. Edison
Southern Calif. Gas
General Telephone
Temecu]a Chamber of Cemerce
Ht. Plaomar
Eastern Huntctpal Water
Regional Water Quality Control Bd e9
Co.ntssloner'Bresson
(L____ 6'~.(Te 2)'- =.A:' 31847';" Robert
227!
Beth, Mtlliam Frost & Assoc. ;Rib
11forllft'D~it~tct'~ First S~pe~Vfs'~o al
~strtCt';'Rancho California Road between
KArgartta & Butterfield Stage Road - RoR
Zone - 121.8 Acres - (REQUEST To Change
Zone from R-R to R-Z, R-2, & C-l/C-P) -
Concurrent Cases Tr. 22715 & Tr. 22716 -
Hod 119 - A.P. 923-220-002 & 030
Please review the case described above, along with the attached_case ma~. A Land .
Dtvtston Co,,,itteeeeeting has been tentatively scheduled fo~i.$eptembeF~3~.1987.'~f it
clears, tt will then go to public hearing .......
:
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to August 20. 1987 tn order that~e
my include thee tn the staff repprt for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesttate to contact
Lesley LinktriG a~ 787-1363
Planner
C0fir4ENTS: ~
The FIre Department.has
no co~ents or conditions.
Fire protection requirements
will be addressed with the related
tract maps.
DATE: 9-1-87 SIGNATURE
PLEASE print name and title
· C :"I V ED
~ICTJLEL E. Y, PZannin90~icet
4080 LEMON STREET, 9t' FLOOR
Dflil~D'qlr"'mm~' f'*AI Im~'f"'it")e,,meA ~n:n*
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
RIVERSI.DE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTNENT
SUBDIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVE
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
DATE: JAN. 26, 1988
EXPIRES: aAN. 26, 1990
SI'ANDARD CONDXTIONS
/~The subdlvider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County of
Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County
of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
concerning Tentative Tract No. 22715, which action is brought about within
the time period provided for in California Government Code Section
66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the subdivider of
any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside and
t
will coo rate fully in the defense. If the County fa ls to promptly
notify t~e subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to
cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the County of
Riverside.
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Nap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule
A, unless modified by the conditions listed below.
Thts conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provided by Ordinance 460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Nap Act and
t
Ordnance 460.
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside
County Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and
Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of
comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The
plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as mended
by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these
conditions of approval.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
Conditions of Approval
Page 2
GA grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Building and
Safety prior to commencement of any grading outside of county maintained
road right of way.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the
final map. ~
.~The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement recommendations
outlined in the Riverside County Road Department's letter dated t;ei~temke,
!)~ tgi);~ November 18, 1987, a copy of which is attached. (Amended at
Planning Commission on November 18, 1987.)
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a County maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing 'body accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved
tb~ the Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
· Road Commissioner.
___~Easements, when
uttlities,.etc.,
wl th i n the 1 and
conveyances shal 1
Surveyor.
required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located
division boundary. All offers of dedication and
be submitted and recorded as directed by the County
Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance
with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's
letter dated August 21, 1987, a copy of which is attached.
1/.. The subdivider shall comply with the flood control' recommendations
outlined by the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated
September 15, 1987, a copy of which is attached. If the land division
lies within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section
10.25 of Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area
drainage facilities shall be collected by the Road Commissioner.
The subdivider shall compl3~ with the fire improvement recommendations
outlined in the County Fire ~rshal's letter dated September 1, lgB7, a
copy of which is attached.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed co~non 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.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2Z,.
Conditions of Approval
Page 3
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
a. All lots shall have a minimum size of 7200 square feet net.
b. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section
3.8C of Ordinance 460.
Corner~ lots and through lots, if any, shall be provided with
additional area pursuant to Section 3.8B of Ordinance 460 and so as
not to contain less net area than the least amount of net area in
non-comer and through lots.
d. Lots created bY this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-I' zone.
When lots are crossed by major public uttlity easements, each lot
shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet,
exclusive of the utility easement.
fe
Graded but undevelo ed land shall be mtntatned in a weed-free
condition and shal~ be either planted wtth fntertm landscaping or
rovided wtth other erosion control measures as approved by the
~lreCtor of Bullding and Safety.
18. Prior to RECOROATZON of the ftnal map the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the recordatton of the final map the applicant shall submit
written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department
that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval
letter~ from the following agencies have been met.
County Fi re Department
County Flood Col~trol
County Heal th Department
County Planning Department
be
Prior to the recordatton of the ftnal map, Change of Zone No. 4982
shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors 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.
The common open space areas shall be shown as a numbered lot on the
final map and shall be managed by a master property owners association
or other appropriate authority as identified in the Specific Plan.
de
Zf the open space lots and easements are to be maintained by a
homeOwner's association, then a property owner's association with the
unqualified right to assess the owners of the fndtvtdual units for
reasonable maintenance costs shall be established and continuously
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22/15
Conditions of Approval
Page 4'
maintained. The association shall have the right to lien the property
of the owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such
lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first
deed of trust provided such deed of trust is made in good faith and
for value and is of record prior to the lien of the association.
Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map, the applicant shall
submit to the Planning Deparl~nent the following documents for County
approval which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Department
that the total project will be developed and maintained in accordance
with the intent and purpose of the approval.
1) The document to convey title
2) Covenants, codes and restrictions to be recorded
· The approved documents shall be recorded at the same time that the
· subdivision map is recorded. Said documents shall contain provisions
for ownership or the irrevocable right to use the open space and
amenitles by the owners of the project. The approved documents shall
also contain a provision which provides that the CC & R's may not be
terminated, or substantially amended without the consent of the County
or its successor-in-interest.
Prior to recordation of the final map, easements on Lots 1, 109 and
112 shall be created for the purpose of establishing entry statements
to the project.
g. The developer shall comply with the following parkway landscaping
conditions:
1)
2)
Prior to recordation of the final map the developer shall file an
application with 1he County for the formation of or annexation to
County Service Area 143 for maintenance of common open space,
parkways, and entry statements or place the maintenance
-responsibilities within the jurisdiction of the homeowner's
association.
Prior to the issuance~of building permits, the developer shall
secure approval of proposed landscaping and irrigation plans from
the County Road and Planning Department. All landscaping and
irrigation plans and specifications shall be prepared in a
reproducible format suitable for permanent filing with the County
Road Department.
3)
The developer shall post a landscape performance bond which shall
be.. released concurrently with the release of subdivision
performance bonds, guaranteeing the viability of all landscaping
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2Z~z5
Conditions of App'.-oval
Page 5
which will be installed prior to the assumption of the maintenance
responsibility by the district or homeowners association.
4) The developer, the developer's successors-in-interest or
assignees, shall be responsible for all parkway landscaping
maintenance until such time as maintenance is taken over by the
district or homeowners association.
h. In the event that o~n space lots are managed and/or maintained by
County Service Area 143, and if County Service Area 143 is no longer
able to manage and/or maintain the open space lots due to legal and/or
other reasons, then management and/or maintenance shall become the
responsibility of the master property owner's association.
t. 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.
J. Prior to recordatton 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
file~l with the office of the County Surveyor. A copy of the ECS shall
be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
The approved ECS shall be forMarded with copies of the recorded final
map to the Planning Department and the Department of Butldtng and
Safety.
k. 'The notice appearing in Sectton 6.a. of Ordfnance No. 625, the
Riverside County Right-to-Farm Ordinance, shall be placed on the
Environm. ental Constraints Sheet, with Lots No. 52, 73, 74, 75 and 76
identified therein, in the manner i
pray dad in said Sect on 6.a., as
being located partly Or wholly within, or within 300 feet of, land
zoned for primarily agricultural purposes by the County of Riverside.'
1. The. following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints
Sheet: 'This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Haunt
Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lightin systems shall
comply with the Cult on~ a Institute of Technology, Palomar
f t
Observatory recommendations dated August 25, 1987 a copy of which is
attached. '
19. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERHITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
o a, P~4ew te the 4seatnee e4r g~ad4ng pe~m-its detai~ed neemen epee spaee
a~ee ~aedssa~eg end 4~F4ga~4ee p~ans ~a~ be se~~ ~oF P;eneie9
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
Conditions of Approval
Page 6
~- PoPeanent eelemerge 4wwefe~en systems she;; be 4es{a;;ed en aS;
heRdssaFe ss~eenen9 whewe ~eqwi~ed she;; be desiWeed 4e be efeqee
veew we~k ;eeds(eFJmj end desewe~eve
· (weateents~ as spIN,eyed by the
be ~ased eede+'W~eeed,
Peekways end :,andseeped be4;deeg setbanks she;; be 3,andssaWed 4e
twev4de yeses; ~s~eeneeg ew · 4wens4teen 4Fke the pw4mewy use ewes
o4 4he s4te, I=eedseepe e;emen~s she;; 4Ms;ode eew~h beeneeg~
g~ebled eeveh sh,',bs led sFes4men 4Wens 4e eeRieRSeeM w44h
mesnde~.eeg sedewe;kst benekes end e{ke~ Fedes{weee emeee{ees wkewe
eFeJwree(e es sFFweved by the P;aRR~Rg DelMw4:ment,
· kendSeei*4e9 peeRS Ski;; 4REeFpowers lhe use o4 speeemee assert{
~wees e{ key vesusS 4onE; Feee~s we~hes ~he 9+'e~es~v
Hkewe s~wee4 4Fees .sense( be
4n~e~*4eF seweatS end Fwo~es4
wegkt-oeF-ways ~hey she;; be
w4gh.t-e~'-way.
we{heR wegk{-ei-wsy o4
due 4e 4RSM~44SeeR-t wed
ea~sede e~ {he weed
;- ksndssapeeg FeaRs she;; 4neeFpeFate native and dweegk~ ~e;eFas~
81
AS; eN4s~ee9 spes4men ~Fees and sege444ean4;: week ee~sweppengs en
~ke sub:~eet f~reeaewty she;; be shown eS the p4,e~es~!s gwedeeg F-)SRS
..and ska;; ee{e {hess {e be wemevedt we;seated endJew Peta~nedv
&aS tPees shs;S be edn4nNm deebee staked,
9eew~e9 {Fees she;; be seen1 s~aked,
Heaker end/tow
pFevede de~a4S ef }e feet eqees~F~en tweed, leerig RaRehe
RHd~
(Condition 19a Deleted at Planning Commission on November 18, 1987,)
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22715
Conditions of Approval
Page 7
de
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
a ter
Sedimentation during and f the grading process.
probabtl
gher rain months
January through Flarch.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Grading plans shall conform to Board' adopted Hillside Development
Standards: All cut and/or fill slopes, or individual combinations
thereof, which exceed ten feet in vertical height shall be modified by
an appropriate combination of a special terracing (benching) plan,
increase slope ratio (i.e., 3:1), retaining walls, and/or slope
planting combined wtth irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a
fifteen percent grade.
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:
1) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the
angle of the natural terrain.
2). Angular forms sh&ll be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect
the natural rouqded terrain,
3) 'The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with
radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes
where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
4) Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
undulating fashion.
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.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2Z/)5
Conditions of Approval
Page B
Prior to the issuance of grading pemits, a qualified paleontologist
shall be retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the
proposed grading with respect to potentia} pa]eontological ~mpacts.
Should the paleontologist find the potential is high for tmpact to
significant resources, a pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist
and the excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. ~hen
necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the
authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading actlvlty to
allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance. of BUILDING PERNITS the following conditions shall
be satisfi.~.e.d:
No building pemits shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any
residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's
successor's-in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public
facility ftnanclng measures, A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100)
per lot/unit shall be deposited with the Riverside County Department
of Building and Safety as mitigation for public library development.
All .building plans for all new structures shall incorporate all
required mitigation as identified in the Revised Acoustical Analysis
of Tentative Tract Nap 22715 in Riverside Count , dated October 5,
1987, Said plans shall be reviewed and sl ne~Yby acoustical engineer
i
verify ng that all recommendations within ;~fs report have been met.
c. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a fencing and/or wall plan -
tract be to
for perimeter of shall submitted and approved by the
Planntn Department and Building and Safety Department. Said plan
shall .Vncorporate acoustical shielding on lots 12, 13, 75 and 76 as
identified in Revised Acoustical Analysis of Tentative Tract Hap
22715 in Riverside County dated 10-5-B7, and shall also have been
reviewed and signed ~y acoustical engineer verifying that
recommendations of report have been met.
Prior to the issuance of building pemits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall addres~ 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 County Fire Harshal.
TENTATIVE TRAC' NO. 22715
Conditions of .~proval
Page 9
h. Prior to the issuance of building pemits, detailed entry statement
plans shall be submitted for Planning Department, Road Department and
Building and Safety Department approval.
t. Prior to the issuance of building peruits, a detailed park development
plan, including eqUestrian trail, shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning Department for Lot Z12.
aP;te2r to' the issuance of building ~anr~.tts detailed common open space
landscaping and irrigation p 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 fol 1 owl ng:
./l~ennanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
andscaped areas requiring Irrigation.
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque
up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
y3C All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
~tew with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground·
, k~ere street trees cannot be planted
interior streets and project parkways due
right-of-way, they .shall be planted
right-of-way.
.Landscaping plans shall incorporate native
Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to
'provide vtsual screening or a transition into the primary use area
of the site. Landscape elements shall ~nclude earth beming,
ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with
meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amenities where
appropriate as approved by the Planntng Department.
Landscaping plaa~ shall incorporate.the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
within right-of-way of
to insufficient road
outside of the road
plants where appropriate.
and drought tolerant
8<f. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
the subject property shall be shown on the proJect's grading plans
and shall not those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22,,~
Cond tions of Approval
Page 10'
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 not those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
Landscape and irrigation plans for open space Lot 112 shall
provide detail of 10 foot equestrian trail along Rancho California
Road.
(Condition 20j Added at Planning Commission on November 18, 1987.)
21. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERNITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
bo
Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and
Safety Department, fencing and/or wall shall be constructed according
to ~pproved plan.
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If
seasonal condi t d not permit planting, interim landscaping and
tons o-
erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning
Oirector and the Oirector of Building and Safety.
c. Entry statements shall be installed in accordance with approved plans.
d. Street 'lights shall be installed within the subdivision.
2.
The applicant shall compl) with all conditions of approval as set forth in
Specific Plan 199 as they relate to Tract No. 22715 and the development of
Planning Area 13.
LBL:me
11-4-87
12-10-87
L(
LeRoy D. Smom
IO&D ~t, tvVS$~Olagl · COUN/Y IUIVLrt'OI
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOI~""
November18, 1987
RIverside County Planning Cammission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
COUNTY &OadlNiITl~&flVtr CINTKR
TII-I:IDNONC It141/It-ill4
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Tract Nap 22715
Schedule A - Team 1
Amended at Planning Comatssion November 18, 1987
Ntth respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land
dtvtston mp, the Road Department recommends that the landdivider provine the
following Street Improvement plans and/or road dedications In accoraance with
Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road Zmprovement Standards (Ordinance 46Z).
Zt ts understood that the tentative map correctly sho~s acceptable centerline
'profiles, a11 existing easements, traveled Nays, and drainage courses wtth
appropriate O's, and that thetr omtsston or unacceptabtltty my require the mp
to be resubm'ttted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring tn ONE is as btnaing
as though occurring tn a11. They are tntended to be complementary and to
describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Road
Coffnisstoner's Office.
1. The landdivider shall protect donstree properties from damages
caused by alteration of the dratnage patterns, 'i.e., concentra-
tion of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by
constructing adequate drainage facilities Including enlarging
e~tsttng facilities or by securing a drainage easement or by
both. All drainage easements shall be shown on the final map
and noted as follows: "Drainage Easement - no building,
obstructions, or encroachments by-land fills are allowed". The
protection shall he as approved by the Road Oepartment.
2. The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite
drainage ~owtng onto or through the stte. In the event the
Road Commissioner emits the use of streets for drainage
purposes, the provisions of Article X! of Ordinance No. 460
~11 apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
_.capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage
facilities as approved by the Road Department.
'TraCt Map 22715 /
No e e,
Sef~em~eP-~r-}g&~ v mb , 1987
Page 2
Amended at Planning Conmnission 11-18-87
3. Major drainage is involved on this landdivision and its resolution
shall be as approved by the Road Department.
4. ~Rancho Vista Road shall be improved within the dedicated right of
way in accordance with County Standard No. 102, (64'/88')
5. Butterfield Stage Road shall be improved within the dedicated right
of way in accordance with County Standard No. 100, (43'/55').
6. "A' Street shall be improved within the dedicated right of way in
accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A. (40'/60').
7, "B", 'C", eD", "E", and "F" Streets , shall be improved within the
dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 105,
Section A. {36'/60').
The westerly boundary of lot 112 shall be improved with 34 feet of
asphalt concrete pavenent within a 45 foot part width dedicated
right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section
A. (22'/33').
9. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the landdivision
in accordance with County Standard No. 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
0.
Rancho California Road shall be improved with concrete curb and
gutter located 43 feet from centerline and match up asphalt
concrete paving; reconstruction or resurfactng of existing paving
as determined by the Road Commissioner within a 55 foot half width
dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 100.
11. A s~condary access road to the nearest paved road maintained by the
County shall be constructed within the public right of way in
accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a
grade and aligrment as approved by the Road Con~isstoner, This
.~s necessary for circulation purposes.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall
deposit with the RIverside County Road Department, a cash sum of
$150.00 per lot as mitigation for traffic signal impacts. Should
the developer choose to defer the time of payment, he may enter
into a written agreement with the County deferring said payment to
the time of issuance of a building permit.
'Tract Nap 22715
SepeembeP-i~-tgB; November 18, 1987
Page 3
Amended at Planning Con~ission 11-18-87
Zmprovement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile
extending a ,finimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at
a grade and alignment as approved by the Riverside County Road
Commissioner. Cc, npletion of road improvements does not imply
acceptance for maintenance by County.
14. Electrical and communications trenches shall be provided
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
Asphalttc emulston (fog seal) shall be applied not less than
fourteen days. following placement of the asphalt surfacing and
sh&11 be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard.
~phalt'emulsion Shall conform to Secttons 37, 39 and 94 of the
State Standard Specifications.
16. Standard cul-de-sacs and off-set cul-de-sacs shall be constructed
throughout the landdivision.
17. Corner cutbacks te conformonce wtth County Standard No. 805 shall
be shown on the ftnal map and offered for dedication.
'Lot access shall be restricted on ~ncho ~11fornta Road. ~tter-
field Stage Road and hncho Vista Mad and so noted on the final
map·
Landdivisions creating cut or fill sopes adjacent to the streets
shall provide erosion control, sight distance control and slope
easements as apprOved by the Road Department.
The landdivider shall provide utility clearance from ~ncho
California ~ter District prior to the ~cordation of the final
map.
21. The maximum centerline gradtent shall not exceed 15%.
22. 'The mtntmum centerline red11 shall be 300' as approved by the Road
Department.
,,
23. The minimum lot frontages along the cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall
be 35 feet·
24. M1 driveways shall conform to the applicable Riverside County
Standards.
· Tract Rap 22715 ..'
-$e~-~r-lJ~ Novembe. 18, 1987
Page 4
Amended at Plannin9 Conznission 11-18-87
26.
7e
'2~'.
The minimum garage setback shall be 30 feet measured from the face
of curb.
All centerline intersections shall be at 90° with a minimum 50'
tangent measured from flow line.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with PH 22514, TR 22716, PH 22554 and TR 22267.
Street lighting shall be required in accordance with Ordinance 460
and 461 throughout the subdivision, The County Service Area (CSA)
Administrator determines whether this proposal qualifies under an
existing assessment district or not. If not, the applicant shall
file an application with LAFCO for annexation into or creation of
a "Lighting Assessment District' in accordance with Governmental
Code Section 56000.
Very truly yours,
Gus Hughes
Road Division Engineer
GH:lh
*Added at Planning Comisston 11-18-87
OUNTY O1: I:IIVEI=ISlCIE- DEPARTMENT OF
August 21, 1987
HEALTH
II
Riverside County Planning Commission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92502
IRE; TRACT NAp 22715: Being a portion of the Pauba Land and
Water Company's subdivision of the Temecula Rancho in County
of Riverside, State of California, as per map recorded in
BOok 11, Page 507 Naps, in the Office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County,' Calif.
(112 Lots)
Gentleken:
The Department of P~blic Health has reviewed Tentative Hap
No. 22715 and recommends that:
I water system shall be installed according to
plans and specification as approved by the water
company and the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale
~ot less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with
the original d~awin9 to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and
joint specifications, and the size of the main
at the junction of the new system to the
existing system. The plans shall comply in
all.respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of
the California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code. Title 22, Chapter 16, and General
Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of California,when applicable. The plans shall
be signed by a registered engineer and water company
with the following certification: "I certify that the
design of the water system in Tract Hap 22715 is in
accordance with the water system expansion plans of the
Rancho California Water District and that the water
service, storage and distribution system will be
adequate to provide water service to such tract. This
certification does not constitute a guarantee that it
will supply water to such tract at any specific
quantities, flows or pressures
any other purpose".
g S i987
RiVERSiDE COUNTY
pLANNING DEPARTMENT
Riverside County Planning Commission
Page Two
August 21, 1987
This certification shall be signed by a responsible
official or the water company. The plans must be
~bmitted to the County. Surveyor's Office to review
~_~_~_~eks .prior to the request for the
C~cordation of the final ma~.
This Department has a statement from the Rancho California
Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subdivider. It will be necessary for the financial
arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the
final map..
This Department has a statement from the ~astern Municipal
Water District agreeing to allow the subdivision sewage
s~stem. to be connected to the sewers of the District. The
sewer system shall be installed according to plans. and
specifications as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the
plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate,
along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of
manholes. complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications
and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system
to the existing system. A single plat indicating location
of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the
sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be 'signed by a
registered engineer and the sewer district with the
following certification: "I certify that the design of the
sewer.-system in Tract Map 22~1~ is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water
District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at
this time to treat the ~nticipated wastes from the proposed
tract.' The plans must be submitted to the Coun~
Survey~E's Office to reyl!~_~!_i~!t two weeks prior to the
E~guest for the recordation of the final ma~.
incerely,
men a ea ices
Division
SM:tac
!118 MARK[TITR[ITT
P. O. IOX 1033
TELEPHONE (714) 787-2015
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVEMID[, ~AI, IFOIINIA I.l~Ol
September 15, 1987
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention:
Regional Team No. 1
Lesley Likins
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Tract 22715
Tract 22715 is a proposal to divide 61.5 acres into 109 lots in
the Temecula Valley area, On the southwest corner of Rancho
California Road and Butterfield Stage Road.
Much of the site is onhilts above Long Canyon Wash· The wash
conveys runoff from the east along the northern tract boundary.
Another watercourse to the:ea'st that conveys runoff from about
145 acres, approaches the project in the vicinity of Lot 13. The
applicant proposes to convey Long Canyon Wash in a culvert under
Butterfield Stage Road and in a grass lined channel. The channel
would. outlet into a proposed underground drain for Tract 22716.
Drop structures are shown as part of the Channel improvement.
The runoff from the 145 acre watershed would be collected into a
storm drain and discharged. into the grass lined channel. Onsite
storm runoff would be conveyed in the street system to outlet
into the preposed drain of Tract 22716.
Following are the District's recommendations:
This tract 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 July 3, 1984: ·
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as part of the .filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be-
paid as a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel map: or
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Tract 22715
-2-
September 15, 1987
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting deferment of the payment
of fees, the drainage fees shall be paid to the
Building Director at the time of issuance of a grad-
.ing permit or building permit for each approved par-
eel, whichever may be first obtained after the
recording of the subdivision final map or parcel map;
however,
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as..-~ part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or before receiving a waiver
to record a land division, for each lot within the
land division where construction activity as evi-
denced by one of the following actions has occurred
since May 26, 1981:
(a)
A grading permit or building permit has been
obtained.
(b) Grading or structures have been initiated.
e
The grass lined channel and culvert crossing should be
designed to collect the 100 year peak flow bulked 50% for
debris, and convey it safely through the property to an
adequate outIet. The channel should be protected from
erosion at the culvert crossing. Storm flow in the chan-
nel should not reach erosive velocities· If flow veloci-
ties are erosive, then channel side slopes should be pro-
tected. Slope protection should extend an adequate dis-
tance below the fl6w line.
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism for the grass
line'~ channel which should include irrigation, should be
submitted to the District and County for review and
proval prior to record~tion of the final map.
At least one maintenance ramp should be provided upstream
and one downstream of each drop structure to afford ac-
cess from a road to the four to one channel slope area.
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.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Tract 22715
-3-
September 15, 19~7
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities.
Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right
of wBy 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'.
7. Offsite drainage facilities should be located within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property Owners. The documents should be re-
corded end a copy Submitted to the District prior to
recordation of the fina~ map.
8. Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism for the under-
ground storm drains should be submitted to the District
and.County for review and approval prior to recordation
of the final map.
All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet.
The 10 year storm 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 are exceeded, additionaldrainage facilities
should be installed.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
If the tract is built,in phases, each phase shall be pro-
tected from the I in r00 year tributary storm flows.
A drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or di-
verted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of
the recorded drainage easement should be submitted to the
District for review prior to the recordation of the final
map.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Tract 22715
-4-
September 15, 1987
14. A co~y of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with detailed supporting hydrologic and hy-
draulic calculations should be submitted to the District
for review and approval prior to recordation of the final
map. Grading plans should be approved prior to issuance
of grading permits. A registered engineer must sign,
seal and note his expiration date on plans and calcula-
tions submitted.
Questions concerning this matter maybe referred to Stuart
McKibbin of this office at 714/787-2333.
Very truly yours,
cc:
William Bein, Robert Frost
& Associates
KENN~TH L. EDWARDS
Engine r
..- ginset
SEM: bah
A~I.- '~..N~ 'r
RIVERSIDECOUNTY f"'
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
RAY HEBRARD
FIRE CHIEF
9-1-87
Pleamini & Enlineerinl 0ffi4e
4080 I.ason SueeL Suite t I
OCT 0 6 1987
RE: T~ 22715 RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land dAvAsi~n,
the FAre Department recomends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside Count~ Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PRC~'m.-kION
Schedule 'Aw fire protection approved standard f~ hydrants (6'x4"x2½"), located
.one at each street intersection and spaced'no more than 330 feet apart in any
direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant.
Minimum fAre flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.
APPlicant/developer shall furnish one cop~ 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 ffi'e flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with
the following cer~ificationz el certif~ that the design of the water system is
in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department'.
The required w~ter system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency. prior to any combustibebuilding
material being placed on an i~dividual lot.
All buildin~s shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as
described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles
or shakes shall have a Class sB' ~ating and shall be approved b~ the Fire
Department prior to installation.'
MITIGATION FEES
Prior to the recordatAon of the final map, the developer shall deposAt with the
Riverside County Fire Department a cash sum of $400.OOper lot/unit as mitigation
for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County deferring
said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
MICHAEL E. GRAY, Planning Officer
DATE: July 27, 1987
FLAllRiilm:; DEPA ; EnC
TO: Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor -Oave Ouda
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
LAFCO Ooug Vterra
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson
-AUG 2 7 i987
RIVERSi DE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMEN1R E C E I V E D
AUG 2 5 1987
PALOMAR OBSEle/ATORY
Rancho Calif. Water
Southern Caltf.. Edison
Sourherb Caltf. Gas
Gener&3 Telephone
Temecula Chamber of Comerce
Eastern Municipal Water
Regional Water Quality Control Bd t9
(ht Palomar'~
Conxnlssloner Bresson
TRACT 22715 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 31847 -
Robert Beth, William Frost & Assoc. -
Rancho California District - First
Supervisorial District - Rancho
California Road between Nargarita Road
and Butterfield Stage Road - R-R Zone -
Schedule A - No Waiver - 61.5 acres into
: 109 lots - (CONCURRENT CASES CZ 4982 & TR
..... ,, ......... 22716).- Nod 119 - A,P, 923-220-002 & 030
. . . .....~.;.. ~.
: .- : y -~-.!- ' '.
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentathely scheduled.for. September 3, 1987. If it
clears, it will then go to public hearing. '-
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to August 20, 1987 in order that we
my Include them in. the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any 'questibns regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Lesley Linkins at 787-1363 ·
Planner
CONNENTS:
PLEASE'S~E ATTACHED
DATE: R/?%/R? SIGNATURE
_ PLEASE print name and title
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
Dr. at taut Dtrector/Palomar
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
OFFICE OF THE DIIECTDR FALOIdAIt OISEIVATOIY 10l-Z¢
This cue is vi~htn 30 miles of tbj Palomar Observatory tad is therefore
rl~hin the zone requirinZ ~he use of lov-pressure sodima vapor 1muDs for
street ligh~ing, as s~ipulaced by the Riverside County Board of Superv~*sors.
~e request ~t the design for ocher types o~ outdoor li2hcing tha~ may be
uplo~ed on ~his proper~y ~ m~e cnsis~n~ ~h the spirit of Uhe decision
of ~he Board of Supe~isorS vMch is ~cended co ~ci~ace the ~verse effects
su~ rarities h~e ~ ~he ucr~c~ resear~ ac P~, ~nefici~
s~eps ~o ~ha~ ~d ~clude:
1, Use Che minimum tmounc of light needed for the Cask.
2, Orten~ and shield ltghC Co preven~ dtrec~ u.mfard illumination.
Tun o~f ltghcs at 11:00 p.m. (or earller) unless, lu counnerctal
applicactoas, Che tssoctated business is ouen pasc chaC cime, in fnlch
cue ~he lighcs should be curned off at closing.
Use 1me-pressure sodtt~ lamps for roadrays, valkvays, equipment yards,
parking lots, securi~ tad ocher similar applications. These lights
need no~ be ~urned off at 11:00 p.m.
For further informsCion, call (818) 356-A035.
Robert J. Brucaco
Asstsctat Director
PAIAOINA. CALIFOINIA '1'!135 TELEPHONE (Ill) 3l~,-4013 TELEX it1431 CALTECH PSD
ATTACHMENT 6
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
PARCEL MAP NO. 26766
DATE: March 3, 1992
IMPROVEMENTS
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
MATERIAL F, LABOR
SECURITY SECURITY
Streets and Drainage $ -0- $
Water $ -0- $
Sewer $ -0- $
TOTAL $ -0- $
-0-
-0=
-0-
-0-
*l~tntaance RBtentim (lOB fer me 3~r)
*(or B~ds if work is cclleted)
-0-
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
Fire Mitigation Fee
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #9
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
-0-
=0-
400. O0
1980.81
150.00
=0-
-0-
Planning Department Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan Fee
Quimby Fee
Plan Check Fee
Inspection Fee
Monument Inspection Fee
$
$
$
$
$
$
56.00
4.00
-0-
790.00
-0-
250.00
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees
Less Fees Paid To Date (Credit)
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due
$
$
$
1,100.00
1,100.00
-0-
ITEM NO. 10
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '~
TO:
FROM:
CITY' OF TEMECULA
A GENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council (~Yr~~
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst
Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works/City nginee
DATE:
May 12, 1992
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the attached Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement
and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement.
DISCUSSION:
Representatives of the Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works worked with representatives of other County
and City Public Works Departments, the State Office of
Emergency Services, the American Public Works
Association, the League of California Cities, and the County
Supervisors Association of California and developed a
formal Mutual Aid Agreement for rendering Public Works
Mutual Aid in disasters.
Formal Mutual Aid Agreements already exist for the Fire
Service, Law Enforcement, and Coroner agencies
throughout the State. It has been recognized that
formalized Mutual Aid Agreements are also needed in the
public works discipline which is heavily involved in major
disasters. Because the need for Public Works Mutual Aid
occurs less frequently than in fire and law enforcement,
reciprocal service is less likely within any reasonable time
frame so a reimbursement provision has been included in
the attached Agreement. The California Emergency
Services Act authorizes Public Works Mutual Aid
Agreements.
The attached Agreement is between Los Angeles County
and Orange County as initial signatories. However, to date,
17 Counties and 119 Cities have endorsed and become
signatories as provided under the terms of the Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT.'
A TTA CHMENT:
The Agreement is intended to be used only in major
disasters when the available resources of any one County
or City are not adequate to cope with the disaster and
outside public works resources are required. It is
anticipated that in such a case, a Local Emergency will
have been declared and a State of Emergency will probably
be requested. While the Agreement is primarily aimed at a
catastrophic disaster such as a major earthquake, it could
be used for any disaster such as a major flood. The basic
provisions of the Agreement are that rendering of mutual
aid by any party is strictly voluntary so that the resources
of the assisting party are not unreasonably depleted by the
rendering of such aid. The aid provided by a party would
be fully reimbursed by the party receiving the aid. In a
major disaster, most of this cost is likely to be reimbursed
by the State and Federal Governments.
The approval of this Agreement will be a major step in
developing critical assistance to save lives and protect
property of the citizens of this City by allowing us to
receive public works assistance from other Counties and
Cities in Southern California and allowing us to provide
assistance to them so they can do the same.
Since services received in a declared emergency would
most likely be reimbursed by State and Federal
Governments, no fiscal impact is anticipated.
Since services voluntarily rendered in a declared emergency
would be reimbursed by the receiving agency and that
agency would most likely be reimbursed by State and
Federal Governments, no fiscal impact is anticipated.
Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement
2
PUBLZC WORKS MUTUAL AZD AGREEMENT
Thts Mutual AId Agreement ("Agreement") ts made and entered Into by those parttes
who have adopted and signed thts Agreement,
WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services, the League of
California CIties, the County Supervisors Association of California, and the
Amertcan Publlc Works Association have expressed a mutual Interest tn the
establishment of a plan to facilitate and encourage public works mutual aid
agreements between political subdivisions throughout California; and
WHEREAS, the parttes her. to have dotemined that tt would be In thetr
best Interests to enter Into an agreement that Implements that plan and sets
forth procedures and the responsibilities of the parties vhenever emergency
personnel, equipment and factllty assistance Is provided from one party's
Publlc Works Department to the other; and
WHEREAS, no party should be tn a posttton of depleting unreasonably Its
own resources, facilities, or servtces providing such mutual aid; and
WHEREAS, such an agreement ts tn accord vlth the California Emergency
Servtces Act set forth tn Tttle 2, Dtvtston Z, Chapter 7 (Section 8550 et seq.)
of the Government Code and specifically vlth Arttcle 14 (Sectlon 8630 et seq.)
of the Act,
' NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONS/DERATZON OF THE CONDZTZONS AND COVENANTS
CONTAZNED HEREZN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLONS:
1. For thts Agreement, the folioring toms shall be ascribed the following
meanings:
· COordinator" shall man the person designated by each party to act
on behalf of that party on all matters relattve to mutual atd, to
Include but not be limited to requests, responses, and reimbursement.
be
'Local Emergency' shall main the actual or threatened existence of
conditions of dtsaster or extreme pert1 to the safety of persons or
property vtthtn the territorial 11mlts of one of the parties caused
by human or natural conditions such as atr pollution, fire, flood,
stom, vtnd, earthquake, explosion, transportation accident, hazard-
ous material problem, tsunaml, sudden or severe energy shortage,
epidemic, rtot or other occurrences, other than conditions resulting
frame labor controversy, which occurrences, or the 1needlate threat
thereof, are likely to be beyond the control of the personnel,
equipment, or facilities of that party to thts Agreement and whtch
personnel, equipment or facilities of the other party are therefore
desired to combat.
An "Operational Are4" for the coordtMtlon of publlc vorks mutual aid
shall normally be a County and all the Jurisdictions vlthln the County
that are parties to this Agreement. A different public vorks opera-
ttonal area may be established by the parttes In some unique cases.
Coordinators deslgMted by each party shall be designated by TItle,
Name, Address and Phone Number, and If satd Coordinator changes, the
other parttes of the Agreement shall be nottiled In writing as soon as
practical after the appointment has been made through the Agreement
Coordinator designated tn Paragraph Z8 heretnafter.
When a Local Emergency has been proclaimed by party's
governtng body or authorized official, the Coordinator may request
assistance.
When request for assistance ts receSved, the assisting Coordinator shall
promptly advlse of the extent of response, provtde vhatever personnel,
equipment, and/or facilities as can be provided vtthout Jeopardizing
the safety of persons or property vlthtn thetr Jurisdiction. No party
receiving a request for assistance shall be under any obligation to
provide assistance or Incur any 11ability for not complying vlth the
request.
When the assisting Coordlnator's personnel, equipment, and/or facil-
Ities are no longer requlred or vhen assisting Coordinator advises
that the resources are requtred wtthtn thetr own Jurisdiction, the
requesting Coordinator shall lnmedtately arrange for the return of
those resources.
Requesting party shall be responsible for the safekeeping of the
resources provtded by the assisting party. Requesting Coordinator
shall remain tn charge of the lnctdent or occurrence and shall provlde
control and direction to the resources provtded by the assisting party.
The request may tnclude for providing supervisory personnel to take
dtrect charge of the resources under the general dSrectton of the
requesting Coordinator. Requesting Coordinator shall make arrange-
merits for houstng and feeding, assisting personnel, fuellng, servicing,
and repa$r of equipment tf such support Is requested by assisting
Coordinator. Assisting party's personnel shall not be damned employees
of requesting party and vice verse.
The requesting party agrees to pay 811 direct, Indirect, amlntstra-
tlve and contracted costs of assisting party tncurred as a result of
prevtd~ng assistance pursuant to thts Agreement, based upon standard
rates applicable to assisting party's tnternal operations. Payment
shall be made vtthtn sixty (60) days after receipt of a detalled
lnVotce. Requesting party shall not assume any liability for the
dtrect payment of any salary or rages to any offtcer or employee of
asSIsting party,
Requesting party shall hold hamless, Indemnify, and defend the
asSIsting party, Its officers, agents, and employees agatnst all 11a-
bility, ClaimS, losses, demands or actions for Injury to, or death of,
a person or persons, or damages to property artstrig out of, or alleged
to artst out of or tn consequence of, thts Agreement provtded such
11ability, clatms, losses, demands, or acttons are clatmed to be due
to the acts or omissions of the requesting party, 1is officers, agents,
or employees, or employees of the assisting party vorktng under the
direction and control of the requesting party vhen the act or ~ntsston
of such assisting party eployee occurs or ts alleged to occur vtthln
the scope of emploJlment under the direction and control of the
requesting party.
~fhen mutual aid ts provided, the requesting and assisting agencies,
will keep account records of the personnel, equipment, and materials
provtded as required by Federal and State (NDAA) and FEHA guidelines
to maxlmlze the possibility of Federal and State disaster reimbursement.
Each party shall have access to other party:s records for this purpose.
Agreement shall take effect lna~edlately upon Its execution and shall
remain In effect Until terminated,
Any party my withdraw from agreement wlthout cause upon de11very of
stxty (60) days prior vrttten nottce to the Agreement Coordinator
designated In Paragraph 18 berethalter.
To the extent that they are Inconsistent wtth thts agreement all prlor
agreements for public works mutual atd between the parties hereto are
hereby null and void.
Requests for mutual aid assistance under thts Agreement when more
then one County Is impacted by a disaster, should be channeled
through the appropriate Ragtonal State Offtce of Emergency Servlces
to ensure maximum effectiveness tn a11ocat$ng resources to the
htghest prtortty needs,
Requests for Publlc Works assistance from outstde of an operational
area should be channeled through the authorized emergency management
organizations for the requesting and providing parties' operational
areas,
Any controversy or clatm artsing out of or relattng to thts Agreement,
or the breech thereof, shall be settled by arbitration In accordance
wtth the Rules of the Amertcan Arbitration Association and Judgment on
the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered In any court
havtng Jurlsdtct$on thereof.
Thts Agreement In no way acts to abrogate or vatve any tnemntty available
under the Tort Clatms Act.
17. %ntt$al signatories to thts Agreement are:
Los Angeles County
Orange County
%8. The-County of Los Angeles shall act as the Initial Agreement coordinator
of thts program for the purpose of:
a. Recetpt of nay mars to the Agreement.
b. 1485n~1ntng a current 11st of s$gnatory parttes and representatives.
c, Ctrculat$q annually a 11st of all parttes and Representatives to all
signatory parties.
d. Arraqlng for amendments to agreement as my be necessary.
The party acting as Agreement Coordinator may transfer these responsi-
bilities to another party with the consent of that party and upon
notification of the other partles to the Agreement,
19.,. A]I signatory parties agree that any other qualified public agency or
quasi publlc agency my become a party to thts agreement by executing a
duplicate copy of thts agreement and sending sa~ to the Agreement
Coordinator, Initially the County of Los Angeles, addressed as follows:
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
900 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, CA 9%803-133%
Attention: DIsaster Services Coordinator
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parttes hereto have executed this Agreement by their
duly authorized officers on the dates herelMfter Indicated.
ATTEST
SIGNED AND CIRTIFIED TII/~ACOPY
THIS DOCUHENT HAS BEEN DI"L. IVI]LE;D
THE CI~IRNAIi OF THE BOARD.
LIBiDA D. RUTI[ J~VI fOW
CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SlIP ISOP,.~
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
DeWtit W. Clinton
County Counset
ORANGE COUNTY
CHAIRNAN, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ADOPTED
R-MCPW
PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT
NO. 62170
ADDITIONAL PARTIES TO AGREEMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement by
their duly authorized officers of the dates hereinafter indicated.
BY:
DATE:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
City of Temecula
ATI'EST:
BY:
DATE:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
City of Temecula
ITEM NO.
11
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
May 12, 1992
SUBJECT:
Settlement of Dispute Between City and County Regarding
Development Application Fees Received By County for Permits
from December 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to
sign the Settlement Agreement regarding Development Application Fees received by
the County for the period from December 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 subject to
approval by the City Manager and City Attorney as to the final form of the Agreement.
DISCUSSION: Following incorporation on December 1, 1989, the County
of Riverside continued to provide governmental services within the City through June
30, 1990. As part of those services, the County received application fees for
processing land use entitlements through the County Planning and Engineering
Departments. The County also received fire mitigation fees. However, many of these
applications were transferred to and processed by the City (principally, Willdan
Associates). Consequently the City is entitled to much of the fees the County
collected.
The County of Riverside has provided a list of development cases transferred to the
City. The list has been reviewed by the appropriate City staff and we are
recommending execution of the attached agreement.
A recap of fees collected from the County will be included on the May 26, 1992
agenda.
FISCAL IMPACT:
amount of $791,526.
The County will make a one time payment to the City in the
Attachment: Agreement for Settlement of Dispute Regarding
Development Processing Fees Between the County of
Riverside and the City of Temecula
DRAFT
SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE REGARDING
DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FEES BETWEEN
THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula ("City") incorporated on
December 1, 1989;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code S 57384, the County of
Riverside was obliged to continue to provide governmental
services within the City through June 30, 1990;
WHEREAS, as part of those services, the County received
application fees for proaessing land use entitlements through the
County Planning and Engineering Departments;
WHEREAS, during this same time period, the County received
fire mitigation fees;
WHEREAS, the City completed the processing of many of the
land use entitlements where the County initially received the
application and associated fees;
WHEREAS, the City is entitled to a substantial portion of
the land use entitlement application fees and the fire mitigation
fees received by the County, for the period from December 1, 1989
through Juae 30, 1990;
TEM/II076'~2~OR (515/92)
-1-
WHEREAS, City and County are desirous of ending and
resolving all disputes between them concerning application fees
for land use entitlements and fire mitigation fees collected by
the County for the period from December 1, 1989 through June 30,
1990 (heroinafter referred to as the "Fees");
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the parties hereto as
follows:
1. The parties hereto do hereby release and discharge each
other from any and all rights, claims, demands, and damages of
any kind, related to the Fees. The scope of this Release is
limited to the Fees and does not effect any other rights, claims,
demands and damages of any kind, known or unknown, asserted or
unasserted, between the parties.
2. The County agrees to pay the City Seven Hundred Ninety-
One Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Six Dollars ($791,526) within
five (5) days of the execution of this Agreement by all of the
parties.
3. Each party hereby agrees to waive any claim it has
against the other for costs of attorney fees incurred in this
dispute.
-2-
4. It is understood and agreed that this agreement
represents settlement of disputed claims and is not to be
construed as representing an admission of liability on behalf of
any party to this Agreement. The parties, however, intend to buy
their peace and to forever provide a full and complete release
and discharge from any and all liability arising out of the
transactions, matters and events more particularly identified
hereinabove.
5. The parties hereto expressly warrant, represent, and
agree that in executing this Agreement, they do so with full
knowledge of any rights which they have or may have with respect
to the other, and that they have received independent legal
advice from their respective attorneys with respect to this
Agreement.
The parties hereto acknowledge that after entering into
this Agreement, they may discover different or additional facts
concerning the Fees or their understanding of those facts. The
parties, therefore, expressly assume the risk of such facts being
so different and agree that this Agreement, shall in all
respects, be effective and not subject to rescission,
cancellation or termination by reason of any such additional or
different facts.
-3-
O 4p
6. Should either party bring an action against the
other for the purpose of enforcing the terms of this Agreement,
or for damages arising from its breach, then in such event, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney
fees and costs in addition to any other award entered by the
Court.
7. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of the
parties and to their respective successors, representatives and
assigns, and shall be binding upon and each of the foregoing.
8. This Agreement shall, in all respects, be interpreted,
enforced and governed by and under the laws of the State of
California. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and
understanding between the parties concerning the subject matter
hereof and supersedes and replaces all prior negotiations,
proposed agreements or agreements, whether written or oral.
9. This Agreement may be executed in one or more
counterpar~cs. A copy of this Agreement shall be as binding as
the original.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned have executed
this Agreement on the date and year indicated below. Each of the
below named persons warrant that they are duly authorized to sign
TEM/II076'/2.AOR
-4-
this Agreement on behalf of their principal and are authorized to
bind their principal to this Agreement.
DATED: , 1992
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
By
Chairman, Board of
Supervisors
DATED: , 1992
CITY OF TEMECULA
By
Patricia Birdsall
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
Scott F. Field
CITY ATTORNEY
ATTEST:
By
June S. Greek
CITY CLERK
~ TEM/l107672.AOR (5/S7t~2) -- 5 --
ITEM NO. 12
ORDINANCE NO. 92-09
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 CONTAINEr} IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO.
13, CHANGING THE ZONE PROM R-R 2 1/2 (RURAL
RESIDENTIAL, 2 1/2 ACRE LOT SIZE MINIMUM) TO R-1
(SINGLE FAM~.Y RESIDENTIAL) ON PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
SERAPHINA ROAD AND RITA WAY, AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 914--260-039 THROUGH 046
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the State of
California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The zoning district as shown on the
attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official zoning map for the City
of Temecula as adoptee by the City and as may be amended hereafter from time to time by the
City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of Temecula Official Zoning Map is
amended by placing in effect the zone or zones as described in Change of Zone No. 13 and in
the above rifle, and as shown on zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. Notice of Adoption. Within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City
Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
posted in at least three public places in the City.
SECTION 3. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of
its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVEn AND ADOPTED, this 12th day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Ords 92-09
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do .hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92-09 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of April, 1992, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of May.
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOF_,S:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Offis 92-09
CITY OF TEM~C~
CITY COUNCIL
MAP NO.:
CHANGE OF ZONE NO.: 13
ORDINANCE NO.:
S~ST, f~PT~I3CZ-OIe. D.CC 4
ITEM NO. 13
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Mark J. Ochenduszko, Assistant City Manager
May 12, 1992
1) The Environmental Assessment to locate a park south of
Margarita Road, east of Stonewood Road, and 2) Condemnation
of the same property for park and recreational purposes.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is requested that the City Council:
Open the Hearing, Review Facts, Accept Comments
and Close the Hearing;
ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
Environmental Assessment (EA) Number 8; and,
ADOPT the Resolution of Necessity to Initiate
Eminent Domain Proceedings for the Acquisition of
the Property.
Advance $1,300,000 from the Development Impact
Fees Fund to the Capital Projects Fund and
appropriate $1,300,000 in Capital Projects Account
021-165-624-44-5700 for the purchase of this
property. Authorize repayment of the Development
Impact Fees from CFD 88-12 Bond Proceeds once
the bonds are issued.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Temecula made offers to purchase approximately 20.23 acres of real
property located on the South side of Margarita Road, approximately 400 feet east of
Stonewood ROad for public park and recreational purposes. The subject property is
located immediately west of Temecula Elementary School and is shown on Exhibit A.
The offers to purchase this real property were made on November 8, 1991, and again
on November 21, 1991, pursuant to and in compliance with, the provisions of Section
7267.2 of the Government Code and was for the full amount determined to be just
compensation for the property and any improvements thereon. In the discussions
that occurred, the City and the property owner, Mr. Eion F. McDowell, have been
unable to arrive at a mutually agreeable sale price for the property. As a result, the
City Council must initiate eminent domain proceedings if it wishes to proceed with the
park project. The City notified Mr. McDowell on February 10, 1992, that a hearing
to discuss whether the property should be acquired by eminent domain was scheduled
for February 25, 1992. The public hearing was continued to May 12, 1992 to allow
the property owner to obtain a separate real estate appraisal and continue negotiations
with the City for the purchase of the property.
ANALYSIS
An Initial Environmental Study was prepared pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act on January 3, 1992, for the acquisition of the
property and the development of a community park on the site. The Initial Study was
circulated to organizations that have a statutory or regulatory interest in the project,
or that could potentially be impacted by the project. In addition, the Notice of
Proposed Negative Declaration was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the
site, and a copy of the Notice was posted on-site facing Margarita Road. As of
February 10, 1992, only one comment letter had been received by the City. The
Southern California Gas Company commented on January 13, 1992, that they could
provide gas service to the property without additional environmental impact. No other
comments or inquiries were received in response to the City's Notice of Proposed
Negative Declaration.
Based upon an analysis of the potential environmental impacts from this Project, as
contained in the Initial Study, four potentially significant impacts have been identified.
The potentially significant impacts include: the possibility of a reduction in the amount
groundwater recharge, the loss of riparian vegetation, the loss of habitat for the
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, and light pollution impacts on the Mr. Palomar Observatory.
It is anticipated that these potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to a level
of insignificance by the Mitigation Measures contained in the Initial Study. The
implementation of the Mitigation Measures will be undertaken by the City Community
Services Department with the assistance of the City Planning Department.
CONCLUSION
City Staff recommends that the City Council first adopt the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration for this Project, and then adopt the Resolution of Necessity
stating that the acquisition of the property is in the public interest, convenience and
necessity, that it will create the greatest public good and the least private injury, and
that acquisition of the property is necessary for the Project.
Since that time, staff has frequently contacted and attempted to negotiate with Mr.
McDowell regarding the subject property. Unfortunately, these efforts have been to
no avail, Mr. McDowell has not obtained a separate appraisal nor accepted staff's
offer to meet, and an agreement has not been reached.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds for the purchase of a parksite in this vicinity are identified in the Capital
Improvement Program under Community Facilities District 88-12. Bond proceeds can
be used for this $1,300,000 outlay, once received. In the interim, 91 ,300,000 from
the Development Impact Fees Fund should be advanced to the Capital Projects Fund
and appropriated in Capital Projects Account 021-165-624-44-5700. These monies
will be repaid to this fund once the CFD 88-12 bond proceeds are received.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Vicinity Map
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
Initial Study for Environmental Assessment No. 8
Resolution of Necessity
Notice to Property Owner
Letters of November 8, November 21, 1991, and April 20,
1992 to Eion F. McDowell
a:agenda.mcd
ATTACHMENT: 1
VICINITY MAP
EXHIBIT A
VICINITY MAP
Illel
Ieel
ATTACHMENT: 2
PROPOSED MITIGATED iNEGATIVE DECLARATION
CITY OF TEMECULA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
X Proposed __ Final
PROJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Temecula Elementary School Park Site Project.
Environmental Assessment No. 8.
City of Temecula.
South side of Margarita Road between Stonewood and Moraga Roads,
adjacent to Temecula Elementary School in the City of Temecula.
The acquisition of approximately 20.23 acres and the construction of
a Community Park by the City of Temecula.
Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has
been determined that the above mentioned project will have no significant impact upon the
environment. The City of Temecula
X
City Council
Planning Commission
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant impact upon the
environment, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted. The mitigation
measures for this project are contained in the Initial Study.
Prepared by: ~'~ ~ ~ ~t ~]. ' avid W. Hogan. Associate Planner
(Signature) /~~(Name and Title)
Public Review Period: J,nuarv 7. 199~ to
Public Notice was given through:
_ Local Newspaper. , Posting the Site.
January .~8. 1992.
X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
ATTACHMENT: 3
INITIAL STUDY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT NO. 8
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent:
Citv of Temecula
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
43174 ~b~Sir~SS Perk Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
(714) 694-6400
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
January 3.1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
ENVIRONMFN'rAL ASSESSMENT {F.A) NUMBER 8.
Temecula Flernentarv School Park Site
6. Location of Proposal:
7. Description of Project:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Southside of Maro,~rita Road. between Stonewood
Road and Moreoa Road in the Citv of Temecula
The project consists of: {1) the acauisition of
approximately 90 acres of vacant land adiacent to
Temecula Elementan/School: (2) the development
of a community Dark bv the CiW of Temecula:
and. (3) tome incidental flood control
imorovementl to the Lono Canyon channel.
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
t,on 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
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
f$
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 bey, 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?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Yes Maybe No
X
X m
X
X
~ 2
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?
Plato Life. Will the proposal result in:
b®
de
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Yes Maybe .N0
X
X
X
..X
3
ge
10.
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?
be
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Ught 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 Reseurcse. Will the proposal
result in:
ae
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
~ 4
11.
12.
13.
14.
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Populaljon. 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 · demand for
additional housing?
TransportaljonlCirculation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Effects on existing paring 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?
eo
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, b/cyclists or pedestrians?
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 arms:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
..X
X
15.
16.
17.
18.
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
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?
Utililies. 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 saptic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (exoluding
mental health)?
be
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?
Yes Maybe NQ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~ 6
Yes Mavb~p N~
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
X
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
C$
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
...X
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
X
III DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
1 .a,c,d,g.
NO. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique
geologic or physical features, or the exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards. Some minor changes in surface relief will occur as the property is
developed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
1.b.
Yes. The development of this site for a public park will result in the disruption,
displacement, overcovering and compact.on of soils. However the overall
amount of oneire grading is expected to be relatively minor because of the lack
of significant onsite topography and the localized displacement, overcovering
end compact, on associated with the development of community parks. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
1 .e ,f.
Yes. Some increase in wind or water erosion and deposition could result from
the construction of the proposed park facilities. The majority of the impacts are
expected to be short-term and construction related. The City will use the
appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion
and offsite deposition. The development of perk facilities on this site will
reduce long-term wind and water erosion by reducing the extent and steepness
of oneits slopes and covering of the site with erosion resistant materials such
7
as turf grass and paving, and by providing appropriate improvements to onsite
drainage facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Air
2.8,b,c.
No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the
local or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. Some
short-term and construction related air quality emissions or odors may occur
during the construction process. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
Water
3.8,c,d,e,i.
No. No alterations in the course or direction of flood flows, changes in the
quantity and qualit~ of surface water, or discharges to surface waters are
expected to occur as a result of this project. The existing channel will continue
to cross the project site when the site is developed. The project will reduce the
exposure of people and property to water related hazards by precluding the
development of housing on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
3.b.
Yes. Some changes in absorption rates, onsite drainage patterns, and surface
runoff may occur as a result of this project. Onsite absorption rates may be
reduced as portions of the site are compacted or paved. The surface runoff
pattern may also change as the site is developed. However, because most of
the project site will not be paved it is expected to retain much of its soil
absorption potential, The project site will continue to drain into the Long
Canyon Channel. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result' of this
project.
3 .f,g ,h.
Yea. Some changes in the amount of groundwater recharge may occur as a
result of this project if channelization in LOng Canyon Channel includes a hard-
bottomed channel. Channelization may reduce the amount of area available for
groundwater recharge. The reduction in the amount of groundwater recharge
has the potential to reduce the amount of public water supply that could be
available in the future. (Residents of the Temecula Valley rely heavily on
groundwater for potable water supplies.) These impacts have the potential to
result in a significant impact on the environment. These impacts will be
mitigated in the final design of the perk facility by ensuring that the Long
Canyon Channel maintains a soft-bottomed characteristics to allow the
continued recharge of groundwater. As a result of the mitigation included in
the project design, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Plato i ire ..
4.8,C,
Yes. The project will change the diversity of the native plant and riparian plant
species and will introduce new plant species onto the project site. The site
currently contains degraded upland grasSland, degraded riperian habitat, and
%S~r-ONdmEA8 8
4.b.
4.d.
Animal Life
5 .a,c.
5.b.
manmade riparian habitats. No significant areas of Coastal Sage Scrub have
been identified. Development of a park facility on the site will replace most of
the existing grassland species with mixture of Bermuda Grass and Fescue, and
a variety introduced shrubs and trees. The manmade riparian area created by
the inadequate drainage facilities along the eastern property line will be
removed as a result of this project. To mitigate any environmental impacts
caused by the development of the proposed project on this site, the degraded
riparian habitat located in the main channel area will be enhanced and expanded
through the stabilization of the channel area. The channel stabilization will
encourage the propagation of adjacent riparian species onto the project site.
Because of these mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
No. No unique, rare or endangered species have been identified on the site.
The project site was used for agricultural purposes earlier in the dentury and the
natural oneits vegetation was significantly altered at that time. In addition, no
endangered or rare vegetative species were identified onsita in the FEIR for the
1989 Southwest Area Community Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
Ye~. The soils on the project site have been identified as locally important land
in earlier planning studies done by the County of Riverside. The project site is
too small for economically viable agricultural production is currently isolated
from other agricultural areas, and completely surrounded by urban uses. The
site was also identified as future urban development in the Southwest Area
Plan adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in 1989. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. The project will change the diversity of the animal species onsite and may
reduce the amount of limited wildlife habitat on the project site. Limited
populations of common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds are believed
to rely on the site for either habitat, food., and/or water. The majority of the
site is covered with degraded grassland area. Some limited marginal riparian
area is also found on the site. The project site is an isolated undeveloped parcel
in an otherwise developed area of the City of Temecula. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
Maybe. The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Area. While a specific site inspection has not been conducted,
it's small size, proximity to urban development, and isolation from other wildlife
habitat areas make it unlikely that the Stephem Kangaroo Rat (SKR) inhabits
the site. During the planning phase of the project, a specific site survey will be
conducted to determine if the SKR presently inhabits the site. If the Stephens
Kangaroo Rat is identified on the project site, the project could contribute to an
incremental reduction of SKR habitat. Any impacts to the SKR would be
mitigated by the Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fees that are required by
the City of Temecula. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from
this project.
~ 9
Noise
6.a,b.
Yes. Some increase in noise levels may occur as a result of this project.
However, The majority of these noise impacts are expected to be of short-term
end construction related. Some long-term noise impacts may also occur as a
result of this project. The development of this site as a public park will bring
additional people-to the site for both active and passive recreation. These
additional people have the potential to increase ambient noise levels adjacent
to this q)roposed site. However given the character of the noise, (primarily
people talking and children playing) the impact of the noise is not expected to
be offensive or to generate severe noise levels. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
I iJht and Glare
Yes. The light and glare will result from the lighting of activity areas for
evening and night use and for any needad security lighting. The Park Site is
located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The
lighting standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium
street and security lights be installed and all other lighting must be oriented or
shielded to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. Additional
light and glare may result from the development of the site for a park facility.
The impact of the additional light and glare will be mitigated by following the
standards of the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District
(Ordinance No. 655) and through the appropriate design of the lighting system.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Land Use
Yes. The future land use on this site will change if the site is developed for a
public park. The existing zoning on the project site is R-2-3000. The R-2-3000
zone would allow one dwelling unit per 3,000 square foot of lot area. The
project would result in development of the site as a community park with public
recreational facilities. At present, public recreation facilities are very limited in
the City of Temecula and will have less impact on the surrounding areas than
the currently allowable multiple family development. No significant adverse
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Natural ResourCe8
9.a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will result in a minor incremental
increase in the use of some renewable and non-renewable resources. The use
of the proposed perk facility is not expected to result in the use of a significant
mount of renewable and non-renewable resources. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Rilk of U~et
10.a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will not result in a risk of explosion,
the release of hazardous substance, or any interference with an emergency
response plan, No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
POpulatiOn
11,
No. The development of a park on this site will not alter the location,
distribution, or growth rate of population in this area. The development of a
park in this area will result in less population in this vicinity. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Housino
12.
No. The development of a park on this Site will not affect existing housing or
create a demand for additional housing in this area. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Trap--,ortationlC,,ircul-tion
13.a,b.
Yea. The development of a park on this site will generate additional vehicular
traffic and will generate a demand for new parking, However, the additional
traffic that would be generated and the additional parking facilities that will be
required are significantly less than would occur if the project site was
developed as a residential project under the current zoning. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c,d,e,f.
No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the
existing traffic system, alter the pattern of vehicular, rail, air, or pedestrian
circulation, or increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
pedestrians. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
14.a,b,c,f.
No. The development of a park on this site will not create a need for, or result
in any alterations to additional fire, police, or school services. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d,e.
Yea. The development of this site may require the expansion of current City
park and recreation services to staff and maintain the proposed project. The
project may require that the City government allocate future funding for site
maintenance of costs. However, the impact on theses costs on the City's
budget is not expected to be significant, (Park and recreation services are a
high priority for the City of Temecula given the historic shortage of these
facilities in the Temecula Valley.) No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
15.a,b.
No. The development of this project will not result in the use of substantial
amounts of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for
existing sources of energy. The development of a park may result in a minor
increase in the use of existing energy resources. Some incremental increase in
energy usage as a result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
Utilities
16.all.
lto. The development of a park on this site will not result in a need for new
utility delivery systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric,
communication, water, sewer, storm drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or
services. All utilities needed to support the proposed park facility are located
on or immediately adjacent to the .site. A minor change to complete the
existing storm drain system may occur as a result of this project. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Human Health
17 .a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will not result in the creation of a
health hazard, or the additional exposure of people to any human health
hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
18.
I%1o. The development this project site will not result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive view, or the obstruction of any scenic view or vista. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
19.
No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the
quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunities in the area. The
development of a park of this site will improve and increase future recreational
opportunities in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
Cultural Resour;es
20.a,b,c,d.
Maybe. No identified cultural resources or historic sites are known to occur on
the site. The Southwest Area General Ran did not identify this area as an
"Area of Sensitivity for Archaeological Resources'. The project site has been
significantly modified over the last 30 years and it is unlikely that any cultural
resources would have avoided detection or destruction. Additional analysis will
be undertaken during the planning and development of this project. Any future
impacts will be mitigated through the application of standard City paleontologic
and archaeologic development conditions. In addition, if needed, onsite
archaeologic and Native American heritage resource experts will monitor
activities on the site. Because of these mitigation measures, No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
~,arae 12
IV MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIRCANCE
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?
Yes
Maybe
NQ
..X
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-
term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.)
X
Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (A project's impact on two or
more separate resources may be relatively small, but where
the effect of the total of those impants on the environment is
significant.)
X
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly
or indirectly?
13
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, them will not be · significant 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, end an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Prepared by:
(Signature)
David W. Hogln.
(Name and T'ffie)
Associate Planner
Approved by:
Garv Thornhill. Director of Plannino
(Name and Title)
(Date)
VICINITY MAP
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(Not to Scab)
NO. 8
Way
PROJECT SITE
N
O
Road
ATTACHMENT: 4
RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA HNDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC
INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE
ACQUISITION OF CERTMN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC PARK AND
RECREATION PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTENANT
THERETO FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF
MARGARITA ROAD, EAST OF STONEWOOD ROAD, WITHIN THE
CITY OF TE1VIECULA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula (hereinafter "City") hereby
finds, determines and declares as follows:
1. That the public interest, convenience and necessity require the approval as a
project of the acquisition by said City of the fee interest in and to certain hereinafter described
real property (*Property") for public park and recreational purposes and all uses appurtenant
thereto;
2. That the project is planned or located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury;
3. That the taking of the interest in and to the Property as above described is
necessary to such use and is authorized by Section 19, Article I of the California Constitution,
Section 38000 et seq. and 37350.5 of the California Government Code, Section 1230.010 et seq,
of the California Code of Civil Procedure, and other applicable law;
4. That the offer to purchase required by California Government Code Section
7267.2 has been made to the owner of the Property to be acquired by the City and that said offer
was rejected by the Property owner.
SECTION 2. The City hereby declares that it is the intention of the City to acquire said
Property in its name in accordance with the provision of the laws of the State of California with
reference to condemnation procedures.
SECTION 3. That if any of the subject property has been appropriated to some public
use, the public use to which it is to be applied is a more necessary and paramount public use.
SECTION 4. Said Property hereinabove referred to, the acquisition of which is required
YReeo: 236 -1-
by said public interest, convenience and necessity for the purposes set forth in Section One
hereof, is located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is more
particularly described in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference and made a pan hereof. A map showing the general location of the Property sought
to be acquired in this proceeding is marked Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference and made a part hereof.
SECTION 5. The City Attorney and the firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, as special
counsel, under the direction of the City Attorney, are authorized and directed to prepare,
institute and prosecute in the name of the City such proceedings in the proper Court having
jurisdiction thereof as may be necessary for the acquisition of said Property described in Section
4.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
SECTION 7. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 251h day of February, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Reeo~ 236 -2-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I BI~RY 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 25th day of February,
1992 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOF_,S:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
EXHIBIT ~A"
EXHIBIT "A"
Lot 14 of Tract 3334 in the City of Temecula as recorded in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30, of
maps, as recorded in the office of the Riverside County Recorder. (APN J921-300-006)
(MAP)
EXHIBIT "B"
3/Y, uo: 236
EXHIBIT B
VICINITY MAP
ATTACHMENT: 5
NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER
NOTICE OF HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
A GENERAL LAW CITY, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF
NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE FEE
INTEREST IN AND TO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF STONEWOOD
ROAD, CITY OF TEMECIJLA, CALIFORNIA
TO: Mr. FAon F. McDowell
6501 Crista Palma Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
YOU APE EREBY NOTIPI.bD, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010
et. sell. that the City Council of the City of Temecula intends to consider the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity approving a project and the acquisition by eminent domain of the fee
interest in and to the real property described on Exhibit "A' attached hereto, and incorporated
herein by this reference, ('Property') for public park and recreational purposes and all uses
appurtenant thex~to. The heating on the Resolution will be held on February 25, 1992, at 7:00
P.M. or as soon thereahr at the Temecula Community Center, located at 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California.
YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that you have the right to appear and be heard on the
issues to be considered at that heating. The precise, and only, issues which will be considered,
are as follows:
l. Whether or not the public interest and necessity require the approval of the project,
which includes the acquisition and use of the Property for park purposes;
Whether or not the Project is planned or located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
3. Whether or not the property sought to be acquired is necessary for the Project; and
Whether or not the offer required by Government Code Section 7267.2 has been made
to the owner or owners of records.
ff you wish to be heard at this heating, you MUST FILE A WRITFEN REQUEST,
indicating your intent to appear and be heard, within fifteen (15) days of the mailing of this
notice by filing or delivering that written request to the City Clerk, 43174 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590; telephone (714) 694-1989.
You my use the enclosure for the purpose of notifying the City of your intent and desire
to be heard. Your failure to timely file a written request to appear and be heard may result in
a giver of your right to be heard. .
For further information, contact the City Clerk's Office at Temecula City Hall.
June S. Greek, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
Lot 14 of Tract 3334 in the City of Temecula as recorded in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30, of
maps, as recorded in the office of the Riverside County Recorder. (APN//921-300-006)
REQUEST TO BE HEARD ON RESOLUTION O1= NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION
OF THE 1~,1=, INTEREST IN AND TO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF
STONEWOOD ROAD, W1THIN THE CITY OF TEMBCULA, CALIFORNIA
NAME TELEPHONE
ADDRESS
DATE
SIGNATURE
ATTACHMENT: 6
LETTERS OF NOVEMBER 8, NOVEMBER 21, 1991, AND
APRIL 20, 1992 TO EION F. MCDOWELL
City of Temecula
November 8, 1991
Ror~ld J, P~I~
Mayor
Patrlcla H. Blrd~il
Mayor Pn~ Tern
Karel F, Llndem~s
CouncjlmemOer
Mr. Eion F. McDowell
42601 Pradera Avenue
Temecula, CA 92590
Reference: APN No. 921-300-006
Peg Moore
CounOImemOer
Dear Mr. McDowelh
J. Sal Mufioz
CouncilmemOer
David F. DIxon
City Manager
(7141 694-1989
FAX (714) 694,.1999
The City of Temecula, a general law city, hereby offers, subject to the
usual escrow provisions and approval by the City of the soil conditions
of the Property, to acquire your ,property described on Exhibit A,
enclosed herewith, for the total sum of $1,300,000, which is for land.
An independent appraisal was made of your property by the firm of
John P. Neet, M.A.!. The amount of the above offer is the amount the
City has determined to be the fair market value for your property. The
basis for that determination is explained in the attached Appraisal
Summary Statement. If you have any questions regarding this letter,
the acquisition or the Appraisal Summary Statement, please contact me
at (714) 694-1989.
It is the City's hope that this price will be agreeable to you and that the
acquisition can begin immediately· Please advise if you have any
questions regarding this offer.
Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours,
Mark~.tchenduszko
Assistant City Manager
cc: D. Dixon
Attachments
ATTACHMENT B
EXHIBIT A
LOT 14. OF TRACT NO. 3334., AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK 54., PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS,
RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
Attachment A
APPRAISAL SUMMARY STATEMENT
PROJECT:
SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF
STONEW00D ROAD, TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA
OWNER:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
MR. EiON F. MCDOWELL
EXHIBIT A, ATTACHED HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN
ZONING: R-2-~,000
TOTAL AREA: 20.23
ACRES
SQUARE FEET:
TOTAL TAKE: X
PARTIAL TAKE:
PRESENT USE AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED:
This offer is presented in settlement of the acquisition of your real property described
on Exhibit A, as follows:
ONE MILLION THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS
( $1,300,000.00)
The amount of the offer is based upon a market value appraisal prepared by an
independent appraisal firm in accordance with accepted appraisal procedures. The
valuation is based upon an analysis of recent sales of comparable sites and similar
properties in this locality wit'l;t consideration to the highest and beat use for
development of the property. The appraiser, in rendering an opinion of fair market
value has disregarded any decrease or increase in the fair market value of the real
property to be acquired prior to the date of valuation caused by the public
improvement or the likelihood that the property would be acquired for such
improvement.
The above determination of ]uat compensation is not less than the City's approved
appraisal of the Fair Market Value of the property. The appraisal does not reflect any
consideration of, or allowance for, any relocation assistance and payments to which
you may be entitled to receive, nor does it include consideration of certain
acquisition/escrow costs.
Fair Market Value, as used in the appraisal, means the highest price on the date of
valuation that would be agreed by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular
or urgent necessity for so doing, nor obligated to sell, and a buyer, being ready,
willing and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing
with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property
is reasonably adaptable and available.
It is the City's understanding that there are no separately held interests' in your real
property to be acquired such as easements, leasehold interests, tenant-owned
improvements, life estates, and water, gas, oil or other mineral rights. Should any
such separately held interests be 'identified at a later date, a separate statement of the
apportionment, based on the appraisal and the City's review appraisal, of the total ]us~
compensation to each separately held interest to be acquired will be forwarded to you.
This summary of the basis of the amount offered as lust compensation is presented
in compliance with applicable law.
a:appraisl
City of Temecula
4317~. Business Parr Drive · Temecula. California 92590
November 21, 1991
Ronaid J, Parks
Mayor
Patrlcla H. Birdsall
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel F. Undemans
CouncilmemDer
Peg Moore
CouncilmemOer
J. Sal Mufioz
CouncilmernDer
David F. DIxon
City Manager
(7141 694-1989
FAX (714l 694-1999
Mr. Eion F. McDowell
42601 Pradera Avenue
Temecula, CA 92590
Reference: APN No. 921-300-006
Dear Mr. McDowelh
On November 8, 1991, ! sent you an letter offering, in behalf of the
City of Temecula, to acquire your property described on Exhibit A,
enclosed herewith, for the total sum of $1,300,000, which is for land.
This offer amount was based on a independent appraisal for the
property by John P. Neet, M.A.I., and was for an amount the City
determined to be the fair market value of the property. Since that date,
I have not received a response from you regarding the City's offer.
It is the City's hope that the noted price is acceptable to you and that
you are still interested in selling the property. Please contact me with
your response at the above noted address at your earliest convenience,
but no later than Friday, December 6, 1991.
If I do not receive a response from you by that time, I will assume that
you have refused the City's offer.
I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
i r , ~ ~
Ma~~J. O~henduszko
Assistant City Manager
cc: D. Dixon
OF TI M[CULA
April 20, 1992
Eion McDowell
42600 Pradera Way
Temecula, CA 92390
Dear Mr. McDowelh
I have received your letter as of this date.
As you know, the public hearing regarding your 20.23 acre property
located south of Margarita Road and east of Moraga Road, Parcel
//921-300-006, was continued until May 12, 1992. The purpose of
the continuance was to allow you to obtain a separate appraisal from
a certified real estate appraiser (MIA) so that you and I could further
discuss the City's interest in purchasing your property. This letter is to
invite you to meet with me so that we can jointly consider all the
possibilities and options related to this matter.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience. It is my hope that you
are in fact obtaining a separate appraisal based on the current zoning
and entitlement status that exists for the property and that you and I
can meet no later than Friday, April 24.
I look forward to hearing from you soon. You can reach me at my
office at (714) 694-1989.
Sincerely,
Mark J~henduszko
Assistant City Manager
bcc: Ctl:y CounciL1
D. Dixon.
4.~174 [~U,qNES PARK DRIVE * T&'4ECUL~- CALIFORNIA 9{2590 · PHONE (714) 69,4-1989 · F.~x (714) 694-1999
P 897 138 018
Certified Mail Receipt
Insurance Coverage Provided
m Do not use for International Mail
· ~i~'~ (See Reverse)
Eion McDowell
stem & No.
42600 Pradera I4ay
P.o.. s~ & z~
Temec~la. CA 92390
$ .z~
ITEM NO.
14
CITY ATTOR~OV~''~'
CITY OF MECUIA
AGENDA 1~EPORT
TO:
City Council/City Manager
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
May 12, 1992
SUBJECT:
Approval Authority Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 92---, upholding the Planning Commission's
approval of an ordinance regulating the approval of land use
regulations.
BACKGROUND
In response to past concerns expressed to Staff by the Council relative to speeding up the
processing of development applications, Staff initiated an amendment to the existing approval
ordinance which staff believes will substantially reduce processing time for a number of project
types.
Under County processing requirements, projects (depending on their scale) were approvable by
either Staff, Planning Director with public hearing, Planning Commission, or the Board of
Supervisors. When the City incorporated December, 1989, the City Council amended the
County procedures.
When the City formed the Planning Commission in June of 1990, approvals were largely
advisory to the Council.
In August of 1990, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-19, which outlined approval authority
for all development proposals, (see Attachment 4). This ordinance still did not provide for
Planning Direc~r approvals of discretionary projects and only allowed the Planning Commission
to approve relatively minor projects.
The Planning Commission has reviewed development applications for the last 20 months. In
addition, consultant. Planning Staff has been replaced by City employees. Conscquen~y, the
level of both Commission and Staff experience has risen to a point where additional approval
authority is warranted.
S~TAFFRPT~APPAUTH.CC 1
Prior to scheduling the proposed changes to the approval authority ordinance, Staff presented
the revisions to both the City Coordinating Committee and the Economic Development
Committee. Both committees were enthusiastic about the proposed changes and felt that their
implementation would result in substantially improved processing times.
At their January 21, 1992 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended some revisions be
made. Planning Commissioners' recommendations on Matrix #1 (page 8) were made as shown
on Matrix
Item numbers 3, 18, 22, 23, 24, and 27, on Matrix #1, were moved from Director approval to
Commission approval and are referenced as the numbers 3, 19, 24, 25, 26, and 29 as shown on
Item no. 8, on Matrix #1, was moved to Staff approval from Director approval.
Item No. 21, on Matrix #1, was revised to require temporary use permits beyond six months
to be approved by the Commission. The commi~sien then continued the matter to February 3rd,
for consideration of the revised Approval Authority Matrix with their recommended changes,
and recommended adoption of the proposed amendments to the Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
e
Approval Authority Matrix
(Planning Commission RecOmmended) - page 3
Ordinance No 92~ - page 5
Planninl~ Commission minutes of January 27 and February 3, 1992 - page 9
Planning Commission Staff packet, January 27, 1992, with the Planning
recommended matrix attached - page 10
Letter of support, Temecula, Murrieta EDC dated Ianuary 23, 1992 - page 11
Staff
vgw
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
APPROVAL AUTHORITY MATRIX
s~'r~-r~n,^trm. cc 3
APPROVAL AUTHORITY
STAFF
1. Certificate of Compliance
2. Change of Zone/Ordinance Amendment.
3. Conditional Use Permit (Existing Bugding)
4. Conditional Use Permit (Not in hisring Building)
5. Final Map
6. General Plan Amendment
7. Parcd Merge
8. Lot Line Adjustment
9. Parking Adjustment
10. Plot Ran far Antennae and Off-Site Advertising
X
X
X
X
{PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED| :l~ ~
*PLAN. DIRECTOR *PLAN. *CITY
COMMISSION COUNCIL
Recommendation
X
X
Recommendedon
X
X
X
11. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEOA
12. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Nofi Exempt frm CE(:)A
13, Rot Ran Over 10,000 Sq,Ft,
14. Publk Use Peemit UfKle 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEOA.
15. Pubtic Use Pemit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEO A.
16, Public Use Permit Over 10,000 Sq. Ft,
17. Reversion to Acreege
18. Second Dwdling Unit Pernit
19. Special Care Facility
20. Specific b/Amendment
21, Substantial Confarn-mtce
22. Temporary Use Permit (Under 6 Months)
23. Temporary Use Permit (Over 6 Months)
24. Tentative Parcel Map (Reddentid
Less that 5 Lm)
25. Tentative Proreal Map {Commercial/Industrial}
26. Tentative Tract Map (More then S Lots)
27. Time Extendoff - CIty Approve Projects
28. Time Extension - County 'Alproved Projects
29. Vadance
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
X
X
X
X
· Noticed Pubic Heering, 300 R. let ~ Director Approval, 600 Ft. for Pbn~i~g Convnieeim end City Counci Approval.
X
STr~B~'T~3e^UTB.CC 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 92-,_
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 90-19 AND
ESTABLISHING DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY FOR
SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, on December 1, 1989, the City of Temecula was established as a duly
organized municipal corporation of the State of California;
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90.04, the City adopted certain portions
of the non-codi~ed Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ("Land Use
Code") and Ordinance No. 460 ("Subdivision Use Code") for the City of Temecula;
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1990, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
Ordinance No. 9{}-19 establishing decision-making authority for subdivision and land use
applications in order to provide for a smooth transition from the County of Riverside to the City
of Temecula involving such land use applications;
WHEREAS, in recognition of the fact that most hnd use applications are now originating
in the City of Temecula, it is the desire of the City Council to make more efficient and to
establish a line of authority for the review and approval process involving development
applications.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 9{}-19, adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula
is hereby repealed;
Section 2. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 and Ordinance No. 460, as adopted
by City Ordinance No. 90-04, are hereby amended to adopt the development application
procedures identified in Exhibit "A", attached hereto.
Section 3. Where combined development applications are submitted for consideration,
to the extent any portion of the application would be considered for approval by the highest
reviewing body, as set forth in Section 2, then the entire combined application shall be
considered by the reviewing body.
Section 4. Any application for extension of an approved tentative map, parcel map,
or vesting tentative map considered in accordance with the procedures contained herein shall pay
the same fee as if the application were for the original map approval.
Ords38 -1-
Section 5. Any interested person may file an appeal to a final decision by the
Planning Commission to the City Council. Together with the applicable filing fee established
by Resolution of the City Council, such appeal must be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10)
days of the date the matter was decided by the Planning Commission. For purposes of this
Section, any City Council member may appeal a decision by the Planning Commission without
payment of any fee for the appeal.
Sections6. Except as otherwise provided therein, any other land division or
development application may be submitted to the City Planning Director for approval. If the
Planning Director determines that the proposed application is comparable to one of the approvals
described in Se~ztion 2, he shall direct that such application be submitted to either the Planning
Commission or City Council for consideration pursuant to the procedures set forth at Section 2.
Section 7. To the extent the provisions of Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460 are not
superseded by the provisions of this City Ordinance, including notice and hearing requirements,
said remaining provisions shall remain effective.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSRD, APPROVRD, AND ADOFrED this
day of April, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATrF_.ST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the of ,1992, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopl~i and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of
,1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
CRdt18 -3-
APPROVAL AUTHORITY
1. Certificate of Compliance
2. Change of Zone/Ordinance Ammdment.
3. Conditional Use Permit (Existing Building)
4. Conditional Use Permit (Not in Existing
Building)
7. Parcel Merger
8. Lot Line Adjustment
9. Parking Adjustment
10. Hot Plan for Antennae and Off-Site
Advertising
Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA
12. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA
13. Plot Plan Over 10,000 Sq. Ft.
14. Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA. '
15. Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA.
16. Public Use Permit Over 10,000 Sq. Ft.
17. Reversion to Acreage
18. Second Dwdling Unit Permit
19. Special Care Facility
20. Specific Plan/Amendment
21. Substantial Conformance
22. Temporary Use Permit (Under 6 Months)
STAFF PLANNING PLANNING
DIRECTOR COMMISSION
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
CITY
COUNCIL i
X
X
X
X
Ords38 -4-
Temporary Use Pexmit (Over 6 Months)
24. Tentative Parcel Map (Residential
Less that ~ Lots)
25.Tentative Parcel Map
(Commercial/Industrial)
26. Tentative Tract Map (More than S Lots)
27. Time Extension - City Approved Projects
?8. Time Extension - County Approved Projects
29. Variance
X
X
X
X
X
X
Onb38 -5-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
January 27, 1992
Approval Authority Ordinance
The attached approval authority matrix, if approved, would provide for more expedient
processing of applications by City Staff· The proposed revisions and their effect are
summarized below:
ConditiOnal Usa Permits (C.U.P.'s) in an existing building rr.I) would be approvable by
the Director rather than the Planning Commission.
Public Use Permits (P.U.P.'s) under 10,000 square feet in size and exempt from CEQA
would be approvable by Staff (Director); P.U.P.'s and P.P. under 10,000 square feet
and not exempt from CEQA would be approvable by the Director (with a public
hearing); P.U.P.'s and plot plans over 10,000 square feet would be approvable by the
Planning Commission. Currently, all P.U.P.'s and plot plans require Planning
Commission approval and/or City Council (in excess of 50,000 square feet) approval·
Second dwelling units would be approvable by the Director with public hearing, rather
then the Planning Commission, per current ordinance.
Substantial Conformance determinations would be approvable by the Director, rather
than Planning Commission.
All commercial and industrial parcel maps and residential parcel maps would be
approvable by the Director at a public hearing. At the present time, the Commission
approves all tentative parcel maps rr.P.M.'s) under 20 acres in size; the Council
approves all T.P.M.'s in excess of 20 acres.
All tentative tract maps would have final approval by the Planning Commission,
regardless of size. Currently, the same criteria as stated above in item 6 applies to
approvals·
s~.s'r,u~m,r~A~m.cc 6
The Planning Commission
Approval Authority
Page 2
Time extension requests on maps, P.U.P.'s, plot plans, and C.U.P,'s previously
approved by the City would be approvable by the Director with public hearing. Time
extension requests on applications approved by the County would require Planning
Commission approval. Currently, time extension requests are approvehie by the
Commission and/or Council depending on the size of the project.
The net effect of instituting these changes would, in Staff's opinion, result in a measurable
decrease in processing times; for affected applications, this could amount to four weeks or
more in some cases.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend approval of Ordinance
No. 92~, an interior Ordinance regulating the approval of land
use regulations.
vgw
mSTAmmimAPPAUTH.CC 7
0
.¢
·
m_, x
x x x X X
x x x X X X X X X X
x
x
X X X X
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OF
JANUARY 27 AND FEBRUARY 3, 1992
s~r~^u'm.cc ~
3.2. JU,LEI4DiG3~ OF OKDZIIA!iCZ 90-3.t
12.Z Proposal by the City of Temecula to amend Ordinance 90-19
establishing decision making authority for sub-division
and' lend use applications, City of Temecula City
boundaries.
e
2~RY ~2iMHILL reviewed the revised Approval Authority
Ordinance. After C~-~tssion discussion, the following
amendments were recommended:
No. 3 -
No. 8 -
No. :1.1 -
No. 18 -
No. 20 -
No. 21 -
Planning Commission Approval
PlanningDirector Approval
Planning Commission Approval
Planning Commission
Planning Commission
· xcesding six months
No. 22 - Planning Commission Approval
No. 23 - Planning Commission Approval
No. 24 - Planning Commission Approval
No. 27 - Planning Commission Approval
Approval
Approval
, Planning Commission
~t~3WrFImTON~ITN~Wa ~!eU~Y 27.
e~M~ll01~.wD~penedthe public hearing at 9:30 P.M.
IUIIBLLIUMAB~OFF, 27349 aefferson Avenue, representing
the Tamecula/MurrietaABCBxpediting Committee, indicated
their support of staff's approach to streamline the
approval process.
ld~RY M~wwrt, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester
Road, Tamecula, concurred withstaff's approval authority
proposal.
2TBVBI~QUIST, 31265 Infield, Tamecula, Vice President of
the economic Development Corporation, concurred with
staff's recommendation to streamline the process.
k
~AT )]~RTON, 38605 Highway 79, Tamecula, Executive
Assistant for theBconomic Development Corporation, very
supportive of this process.
eXRY~HORNKILL stated that parking adjustments are done
at staff level. He also stated that any time there is an
accompanying general plan change or re-zoning, everything
will trail with that application and go on to the highest
approval authority.
(next~ to the meeting
COMMIBBXOW F~KE~.
moved to continue Ordinance 92-
of February 3, 1992, seconded by
AYES: 5
CONMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey,
Chiniaeff,
Hoagland
Ford,
NOES: 0 COmaSSIONZRS: None
GaRY 2~J2R3~33~ reminded the ~issl~ o~ ~e Joint meeting
~he Ci~ ~ll ~ W~u~, F~ 5, 1992.
pT~NNT~ fY~nWTGITnN
COMMIISI~ ~ moved to adjourn at 7:00 P.M., seconded by
CGMMIIIZO!~I FORD. The nect meeting of the City of Temecula
Planning Commission will be on Monday, February 24, 1992.
sacra~xry
PCMIN02/03/92
02/05/92
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF PACKET
DATED
JANUARY 27, 1 992
WITH PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDED MATRIX ATTACHED
t,s'r, eq~tu~AU'm.ac '10
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
January 27, 1992
Approval Authority Ordinance
The attached approval authority matrix, if approved, would provide for more expedient
processing of applications by City Staff· The proposed revisions and their effect are
summarized below:
Conditional Use Permits (C.U.P.'s) in an existing building (T.I) would be approvable by
the Director rather than the Planning Commission.
Public Use Permits (P.U.P.'s) under 10,000 square feet in size and exempt from CEQA
would be approvable by Staff (Director); P.U.P.'s and P.P. under 10,000 square feet
and not exempt from CEQA would be approvable by the Director (with a public
hearing); P.U.P.'s and plot plans over 10,000 square feet would be approvable by the
Planning Commission. Currently, all P.U.P.'s and plot plans require Planning
Commission approval and/or City Council (in excess of 50,000 square feet) approval.
Second dwelling units would be approvable by the Director with public hearing, rather
than the Planning Commission, per current ordinance.
Substantial Conformance determinations would be approvable by the Director, rather
than Planning Commission.
All commercial and industrial parcel maps and residential parcel maps would be
approvable by the Director at a public hearing· At the present time, the Commission
approves all tentative parcel maps (T.P.M.'s) under 20 acres in size; the Council
approves all T.P.M.'s in excess of 20 acres.
All tentative tract maps would have final approval by the Planning Commission,
regardless of size. Currently, the same criteria as stated above in item 6 applies to
approvals.
The Planning Commission
Approval AuthOrity
Page 2
Time eXtension requests on maps, P.U.P.'s, plot plans, and C.U.P.'s previously
approved by the City would be approvable by the Director with public hearing. Time
extension requests on applications approved by the County would require Planning
CommiSsion approval. Currently, time extension requests are approvable by the
CommiSsion and/or Council depending on the size of the project.
The net effect Iof instituting these changes would, in Staff's opinion, result in a measurable
decrease in processing times; for affected applications, this could amount to four weeks or
more in some Cases.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend approval of Ordinance
No. 92-_, an interior Ordinance regulating the approval of land
use regulations.
vgw
s~r~P^m~a-Cc 7
ORDINANCE NO. 90-19
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE crry COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ~ ESTABt-~:PNG DECISION
MAKING AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION AND LAND
USE APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, m r~:~mbrr 1, 1989, th~ City of Temecula was established as a duly
organized municipal c6,~o, atioa of the $m~ of'California;
WlIEREAS, pursuant to City Odinuc~ No. 90.04, t~ City adopted main portions
of the non-codif~sd Rinnide County Ordiranou, including Ordinance No. 348 ('La~d USe
Code') and Ordinance No. 460 ('Subdivision Use Code') for the City of Temecula;
WHEREAS, both the hnd Use Code and the Subdivision Code curready provide for
procedures for consideration of sppmval for various development applications. These land uSe
procedurm wen designed by the County of Riverside in light of the very large number of
development applications that it had to process; ctmsequendy, · significant number of
applicatioos were delegated to the County Planning Director and County Plznning Commission
for considuation;
WtlutEAS, subsequent to the City's inco,~o, alion and pursuant to Section 2.06.010
of the Temecula Munic/p-1 Code, th~ City Council utablished th~ Tcm~cula Planning
Commission which become ~f~ive on June 4, 1990;
WHEP. EAS, prior to lune ,t, 1990, the mereben of the Riverside County Plannin~
Commission and the Riverside County Planning Director sm'ved as members of the ir,~'~.,
Planning Agency for the City of Temecula lmmant to the City Ordinance No. 89-13; at,...,
WHEREAS, in m:ognition of the need for · smooth transition from the County to lhe
City, it is nece~,-ry for the ~t operation of the affairs of the City that the City Council
establish · clear line of attthority for the tzvi~v and approval procus involving development
applications;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CrTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES iIEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLDWS:
SECTION 1. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 and Ordinance No. 460, as adopint
by City Ordinance No. 90-04, ar~ hereby amended to adopt the following development
application proceduru:
3/UrOs 90-19 -1-
Ill
I
,!
ATTA~,IZR..""NT NO, B
LETTER OF SUPPORT
TEMECULA, MURRIETA EDC
DATED
JANUARY 2.3, 1992
1!
TEMECULA- MURRIETA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
January 23, 1992
Planning Commission
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Planning Commission Members:
I am writing on behalf of the Temecula/Murrieta Economic
Development Corporation to request your support of a matter of
great importance to the business community.
It is our understanding that the Planning Department staff will be
proposing changes in the approval process to allow for various
types of routine planning approvals to be granted at the staff
level rather than submitting the items for public hearing as is
currently required. This matter will reportedly be heard by the
Planning Commission on February 27th.
The Temecula/Murrieta Economic Development Corporation is dedicated
to supporting economic growth in the Tomecula Valley. We believe
that streamlining the development approval process to allow for
faster approvals of routine matters would be of great benefit to
the local business comity and the overall economy of the area.
Please support the planning staff and the. economic development of
Temecula with your "yes" vote on this matter when it comes before
you.
Thunk you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
Carliens M. Danielsen
Riverside County Portfolio Manager
CMD/cah
40945 COUnty CelKer Drive, Suite C sl-,-K'~l. CBIUrOITBM 92591
714-699-6266 i~AX 714-6944201
ITEM NO.
15
APPROVAL,----
CITY ATTORNEY '- ~' '
FINANCE OFFICER~
CITY MANAGER '
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 12, 1992
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
PREPARED BY:
Debbie Ubnoske
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council continue Change of Zone
No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 to June
9, 1992.
ANALYSIS
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 were previously before
the City Council on October 8, 1991, November 12, 1991, December 10, 1991, January 14,
1992, March 10, 1992 and April 14, 1992. These items were continued at the applicahts'
request. The item is once again being continued to June 9, 1992.
vgw
S%STAFFtFT%5631 cz.ee7 1
ITEM NO. 16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL-~'
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 12, 1992
Appeal No. 24 (Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Plot Plan No. 8839,
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2)
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council:
DENY Appeal No. 24; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 92-_ upholding the Planning Commission
decision to deny Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended
No. 2, based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff
report.
BACKGROUND
Plot Plan No. 8839 was originally approved on February 21, 1986 by the Planning Director of
Riverside County. This approval was for a two-story building. First floor uses included office
and retail space. The second story was approved for storage space. Parking calculations were
based upon utilizing the fn'st and second floors in this manner.
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, was submitted to the City of Temecula Planning Department
on November 6, 1991. The proposal is a request to change uses on the second floor from 5,413
square feet of storage to a 780 square foot beauty shop, 2,961 square feet of office space and
1,672 square feet of storage, and request a reduction in required off-street parking from 44 to
40 spaces. The subject project was reviewed by Staff at Development Review Committee
meetings.
The project was heard at the March 16, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. The Commission
voted 3-1 with 1 abstention to deny Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amendment No. 2.
Commissioner Fahey voted against the motion for denia_l, stating that she believed that any
potential parking problems could be adequately mitigated by requiring the applicant to pay a
parking mitigation fee or through participation in an assessment district. Commissioner Ford
abstained due to a potential conflict of interest.
sx~rAmu, m4A~n.~cc 1
The Planning Commission made the following findings in the denial of Plot Plan No. 8839,
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2: there is a reasonable probability that the proposed pwject
would be inconsistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, and State Planning and
Zoning hws since the project does not meet the required parking standards; the site is not
suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the circuhtion paRems, access, and
intensity of use; the project will adversely affect the public health or welfare; the project is not
compatible with surrounding land uses; and that the design of the pwject, the type of
improvements, and the resulting street hyout are such that they are in conflict with easements
for access through or use of the property within the proposed pwject.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
City Council Resolution - page 3
Conditions of Appwval - page 7
Planning Commission Minutes - page 8
Planning Commission Staff Report - page 9
Fee Checklist - page 10
Correspondence/Petitions - page 12
Exhibits- page 13
vgw
S~TA~AP!q~AL.CC 2
ATTA~ NO. 1
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
S~r~APP~AL.CC ~
ATrACttlV~-NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-_
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF TRE CITY
OF TEMECUIA AFFIRMING ~ DECISION OF ~
PLANNING COMlVlIRSION TO DENY PLOT PLAN NO. 8839
REVISED NO. 1, AMENDED NO. 2, CHANGING USES ON
~ SECOND FLOOR PROM 5,413 SQUARE FEET OF
STORAGE TO A 780 SQUARE FOOT BEAUTY SHOP, 2,961
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AND 1,672 SQUARE
FEET OF STORAGE, AND A iiEnUCTION IN REQUIRED
Off-STREET PARKING ON PROPERTY KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 922-024027.
WIHi/,EAS, Temecuh Sixth Street-A Limited California Partnership ~ed Plot Plan No.
8839 Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use,
Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed
by State and local law;
WREIlI~AS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot
Plan on March 16, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said
Plot Plan.
WHEuE&S, Appeal No. 24 was fried in the time and manner prescribed by state and
local law pertaining to the Planning Commission's denial of Plot Plan No. 8839, Revise~l No.
1, Amended No. 2;
WRit&S, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal No.
24 on May 12, 1992 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition to said Appeal; and
WITE!IEAS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal;
NOW, T!tE!ili'-Ii'ORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIlE CITY OF
TI~N'IF_fULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin~,s. That the Temecuh City Council hereby makes the following
findings:
S~TAI~IPJq~API~AL. CC 4
A. The City Council, in denying the appeal for the proposed Plot Plan No. 8839
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2, makes the following Findings, to wit:
1. There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised No. 1,
Amended No. 2 would be inconsistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, which will
be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. Plot Plan No. 8839
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 does not meet the parking standards as set out in the existing
ordinances and anticipated in the General Plan.
2. There is a likely probability of substantial detriment to and interference with
the future General Plan, as a result of an approval.
3. The proposed use or action does not comply with State planning and zoning
laws. There is no substantiation for the reduction in the number of required parking spaces for
the usable space proposed.
4. The site is not suitable to accommodate the propose~ land use in terms of the
circulation patterns, access, and intensity of use.
5. The project as designed and conditioned will adversely affect the public health
or welfare due to lack of adequate parking.
6. The project is not compatible with surrounding land uses. The alley would
be sub-standard and would be creating traffic conflicts in the alley which needs to service
surrounding properties.
7. The design of the project, the type of improvements, and the resulting street
layout are such that they are in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property
within the proposed project. The project has inadequate circulation.
8. Said fmdings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental
documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. This Staff
Report contains mapping, Conditions of Approval, and an Initial Study which support the Staff
recommendation.
B. As condi~oned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the
logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
The proposed P10t Plan No. 8839 Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 is a Class 1 Categorical
Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (e)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines which pertains to minor alterations to existing structures.
5XSTAIqqtlvI'~APPllAL. CC 5
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecuh City Council hereby denies Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised No. 1,
Amended No.2 to revise Plot Plan No. 8839, changing uses on the second floor from storage
to a 780 square foot beauty shop, 2,961 square feet of office space and 1,672 square feet of
swrage, and a reduction in required off-street parldng from 44 to 40 spaces and known as
Assessor's Parcel No. 922-024-027.
SECTION 4.
DENW. D this 12th day May, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSAt
MAYOR
I B'ERERY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting thereof, hem on the 12th day of May,
1992 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
COUNTERS:
COUNCK1VIEMBBRS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTA~ NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S~TAIq~Jq~4APPRAL.CC 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
Project Description: Conversion of uses on the second floor of
an existing building from 5,413 square feet of storage space into
a 780 square foot beauty shop, 2,961 square feet of office
space and 1,672 square feet of storage space.
Assessor's Parcel No. 922-024-027
Planning Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for conversion of uses on the second
floor of an existing building from 5,413 square feet of storage space into a 780 square
foot beauty shop, 2,961 square feet of office space and 1,672 square feet of storage
space.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City
of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul,
an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative
body concerning Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2. The City of
Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails
to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to
cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to
defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
e
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter
diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization
contemplated by this approval. This approval shall expire on .
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 marked Exhibit "D" or as amended
by these conditions.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon
adjoining property or public rights-of-way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting
shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety
for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 655.
s~TAm~ma~ej~v.R. 12
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The applicant shall comply with the Public Works Department's Conditions of Approval
which are included her.in.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. An automatic
sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped areas shall be maintained in a
viable growth condition. Planting within ten (10) feet of an entry or exit driveway shall
not be permitted to grow higher than thirty (30) inches.
A minimum of 40 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12,
Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. 40 parking spaces shall be provided as shown
on the Approved Exhibit "D". The parking area shall be surfaced with asphaltic
concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on 4 inches of Class II base.
A minimum of 2 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on Exhibit
"D". Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a
permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text
or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be
smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the
parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the
parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the
parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a
conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17
inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or
license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be
towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be
reclaimed at or by telephone
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at
least 3 square feet in size.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit "E" .
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening material shall
be subject to Planning Department approval.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be made with masonry block and
a steel gate which screens the bins from external view.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground.
All existing garage spaces shall be used for the parking of vehicles which shall utilize
the site. No other uses shall be permitted in the garage enclosure.
S~S~Am~'T,~a3S-.~V.R. I 3
15.
Plans for three (3) foot high railings located adjacent to the covered walk shall be
submitted to the Planning Department for review by the Old Town Temecula Local
Review Board prior to issuance of building permits for approval by the Department.
16.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use
allowed by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
17.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1988 edition of the Uniform Building,
Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative
Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code.
18.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with
Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution.
19.
Obtain all building plan and permit approvals prior to the commencement of any
construction work.
20. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
21.
Provide occupancy approval for all existing buildings (i.e. finaled building permit,
Certificate of Occupancy).
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff personnel of the
Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their
omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
22.
A precise onsite improvement plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public
Works for review and approval. The design shell be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, and shall include a final striping layout. The plan shall be drawn on 24" X
36" mylar as directed by the Department of Public Works.
23.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the oneire and alleyway improvements shall
be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works.
24.
All site improvements, landscape and irrigation plans, and alley improvement plans
shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects.
25.
Prior to any work being performed on the alley and the onsite parking lot, fees shall be
paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works.
S~STA~g'REV.IsP 14
26.
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.
27.
The developer shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed
guaranteeing the construction of the alley improvements in conformance with
applicable City standards.
28.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage
entering the property from adjacent areas.
29.
A 3'0" high railing shall be installed as shown on the approved Plot Plan to restrict
pedestrian crossing behind parked cars.
30.
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 82.00 per square foot, not to exceed 810,000. 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 CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
31.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
32.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards and shall be
shown on the improvement plans.
33.
Construct full alley improvements 20' in width including, but not limited to, A.C.
pavement, and drive approach across the length of the property. A flowline of 1
percent minimum shall be constructed at the alley centerline.
S~ST&R=RPT~e3S-RL:V.R' I 5
ATFACHlV~-NT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMIgSION MINLVFES
S~'T~Jqqtiq%~4APPIAI,.~C 8
It was moved by Commissioner Chinieeff, seconded by Commissioner Ford, to
approve the minutes of February 24, 1992 as amended. The motion was
carried unanimously.
:ON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
PUBLIC ITEMS
3. OUTDOOR
DISPLAY ORDINANCES
3.1
ProDosed
Disolavs.
rim Ordinance establishinq regulati
for Outdoor Advertisina
Senior Planner
summarized
report.
Chairman Hoegland
the public
at 6:15 P.M.
Commissioner Fahey cl~
sentence of the Ordinance.
wording on Page 11, Section 3., fifth
City Attorney Scott Field
uses for one (3) year ~d...".
sentence should read 'conforming
Commissioner
'Non-Commerc'
Signs".
and Commissioner
)ff-Premise Signs" and re(
questioned the meaning of
:larification of "Prohibited
t .view this section
City Art Scott Field stated that staff would like time
of the
moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commiss er Ford to
Outdoor Advertising Display Ordinances to the meeting April 6,
1992, to allow staff time to review Section 2. Prohibited Signs. tion
was carried unanimously.
PLOT PLAN NO. 8839, REVISED NO. 1, AMENDMENT NO. 2
4.1
Prooosal to revise Plot Plan No. 8839. chanqina uses on the second floor from
5.413 souare feet of storetie to a 78Q sauare foot beauty shoo and 9,961
· souare feet of office soace and 1.672 ~auare feet of storaae, and reauest s
PCMIN3/16~92 -2- 3~20~92
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 16, 1992
reduction in reouired off-street oerkino from 44 to 40 soaces. Located at
41910 Sixth Street.
Commissioner Ford stepped down due to a potential for conflict of interest.
Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan summarized the staff report.
Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 6:30 P.M.
Ed Rabalais, representing the applicant, advised that the garages would be
assigned to various suites.
Chairman Hoagland advised that the Commission had received one letter in
opposition.
Ed Rabalais requested that Condition No. 27, requiring improvements to the
alley, be changed to "Prior To Issuance Of Certification of Occupancy".
Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that he is not comfortable with the request to
increase square footage and reduce parking. Commissioner Chiniaeff added
that he did not agree with deleting the requirement posting a bond for
improvements to the alley and that he was concerned about 90 degree parking
spaces in a 20 foot wide alley and ensuring that the parking spaces would be
used for parking not storage. Lastly, he stated he did not feel that Item No. 4
under Findings supported the request.
Chairman Hoegland concurred with Commissioner Chiniaeff's comments and
added the request conflicts with previous requests that have come before the
Commission. Chairman Hoagland stated he would be willing to approve the
request if the applicant is required to pay a parking mitigation fee for the
purchase of fourteen off-site parking spaces in the Old Town area.
Commissioner Fahey questioned if there was a way that the City could require
projects to contribute to the purchase of lots for public parking.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that the applicant could be conditioned to pay
an impact fee for a designated number of parking spaces or required to
participate in an assessment district.
It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Blair, to
close the public hearing at 6:55 P.M. and Deny Plot Plan No. 8839, Revision
No. 1, Amendment No. 2, due to the reasonable probability that this plot plan
will be inconsistent with the City's future adopted General Plan because it will
not meet the parking standards set forth in the existing Ordinances and there
is a likely probability of substantial detriment and interference with the future
General Plan; that the proposed use or action does not comply with state
PCMIN3/16/92 -3- 3120/92
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 16.1999
zoning end planning laws in that there is no substantiation for the reduction in
the number of required parking spaces for the useable space proposed; the site
is not suitable to accommodate the proposed land uses in terms of circulation
patterns, access end intensity of uses; the project is not compatible with
surrounding land uses due to the fact that the alley would be sub-standard end
would create traffic conflicts in the alley that would be serving surrounding
properties; and the proposal would have an adverse effect on the surrounding
properties.
AYES:
3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Hoagland
NOES: I COMMISSIONERS: Fahey
ABSTAIN: I COMMISSIONERS: Ford
Commissioner Fahey stated that she believes that the parking problem could be
adequately mitigated by requiring the applicant to pay a parking mitigation fee
or participate in an assessment district and therefore voted against the motion.
PCMIN3/16~92
PLAN 11001, AMENDMENT NO. 3, EXTENSION OF TIME
for extension of time for Plot Plan No. 11001. an aoorovet olan
for unit apartment complex. Located south of Mm Road.
aooroxima 400 feet east of MoracJa Road and 550 feet of Rancho
California
Assistant Planner M; ew Fagan summarized the
Chairman Hoagland
public hearing )0 P.M.
Linda Miller, J.F. Davidson &
representing the applicant, expres=
conditions presented by staff.
Jefferson Avenue, Temecula,
applicant's concurrence with the
James Marpie,
Responsible
original approval
for rainfall run
required to
keep the
19210 Gallen Way, representing Citizens For
gement, advised the that since the
project, there have been man, ~anges in regulations
Mr. Marpie suggested that the veloper should be
the most modern technology available to rainfall and
run-off from entering the drinking water.
Righetti stated that the Department of Public Works has osed a
which requires this project to comply with the National
ge Elimination System requirements of the Department of Water
-4- 3/20/92
ATTA~ NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
S~Tr~APPB.~d,.C~C 9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 16, 1992
Case No.: Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
Prepared By: Matthew Fagan
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- approving Plot Plan No. 8839,
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2, based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Temecula-Sixth Street - A California Limited Partnership
REPRESENTATIVE:
Ed Rabalais
PROPOSAL:
Revision to Plot Plan No. 8839, changing uses on the second
floor from 5,413 square feet of storage to a 780 square foot
beauty shop, 2961 square feet of office space and 1,672 square
feet of storage, and request a reduction in required off-street
parking from 44 to 40 spaces.
LOCATION:
41910 Sixth Street (southwest corner of Sixth and Mercedes
Streets)
EXISTING ZONING:
C-1/C-P
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North: C-1
South: C-1
East: R-1
West: C-1
(General Commercial)
(General Commercial)
(One Family Dwelling)
(General Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not Requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Commercial Office/Retail Building
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Single Family Residences
East: Single Family Residences
West: Offices
S~STA~S-REV.PP 1
PROJECT STATISTICS
Site Area:
Garages Net Area:
First Roor Net Area:
Second Floor Net Area:
Parking Spaces Provided:
Parking Spaces !Required:
21,000 square feet
1,746 square feet
4,362 square feet
5,413 square feet
40
BACKGROUND
Plot Plan No. 8839 was originally approved on February 21, 1986 by the Planning Director
of Riverside County. This approval was for a two-story building. First floor uses included
office and retail space. The second story was approved for storage space. Parking
calculations were based upon utilizing the first and second floors in this manner.
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, was submitted to the City of Temecula Planning
Department on November 6, 1991. The subject project was reviewed by Staff at
Development Review Committee meetings (DRC) on December 19, 1991 and January 9, 1992
when two amendments to the plot plan were submitted. At the January 9th meeting, Staff
directed the applicant to submit the materials necessary in order to establish a Planning
Commission hearing date.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject project is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sixth Street and
Mercedes Street in Old Town Temecula. A two-story building presently exists on the site.
The applicant proposes no changes to the exterior of the building, however, Plot Plan No.
8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 proposes to convert uses on the second floor from
5,413 square feet of storage area into a 780 square foot beauty shop and 2,961 square feet
of office space while retaining 1,672 square feet of storage space. With the second floor
utilized solely for storage under Plot Plan No. 8839, the site required 22 parking spaces. The
site was in excess of the required parking by 18 spaces. Total parking provided on site is 40
spaces. The present request will increase the amount of off-street parking required for the
site from 40 to 44 spaces. The applicant submitted a request for special review of parking
under Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348 to allow 40 spaces instead of 44 (Reference
Attachment No. 4). In addition to the off-site parking provided in the front of the site (30
spaces), the applicant proposes to use garages in the rear of the building (on the south side
of the site) which are adjacent to the alley as additional off-street parking (10 spaces).
ANALYSIS
ReQuest for Soecial Review of Parkinq
Under Section 18.12.c. (5) of Ordinance No. 348, parking reductions or modifications
exceeding the maximum specified in Section 18.12 (e) (1), (2), (3), and (4) may be granted
as part of a review of a plot plan. Further stated in this section is the requirement that the
project proponent submit with a request for special review of parking whatever evidence and
documentation necessary to demonstrate that unusual conditions warrant a parking reduction.
S%STAI:FRFT',8839-REV .PP 2
On December 30, 1991, the applicant submitted a letter with a request for special review of
parking along with five conditions which demonstrated unusual conditions warranting a
parking reduction. (Reference Attachment No. 4). Staff reviewed the request and the
rationale behind the request and determined that unusual conditions were in fact particular to
this site due to it's location in Old Town Temecula. Meeting the required parking per
Ordinance No. 348 would not be possible due to the small dimensions of the lots in Old Town.
The parking requirements in Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348 are not reflective of these
conditions, but instead are more reflective of standard commercial development on larger lots.
It is, in Staff's opinion, a valid request, and therefore warrants Staff's support.
GaraQes Utilize~l As Parkino
The applicant proposes to utilize individual garage spaces (located adjacent to the alley) in
determining available parking for the site. Staff was concerned with uses which were
currently occurring in these garages which preclude the storage of automobiles. Staff
observed the garages being used as make-shift offices for businesses and storage areas for
the automobiles and vans used for the businesses. Staff has included Condition of Approval
No. 14, to assure that the garage spaces are used solely to meet parking requirements for the
site. In addition, Condition of Approval No. 33 requires construction of full alley
improvements 20 feet in width, but not limited to, A.C. pavement, and drive approach across
the length of the property. This will assure that access to the garage parking spaces will be
feasible.
EXISTING ZONING, SWAP AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The existing zoning for the site is C-1/C-P (General Commercial). The existing uses and
proposed uses are permitted uses with plot plan approval in the C-1/C-P zone. The SWAP
designation for the site is Commercial (C). The project as proposed is consistent with the
existing zoning of C-1/C-P and the SWAP designation of Commercial. Due to the consistency
with existing zoning and SWAP, and due to the nature of development in the vicinity, it is
likely that this project will be consistent with the Future General Ran upon its final adoption.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed project is a Class I categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (a) of the
CEQA Guidelines. Class I exemptions consist of minor alterations of private structures
involving negligible or no expansion of the use beyond that previously existing including
interior or exterior alterations involving such things as interior partitions, plumbing, and
electrical conveyances.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 is a proposal to convert uses on the
second floor from 5,413 square feet of storage area into a 780 square foot beauty shop, and
2,961 square feet of office space while retaining 1,672 square feet of storage space to an
existing building. The applicant has requested a special review of parking along with five (5)
conditions which demonstrated unusual conditions warranting a parking reduction. Staff
supports this request. The project as proposed is consistent with the existing zoning (C-1/C-
P) for the site, is consistent with SWAP designation of Commercial (C), and therefore is likely
to be consistent with the City's future General Plan. =The proposed project is a Class 1
categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines.
FINDINGS
There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised No. 1, Amended No.
2 will be consistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, which will be
completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. Plot Plan No. 8839
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 is a commercial project. The proposed site is
designated commercial by SWAP, and the existing zoning is General Commercial.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, If the
proposed use is inconsistent, it will not be detrimental because of the commercial
nature of surrounding uses,
The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws. The
proposed use complies with local planning and zoning laws which are prepared in
conformance with State planning and zoning laws.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use. Plot Ran No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended
No.2 as proposed is in conformance with Ordinance 348.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, Potential impacts are mitigated to a level of non-significance through
Conditions of Approval.
The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk,
height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with
adjoining properties, through appropriate building mass reduction techniques and
landscape installation, and distance from planned adjacent structures.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does
not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area. The
project conforms to the existing General Commercial zoning and SWAP Commercial
designation·
B
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project will take access from Sixth Street.
The design of the project, 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 project has adequate circulation throughout
the entire site.
mST~94EV.PP 4
10.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. This Staff
Report contains mapping, and Conditions of Approval, which support the Staff
recommendation.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- approving Plot Plan No. 8839,
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2, based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
Resolution - page 6
Conditions of Approval - page 11
Exhibits - page 16
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP Map
c. Zone Map
d. Site Plan
e. Elevations
f. Floor Plan
Letter from applicant requesting for special review of parking
dated December 30, 1991 - page 17
S%STAFFRFT'~839-REV.PP 5
ATTACHMENT NO. i
RESOLUTION NO. 92-.._
S%STA~9-FL:V.PP
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-015
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA DENYING PLOT PLAN NO. 8839 REVISED NO.
1 o AMENDED NO. 2, CHANGING USES ON THE SECOND FLOOR
FROM 5,413 SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE TO A 780 SQUARE
FOOT BEAUTY SHOP, 2,961 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE
AND 1,672 SQUARE FEET OF STORAGE, AND A REDUCTION
IN REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING ON PROPERTY KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 922-024-027.
WHEREAS, Temecula Sixth Street-A Limited California Partnership filed Plot Plan No.
8839 Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use,
Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed
by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot
Plan on March 16, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said
Plot Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findinqs. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall
adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the
following requirements are met:
· 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. 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.
S~rAFFemSeS4~V.P, 7
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 end local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General
Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan
guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is not consistent with the SWAP and does not meet the
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
Plan.
1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the General
2. The Planning Commission finds, in denying projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a. There is not a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised
No. 1, Amended No. 2 as 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 a 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 does not comply with all other applicable
requirements of State law and local ordinances. The project as proposed is inconsistent with
SWAP and Ordinance No. 348.
D. 1. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c) of Ordinance No. 348, no plot plan may be
approved unless the following findings can be made:
a. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements
and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances.
b. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of
the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land
and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property.
2. The Planning Commission, in denying the proposed Plot Plan No. 8839
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2, makes the following findings, to wit:
S~STAFFRPl'~e39-RE'V. PP 8
a. There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised No.
1, Amended No. 2 would be inconsistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, which
will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. Plot Plan No. 8839
Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 does not meet the parking standards as set out in the existing
ordinances and anticipated in the General Plan.
b. There is a likely probability of substantial detriment to and
interference with the future General Plan, as a result of an approval.
c. The proposed use or action does not comply with State planning and
zoning laws. There is no substantiation for the reduction in the number of required parking
spaces for the usable space proposed.
d. The site is not suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in
terms of the circulation patterns, access, and intensity of use.
e. The project as designed and conditioned will adversely affect the
public health or welfare due to lack of adequate parking.
f. The project is not compatible with surrounding land uses. The alley
would be sub-standard and would be creating traffic conflicts in the alley which needs to
service surrounding properties.
g. The proposal would have an adverse effect on surrounding property,
because the alley would be sub-standard and would be creating traffic conflicts in the alley
which needs to service surrounding properties.
h. The design of the project, the type of improvements, and the resulting
street layout are such that they are in conflict with easements for access through or use of
the property within the proposed project. The project has inadequate circulation.
i. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by
reference. This Staff Report contains mapping, Conditions of Approval, and an Initial Study
which support the Staff recommendation.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the
logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Comoliance.
The proposed Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2 is a Class 1 categorical
exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (e)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines which pertains to minor alterations to existing structures.
S%STAFFRPT~839-FEV.PP 9
SECTION 3. COnditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby denies Plot Plan No. 8839 Revised
No. 1, Amended No.2 to revise Plot Plan No. 8839, changing uses on the second floor from
storage to a 780 square foot beauty shop, 2,961 square feet of office space and 1,672
square feet of storage, and a reduction in required off-street parking from 44 to 40 spaces and
known as Assessor's Parcel No. 922-024-027.
SECTION 4.
DENIED this 16th day March, 1992.
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 16th day of
March, 1992 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HOAGLAND, BLAIR, CHINIAEFF
NOES: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS FAHEY
ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS FORD
S~STAFFemeae-,EV..' I 0
ATTACItMENT NO. ~
DEVELOPIVIlr. NT F!r.l~. CffECKLIST
s~,u,mu, r~A.~,.cc 10
CASE NO.:
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPM!~NT FI~E CIW~KI~T
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fe~
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Pat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Ubrary)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Consistent with Specific Plan
Consistent with Future General Plan
Condition of Approval
N/A
N/A
Condition No. 30
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NO
s~r^Fn~a~Ansa,.cc 11
ATTAC'3tMENT NO. 6
CORRESPONDENCEfPETITIONS
s~^mu,'r~,,a,~a..cc 12
Curtis & Marilyn Winters
Post Office Box 456
Temecula, California
Zip: 92593-0456
714/699-3333
Mr. Matthew Fagan
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula CA 92590
Rr:.CF.,IV u
MAR 16 1992
CITY OF TD,]EC',JLA
Dear Mr. Fagan:
Other than 'the builder of the property, I doubt if anyone ever
knew the property,at 41910 Sixth Avenue any better than LAND WEST
REALTY- As per your posted notice, I am writing to set forth
my views as it concerns a request for a vari~nce--.in particular,
changing the parking requirements from 44 spaces to 40. I object
to this most strenuously. I assume you have checked with the
County as to the issuance of permits.
We once occumied "Suite A", now occupied by REAPPEARANCES- As
you must su~y know, sometime in 1985, or thereabouts, a permit
was granted tooerect a one story buildtng..-and, instead, the
owner of the property, Felix Hurtado, put up two stories. At
the time, he didn't have enough parking space for even a one s~'~-
And it is still the same...27 spaces, if you want to count the
space for bicycles- Because of this deficiency, the County of
Riverside certified only 3600 square feet for occupancy-
The owner proceeded, despite this deficiency, to rent the whole
downstairs, and, a few weeks later (in 1988) to rent out the second
story. A church even met there on Sundays- He had put in his
out some space for his daughter's hair salon,
fown office, "rented"
rented some space for offices, etc. The County was never advised
of this violation-
The County never noticed, obviously, that he had put up a two
story building instead of only one, as allowed by the permit.
Unless the present limited partnership has procured property across
the alley, or that property just to the west, I don't see how
the partnership can come up with 40 parking spaces. Have you
bothered to count the parking spaces in the current parking lot?
There are 27 spaces including that for bicycles-
Additional considerations as it regards this building would be
advisable before you bring this building into the family of accept-
able office and retail spaces in Temecula. There are many other
shortcomings- I am speaking of it as a structure that should
have never come into being- We had almost an inch of water towards
the back of our offices after the heavy rain of January, 1990-
The fact that it took so long to get the owner to cure the prc'~em
-more-
M. Fagam, City of Temecula, Page 2
is not being addresse~ here. However, their method of cure
was simply to seal up the "cracks" from inside, so the water didn'!t
run into our offices, anymore.
I should assume that the building couldn't pass a good inspection,
if submitted to same. There are/were some other problems. For
instance: At one time, we couldn't understand why our heating
bill was so high. We called the gas company, and requested that
they survey our premises. They found that the heat to our unit
was inadequate, but we were heating the offices to our west, and
also to the east. I assume that this condition still exists.
Also, concurrently renting other space, was a security company
that never had any heat whatsoever. I don't know if this problem
still existS- We were told by the gas company inspector that
only the minimal conduits and heating units were in place, and
that is why we were always cold.
Frankly,. I don't think that the foundation can handle a two story
building...it may be unsafe...perhaps I am wrong.
At the time we went to court over the occupancy, we had some five
pages of complaints.
Please note the violation as it regards the placement of fire
extinguishers. There is supposed to be an accessible fire extin-
guishere every 60 feet!!! We were worried enough to provide our
own extinguisher.
This is a poorly built structure, and certainly not a credit to
Temecula. I think that your inspectors should go over it with
a fine toothed comb, and have it brought up to code.
If you have any questions, please call me before noon Tuesday,
as I may be leaving town. I am also having the phones disconnected
for a short period...699-3333-
cannot be at the meeting...hence, this letter.
Sincerely yours,
Curtis R. Winters, Jr., Broker
LAND WEST REALTY
P.S.. Peter Peterson, County Building and Planning Department,
knows this building well.
CRWm
March 27, 1992
TEMECULA - SIXTH STREw, ,'
A California Limited Parmenhip
2172 Dupont Drive * Suite 217 * lrvine, CA 92715
(714) 252-2970 ' (Fax) 252-2974
City Council
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temectda, CA 92390
RE: APPEAL OF DECISION BY PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING PLOT PLAN 8839
Honorable Councilwomen and Councilmen:
We wish to appeal the decision, of March 16, 1992, by the Planning Commission
to deny our request for a revision to Plot Plan No. 8839. The reasons given
for denial centered around the number of on-site parking spaces provided.
Prior to purchasing this existin9 building we met with the City to discuss our
proposed use and parking requirements. We also submitted a plan showing our
proposal together with a fee required for Planning Department review. After
the plan was reviewed, we were told, and received a letter dated December 3,
1990 stating, that we could count 42 on site parking spaces to calculate
allowed uses for the building.
Based upon our meetings, City review of the project and the above mentioned
letter which occurred prior to purchase, we were able to obtain financing and
completed the purchase.
Immediately after purchase, we submitted an application to occupy a portion of
the building on the second floor. That application was released to the
Building Department by the Planning Department but then we were told that we
should submit an application to the Planning Depati~ent for site plan revision
before applying to the Building Department for additional occupancies on the
second floor. We did so, and met twice with the City Development Review
Committee. The result of those meetings was that the on site parking spaces
were reduced from 42 to 40. One space was lost because the Committee desired a
landscape island to be added where one space had been. The second space was
lost due to the requirements of 8'-6" width for compact spaces. Also, at the
first DRC meeting we were told to submit a letter to the Planning Director
requesting approval of a reduction of parking spaces from 44 to 40. The
request for parking reduction, dated December 30, 1991, was submitted and · at
the second DRC meeting of January 9, 1992 we were told that the request had
been approved.
After the public hearing phase on this matter was closed by Planning
Commission, the Commissioner who moved for denial brought up the fact that ten
(10) parking' spaces are located in garages which have garage doors and that the
public alley at the garages is twenty (20) feet wide. Prior to close of the
public hearing it was noted that the garage spaces are assigned to specific
tenant spaces for the tenants use rather than use by tenant clients. A twenty
foot width is standard for public alleys and, although not brought up, the
building was built two (2) feet from the alley right of way. Although the turn
into the garages is tight, the Public Works Department responded, correctly,
March 27, 1992
Page 2
RE: APPEAL OF DECISION BY PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING PLOT PLAN 8839
that the garages would be used by the Tenants arriving in the morning and
leaving in the evening, rather than clients coming and going during the day. A
question was raised by the Commissioner as to assurance that the garages would
indeed be used as garages. Of course the garage doors could be removed if you
desired, but that would result in a loss of appeal to the Tenants and possible
security problem for the ten created open parking at the alley.
In view of the above background and history prior to the Planning Commission
meeting, no concerns regarding access, etc. by the Fire Department per its
letter of January 9, 1992 to the Planning Department, no objections stated by
the public during the public hearing at the Commission and that the Public
Works and Planning Departments, after revisions they requested were made-at the
DRC meetings, have no real concerns with the site plan, access and parking and
recommended approval as submitted, we respectfully request your approval as
submitted or, at your discretion, approval of one of the two alternates listed
on the Appeal of Decision application.
Sincerely,
TEMECULA - SIXTH STREET
Partner
LEDC:pw
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
EXHIBITS
s~,,.FnPT~l,n~.cc 13
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: A
P.C. DATE:
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
VICINITY MAP
March 16, 1992
S%ST~9-REV.PP
-I
CITY OF TEMECULA
Exhibit B: SWAP Designation: Commercial
'/I
SITE
Exhibit C:
Case No.:
P.C. Date:
ZONING
Designation: General Commercial
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
March 16, 1992
S~STAFFRPT~839-REVoPP
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: D
P.C. DATE:
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
SITE PLAN
March 16, 1992
S~STA~9-REV.PP
CITY OF TEMECULA
6_
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: F
P.C. DATE:
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
March 16, 1992
FLOOR PLAN
b"~TAFf:~FTI~8~I-REV.pp
CITY OF TEMECULA
,e .~
t
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: F
P.C. DATE:
Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised No. 1, Amended No. 2
March 16, 1992
FLOOR PLAN
ITEM
17
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPRO
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department,,
May 12, 1992
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Extension of Margarita
Road between Winchester Road and Solana Way; EA-10.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is requested that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Environmental Assessment Number 10, the
proposed extension of Margarita Road between Winchester Road
and Solana Way.
BACKGROUND
Attached is a copy of the project description for the extension of Margarita Road. Based upon
the analysis of the potential environmental impacts, as described in the Initial Study, it has
been determined that the proposed project could not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment. As a result, it is recommended that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for this project.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments: 1.
2.
Negative Declaration - page 2
Initial Environmental Study - page 3
S~TAFFRF~IOF, A.CC
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
S~STAFFRPT~IOEA.CC
CITY OF TEMECULA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Proposed _ Final
PROJECT:
Margarita Road Extension, Environmental Assessment No. 10
APPLICANT:
City of Temecula
LOCATION:
Approximately 1/2 mile east of Ynez Road between Winchester Road
and Solana Way in the City of Temecula.
DESCRIPTION:
The construction of approximately 1.1 miles of Margarita Road. The
southern half of the project will use the existing pavement for North
General Kearney Road, the northem half of the project consists of the
construction of half-width improvements (is. I lane in each direction).
Based upon the information contained in the Inffial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has
been determined that the above mentioned project will have no significant impact upon the
environment. The City of Temecula,
City Council
Planning Commission
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant impact upon the
environment, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted.
Prepared by: ~~gna~uur '
e)
David W. Hogan. Associate Planner
(Name and Title)
Public Review Period: ADril 10. 1992 to Mav 11.1999 .
Public Notice was given through:
X Local Newspaper. __ Posting the Site. __ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
Negative .Declaration Adoption Date:
~et, N~ININ~I OEA.ND
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
S~STAFFRPT~IOEA.CC
II
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
BACKGROUND
1. Name of Project:
Margarita Road Fxtension
{Fqvironmental Assessment 10)
e
Location of Project:
ADoroximatelv 1/? mile east of Ynez Road between
Winchester Road and Solana Way
Description of Project:
Construction of aooroximatelv 1.1 miles of Maroarita
Road between SolaM Way and Winchester Road in the
City of Temecula. The southerly seoment of the
oroiect. from Solana Way to just north of the unnamed
channel. will consist of resurfacino the existino North
r-eneral Kearnev Road. The northerly half of the
oroiect. from lust north of the unnamed channel to
Winchester Road. will consist of full width oradina and
half-width road imorovements. The Droiect represents
an interim roadway imorovement that is Dart Of a laraer
oroiect. Soecific Plan 763 (the Temecula Reoional
Center). for which a Fnvironmental Impact Reoort (EIR)
is currently beino oreDared. The imoacts for the entire
oroject will be addressed in the EIR for Specific Plan
263 which is currently under review by the Ciw of
Temecula. MarQarita Road is identified as an arterial
roadway surroUnded bv urban scale uses in the
Southwest Area CommuniW Plan.
4. Date of Assessment:
March 70.1992
5. Name of Proponent:
CiW of TemeCula
e
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
431'7'4 Business Park Drive. Temecula, CA 92590
(714) 694-6400
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic
substructures?
Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or
overcovering of the soil?
X
Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
eo
Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or off the site?
f. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion?
The modification of any wash, channel, creek,
river, or lake?
Exposure of people or 'property to geologic hazards
such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, liquefaction, or similar hazards?
Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
8. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
Alteration of air movement, temperature, or
moisture or any change in climate, whether
locally or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b$
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface water in any
waterbody?
Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
2
Yes Mavbq NQ
X
X
X
X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions, withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
Ram Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of
any native species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare,
threatened, or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of animals (animals includes all land
animals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, shellfish,
benthic organisms, and/or insects)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare,
threatened, or endangered species of animals?
c. The introduction of new wildlife species into
an area?
d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a, Increases in existing noise levels?
Yes Maybe NQ
_ _ X
X
X
X
X
_ _ X
X
_ _ X
X
$'4TARqqP~IQF. A.B 3
10.
11.
12.
13.
Yes Maybe No
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X _ _
c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? _ _ X
Ught end Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in
new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in:
a. Alteration of the present land use of an area?
Alteration to the future planned land; use of an
area as described in a community or general plan?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
An increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
_ _ X
X
b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? __X _
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in!
A risk of an explosion or the release of any
hazardous substances in the event of an accident
or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes,
but is not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
be
The use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous
or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil,
pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
Ce
Possible interference with an emergency 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?
TranaportationlCircdation. Will the proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
X
14.
15.
16.
Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand
for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems, including public transportation?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterbore, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
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:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems,
or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities:
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Water systems?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I~'rAR=IIP~loEA.IEI 5
Yes Maybe No
Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage systems?
X
X
fe
Solid waste disposal systems?
X
Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient
pattern of utility delivery system improvements for
any of the above?
X
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
Se
The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard?
X
be
The exposure of people to potential health
hazards, including the exposure of sensitive
receptors (such as schools and hospitals) to
toxic pollutant emissions?
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
ae
The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open
to the public?
The creation of an aesthetically offensive site
open to public view?
X
Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area?
X
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources
or opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
ae
The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic,
prehistoric, archaeological or historic site?
Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object?
Any potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
de
Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses
within the potential impact area?
III DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Earth
1 .a ,d ,f,h,i.
No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique
geologic or physical features, changes in the erosion and deposition of beach sands,
the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, or any construction in an
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
1 .b,c.
Ye~. The construction of Margarita Road will =result in the disruption, displacement,
overcovering and compaction of soils, and a possible change in surface topography.
Some change is surface topography will occur at the base of a small hill north
located just north of General Kearney Road. Approximately three-quarters of the
project site is existing roadway and borrow site. The remaining quarter of the site
is level; the amount of grading is expected to be minor. As a result, no significant
impacts are anticipated from this project.
1,e.
Yes. The wind erosion, water erosion, and deposition which could result from
project construction are expected to be short-term and construction related. The
City will require the use of appropriate best management practices to reduce and
mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. No long-term erosion and deposition
impacts are expected from the project because of the resulting in the paving and
landscaping. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from of this project.
1.g
Yes. The project will cross an unnamed intermittent blue-line channel shown on the
Murrieta U.S.G.S. Quad map. The project will not change or alter the channel that
is currently crossed by North General Kearney Road. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
2.a,b.
2,c.
Yea. The construction of Marg.arita Road will result in short-term, construction
related increases in air emissions and mayn result in the local deterioration of air
quality. The project will result in increased road use and air emissions in the
Temecula Valley. However, any increase in emissions caused by additional
automobile use is expected to be offset by the long-term decrease in emissions
caused by the reduction of traffic congestion on Ynez Road. As a result, no
significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the local
or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
S~rAF~P~OF.A~S 7
Water
3.a,c,d,e,f,
g ,h,i.
3.b.
No. No changes or alterations in the course or direction of flood flows, the quantity
and quality of surface and ground water, or discharges to surface waters are
expected to occur as a result of this project. The existing intermittent channel and
drainage pattern will not be changed by this project. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. Some changes in absorption rams, and the amount of surface runoff will
occur as a result of this project. The project will reduce the soil absorption capacity
on about 2.9 acres. The soil absorption rates will not significantly change on the
other half of the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Plant Life
4.a,b,c.
4.d.
No. The site does not contain any native, unique, rare or endangered plant species.
The site has been historically used for a wide range of activities (agriculture,
roadway, and borrow site) that tend to eliminate native species. The site currently
contains degraded graBland and is adjacent.to several isolated pockets of degraded
Coastal Sage Scrub areas. No endangered or rare vegetative species were
identified on the site in the FEIR for the 1989 Southwest Area Community Plan.
Future roadway landscaping will replace the existing introduced species with other
introduced species. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. The soils on the project site have been identified as locally important
agricultural land in earlier planning studies done by the County of Riverside. The
small size and isolation of the project site reduce the viability of the site for
agricultural production. The site was also identified future urban development in the
Southwest Area Plan adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in
1989. Because of it's degraded condition, isolation, and small size; no significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Animal Life
5 .a ,e.
5 .c,d.
Yes. The construction of Margarita Road will change the diversity of the animal
species and reduce the amount of wildlife habitat on the project site. The majority
of the site is currently used for roadway and borrow site purposes. Limited
populations of common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds are believed to
rely on the site for either habitat, food, and/or water. The project site is an isolated
undeveloped parcel in an otherwise developed area of the City of Temecula. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
No. The project is located currently surrounded by urban scale development and
will not result in the introduction of new species or result in a barrier to migration.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
mITARqqPt~lU
8
5.b.
No. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Area. The site and surrounding area was surveyed for Stephen's
Kangaroo Rats (SKR) in February 1988, March 1989, and August. 1990. These
surveys identified no SKR south of Winchester Road. (A small area with a small
SKR population was identified north of Winchester Road during all the surveys.)
Because no Stephen's Kangaroo Rats occupy the site; no significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Noise
6.a,b.
6,c.
Yea. Some increase in noise levels will occur as a result of this project. The
increases in short-term noise levels will result from the construction of the roadway,
the increase in long-term noise levels will result from the use of the roadway.
Because the short-term construction related noise will be of limited duration during
daylight hours. and is located between 800 and 1200 feet from the closest
residences; the impacts are not expected to be significant.
The long-term noise impacts have the greatest potential for significant adverse
impacts. It is expected that the completion of this missing segment of Margarita
Road will increase traffic volumes and related noise levels along much of Margarita
Road from Rustic Glen Drive (north of Winchester Road) to Rancho California Road.
According to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Temecula Regional
Center Specific Plan, future average noise levels (CNEL) along to Margarita Road will
exceed 65 CNEL immediately adjacent to the project site.
Implementation of state noise standards will minimize the adverse impacts of future
noise in this area. In addition, Margarita Road was planned and constructed as a
major street and the existing urban development addressed future noise concerns
in previous development approvals. As a result, no significant impacts are
anticipated from this project.
No. The construction and use of Margarita Road will not result in the exposure of
people to severe vibrations. No significant impact is anticipated as a result of this
project.
Liaht ~nd Glare
Yes. Additional light and glare may result from this project. The additional lighting
impacts will result from nighttime traffic use and street lights. The project is
located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The
lighting standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium street
lights be installed to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. The
impact of the additional street lights will be mitigated by compliance with the
standards contained in the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District
(Ordinance No. 655). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Lend Use'
8.a.
8.b.
Yes. Some of the existing lend uses on the project site will change as a result of
this project. The current land uses on the project site are: 3.0 acres of existing
road and shoulder surface, 1.3 acres of borrow site and haul road, and 3.0 acres
of vacant land. Future land use is expected to be: 4.5 acres of road and shoulder
surface and 2.8 acres of graded future roadway area. As a result, no significant
adverse impacts are anticipated from this project.
No. The construction of Margarita Road is consistent with previous County General
Plan for this area. According to the 1989 Southwest Area Community Plan
prepared by Riverside County, the future land use for the project site is arterial
roadway. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Natural Resources
9.a,b.
Yes. Construction of an arterial roadway will result in a minor incremental increase
in the use of natural and nonrenewable resources such as construction aggregate
and petroleum products. The project does not require the development of new
sources for these materials. If this project were not undertaken, the existing
aggregate and petroleum resources would be used for other development and
construction activities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Risk of UpSet
10.a,b,c.
No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion, the release of hazardous
substance, or any interference with an emergency response plan. The proposed
project will improve the local emergency response capability by providing an
important alternative route in an area with very few alternatives. As a result, no
significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
Population
11.
No. The construction of a roadway in this location will not alter the location,
distribution, or growth rate of population of this area. This project is a response to
previously under mitigated development activities. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Housin;
12.
No. The construction of the project in this location will not affect existing housing
or create a demand for additional housing in this area. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
swrN;wm~oede 10
TrensDortstion/~ir~lation
13.8,c,d.
Yes.' The construction of this project will generate additional vehicular traffic,
change the existing transportation system, and will alter the existing pattern of
circulation in Temecula. The project provide an alternative north-south roadway in
a area where few alternatives exist. The project is expected to improve the
capacity and efficiency of the local circulation and transportation system. As a
result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
13.b,e,f.
No. The project will not increase the demand for parking, alter rail or air traffic, or
increase hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. The project will reduce the
vehk:ular traffic hazards in other locations, most notably along Ynez Road. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
14.a,b,c,d.
No. The construction of Margarits Road will not create a need for, or result in any
alterations to, fire, police, school, or park services. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
14.e.
Yes. This project will require the additional expenditure of future City funds to
cover the cost of maintaining the future street, The expected maintenance costs
will have an impact on City's budget is future years, However, the future
maintenance costs for this project are expected to represent a minimal incremental
increase in future costs, As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated this
project,
15 .a,b.
No. The construction of Margarita Road will not result in the use of substantial
amounts of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for
existing sources of energy, No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project,
U'ffiitiea
16.all.
No. The construction of Margarita Road will not result in a need for new utility
delivery systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric,
communication, water, sewer, storm drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
.TAFFem~A.r~ 11
Human Health
17.a,b.
No, Construction of the project will not result in the creation of a health hazard, or
result in the additional exposure of people to any human health hazards. The
project is expected to reduce existing and future the traffic hazards in other areas.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a =result of this project.
Aesthetics
18.a,b,c.
No, The construction of Margarits Road will not result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive view, the obstruction of any scenic view or vista, or have a
detrimental impact on the surrounding area, The proposed roadway will be visible
from the existing residential units to the south and east. While the view may be
different than the current view, it is not likely to be offensive or aesthetically
offensive. Landscaping along the roadway will reduce future visual impacts. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
19.
No. The construction of Margarita Road! will not impact existing recreational
opportunities. The project would be constructed along an existing roadway and on
private land. No impact on the quality and quantity of existing recreational
opportunities in the area is expected. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
Cultural Resources
20.a.
Maybe. The Southwest Area General Plan identified the vicinity of Margarita Road
and Solana Way as an "Area of Sensitivity for Archaeological Resources' and much
of the northerly area as an 'Area of Known Paleontological Resources". No
additional roadway construction is anticipated in the southern section of the project.
In the center section, most of the area has already been used as a borrow site and
paleo-salvage activities have been undertaken. In the northerly section of the
project where archaeologic or paleontolngical impacts are possible, standard City
paleontologic and archaeologic development conditions will be applied. As a result,
no significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
20.b,c,d.
No. The project site is not known to contain any prehistoric or historic structure,
affect any unique ethnic cultural values, or affect any religious or sacred uses. The
Southwest Area General Plan did not identify any of these resources in this area.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
swrN~m~oeda 12
IV
MANDATORY 'RNDINGS OF SIGNIRCANCE
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?
Yes Maybe No
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.)
X
Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate resources may be
relatively small, but where the effect of the total
of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
V DEPARTMENT OF RSH AND GAME "DE MINIMUS" RNDINGS
Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect,
either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources?
Wildlife is defined as 'all wild animals, birds, plants, fish,
amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued
viability' (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code).
X N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there WILL NOT be · significant effect in this case
because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached sheets and
in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will
mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Prepared by:
David Hogan. Associate Planner
Name and Title
March 20.1992
Date
swrAm~m~osu. 14
MARGARITA ROAD 2;x'rRqSION
ENVIRONMENTAL ~ NO. 10
I I
Project Location ../
./.'
ROAD
~ ROAD'
· k
ITEM NO. 18
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 12, 1992
Maintenance of Streets Not Within the Maintained Road System
PREPARED BY:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and provide Staff direction.
BACKGROUND:
There are several unimproved (dirt) streets within Temecula such as Leifer Road north of
Nicolas Road, Walcott Lane, Calle Girasol, John Warner Road, and Santiago Road, that were
not accepted into the County's maintained road system due to the increased maintenance
costs and liability associated with lack of asphalt pavement and drainage facilities. The land
divisions associated with the streets were typically required to provide an offer of dedication
to the public for street and road purposes, but were not conditioned to install the
infrastructure improvements that would have made them eligible for maintenance by the
County Road Department. The offers of dedication were then either not accepted by the
County Board of Supervisors, or were accepted only for vesting purposes to preserve access
rights.
Under Section 1806 of the Streets and Highways Code, the governing agency is not
responsible for maintenance nor liable for failure to maintain until the agency formally accepts
the street into the maintained street system, Additionally, streets that are not within a City
or County's maintained street system are not eligible for Gas Tax Funding and the associated
maintenance cost must be funded by an alternative source.
-1 - pwO1\agdrpt\92\0512\meintnon.mrs 0501 a
Currently, the Public Works Department will respond to citizens in these areas in times of
emergency with barricades or sand bags, but will not do any routine maintenance of these
streets. The Council may wish to continue this policy or direct Staff to formulate a policy that
would limit the expenditures of public funds to emergency repairs; or possibly accept all the
streets into the maintained system, but maintain only minimally with grading and minor
drainage facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
To design and construct to a minimum standard a twenty-four foot paved roadway (using
Leifer Road as an example) with 3" of asphalt over 4" of base, asphalt berms, down-drains
and one minor culvert crossing (2-24" C.M.P,) would cost approximately ~100,000-
$115,000. To only compact and grade the roadway, along with dust control and base
stabilization, would cost approximately $12,000. However, the road would need to be
re-graded twice per year at an approximate annual cost of $14,000.
Attachment
Memo on Leifer Road
-2- pw01 ~agdrpt\92\0512\maintnon .mrs 0501 a
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Brad Buron, Maintenance Supervisor
March 11, 1992
Leifer Road Update
Tim, here is a cost breakdown for projected work to be constructed on Leifer Road.
1. Grade, compact subgrade
106,800 sq. ft. @ 90.05/s.f. --
2. Two 24" arched C.M.P., installed
60 linear feet @ 978.55/I.f. =
SUBTOTAL =
3. Dust control and road base stabilation using
liquid calcium chloride application
3.88 gai. per sq. yd. =
TOTAL COST --
95,553.60
94,713.00
910,268.60
91,500.00
$11,768.60
In response to your request of how many families access their homes off Nicolas Road into
Liefer Road area, there are forty-two (42) different residences that live on the following
streets:
Liefer Road
Greenwood Lane
Kimberly Lane
Pala Vista Drive
Jessie Circle
Gatlin Road
Indian Summer Road
If you have any more requests, or require more information on any of the above, please feel
free to contact me at extension 184.
pwO2\buronb\0311 a.mem
ITEM
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY,~'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Scott F. Field
May 12, 1992
Ordinance Amending County Ordinance No. 630 - Animal Regulations
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AUTHORIZING THE SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED, NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED
ANIMALS
DISCUSSION: The City of Temecula contracts with the County of Riverside for animal
control services. In order to provide for uniformity of enforcement in the unincorporated and
incorporated areas where the County Animal Control Officer provides services, it is necessary
that the County and City Ordinances be consistent.
Effective January 1, 1991, the State modified the procedures for addressing abandoned,
neglected, or cruelly treated animals, including providing a special hearing procedure to take
away animals from their owners. Late last year the County amended its ordinance to
incorporate this procedure. It is recommended that the City Council make the same
amendment.
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE
SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED,
NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED ANIMALS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula, adopted Ordinance No. 90-04
on February 27, 1990. Said Ordinance, adopted by reference, Riverside County Ordinance No.
630.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 597.1, Subdivision (e) , the City
of Temecula hereby determines that California Penal Code Section 597.1 shall be operative in
the City of Temecula and that Penal Code Section 597f shall not be operative.
SECTION 3. Any dog, cat or other animal which is abandoned, neglected, sick, lame,
feeble, is unfit for the labor it is performing, or that in any manner is being cruelly treated may
be impounded and disposed of in a humane manner as hereinafter provided.
SECTION 4. Whenever any peace officer or animal control officer has reasonable
grounds to believe that very prompt action is required to protect the health or safety of the
animal or the health or safety of others, the officer shall immediately seize the animal and
comply with the procedure established in Section 4 of this Ordinance. In all other cases, the
officer shall comply with the provisions of Section 5 of this Ordinance. The cost of caring for
and treating any animal properly seized under this Ordinance shall constitute a lien on the animal
and the animal shall not be returned to its owner until the charges are paid, unless the hearing
officer determines that the seizure was unjusti~ed.
SECTION 5. Whenever an animal control officer or peace officer seizes or impounds
an animal based on a reasonable belief that prompt action is required to protect the health or
safety of the animal or the health or safety of others, the officer shaH, prior to the
commencement of any criminal proceedings provide the owner or keeper of the animal, if known
or ascertained after reasonable investigation, with the opportunity for a post seizure hearing as
hereinafter provided to determine the validity of the seizure or impoundmerit, or both.
1. The Health Department shah cause a notice to be affixed to a conspicuous place
where the animal was situated or personally deliver a notice of the seizure or impoundment, or
both, to the owner or keeper within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays. The notice
3lOrd, 41 -1-
shall include all .of the following:
a. The name, business address, and telephone number of the officer providing
the notice.
b. A description of the animal seized, including any identification upon the
animal,
c. The authority and purpose for the seizure, or impoundment, including the
tim,e place, and circumstances under which the animal was seized.
d. A statement that, in order to receive a post seizure hearing, the owner or
person authorized to keep the animal, or his or her agent, shall request the hearing by signing
and returning an enclosed declaration of ownership or right to keep the animal to the Health
Department within 10 days, including weekends and holidays, of the date of the notice. The
declaration may be returned by personal delivery or mail.
e. A statement that the cost of caring for and treating any animal properly seized
under this section is a lien on the animal and that the animal shall not be returned to the owner
until the charges are paid, and that failure to request or to attend a scheduled hearing shall result
in liability for this cost.
2. The post seizure hearing shall be conducted within 48 hours of the request, excluding
weekends and holidays. The heating shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of
Section 10 of this Ordinance.
3. Failure of the owner or keeper, or of his or her agent, to request a hearing within the
prescribed time period, or to attend a scheduled hearing, shall result in forfeiture of any right
to a post seizure hearing or right to challenge his or her liability for costs incurred.
4. The Health Department, or law enforcement agency that directed the seizure shall be
responsible for the costs incurred for caring and treating the animal, if it is determined in the
post seizure hearing that the seizing officer did not have reasonable grounds to believe every
prompt action, including seizure of the animal, was required to protect the health or safety of
the animal or the health or safety of others. If it is determined the seizure was justified, the
owner or keeper shall be personally liable to the seizing agency for the costs of the seizure and
care of the animal, and the animal shall not be returned to its owner until the charges arc paid
and the sizing agency or heating officer has determined that the animal is physically fit or the
owner demonstrates to the seizing agency's or the hearing officer's satisfaction that the owner
can and will provide the necessary care.
SECTION 6. Where the need for immediate seizure is not present and prior to the
commencement of any criminal proceedings the Health Officer shall provide the owner or keeper
3lOrds 41 -2-
of the animals, if known or ascertainable after reasonable investigation, with the opportunity for
a hearing prior to any seizure or impoundment of the animal. The owner shall produce the
animal at the time of the hearing unless, prior to the hearing, the owner has made arrangements
with the agency to view the animal upon request of the agency, or unless the owner can provide
verification that the animal was humanely destroyed. Any person who willfully falls to produce
the animal or provide the verification is guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine of not less
than two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) no more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).
1. The Health Department or law enforcement agency shall cause a notice to be affixed
to a conspicuous place where the animal was situated or personally deliver a notice stating the
grounds for believing the animal should be seized. The notice shall include all of the following:
notice.
a. The name, business address and telephone number of the officer providing the
animal.
b. A description of the animal to be seized, including any identification upon the
c. The authority and purpose for the possible seizure or impoundment.
d. A statement that, in order to receive a hearing prior to any seizure, the owner
or person authorized to keep the animal, or his or her agent, shall request the hearing by signing
and returning the enclosed declaration of ownership or right to keep animal to the officer
providing the notice within two days, excluding weekends and holidays, of the date of the notice.
e. A statement that the cost of caring for and treating any animal properly seized
is a lien on the animal, that any animal seized shall not be returned to the owner until the
charges are paid, and that failure to request a hearing within the prescribed time period, or to
attend a scheduled hearing shall result in a conclusive determination that the animal may
properly be seized and that the owner shall be liable for the charges.
2. The preseizure hearing shall be conducted within 48 hours, excluding weekends and
holidays, after receipt of this request. The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the
procedure established in Section 10 of this Ordinance.
3. Failure of the owner or keeper, or his or her agent, to request a hearing within the
prescribed time, period or to attend a scheduled hearing, shall result in a forfeiture of any right
to a preseizure hearing or right to challenge his or her liability for costs incurred pursuant to this
Ordinance.
SECTION 7. If any animal is properly seized under this Ordinance, the owner or keeper
shall be personally liable to the seizing agency for the cost of the seizure and care of the animal.
Furthermore, if the charges for the seizure or impoundment and any other charges permitted
under this Ordinance are not paid within 14 days of the seizure, or, if the owner, within 14 days
3lOrds 41
of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, fails to pay charges permitted under this
Ordinance and take possession of the animal, the animal shall be deemed to have been
abandoned and may be disposed of by the impounding officer.
SECTION 8. If the animal requires veterinary care and the seizing agency is not
assured, within 14 days of the seizure of the animal, that the owner will provide the necessary
care, the animal shall not be returned to its owner and shall be deemed to have been abandoned
and may be disposed of by the impounding officer. A veterinarian may humanely destroy an
impounded animal without regard to the prescribed holding period when it has been determined
that the animal has incurred severe injuries or is incurably ill or crippled. A veterinarian also
may immediately humanely destroy an impounded animal afflicted with a serious contagious
dim unless the owner or his or her agent immediately authorizes treatment of the animal by
a veterinarian at the expense of the owner or agent.
SECTION 9. No animal properly seized under this ordinance shall be returned to its
owner until, in the determination of the seizing agency or hearing officer, the animal is
physically fit or the owner can demonstrate to the seizing ageney's or hearing of~cer's
satisfaction that the owner can and will pwvide the necessary care.
SECTION 10. All hearings conducted pursuant to this ordinance shall be conducted by
the Health Officer or his designee (Hearing Officer), who shall not have been directly involved
in the subject action and shall not be subordinate in rank to the person seizing or impounding
the animal. Hearings shall be conducted in the following manner:
1. The Hearing Officer may continue the hearing for a reasonable period of time, if the
Hearing Officer deems such continuance to be necessary and proper or if the owner or custodian
shows good cause for such continuance.
2. The Health Department shall have the burden of proof to establish, by a
preponderance of evidence, the existence of the condition or conditions which give rise to the
need for the seizure or impoundment.
3. h a case where the Department is also seeking to terminate the owner's rights in the
animal, the Department shall have put the owner or keeper of the animal on due written notice
thereof and shall establish the existence of the owner's or keeper's acts or omissions resulting
in cruelty or neglect to the animal be clear and convincing evidence to a reasonable certainly.
4. The Department shall present its case first, followed by the party against whom the
seizure or impoundment is being proposed. The Department may present rebuttal in the
discretion of the Hearing Officer.
5. Oral evidence shall be taken only on oath or affirmation.
6. Each party shall have the right to call and examine wimesses, to introduce exhibits,
3/Ords 41 -4-
to cross-examine opposing witnesses on any other matter relevant to the issues even though that
matter was not covered in the direct examination, to impeach any witness regardless of which
party first called the witness, and to rebut evidence.
7. The hearing need not be conducted according: to technical rules relating to evidence
and witnesses. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the son of evidence on which
responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the
existence of any common law or statutory rule which might make improper the admission of
such evidence over objection in civil actions. Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose
of supplementing or explaining other evidence, but shall not b e sufficient in itself to support a
finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions. The rules of privilege shall
be effective to the extent that they are otherwise required by statute to be recognized in the
hearing. Irrelevant and unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded.
8. At the conclusion of the hearing, each side shall be given an opportunity to
summarize its position.
9. Within three (3) working days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Officer
shall render, in writing, his findings, decision and order thereon, and shall give notice, in
writing, of said findings, decision and order to the owner or custodian of the animal.
10. In the event a sufficient Quantum of evidence presented at the hearing supports a
determination for seizure, impoundment, and/or termination of the owner' s fights in the animal,
the Hearing Officer as a part of his decision may order, but is not limited to ordering, that one
or more of the following actions be undertaken:
a. That the owner's and/or custodian's rights in the dog, cat or other animal are
terminated.
b. That the owner or custodian of the dog, cat or other animal shall remove the
animal(s) from the premises by a specified date.
c. That the Health Department personnel after a specified date, shall impound
the animal or animals.
d. That the Health Department shall sell, give away, or otherwise dispose of, the
animal(s) with the owner or custodian of the animal(s) being responsible to reimburse the City
for all costs and expenses including, but not limited to, board, care,
veterinary services, and costs of disposal. If the animal(s) are sold, the proceeds from the sale
shall go to the City or agency as designated by the City.
11. A decision upholding seizure or impoundment shall become effective upon issuance.
12. A decision terminating an owner's rights in the animal shall become effective 30
31Ord~ 41 -5-
days from the date the decision is mailed unless a stay of execution is granted.
SECTION 11. Every such, disabled, infirm or crippled animal, except a dog or cat,
abandoned in any pan of the City of Temecula the County of Riverside may be immediately
ldlled by the Health Department of law enforcement agency or their designees if, after a
reasonable search, no owner of the animal can be located. It shall be the duty of all pease
officers and animal control officers to cause the animal to be killed or rehabilitated and placed
in a suitable home on information that the animal is stray or abandoned.
SECTION 12. Any peace officer, humane society officer, or animal control officer shall
convey all injured cats and dogs found without their owners in a public place directly to a
veterinarian known by the officer to be a veterinarian who ordinarily treats dogs and cats for a
determination of whether the animal shall be immediately and humanely destroyed or shall be
hospitalized under proper care and given emergency treatment.
If the owner does not redeem the animal within the locally prescribed waiting period, the
veterinarian may personally perform euthanasia on the animal. If the animal is treated and
recovers from its injuries, the veterinarian may keep the animal for purposes of adoption,
provided the responsible animal control agency has first been contacted and has refused to take
possession of the animal.
Whenever any animal is transferred to a veterinarian in a clinic, such as an emergency
clinic which is not in continuous operation, the veterinarian may, in turn, transfer the animal to
an appropriate facility.
If the veterinarian determines that the animal shall be hospitalized under proper case and
given emergency treatment, the costs of any services which are provided pending the owner's
injury to the responsible agency or department shall be paid from the dog license fees, fines, and
fees from impounding dogs in the city, county, or city and county in which the animal was
licensed or, if the animal is unlicensed, shall be paid by the jurisdiction in which the animal was
found, subject to the' provision that this costs be repaid by the animal's owner. The costs of
caring for and treating any animal seized under this Section shall constitute a lien on the animal
and the animal shall not be returned to the owner until the charges are paid. No veterinarian
shall be criminally or civilly liable for any decision which he or she makes or for services which
he or she provides pursuant to this section.
An animal control agency which takes procession of an animal pursuant to Section 11 of
this Ordinance shall keep records of the whereabouts of the animal for a 72-hour period from
the time of possession, and those records shall be available for inspection by the public upon
request.
SECTION 13. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any peace officer
or any animal control officer may, with the approval of his or her immediate superior, humanely
destroy any stray or abandoned animal in the field in any case where the animal is too severely
3lOrds 41 -6-
injured to move or where a veterinarian is not available and it would be more humane to dispose
of the animal.
SECTION 14. Every owner, driver or keeper of any animal who permits the animal to
be in any building, enclosure, lane, street, square or lot within the City of Temecula area of
Riverside County, without proper care of attention shall be guilty of an infraction or
misdemeanor as hereinafter specified. Such individual. shall be deemed guilty of a separate
offense of each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the
provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted. Any individual convicted a
violation of this ordinance shall be:
1. guilty of an infraction offense and punished by a free not exceeding one
hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation;
2. guilty of an infraction offense and punished by a fine not exceeding two
hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second violation. The third and any additional violations shall
constitute a misdemeanor offense and shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand
dollars ($1,000.00) or six (6) months in jail, or both. Notwithstanding the above, a first offense
may be charged and prosecuted as a misdemeanor. Payment of any penalty herein shall not
relieve an individual from the responsibility for correcting the violation.
SECTION 15. Upon the conviction of a person charged with a violation of this
ordinance, all animals lawfully seized and impounded with respect to the violation shall be
adjudged by the court to be forfeited and shall thereupon be transferred to the impounding
officer for proper disposition. A person convicted of a violation of this Ordinance shall be
personally liable to the seizing agency from all costs of impoundrnent from the time of seizure
to the time for proper disposition. This Ordinance shall not prohibit the seizure or impoundment
of animals as evidence as provided for under any other provision of law.
SECTION 16. This Ordinance is not intended, nor shall it be construed in any way; to
affect Section s 31101 or 31752 of the Food and Agriculture Code.
SECTION 17. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not-affect the other provisions or applications of the provisions of this Ordinance
which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the
provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 18. Section 13 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 630 adopted by reference
in Ordinance No. 90-04 on February 27, 1990, is hereby repealed.
3/Ord~ 41 -7-
SECTION 19. This Ordinance shah be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this
Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED., APPROVED AND ADOPTF-D, this 261h day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of May, 1992 and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 261h day of May,
1992, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
3lOrds 41
June S. Greek, City Clerk
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order Tuesday,
April 28, 1992, at 8:20 P.M., Tamecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California· President Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mur~oz, Parks
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Moore
PUBLIC COMMENT
None given.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
Minute6
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of April 14, 1992 as mailed.
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve the
minutes of April 14, 1992 as mailed.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
·
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Moore
Credit Prooosal for FY 1992-93 TCSD Assessments
City Manager David Dixon summarized the staff report prepared by Director of
Community Services Nelson. Mr. Dixon advised that the City would be issuing a check
rather than credit to the affected property owners.
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve staff
recommendation with the modification that a check will be issued to the affected
property owners as follows:
2.1 Approve credit towards the FY 1992-93 TCSD Assessments to affected
property owners who were over assessed for slope maintenance services in FY
1990-91.
CSDMINI042892 -1 - 05106192
CSD Minutes
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS:
April 28. 1992
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
None
Moore
FlaQ Pole ProPOsal For Rancho California Soorts Park
Director of Community Services Nelson presented the staff report.
President Parks opened the public hearing at 8:30 P.M.
Bill Perlette, 29630 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula, representing the Rancho California Little
League, requested the Councils approval of the Flag Pole Monument in remembrance
of Craig Lewis, a strong leader and supporter of the Little League.
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans, to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
3.1
Proposal by the Rancho California Little League to install a flag pole and
memorial monument in the Rancho California Sports Park in remembrance of
Craig Lewis.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Moore
Bond Issuance to Fund the Temecula Community Services District Caoital Imorovement
Proaram
Finance Director Mary Jane Henry presented the staff report.
City Manager Dixon advised that the request had been reviewed by the finance
committee.
CSDMIN/042892 -2- 05106/92
CSD Minutes Aoril 28.1992
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
4.1 Authorize the General Manager to hire a financial advisor and bond counsel to
proceed with the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,300,000.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS:
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
None
Moore
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
None given.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
Director Nelson advised that Community Services is preparing for it's summer recreation
programs.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
Director Birdsall advised that she, Shawn Nelson, and Parks and Recreation Commissioners
Harker and Hillen artended a Community Services Conference at which Director Nelson gave
a well artended forum. She added that Commissioner Harker brought back a drug program
that is being implemented in the City of Monrovia which she has turned over to the Police
Chief.
Director Lindemans advised that he had artended a seminar in San Antonio, Texas with City
Manager Dixon on how to build a baseball stadium. Director Lindemans requested a feasibility
study be done as to the best use for the recently acquired 40 acres.
CSDMINI042892 -3- 05/06192
CSD Minutes Aoril 28.1992
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to adjourn to the Temecula
Community Services District meeting of May 12, 1992, 8:00 P.M., Temecula Community
Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California.
Ronald J. Parks, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City ClerkrTCSD Secretary
CSDMINIO42892 -4- 06106192
ITEM
2
Approval
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Temecula Community Services District Board of Directors/
General Manager
Public Works Department
May 12, 1992
Slope Maintenance Easement Vacation -
Portions of Tract Nos. 20735'L~- 20735-6, 21082-~ and 21082
in "The Villages"
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDAT I ON:
Dana S. Robie
That the Board of Directors ADOPT a resolution titled
"Resolution No. CSD92- ..., a ResoJution of intention of
the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community
Services District Regarding Vacation of the Slope
Maintenance Easements Over Portions of Tract Nos. 20735-
~, 20735-6, 21082-L~ and 21082", and set a date for a public
hearing regarding the proposed vacation, based on the
background analysis and findings contained in the
attached Staff Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
"The Villages" Homeowners Association
APPLI CANT:
R EPR ESE NTAT I VE:
PROPOSAL:
David Michaels
To set a date for a public hearing to consider whether to
vacate the slope maintenance easements over portions of
various tracts in "The Villages", as specified in attached
Exhibits "A" through "H". State law establishes a two-
step procedure for vacating public easements. First, the
Board sets a hearing date. Then, at least 15 days later,
it may consider whether to vacate said easements.
Agenda Report
May 12, 1992
Page Two
LOCAT ION:
Easterly/Southerly side of Margarita Road between 1100'
Northerly and 6500~ Northwesterly of Rancho California
Road.
BACKGROUND:
At the present time, the maintenance of these slopes is
under the auspices of the Temecula Community Services
Department(T.C.S.D. ). "The Villages" Homeowners
Association has requested that the T.C.S.D. vacate the
slopes, with the Association assuming the maintenance
obligation. The Association believes that it can maintain
the slopes for less than the T. C. S. D. charges. The area
encompassed by these easements totals approximately 3.23
acres. The Planning Commission Staff Report dated May
4, 1992 is attached for review. The commission found on
May 4, 1992 that the proposed vacation is consistent with
the future General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report from Public Works to Planning Commission
Resolution No. CSD92- (Intent to Vacate)
Legal Descriptions and~lats - Exhibits "A" through "H"
Vicinity map
RESOLUTION CSD92-_
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT REGARDING
VACATION OF THE SLOPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS OVER
PORTIONS OF TRACT NOS. 20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-~ AND 21082.
WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code Section 8300 et seq. provides for a
method by which public service easements may be vacated; and
WHEREAS, the City has received a request from "The Villages" Homeowners
Association to vacate various landscape maintenance easements within Tract Nos.
20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-~ and 21082;
NOW, THEREFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Board of Directors declares that it hereby intends to vacate
the landscape maintenance easements within Tract Nos. 20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-~
and 21082.
SECTION 2. The City is conducting this vacation pursuant to the Public
Streets, Highways and Service Easement Vacation Cede.
SECTION 3. The Board of Directors shall conduct a public hearing on June 9,
1992 at 8:00 p.m. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California, at which time all interested persons will be heard regarding the proposed
vacation.
SECTION 4. The easements to be vacated are described in Exhibits "A"
through "H", which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution. The City Clerk shall post this Resolution in three locations within the
City, and cause notice of the public hearing to be published in the manner set forth
at Sections 8322 and 8323 of the Streets and Highways Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1992.
Ronald J. Parks, President
Temecula Community Services District
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at a regular meeting
thereof, held on the 12th day of May, 1992 by the following vote of the Directors:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
june S. Greek, City Clerk
TEMECULA REDVELOPMENT
AGENCY AGENDA
ITEM
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD, TUESDAY APRIL 28, 1992
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was held Tuesday, April
28, 1992, 8:40 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California. Chairperson J. Sal Mu~oz presiding.
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
ABSENT: I AGENCY MEMBERS: Moore
PUBLIC COMMENT
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minute~
1.1
It was moved by Agency Member Parks, seconded by Agency Member
Lindemans to approve the minutes of April 14, 1992 as mailed.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: I
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mufioz,
Parks
None
Moore
Discussion of Loan to Bovs and Girls Club for Relocation of Portable Buildings
City Manager Dixon advised that the Committee had met and requested that a report
be prepared and presented to the agency during the month of May.
Agency Member Parks stated he feels it is very important to establish a Boys and Girls
Club in the Pujol area. He added that they have acquired a portable building and
redevelopment funds could be used to make permanent improvements at this location.
Agency Member Lindemans expressed his support.
RD A MintO42892 - 1 - 05106192
RDA Minutes
3.
April 28.1992
Bond Issuance to Fund the Redevelooment Aoencv Caoital Improvement Proqram
Finance Director Mary Jane Henry presented the staff report.
Executive Director Dixon advised that the bond issuance had been reviewed by the
finance committee and was presented with their recommendation.
It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall
to approve staff recommendation as follows:
3.1 Authorize the Executive Director to assemble a financing team to proceed with
the issuance of bonds in the amount of $16,000,000.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 1
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz,
Parks
None
Moore
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Dixon stated that the By-Laws for the advisory committee will be presented on May
12.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
Agency Member Parks requested a summary of redevelopment expenditures.
Director Dixon advised that a summary will be presented in May, as well as a recap of the
funds negotiated from the County.
Mary Jane Henry advised that quarterly financial statements will reflect activity through March
31, 1992.
Chairperson Muftoz added that the committee should be looking at needs of the community
which the funds should be used for.
RDAMinI042892 -2- O6106/92
RDA Minutes Aoril 28.1992
ADJOURNMENT
Agency Member Parks moved that the meeting be adjourned at 8:48 P.M., seconded by
Agency Member Birdsall. The motion was unanimously carried with Agency Member Moore
absent.
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency will be held on Tuesday,
May 12, 1992, 8:00 P.M., Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California.
J. Sal Mufioz, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
RDAMin/042892 -3- 06106/92
ITEM
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY '_~"'~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ,'~-1.:-/
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Redevelopment Agency/Executive Director
FROM:
General Counsel
DATE:
May 12, 1992
SUBJECT:
Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee Bylaws
PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek
RECOMMENDATION:
Advisory Committee.
Adopt the By-laws of the Old Town Redevelopment
BACKGROUND: The Agency did not adopt bylaws, to govern the conduct of the
Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee, when they were originally presented
because it was felt the Committee should be in place prior to their adoption. The
Agency recently appointed the seven members to serve on this Committee and it is
staff's recommendation that these bylaws, which have been amended to reflect the
interim appointments of the four elected members, be adopted at this time.
JSG
BY-LAWS OF THE
OLD TOWN REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ARTICLE I
Puroose of the Committee
The Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee ("Committee") shall serve as the means
through which the community can participate with the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (the
"Agency") in the planning and implementing of the Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the Old
Town portion of the Temecula Redevelopment Project Area No. 1-1988 (the "Old Town
Area"). The Old Town Area is delineated on the map attached hereto and incorporated by this
reference. To accomplish this, the Committee will review, evaluate and submit written
reports to the Agency and/or the City on any and all redevelopment actions proposed to be
undertaken by the Agency and/or the City in furtherance of redevelopment conducted within
the Old Town Area.
ARTICLE II
Creation and Termination of the Committee
The Committee shall be created by resolution of the Agency and shall expire with the
termination of the Plan.
2/CityAtty/~ylews,RDA 1 05/06/92
ARTICLE III
Members
Section 1. Membership The membership of the Committee shall consist of
seven (7) members, four (4) of whom shall be elected and three (3) of who shall be appointed,
in the manner herein provided and according to the conditions of eligibility herein provided.
Members shall not receive compensation for their service on the Committee.
Section 2. Eligibility for Membership.
A. "Eligible person" as used herein shall mean a natural person 18 years or older
who resides in the Old Town Area or who works in the Old Town Area and owns, leases
and/or operates a business entity (for profit or not for profit) which has its principal place of
business located within the boundaries of the Old Town Area.
B. For purposes of this section, a "principal place of business" may be determined
with reference to, without limitation, the annual statement of general information required to
be filed with the Secretary of State by every corporation pursuant to Corporations Code
Section 1502. For purposes of this section, residency in the Old Town Area may be
determined with reference to, without limitation, a driver's license, tax or utility bill, or a
business license.
C. Failure to abide by the eligibility requirements stated herein shall be deemed a
vacancy subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Article.
No current member of the Agency shall serve as a member of the Committee.
2/CityAtty/~ytewe.RDA 2
Section 3. Membership Terms
A. Appointed Members: Upon the initial creation of the Committee, three
eligible persons shall be appointed members by the Agency, two of whom shall serve for
terms of four (4) years, and one for a term of two (2) years.
At the expiration of the initial terms, the Agency shall appoint eligible persons as
successor members for terms of four (4) years.
B. Elected Members: Upon the initial creation of the Committee, the Agency
shall appoint four eligible persons to serve as members until the first elected members take
office following the initial election.
Upon the initial election, the two persons receiving the highest number of votes shall
serve terms of four (4) years each, while the two persons receiving the lowest number of
votes shall serve terms of two (2) years each.
At the conclusion of the initial terms of office, persons elected to the Committee shall
serve for terms of four (4) years.
Section 4. Vacancies The membership of any member on the Committee shall
be vacated whenever any of the following occur:
A. By more than three (3) consecutive unexcused absences from any of the
meetings of the Committee.
2/CityAtty/aylews. RDA 3 06/08/12
B. By death of a member.
C. By resignation of a member.
D. By the failure of the member to maintain eligibility for membership as specified
in Article III, Section 2 herein.
E. If a special election to impeach an elected member is successful where the
grounds for impeachment are gross misconduct; upon the same grounds, a majority of the
Agency may vote to remove an appointed member.
Notice of a vacancy shall be sent to the affected member and said vacancy may be
appealed by that member to the Agency with the decision of the Agency being final.
Any vacancy occurring in the membership of the Committee shall be filled by majority
vote of the Agency by an eligible person for the remainder of the unexpired term of the
vacated member:
ARTICLE IV
Procedure for Electing and ADoOintina Members
Section I. Public Notice "Public Notice" as required herein, shall mean either or all
of the following, as designated herein:
2/CityAtty/~yi~wm. RDA 4 0B/06/~2
A. Notice sent via first-class United States mail service to all natural persons who
reside within the boundaries of the Old Town Area.
B. Notice delivered to all business entities located within the boundaries of the 01d
Town Area.
C. Notice posed at the fire station located within the Old Town Area, a
conspicuous place at Sam Hicks Park, a conspicuous place at the location of the Temecula
Community Center and at each lobby or entrance of all multi-family buildings in the Old Town
Area.
D. Notice published in a paper of general circulation within the Old Town Area once
a week for a period of two weeks.
Section 2. Initial Membershio The Agency may make interim appointments of four
(4) members of the Redevelopment Agency Committee until the time of the first biannual
elections.
Section 3. Procedure for Nominatina Elected Members
biannually on January 1.
Elections shall be held
A. Nominations: Public notice shall be provided pursuant to Section 1 (B), (C) and
(D) of this Article two (2) months before the date of the election requesting the submission
of the names of eligible nominees. Said notice shall provide the location where nomination
2/CityAtty/Bylew$.RDA ~ 06/06/92
applications are available and the final date for their submission. The nomination application
shall list the name of the candidate, include an affidavit of eligibility pursuant to Article III,
Section 2 and shall contain the signatures of ten (10) eligible persons in order to place the
name of the candidate on the ballot.
B. Elections: Ballots shall be mailed by the 30th day in November preceding the
January 1 election date to every eligible person within the Old Town Area. The ballots shall
include an affiidavit of eligibility and shall state that they are to be returned, postmarked no
later than January I of the election year. Only one vote is allowed per eligible person.
Section 5. Political Reform Act Comoliance All members, whether appointed or
elected shall comply with the disclosure and disqualification provisions of the Political Reform
Act (Government Code Section 87100 et sea.).
ARTICLE V
Internal Orqanization and Staffing
Section 1. Officers By majority vote of the members, there shall be selected
one member to act as chairperson and another member to act as vice chairperson. The term
of these offices shall be one year and no member holding the same office for more than two
consecutive terms. Vacancies in any of these offices shall be filled by majority vote of the
membership.
2~ityAtty;Bylowm.RDA 8 06/08/92
Section 2. Staff
A. Executive Director: The Executive Director of the Agency shall be the
Executive Director of the Committee. The Executive Director's duties shall include, without
limitation, making requests of the Agency for additional staffing and/or funds for the
administration of the Committee.
B. Secretary: The Secretary of the Agency shall act as the Secretary of the
Committee. The Secretary's duties shall include, without limitation, collecting and distributing
to each Committee member all non-privileged material and documentation relating to proposed
redevelopment activity by the Agency affecting the Old Town Area.
C. Counsel:
of the Committee.
The General Counsel of the Agency shall be the General Counsel
ARTICLE VI
Meetinos
Section 1. Regular Meetinas Meetings shall be held once a month on the first
Tuesday of every month; provided, however, that should such a date be a legal holiday, the
regular meeting shall be held on the next business day which is not a legal holiday or may be
cancelled by resolution of the Committee.
2/CityAtty/Bylew~.RDA 7 06/06/12
A quorum of four (4) members is required to conduct a meeting; any meeting failing
to achieve a quorum shall be adjourned. A majority vote of the quorum shall be necessary to
pass any resolution of the Committee.
The committee shall be subject to and abide by the open meeting provisions found in
the Brown Act (Government Code Sections 54950 et sea.), including those provisions
governing the holding of special meetings.
The protocol for all meetings shall be conducted pursuant to the rules contained in the
current edition of Roberts Rules of Order.
ARTICLE VII
Amendment of Rec)ulttions
The Regulations of this Committee can be amended by resolution of the Agency.
2/CityAtty/~ylewe.RDA 8