Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout012594 CC AgendaAGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING: TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER -28816 Pujol Street JANUARY 25, 1994 - 7:00 PM 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 EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 PM - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Lake Villages Homeowners Assodation (§54956.9(a); Pechanga Reservation v. City of Temecule (154956.9(a)); Modeflare v. City of Temecula (§54956.9(a)). City of Temecula v. Freman Financial (§ 54956.9(a)): Real Estate Negotiations between City of Temecula and Bank of Amedca Properties regarding land north of Winchester and west of Diaz within Tract 21383. CALL TO ORDER: Invocation Flag Salute ROLL CALL: PUBLIC COMMENTS Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 94-04 Resolrution: No. 94-04 Mayor Ron Roberrs presiding Pastor Sofia Sadler, Harvester Church of Temecula Councilmember Muf~oz Birdsall, Mur%oz, Parks, Stone, Roberts A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item not listed on the Ageride or on the consent Calendar, a pink 'Request To Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. AeendN012~14 1 01t~0/14 When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items a 'Request To Speak' form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 3 )~eenk/012614 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. Standard Ordinance Adoorion 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 January 11, 1994. Resolution Aoorovino List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution emitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 2 01/20/14 ~-- 4 1993-94 Fire Protection Aoreement 5 6 7 8 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the Fiscal Year 1993-94 Fire Protection Agreement with the Riverside County Fire Department and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Mao 23561-1 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Authorize the release of Street, Water and Sewer Improvement Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-1, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Mao No. 23561-2 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize the release of Street, Water and Sewer Improvement Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-2, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. Release Material and Labor Security in Parcel Mao No. 21592 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Authorize the release of Material and Labor Security for Street, Sewer and Water Improvements in Parcel Map No. 21592, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Murrieta Creek Channel. Stage One. Coooerative Af~reement RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC & WCD) and Electrend, Inc., dba ECI, for the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication and eventual fee title transfer to RCFC & WCD, to certain rights of way along Murrieta Creek, at such unknown time in the future when the property is needed for the construction, inspection, operation, and maintenance of the Murrieta Creek Channel. )keende/Ot2t)e4 3 01/20Ve4 No Parkino 7ones on Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Road Adjacent to Temecula Valley Hioh School RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING "NO PARKING' ZONES ON MARGARITA ROAD AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD 10 Award of Contract for MarOarita Road Sidewalk Imorovemants (Project No. PW93-08) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the plans and specifications and award a contract for the Margarita Road Sidewalk Improvements, Project PW93-08, to Joslen Construction for $17,659.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of 81,765.90, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 11 Summary Vacation of a Portion of CamDanula Way Subject to the Condition that a Realianed CamDanula Wav be Offered for Dedication RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, TO SUMMARILY VACATE A PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY SOUTHERLY OF DE PORTOLA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 3, PART 3, DIVISION 9 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE, SUBJECT TO THE ASSOCIATED OFFER OF DEDICATION OF REALIGNED CAMPANULA WAY SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 12 Second Readina of Ordinance 94-01. Reoarding Prime Facie Speed Limits on Certain Streets RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt an ordinance emitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-01 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS 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. 13 Specific Plan No. 164. Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145i and Tentative Tract MaD No. ~78~7 (PA93-0144). RoriDaugh (Continued from 12/14/93) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA 93-0144), - Roripaugh; 13.2 Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (PA93-0145); AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD /eenda~12614 6 01rJ0iN 13.3 Adopt a resolution emitled: 14 RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2; AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 {PA93-0145) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL {12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD 13.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 (PA93-0144) TO CREATE A 162 SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A THREE {3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7 AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD Ordinance Amending Land Use Code Regardina Plot Plans. Conditional Use Permits end Public Use Permits RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled: 14.2 ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS Adopt · resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS -. 01/20/14 15 Old Town Soecific Plan RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Approve the Negative Declaration; 15.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE OLD TOWN 9PECIFIC PLAN OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA 15.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING PORTIONS OF THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AMENDING CITY ORDINANCES 90-04, 92-16, AND 93-12 15.4 Direct staff to begin implementing the First Year Implementation Program; 15.5 Direct the City Clerk to advertise for positions on the Old Town Local Review board to begin the process of filling the vacancies on the Board; 15.6 Provide direction regarding the requested boundary change amendment to the Specific Plan. 16 Adootion of Temeculs Municioal Code RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Conduct a public hearing to consider adoption of the Temecula Municipal Code end the following secondary codes: Riverside County Ordinances adopted by reference; Uniform Buildins Code, 1991 Edition with appendices in California State Amendments. Uniform Building Codes Standards, 1991 Edition Uniform Mechanical Code 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments. -. /~letde/012~14 7 01/20/14 E. Uniform Plumbing Code. 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments. F. Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 Edition. G. Uniform Code for the Abatement of Danoerous Buildings. 1991 Edition. H. Uniform Housing Code, 1991 Edition; and I. Uniform Swimming Pools. Spa end Hot Tub Code, 1991 Edition. 16.2 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE 17 Establishment of a Vehicle Imoound Cost Recovery Fee RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Adopt a resolution emitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A VEHICLE IMPOUND COST RECOVERY FEE COUNCIL BUSINESS 18 Exoenditure of Funds from CFD 88-12 for the Purchase of a Park Near the Intersection of Maroarita Road and Moraoa Road RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY..OF TEMECULA REGARDING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FROM CFD 88-12 FOR THE PURCHASE OF A PARK NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMI:NT Next regular meeting: February 8, 1994, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecule, California. Aeendd012114 · 01/'~0/14 T~ECULA aO~UNITY ~ERVICE~ gISTRIOT ~E~I"ING - ITo ~e held et 8:00| Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 94-01 Resolution: No. 94-01 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Mui~oz, Parks, Roberrs, Stone PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of January 11, 1994. 2 Release of Bond for Kent Hinteraardt Memorial Park RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Authorize the release of the Parkland/Landscape Faithful Performance Bond for the construction of Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. Release of Landscape Warranty Bond Amount for Tract No. 22915-0. TCSD Sloe Maintenance Areas. Vintaae Hills RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Authorize the release of the remaining landscape bond amount for TCSD slope maintenance areas within Tract No. 22915-0, Vintage Hills. 10 GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - Dixon DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting February 8, 1994, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California Aeende/012tN. 11 01/20/14 TEMECUI A R;nEVFI OPMENT A~ENCY MFETING Next in Order: Resolution: No. 94-01 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Roberts, Parks Stone, Mur~oz, PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. AGENCY BUSINESS Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of January 11, 1994. 2 RDA Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 2.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM FOR REHABILITATING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AND FINANCING MANUFACTURING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Approve loan requests per Attachment A. leeilN012614 12 O1/20/14 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'$ REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting February 8, 1994, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816, Temecula, California. .Aeenda/O12iN 13 ITEM 1 ITEM NO. 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD JANUARY 11, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:05 PM at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Roberts presiding. PRESENT 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field, and City Clerk June S. Greek. EXECUTIVE SESSION A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:40 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to adjourn to Executive Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to discuse pending litigation (New Community Lutheran Church), Section 54956.9(b) to discuss potential litigation and Section 54957.6 regarding labor negotiations. The motion was unanimously carried. Councilmember Mufioz joined the Executive Session at 5:50 PM. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Kenn Coil, Neighborhood Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance Councilmember Birdsall lead the audience in the pledge of allegiance. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Councilmember Muftoz presented a proclamation proclaiming January 11, 1994 as "John Affolter Day," Mr, Affolter thanked the City Council for the proclamation. Former Mayor J. Sal Mu~ioz presented a Gavel to Ron Roberrs, incoming Mayor, Brian Loew, Executive Director of Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency presented an overview of the Long Term Habitat Conservation Plan for Stevens Kangaroo .Rat, He Minutee%011194 -1- 01119/94 City Council Minute January 11.1994 ----.,, distributed a staff report that will be going to the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Board of Directors and summarized its contents. PUBIIC FORUM Sharon Bolton, 27555 Ynez Road, Ste 410, voiced her opposition to the Santa ,Margarita Watershed Management Plan, and asked the Council to carefully scrutinize the plan, stating it is redundant and unnecessary. Louis Todd, 30645 Southern Cross Road, addressed the Council regarding problems with the approval process of the New Community Lutheran Church. He stated the City Council, on a 5/0 vote, approved a property exchange, and the Planning Commission has voted in favor of this project. He stated his disapproval of the appeal filed by Councilmember Birdsall on this project and asked the support of the Council to support the Planning Commissions' recommendation for approval of this project. Councilmember Birdsall stated she had been contacted by surrounding property owners who claimed they did not receive timely notification, and she felt they should have the opportunity to be heard. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Birdsall stated she has been reappointed the Community Services Committee of the League of California Cities and Mayor Robarts has been reappointed to the Public Safety Committee of the League. Councilmember Parks reported that Council will be receiving a copy of the SCAG Regional Plan, on which local public hearings will be held. He asked that the Council take time to review the plan and become familiar with it prior to these hearings. Councilmember Mufioz announced that he and Mayor Pro Tam Stone have been asked to give a deposition by Kemper regarding the Walmart litigation. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Mufioz requested that Item No. 15 be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Muftoz thanked Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney for revising the format of the City Treasurer's report, making it easier to understand. Mayor Pro Tam Stone requested that Items 10 and 13 be removed from the Consent Calendar and registered a "no" vote on Item No. 14. Minutes%011194 -2- 01119/94 ,,...,_ CiTy Council Minu~ee January 11. 1994 Mayor Pro Tam Stone stressed the importance of Item No. 10, Letter of Support for AB-927 (Strengthen Anti-Pornography Laws) and asked for the assistance of the public to write their legislators in support of this Assembly Bill. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-9, 11, 12, 14, and 16. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mufioz, Parks, Stone, Robarts NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 2 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 November 30, 1993; 2.2 Approve the minutes of December 14, 1993. Resolution Aooroving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Minutee~,011194 -3- 01 I19/94 City Cofandl Minute January 11.1994 ~ 4 5 7 8 City Tre-aurer's Reoort as of October 31. 1993 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of October 31, 1993. City Treasurer's Reoort as of November 30.1993 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of November 30, 1993. "No Parkina" 7one on Ynez Road from Rancho California Road to Rancho Highland RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt ·resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ESTABLISHING "NO PARKING' ZONE ON YNEZ ROAD FROM CALIFORNIA ROAD TO RANCHO HIGHLAND DRIVE Soeed Limit on Maroarita Road between Solana And Winchester RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 OF TEMECULA RANCHO Introduce end read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-01 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF+ THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS All Way Stop. Pauba Road at Meadows Parkway RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution emitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ESTABLISHING "STOP SIGNS" OF TEMECULA Minutee%011194 -4.. 011life4 ..,,.-, Cit'v Courtoil Minute January 11, 1994 9 10 11 Authorization to Execute Suoolemental Aoreement for the Use of 19th Year Community Develooment Block Grant Funds RECOMMENDATION: 9'1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for the 19th Year Community Development Block Grant Funds. Ietter of S-~oort for. AB-9~7 (Strengthen Anti-Pornograohv l AWS) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Direct staff to prepare a letter indicating support for Assembly Bill No, 927 as it will be reintroduced in the 1994 Legislative Session. Completion and Acceptance of Jefferson Avenue Storm Drain Improvements at Winchester Road. PrOject No, PW93-O1 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept the Jefferson Avenue Storm Drain Improvements at Winchester Road, Project No. PW93-01, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 12 Contract Amendment No. 1 for Professional Survevino and Geotechnical Services for the Ynez Road Widenino Project. PW92-05. CFD 88-12 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve Contract Amendment No. 1 for additional Professional Services for the Ynez Road Widening Project, PW92-O5 for the following professional services: Professional Surveying Services by JFD Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $20,033.50. Mi nutee%011194 -5- 01 I19/94 Citv Coundl Minutes January 11.1 leg4 ~ 14 Professional Geetechnical Services by Law/Crandall, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $6,586.00. Fifth Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement Creatina the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Aaencv to Allow Comoensation of $100,00 for Board Meetinn Attendance RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the attached amendment to Section 3.6 of the Joint Powers Agreement Creating the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (the "Agreement") and Authorize the Mayor to sign the amended Agreement. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberrs NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 16 Pechanga Casino Status Report RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Receive and file report. 13. Contract Chanoe Orders No. 36 throuoh No. 40 for Ynez Road Widenine Proiect. PW9~-05. CFD 88-12 Mayor Pro Tern Stone asked in regards to Change Order No. 36, why a new sign is needed. Director of Public Works Serlet answered that the word "towne" was originally spelled incorrectly and the sign had to be redone. Mayor Pro Tem Stone asked for an explanation of Change Order 37 and 38. Mr. Serlet explained that both relate to private parks where plans were not available and therefore difficult to estimate. Minutee%011194 .~ 01119/94 /_,, City Counoil Minutee January 11.1994 Mr. Serlet explained on Change Order No. 39 extra cost was incurred due to additional grading necessary on Solana Way. Change Order No. 40 was necessary due to · misinterpretation on the part of one of the inspectors. Director of Public Works Serlet reported that even in spite of change orders, this project is still $500,000 below estimated cost. Councilmember Parks asked when the medians would be landscaped. Mr. Serlet answered that plans are in the final stage and staff will come beck with a schedule. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Stone to approve staff recommendation: 13.1 Approve Contract Change Orders No. 36 through No. 40 for Ynez road Widening Project, PW92-05 for labor and equipment for various items of work, in the amount of $12,711.68. The motion was unanimously carried. 15. Records Destruction ADDrOVal Councilmember Munoz asked if any of the items being destroyed include video or audio tape. City Clerk June Greek explained that the only records being destroyed are administrative plot plans transferred to the City from the County of Riverside and these records have three microfilm copies placed in storage within the appropriate City Department, the City Clerk's vault and off-site storage. .It was moved by Mayor Muf~oz, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve staff recommendation: 15.1 Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of Temecula approved Records Retention policy. The motion was unanimously carried. Mayor Roberts announced that staff requested that Item 22 be taken out of order. MinutN%011194 -7- 01 !1 ill4 City Council Minutes J,m,~ - -y 11.1994 ~ CC)UN~It BUSINFRS 22 Paloma del Sol - Agreement Between KRDC. Inc. and City Reoardina Acceotance of Park. Agoroyal of Final Tract MaD No. 74135-3 and Modification of Target Density for Planning Area 6 City Attorney Field presented the staff report. Councilmember Birdfill asked for an explanation of the confusion on the acreage of the site. City Attorney Field answered that 36.3 acres is the correct figure, however the acreage is not a controlling factor. He explained that the amendment will be processed to provide for 590 target units. Mayor Mufioz asked if 16.5 max density is a limitation in addition to the 590 units or could there be additional units. City Attorney Field explained that the agreement reads whichever is lower. Mayor Mufioz asked that the language be amended to make this more clear. Dennis O'Neil, representing Kemper, stated that there is no intention to exceed the 590 unit cap, regardless of the acreage. City Attorney Field read the following change: e City shall process, at no cost or fees to be paid by Owner, an amendment to the Specific Plan to increase the maximum number of dwelling units permissible in Planning Area 6 of the Specific Ran to 590 dwelling units or 16.5 dwelling units per acre, whichever is less. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as amended: 22.1 Approve the Agreement between Kemper Real Estate Development Company and the City of Temecula regarding Paloma del Sol. The motion was unanimously carried. RECESS Mayor Roberts called a recess at 8:24 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the previously scheduled Community Services District and Redevelopment Agency Meetings at 9:01 PM. IVtnutN~011194 -8- 01/19/94 __ City Council Minutes Jenuerv 11.1994 PUBLIC HEARINGS 17 An Interim Ordinance Adooted bv Urgency Measurers Reouirino s Conditional Use Permit for the Fstablishment of Nightclubs. Teen Clubs. Dance Halls. Bars and Cocktail Lounges. Billiard Halls. Massage Parlors end Video t;-ame Arcades Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. He reported that due to the delay in adoption of development codes, staff is recommending that this interim ordinance be extended for another year, at which time the permanent ordinance will be in effect. Mayor Mufioz stated it is his understanding that CUP's are transferable from one individual to another after approval by the Council, and asked whether this should be changed to insure the integrity of the current operator. City Attorney Field stated CUP's normally run with the land and he would not recommend changing that, however, this is a legitimate concern, and some cities address this matter by issuing a sheriffs permit or license for certain types of uses, i.e. gun shops, massage parlors, adult businesses, etc. Councilmember Parks asked if this should be made a part of this ordinance. City Attorney Field answered this should not be a part of this ordinance, but could be brought to the Council in the next 60 days. Mayor Roberts opened the public hearing at 9:13 PM. Ron Walton, addressed the Council stating that adding such a condition on a CUP would create a hardship for business person should they decide to sell, and stated that when liquor licenses are involved, new owners are carefully scrutinized. Mayor Roberts closed the public hearing at 9:15 PM. It was moved by Mayor Muftoz, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve staff recommendation, and further directed staff to return to the City council with a recommended permit process to address the concerns regarding transfer of ownership within 60 days. RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Issue a report describing the steps to address the condition that resulted in the adoption of the Ordinance; Minutes%011194 4- 01111/94 CiW Coundl Minute~ Jmnuarv 11.1994 ~ 17.2 Adopt an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-02 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUIRING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NIGHTCLUBS, TEEN CLUBS, DANCE HALLS, BARS AND COCKTAIL LOUNGES, BILLlARD HALLS, MASSAGE PARLORS AND VIDEO GAME ARCADES The motion was unanimously carried. 18 Plannina Aoolication No. 93-0179. Amendment No. 1 .Second Unit Permit - APPeal Of Conditions of Aooroval No. 31 and 4~ (reauirement for the all-weather access to the second unit) (Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93) Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report outlining an amendment, and recommended that the Council deny the appeal based on the changed conditions of approval which address the requirements for all weather access. RECESS Mayor Robarts called a brief recess at 9:22 PM to change the tape. The meeting was reconvened at 9:23 PM. Director of Planning Thornhill stated that he would suggest continuing this item one more time as the applicant still has concerns. Mayor Rotarts opened the public hearing at 9:25 PM. Paul Toomey, 34664 County Linerd, Suite 6, Yucaipa, representing the applicants, stated that the proposed amendment in the ordinance is overall acceptable. He stated he feels the applicants are generally satisfying the Fire Department requirements and asked why they are being required to hold the City harmless. He also listed concerns regarding preparing a street improvement plan, listing cost of hiring a civil engineer to prepare these plans a hardship. He stated this is a mobile home on e temporary foundation, and asked that a grading plan be sufficient. Direct of Public Works Serlet stated this is a public safety issue as far as the Public Works Department is concerned, end he feels proper engineering and plans are necessary, specifically in terms of drainage. IVinutN~011194 -10- 01119/'14 ~ City Council Minutes January 11. 1994 Councilmember Birdsall suggested this be referred back to staff to address these issues. Councilmember Parks stated he feels that people are trying to place a triple-wide mobile home on the property and current requirements for such use are too extensive. He suggested perhaps a profile on a grading plan could be used. City Attorney Field stated the first property owner to develop carries the burden for all others. He suggested a process be developed to reimburse the lead property owner in situations like this when future property development takes place. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Stone to continue the Public Hearing to the meeting of February 8, 1994. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mur~oz Stone, Robarts NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 ADoointment of Planning Commissioner City Clerk June Greek presented the staff report. Councilmember Parks stated he did not have the opportunity to talk to Mr. Salyer prior to his recommendation, but has since had the opportunity, and he feels Mr. Salyar would be equally qualified to serve on the Planning Commission. Councilmember Mufioz explained his reason for recommending Mr. Salyer is that he feels he would not experience · conflict of interest in planning issues, since he does not do business in the City of Temecula. Mayor Pro Tam Stone stated he was impressed with many of the applicants but is in favor of appointing Mr. Salyer due to his degree in Engineering and his Masters of Business Administration. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mufioz to appoint Arthur Salyer to fill the unexpired term (ending June 4, 1994) on the Temecula Planning Commission. The motion was unanimously carried. Minutee%011.194 - 11 - 01 I1 g/94 City Council IVlinutes Jarmew 11.1994 ~ 20 Ordinance Adootino Temecula Municioal Code City Clerk June Greek presented the staff report. Mayor Mutioz requested that staff look into an agricultural allowance for barn related structures in rural areas. City Manager Dixon explained that the codes which are noted here, are those the Council has already approved, and this is simply putting those ordinances into codified form. He stated in terms of the request of Councilmember Mu~ioz, Building Official Tony Elmo will look into the matter. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mufioz to approve staff recommendation 20.1 as follows: 20.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-03 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ADOPTING THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mufioz to approve staff recommendation 20.2 as follows: 20.2 Direct the City Clerk to schedule a public hearing to be held on January 25, 1994 which includes consideration of the adoption of the Temecula Municipal Code and the following secondary codes: Am C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Riverside County Ordinances adopted by reference; Uniform Buildino Code, 1991 Edition with appendices in California State Amendments Uniform Buildina Codes Standards, 1991 Edition Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments. Uniform Plumbina Code. 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments. Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 Edition. Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dan.erous Buildin.s. 1991 Edition. Uniform Housina Code. 1991 Edition; and Uniform Swimming Pools. Spa and Hot Tub Code, 1991 Edition. The motion was unanimously carried. IVinutee%011.194 -12- 01 I19/94 City Council Minutes Jertuerv 11. 1994 21 Selection of Citv Council Committee Assionments City Clerk June Greek presented the staff report, and stated the RDA Loan Program Committee is missing from the list. City Attorney Field stated the new Brown Act provisions take effect April 1, 1994. He explained that previously, Ad Hoc Committees of less than a quorum, were not subject to notice. He explained the new amendment will provide that committees of less than a quorum, if they are standing committees, are subject to Brown Act noticing provisions. He stated he will be a attending a League Conference next month, where the League will arrive at a consensus of thought on this subject. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Stone to appoint new committee and liaison assignments to serve during 1994 as listed below: TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL 1994 Committee Assianments Commission Uaison (One Member) Community Services Commission: Planning Commission: Public/Traffic Safety Commission: Jeff Stone Ronald J. Parks Ron Robarts Reoresentative Assianments (External Organizations) Airport Committee Liaison: K-RAT, JPA: RCTC: RDA Committee: Regional Transit Authority Representative: WRCOG Representative: Ron Parks Ron ParksiSal Muf~oz(alt.) Ron Perks Sal Mur~oz, Ron Parks Sal Mufioz Ron Robarts, Ron Parks (air.) Council Committee Aesianments (One or two members) Administration Committee: City Promotion/Economic Development Committee: Community Services Funding Review Committee: Cultural Preservation Committee: Jeff Stone Jeff Stone, Ron Robarts Pat Birdsall, Jeff Stone Jeff Stone MinutN~011194 -13- 01119fJ4 ~ Coundl Idin~es January 11. 1994 Council Committee Assianments (cont.) Finance Committee: Land Use Committee Integrated Waste Management Committee: Old Town Steering Committee: Pechanga Tribe Liaison Public Works/Facilities Committee: Sister City Committee: Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/Traffic Cornre, RDA Loan Program Committee The motion was unanimously carried. Sal Mufioz/Pat Birdsall Sal Muftoz Ron Roberrs Jeff Stone/Ron Parks Sal Mufioz/Jeff Stone Ron Roberrs, Ron Parks Pet Birdsall, Ron Robarts Ron Roberrs Pat Birdsall/Jeff Stone It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Muf~oz to extend the meeting until 10:35 PM. The motion was unanimously carried. 23 Aooroval of Final Tract Meg No. 94135.3 Director of Public Works Tim Serlet presented the staff report. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 23.1 Approve Final Vesting Tract Map No. 24135-3 subject to the Conditions of Approval. The motion was unanimously carried. 24 Status Renort on Widening of Winchester Road Bridge Widening and Logo Ramo. Overland Overcrossing. and Maraarita Road Widening North of Rancho California RoRd (Raced on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Muf~oz) Director of Public Works Tim Serlet presented the staff report outlining the status of the Winchester Road Bridge widening and loop ramp, Overland Overcrossing and Margarita Road widening North of Rancho California Road. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to receive and file the report. The motion was unanimously carried. Minutes%011194 -14- 01119/'Fl. ,-_ CiW Cour~il Minutes January 11. 1994 25 Discussion of Sister Citv Prooram (Placed on the agenda at the request of Mayor Robarts) Mayor Robarts reported that the City welcomed visitors from Nakayama Town, Japan, in December. The Temecula Sister City Committee, has received an official invitation from the Mayor of Nakayama Town to visit Nakayams Town in April for the official signing of a sister city agreement. Mayor Robarts introduced Jay Hoffman to give a brief report on the status of the Sister City Committee. Jay Hoffman, Co-Chairman of the Temecula Sister City Association, and Assistant Superintendent of the Temecula School District expressed appreciation for the efforts of former Councilmember Lindemans who was actively involved in Veerburg, Holland becoming a Sister City of Temecula. He reported members of the Sister City Association, will meet with representatives from Carconne, France, who have an interest in the wine industry. He stated the School District is very interested in the Student Exchange Program and he appreciates the support of Mayor Robarts, and the City Council. He stated in the near future, Temecula will need to reciprocate visits, and he will be soliciting corporate support for this effort. Mayor Ron Robarts stated the Sister Cities Association will meet next week and formalize an agreement with Carconne, France and prepare 'for a trip to Nakayama. He said the Association is working on · program jointly with the School District in this venture and in addition to members of the City Council, students may also be selected to go as a learning experience. Mayor Robarts asked for Council consensus to support this effort. Council consensus was given in support of the Sister City effort. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Dixon suggested with respect to Item 18, that Building Official Tony Elmo look into the possibility of a "Sprinkler Ordinance," to retrofit or install sprinklers in second units. He stated this may be a way to bring the cost down for second units. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None given. Councilmember Parks asked that the City Council set aside time for an evaluation of the City Manager, stating he did not feel it is fair to comment on ones performance in the newspaper when a review has not taken place. City Manager Dixon said he would get with the Mayor and set a date everyone could agree on. Minutes%011194 -16- 01119/i4 City Council Minute Jantaw 11.1994 ~ ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Stone to adjourn at 10:45 PM to a meeting on January 25, 1994, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temacula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. Ron Robarts, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk Miaate%011194 -16- 01 I19/94 ITEM NO. 3 RESOL~ON NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN ~IIB1T A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETEILM]NE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the followjn8 claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the mount of $930,224.78 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVI~I) AND ADOPTED, this 2:jth day of January, 1994. ATTEST: J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] l~sos O1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS OF TEM ULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 94- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 25th day of January, 1994 by the following roll call vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCH.,MP-MBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None lune S. Greek, City Clerk R~sos Ol CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 01/05/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01 I13194 TOTAL CHECK RU N: 01125/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 12/30/93 TOTAL PAYROLl; 01/11/94 TOTAL PAYROLl; TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 01/25/94 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 191 210 250 310 ~0 340 GENERAL GAS TAX TCSD TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERV1CE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO J (CIP) TCSD-CIP RDA-CIP SELF-INSURANCE VEHICLES INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS COPY CENTER FACILITIES $412,613.78 $509.80 S3,115.83 $15,049.84 $2,785.47 $;34,611_%3 PAYROLL: 001 190 191 193 300 320 3,..10 340 GENERAL (PAYROLL) GAS TAX (PAYROLL) TCSD (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C (PAYROLL) SELF-INSURANCE (PAYROLL} INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL) COPY CENI~R (PAYROLL) FACIUTIES TOTAL BY FUND: PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE MARY JANE MCLARNEY, FiNANCE OFFICER ,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. $141,668,59 S141,179.85 S439,717.12 S102,809.22 S104,850.00 $~30,224.78 ~.VE DIXON, CITY MANAGER , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. CITY OF TEMECULA UST OF DEMANDS 01/05/94 TOTAL CHECK BUN: 01/13/94 TOTAL CHECK BUN: 01/25/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 12/30/93 TOTAL PAYROLL: 01/11/94 TOTAL PAYROLL: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 01/25/94 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 100 190 191 192 193 194 210 250 280 300 310 320 330 340 GENERAL GAS TAX TCSD TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO J (CIP) TCSD-CIP RDA-CIP SELF-INSURANCE VEHICLES INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS COPY CENTER FACILITIES $412,813.78 $509.80 $3,1 t6.83 $355.96 $15,049.84 $!,785.47 $34,811.53 PAYROLL: 001 191 193 300 3~ 330 340 GENERAL (PAYROLL) GAS TAX (PAYROLL) TCSD (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C (PAYROLL) SELF-INSURANCE (PAYROLL} INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL) COPY CENTER (PAYROLL) FACILITIES $131,028.20 $34,257.34 $31,588.44 S874.83 $3,383.96 $1,080.79 $3,490.65 $1,350.07 $1,604.94 TOTAL BY FUND: "~A DAVE DIXON, CITY MANAGER CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING ]8 TBUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. $141,668.59 $141,179.85 S439,717.12 $102.809.22 $104,850.00 $l)30,224.78 $722,565.56 $107,659.22 $i)30,224.78 VOUCHRE2 o~/,r'-, 14:52 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 CONNUN]TY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAP/TAL IIqPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 280 REDEVELOPIqEMT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 ]NFORNATION $YSTENS 330 COPY CENTER FUND 340 FACILITIES TOTAL NqOUNT 69,760.53 8,998.~3 18,7~..92 2,206.89 1,285.12 2,&70.08 37.13 258.20 506.96. 3,103.17 252.25 33,844.91 161,668.59 VOUCHRE2 PAGE 1 01/05/94 14:52 ~ VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 13265 132(~ 13267 316142 3161/+2 3161/++2 316142 3161/+2 3161/+2 316142 3161/+2 316142 316142 316142 316142 316142 316142 316142 3161/+2 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 3~1~ 13271 13272 13272 13272 13272 13272 13272 13272 CHECK DATE 01/04/94 01/03/94 01/05/94 12/31/93 12/~1/93 12/~1/93 12/~1/93 12/31/9~ 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 12/31/93 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 01/05/94 VENDOR NUMBER 000175 000154 000253 000444 000~ 000444 000/,44 000~/+ 000~/+ 0004~ 0004~ 001)4~ O00~z~ .000~ 000444 00044/+ 000444 000444 000283 000283 000283 00028~ 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 00028~ 000283 00028~ 00028S 000101 000116 000116 000116 000116 000116 000116 000116 VENDOR NAME GFOA CSNFO POSTNASTER FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) F/RSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FiRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FiRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (XRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (XRS) APPLE ONE AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS AVP VISION PLANS CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER]OOS ITEM DESCRIPTION GFOA TRAINING CSFNO SEMINAR FEB 27-NA SULK HAIL/REC BROCHURE 000/,44 SDI 000444. SDI 000/+4~ $DI O00/F~ SDI O00M~ SDI 000444 SDI O00Z~ SDI 000/~ SDI 00044~ STATE 00042~ STATE 0004/~ STATE 000444 STATE 000/~4 STATE 00044~ STATE 000/,44 STATE 000~ STATE 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 MEDXCARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 NEDiCARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE TEMPORARY SERVICES FOR INSURANCE PREMIUN/JANUA INSURANCE PREMIUN/JANUA INSURANCE PREMIU~/JANUA INSURANCE PRENIUN/JANUA INSURANCE PREMIUN/JANUA INSURANCE PRENIUN/JANUA INSURANCE PRENIUN/JANUA ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-140-999-5261 001-1/+0-999-5261 190-180-999-5230 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 3/+0-2070 280-199-999-5250 001-2~10 100-2310 190-2310 191-2310 193-2310 300-2]10 330-2310 ITEM AFK)UNT 820.00 855.00 1,775.97 393.04 110.7'$ 168.37 7.33 22.36 2.81 9.60 11.17 2,417.37 676.20 454.15 22.27 47.68 25.56 61.47 11.11 9,731.97 2,780.61 2,147.69 87.15 240.67 83.24 268.60 69.08 11.76 2,264.10 622.10 552.60 16.36 58.08 19.24 47.44 21.42 24.92 103.20 437.14 136.52 97.15 4.14 · - 5.06 3.94 15.75 CHECK AMOUNT 820.00 855.00 1,775.97 4,421 "' 19,047.03 103.20 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA 01/f""' 14:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEN ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUNBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUIIER ]TEN ANOIJNT CHECK AMOUNT 13272 01/05/94 000116 AVP VISION PLANS INSIJRANCE PRENIUN/JANUA 001-1180 13272' 01/05/94 000116 AVP VISION PLANS INSURANCE PREN]UN/JANUA 340-2310 24,95 15,75 740.40 13275 01/05/94 000127 CALiFONNZAN - LEGAL 52 ~EEKS SUBSCRIPTION 190-180-999-5228 48.00 48.00 13274 01/05/94 000129 CAL WEST RENTAL CENTER TILLER-REAR TINE 190-180-999-5238 38.7~ 38.79 13275 01/05/94 000131 CARL ~ARREN & CO, RANCON.CONN CTR/OOL 01/300-199-999-5205 13275 01/05/94 000131 CARL WARREN & CO. SO CALIF EDISON/DOL 05/300-199-~-5205 13275 01/05/94 000131 CARL WARREN & CO. LOSS 12/02/92 TaqL]NSON 13275 01/05/94 000131 CARL WARREN & CO. LOSS 11/0&/92 NARY STEW 86.00 128.6~ 22.50 277.51 13276 01/05/94 000137 CHEVRON U,S.A. [NC. FUEL/CN 001-110-999-5263 13276 01/05/94 000137 CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. FUEL/TCSD 190-180-999-5263 13276 01/05/94 000137 CHEVRON U,S,A, INC, FUEL/POLICE 001-170-999-5262 57.53 12.~4 63.10 132,97 13277 01/05/94 000138 C]T]CORP NORTH AHERICA JAN PAYHENT/07837~2 320-2800 13277 01/05/94 000138 CZTICONP NORTH HqERICA JAN PAYHENT/07837~Z 320-199-~-5391 1,120.52 307.05 1,427.57 13278 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LiFE & ACCIDEN INSURANCE PREMIUM 13278 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACC]DEN INSURANCE PRENIUN 132'"' 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN INSURANCE PRENIUN 1: 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCXDEN ]NSURANCE PREMIUN 132f~ 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN INSURANCE PREN]UN 13278 01/05/94' 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN INSURANCE PREN]UN 13278 01/05/94 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACC]DEN INSURANCE PRENIUN fJANUA 001-2330 fJANUA 100-2~30 ~JANUA 190-2330 fJANGA 191-25~0 fJANUA 19~-2~30 fJANUA 330-2.330 rJANUA 3~0-2330 130,75 9,75 132.00 11,~8 14,02 19,50 25,50 343.00 13279 01/05/94 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS PRIONITY LTR ACCT 1339- 001-161-999-52~0 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 10660 REPLACE FILLER 001-162-~-5242 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 104~5 STORAGE B]NDERS(B 001-162-~-5242 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COHPANY 10357 SHEET PROTECTOR 001-162-~-5242 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST CONPANY 10/~5 SHEET PROTECTOR 001-162-~-5242 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST CONPANY FREIGHT 001-162-~q~-5242 13280 01/05/94 000170 FRANKLIN DUEST COIqPANY TAX 001-162-~-5242 9,50 79.80 20.85 12.00 6.95 21.50 10.94 9,50 152.04 13281 01/05/94 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT SONY M-550V MXCROCASSET 13281 01/05/94 000177 GLENN[ES OFFICE PROIMJCT TAX 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5242 13282 01/05/94 000184 GTE 909-695-3539 320-199-999-5208 13282 01/05/94 000184 GTE 909-699-0128 320-199-999-5208 13282 01/05/94 00018~ GTE 909-699-2309 320-199-999-5208 43.95 3.41 24.02 277,67 25.12 4T.~ 326.81 13283 01/05/94 000204 J.R. FREENAN CO, INC. NAIWTENANCE ON CITY HAL 3~0-199-~-5212 13283 01/05/94 000204 J.R. FREENAN CO, INC. SERVICE CALL 340-199-~-5212 13283 01/05/94 000204 J.R. FREENAN CO, INC. (APPROX.) PARTS 340-199-~-5212 35.00 36.00 30.00 101.00 13284 01/05/94 000206 KINKO'S COPIES 13~S_ 01/05/94 000209 L & N FERTILIZER 1~ 01/05/94 000209 L & N FERTILIZER NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH/BALA LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES 1GAL ROUNDUP INV ~ 001 - 110-999-5222 100-164-999-5218 190-180-999-5242 391.78 270.79 85.95 391.78 356,74 VCXJCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 01/05/94 14:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAG~ VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 13286 01/05/94 000213 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COlellS PLANNING 140RKSHOP 001-161-999-5258 60.00 60.00 13287 01/05/94 000214 LUNCH & STUFF CATERING BOX LUNCHES FOR JAN 6 1 190-180-999-5260 87.50 87.50 13288 01/05/94 000228 MORIL 8839303792 GAS CARD 001-162-999-5263 13288 01/05/94 000228 MOBIL 8839303792 GAS CARD 190-180-999-5263 13288 01/05/94 000228 MOBIL 8839303792 GAS CARD 100-164-999-5263 28.99 6.75 11.46 47.20 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PER REDE 001-2130 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PER REDE 100-2130 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE!q 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 100-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 320-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PEltS RET 330-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PERS RET 340-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 001-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RET]REM 000246 SURVIVOR 100-2390 13289 01/05/9~ 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 193-2390 13289 01/05/94' 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 330-2390 13289 01/05/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 13290 01/05/94 000248 PETROLANE FUEL 100-164-999-5263 13290 01/05/9~ 000248 PETROLANE FUEL 190-180-999-5263 13290 01/05/94 000248 PETROLANE FUEL 001-162-999-5263 13290 01/05/9~ 000248 PETROLANE FUEL 190-180-999-5263 13290 01/05/9~ 000248 PETROLANE CREDIT MEMO/FOOTING ERR 190-180-999-5263 107.35 107.35 10.958.57 2,694.77 2,454.91 80.06 28~.39 94.20 104.86 122.01 51.17 12.54 13.02 1.~ .46 .93 .93 .93 3.54 37.27 201.22 112.09 .10- 17,322.66 354.02 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 001-140-999-5262 13291 01/05/9~ 000249 PETTY CASH REINE PETTY CASH 340-199-999-5212 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 190-183-999-5320 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 250-190-129-5804 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REINB PETTY CASH 190-183-999-5370 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 190-180-999-5222 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REINIl PETTY CASH 190-181-999-5301 13291 01/05/9~ 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 190-180-999-5260 13291 01/05/94 000249 PETTY CASH REIMB PETTY CASH 001-150-999-5265 58.24 19.40 34.55 37.13 12.62 50.00 49.77 8.53 16.00 286.24 13292 01/05/94 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS NAIL 001-162-999-5230 13292 01/05/94 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL 001-161-999-5230 9,95 15.95 25.90 13293 01/05/94 000268 RIVERSIDE COUNTY HABITA DEC 93 K-RAT PAYMENT 001-2300 13294 01/05/94 000295 STEAM MASTERS EMERGENCY CALL 190-182-999-5250 4.,563.00 242.81 4,563.00 24 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA 01If""" 14:52 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPT10N NUMBER I TEM AMOUNT .CHECK AMOUNT 13295 01/05/94 000302 SYSTEM SOURCE 13295 01/05/9~ 000302 SYSTEM SOURCE 2 DOUBLE SORTERS; 11Xll 001'140-999-5242 TAX 001-140-999-5242 38. O0 2.95 40.95 13296 01/05/94 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY SOFTBALL/1ST PLACE PLAQ 190-18~-999-5380 13296 01/05/94 000307 TENECULA TROPHY TROPHYS, RIBBONS AND PL 190-183-999-5370 13296 01/05/94 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY TROPHYS, RIBBONS AND PL 190-183-999-5370 263.99 154.16 526.87 945.02 13297 01/05/94 000325 UNITED MAY OF THE INLAN 000325. rig 001-2120 13297 01/05/94 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 LN 190-2120 82.00 17.50 99.5O 13298 01/05/94 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE FLOOR NAT SERVICES; CIT 3~0-199-999-5250 34.50 34.50 13299 01/05/94 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC JAN RENT & TI#S/rAN FO 340-199-999-5234 13300 01/05/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 6677795808201 11/19-12/190-181-999-5240 13300 01/05/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF BISON 11/23-12/23 191-180-999-5319 .13300 01/05/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 11/Z~-12/Z$ 340-199-999-5240 13300 01/05/94 00037~ SOUTHERN CALIF EOISON 11/Z$-12/Z~ 190-180-999-5240 13300 01/05/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 11/23-12/23 19~-180-999-5240 13301 01/05/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TEL 909-202-4760 NOV LOANER 13,~'~ 01/05/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TEL 909-202-4770/DD 100-16~-999-5208 001-110-999-5208 29,798.92 653.30 1,977.68 2,666.09 1,480.26 611.42 97.31 230.15 29,798.92 7,388.75 327.46 133uZ 01/05/94 000389 USCN/PEBSCO, (08RA) 000389 PT RETIR 13302 01/05/94 000389 USCM/PEBSCO, (ORRA) 000389 PT RETIR 13302 01/05/94 000389 USCIq/PEBSCO, (OBRA) 000389 PT RET]R 001-2160 100-2160 190-2160 44.96 145.96 132.56 323.48 13303 01/05/94 000403 SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA 13304 01/05/94 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 13304 01/05/94 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 13304 01/05/94 000426 RANCHO ]NOUSTRIAL SUPPL 13304 01/05/94 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL POOL SERVICE & NAINTENA JANITORIAL SUPPLIES; CI JANITORIAL SUPPLIES; CI JANITORIAL SUPPLIES; CI JANITORIAL SUPPLIES; C[ 190-180-999-5212 340-199-999-5212 340-199-999-5212 340-199-999-5212 340-199-999-5212 211.00 241.75 59.05 122.53 41.38 211.00 46~. 71 13305 01/05/94 OOGG28 HORIZON WATER CUPS/gATER/JAN COOLER R 190-182-999-5240 32.05 32.05 13306 01/05/94 000430 13306 01/05/94 000430 13306 01/05/94 000430 13306 01/05/94 000430 GROUP AMERICA - VOLUNTA GROUP AMERICA - VOLUNTA GROUP AMERICA - VOLUMTA GROUP AMERICA - VOLUNTA INSURANCE PREMIUM/JANUA 001-2510 INSURANCE PREMIUM/JANUA 100-2510 INSURANCE PREMIUM/JANUA 190-2510 ADJUSTMENT 001-150-999-5250 257.80 22.80 89.00 .40- 369.20 13307 01/05/94 000499 SCCCA CCAC GENERAL MEETING 001-120-999-5260 25.00 25, O0 13308 01/05/94 000558 13308 01/05/94 000558 13309 01/05/94 000587 13309 01/05/94 000587 13309 01/05/94 000587 1~ 01/05/94 000596 ADVANCED NOBILECOMN ADVANCED MOBILECORN NUNOZ, NARIO MUNOZ, NARIO NUNOZ, MARIO LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF MONTHLY MOBILE COVERAGE MONTHLY MOBILE SERVICE FLOOR CARE/SENIOR CENTE DEC JANITORIAL SERVICES STRIP/SCRUB/SEAL/WAX TI EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 2/24 320-199-999-5209 320-199-999-5209 190-181-999-5250 190-181-999-5250 340-199-999-5212 001-150-999-5261 360.00 378.00 215.00 160.00 · 200.00 185.00 738.00 575.00 185.00 VOUCHRE2 PAG,,~ 01/05/9/+ 14:52 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ZTEN NUIqBER DATE NUNliER MANE DESCRIPTION 13311 01/05/94. O00T'Z4. A & R OUSTON SCREEN PRI JACKETS/SHIRTS/T-NECKS 13312 01/05/94. OO0769 DOS GR[NGOS REPLACE CK#13094. BKFST 13313 01/05/9/+ 000881 OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/]RR] EMA 2109 1331/+ 01/05/94 000~10 KOLL NANAGENENT SERVICE JAN 94. TEEN CENTER RENT 190o182-~-52]~ 13315 01/05/9/,, 000993 FREEDOM COFFEE, INC. 13315 01/05/94 000993 FREEDON COFFEE, INC. 13315 01/05/94 000993 FREEDON COFFEE, [NC, 13315 01/05/94 000993 FREEDOM COFFEE, INC. ACCOUNT NUNBER 190-183-999-5380 190-183-999-5370 100-16G-999-5402 COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HA 340-199-~-5250 COFFEE SERVICE FOR CITY 340-1~-~9~-5250 COFFEE SERVICE FOR CITY 3~,0-199-999-5250 COFFEE SERVICE FOR CITY 340-199-999-5250 100-1(~4-~-5242 210-2035 100-1~-9~9-5402 NINIINN CONTRACT STORAG 001-120-9q9-5250 LEASED CONTAINER #648 001-120-999-5250 LEASED CONTAINER t 001-120-~-5250 13316 01/05/9/,, 00101/'* COUNTRY S]ONS & DESIGNS PROVIDE ALL LABOR AND N 190-180-~9~-5212 13317 01/05/94. 001096 BOLAR, HIRSCH & JENNING RDA CONSULTING 280-199-99~-5248 13318 01105/94. 001118 ANERICAN VEHICLES, INC, TO RENOVE NANHOLE COVER 100-164-~9~-5242 13318 01/05/94. 001118 ANERICAN VEH/CLES, INC. FREIGHT 100-164-~9-5242 13318 01/05/9/+ 001118 ANERICAN VEHICLES, INC. TAX 13319 01/05/94. 001131 GOSNEY CONSTRUCTION NAC RETENTION PAYNENT 13320 01/05/94. 001192 K.L.N. ENGINEERING MORK ORDER 93-94 #50 13321 01/05/9/+ 001209 VAULT, THE 13321 01/05/9/+ 001209 VAULT, THE 13321 01/05/9/+ 001209 VAULT, THE 13322 01/05/94. 001271 UNIVERSITY NICROFILNS I ENGINEERING SHALL STREA 1~0-180-~-5228 13323 01/05/94 001273 NURRIETA, CITY OF, PARK ALLSTAR OFFICIALS 1~0-183-~-5380 13324 01/05/9/+ 001274. EPISCOPAL CONIqUNZTY SER 93-94. FUND]NG/NEDICAL S 001-100-9~-5267 TOTAL CHECKS ZTEN ANOUNT 890.62 150.00 3,374..95 69.13 136.65 932.96 155.00 195.98 .01 .01 2,670.08 950.00 25.00 2.00 2.00 13.47 1/,,0.00 35,000.00 · CHECK AIqO(~T 890.62 854.50 150.00 3,374.95 34.8.25 932.96 155.00 196.00 2,67r"'~ 950. O0 29. O0 13.4.7 140.00 35,000. O0 1/'.1,668.59 VOUCHRE:) 01/,/"' 16:15 CITY OF TEHECIJLA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOil ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 COIIeJNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 iNSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLES FUNO 320 iNFORHATZON SYSTEMS 330 COPY CENTER FUND 3~0 FACiLiTIES TOTAL AMOUNT 85,698.45 14,174.81 14/,02.50 ~82.10 1,76Q.TZ 2?.5.00 17,449.65 251.60 422.87. 355.96 4,416.67 766.62 141,179.85 VOUCHRE2 PAGE 1 01/13/94 16:15 ~ CITY OF TEHECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERZOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NUNBER VENDOR NANE ITEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUNBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK Affi3UNT 13327 13327 13327 13327 13327 13327 13327 13327 13327 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 385894 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 398943 1333~ 13335 13336 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/94 01/10/~. 01/10/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 O004J~ 00042~ O00zdd~ 00042~ 0004~4 O004J~ 00042~ 00042~ 0004~&4 00044.4 00{)/,.44 000444 000~. 0004~ O0(:)z~, 0004~ 000444 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000101 PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH PERS (HEALTH IN$IJR.PREH INSUR.PREN INSUR,PREH IWSUR.PREM INSUR.PREN INSUR.PREH INSUR.PREH INSUR.PREH INSUR.PREH FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) F/RSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) F/RSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX (EDD) FIRSTAX CIRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) F/RSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (]RS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (ZRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) FIRSTAX (IRS) BIO-TRON TECHNOLOGIES PRESLEY CONPANIES, THE APPLE ONE INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN INSURANCE PREN FOR JAN INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN INSURANCE PREN FOR JAN INSURANCE PREN FOR JAN INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN INSURANCE PREH FOR JAN 000~ SDI 000444 SDI 000~4 SOl 000/-44 SOl 0004~ SDI 000/~ 000666 SOl 000~44 SDI 00066~ SDI 000~ STATE 0004~4 STATE 000444 STATE 0004~ STATE 000444 STATE 00044~, STATE 00044~ STATE 000/,/,4 STATE 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 MEDICARE 00028~ MEDICARE 00028~ MEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NEDICARE 000283 NED[CARE 000283 NEDICARE BIO-TRON REFUND REFUND ENG DEPOSIT TEMPORARY gE 12/25 001-2090 100-2090 190-2090 191 - 2090 19]-2090 300-2090 5"50-2090 :~0-2090 001 - 150-999- 5250 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 ~40-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-199-4056 001-2670 280-199-999-5250 13,979.09 3,836.81 3,981.8/, 135.95 469.74 143.88 302.11 422.93 111.01 1,061.22 271.30 244.31 7.22 26.9] 8.62 20.18 10.25 10.44 2,442.07 635.63 474.65 20.96 48.6~ 25.13 55.29 13.25 9,861.00 2,647.12 2,187.54 82.55 245.04 81.28 246.24 75.14 2,3R%92 605.11 545.02 16.09 60.09 19,2,3 45.02 22.86 23.30 35.00 25,611.12 51.60 23,383.36 5,376.09 19,146.55 35.00 25,611.12 VOUCHRE2 01/f/''' 16:15 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NLNBER ITEN AMOUNT CHECK AN(X)NT 13336 01/13/94 000101 13337 01/13/94 000135 13338 01/13/94 000155 APPLE ONE CENTRAL CITIES SION SER LINES, DAVID TEffi~3RARY E 01/01 FIRE DEPARTMENT VIDEO/AUDIO TAPE 001-1/*0-999-5118 100-16~-999-5244 001-161-999-5250 36.12 96.98 150.00 87.72 96,98 150.00 13339 01/13/94 000160 13339 01/13/94 000160 13339 01/13/94 000160 13340 01/13/94 000170 13340 01/13/94 000170 13340 01/13/94 000170 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13341 01/13/94 000177 13~'~ 01/13/94 000177 ENPLOYNENT DEVELOPHENT /*TH QTR EMPLOYMENT DEVELOP~ENT 4TH QTR EMPLOYMENT DEVELO!~ENT /*TH QTR FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY FRANKLIN GUEST COMPANY FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY GLENNIES OFFICE PROOIJCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT CLASSIC REPLACEMENT FIL FREIGHT TAX N[SCELLANEOUS OFFICE SU OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES; OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-2350 100-2350 190-2~50 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 001-1/.0-999-5220 472.40 703.85 985.13 19.95 8.~ 2.22 1~,.30 98.03 13.25 57.86 139.18 43.52 86.24 197.80 2,161.38 30.92 '133q~ 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 13342 01/13/94 000180 GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTRIC GRAY BAR ELECTR]C CR4915020 GOPHER POLE FREIGHT TAX 0R410055-000 0814 PUNCH ATT110AWl-lO0 103-80/*-8 ATT110C-/* 103-801-2/,7/* ATTllOC-5 103-801-254 5 FRE I GHT TAX DR410176-000 88/110 BLA FREIGHT TAX 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-52/.2 320-199-999-52/.2 320-199-999-52/.2 320-199-999-52/.2 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 124.50 2.61 9.65 50.21 25.94 25. O0 5.80 2.50 8.28 33.92 2.28 2.63 293.32 13343 01/13/94 000184 GTE 13343 01/13/94 000184 GTE 13344 01/13/94 0O0186 13344 01113194 000186 13344 01/13/94 000186 13345 01/13/94 000194 13345 01/13/94 000194 13345 01/13/94 000194 13345 01/13/94 0O0194 13345 01/13/94 000194 13345 01/13/94 000194 133~.01/13/94 000194 HANKS HARDWARE HANKS HARDWARE HANKS HARDWARE ICNA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ]CNA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ICNA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ICNA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 ICNA RETIREMENT TRUST 4 909-694-6/,00 909-699-182 OFFICE SUPPLIES NISC, SUPPLIES - NUTS, NISC, SUPPLIES - NUTS, 00019/* DEF COMP 000194 DEF CONP 000194 DEF CQNP 000194 DEF COMP 0OO194 DEF CONP 000194 DEF CONP 000194 DEF COMP 320-199-999-5208 320-199-~99-5208 190-180-999-5212 100-164-999-5242 100-164-999-5242 001-2080 100-2080 190-2080 191-2080 193-2080 300-2080 340-2080 2,822.86 17.15 42.08 ~.~ 2,175.01 564.16 496.96 34.08 41.66 25.36 . 50.00 2,8/,0.01 138.91 3,385.23 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA 01/13/94 16:15 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER]QOS PAG~ VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 133~6 01/13/94 000195 ASCON HASLER NAILING $Y METER RENTAL/RESET 330-199-999-5239 227.25 227.25 13347 01/13/94 00020~ J.R. FREEMAN CO, INC, 13347 01/13/94 000204 J.R. FREEMAN CO, INC. SERVICE CALL FOR REPAIR 001-120-999-5217 LABOR CHARGES 001-120-999-5217 36.00 15.00 51.00 133~8 01/13/94 000214 LUNCH & STUFF CATERING COUNCIL LUNCHES 001-100-~-5260 80.00 80.00 13349 01/13/94 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVZC TEMPORARY SERVICES FOR 001-162-999-5119 13349 01/13/94 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERV[C TEMPORARY SERVICES FOR 001-162-999-5119 13349 01/13/94 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERV[C TEMPORARY SERVICES FOR 001-162-999-5119 218.40 218.40 200.20 637.00 13350 01/13/94 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREM 0002/,6 PER REDE 001-2130 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREN 000246 PER REDE 100-2130 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES# RETIREN 0002/,6 PERS RET 001-Z390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRBq 0002/,6 PERS RET 100-2390 13350 01/13/94 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIREM 0002~6 PERS RET 190-2390 13350 01/13/94 0002~6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 13350 01/13/94 0002~6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 13350 01/13/94 00024& PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 13350 01/13/94 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 320'2390 13350 01/13/94 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 330-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 340-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 001-2390 '13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 100'2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RET]REM 000246 SURVIVOR 1~0-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RET]REM 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RET]REM 000246 SURVIVOR 193-23~0 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RET]REM 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 330-2390 13350 01/13/94 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 107.35 107.35 11,284.25 2,701.42 2,450.10 80.06 28~.39 9L20 232,35 104.86 122.01 59.17 12.54 13.02 .42 1.44 .46 17,658.18 13351 01/13/94 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKS AT SR CENTER 190-181-99~-5250 86.20 86.20 13352 01/13/94 000262 RANCHO WATER WATER USEAGE 190-180-999-5240 13352 01/13/94 000262 RANCHO WATER WATER USEAGE 191-180-999-5240 13352 01/13/94 000262 RANCHO WATER WATER USEAGE 193-180-~-5240 13352 01/13/94 000262 RANCHO WATER 11/09-12/09/93 WATER 1~0-181-~-5240 1,247.74 104.77 582.7~ 9.94 1,945.24 13353 01/13/94 000270 RJM DESIGN GROUP MARCH 31, 1993 250-190-129-5802 13353 01/13/94 000270 RJM DESIGN GROUP SERVICES THRU 08/31/93 250-190-129-5802 13353 01/13/94 000270 RJM DESIGN GROUP SERVICES THRU 10/31/93 250-190-129-5802 1,410.40 9,623.55 6,415.70 17,~49.65 13354 01/13/94 000280 BENEDICT, CHARLES DEC 93 PLANNING SIGNS 001-161-999-5256 135.00 135.00 13355 01/13/94 000285 SIR SPEEDY 1000 BLACK/WHITE BIJSINE 001-163-~-5220 13355 01/13/94 000285 SIR SPEEDY TAX 001-163-~-5220 13355 01/13/94 000285 SIR SPEEDY 500/BUSINESS CARDS: 001-140-~-5220 13355 01/13/94 000285 SIR SPEEDY 500/BUSINESS CARDS: 001-140-~-5220 13355 01/13/94 000285 SIR SPEEDY TAX 001-140-~-5220 45.00 3.49 27.70 27.70 4.30 VQUCHRE2 PAGE/* 01/f'''' 16:15 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUHBER 13356 01/13/9/, 0002~1 13356 01/13/9/, 0002~1 13357 01/13/9/, 000305 13358 01/13/9/, 000306 13359 01/13/94 000307 13359 01/13/94 000307 13359 01/13/9/, 000307 13359 01/13/9/* 000307 13359 01/13/9/, 000307 13359 01/13/9/, 000307 13360 01/13/9/, 000320 13360 01/13/9/, 000320 13360 01/13/9/, 000320 13360 01/13/9~ 000320 13361 01/13/9/, 000322 13~ 01/13/9/, 000325 1~ 01/13/9/, 000325 133o~ 01/13/9/, 000325 13363 01/13/9/, 000326 13363 01/13/9/* 000326 13364 01/13/9/, 000332 13365 01/13/9/, 000339 13366 01/13/9/* 0003~ 13367 01/13/9/* 000389 13367 01/13/9/, 000389 13367 01/13/9/* 000389 13368 01/13/9/* 000404 13368 01/13/9/* 000404 13369 01/13/9/, 000/*09 13369 01/13/9/* 000409 13369 01/13/9/, 000409 13370 01/13/9/* 000437 13370 01/13/9/, 000437 13370 01/13/9/, 000437 133/7,1_,,01/13/9/, 00O440 1~ 01/13/9/, 000/*40 SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T TARGET STORE TEMEOULA VALLEY PIPE TEHECULA TROPHY TENECULA TROPHY TEMECULA TROPHY TENECULA TROPHY TEMECULA TROPHY TEMECULA TROPHY TOgNE CENTER STATIONERS TOialE CENTER STATIONERS TOgNE CENTER STATIONERS TOgNE CENTER STATIONERS UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR UNITED gAY OF THE INLAN UNITED UAY OF THE INLAN UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI UEST PUBLISHING COMPANY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TEL CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION REPAIR & NAINT, CITY VE REPAIR & NAINT, CITY VE RECREATION SUPPLIES MISC. SUPPLIES 5 BRASS PLATES ENGRAVED GAVEL; 10" ENGRAVED GAVEL; 10" ENGRAVED GAVEL; 10" POUND]NG BLOCK TAX OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES AIRFARE/MJM/GAN JOSE 000325 IN 000325 IN 000325 IN 2 SETS OF UNIFORMS CLEA HARRINGTON, STERLING, R PLAN CHECK FEES CA AN CO V1-37B 94PP 909-202-4761 NOV 93 USCM/PEBSCO, (ONRA) 000389 PT RETIR USCN/PEBSCO, (ONRA) ~ PT RETIR USCM/PEBSCO, (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT VALLEH SAFETY SUPPLY VALLEN SAFETY SUPPLY VALLEN SAFETY SUPPLY MORELAND & ASSOCIATES MORELAND & ASSOCIATES MORELAND & ASSOCIATES AGLOk/PHOTOGRAPHY AGLO~ PHOTOGRAPHY CHARTPAK ARROUS/SCREENS SCREENS & PATTERNS TUIN CARTRIDGE ADAPTOR FREIGHT TAX CITY AUDIT REDEVELOPNENT AGENCY SINGLE AUDIT SITTING CHARGE; PORTRAI 8 X 10 PONTRA]T$ ACCOUNT NUIIER 310-162-999-521/, 310-162-999-521/, 190-180-999-5301 190-180-99~-5212 001-100-~-5220 001-100-999-5220 001-100-~-5220 001-100-~-5220 001-100-999-5220 001-100-~-5220 190-180-99~-5220 190-180-9~-5220 190-180-999-5220 001-163-~-5220 001-1/,0-~-5258 001-2120 100-2120 190-2120 100-164-~-52/,3 1~0-180-~-52/,3 001-162-~{,,x~-52/,8 001-120-~-5228 001-100-~9~-5208 001-2160 100-21&0 190-21&0 001-161-~-5220 001-161-99~-5220 100-164-~-5218 100-164-99~-5218 100-164-99~-5218 001-1/,0-99~-52/.8 280-1~9-~-52/,8 001-100-~-5250 001-100-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 20.99 39.03 20.27 /*3.96 21.95 21.95 21.95 13.95 6.18 13.17 17.08 8.90 114.00 83.25 2.25 17.00 23.00 16.10 85.31 352.95 1/,2.28 39.00 99.88 96.32 15.35 78.00 6.05 576.60 200.00 200.00 40.00 60.00 · CHECK AHOUNT 41.98 39.03 20.27 129.9/, 89.09 114.00 102.50 39.10 85.31 352.95 1/,2.28 235.20 1/.0.34 88.35 976.60 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA 01/13/94 16:15 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NLNBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUNBER ITEM AMOUNT · CHECK · AMOUNT 13371 01/13/94 0004~0 AGLOW PHOTOGRAPHY eltOUP PORTRAIT; COUNCIL 001-100-999-5250 13371 01/13/94 000~0 AGLO~ PHOTOGRAPHY 8 X 10 PORTRAITS; GROUP 001-100J~9-5250 13371 01/13/94 000~0 AGLOI4 PHOTOGRAPHY FRAMES/CREATION FEE/Bxl 001-100-999-5250 65.00 30.00 144.41 339.41 13372 01/13/94 000471 IGOE & COMPANY FLEX PLAN/DECEMBER 001-150-999-5250 264. O0 264. O0 13373 01/13/94 000473 CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMEN CRA LEGAL CLINIC/JAN 20 001-140-999-5261 250.00 250.00 13374 01/13/94 000474 ARBOR-PRO TREE SERVICE ROOT-PRUNE TMO TREES OR 100-164-999-5402 150,00 150.00 13375 01/13/94 000525 PARKS, RONALD J. 07/21-07/24 RP 001-100-~-5258 13.00 13.00 13376 01/13/94 000596 LEAGUE OF CA C]TIES/LAF FEB. 24/EMPLOYEE RELATI 001-110-~99-5258 13376 01/13/94 000596 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF FEB 9-11, REGISTRATION 001-100-999-5258 110.00 210.00 320.00 13377 01/13/94 000642 CITY OF TENEOULA - FLEX 13377 01/13/94 000642 CITY OF TEMECULA - FLEX 13377 01/13/94 000642 CITY OF TEMECULA - FLEX 13377 01/13/94 000642 CITY OF TENECULA - FLEX 13377 01/13/94 000642 CITY OF TEMECULA - FLEX FLEXIBLE BENEFIT JAN 13 001-1020 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT JAN 13 190-1020 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT JAN 13 100-1020 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT JAN 13 330-1020 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT JAN 13 300-1020 13378 01/13/94 000680 ANS-TMS POSTAGE 001-100-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 AMS-TMS POSTAGE 001-110-~9-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 AMS-TMS POSTAGE 001-120-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 ANS-TNS POSTAGE 001-140-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 AMS-TMS POSTAGE 001-150-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 0O0680 ANS-TMS POSTAGE 001-161-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 AMS-TMS POSTAGE 001-162-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 000680 AMS-TNS POSTAGE 001-1&3-999-5230 13378 01/13/94 0OO68O ANS-TMS POSTAGE 190-180-999-5230 13379 01/13/94 000689 CAMPBELL'S LIGHTING S1G CHECK POLE #29 190-180-999-5212 3,050.72 50.00 16.25 21.24 7.13 163.~ 143.78 228.68 52.47 112.52 97.13 184.64 115.40 1~.50 3,864.87 / 1,105.69 144.50 13380 01/13/94 000704 SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL 001-110-999-5263 13380 01/13/94 000704 SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL 001-162-999-5263 13380 01/13/94 000704 SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL 190-180-999-5263 13380 01/13/94 000704 SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL 100-164-999-5263 21.13 21.16 72.97 334.25 ~9.51 13381 01/13/94 000796 ICBO - SAN DIEGO CHAPTE 9~ MEMBERSHIP/ANTHONY E 001-162-999-5226 25.00 25.00 13382 01/13/94 000907 TEMECULA CAR ~ASH OIL CHANGES/CAR WASHES 310-164-~99-5214 20.00 20.00 13383 01/13/94 000937 C.N. ENGINEERING ENGINEERING FOR PROFESS 210-190-119-5802 225.00 225.00 1338~ 01/13/94 000978 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRO 2ND QTR BILLING 001-171-999-5274 13385 01/13/94 000992 RAMONA TIRE TIRE SERVICES CITY VEHI 310-180-999-5214 1,312.50 293.~8 1,312.50 293.~8 13386 01/13/94 000993 FREEDON COFFEE, INC. COFFEE SERVICE FOR CITY 340-199-999-5250 13387 01/13/94 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473-6664-0391-0024/1)D 001-110-999-5258 · 137.01 176.58 137.01 VOUCHRE2 01///'~ VOUCHER/ CHECK NLIHBER 13387 13387 13387 13388 13388 13388 13389 13389 13389 13389 13389 13390 13390 13390 13390 13390 13391 133~ 13392 13393 13394 13395 13396 13397 13398 13399 16:15 CHECK DATE 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/9~ 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94- 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/9~ 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 01/13/94 VENOOR NUMBER 001002 001002 001002 001029 001029 001029 001030 001030 001030 001030 001030 001065 001065 001065 001065 001065 001192 001193 001193 001193 001201 001209 001212 001272 001275 001276 001277 VENDOR NAME FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - FIRST INTERSTATE BANK ' FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - DATA GUICK DATA OUICK DATA OUICK MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, MINI'GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, MINI'GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, MINI'GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, MINI'GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, CiTY OF TENEOULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERICl)S ITEM DESCRIPTZOR 5473-zz,.~,.~4z'--O391-OO32/MJ 5473-666~-0391-0040/PB 5473-6664-0391-0115/JG DATAGUICK INFORMATION S FREIGHT TAX 351el PLANETARY IllAGES MASTER APERTURE CARD DUPLICATE APERTURE CARD EMPLOYEE PICK UP DELZVE TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-140-999-5260 001-100-999-5258 001-120-999-5258 320-199-999-5250 320-199-999-5250 320-199-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 USCN/PEBSCO (DEF, CONP. 001065 DEF CUMP 001-2080 USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CUMP. 001065 DEF CCNP 100-2080 USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CCNP. 001065 DEF CCNP 190-2080 USCM/PEBSCO (DEF, CUMP, 001065 DEF CCNP 300-2080 USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. CONP. 001065 DEF CONP 320-2080 K.L.M. ENGINEERING COMP USA CGHP USA COMP USA BUSINESS t4EEK VAULT, THE SOUTHERN CALiFORNiA GAS CHINIAEFF, DENNIS CONPUSERV, INC. HARVARD BUSINESS REVZE~ NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CIT HORK ORDER 93-94 ~1/53 100-164-999-5402 875484 HEDI SEKURIT LOC 320-199-999-5242 TAX 320-199-999-5242 USRO SPORT 320-199-999-5221 1YR SUBSCRZPTZON 001-110-999-5228 COURIER & HANDLING 001-120-;-5250 17-8274-036-1451-1 DEC 190-181-999-5240 LEAGUE 10/13-10/20 001-161-999-5272 USEAGE CHARGE 320-199-999-5228 1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION 001-110-999-5228 COST & SHIPPING 001-140-999-5228 ITEM AMOUNT 2.00 779.50 ~42.60 70. O0 10.00 5.43 49.40 177.84 113.50 15.00 27.57 3,035.65 197.98 156.32 3.47 312.50 950.00 7~.38 6.15 159.92 37.95 20.00 77.09 746.18 39.95 75.00 7.00 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 1,400.68 85.43 383.31 ' 3,705.92 950.00 245.45 37.95 20.00 77.09 746.18 39.95 75.00 7.00 TOTAL CHECKS 141,179.85 VOUCHRE2 01/13/9~ 17:16 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS PAG~ FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 COIqlqUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 210 CAPITAL INPROVENENT PROJ FUNO 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 300 INSURANCE FUNO 320 INFORNATION SYSTENS 330 COPY CENTER FUND TOTAL ANOUNT 20,809.80 2,676.00 5,602.2~ 4,02L76 395,127.00 2,187.00 7,530.00 1,760.32 639,717.12 VOUCHRE2 01/+/'-` 17=16 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER 1:5/,03 01/25/94 00012~ 13403 01/25/94 000123 13403 01/25/94 000123 1~04 01/25/94 000128 13405 01/25/94 000161 13405 01/25/94 000161 13406 01/25/94 000164 1:5/,07 01/25/94 13408 01/25/94 13408 01/25/94 13/,09 01/25/94 1:~09 01/25/94 13409 01/25/94 13410 01/25/94 000379 01/25/94 000586 13412 01/25/94' 000754 13412 01/25/94 000754 13412 01/25/94 000754 13413 01/25/94 VENDOR NAME 13414 01/25/94 13414 01/25/94 13415 CITY OF TEMEOULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERICOS BURKE WZLLIANS & SOltENS CODE ENFORCEMENT BURKE WILLlAMB & SOREMS CL PHARR[S VS RANTEK BURKE WZLLZANS & SORENS WAL-NAR REFERENDUM CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, EDEN SYSTEMS, INC. EDEN SYSTEMS, iNC. iTEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-524& RENEWAL/FAITHFUL PERF/B SUPPORT CHARGES; BASIC 320-199-999-5211 SLIPPORT CHARGES; SSS 320-199-999-5211 12/01-12r51 001-162-999-5248 JANUARY 94 SERVICES 190-180-999-5370 ESGIL CORPORATION 000230 MtJNI FINANCIAL SERVICES 000310 TENECULA CREEK 000310 TENECULA CREEK INN 000;$45 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILL] W. DEAN DAVIDSON BOOK PUBLISHING COMPANY ELLIOTT GROUP, THE ELLIOTT GROUP, THE ELLIOTT GROUP, THE 000820 WINCHAK, KRIS 000929 T,B, PEN[CK 000929 T.B. PENICK CHRISTHAS PARTY CREDIT CHRISTHAS BUFFET METER USAGE; 5100 COPIE XEROX 5100 TONER TAX DEC ~ SERVICES/HINDERG MUNICIPAL CODE BOOKS LANDSCAPE REVIEW LONA L]NDA/R]VERTON LANDSCAPE REVIEW SERVICES TNRU 12/29/93 CONSTRUCTION OF THE CON RETENTION PUJOL AT 6TH STREET, PUJOL AT IqA[N - PUJOL A 001-150-999-5265 001-150-999-5265 330-199-999-52~9 5qJ0-199-999-5220 330-199-999-5220 210-190-136-5802 001-120-999-5250 001-161-999-5250 190-180-999-5250 001-161-999-5250 190-180-999-5250 250-190-129-5804 250-2035 100-164-999-5402 100-164-999-5402 320-199-999-5211 01/25/94 000979 DEL RIO ENTERPRISE 13416 01/25/94 001007 NPG CORP. 13417 01/25/94 1:~18 01/25/94 001015 PROGRAMMED FOR SUCCESS, USER GROUP SUPPORT & HA 0010/,6 REXON, FREEDMAN, KLEPET DEC 1993 LEGAL SERVICES 001-130-999-5247 TOTAL CHECKS ITEM AMOUNT 3,532.23 1,463.38 530.25 2,187.00 5,175,00 1,035. O0 4,289.35 1,574.74 3,774.32 192.89' 925.25 775.00 60.07 4,024.76 5,951.69 450.00 1,980. O0 450.00 2,0/,7.50 439,030. O0 43,903.00- 1,407. O0 1,269. O0 1,320 · O0 561,47 PAGE I CHECK AMOUNT 5,525.86 2,187.00 6,210.00 4,289.35 1,574.74 3,581.43 1,760.32 4,024.76 5,951.69 2,880.00 2,047.50 395,127.00 1,407.00 1,269.00 1,320.00 561,47 439,717.12 ITE-.M NO. 4 /~PROV~x. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Mary Jane McLarney; Finance Officer January 11, 1994 1993-94 Fire Protection Agreement RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Fiscal Year 1993- 94 Fire Protection Agreement with the Riverside County Fire Department and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. DISCUSSION: The City of Temecula contracts with the County of Riverside and the California Department of Forestry to provide fire protection, fire prevention, and rescue and medical aid services. The contract calls for a total of 23.6 positions and service delivery and support services for Stations 12 and 73 as outlined in "Exhibit A" of the agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: budget. The costs included on Exhibit A agree to the FY 93-94 Attachments: Cooperative Agreement for City of Temecula Fire Protection Services 1 2 3 4 5 6 '7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 t7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE PROTECTION, FIRE PREVENTION, RESCUE, AND MEDICAL AID FOR THE CITY OF T~.CULA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 19 , by and between the County of Riverside,. hereinafter called "County", and the City of Temecula hereinafter called "City", whereby it is agreed as follows: I PURPOSE The purpose of the Agreement is to arrange for the County, through its Cooperative Agreement with the State of California, to provide the City with'fire protection, fire prevention, rescue, and medical aid services, hereinafter called fire protection services. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority granted by Government Code Sections 55603, 55603.5, 55632, 55606 and 55642, ant will be mutually advantageous to the City and the County in that it will provide a unified, cooperative, integrated, and effective fire protection, rescue, and medical aid system which will satisfy the combined County/City responsibilities to protect lives, property, and natural resources from fire danger. II COUNTY IN CHARGE A. The County Fire Chief shall represent both parties durln~ the period of this Agreement and that Officer shall, under the supervision and direction of the County Board of Supervisors, have charge of the organization to provide the services as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, for the purpos~ of providing such fire protection services as deemed necessary to Satisfy the needs of both the County and of the City, except upon those lands wherein other agencies of government have responsibilit} for the same or similar fire protection services. B. The County will provide the services (at the levels specified in Exhibit "A") in return for the payments made by the City under Paragraph III. C. The County will be allowed flexibility in'the assignment of available personnel and equipment in order to provide the fire protection services, rescue and medical aid services as agreed upon herein. 26 D. The City shall appoint the County Fire Chief referred to 27 under Paragraph A. above, to be the City Fire Chief. 28 WILLIAM C KATZI='NSTEIN SLITE 300 3535 'OTH ~,TItEET RI%ERSIOE. CALiFOR'NIa /// -1- 1 3 4 5 III PAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. The City shall appropriate a sum of money to provide fire protection services within the area of responsibility of the City for the period from the date of execution of this Agreement to Jt,~ 30. 1996 . B. The County shall make a claim to the City for the actual cost of contracted services as shown on Exhibit 'A' during each of ? the following periods: (1) July 1 through September 31, claim in October; (2) October 1 through December 31, claim in January~ (3) 8 January 1 through March 31, claim in April; and (4) April 1 through June 30, claim in April for estimated cost of services, with final 9 reconciliation to actual costs resulting in an additional claim or refund to City, in June. City shall pay each claim within fifteen 10 (15) days after receipt thereof. The County shall allow a credit to each claim in the amount of 25% of the Structural Fire Taxes as I1 determined by County to be collected in each Fiscal Year of this Agreement. The allowed credit shall not exceed the cost of 12 contracted services. 13 C. Any change o~ the salaries or expenses set forth in said Exhibit 'A' made necessary by action of the Legislature or an~ 14 other public agency with authority to direct changes in the level of salaries or expenses, shall be paid from the funds represented 15 therein or as on said Exhibit 'A'. There shall be no obligation on' the part of the City to expend or appropriate an~ sum in excess of 18 the total of Exhibit 'A' which exceeds the appropriation of the City for the purposes of the Agreement. If within thirty, (30) days 17 after notice, in writing, from the County to the CitJ[ that the actual cost of maintaining the services specified in Exhibit 'A' as 18 a result of Legislative or other action will exceed the total amount specified therein, and the City has failed to agree to make 19 available the necessary additional funds, the County shall have the right to reduce the services furnished under this Agreement b~ an 20 appropriate amount and shall promptly notify the City, in writing, specifying the services to be reduced. If City desires to add 21 funds to the total included herein to cover the cost of increased salaries or services, such increase shall be accomplished by an 22 amendment to this Agreement approved by the parties hereto. 23 IV 24 HOLDING OVER 25 A. The initial term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 199~ to June 30. 1996. . The term of this Agreement shall 26 be a one (1) year term thereafter. Either party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement by providing a written notice of term- 27 ination to the other party hereto twelve (12) months prior to the expiration of the term hereof. In no event shall this Agreement be 28 terminated by either party prior to June 30, .1996 . If no written notice of termination is received b~, either party, this wlLUA,~F"-~ATZE',,iSTI:iN CO O~,xSEk -- 2 -- 300 mlvERSaOE CALIFORNIA IF 1 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Agreement shall be automatically renewed at the same level of service, but at the level of expense in effect for the year of renewal, and otherwise on the same terms and conditions herein specified, so far as applicable until: (1) (2) A new Agreement is fully executed, or Termination of the Agreement following twelve (12) months prior written notice of termination, or (3) New Exhibit 'A" is mutually agreed to by and between the parties. B. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of the parties at any time after June 30. 1996 . C. Nothing. herein shall be construed as excusing City's compliance with Government Code Section 25643. V COOPERATIVE OPERATIONS All fire protection, rescue, and medical aid work contem- plated under this Agreement shall be done by both parties to this Agreement working as one unit; therefore, personnel and equipment, regardless of whether they are included in Exhibit 'At msy be temporarily dispatched elsewhere from time to time for mutual aid. Coverage will be provided to City following the County's stsnda~'' move-up and cover procedures. VI MUTUAL AID When rendering mutual aid or assistance as authorized in Section 13050 and 13054, Health and Safety Code, the County may demand payment of charges and seek reimbursement of City costs for 21 personnel as funded herein, under authority given by Section 13051 and 13054, Health and Safety Code. The County in seeking said 22 reimbursement will represent the City in following the procedures set forth in Section 13052, Health and Safety Code. Any recovery 23 of City costs, less collection expenses, will be credited to the City. 24 VII 25 26 PROPERTY ACCOUNTING All personal property provided by the City and by the Count} 27 for the purpose of providing fire protection and rescue services under-the terms of this Agreement shall be marked and accounted fox Z8 by the County Fire Chief in charge, in such a manner as to conform to the standard operating procedure established by the COunty Fire WILLIAM C w, ATZEi.~TEIN ' "~ COLNTV COL ~SEL ' 3 ' ~TE 3~ 1 Department for the segregation, care, and use of the respective property of each. 3 VIII INDEMNIFICATION 5 A. City shall indemnify and hold County, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless 8 from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of City, its officers, agents, employees, ? subcontractors and independent contractors, for Property damage, bodily injury or death or any other element of damage of any kind 8 or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on 9 the County by the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, and City shall defend at its 10 expense, including attorney fees, County, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors in any legal action or claim 11 of any kind based upon such alleged acts or omissions. 12 B. County shall indemnify and hold City, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless 13 from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of County, its officers, agents, employees, 14 subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or death or any other element of damage of any kind 15 or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on 16 the City by the provisions of Section 895.2 of th~ Government Code of the State of Californian' and County shall defend at its expense, 1~ including attorney fees, City, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind 18 based upon such alleged acts or omissions. 19 IX 20 DELIVERY OF NOTICES 21 Any notices to be served pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered delivered when deposited in the United States mail and 22 addressed to: 23 COUNTY CITY OF T~M~.C~7.~ County Fire Chief 210 W. San Jacinto Ave. Perris, CA 92570 City Manaaer 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula. CA 92590 300 Provisions of this section do not preclude any notices being delivered in person ~o the addresses shown above. X ENTIRE CONTRACT -4- p ! lIP This Agreement contains the whole contract between the 'parties. It may be terminated at any time or any Provision herein contained may be amended or modified upon the mutualwritten con- 4 5 sent of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officials of the parties hereto have, in their respective capacities, set their hands as of the date first hereinabove written. 7 8 Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM CITY OF TEHECULA 9 10 11 12 13 ATTEST: By By Title 14 15 17 18 Title ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By Chairman, Board of Supervisors 19 20 21 By Deputy 22 (SEAL) 23 24 25 26 27 28 GB:jf-722/lit(pp. 1-5)5/1'8/92 REV:q[IIIC: 7/21/92 LLIAM C KATZENSTEIN COL;~rv COb",SEL )S)S · tOTIN STIILrLe'T eR/ERS~O[. C,N, JFORNIA -5- EXHIBIT A TEMECULA FIRE SERVICES FY 1993-94 PERSONNEL AND SERVICE DELIVERY COSTS PERSONN;L Classification Battalion Chief Fire Prevention Captain Fire Safety Specialist Fire Captains Fire Apparatus Engineers Firefighter II Positions 1.0 Eliminated 7-1-93 1.0 2.0 3.2 10.4 ,0% Aerial Truck Staffing Fire Captain 1.5 Fire Apparatus Engineer 1.5 Firefighter II 3.0 Total Positions 23.6 Salaries, benefits, State Administrative Charge ..... $1,420,452 Total Uniform Allowance .... $20,734 Total ...... $1,543,602 SERVICE DELIVERY/DFPARTM;NT SUPPORT SFRVICFS Station 12 $188,472 Station 73 200,394 Total ~388,866 Total cost for Personnel and Service Delivery *Less estimated structural fire and redevelopment tax credit $1,830,052 1,373, 179 Net City Billing $ 456,873 1 3 A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE PROTECTION, FIRE PREVENTION, RESCUE, AND MEDICAL AID FOR THE CITY OF TN~4~.CDT.A 5 6 '7 8 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of · 19 , by and between the County of Riverside, hereinafter called "County", and the City of Temecula hereinafter called "City", whereby it is agreed as follows: PURPOSE The purpose of the Agreement is to arrange for the County, 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 through its Cooperative Agreement with the State of California· to 10 provide the City with fire protection, fire prevention, rescue· and medical aid services', hereinafter called fire protection services. 11 This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority granted by Government Code Sections 55603, 55603.5, 55632, 55606 and 55642, ant will be mutually advantageous to the City and the County in that it will provide a unified, cooperative, integrated, and effective fire protection, rescue, and medical aid system which will satisfy the combined County/City responsibilities to protect lives, property, and natural resources from fire danger. II COUNTY IN CHARGE A. The County Fire Chief shall represent both parties durin~ the period of this Agreement and that Officer shall, under the 18 supervision and direction of the County Board of Supervisors· have charge of the organization to provide the services as described in 19 Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof· for the purpose of providing such fire protection services as deemed necessary to 20 satisfy the needs of both the County and of the City, except upon those lands wherein other agencies of government have responsibilit} 21 for the same or similar fire protection services. 22 B. The County will provide the services (at the levels specified in Exhibit 'A') in return for the payments made b~ the 23 City under Paragraph III. C. The County will be allowed flexibility in'the assignment 24 of available personnel and equipment in order to provide the fire 25 protection services, rescue and medical aid services as agreed upon herein. 26 D. The City shall appoint the County Fire Chief referred to 27 under Paragraph A. above, to be the City Fire Chief. 28 III -1- 1 III PAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. The City shall appropriate a sum of money to provide fire protection services within the area of responsibility of the City for the period from the date of execution of this Agreement to J,ne ~0. 1996 . B. The County shall make a claim to the City for the actual cost of contracted services as shown on Exhibit "A' during each of the following periods: (1) July 1 through September 31, claim in October; (2) October 1 through December 31, claim in January; (3) January 1 through March 31,. claim in April; and (4) April i through June 30, claim in April for estimated cost of services, with final reconciliation to actual costs resulting in an additional claim or refund to City, in June. City shall pay each claim within fifteen (15) days after receipt.thereof. The County shall allow a credit to each claim in the'amount of 25% of the Structural Fire Taxes as determined by County to be collected in each Fiscal Year of this Agreement. The allowed credit shall not exceed the cost of contracted services. C. Any change of the salaries or expenses set forth in said. Exhibit 'A' made necessary by action of the Legislature or any other public agency with authority to direct changes in the level of salaries or expenses, shall be paid from =he funds represented' therein or as on said Exhibit "A". There shall be no obligation on' the part of =he City to expend or appropria=e any sum in excess of the total of Exhibit "A" which exceeds the appropriation of the City for the purposes of the Agreement. If within thirty (30) d~~. after notice, in writing, from the County to the City that the actual cost'of maintaining the services specified in Exhibit 'A" as a result of Legislative or other action will exceed the total amoun= specified =herein, and the City has failed to agree to make available the necessary additional funds, the County shall have the right to reduce =he services furnished under this Agreement by an appropriate amount and shall promptly notify the City, in writing, specifying the services to be reduced. If City desires to add funds =o the total included herein to cover the cost of increased salaries'or services, such increase shall be accomplished by an amendment to this Agreemen= approved by the parties hereto. IV HOLDING OVER A. The initial term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 199~ to June 30. 1996. . The term of this Agreement shall be a one (1) year term thereafter. Either party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement by providing a written notice of term- ination to the other party hereto twelve (12) months prior to the expiration of the ~erm hereof. In no event shall this Agreement be terminated.by either party prior to June 30, .I996 . If no written notice of termination is received by either party, this 1 4 5 7 8 9 Agreement shall be automatically renewed at the same level of service, but at the level of expense in effect for the year of renewal, and otherwise on the same terms and conditions heroin specified, so far as applicable until: (1) A new Agreement is fully executed, or (2) Termination of the Agreement following twelve (12) months prior written notice of termination, or (3) New Exhibit "A" is mutually agreed to by and between the parties. B. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of the parties at any time after June 30, 1996 . 10 C. Nothing herein shall be construed as excusing City's compliance with GoVernment Code Section 25643. 11 V 12 COOPERATIVE OPERATIONS 13 All fire protection, rescue, and medical aid work contom- 14 plated under this Agreement shall be done by both parties to this Agreement working as one unit; therefore, personnel and equipment, regardless of whether they are included in Exhibit 'At may be temporarily dispatched elsewhere from time to time for mutual aid. Coverage wilI be provided to City following the County's standard move-up and cover procedures. VI MUTUAL AID When rendering mutual aid or assistance as authorized in Section 13050 and 13054, Health and Safety Code, the County may demand payment of charges and seek reimbursement of City costs for personnel as funded heroin, under authority given b~ Section 13051 and 13054, Health and Safety Code. The County in seeking said reimbursement will represent the City in following the procedures set forth in Section 13052, Health and Safety Code. Any recoveE7 23 of City costs, less collection expenses, will be credited to the City. ' 24 VII 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 PROPERTY ACCOUNTING 25 26 All personal property provided by the City and b~ the Count) 27 for the purpose of providing fire protection and rescue services under-the terms of this Agreement shall be marked and accounted fox 28 by the County Fire Chief in charge, in such a manner as to conform to the standard operating procedure established by the County Fire -3- 1 4 5 Department for the segregation, care, and use of the respective property of each. vIII INDEMNIFICATION A. City shall indemnify and hold County, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless. from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of City, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or death or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on the County by the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, and City shall defend at its expense, including attorney fees, County, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind based upon such alleged acts or omissions. B. County shall indemnify and hold City, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of County, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or death or any other element of damage of Iny kind or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on the City by the provisions of Section 895.2 of thq Government Code of the State of Californian' and County shall defend at its ezpen~"'~ including attorney fees, City, its officers, agents, employees aL independent contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind based upon such alleged acts or omissions. IX DELIVERY OF NOTICES Any notices to be served pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered delivered when deposited in the United States mail and addressed COUNTY CITY OF TrueR. CUbA County Fire Chief 210 W. San Jacinto Ave. Perris, CA 92570 City Mana2er ~3174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Provisions of this section do not preclude any notices being delivered in person to the addresses shown above. X ENTIRE CONTRACT -4- F 1 This Agreement contains the whole contract between the 2 'parties- It may be terminated at any time or any Provision herein contained may be amended or modified upon the mutual written con- 3 sent of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officials of the parties hereto have, in their respective capacities, set their hands as of the date firs~ hereinabove written. Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM CITY OF TEMECULA 9 10 11 ATTEST: 12 13 By By Title 14 15 16 17' 18 Title ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By Chairman, Board of Supervisors 19 20 21 Deputy 22 23 (SEAL) 24 25 26 27 28 GB: j f-722/1it (pp. 1-5 ) 5/1'8/92 REV:¶IIXC: 7/21/92 LLIAM ,~NSTEIN -5- This Agreement contains the whole contract between the · parties. It may be terminated at any time or any Provision herein contained may be amended or modified upon the mutual written con- 3 4 5 6 7 sent of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officials of the parties hereto have, in their respective capacities, set their hands as of the date first hereinabove written. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 25 LIA,~ C- I'(,%TZt~iSTEIN CO~,'rv Dated: CITY OF TEMECUIA APPROVED AS TO FORM ATTEST: By Title By Title COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board By Chairman, Board of Supervisors By Deputy (SEAL) GB:jf-722/1it(pp.1-5)5/ra/92 REV:¶IIIC:7/21/92 -S- EXHIBIT A TEMECULAFIRE SERVICES FY1993-94 PERSONNEL AND SERVICE DELIVERY COSTS PERSONNEL Classification Battalion Chief Fire Prevention Captain Fire Safety Specialist Fire Captains Fire Apparatus Engineers Firefighter II ~0% Aerial Truck Staffing Fire Captain Fire Apparatus Engineer Firefighter II Total Positions Positions 1.0 Eliminated 7-1-93 1.0 2.0 3.2 10.4 1.5 1.5 3.0 23.6 Salaries, benefits, State Administrative Charge ..... $1,420,452 Total Uniform Allowance .... $20,734 To~l ...... $1,543,602 SERVICE DELIVERYIDEPARTM;NT SUPPORT SERVICFS Station 12 $188,472 Station 73 200,394 Total .8388,866 Total cost for Personnel and Service Delivery *Less estimated structural fire and redevelopment tax credit $1,830,052 1,373,179 Net City Billing $ 456,873 ITEM ~PPROV~,T. ~ NANCE OFFICER TY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25~ 1994 Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-1 PREPARED BY:/f(-¢' Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the release of Street, and Water and Sewer Improvement Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-1, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. BACKGROUND: On June 13, 1989, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision agreements with: Bedford Development Company (now Kemper Real Estate Management Co.) 28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92590 for the improvement of streets, installation of sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company as follows: 1. Bond No. 3S 740 091 O0 in the amount of $1,138,000.00 to cover street improvements. 2. Bond No. 3S 740 091 00 in the amount of ~102,000.00 to cover .water improvements. 3. Bond No. 3S 740 091 00 in the amount of ~74,000.00 to cover sewer impro~/ements. Bond No. 3S 740 094 00 in the amount of $657,000.00 to cover material and labor for street, water, and sewer improvements. I w of 2 PwO2%ailfPt%14%O125~eM235611 .exo 5. Bond No. 3S 740 092 00 in the amount of $8,000.00 to cover subdivision monumentation. On March 10, 1992, the City Council accepted these improvements and retained the following secured amounts for a one (1) year maintenance period: Streets: Bond No. 3S 744 730 00 $113,800.00 Water: Bond No. 3S 744 730 00 $10,200.00 Sewer: Bond No. 3S 744 730 00 $7.400.00 TOTAL: $131,400.00 The developer was required to post Material and Labor Bonds to ensure payment to suppliers and workers. These bonds are maintained in effect for a period of time determined by statute after the Governmental Agency has accepted the public improvements. At Staff recommendation, the City Council authorized the release of these Material and Labor Bonds on August 11, 1992. The warranty period having been exceeded, and any and all necessary repairs and replacements having been satisfactorily completed, Staff recommends the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty Bond ( Bond 3S 744 730 00). The affected streets are a portion of Jefferson Avenue, Sanborn Avenue, Madison Avenue and Buecking Drive. Attachment: Vicinity Map 2 of 2 pwO2%egdfpt%94%0125%PM235611 .exo / · \ / /// / / ' / ~ ·e N.T.S. 7 VICINITY MAP SECTION 26; '1'.7S., R.~ W., S,B,B.M, ITE-M NO. 6 APPROV~r. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: January 25; 1994 SUBJECT: Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-2. PREPARED BY: Ibert Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the release of Street, and Water and Sewer Improvement Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Parcel Map No. 23561-2, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. BACKGROUND: On December 4, 1990, the City Council entered into subdivision agreements with Bedford Development Company (now Kemper Real Estate Management Co.) 28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92590 for the improvements of streets, installation of sewer and water systems, .and subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by Lumbermane Mutual Casualty Company as follows: 1. Bond No. 743 462 00 the amount of $842,000.00 to cover street improvements. 2. Bond No. 743 462 00 in the amount of $142,000.00 to cover water improvements. 3. Bond No. 743 462 00 in the amount of $173,000.00 to cover sewer improvements. Bond No. 743 462 00 and in the amount of $578,500.00 to cover material-and labor for street, water, and sewer improvements. Page I of 2 pwO2%agdrpt%94%012~PM23Se12.exo 5. Bond No. 743 458 00 in the amount of $10,500.00 to cover subdivision monumentation. On March 10, 1992, the City Council accepted these improvements and retained the following secured amounts for a one (1) year maintenance period: Streets: Bond No. 3S 744 731 00 $84,200.00 Water: Bond No. 3S 744 731 00 $14,200.00 Sewer: Bond No. 3S 744 731 00 ~17,300.00 TOTAL: $115,700.00 The developer was required to post Material and Labor Bonds to ensure payment to suppliers and workers. These bonds are maintained in effect for a period of time determined by statute after the Governmental Agency has accepted the public improvements. At Staff recommendation, the City Council authorized the release of these Material and Labor Bonds on February 23, 1993. The warranty period having been exceeded, and any and all necessary repairs and replacements having been satisfactorily completed, Staff recommends the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty Bond (3S 744 731 00). The affected streets are McCabe Court and a portion of Jefferson Avenue, Madison Avenue and. Buecking Drive. Attachment: Vicinity Map Page 2 of 2 pwO2~gdrpt%94%0125'%PM235612.exo / ./ ITEM NO. 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25, .1994 Release Material and Labor Security in Parcel Map No. 21592 PREPARED BY: rX'f/'Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council AUTHORIZE the release of Material and Labor Security for Street, Sewer and Water Improvements in Parcel Map No. 21592, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. BACKGROUND: On May 17, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision agreements with: Tomond Properties A General Partnership P.O. Box 2159 Escondido, CA 92025 for the improvement of streets, and installation of water and sewer systems. Accompanying the subdivision agreements was Letter of Credit No. 01-800312-01 issued .by: Torrey Pines Bank On December 18, 1990 the City Council accepted these improvements and permitted a reduction in the security, and retained the following secured amounts (ten percent of Faithful Performance amounts) for a one year warranty/maintenance period: Streets: Letter of Credit No. 01-800312-01 $ 9,750.00 Sewers: Letter of Credit No. 01-800312-01 $ 2,750.00 Water: Letter of Credit No. 01-800312-01 $ 2,850.00- -1- pw01 ~egdrpt~94~0125~0m21592m.&lr Subsequent to the issuance of the Letter of Credit, Torrey Pines Bank was succeeded by Wells Fargo Bank who issued their Letter of Credit No. NBS141203 in substitution. The developer is also required to post Material and Labor securities to ensure payment to suppliers and workers. These securities are maintained in effect for a period of time determined by statute after the governmental agency has accepted the public improvements. The Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors end the City Clerk's office indicate that no liens have been filed against this project and a period in excess of the statutory lien period has run. Staff recommends that this Material and Labor security be released pursuant to Ordinance 460. The Faithful Performance Warranty security will be maintained in place until several substantial repairs/replacement of improvements damaged during the warranty period are made. The affected street is Bedford Court. Attachment: Location Map -2- pwO 1 ~egdrpt%94%0125~21592m.&lr PROJECT LOCATION PM 21592 -N- / / I / LOCATION MAP ITEM NO. 8 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER.~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25, 1994 Murrieta Creek Channel, Stage 1, Cooperative Agreement PREPARED BY: ~FRaymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) and Electrend, Inc., dba ECI, for the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication and eventual fee title transfer to RCFC&WCD, to certain rights of way along Murrieta Creek, at such unknown time in the future when the property is needed for the construction, inspection, operation, and maintenance of the Murrieta Creek Channel. BACKGROUND: RCFC&WCD is currently designing the Murrieta Creek Channel to contain the 100 year design storm flow and requires rights of way and slope easements from properties along the creek to be set aside as an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication to the public for the drainage improvements. In compliance with that request, on June 17, 1991, the City of Temecula Planning Commission conditioned Conditional Use Permit No. 5 for a 25 foot Irrevocable Offer of Dedication. Hence, the agreement provides for the transfer of the right of way to RCFC&WCD. Upon approval of the agreement by the City of Temecula City Council and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, the Declaration of Dedication for the required right of way will then be recorded by the District. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Agreement. pwl 2%agdrpt~,94~O125Vnurcr~g1 .egr 011294 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1'6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2~ AGREEMENT (Conditional Use Permit No. 5) APN 922-110-006-5 The RIVERSIDE'COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, hereinafter called "DISTRICT", CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called "CITY", and ELECTREND, INC., dba ECI, a California corporation, hereinafter called "PROPERTY OWNER", hereby agree as follows: RECITALS A. PROPERTY OWNER has submitted for approval Conditional Use Permit No. 5 in the City of Temecula ("CU No. 5") and as a condition for approval, PROPERTY OWNER must offer for dedication to the public certain rights of way necessary for the future construction, inspection, operation and maintenance of a portion of proposed Murrieta Creek Channel, hereinafter called " "RIGHT OF WAY", as shown in concept in blue on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; and B. CITY is willing to consent to the recordation of the Irrevocable Offers of Dedication for RIGHT OF WAY as set forth herein~ and if it should become necessary, to accept and convey said rights of way to DISTRICT upon request; and C. DISTRICT desires PROPERTY' OWNER to.convey to DISTRICT, at some unknown time in the future as set forth herein, fee simple title to RIGHT OF WAY; and D. PROPERTY OWNER is willing to convey said rights of way to DISTRICT; and IT IS THEREFORE mutually agreed as follows: - i - 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 24 25 26 27 28 1. PROPERTY OWNER shall provide DISTRICT with duly executed Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication to the public for RIGHT OF WAY, for flood.control purposes, including ingress and egress. At that time, PROPERTY OWNER shall further provide DISTRICT with Preliminary Reports of Title, dated not more than thirty (30) days prior to. date of submission for all the property described in the Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication. 2. Upon recordation of the offer(s) of dedication as set forth in Paragraph 1, PROPERTY OWNER shall be granted Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan right of way credit for RIGHT OF WAY, pursuant to the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area Drainage Plans", dated June 10, 1980 and as amended. 3. CITY shall, by execution of this agreement, consent to the recording of the Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication furnished by PROPERTY OWNER pursuant to this agreement and shall thereafter record or cause to be recorded such dedications. 4. If requested by DISTRICT, CITY shall accept the Offer(s) of dedication as set forth herein, and convey RIGHT OF WAY to DISTRICT. 5. Upon request by DISTRICT at any time in the future, PROPERTY OWNER shall convey to DISTRICT, fee simple title to RIGHT OF WAY, within forty-five (45) days of such request. 6. PROPERTY OWNER shall furnish DISTRICT, at the time of conveyance to DISTRICT of RIGHT OF WAY as set forth in Paragraph 5, with policies of title insurance in the aggregate amount of not less than one hundred thousand do!lars - 2 - j 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 !l ($100,000.00), or not less than twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for each parcel, if it constitutes more than four (4) parcels, guarantee.ing DISTRICT'S title to any properties conveyed from PROPERTY OWNER to DISTRICT as being free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, easements, taxes and leases (recorded and unrecorded), except those which, in the sole discretion of DISTRICT, are acceptable. 7. PROPERTY OWNER hereby warrants that it is the owner of the property which is the subject of this agreement, and has all rights necessary to commit to the. conveyance of said property. 8. Any waiver by DISTRICT or by CITY of any breach of any one or more of the terms of this agreement shall not be construed to be a waiver of any subsequent or other breach of same or of any other term thereof. Failure on the part of the DISTRICT to require exact full and complete compliance with any terms of this agreement shall not be construed as in any manner changing the terms hereof, or estopping DISTRICT from enforcement hereof~. 9. If any provision in this agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way. 10. This agreement is to be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. - 3 - 1 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 15 14 15 16 18 19 E1 24 26 .I 11. Any and all notices sent or required to be sent to the parties to this agreement will be mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995 Market Street. Riverside, CA 92501-1719 ECI 3517 W. Common Wealth Avenue Fullerton, CA 92633 CITY OF .TEMECULA Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92590 Any action at law or in equity brought by any of the parties hereto for the purpose of enforcing a right or right~ provided for by the agreement shall be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Riverside, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for change of venue in such proceedings to any other county. 13. This agreement is the result of the negotiationa between the parties hereto and the advice and assistance of their respective counsel. The'-'fact that this agreement was prepared as a matter of convenience by DISTRICT, shall have no import or significance. Any uncertainty br ambiguity in this agreement shall not be construed against DISTRICT because DISTRICT prepared this agreement in its final form. ~4. The_rights and obligations of PROPERTY OWNER including, but not limited to, the provisions of Paragraphs 5 and 6, shall inure to and be binding upon all heirs, successors and assignees. - 4 - 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 15. PROPERTY OWNER shall not assign or otherwise transfer any of their rights, duties or obligations hereunder t any person or entity without the prior written consent of the DISTRICT being first obtained. In the event of any such transfer or assignment, PROPERTY OWNER expressly understands and agrees that they shall remain llable with respect to any and all of the obligations and duties contained in this agreement. 16. This agreement is intended by the parties hereto as a final expression of their understanding with respect to the subject matter hereof and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof a~d supersedes any and all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written, in connection therewith. This agreement may be changed or modified only upon the written consent of the parties hereto. // // - 5 - 1 2 4 5 6. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 this IN WITNESS agreement on WHEREOF, the (to be filled RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: KENNETH L. EDWARDS General Manager-Chief Engineer APPROVED AS TO FORM: WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN. County Counsel By~q ~ Deputy Dated: ~/|~(q% parties hereto have executed in by Clerk of the Board) RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL /%ND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT By Chairman, Board of Supervisors ATTEST: GERALD Ao Clerk of By Deputy (SEkL) MALONEY the Board Cit~ of Temecula By Mayor ELECTREND, INC., dba ECI yCalif~i~o~rp~ration_ Title By me. , ~ .~.6 o,~ tl ,s ~sis ~* S~tiSflCto~ ev~=nre~ tO ~ ~e person(~ ~e name~ i~mubscri~d to ~e ~hin i~strument and ~cknowledg~ to me thal hel~ executed the same in his~h¢ir 6mhorized ~pac~ ~nd that by hi~h~,/th~ ~ignature~ on the increment the ~rson(s~ or ~e ~ u~n behaff of which th~ I:erson(~ acted, executed the instrument. (This area fof official nolmiil seal) % I TEMEC See ~-xhibit "A" ~ ~ · 2of 2 OVER lOT I0, 8LOEI( 3~, 7'EMEOUL,~ TOlIN~'!TE, ~D. RI~. 15172~. IA/ TI. IE' CITY OF 7'E'M~5OULA, COUNTY OF RIVE't'SlOE' ST~7~ OF CAL/RORN/A ~ FRONT STREET _ - _:-_l--?- ~ cPOINT OF ·,,' ", ,v~,~: ~ 7 COMMENCEMENT or4~,,,E3-"'PO/NT OF · ~;...u:-,: ?.... ::.,....:.~::?!:..:.~ :>_'?!<':'..'-:'.-'2 Z'::: :j:,.-,: .... ':' ' ~ = · f. .'1"';..;' ,~:3 · "',,-/ N/5.,39,24#,1;/2 I 9. 3~/ I ' "fe4~e"' /"' fXlllBI T flBu dN 2517-B EXHIBIT A 2of2 41934 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CA 92390 (714) 676-5715 I (714) 676-5716 ITEM NO. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25, 1994 No Parking ZOnes on Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Road Adjacent to Temacula Valley High School PREPARED BY: Martin C. Lauber, Traffic Engineer RECOMMENDATION: The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING "NO PARKING" ZONES ON MARGARITA ROAD AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD BACKGROUND: In September, staff met with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to discuss District changes to traffic circulation involving the school. During that meeting District representatives requested that staff consider restricting parking on Margarita Road to allow for bus drop-offs and pick-ups. The school district also requested City staff review traffic operations subsequent to the School District eliminating the traffic controllers at the previous bus loading area on Rancho Vista Road. The Traffic Division of the Public Works Department immediately implemented an emergency "No Parking" zone on Margarita Road to support the district's request for a new bus loading zone. In order to improve traffic operation on Rancho Vista Road staff reviewed the morning peak (6:45 a.m. - 7:45 a.m.) and the afternoon peak (2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.) periods. Both Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Road were studied adjacent to the school grounds as well as each approach to their intersection. Traffic counts were conducted on Rancho Vista Road and at all access points to the school grounds. Pedestrians were also counted and specific travel paths were noted. - 1 - pw 15%egdrpt%94%0125%tvhs .ts Staff's investigation identified two (2) areas for possible improvement. These two (2) areas are, the reduction of traffic conflicts at existing driveways and channelization. To reduce traffic conflicts along Rancho Vista Road, the school driveway across from Calls Rio Vista will be used as an exclusive entrance and the driveway across from Avenida Della Reina as an exclusive exit. To provide vehicular channelization Rancho Vista Road will be striped for four (4) through lanes and bike lanes will be added on both sides. Additionally, the temporary parking restriction on Margarita Road will be converted to a limited time restriction, during school hours, in conformance with the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommendation. By implementing the above changes, Staff feels the reduction of traffic conflicts will reduce congestion and increase public safety adjacent to the high school. FISCAL IMPACT: Signing = Pavement Markings -- Marking Removals = ,375.00 ,266.00 .668.00 TOTAL = ~4,309.00 Sufficient funds exist in Account No. 001-164-999-5244 (Signs) and Account No. 001-164- 999-5410 (Pavement Markings and Marking Removal). Attachments: 1. Exhibit "A" - Existing Signing and Striping 2. Exhibit "B" - Proposed Signing and Striping -2- pwl 5%agdrpt%S4~,012S'ttvfe.te RESOL~ON NO. 94.- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLI~I:HNG "NO PARKING* ZONES ON MARGARITA ROAD AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD ADJACENT TO ~ VALLF-y HIGH SCHOOL. The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: Section 1. Pursuant to Section 12.08.216 of Ordinance No. 91-16, which the City has adopted by reference, the following *No Parking* zone is hereby established in the City of Temecuh: "No Parking* Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Road adjacent to Temecula Valley High School. SetHon 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSEB, APPROVEB AND ADOFrED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of January, 1994. Ronald H. Robens, Mayor ATTEST: lune S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] -3- pwl 5~egdrpt%94%0125%whe.m Z | 'S'H'KM 01 IAICl VNI::IU V'I 3Q 3AV VlSIA OIU ::!llV:D 'k I,-- X Z Z u..I >, lID 0 m r,,.) U..I Vlll:lVDHVlfl ""' 'S'H'A'U 0.1. M/~I ~ g  YNI::aU Vq :~a qAY dlem~ /~ g J I  V. LSIA OIU qq'"lVO ~ ~ ~ I i"-~ Ct) I,,~,1,''> i-~-~ 13. I j 0 ~ _m m CC I ' 1 a'VOId V. LII:IV'~I:!'VIN "'r X lu ITEM NO. 10 APPROVAl CITY ATTORNEYF~ FINANCE OFFICE [] CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer January 25, 1994 Award of Contract for Mergerira Road Sidewalk Improvements (Project No. PW93-08) PREPARED BY: Don Spegnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve the plans and specifications and award a contract for the Margarita Road Sidewalk Improvements, Project PW93-08, to Joslen Construction for $17,659.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract and; Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $1,765.90, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: Construction bids were solicited and the bids were opened on January 13, 1994. The project includes installation of a six foot wide sidewalk and an access ramp on the east side of Margarita Road between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road adjacent to the High School. The engineer's estimate for this project was $31,000. Ten bids for the project were publicly opened and results are as follows: 2. 3. 4· 5. 6. 7. Joslen Construction ......................... $17,659.00. E.A. Mendoze Construction .................... $19,967.50. Eastland Construction Co ...................... $20,800.00. Kershaw Construction ........................ $20,900.00. ANM Construction & Engineers .................. ~i23,592.00. Alford & Puyear Inc .......................... $24,982.50. John C. Gosney ............................ $24,997.50. -1 - pwO4~agdrpt~94~0125%pwg3-O8.awd 0118 9. 10. Slater Inc ................................. $31,580.00. West Coast Construction ..................... $31,950.00. Excel Paving Co ............................ $43,896.50. Joslen Construction is a newly formed company with s combination of over 50 years of construction experience. Based on comments from references of the current work being done by Joslen Construction they have performed well. The construction schedule is for 30 working days with work expected to begin in mid- February and be completed by the end of March. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: This project is a Capital Improvement Project and is being funded from Development Impact Fees and reimbursed by SB 821 funds, which are administrated by the Riverside County of Transportation Commission. The total project amount is 19,424.90, which includes the contract amount of $17,569.00 plus the 10% contingency of $1,756.90. The funds are appropriated in account number 210-165-636-5804. -2- pwO4%egdq21%94%0125%pw93-OB.ewd 0118 ~-- CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW93-08 MARGARITA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 25th day of January. 1994, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Joden Construction, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1,a. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW93-08 MARGARITA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEItigII'S, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Soecifications for Public Works Construction. including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW93-08 MARGARITA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS. Copies of these Standard Specifications ere available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General, Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW 93- 08 MARGARITA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Document describe portions of the work in general terms., but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise CONTRACT CA-1 pwO5%cip%project~%pw93-O8%bidpkg e specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the. Contract. The Contract Documents ere complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW93-08 MARIA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS All of said work to be performed end materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEnUI F. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: ~ave,,,taa., thousand, six hundred and ;;;~f-dne DOLLARS and no CENTS ($17,659.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed twenty-five (25) working days, commencing with delivery of Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANG; ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS. On or about the thirtieth (30th) day of the month next following the commencement of the work, there shall be paid to the CONTRACTOR a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed since the commencement of the work. Thereafter, on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid such sum as will bring the payments each month up to ninety percent (90%) of the previous payments, provided that the CONTRACTOR submits his request for payment prior to the last day of each preceding month. The final payment, if unancumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after CITY acceptance of the work and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year warranty with the CITY on a warranty form provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, .and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments \on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. CONTRACT CA-2 pwOS~ip%projecTe%pw93-08%bidpkg e LInUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CI AIMS. Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing., ell' claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract; the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shell comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of ~25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechenic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 11. 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be st the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of parsons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations her.in undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employ. be, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, CONTRACT CA-3 pwOb-~d,.p%projecte%pw93.08~ilpkg 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTI=REST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other puerperal of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating .that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed Claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS. Any dispute or claim arising out of this Contract shall be arbitrated pursuant to Section 10240 of the California Public Contracts Code. NOTICF TO CITY OF I AROR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. GOVERNING I AW. This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by the law of the State of California. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract DocUments, and to the CITY addressed as follows: CONTRACT CA-4 pwOS%dp~rojects~w93-O8~idl~g Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first' above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR By: Prim or type NAME Print or type TITLE DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF TEMECULA By: Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor Scott F. Field, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-S pwOS~,{=ip%proje~t~%pwS3-Oa~NdRkg ITEM NO. I 1 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Council/City Manager ,,~ Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Summary Vacation of · Portion of Campenula Way Subject to the Condition that A Realigned Campanula Way be Offered for Dedication PREPARED BY: ,~m D. Faul, Assistant Engineer - Land Development RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA , TO SUMMARILY VACATE A PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY SOUTHERLY OF DE PORTOLA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 3, PART 3, DIVISION 9 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE, SUBJECT TO THE ASSOCIATED OFFER OF DEDICATION OF REALIGNED CAMPANULA WAY. BACKGROUND: On December 8, 1992, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved SpeCific Plan 219, Amendment No. 3, to add an eight (8) acre public park in the Paloma Del Sol Community. A revised street alignment of Campanula Way was approved in conjunction with the park location. The vacation of one portion of Campanula Way end the offer of dedication of the realigned Campanula Way are therefore required as a result of this action. The proposed vacated portions of Campanula Way were offered for dedication to the public as shown on Parcel Map No. 23432 filed in Book 159, pages 38 through 61 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, but no improvements were constructed, or public facilities exist within the proposed vacated street easement.- p~rpt%94%0 125%camp wey. vec The Final Map for Tract 25418, Specific Plan 219, would have formally re-aligned Campanula Way through the mapping process, had it been recorded. However, the vacation of portions of Campanula Way is needed prior to the final mapping process in order to effectuate the acceptance of the Paloma Del Sol Park Site by the City. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 94- with Exhibits "A-C", Inclusive pwO5%agdrpt%94%0125%aampwey.v,,c RKSOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ~, CALIFORNIA , TO SUMMARILY VACATE A PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY SOUTHERLY OF DE PORTOLA ROAD BETWEEN MARGAR1TA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED BY CItAFrER 3, PART 3, DIVISION 9 OF THE STREETS AND ltlGHWAY CODE, SUBJECT TO THE ASSOCIATED OFFER OF DEDICATION OF REALIGNEl) CAMPANULA WAY. The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEMEAS, Streets and Highway Code Section 8330 et. s~_ provides for a method by which City streets may be summarily vacated; and WHEREAS, Streets and Highway Code Section 8333 provides that the City Council may summarily vacate a street easement if the easement has been superseded by relocation and there are not other public facilities located within the easement and said circumstances apply to the easement in the present case; and WHEREAS, the legal description for these penions of Campanula Way is set forth in Exhibit "A ", attached hereto; WHEREAS, the penions of Campanuh Way as depicted in Exhibit "B" attached hereto, has been offered for dedication to the City of Temecula on Parcel Map No. 23432; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Temecuh hereby finds as follows: (a) That the City Council intends to summarily vacate that penion of a street easement in the City of Temecula, described as follows: That penion of that street known as Campanuh Way southerly of De Portoh Road between Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway, as shown on Parcel Map No. 23432 on file in the office of the County Recorder of Riverside County. That penion is more particularly described in Exhibits "A" and "B" which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. (b) Said easement is no longer necessary because the street has been relocated; a~d pwOS~egdmt~94~O 12S~campwey.vec (c) Vacating the street easement is consistent with the General Plan adopted by the City of Temecula on November 9th, 1993. Section 2: The easement described in Exhibits "A" and "B" which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference is hereby vacated and shall no longer constitute an easement or right-of-way of the City of Temecula and shall revert back to the ~ owner. Section 3: This vacation is subject to the condition that the property owner offer for dedication for a public street and right-of, way the land described in Exhibit *C* , attached hereto. Section 4: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSI~, APPROVI~, AND ADOFfI~, by the City Council of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of January, 1994. Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek City Clerk [SEAL] STATE 'OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMF. EULA SS I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 94- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th day of January, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: - COUI~CIL,WAE_IVfi~F..RS: NOES: - COUNCIL~MBERS: ABSENT: - COUNC~ERS: ABSTAIN: - COUNCILMEMBERS: pwOS~agdrpfi94%0125%oampway.vac EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 94- Summarily vacate a portion of Campanula Way southerly of De Portola Road between Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway, subject to the associated offer of dedication of realigned Campanula Way. (Legal description attached) pwOS%agdq~t%94%0125%;empwey. vec EXHIBIT 'B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 94- SUBJECT SUMMARY VACATION - A PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY (Map Attached) pwOS~gdrpt~4\O 125%cempwey.vec EXHIBIT "C" TO RESOLUTION NO. 94- SUBJECT OFFER OF DEDICATION - ROAD PURPOSES (Legal Description, Map, and Offer of Dedication attached) p wOS~gdrpt%94%0125\camp wey.vac 'b TAI81,~' ~Ir <~Z~.,.,: o,,: ,,,; :,o,,:' .%,,%~.,,,,,,,: ~- ~ itIO'3N'~"W I~. 3Z, 78' L- ~ N,.f~9"4:k~' ~. ~9' ' ' ~ N4oeB,r,f!"E 9/. 8 7' (~'~'-~ ~-"~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~v.JO'03"Ih~.~* L- Ig)'A" l ell'~7" R*I,III. ZlO' ' I' DETAIL ,SCALE: I" · i00' EXHIBIT "B" SKS'rCH ~l$k!r OF WAY FOR CA MPA MU/ A WAY ROBERT BEIN, XILLIAR FROST AND ASSOCIATES 28765 Single Oak Drive Temecula, California 92590 EXHIBIT "A" Revised November 30, 1993 November 2, 1993 3N 400488-N] Page 1 of ] LEGAL DESCRIPTION VACATION OF CANPANULA WAY That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being that portion of Campanula Way shown as a "Road Easement" lying within Parcels 1, 2, 3 and 51 of Parcel Rap No. 23432 filed- in Book 159, Pages 38 through 61 of Parcel Raps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County and being bounded northerly by the southerly line of De Portola Road (100.00 feet wide) as shown on said parcel map and southerly by the northerly line of a strip of land ]00.00 feet wide, the centerline of which is described as follows; BEGINNING at the intersection of the centerline of Readows Parkway with the centerline of Campanula Way as shown on said parcel map; Thence along said centerline of Campanula Way South 54'00'00" West 123.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; Thence along said curve westerly 691.21 feet through a central angle of 39'36'12"; Thence tangent from said curve North 86'23'48" West 333.69 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; Thence along said ~urve northwesterly 939.22 feet through a central angle of 53'48'48"; Thence tangent from said curve North 32'35'00" West 114.41 feet to a point in the centerline-of De Portola Road as shown on said parcel map. EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527 PCL. PCL. 2 PARCEL !t,'I ,~ P NO. P.M.B. 159 / 2S8-6'I PCL. 5 PCL. 50 PCL. ! OF RI~MT ~f WAY EXHIBIT "B" SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LE6AL DESCRIPTION VACATIDM Of CA MPANliLA H/A Y H/~N~tAY PCL. 3H~er I Of I NOV. Z, 1993 .,eEV'i.,cED ///,~f/~3 J.N. 40048e-MI } STATE OF CALIFORNIA }ss. COUNTY OF T~-i ~r~ rl~ } On3~,n_',~7 32~ lqq4 beforeme. Caz'o].yzl S, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are sulDscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in h~s/her/their authorized capacity{ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on me instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behaff Of which tl~e person(s) acted, executed the instrument. · · ~ OI=FICIAL NOTARY SEAL ~ ~ ;;-" ~F~:,' : CAROLVN S AGNEW ~ My Cornre. ExlNIlls DEC 16,1g94 ~ WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature ~ _~ ('This area for official notarial seal) ROBERT BUN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES 28765 Single Oak Drive Temecula, California 92590 EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIFrrION RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR CAMPANULA WAY Revised December 16,'1993 November 2, 1993 JN 400488-M2 Page 1 of 3 Those certain parcels of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Parcels 1, 2, 3 and 51 of Parcel Map No. 23432 filed in Book 159, Pages 38 through 61 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as follows: PARCEL I A strip of land 100.00 feet wide, the centerline of which is described as fol 1 ows: BEGINNING at the intersection of the centerline of Meadows Parkway with the centerline of Campanula Way as shown on said parcel map; Thence along said centerline of Campanula Way South 54'00'00" West 123.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; Thence along said curve westerly 691.21 feet through a central angle of 39'36'12"; Thence tangent from said curve North 86"23'48" West 333.69 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; Thence along said curve northwesterly 939.22 feet through a central angle of 53'48'48"; Thence tangent from said curve North 32°35'00' West 114.41 feet to a point in the centerline of De Portola Road as shown on said parcel map. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion included within Meadows Parkway (100.00 feet* wide), Campanula Way (variable width) and De Portola Road (100.00 feet wide), shown as 'Road Easements' on said parcel map. CONTAINING: 4.0343 Acres, more or less. Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates Right-of-Way for Campanula Way PARCEL 2 Revised December 16, 1993 November 2, 1993 JN 400488-N2 Page 2 of 3 BEGINNING at the intersection of the southeasterly line of De Portola Road (100.00 feet wide) with the southwesterly line of the aforedescribed Parcel 1, said southeasterly line being a curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 1250.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 30'17'27" West; Thence along said southeasterly line and curve southwesterly 21.71 feet through a central angle of 0°59'42"; Thence non-tangent from said curve South 75'56'23" East 31.58 feet to a point in said southwesterly line of Parcel I (100,00 feet wide); Thence along said southwesterly line North 32'35'00" West 21.91 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 0.0054 Acres, more or less. PARCEL 3 BEGINNING at the intersection of the southeasterly line of De Portola Road (100.00 feet wide) with the northeasterly line of the aforedescribed Parcel 1 (100.00 feet wide), said southeasterly line being a curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 1250.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 34'52'33" West; Thence along said southeasterly line and curve northeasterly 21.71 feet through a central angle of 0'59'42"; Thence non-tangent from said curve South 10'46'23" West 31.58 feetto a point in said northeasterly line of Parcel 1 (100.00 feet wide); Thence along said northeasterly line North 32'35'00" West 21.91 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 0.0054 Acres, more or less. PARCEL 4 BEGINNING at the easterly terminus of a course in the southerly line of Campanula Way shown as "North B0'40'17" West 32.71 feet" on said parcel map, said terminus being a point on a curve in the southwesterly line of Neadows Parkway (100.00 feet wide) concave southwesterly and having a radius of 1550.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 54'39'26" West; '-. Thence along said southwesterly line and curve southeasterly 6.09 feet through Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates Right-of-Way for Campanula Way a central angle of 0'13'30"; Revised December 16, 1993 November 2, 1993 JN 400488-H2 Page 3 of 3 Thence non-tangent from said curve North 80'33'32" West 32.78 feet to the southeasterly line of the aforedescribed Parcel 1 (100.00 feet wide); Thence along said southeasterly line North 54'00'00" East 6.01 feet to said course shown as "North 80'40'17" West 32.71 feet"; Thence along said course South 80'40'17" East 24.28 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 0.0028 Acres, more or less. PARCEL 5 BEGINNING at the northerly terminus of a course in the northerly line of Campanula Way shown as "North 10'08'51" East 31.87 feet" on said parcel map, said terminus being a point on a curve in the southwesterly line of Neadows Parkway (100.00 feet wide) concave northeasterly and having a radius of 1650.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 56'17'43" East; Thence along said southwesterly line and curve northwesterly 5.92 feet through a central angle of 0'12'20"; Thence non-tangent from said curve South 10'15'02" West 31.81 feet to the northwesterly line of the aforedescribed Parcel 1 (100.00 feet wide); Thence along said northwesterly line North 54'00'00" East 5.99 feet to said course shown as "North 10'08'51" East 31.87 feet"; Thence along said course North 10'08'51" East 23.21 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 0.0026 Acres, more or less. PARCELS 1 THROUGH 5 CONTAINING: 4.0505 Acres, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record. EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. .PCL. 4 . NO. ~ 22S432 ~-~ $rara TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~IGHT OF WAY CA td! PA MIIL A eeov. Z. ~!~3 ,eL. WSEO IZ /,,~/.~3 J.N. 40048e.fIZ OtyofTemeada 43174Busiammltmtl)tive Tmmmcmia. CA ~/~0 MAIL TAX STA'I~MENTS TO C3~/Tsmacda 4MY4 ~msiaam Past Dme OFFER OF DEDICATION - ROAD (captor) street~nd~g~waypurpmes~t~se.~e~pt~pe~ysimatedintbeCity~fTme~sh~C~un~y~fRive~sk~State~fC`~a~f~rnis~ in s:d-'Nt 'A" (wr~___~ dcsaiption) and shown ma Exhs~ "B" (plat map) attachat hercto. It is msdcrstood and qrced that the ~ dTcme. omla and its succcsson or -,,'_~, ~ incur no liabifi~y with rcspc~ to such offer d dedication, and ~,n not assume any r.p~-'bifi-/lor the offcrcd pm'cel of ~ or any improvanems thcrcoo or therein. ,,,h'l such offer has been accepted by appropriate aaion dtlae City Council, or of the local governing bodiu o~ its succcssors Tbc provisims hereof shall inure to the bmem of msd bc bimtiq upon heirs, suazssors, assigns, and personal rcpzucm=6ves IN WITNF.~THEREOF. tlsse lsmmems have'mmcuted this instrum~t STATE OP CAIJPORNIA ~ OF !~IDE } On ,befmess~theussknigned. aNma~Ps~ia md for tM Sme ot CSiform, penmsnysppumS ,pessmanyknown to me (or pmvsd to me on ths tssis a~ mfidaaay evidmce to be the Ixam(s) wtm~ name(s) i/ate subaibed to fig within iamsment and ~'~ .d : sS 'mo mm ms h-/sS/me,/mesd ~ same in his/Mr/ WITNES~myhaslando~Tsciaisssd. aCanfon~c, mpom~ CONSENT The City Council, City of Temecula hereby consents to the grant of real property set forth above. BY.' Junc S. Grcck APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: City of Tcmanda Rona!d H. Rober~s, Mayor Seott F. F~Jd C_jty Attorney .ITEM NO. 12 ORDINANCE NO. 9401 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28 OF THE TEIVlF~ MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPRED ~ ON CERTAIN STREETS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The City of Temecula finds and determines that from time to time it is necessary to add or modify existing prima facie sr-,ccd limits within the City for certain streets, or parts of streets. SECTION 1. Section 10.28.010(d) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby mended to add the following streets: 'Name of Street and Portion Affected Declared Prima Facie Speed Timit, Miles Per Hour Margarita Road - Winchester Road to Solana Way SECTION 2. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining pans of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City 'Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shah publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shah be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. 5~ords~94-Ol I PASSED AlPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January, 1994. Ronald I-I. Roberrs, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] 5\ords\94-Ol 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS C1TY OF TE1VIF_~A ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the forgoing Ordinance No. 94-01 was dully introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 1 lth day of January, 1994, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of January, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Stone Robem NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None June S. Greek, City Clerk 5\ords\94-01 3 ITE:M NO. 13 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPRO~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning January 25, 1994 Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144), Roripaugh, Continued from December 14, 1993 City Council meeting PREPARED BY: Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Negative Declaration for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144), Roripaugh Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIRC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (PA93-0145); AMENDING SPECIRC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 64- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2; AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 (PA93-0145) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND R:~'TAFFRP~I4~PA93.CC2 lllS/g~ t~- 1 9 LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. 4. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 (PA93-0144) TO CREATE A 162 SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A THREE (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7 AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD, BACKGROUND The City Council continued this item and directed staff and the applicant to meet with the homeowners in the area to discuss their concerns. A meeting was arranged for January 12, 1994 by notifying the Homeowners Associations in the area and homeowners within a 600 foot radius of the project. DISCUSSION Over 150 residents artended this meeting and a list of their concerns and questions is included in Attachment No. 6. Another meeting with homeowners and ad hoc group representatives was scheduled for January 18, 1994. However, because of time constraints relative to the preparation of the Staff Report, the discussion items and the result of this meeting will be presented orally to the City Council on January 25. As discussed in the December 14, 1993 Staff Report, staff recommends amending Condition No. 59 pursuant to Commission concerns regarding the access points to. the project (refer to Attachment No. 7 for the updated Traffic Report). The following is the recommended language (strikeout denotes a deletion and bold denotes an addition): 59. The draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Ran calls for an 18 foot wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No. 100. Consequently, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shall be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the improvements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Developer constructs the median, it shall accommodate a left turn pocket into Roripaugh Road. Tho madion shall bo oontinuou~ at "A" Stroot to rostriot ooooo~ to right turn in/out movomont if tho it io to romoin Ot its Ourrontly do3ignod Ioootion. The median shall also be designed to accommodate a 150 foot left turn pocket with adequate transition into Warbler Circle, ~..~ "G" Entry Street and "D" Stroot and Nioolos Read ohould tho Dovolopor ohoooo to roloooto tho aoooo~ to that Ioootion. "A" Street. Left turning movements on to west bound Nicolas Road shall be restricted with proper median design. If the median is not constructed, the devoidper shall accommodate the above by striping accordingly. R:~TAFFRP'BI44PA93.CC2 !/18/94 FISCAL IMPACT None. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Ordinance No. 94- - Page 4 Resolution No. 94- - Page 7 Resolution No. 94- - Page 11 Conditions of Approval - Page 16 City Council Staff Report, December 14, 1993 - Page 34 List of Homeowners' Concerns and Questions - Page 35 Development Fee Checklist - Page 36 R:~STAFFRP~I44PA93,CC2 lll~/~l 1~ 3 AI'I'ACHMENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 94- R:~STAPPRPT~144PA93.CC2 1/INN tjs 4 ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF MECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDM'ENT NO. 2 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-014~) AMENDING SPEC~IC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PLANNING AI~EAS 7 (22.$ ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWRI .LE~IG UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DV~.IJ.ING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THIH~.R (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST TIff. BOUNDAIHES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON ~ NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL I~-ARNY ROAD. THE CITY COUNCIL OF T!:W. CITY OF TEMECULA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Leo Roripaugh has fried PA93-0145 in accordance with applicable Ordinances which are on fde with the City Clerk, is hereby approved. Section 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute said Specific Plan Amendment on behalf of the City of Temecula after execution there of by all landowners listed therein, provided all such landowners have executed said Specific Plan within 30 days after adoption of Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law. R:XSTAFI~PT~I44PA93.CC~ 1/15/94 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATrBST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss crrY OF TEMEC ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 9~_ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of January, 1994, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the _th day of __, 1994 by the following roll call vote: COUNCII2viEMBERS: NOES: COUNTERS: COUNTERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Scott F.Field City Attorney R:~qTAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 tj$ 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 94.- R:~ST~FFRPT~I44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 ~ 7 RESOL~ON NO. 94- A RESOLtrrION OF THF. CITY COUNCH- OF THF- CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPEClFIC PLAN NO. 164, ~MENT NO. 2 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0145) AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.~ ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACR~'-~) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (7,0 DWRI J.~IG UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A TH]tRR (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THR BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON THR NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KR&RNY ROAD. WHERR~kS, Leo Roripaugh ~ed PA93-0145 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by rcfcrencc; WIff, REAS, said Specific Plan Amendment application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local hw; WHRRRAS, the Planning Commission considered said Specific Plan Amendment on November 1, 1993 at which time interested persons had an oppo~ to testify either in support or opposition; WHRREAS, at the conclusion of thc Commission heating, thc Commission recommended approval of said Specific Plan Amendment; Vir!~, thc City Council conducted a public hearing pert3ining to said Specific Plan Amendment on January 25, 1994, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Specific Plan Amcndment; Vv'H~,REAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Report regarding the Specific Plan Amendment; NOW, T!~ZRIr,!~ORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findin~,~. That the Tomecub City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. The City Council in approving the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, makes the following finding, to wit: R:~%'TAlq:RF~I44PAg~.CC2 1/18/94 tj$ 8 1. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residentinl since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Gemdis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance. 2. The proposed action is consistent with the City's General Plan. 3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and the overall density is being roducod. 4. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. Section 2. Environnu~-ntal Conlpliance. A Initial Study was prepared for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. S~otion 3. Condition.~. Not applicable. Section 4. The City Clerk shah certify the adOption of this Resolution. Section 5. PASSEB, APPROVED AND ADOlvrl~ this 25th day of January, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALrI~ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEIVIEC~) I n~.n~.By CERT~Y 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 January, 1994 by the following vote of the Council: R:\STAFFRF~I44PAg~.CC2 111S/94 ljs 9 AYP.,S: NOP.,S: ABSENT: COUNCU-M!~tBERS: COUNCKMEMBERS: COUNCU-MEMBERS: JUNE S. GI~PtlK CITY Ct.ttRK R:~$TAFFRI~144PAg~J.CC2 1/11/94 Ijs I 0 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 94- R:~STAFPRFI~I~t. PA93.CC~ 1/18/94 RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THF~ CITY COUNCIL OF TH'R CITY OF ~ APPROVING TENTATIVE' TRACT MAP NO. 27827 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0144) TO CREATE A 162 SINGLR FAIVm,Y LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A TH'RER (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBHC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7 AND LOCATED ON THY~ NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL IcRMO1Y ROAD. ~!r. AS, Leo Roripaugh fled a request for PA93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHI~EAS, the Planning Commi,sion considered said application on November 1, 1993 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; V~q~,.EAS, at the conclusion of the Commi.~sion hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said application; WIfk"REAS, the City Council considered said application on January 25, 1994, at which time interested persons had an oppommity to testify either in support or opposition; W!~-REAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said application; NOW, THEREi~RE, THR CITY COUNCIL OF THY. CITY OF ~ DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following fmdings: A. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the foliowing findings are made: specific plans. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitabl~ for proposed density of the development. R:\STAFFRPT%I44PA93.CC2 1/10/94 5. That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantinl environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of impwvements 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. to wit: The Council in appwving of the proposed projea, makes the following findings, 1. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law). 2. The proposed action is consistent with the City's General Plan. 3. The City Council has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the re~ion and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Section 66412.3) and finds that the projea density is consistent with the General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type av3i!3ble to the residents of the City of Temecuh. 4. The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing sewer system that is in vioh~on of the requirements as set out in Section 13,'000 et seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been condi~oned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District' s requirements. as conditioned. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and 6. The project is consistent with the intent of the original pwject appwved by the County of Riverside. 7. The project is consistent with the pwvisions of Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. 8. Said Findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact R:~'F~I44PA93.C'C2 1/18/94 that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval. C. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the said application is compatible with the health, safety and weftare of the community. Section 2. Environmentni Complinnce. A Injtinl Study was prepared for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitiL, nted to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Conditior~. That the City of Tcmecula City Council hereby approves the said application subject to thc foilowing-conditions: A. Attachment No. 4, attached hereto. Seaion 4. The City Clerk shah certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section 5. PASSEB, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 25th day of January, 1994. AT'F~T: RON ROBERTS MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS crrY OF TEMF, CULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 25th day of January, 1994 by the following vote of the Council: R:~STAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC~ 1/18/94 ~j, 3 4 AYBS: NOF, S: ABSENT: COUNTERS: COUNCIl, S: COUNCILMm,{BERS: JIJNES. GREEK CITY CLPl~K R:'xSTAFFRFI~I44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 tjs 3 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:XST-,~FFRPT~I44PA93.f~'~2 1/18/94 ~ 'J 6 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PlanninE Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) Project Description: A request to subdivide a 22.S aer~ parcel into 162 single family dwelling lots and a three (3) acre open slmee lot for a public park (Roripaugh Cottages) Assessor's Parcel No.: 911-150-03~ and 911-150-038 Approval Date: Expiration Date: Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Depamnent a cashicr's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the mount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00), which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County 3dmini.m,a~ve fee to enable the City to f~c the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall bc void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, 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. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecuh, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceedhg against the City of Temecuh, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecuh will promp~y notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecuh and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promp~y 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 Temecuh. R:%STAFFRF~I44PA93.CC'2 1/18/94 tjs '[ 7 4. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 5. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. 6. The project and all subsequent projects within this site sb_nll be consistent with Development Agreement No. 37 or any restatements or amendments thereto. 7. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Depamnent of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655. 8. A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Grnding Permits 9. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. The plans shall include a note for dust control indicating: A. All active areas shall be watered at least twice a day. B. Non-toxic soil stabi|iTers shall be applied to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacmrer's specifications. C. Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles exit unpaved areas into paved roads. All din hauling trucks shall be covered or they shall maintain at least two (2) feet offreeboard. -. 10. 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. 11. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: R:~STAFFRPT~I44PAg~.CC'2 111~/94 tjs 18 De A copy of the Final Map A copy of the Rough Grading Plans A copy of the Bavironmental Constraint Shee~ (BCS) with the following notes: (1) This prope~ 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, Ordinaxwe No. 655. (2) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) (1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include: Liability insurance and methods of maintaining, alleys, exterior of all buildings, monument signs for the project, side yard landscaping, Nkolas Road parkway by the Home Owners Association. (Amended By PInnning Commi.~ion on November 1, 1993). (b) The individual lot landscaping, the woll along Nicolas Road, and tho oxtorior of the buildings shah bo maintainod by the individual homco~mcr3. (Amended By Plonnin~ Commission on November 1, 1993). (C) The wall along Nicolas Road sh311 be maintained by the Home Owners Association pninUxi the original color by tho individual homoo~nors. (Amended By Planning Commition on November 1, 1993). (d) No parking shall be allowed on the driveways. (e) Roll-up Re doors shall always be used to rephce the original garage doors for units with shared driveways. The garage door openers and the lights on the buildings that light the alleys shall be maintained and operational at all times. No lot or dwellin_* unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's ~roup or similar entity has been fornmd with the right to assess all properties individually owned or joinfly owned which have any rifhts or interest in the use of the COmmOn areas and COmmon facilities in the development, such R:XSTAFFRPTM44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 sis 3 9 assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to mintain, aH of said mutoaHy available features of the development. Such entity shah operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of aH owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changlno* costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisiom required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shah submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shah not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. (Amended By PIpnnlnE Comm~ion on November 1, 199'3). Every owner Of a dwelling unit or lot shah own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. (Amended By Planning Commksion on November 1, 199:3). The project shall be consistent with the requirements of the French Valley Airport Plan when the plan is adopted. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Bu~ding Pertnits 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscape plans consistent with the following: (1) City Standards. (2) The appmved Typical Conceptual Landscape Plans. (3) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas. Complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property. (s) Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots prior to issuance of the first building permits within each of the phases of the Final Map. Change the California Sycamore in the Nicolas Road Conceptual Plans to London Plane Tree. R:'~STAFFRPTXI44PA93.CC'2 l/lKn~. tjs 20 Wall and fence plans consistent with the following: C, (1) All walls and fences shall be a minimum of six (6) feet measured from the highest grade or as otherwise specified below. (2) A six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block wall or a combination decorative block wall and berming (measured from the finished pad elevation) shah be constructed on the rear property lines for lots 1 through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. These walls shall have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shah have no openings or cracks (Refer to Preliminary Noise Analysis prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, August 11, 1993). (3) Decorative block walls shah be required for the side yards for comer lots and along the western property line (lots 103 through 121). Wrought iron, decorative block or wrought iron combination walls shah be required to take advantage of views for rear yards along the northerly property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. (5) Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by Co), (c) and (d) above. (6) Tho ~11 along Nicola~ Road shall b~ construcWd ontiroly, ~olu&g ~o f~gs, ~4~in ~e ~&vid~ 1~ ~d not ~thin ~c public right of way. (A~nd~ By ~~ C~ion on Novm~r 1, ~3). Precise grading plans including nil structural setback measurements consistent with the approved rough grading plans and the approved plotrings. Elevations, floor plans and colon and materials consistent with the approved The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (1) Site Plan with off-street parking (2) Construction Landscape Plans (3) Fencing Plans (4) Building Elevations A Noise Analysis shall be submitted for review and approval for the' interior spaces within the project. The maximum interior noise level shall be 45 CNI~-. R:~STAI~T~I"PAg$.CC~ 1/1S/94 lj, 2~ 14. 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 Director approval. 15. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 16. If deemed necessary by the Planning Director, the applicant shah provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 17. Front yard and slope landscaping and all fencing within individual lots shall be completed for inipection. 18. All thc Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety. 19. Roll-up garage doors with automatic garage door openers shall be provided for units with shared driveways. Automatic garage door openers shall be provided for all units. 20. The wall and the associated landscaping along Nicolas Road shall be installed prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit within each of the phases of the Final Map that front Nicolas Road. 21. The monument signs for the project shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association applicxmt and shall bo r~movod, if within right of way, prior to issuanoo of the Inst final release of the pi'ojoct. (Amended By P!**nnlng Commlqion on November 1, 1993). 22. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. PUBLIC WORK8 DEPARTMI~-NT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the Tentative Tract-Map. all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage 24. 25. courses, and their omi-~Aon may require the project to be resubmiRed for further review and revision. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on-site flat work and improvements) grading shall be obtnined from the Depamnent of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. An Encroachment Permit shah be obtained from the Depamnent of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 26. All improvement plans, gr~__din~ plans, landSCape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 27. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to Issuance of Gradin~ Permits 28. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with suppodlag hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submilled to the Riverside Coumy Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way. 29.- A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the ~ent of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions of Approval. 30. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway and/or the alley by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 31. The Developer shah comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Enviromental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National PullIt Discharge mimination System (NPDlt3) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permined until an NPDE3 Notice of Intent (NOI) has been ~ed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board or the project is shown to be exempt from that agency. 33. As deemed necessary by the DqmrUnent of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: , - · Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region; R:%STAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 tit 23 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 41. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Depamnent; COmmllllity Sotvices District (TCSD); General Telephone; Southern Cslifornia Edison Company; and Sonthem Cnlifornia Gas Company. A Soils Report shah be prepared by-a registered Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. An Erosion Control Plan in accordance with City Standards, shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Depamnent of Public Works for review and approval. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformante with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 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 Department of Public Works. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevniling Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge r--,~ls to be paid. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the amnent of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection .shah be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlnrging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. R:~TAFFRP'BI44PA93.CC~ 1/18/94 tjs 24 42. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shah include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site nmoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. B. Adequate provision shah be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property-from adjacent areas. C. The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. D. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shah be shown on the improvement plan. 43. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undeSeHnined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shah comply with Ordinance No. 91-12 of the City of Temecula, and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within Flood Zone "A" , which may include obtslnlng a letter of map revision from FEMA. The following storm drain facilities shah be provided along with the facilities as shown on the Tentative Map. The requirement for the underground facilities is to mitigate the surface runoff onto Nicolas Road, the potential maintenance of the nuisance nmoff created by this development, and negate the provision of ad~tional drainage facilities downstream since Assessment District 161 did not accommodate this development's proposed runoff in sizing the downstream drainage facilities. Catch basins shall be ins:slled at the intersection of "G" Street and Nicholas Road to eliminate the cross gutter. The site shall be designed to minimize the contributory onsite runoff to Nicolas Road at "A" Street by providing additional catch basins and storm drain pipes or by redesigning the grades near the intersection of Nicolas Road and "A" Street. Prior to the/ssuance of Encroachment Permits 45. 46. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shah be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be R:~STAFFRP'P,144PA93.(:X:~2 1/18/94 tjs 215 47. prepared by a registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Depamnent of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shah show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. The following criteria shah be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: Flowline grades shall be 0.5 % minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Driveways shah conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A, and 208. 48. 49. Street lights shah be insfailed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shah be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. 5 foot wide concrete sidewalks shah be constructed per City Standard Nos. 400 and 401 specifications. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Depamnent of Public Works. MiDimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section or as otherwise approved by the Depamnent of Public Works. AH street and driveway centerline intersections shah be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. I. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doon. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sigl~ dislxnce and visibility. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through under-sidewalk drains. All driveways shall be located a minimum of 2 foot from the side property Line unless otherwise provided for with a joint use easement for ingress/egress. In order for the City to agree to accept and maintain the proposed. alleys, they. shall be subject to the following conditions: R:LqTAFFRIv~I44PA93.CC2 1118/~ ~js 26 · The alleys shall be concrete paved. · No utilities shall be installed within the alleys. Parking shah not be permitted along the alleys and they shall be signed accordingly. · Lights shall be installed on each garage and/or every house. The Developer shah fde an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. 5O. All utility systems including gas,-electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shah be pre-wired in the residence. 51. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 52. A construction area Traffic Contwl Plan shah be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the ~ent of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Departmere of Public Works. 53. The stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle approach shall be positioned five (5) feet from Nicolas Road curb line. 54. All required fees shah be paid. Prior to Recordation of Final Map 55. Any delinquent property taxes shah be paid. 56. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformancc with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the DcparUncm of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. Storm drain facilities. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). Brosion control and slope protection. R:%STAI~I44PA~J.CC~ 1118/94 Ijs 27 57. 58. 59. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board; Rancho Cnlifornia Water District; Eastern Municipal Water Disuict; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Pbnning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Cable TV Franchise; Community Services District; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; Southern California Gas Company; Department of Fish and Game; and Army Corps of Engineers. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shah be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. The draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan calls for an 18 foot wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No. 100. Consequen~y, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shah be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the improvements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Developer constructs the median, it shall accommodate a left mm pocket into Roripaugh Road. The median shall be continuous at "A" Street to restrict access to right turn in/out movement ff the it is W remain at its currently designed location. The median shall also be designed W accommodate a 150 foot left mm pocket into Warbler Circle and "G" Entry Street and "D" Street and Nicolas Road should the Developer choose to relocate the access to that location. If the median is not constructed, the Developer shall accommodate the above by striping accordingly. Sufficient right-of-way along "G" Entry Street shall be dedicated for public use to pwvide for a 60 foot full width right-of-way and shall be impwved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concn~,te R:~rAFFRFr~l,MPA93.CC'2 1/18/94 tjs 28 61. 62. 63. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "A", "B", "C" , and the remainder of "G" Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 50 foot full width right-of-way including the standard knuckle, and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the DepatUnent of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "D" , "E" , and "F" Streets shah be dedicated for public use to provide for a 46 foot full width right-of-way and shah be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 16 feet on both sides of the centerline and 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along the Alleys shah be dedicated for public use to provide for a 20 foot full width right-of-way and the entire width shall be improved with concrete pavement, or post bonds for the alley improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall fde an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. Comer property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the f'mal map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Nicolas Road and so noted on the Final Map as approved by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Depamnent of Public Works for Nicholas Road and shah be included in the street improvement plans. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at locations as determined by Riversid~ Transit Agency and the Department of Public Works. R:XSTAFFRPT~I,j4PA93.CC2 1/18/94 ~js 29 71. The joint use driveway easements shall be shown on the Final Map. No building permits for units with joint use shall be issued until the Final Map has been recorded. 72. 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 for review and recorded as directed by the DeparUnent of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the f'mal map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shah be kept free of buildings and obstructions. n 73. An Enviromental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanen~y fried with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: A. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. 74. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 75. The Developer shall deposit with the DeparUnent of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a · written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 76. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 77. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. . - R:\STAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC2 111~/94 ~s 3O The CC&R's shah be recorded concurrent with the Final Map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all private areas. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 78. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pads shah be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 79. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 80. The Developer shall pay the Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee as per the mended Development Agreement as reviewed and approval by the City. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 81. All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway tn~s and street lights on all interior public streets. 82. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 83. The traffic signal at Nicolas Road and Winchester Road shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. 84. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. R:~STAFFRPTXI44PA93.CC2 1118/94 tjs 3'] 85. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the DeparUnent of Public Works. 86. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 87. In the event that the required improvements on Nicolas Road along the property frontage of this development are not completed by AD 161, the Developer shall construct the required half width improvements per City Standard No. 100 or as otherwise determined by the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMR~ General Requirements 88. A Class II Bicycle Lane on Nicolas Road shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the City' s Park and Recreation Master Plan and in concurrence with the completion of the street improvements. 89. Construction of the public park site, perimeter landscaping and medians shah commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. 90. The developer, or the developer' s successors or assignees, shall maintain the park site, parkway landscaping and medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 91. All parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public park purposes. A policy of ti~e insurance and soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 92. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space shall be maintained by the individual property owners. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 93. 94. Prior to recordation of the first phase, the developer or his assignee shall enter into an agreement and post security to improve lot number 163, a three (3) acre site, as a public park facility, pursuant tO City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Lot No 163 shah be identified as a public park site and offered for dedication to the City on the final map. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into'an agreement to improve the parkway landscaping and landscaped medians within Nicolas R:\STAFFRPT~!44PA93.CC'2 1118194 tjs 32 City of Temecula Planning Dept, Page 2 Atin: SaiedNaaseh July 27, 1993 'N This subdivision is within the Eastern M,micipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the Disuict The sewer system shall be in~lled according to laxas and ccifications as approvcd by the District, the Ci of m~n holes, complete proffies, pipe and joint edti~afions and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to ~ee exislin system, A sin e plat indicatin lodation of sewer lines lind waterlines shall ~e a potion of ~e sewage plans an~profiles, The p_lans shall be signed by a reSi.'stered engineer an the sewer ,system in Tract Map NEaster~o, 27827 Ls m accor ce sy e_xpansmn plnn-~ of the Mtmicipal Water District and that the waste disposal svstem is adequate at this time W treat the antici ated wastes from the pro osed hrcel Map", The vlans must be submitted to ~e Citv of Temecula's O~t~e to review at least two weeks mot to the request for the recordation of the final man. It will bc necessary_ for financial arrangements to bc completely fmalized prior to rccordafion of the final map. SincereIX, Sam Martinez, Environmental Health Specialist IV SM:ch' (909) 275-8980 K~NNETH L. EDWARDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT le~SMMUCE'TS'TIV. ET P.O. BOX 1033 1TJ..EPNC)NE t/14177S,4200 FAX NO, (/t4) '/se,,eee L.tlies ~ Gentlemen: DUSTY WILUAMS SerierCk'il Engineer C: ' ' rlargerfaalhies flax could be considered regional in nat FV l andjor a logical extension of the adopted ~ix~'r&f,,':r~Tes. ' 'Y Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepti~ ownershtp of such facilities on written request of me Facilities must be constnJcted to DislTict standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan Check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. of · parcel map or subdivision prior Io recorclatior~ of the final map. Fees to be paid should Ille It the rill in effect It the time of recordsriot, or if deferred, ~t tie tim of issuance of the actual permit. P-FNFRAI INFnRMAT!oN This project may recluire a Natiortsl Pdlutant Disrarge Eliminmio6 System (NPDES) permit from Vie Sire® Water ices Control Board. Clearm for grading, recorclatim, or mr final approv/, should not be given until the City ~ deteffnined that the Im'oject has been granted a perrail or is shown to be exempt. ff mis project irwolv-_s a FederaJ Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) n~p~ed flood plain, 1hen the City mould require tte Ippli~nt to lxovicle all studies, caicutstions, plans and ob~er irdormmion required to meet FEMA requiremere, md d~uld h4rlher recMre thin 1he spplics~ main 8 CorK:lffior~ Letter of Map Revisiofi (CLOMR) prior to grin:ling, recordmicro or a0~er ~ ap~wovl of the project. rand Revision (LOMR)' prior to ocoJpancy. If a naturaJ watercourse or rr~opecl flood plan is imp·tied by this project ~he City should re¢luire the II~icw~ to o~tin · Section 160111603 Agreemere from the Ca}ifomil Department of Fish end Game mncl · Ciemn Wlter Acl Seclion 404 permit lmm the U.S. Army Coel~-of Engineers. or written eotrespor~lrk, l from these IcJencies indic:ming the projecl is exempt trorrl 404 Waler QualiW Certificztion rnly be required from the loci Ciifomil Regienai Water Quality Contrd BoBffi prior to m of the Coq~ 404 pertmr. Very truly yours. F"I This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Ptan facilities nor are other tacilhies of regional imerest proposed. ~his projecl involves District Masler Pll'~ facilities. The District will mo0elm ownership of su(~ facilities on ,wTitten request of the C-,iW. Facilities must be conmmcled to i:)ismcl slanclarcls, and DistTict plan check and irtspection will be required tor Disfficl mptancL Plan check, '-~spection and administrative tees will be required. The 0istricl does not norrally r~_ :,.,~-nd cerditiom tor land divisiofa or odor land uae cases in inh~,~o, aled I~ties. The Di81ficl also does not pan check city isncl use cases, or ~,,-c, vicle Stme Division of Read Estme leners or other 6ood hazard reports far ~ cues. I:)istric~ ~rs:: ..... end·dons for such cases are nomaJh/liralind to items of apecific imerest to 1he Diatrict incluciing ~ Mester Drmnage Plan fadlilies, other region/flood ~ and chainage facilities which cx~dd be considered · Iogicad ~.,,C~f~L a or extm,.~on of · rnasler plan system, and District Ares Drainage Ran fees (development rnitjgmion fees). in lidditksn, infom-,mjon of · generaj nBNm is provii. The DistTict has not reviewed the propoeed proiecl in detail ~ lhe Idlewine ¢hm:jt~l ,.f.,, .... las do not in any way eor,stitute or imply District sppr~vaior~nd~rsement~~mepr~p~sedpr~jectwithrespectto~~edhaZard~pubiichea~thandsafmyorany~thersucha: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT " 210 WF, ST SAN JACINTO AVENL~ · PERKIS, CALIFORNIA 92570 * (909) 657-3183 TO: ~TTF. N: RE: Temecula Planning DeQartment Saied Naaseh F'Aq~-O144 Tentative Tract 27827 Augu=t ~, le~-~. With respect to the conditions of approval for the above refer- tne Fire Demartment recommends the foliowind ence~ land ~Ivlslon ~ . - ~ire protection measures be Drovide~ in accordance with F:iversiOe Count>' Or~inance~ and/or recognized fire protectlon stanGarOs: i. Schedule A fire protection. An aDDroved standard fire ny- cranzs~ ~8"x4"x2 I/2") located one at each street intersection ~na SPaCed no more than 150 feet apart or no DoFfion Df lot ~rontace more than ii5 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow ~hail D~ I000 ~PM for 2 hOur~ duration at 20 PSI. 2. Aoo!icant/develoDer snail furnish one coD>' of the water plans ~:, the F;Fe DeDar%ment for review. Plans shall be signed .De a recis. tered civil englneer~ containing a Fire Demartment ammroval s~cnature ~iock. an~ shali conform zo hydrant tvDe location ~ ? sDacln~ and minimum fire flow. Once plans are .Bigned by the local · . the ori~ir, aie shal~ be pre~ente~ to the Fire ~a%e~ comDar, v~ _ Department for signature. Blue ~ot reflectors shall be mounted in private Errsets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be moLlnte~ iF. the middle of the ~treet directly iF, line with fire n>/drant=. · '~ '~- includino fire h,/drant=.: Br~all be ~. ,,a~ required water system: _ . installed and accepted ~y t~e aPproPriate ~ater agency any comDttstible building material being placed on an individual lot. ~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 122h Street, Rivemid,', CA 92501 (909) 275-4.7T7 * FAX (909) 3~9-7451 !1RE PREVENTION DIVISION PLANNING SECTION 222] INDIO OFFICE 79-733 CountD/Club Drive, .Suw: F. lncjiu, CA 92201 ( 619) 863-8886 * FAX [619) 863-7072 ~.. Pr~r t~ the recor~ation of the final maD. The ~eveloDer snal~ OeDO~t with the Cit~/of Temecula a ~a~r, ~um ~ ~ ~ · · per iOt/un~t. aB m~tigatiom for fire protection imma~ts. Sh~ui~ the developer choo~e to defer the ~ime Df mayment: he/she may enter into a written agreement ~ith the County mayment to the time ~f issuance of the ~irst builain~ ~ermit. feared to the Pl~mning and Engimeerimg Staff. ~e RAYMOND H. RE~IS Chief Fire Demartment Planner Laura Cabrat FiFe Safety Sneclali-=t luly 29, 1993 Cba~er C Glibmr.. Preside. Win. G. A~ V, P,. RECEIVED AUS ,.. Said Naaseh, Case Planner City of Temecula PIning D~anmcnt 43 174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Arts 'd ............ SUBJECT: Tract 27827 ('PA 93-0144) Dear Mr. Naa~eh:: We have reviewed the matcriais transmitted by your offi~ which describe the subject project. "'~' Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposal to subdivide 22.5 acres located between Nicolas Rd. and the Santa Gemdis Creek at the northwest comer of the intersection of Nicolas and North General Keamey Rds., into 163 single family residential lots with alleys and a 3.0 acre park site. The subject project is located within the District's sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available service capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the derailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan . of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: Mail To: Post Office Box 8500 · San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 ~ San Jacinto Avenue, San Jar. into * Customer Setvi~/Engimermg Anner 440 F_ Oakland Avenue, Hemet, CA Saied Naaseh City of Temecula Tract 27827 July 29, 1993 Page 2 Written request for a "plan of service". Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits may be required for extensive development projects or projects located in "cliffmuir to serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. Sanitarv Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Faciliry (TVR~,VR.F). The nearest existing TVRWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject project are as follows: 15-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer aligned along Nicolas Rd. between Roripaugh and North General Kearney Rds. Other Issues The District requires that onsite sewers be located within the proposed public roadways and not alleyways. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Senior Engineer-Customer Setice Department DGC/clz AB 93-835 (v,,p-ntwk-TR27827.clz) Jrsclay OctoDer 16~ 199;t Z:lnDm -- From ~7166~9175' -- Page 2j SENT ~Y:T!~II~O.t~ ;10-H-~; 1~:02; 90~6046477;~ 2/3 October 14, I ~: Trod No. 27827 The ~ RCnWl) wnI~r storagc and distn'buiion sTslcm tony not bc ndcqualc r~ provide domt~ir wnla' and ~rc protccLion services to the ]~opc.,L~ tcJr'~ abovc wlml. A.,~z:ssment Di.micl Nn. 161 (AD-161). The following information is int,,rdeA (o explain the Di.~-ird's position in Ix'oviding w'atcr sx-vice Io ~his area. Thc future or wnlzr smricc within AD- 161 is dcpen~ upon thc pto~ Ly owncrs and the County of Rivernidc approving .'~pphm~nta[ fznnncing of wntcr facilities to servicc the lwoperties within RCWD botmdatics. The Di~tzict has _re~-__ived several requests from developas in this ar~ for RCWD to rcvicw the current wmzr service ~Lmficm to dctcrmine if thc existing water systcm can support additional dc, velopme~ prior to the constrnaion of addilion,,d wamr supply faciliti~. Based upon all additional hydraulic nnnlySiS [H~'rottoed by Tran"-ln~'i~c ~ Corlxtation ~K! naual ~dd fn~ flow tesls, the e-d~irtp_ ~ ~an suppint an additional maximum daily flow of 400 gpm. This flow oqnat~ to efiti~-r 380 nnidml housing mits or 115 acres of commemial dcvclopm~t or a combination of both. Thcrc arc son~ limitations to thc arm ttun the exi.~ing sym~ c~n n:rve; ~sld~ntinl d=vciopment L~ iimit~cl to arr~ nnckn-fi~ 1,150-foot elevntion and com,,,.rcial dcvdolmmnt L~ limltnt to pmpes'ties along .thc WinehCSle~' Road col:ridor at clovalions 1311det I,[:Z5 feet Under t[~sc candifions, ~ Dircrict can m~ ~e K~idcntinl daily ck:mancb inchcling a fu~ flow of 1,000 ~ and ~ commercial daily 6-,nnd~ including a maximum tim ~ow of 2,500 gpm. RCWD will n:quin: ~ all residentinl mettn' interals be 1'~ int*~l~S ht ~ zttid thnt all rc~iden~,s inslall a prc,~ac tcgu!-,dnr for f-nn~ conversion to ~ 1380 Pressurc Zone. · . _ .__. .. .. ursaay October lz,, 1993 Z:lOpm -- From '71z,69~917~' -- Page SEIVF BY:T!]i~ClI_k ;10-14-9~; 18:~ 9096946477;/~ B/3 City of Temecnla Planning Department Oetobcr 14, 1993 Page Two The District will accept meter appfications on a fnt-comdFast-scrved ,basis. Applicams must meet the flow and ticration conditions smmd above. Mctcr appficaxion fees must bc paid in full at the current rate at the ,;me Of npplicn~ou. If f~s should increase 'prior to installation of tbc water moron, the · developer w~ll hnvc 90 days to h~vc the meters installed or they will bc liable to pay the increase in appficnfion fees. For those propertics ,h.-d request service ~ rite available capacity L~ dcdicatsd or ff they do not mcct thc elevation conditions stated above, the consmsction of the implenu~siag facilities identified for AI'~ ! 61 will bc required prior to its~htion of the meteted service. Those implemm~ng facii itics are listed below:. I. A 54-inch water nmh, pardlid to grmcheatnr Road, farore I-15 S0 Margarita Road; A 1380 Pressure Zone pump station ncnr the intc,,,ca.'tion of Margaritn Road and WL, w. hc~cr e A water m,,,;n ill X'L~garim R. th-~] thai: is 30 ifie. hcs in diangl~ from flag pump station to Rustic Glen Drive, 30 inches to Date street, anti 30 inches along Dam Street to Winchester Road; A 24-inch waterline from thc intcw.,ofion of Margarila Road and Winchester Road to North General Kcarny Road: 5. A connection to the 1380 Preswjr~ Zoac at North General Kcamy Road and NicoJas Road. A~ mated above, it my be nect~ry For th~ dffclopcn- lo upgradc the ~ waU:r system to provi&: sufficient pn:ssure for domestic and fire pmlection purposes. It my also b~ n~m.~,ary for the devclolgr to install off-,-'~te fanRifles to na,~t the d~mamts or this prolgny. However, this does not constitute a guarantee tha~ RCWD will supply 'w-t~ to said parcel at any specific quantity, flow, or ~ for fire protection or for any oth~ purpose. Wals. avnilability would Ig contingent upon the, property owner signing an Alacrity Agme, ment which anigns want manapmeni fights, if any, to RCWD. If you ahould hnve any qmstions, plcag ooutaut Sincerely, RANCliO C,M.,IFORN'IA WATI~ DIS'fRIC'T Steve Brannon, P.E. "~vclopmctff Enginm-ing Manag~ .~.:SD :eblO/F267 Seaga Doh~'xy, Enginnn-i~g T~,huician Road right-of-way in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. All proposed slopes, landscaping and medians intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the f'mal map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 95. Landscape construction drawings, consistent with the approved conceptual landscape plans, for the public park site, parkway landscaping, and medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of the final map. Conceptual landscape plans shall include a haft-court basketball court. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy 96. Actual development and dedication of the park to the City shall be completed prior to issuance of the 34th'cenfficate of occupancy, or within eighteen months of recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever comes first. 97. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the developer or his assignee shah submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor' s Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. OTffER AGENCIES 98. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated July :27, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 99. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated September 20, 1993, a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division Ordinance No. 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. The applicant shall comply with the fife improvemere recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Depamnent's letter dated August 3, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 101. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated July 29, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 102. The applicant shah comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District Wansmittal dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\STAFFRFBI44PA93.CC~ 1/18/94 tjs 33 COUNTY O~ RIVeSIDE · HEALTH S]~VICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July, 27, 1993 RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43 174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 ATTN: Saied Naaseh: AUG O 4 1993 Ans'd ............ RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOTS 182 AND 183 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS, SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDS, TOGETHER WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF HAMILTON AVENUE, BANANA STREET, AND APRICOT STREET, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA AS SHOWN PER bIAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 37 OF PATENTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL BEING IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (!63 LOTS) De~r Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as a proved bv the w~ter compan and the Health Department. Permanent prints of ~I plans o~ the water system assail be submined in ~riplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one mc~ equals 200 feet, alono with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The pi'ints shall show the ~'nternal pipe diameter, loeauon of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and 'oint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of th~ new system to h~e exi~ing system. The lans shall comply in all re ects with Div. 5 Pan 1 Cha ter 7 of the California ~alth and Safety Code, California Administr;iive C~'de, ~tle 11 Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of~e 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 Map No. 27827 is in accordance with the water system exgansxon plan, of the Rancho California Water District and that the water semces, storaize, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such' Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities flows or pressures for fire oteetion or any other purpose. This cenLfication sYfill be si ed by a re onsi~ official of the water company. The plans must be submine~t; the City ~Temeeula's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordadon of the final map. This subdivision has a statement from Eevas~t~ern .... aereema providing satisfactory financial arrangements are corn leted with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial axrangements to be ma~; prior to the recordafioh of' John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive · Riverside, CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909). 358-501 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600, Riverside, CA 92513-7600) ATTA~ NO. 5 CITY COUNCIL STAFF R~'-PORT DECEMBER 14, 1993 R:\STAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC2 1/1$t9~ tj~ 34 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY ATTOR~'ROVA~/~/, CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Pianning~:~-- December 14, 1993 Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144), Roripaugh PREPARED BY: Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Negative Declaration for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144), Roripaugh 2. Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (PA93-0145); AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE {3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIRC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 AMENDING SPECIRC PLAN NO. 164 (PA93-0145) TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. R:~S~STAFFRF~i44PA93,CC 12/3/93 lib 4. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 (PA93-0144) TO CREATE A 162 SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A THREE (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7 AND LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission recommended approval of these items to the City Council at their November 1, 1993 meeting with a 4-0 vote. Their main concern was the necessity of a Home Owners Association (HOA) to maintain the wall along Nicolas Road and ensure the enforcement of the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & R'S). After the Planning Commission meeting staff discovered that the property owners in the vicinity of the project had not been notified and after further investigation it was determined that the Title Company erred in providing the 600 foot radius property owners list. This list is certified by the Title Company for its accuracy. After Staff learned about the error we contacted the Home Owners Association and informed them of the details of the project and the City Council hearing date. The applicant and the Home Owners Association President had a meeting and they will be meeting with the other home owners on December 13, 1993. It should be noted that a revised 600 foot radius property owners list was obtained from the applicant and the Public Hearing Notice has been mailed to these property owners for the City Council Hearing. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission felt they could not support the project without a Homeowners Association. Without an Association, the wall along Nicolas Road would have to be maintained by the individual home owners which could result in a wall that is not consistently maintained and painted. After the Commission required the Home Owners Association, staff recommended that the Home Owners Association also be responsible for the maintenance of the alleys. However, the Commission felt the City would be better equipped to adequately maintain them. The Commission also discussed the availability of water to the site, the width of the landscape parkway along Nicolas Road and the potential for graffiti on the Nicolas wall. However, the Commission did not recommend any changes, since the Final Map may not be recorded unless it can be served by Rancho Water and the graffiti potential will be reduced once the proposed vegetation is mature. The width of the parkway along Nicolas Road is proposed to be six (6) feet. The Commission after discussing the merits of requiring a wider parking, retained the 6 foot width. Furthermore, staff recommends amending Condition No. 59 pursuant to Commission concerns regarding the access points to the project (refer to Attachment No. 7 for the updated Traffic Report). The following is the recommended language (strikeout denotes a deletion and b~ld i~%S;~!44PA93.CC 12/6/93 Idle 2 denotes an addition): 59. The draft Circulation Element of the proloosed General Plan calls for an 18 foot wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No. 100. Consequently, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shall be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the imlorovements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Develoloer constructs the median, it shall accommodate a left turn pocket into Roripeugh Road. Tho madion oholl bo oontinuous at "A' 8;troot .to'ro,3triot ooooso to right turn in/out movomont if tho it io to romoin at its ourrontly dosignocl Iooation. The median shall also be designed to accommodate a 150 foot left turn pocket with adequate transition into Warbler Circle, ---.':~ 'G' Entry Street and "D" Erroat and Nioolo~J Read ohould tho Dovolopor ohoooo to roloooto tho, aoooss to that Ioootion. "A" Street. Left turning movements on to west bound Nicolaa Road shall be restricted with proper median design. If the median is not constructed, the developer shall accommodate the above by striloing accordingly. FISCAL IMPACT None. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Ordinance No. 93- - Page 4 Resolution No. 93- - Page 7 Resolution No. 93- - Page 11 Conditions of Approval - Page 16 Draft Planning Commission Minutes, November 1, 1993 - Page 34 Planning Commission Staff Report, November 1, 1993 - Page 35 Updated Traffic Report - Page 36 Development Fee Checklist - Page 37 R:~q~"TAFFitFI~I~M. PA93.Cg~ 12/~Jr3 klb 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 93- R:~S~STAFFRP~idM. PA93.CC 12J3~93 IrJb 4 ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF Ti:rF. CITY OF TEMECULA AFFROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0145) ~ING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PIANNING AREAS 7 (22.~ ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DV,'~t .LrNG UNITS PER ACRE) TO mGH DENS1TY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWEt .LtNG UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST ~ BOUNDARIES BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON THF- NORTH WEST CORNER OFNICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL K~F-~,NY ROAD. Tn'F. CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECI~ ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Leo Roripaugh has filed PA93-0145 in accordance with applicable which is on f'~e with the City Clerk, is hew.13y approved. Section 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute said Specific Plan Amendment on behalf of the City of Temecula after execution there of by nil landowners listed therein, provided all such landowners have executed said Specific plan within 30 days after adoption of this Ordinance. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law. R:~qTAFFRF~IdMPA93.CC 12.t3/9~ ~ ~ Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTEB this 14th day of December, 1993. SAL mn oz MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss crrY OF TEMBCLrLA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecuh, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 93--- was duly intnxiu~ and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of December, 199.3, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the _th day of __, 1994 by the following roll call vote: CO~CILMEMBERS: NOES: CO~NI~VlB]~,S: COUNCH-MEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Scott F.Field City Anomey R:~S~qTAl:FRF~I~J4PA93.CC 12/3/93 kJb 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:%S~TAFPRP~i44PA93.CC 1273~93 Idb 7 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RF~OLIYrION OF Twg~ CITY COUNCIL OF Tn'F. CITY OF TEME~ APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, ~l~'~vr NO. 2 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO, 93-0145) AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PIANNING AI~F~AS 7 (22.5 ACP~'-~) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSrI~ RESIDENTIAL (20 DWELLING UNIT~ PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DW~t .L~YG UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THn~. (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST ~ BOUNDARIES BETW~-k'~ PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9 AND LOCATED ON THY~ NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD. WItERI~.AS, Leo Roripaugh filed PA93-0145 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WBtRFAS, said Specific Plan Amendment application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHERRAS, the Planning Commission considered said Specifw Plan Amendment on November 1, 1993 at which time interested persons had an opportunity w testify either in support or opposition; VizIIF-RE~,S, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended appwval of said Specific Plan Amendment; WFrF. RF. AS , the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Specific Plan Amendment on December 14, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Specific Plan Amendment; Report DOES WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff regarding the Specific Plan Amendment; NOW, THtREFORE, Tnv. CITY COUNCIL OF THv. CITY OF TEVIECULA RF~OLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOtJOWS: Section 1. Fmdinn. That the Temecuh City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. The City Council in appwving the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, makes the following finding, to wit: R:XS~"TAFFRPTX144PA93.CC 17~3~93 lrJb 8 1. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residential since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Gertrudis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance. 2. The proposed action is consistent with the City's General Plan. 3. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and the overall density is being reduced. 4. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. Section 2. Environmental Co~lpliance. A Initial Study was prepared for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Conditions. Not applicable. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section $. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December, 1993. SAL mY roz MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMF. CULA) R:~S~qTAFFRPTH~MPA93.CC 1~/~/~3 k~ 9 I n'ER~,Ry CF_,KTI~'~f that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of December, 1993 by tlz following vote of the Council: AYES: NOP.,S: ABSENT: COUNCrLMERIBE~: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCu-MEMBERS: rONES. GRE[~ C1TYO-~K R:%S~TAI~I~41sA~Y~.CC l:~m Idb ~ 0 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 93- RESOLU~ON NO. A RESOL~ON OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THT, CITY OF TEME~ APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0144) TO CIzFATE A 162 SINGLE FAMn.Y LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A TnR~ (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7 AND LOCATED ON THF~ NORTH WEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL K'F-~A"/ROAD. WRERR4~q, Leo Roripaugh filed a request for PA93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by x~ference; WHEREAS, the Phnllhg Commission considered said Time Extensions for the East Side Maps on November 1, 1993 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said application; WH!~3~EAS, the City Council consid~-x~cl said application on December 14, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; W]~, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said application; NOW, T!Yk'~'-~'ORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF TH$~ CITY OF ~ DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOllOWS: Seaion 1. Fmdint, s. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following fmdings: A. Pursuant to Seaion 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: specific plans. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. type of development. That the site of the ~ land division is physically suitable for the 4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the R:'~S'~"TAF!qtFP,!dMPA93.CC 12/3/93 klb '[ 2 proposed density of the development. 5. That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantinlly and unavoidably injure fish or wiidllfe or their habitat. 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public h.~th problems. 7. 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 ff it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provici~l 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. to wit: The Council in approving of the proposed project, makes the following findings, 1. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and Cnlifornia Governmental Code Sections 65000-66(X~ (Planning and Zoning Law). 2. The proposed action is consistent with the City's General Plan. 3. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has bnlnnct~d these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Section 66412.3) and finds that the project density is consistent with the General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. 4. The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13,000 et seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been conditioned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District's requirements. as conditioned. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and 6. The project is consistent with the intent of the original project approved by the County of Riverside. Amendment No. 2. The project is consistent with the provisions of Specific Plan No. 164, R:~S~TAFFItPT~I44PA~J.CC 12t~/tB Iflb '13 8. Said Findings are supported by minutes, Rlaps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and heroin incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval. C. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the said application is compatible with the health, safety and weftarc of the community. Section 2. l~-nvironmentnl Conlplinnce. A Initial Study was prepared for Spe~.i~c Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves the said application subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 6, attached hereto. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section $. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December, 1993. ATTEST: SAL Mtr OZ MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALfFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMF. CULA) I ntn~'.ny C~'rnq' that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of December, 1993 by the following vote of the Council: CO UNCu~I~,S: NOF.,S: COUNCIl, S: R:~SXgTAFF!tP~I,MPA93.CC 12/3/93 lr, Jb 'l 4 A,BS~: COUNCILM]HIVlBERS: JUN]~ S. ~ CT-~:u~.K R:~I'AI~rRPT~I~tPA~3.CC 12~3~93 kl~ ~ 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~S~TAI~I44PA93.CC 12/3~3 idb '~ 6 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) Project Description: A request to subdivide · 22.5 acre parcel into 162 single family dwelling lots end a three (3) acre open 8pace lot for a pubic park (Roripaugh Cottages) Assessor's Parcel No.: 911-150-035 and 911-150-038 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Bght (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars (~1,328.00), which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars (~1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). General Requirements '2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, 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· The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative· body concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails 'to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. R:~S\STAFFRF~I44FA93.CC 12/3/93 klb 17 If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No, 164, Amendment No. 2, The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Development Agreement No, 37 or any restatements or amendments thereto. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655, A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation. of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first, Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director, The plans shall include a note for dust control indicating: All active areas shall be watered at least twice a day. Non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacturer's specifications. Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles exit unpaved areas into paved roads. All dirt hauling trucks shall be covered or they shall maintain at least two (2) feet of freeboard. 10. 11. 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 applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development, Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Pla,nning Director: A copy of the Final Map A copy of the Rough Grading Plans R:~S~'TAFFRP~I~PA93.CC 12/3/93 Idb 18 C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: (1) 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, Ordinance No. 655. (2) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) (1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include: (a) Liability insurance and methods of maintaining monument signs for the project and the wall along Nicdas Road by the Home Owners Association. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). (b) The individual lot landscaping, the wall along Nioolnc Read, and the exterior of the buildings shall be maintained by the individual homeowners. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). (c) The wall along Nicolas Road shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association paintad thc original oolor by thc individual homoownors. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). (d) No parking shall be allowed on the driveways. (e) Roll-up garage doors shall always be used to replace the original garage doors for units with shared driveways. (f) The garage door openers and the lights on the buildings that light the alleys shall be maintained and operational at all times. (2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the fight to assam all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development, Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwdling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services, Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the-City ,for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall R:\S~"TAF~q~vI~I44PA93.CC 12/3/~ IrJb 19 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. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). (3) Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shell own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). The project shall be consistent-with the requirements of the French Valley Airport Plan when the plan is adopted, The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of The development. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscape plans consistent with the following: (1) City Standards. (2) The approved Typical Conceptual Landscape Plans. (3) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas. (4) Complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property. (5) Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots prior to issuance of the first building permits within each of the phases of the Final Map. (6) Change the California Sycamore in the Nicolas Road Conceptual Plans to London Plane Tree. B. Wall and fence plans consistent with the following: (1) All walls and fences shall be a minimum of six (6) feet measured from the highest grade or as otherwise specified below. (2) A six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block wall or a combination decorative block wall and berming (measured from the finished pad elevation) shall be constructed on the rear property lines for lots 1 through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. These walls shall have a surface dens~y of. at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or cradks R:~S~TAFFlU~i44PA93.CC 12,'3~93 Idb 20 (Refer to Preliminary Noise Analysis prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, August 11, 1993}. (3) Decorative block walls shall be required for the side yards for corner lots and along the western property line (lots 103 through 121 ). (4) Wrought iron, decorative block or wrought iron combination walls shall be required to take advantage of views for rear yards along the northerly property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. (5) Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by (b), (c) and (d) above. (6) Tho wall along Nioolos Fleod ohall bo oonotruotod ontiroly, inoluding thc footin~o, within tho individual Iota and not within tho public right of '::-'7. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). Precise grading plans including all structural setback measurements consistent with the approved rough grading plans and the approved plotrings. Elevations, floor plans and colors and materials consistent with the approved plans. E. The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (1) Site Plan with off-street parking (2) Construction Landscape Plans (3) Fencing Plans (4) Building Elevations A Noise Analysis shall be submitted for review and approval for the interior spaces within the project. The maximum interior noise level shall be 45 CNEL. 14. 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 Director approval. 15. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 16. If deemed necessary by the Planning Director, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. - - R:~S'~STAFPRF~.1~M. IsA93.CC 12/3/93 IrJb 21 17. Front yard and slope landscaping and all fencing within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 18. All the Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety. 19. Roll-up garage doors with automatic garage door openers shall be provided for units with shared driveways. Automatic garage door openers shall be provided for all units. 20. The wall and the associated landscaping along Nicolas Road shall be installed prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit within each of the phases of the Final Map that front Nicolas Road. 21. The monument signs for the project shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association npplioant and aholl bo romovod, if within right of way, prior to issuanoc of tho last final roloooo of tho projoot. (Amended By Planning Commission on November 1, 1993). 22. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the Tentative Tract Map 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. 24. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on-site flat work and improvements) grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right- of-way. 25. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing' or proposed City right-of-way. 26. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. -.: R:%S~TAFFRP~I44PA93.CC I~3/93 k.lb 22 27. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 28. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way, 29. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by 8 registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions of Approval, 30. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway and/or the alley by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 31. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board or the project is shown to be exempt from that agency. 33. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Community Services District (TCSD); General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; and Southern California Gas Company. 34. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 35. An Erosion Control Plan in accordance with City Standards, shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. R:\SLSTAFFRF~!44PA93.CC 12/3/93 23 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscapingor provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 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 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off- site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall. be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. D. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. The location of existing and post development floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. 100-year floodplain and it:~S~rAF~vI~I44PA93.CC X2J3/93 IrJb 24 43. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance 'No. 91-12 of the City of Temecula, and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within Flood Zone "A", which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 44. The following storm drain facilities shall be provided along with the facilities as shown on the Tentative Map. The requirement for the underground facilities is to mitigate the surface runoff onto Nicolas Road, the potential maintenance of the nuisance runoff created by this development, and negate the provision of additional drainage facilities downstream since Assessment District 161 did not accommodate this development's proposed runoff in sizing the downstream drainage facilities. Catch basins shall be installed at the intersection of "G" Street and Nicholas Road to eliminate the cross gutter. The site shall be designed to minimize the contributory oneire runoff to Nicolas Road at "A" Street by providing additional catch basins and storm drain pipes or by redesigning the grades near the intersection of Nicolas Road and "A" Street. Prior to the Issuance of Encroachment Permits 45. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment .permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 46. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 47. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C,C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207,207A, and 208, Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. 5 foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed per City Standard Nos. 400 and 401 specifications. R:~S\,qTAFFRF~i~4PA93.O3~ 12/3/93 klb 25 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. I. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through under-sidewalk drains. All driveways shall be located a minimum of 2 foot from the side property line unless otherwise provided for with a joint use easement for ingress/egress. In order for the City to agree to accept and maintain the proposed alleys, they shall be subject to the following conditions: · The alleys shall be concrete paved. · No utilities shall be installed within the alleys. Parking shall not be permitted along the alleys and they shall be signed accordingly. · Lights shall be installed on each garage and/or every house. The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable 'IV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility prorider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. it:~3~q'rAFFRP~I44PA93.CC 12/3/93 ]rib 26 53. The stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle approach shall be positioned five (5) feet from Nicolas Road curb line. 54. All required fees shall be paid. Prior to Recordation of final Map 55. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 56. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 57. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board; Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works: Riverside County Health Department; Cable TV Franchise; Community Services District; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; Southern California Gas Company; Department of Fish and Game; and Army Corps of Engineers. R:\S~TAI:YRIq~li$PA93.CC 12/3/93 {FIb 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. All road easements and/or s~reet dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. The draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan calls for 'an 18 foot' wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No, 100. Consequently, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shall be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the improvements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Developer constructs the median, it shall accommodate a left turn pocket into Roripaugh Road. The median shall be continuous at "A" Street to restrict access to right turn in/out movement if the it is to remain at its currently designed location. The median shall also be designed to accommodate a 150 foot left turn pocket into Warbler Circle and "G" Entry Street and "D" Street and Nicolas Road should the Developer choose to relocate the access to that location. If the median is not constructed, the Developer shall accommodate the above by striping accordingly. Sufficient right-of-way along "G" Entry Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a'60 foot full width right-of-way and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on. both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "A', "B", "C", and the remainder of "G' Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 50 foot full width right-of-way including the standard knuckle, and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "D" , "E" , and "F" Streets shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 46 foot full width right-of-way and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 16 feet on both sides of the centerline and 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along the Alleys shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 20 foot full width right-of-way and the entire width shall be improved with concrete pavement, or post bonds for the alley improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. R:~S~STAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC 12/3/93 kJb 28 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72.. 73. 74. 75. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site propercy interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Nicolas Road and so noted on the Final Map as approved by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Nicholas Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans, Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at locations as determined by Riverside Transit Agency and the Department of Public Works. The joint use driveway easements shall be shown on the Final Map. No building permits for units with joint use shall be issued until the Final Map has been recorded. 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 for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kP~ot free of buildings and obstructions." An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer, A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: A. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts, Should the Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into R:%S~STAFFRP~I44PA93.CC 12/3/93 kib 29 a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 76. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable 'IV Standards at time of street improvements. 77. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shell be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by.the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions:· A, The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B® The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurram with the Final Map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City, The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all private areas, The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 78. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of PUblic Works for review and approval. The building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 79. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the .approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan, R:~S~TAI~i~PA93.CC 12/3~93 fib 30 80. The Developer shall pay the Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee as per the amended'Development Agreement as reviewed and approved by the City. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 81. All improvements shall be completed and in place per The approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 82. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 83. The traffic signal at Nicolas Road and Winchester Road shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. 84. The Developer shall provide. "stOp" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 85. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 86. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 87. In the event that the required improvements on Nicolas Road along the property frontage of this development are not completed by AD 161, the Developer shall construct the required half width improvements per City Standard No. 100 or as otherwise determined by the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements 88. A Class II Bicycle Lane on Nicolas Road shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan and in concurrence with the completion of the street improvements. 89. 90. Construction of the public park site, perimeter landscaping and medians shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. The developer, or the developer's successors or assignees, shall maintain the park site, parkway landscaping and medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. R:~S\STAFFRF~I44FA93.CC 12/3/93 ]db 3 1 91. All parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public park purposes. A policy of title insurance and soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 92. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space snail be maintained by the individual property owners. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 93. Prior to recordation of the first phase, .the developer or his assignee shall enter into an agreement and post security to improve lot number 163, a three (3) acre site, as a public park facility, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Lot No 163 shall be identified as a public park site and offered for dedication to the City on the final map. 94. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve the parkway landscaping and landscaped medians within Nicolas Road right-of-way in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. All proposed slopes, landscaping and medians intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the final map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 95. Landscape construction drawings, consistent with the approved conceptual landscape plans, for the public park site, parkway landscaping, and medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of the final map. Conceptual landscape plans shall include a half-court basketball court. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy 96. Actual development and dedication of the park to the City shall be completed prior to issuance of the 34th certificate of occupancy, or within eighteen months of recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever comes first. 97. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. OTHER AGENCIES 98. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated July 27, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:~S~STAFFltPT~I44PA93.CC 12/3/93 kJb 32 99. 100. 101. 102. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated September 20, 1993, a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division Ordinance No. 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Depar~ment's letter dated August 3, 1993, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated July 29, 1993, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply wi:th the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRJq~,I44tmA93.CC 12/3/93 IrJb 33 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July, 27, 1993 RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43 174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 ATTN: SaiedNaaseh: AUG D B93 R.E: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827: BEING A SUBDIIqSION OF A PORTION OF LOTS 182 AND 183 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS, SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDS, TOGETHER WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF HAMILTON AVENUE, BANANA STREET, AND' APRICOT STREET, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA AS SHOWN PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK I, PAGE 37 OF PATENTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL BEING IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (163 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Departmere of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as a proved bv the w~iter cornpan and the Health Department. Permanent prints of el~et plans o~ the water system assail be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the ori~-final drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the rotereal pipe diameter, lotanon of va~~es and fire hydrants; pipe and 'omt specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of th~ new system to ~e existing system. The lans shall comply in all res ects with Div. 5, Part 1, Cha ter 7 of the California ~Ye~alth and Safety Code, Cre'~omia Administrative Code, ~tle 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. e 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 Map No. 27827 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water sennces, storagte, and 'disn'ibufion system will be adequate to provide water service to stmh~ Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a gumantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pr_essures for fire otecfion or any other purpose. Th/s certification shall be si ed by a re onsi~e~e official of the water company. The plans must be submitte~ttoe the Citv ~F to Temecula's Oitce review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map. to serve domestic water to each and I subdivision on providing satisfactory financial arrangements are corn leted with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be ma~et prior to the recordation of: John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive * Riverside. CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 * FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Ad0ress - P.O. Box 7600 * Riverside, CA 92513-7600) City of Ternecula Planning DepL Page 2 Arm: Saied Naaseh July 27, 1993 the final map. This subdivision is within the Sastem M-nlcipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the Disu'i~ The sewer system shall be installed according to lans and eci~cations as approved by the Diswict, the Ci of Temecula an~ the H~l~Deparunent Permnent ' ~ of the lans of~e sewer of Temecula. The prin~ shalltn~ow the intdmal ' dia~neter, location o~ manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint ecP~ons and the size of e sewers at the .hmction of the ne~V system to ~ ' ' systenk A sin · plat indica' location of sewer lines and waterlinessesesx~e a _portion of ~e sewage pl.n-~ ~ profiles. The plans shall be signed ~ a reg~t_~ea engineer and e sewer disti'ict with the fdllo_wing certifi~on: "I cexiify that the design of e sewer .system in Tract EMap Nastd. 27827 is in accordance with the sewer system expanswn p]sn~ oft he Mnnicipal Water District and that the waste disposal stem is adequate at this time to treat the anfici ated wastes fi'om the pro oseds~arcel Map". The plans must be submined to ~e City of Temecula's OFfF~e to review at least two weeks prior to the reouest for the recordation of the It will be necessary_ for financial arrangements to be completely fmalized prior to recordation of the final map. Smcerel3(, S tat Health Specialist IV SM:dr (909) 275=8980 KENNETH L EDWARDS Ladas and Gentlerrmm RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT of a paroel map or subdivision prior to recordatic~ of the finsi ffmD- Fees to be psid shoutd be at the rme in efiect m me Urne of recordaon, or ~ deterre:l, m the time of Lssuance of the actus} permit. I~-FNFRA! INFrlRUAT!~N This project may require · Nmionel Poilutant Dismerge Eiiminmion Systm~ {NPDES) permit from 1he Sate Water Re Corwo; Board. aearanc~ for grading, record·tim, or other final approvad, shoutd not be given until m City has ckla.,,irJd trm the project has been granted · permit or is srcwn to be exernpt. ~mispr~ec~invofvesaFe~era~Em~encyM~~(FEMA)n~;~d-L~J~--p~am~hen~heC~ah~u~dmquir~theaq;i~ pro~de sil studies, CadcuIlljorG, pill~lfIci cllhsr intm rlQuirld to flllet FEMA rlcp~iI ,, dS, lilld lhCnJId Wflquirl thl~911 Ippijclrlt obtWn aConditio~a} Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, ,: .claljen or mher~rml approvad of the project, and ·Letterof Map Revision (LOMR)' prior to oc::upancy. If · nsturj wsterczxJrse or mapped flood pimn is impacted kay this project the City should recIuim the apCdicant to oknm · Section 160111603 Agreement from the CalHorrd· hiD- b,=. d of Fmh and Gm rand · Geen Wmer ACt Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corns .of Engineer~orwrtttenc`c`~-spor~mCffrornther4agenCiesindicatingtheKqec~isexempttr~mthemerequirenmnts~ACieanW~torAcsSec~Km 404 Water QuaSiW Certiticmion may be required from the local CaJHomia RegionaJ Wster Quality Control Board prior to issuanc~ of the Corps 404 permit. c: .,,: 'q- Z0-q'5 fees have been adopted; applic:ab4e tees should be padd to the ._l:~v___'~ District or City prior to 5nsi approvad of the prqecX. or in the cue . njs project proposes d'~nnels. storm dr·ins 36 ~ or larger in di er, or ether fa~lities tm could be emsiderecl regional in rmure end/or a logical extension of the aclopted t~at, owr~rship of such facilities on wrmen recluest of the . Facilities rn~t ~ mrm'uaed to District mm~clarcls, mcl District plan check v,d mspecuon win be reqL~red for Distna ace·prance. Ps:m Che~ insr,_~n and adminm'mive fees wm be retired. ~$ project involves District Masler Ran facilities. The Districl will aolxpt _t.,~s.lt~, of such tacilities on written request of the City. Facilities ' 'must be constructed to District s~andercls, end District pl,n check and intuit m_~n will be required lor District emeptsnce. Ran cheek. "~spection and administrative fees will be required. The District does not nomaJly r, ac...,.,~snd cordt~ons for land dvisions or other land uN ca=es in b..~,r..:sd citis. The District al=o ~ not ~cdancheckci1y~anduseases~orpr~videSateDivisi~nofReaJEsa~eiet~~rsora~her~i~~d~a2ardmp~m~orsuchcsse$~ District cc, .... s.4r~/ra J' ..... em for mjch cases are norarally limiad to m of apmcific iraemit to tl~ ~ inclultng Dimrict Master Drsinage Ran radiities, mr regional flood w,~,~ ond clrajnage facilities which could be carmktered · iogicsi c,.,,(.x~I.A or man of · master plan lyslem, and Dis~ct Area DrWnage Ran tees (development mitigation be·). In addition, irdm of · general nmure is Forideal. The District ha.~ not reviewed 1he ;xoposed Im'oject in cietajl and the Iolowing chectad k'~,,,,,~e:~. do net In 8ny way cormitute or kinply District RIVERSIDE COUNTY . FIRE DEPARTMENT ' I]NTY ~ ~ ~ 210 W"F.,ST SAN JAClNTO AV"F. NUI~ * PERILIS, CALIFORNIA S}2.570 · (909) 657-3183 TO:, ATTEN: RE: Temecula Planning Department Saied Naaseh PAg5-O144 Tentative Tract 27827 August 3, 1993 With resDect to the conditions of ap:roval for the above refer- enced land division, the Fire Department recommends the ~oliowing fire orotection measures be Drovided in accordance with Riverside County'OrOinances and/or recognized fire protection standarms: i. Schedule A fire protection. An aDproved stan~.ard fire hy- :~ranzs, (6"x4"x2 I:.'2") located one at each street intersection anci. -s.-.ac~d no more than T. 50 feet a~art or no Dotfinn of lot frc, r,~:.a~e more than 16~ feet ~rom a hydrant Minimum fire flow sha].i De 1000 GPM for 2 hour-= duration at 20 PSI. 2. ADolicant/deveioDer snail furnish one cooy of the water plan-=. =o the ~ire Department for review. Plans shall De signed De a recz. stered civil engineer, cnntaining a Fire Demartment approval slgnaZure ~io"' . and sha]. i conform Zo hvdrant ~"' ~.. ~yPe, location, soaclng and minimum fire flow. Once ~lans are signed by the local . . the ori~lnai~ shal~ ~e preser, te~ to the Fir~ Deoar~meni for signature. 3. Blue dot reflectors. shall be mounted it, private streets and Orivewa'...'s to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with fire n'v'drants. 4. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be ins~aiie~ an~ accepted by the appropriate water agency ~rior to any combustible building material being placed on an innividual lot. '=~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Street, Rive~icW, CA 92SO1 (909) 27.~.-47'/7' * FAX (909} 3~9-74~1 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PI.ANNIN{; SEC'r!ON '1 INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Cuuntt7 Club Driw:, Izuiw F, lndiu, CA 92201 1619) 863-8886 · FAX {619) 863-7072 5. .~ricr ~.o ~_.~,e reccr~Zi~n ~f the fine:l m~D. ~ne ~ev~lome~ ~,r,~ll Oemo~ ~ith the me~ ~ot/ur. it am mitim~tior, the deveio~e~ c~come tc Gefe~ ~he time mf ~yment~ b,e/sne may en~e~ into ~ ~itten agreement ~ith the Soun~y me~e~v-ln~ ~ic ~aymenl i~ the time All cuestions regarding the meaning of conditions ~hall ~e~red to the ~'lanning and Engineering Ste. ff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire DeOartment Planner Launa Cabn~l ~ Fine Safety Soecialist E istern Municipa[ 'W'at er District July 29, 1993 RECEIVED Saied Naaseh, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Arts 'd ............ SUBJECT: Tract 27827 CPA 93-0144) Dear Mr. Naaseh:: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposal to subdivide 22.5 acres located between Nicolas Rd. and the Santa Gertrudis Creek at the northwest comer of the intersection of Nicolas and North General Kearney Rds., into 163 single family residential lots with alleys and a 3.0 acre park site. The subject project is located within the District' s sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available service capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must arrange for the prepaxation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan . of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: . . Mail To: Post Office Box 8500 · San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Averme, San Jacinto · Customer Setvice/Engiteting Anne= 440 F_ Oakland Avenue, Hemet. CA Saied Naaseh City of Temecula Tract 27827 July 29, 1993 Page 2 Written request for a "plan of service". Minimum $400.00 deposit 0arger depos/ts may be required for exmnsivc development projects or projects located in "difftcult w serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading. plans and phasing plans. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation FaciliD' (TVR~,VRF). The nearest existing TVRWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject project are as follows: 15-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer aligned along Nicolas Rd. between Roripaugh and North General Keamey Rds. Other Issues The District requires that onsite sewers be located within the proposed public roadways and not alleyways. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT G. Crosley''>~ DGC/clz AB 93-835 (wp-ntwk-TR27827.:lz) ~rstay 0cZoDer lz,, 1~ 2:10pro -- Fren '714~9175' -- Page ~NT BY:~ ;10-14-9~; 1~:02 it08~J4~77;;~ 2/3 LiaudaaM, I;'9 · Ib.a~immm October 14, 1993 City of Teme:d8 43174 :B-,~*,,~ Park T)tiv~ Tcmccula, CA 925~N)-36~ SI:I1UwZC'f: Trgt No. 27827 (i~luding tly., r-xmstruc~m of all ~ am:l ofr-sile facilities) between RCWD and the Fo;x~ owner. The existing RCWD water stonge and distn'bu~on s3m_-cm nmy not bc ndcquatc m ln-ovidc dom~tic wn~m- mid flzc ~tion services to Ihe ])topefry fctimmced above wil]3in A.,sessment DisUi~ N.. 161 (AD=I61). The following information is intpmJeA 1o explnin the District' s position in providing wnt_-T_ s=vlce to this area. Th~ future or wntcr scrvicc within AD-161 is dcpend~t upon th~ property owners nnd the County of Rivcrsidc appmving .~plcmcntnl fmnnclng of wntcr facilines to service the f, roperties within RCWD boundaries. The District !~s _t-:ee__ived several requests from developcn in this ar~ for RCWD to rcvicw the current wster service situnden to dctc.-~.ine if the existing water systcm can support ndditional developme:m prior to ~ conslnsc6on of nddilional wntcr supply facilitics. Bascd upon an additiotml hyttraulic annlysis performed by Tr. ms-T'at;iflc !:-ngjne,-dno_ Corlmration and nclunl field Drc flow tests. the systcm can support an ndditiotud maximum daily flow of 400 gpm. This flow equates to either 380 rcsidual imuslng units or 115 acres of commemial dcvelopment or a combir,,-;on of both. ~ arc some iimilntions to thc arca Ttmt 1he exigling system cnn scrve; nsidential dcve~t is !imit~l to ntr. Lsnncler the 1.150-foot elevation and commercial development ~; llmi~d to properties nlong thc 'd/inehc,3ter Roll coll'idor at devatirms trader t,t2S feet. Undcr thcsc conditions. thc District cnn meet the ttnidcnlinl daily dcmnnds incl-ding flow of ! ,000 ~ and t!~ conunezt~d daily ciPm.~ul,: including a mnximum I'rre flow of 2,500 g!~. RCWD will zccluiz~ ~ nil rcsidcntial mct~ !ntrals bc 1½ inches in diamctcr nnd thnt all residen,.es instnll n prk.~at~ tqpdntnr for futm-c conversion to .tl~ 1380 Pressre= Zone. - Imedem~eleee~Im leiB'llRetet ursOay OcT:oDer 1A, 1993 2:lOpm -- From '716696917~, -- Page 9096St6477;~ 3/3 City of Tomecola Planning Department October 14, 1993 Pagc Two The District will accept motor applications on a f~t~~z~-scrved basis. Applic4ms must meet the flow and elrvalion conditions sum:d above. Mctcr applicmion fe~s must bc paid in full at the current rate -at the tim= o£ application. If f~us should incn=~ 'ptiox to i~.a-,dion of the water me~::'s, the · dovcio]x:r will huv~ 90 days to huv~ flu: mctun: insmlkd or ~ will t~ liablc to pay thc inc:rr. ase in application fees.- For those propertics thrd rcqucs~ service after ~ avaib~!c capacity is dcdicatal or ff they do not mcct thc elev-~ion amclifians stmcd above. th~ consn-ucfion d the impla-t~,i.g facilities idaafifi~ 16l will bc requi. red prior to iastrdlafion o~the metczar service. Those imp~g facilitic~ arc iis'tal below: z. A 54-iuch wata main, paralld to W;,~c.4cr Rind, f:om l-iS to Margari:a Road; A 1380 Pmssmc Zone !xunp station near the inXascction of Msr~ta Road sand Wirrhes~-r Road; e A ,,v~er main in MinXstirs Road that is 30 iachcs in djam,.4,.r fi'om the pump station to Rustic Glen Drive, 30 inches to Date ~ and 30 inches along Dun: S~'cct to Winchester Road; A 24-inch waterline from thc intersection of lvimX~la Road and Winchester Road to Noah Genexal Kcnmy Road; 5. A connection to th~ 13X0 Pressure Zone at North Gau:ral Kcamy Road mgl Nicolas Road. /~ .~ued above, it may be necessary For the developer to upgradc the existing v~s_~_ system to lzovi& ,~ufficic-nt pressure for domestic and rn'c pmtcaion purpose. It may also b~ uc:ce.,~aty for the devdo~ to install off-site f',scilidcs to mf, a the danands of this propcay. Howeva, this does not constitute a guarantee thaX RCWD will .v. tl>ply water to said parcel at any ~fic qunntity, flow, or igcsst~ for fife protection or for any other purpoSc. Water availability would I~ contingent upon the lxopary owncr signing aa AScacy Agreement which as.~igns wa:cr mmmg~me~ rights, if any, to RCV/D. you should b.~ve any qtsc~ion.~ please contact Sinccrcly, RANClIO CALH-'ORNIA WATlr. R DISTRICT Steve ['),rannon, P.E. ")evelopmcat Engineering Ms:roger a~:SD ;eblOIF267 Senga Doheny, Engineering Technician ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:~S~rAFFRP~I44PAg3.CC 12/3m IrJ9 34 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOV;MBER 1. 1993 Director Thornhill asked if the Commission wants to leave determination of the base road material with the County fire agency. Commissioner Hoegland said he feels it is the City's obligation to bring areas up to urban standards. Commissioner Fahey said the City is an urban area however, there are several rural areas in the City that want to remain rural. Commissioner Fahey said she favors some leniency, however if it was to be an all weather road. If it is going to be a public right- of-way, the Commission should approve it with the appropriate conditions based on the ordinance. It was moved by Commissioner Hoegland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close the public hearing at 7:20 P.M. end J~;tQD~ Resolution No. 93-26 approving PA93- 0179, Amendment No. I based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval, deleting Condition No. 10. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoegland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PA 93-0145 (Soecific Plan No. 164. Amendment No. 2) PA 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Mao No..~78~7) A proposed request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164 in order to Change the Zoning for Planning Areas 7 (22.5 acres) end 8 (10.1 acres) from Very High Density Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), to add a three (3) acre park and adjust the boundaries. between Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9 and approval of Tentative Tract Tract Map No. 27827, a 162 single family lot subdivision plus a three (3) acre lot for a public park within Planning Area No. 7. Planner Saied Naaseh presented the staff report. He advised the Commission the applicant does not wish to form a Homeowners Association. He said staff has worked with the applicant to resolved many issues. Changes to the Conditions of Approval were distributed by memorandum dated November 1, 1993 from the Planning Department. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M. Sanford Edward, 110 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, representing the applicant, provided an overview of the project's history. PCMIN11/01193 -.6- 11 I! 6/93 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTI::S NOVFMBFR 1. 1993 Commissioner Fahey suggested the formation of a Homeowners Association would make maintenace of the block walls more cost-effective to the individual homeowner. Patrick Callahan, landscape architect for the project, explained his discussions with the Community Services Director regarding the wall materials and how to handle potential vandalism of the wall. Commissioner Hoegland said he agrees once the vegetation grows and covers the wall, the wall will require very low maintenance however, it will take approximately 3 to 5 years for that plant material to grow and cover the walls. Commissioner Hoagland said a Homeowners Association would cost the individual property owners very little and allow them an avenue to resolve their problems without involving the City. Director Thornhill said the City now owns graffiti removal equipment and can appropriately remove graffrti from public view. Commissioner Blair said she does not recall the Planning Commission reviewing any other project this complex that did not have a Homeowners Association. Commissioner Blair said she is not pleased by the reduction in the parkway from 10' to 6' on one side of the street, and would like to see consistency on both sides of the street. She said she feels the City is giving up several qualities that are important to a Temecula project and she does not feel the project is at the appropriate stage for approval. Commissioner Hoagland said he feels that a Homeowners Association i~s important to the project. He said he feels the concept is good; however, he cannot support the project without the Homeowners Association. He said he is concerned with the berm outside the wall; however, he said he does not feel it is important to the approval. Director Thornhill explained the purpose of the berm was to reduce the apparent height of the wall as viewed from the street. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close the public hearing at 8:20 P.M. and Recommend Adoorion of Resolution No. 93-27, recommending approval for: Planning Application Nos. 93-0144 and 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2, and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval as modified by staff and Recommend Adornion of Negative Declaration for PA93-0144 and P93-0145 and direct staff to draft conditions necessary to require the applicant to provide a community or homeowners association. Sanford Edward, the applicant's representative, concurred with the addition of a condition requiring the formation of homeowners association. Ray Casey said because there was no homeowners association, staff included maintenance of the alleys in Zone R of the Community Services Facilities Districts. He PCMIN 11/01193 -7- 11116/93 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 1.1993 suggested that maintenance of the alleys be placed under the homeowners association. Commissioner Hoagland said he feels the City is better equipped to make a determination on when maintenance should be done on the alleys, therefore, the motion was not amended as Mr. Casey suggested. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Thornhill advised the Commission a workshop on implementing the General Plan Village Concept is proposed for November 18, 1993. Mr. Thornhill advised the Commission of a proposal by Zev Buffman for the Old Town area. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINESS None ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission will be held on Monday, December 6, 1993, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Steve Ford Secretary PCMIN11101193 -8- 11~15fB3 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:~S~'TAFF~!~IPA93.CC 12/3~93 Idb 35 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Case No.: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145) Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) Prepared By: Saied Naaseh RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Resolution No. 93- recommending Approval for: Planning Application Nos. 93-0144 and 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2, and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for PA93-0144 and PA93-0145. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Leo Roripaugh REPRESENTATIVE: Sanford Edward, MPD Don Lohr, Lohr + Associates PROPOSAL: A Request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164 in order to Change the Zoning for Planning Areas 7 (22.5 Acres).and 8 (10.1 Acres) from Very High Density Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), to add a three (3) acre park and adjust the boundaries between Planning Areas .7, 8 and 9; and Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, a 162 single family lot subdivision plus a three (3) acre lot for a public park within Planning Area No. 7. LOCATION: Located on the north west corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road EXISTING ZONING: Planning Area 7: Very High Density Residential: (14.9 Dwelling Units Per Acre) - - Planning Area 8: Office R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PAS3.pC 10128/93 Idb SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Santa Gertrudis Creek Specific Plan No. 164, Medium High Density Residential (5.1 Dwelling UniTs Per Acre) R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings) R-R (Rural Residential) Planning Area 7 and 8: High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Par Acre) Vacant North: Vacant South: Single Family Residential East: Vacant West: Vacant R:\S~q'rAFFRP~144PAJ3.PC 10128/93 klb 2 PROJECT STATISTICS Project Site Area (acres) Density {dwelling units per acre) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Number of Dwelling units Proposed Park Site Area (acres) Private Open Space Area (square feet) Minimum Lot Size (square feet) Minimum Lot Width (feet) Minimum Lot Depth (feet) Minimum Front Setback (feet) Minimum Rear Setback (feet) Minimum Side Setback (feet) Maximum Building Height (feet) 35 Floor Area (square feet) Plan 1 1,012 Plan 2 1,125 Plan 3 1,160 Plan 4 1,340 Plan 5 1,460 PLANNING AREA 7 PLANNING AREA 8 22.5 10.1 12 12 243 * 121 162 * 202 3.0 **0.75 N/A First Story 150 Upper Stories 100 3,400 7,200 40 N/A 85 N/A 10 One Story 20 Two Story and Up 25 5 One Story 20 Two Story and UP 25 5 One Story 15 · * * 10 Two Story 20 Three Story 25 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A A transfer of density from Planning Area 7 increases the density of Planning area 8 from 12 to 20 dwelling units per acre and increases the number of dwelling units from 1 21 to 202. * * The 0.75 acre area will be private common area. For zero lot line developments. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 3 BACKGROUND Specific Ran 164 was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in 1985 and was subsequently amended by the County in 1988. The applicant met with staff on several occasions regarding the tentative map prior to submittal of the project. The applicant's goal was to propose a project that would be compatible with the surrounding uses and at the same time would provide an opportunity for the applicant to develop the site immediately after approval. During these meetings, it was determined that a Specific Plan Amendment would be required to accomplish the applicant's goal. This project was submitted on July 9, 1993 and was scheduled for a Development Review Committee Meeting (DRC) on August 5, 1993. The issues identified at the DRC meeting included: · · · · · Density transfers between Planning Area 7 and 8 Requirement of a median for Nicolas Road Width of the parkway on Nicolas Road Providing access from Planning Area 7 to Winchester Road through Planning Areas 8 and 9 Traffic concerns at the intersection of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road with emphasis on left turn movements Noise impacts on the project from the traffic on Nicolas Road Maintenance of alleys, walls and side yard landscaping Proximity of the site to the French Valley Airport Influence area Lot sizes and the ultimate product type that will be built on the site Location, design and timing of the park PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of a Specific Plan Amendment and a Tentative Tract Map. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164. AMENDMENT NO. 2 The Specific Plan Amendment changes the zoning of Planning Areas 7 and 8 from Very High Density Residential ( 14.9 dwelling units per acre) and Office to High Density Residential ( 12 dwelling units per acre). This amendment also allows for a transfer of density between Planning Areas 7 and 8 and allows a total of 364 dwelling units within these Planning Areas. It also adds a three (3) acre park to Planning Area 7, adjusts the boundaries between Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9, and allows using street cross sections of 46 and 50 feet as opposed to the conventional 60 foot right-of-way. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 The tentative map subdivides a 22.5 acre parcel into 162 single family lots and a three (3) acre park on the east side of the site (refer to Exhibits D and E). The access to the park is provided from General Kearny Road and two access points are provided from Nicolas Road to the tract. The streets within the tract are narrower than the standard sixty (60) foot right- of-way street section with forty six (46) and fifty (50) foot right-of-ways. Additiorial R:~S~STAFFIIwT~144PA~3,pC 1012B/93 Idb 4 circulation is provided by alleys {twenty feet wide). The minimum lot size for the tract is 3,400 square feet which has been established by the Specific Plan amendment. Accompanying the map are elevations, floor plans, colors and materials, typical plotrings, typical from yard landscape plans and conceptual landscape plans for the park and Nicolas Road. ANALYSIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 97827 The following includes discussion of the issues regarding the map: Develooment Aareement Development Agreement No, 37 was approved by the County in 1988. This project has been conditioned to comply with this Development Agreement or any restatements or amendments thereto, The applicant has been negotiating with the City to enter into a new Development Agreement which may reduce the current impact fees. The Development Agreement will be brought back to the Planning Commission under a separate Staff Report. Home Owners Association The project will have Conditions, Covenants' and Restrictions (CC&R's); however, it will not have a Home Owners Association (HOA). Initially, staff requested an HOA to maintain the common areas such as the alleys, side yard landscaping for the corner lots and the wall along Nicolas Road. However, the applicant does not wish to form an HOA for this project, since the future homeowners will be burdened by the HOA dues as the project is entry level housing. Therefore, he is proposing to eliminate all common areas by dedicating the alleys to the City. Individual. home owners will maintain the side yard landscaping and the wall on Nicolas Road. In order for the Public Works Department to maintain the alleys, they will be constructed with concrete to reduce the maintenance costs, parking and speed limits will be restricted and automatic garage door openers will be required. Moreover, in order for the individual home owners to maintain the side yard landscaping, the applicant has been required to connect the side yard irrigation to the front yard irrigation to reduce the chances of the homeowner turning off the irrigation for the side yard {refer to Exhibit F). The wall on Nicolas Road has been moved from the edge of the right-of-way to inside the individual lots; therefore, the individual homeowners will be responsible for maintaining the portion of the wall within their proparty. The CC&R's include a provision that the same color be used when the homeowners are painting their walls. R:\S~STAFFI~.144PAI3.PC 10/2S/~3 Idb 8 Nicolas Road Improvements Assessment District 161 is scheduled to start construction of full improvements of Nicolas Road in 1994 which will include improving it from Winchester Road to Joseph Road. This improvement will not include a median as proposed on the Draft General Plan Circulation Element. This project has been conditioned to pay its fair share to construct this landscaped median consistent with City standards. The City will also install a interim traffic signal in 1994 at the intersection of Nicolas Road and Winchester Roads. Currently the improvement plans for this signal are being prepared. A copy of the Traffic Study Summery has been included as Attachment No. 4. Noise Impacts A Noise Analysis was performed for the map which has identified impacts on the project. According to this study, mitigation measures included in the conditions of approval will reduce the impacts to insignificant levels. These conditions require six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block walls or a combination of berming and block walls measured from the pad elevation. These walls will be constructed on the rear property lines for lots I through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. Additionally, the applicant will submit a Noise Analysis prior to issuance of building permits to determine the mitigation measures necessary to limit the interior noise levels to 45 CNEL. This study will need to be performed with the benefit of the architectural drawings and the precise grading plans. Walls and Fences In addition to above walls required by the Noise Analysis, a decorative block wall is also required along the western property line (lots 103 through 121) and the side yards for corner lots. The applicant has the option of providing wrought iron, decorative block wall or a combination of the two to take advantage of views along the northern property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. These lots are either adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek or the park. All other interior fencing may be wood fencing. Product Tvoe The map was submitted without the benefit of the elevations, floor plans and typical plottings and front yard landscaping. After reviewing this map with proposed minimum lot sizes of 3,400 square feet and alleys, staff requested the applicant to submit the above information to demonstrate that the product type proposed meets the quality of development desired by the City. Moreover, it was necessary to see how these houses will fit the proposed lots and how the applicant was proposing to take advantage of the alleys. The applicant is proposing five (5) models that range from 1012 to 1460 square feet in size. These units include three (3) to four (4) bedrooms and two car garages (refer to Exhibits J, K, L, M and N). The architecture is mediterranean with stucco exterior and tile roofs (refer to Exhibits I, J1, J2, J3, K1, K2, K3, L1, L2, L3, M1, M2, M3, M4, N1, N2 and N3). The entry to the garages is possible with three (3) different variations: conventional front entry, R:~S~STAFFItwT~144PA~3.PC 10121/93 klb 6 shared side entry and alley rear entry (refer to Exhibit G). The project has been conditioned to restrict parking on all driveways, since the front entry driveways are only ten (10) feet long, the side entry driveway needs to be kept free of parked cars since parked cars will block the entry to the garages and in case of rear entry garages, parking in front of the garages will encroach into the alleys. Imorovement of Santa Gertrudis Creek The construction of Santa Gertrudis Creek is the responsibility of Assessment District 161. According to the Assessment District this construction will commence in 1994. Final releases will not be issued for this project until the construction of the creek is complete as determined by the Riverside County Flood Control. Nicolas Road Parkway Width The proposed map only allows for a six (6) foot wide landscaped parkway between the sidewalk and the property line (refer to Exhibit H1 and H2). However, across the street from the project site the width of the parkway is approximately ten (10) feet wide. Staff requested the applicant to match this width; however, the applicant has maintained a position that the six (6) foot parkway is sufficient to provide a pleasing streetscape and a larger parkway will further reduce the lot sizes (refer to Attachment 5). Park The proposed three {3) acre perk will be improved by the applicant as a turn key operation prior to issuance of the final release of the thirty fourth (34th) dwelling unit or within eighteen (18) months of the recordation of the first phase of the Final Map, whichever comes first. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164. AMENDMENT NO. 2 The following includes a discussion of the issues regarding the Specific Plan Amendment: Boundary Chanaes The Specific Plan Amendment will change the boundaries of Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9 which will result in changes in the areas of these Planning Areas. The following represents these changes: PLANNING AREA 7 . PLANNING.:AREA 8 PLANNING AREA 9- Approved 18.16 4.83 26.69 Proposed 23.60 10.1 20.18 Note: The above totals are not equal due to Santa Gertrudis Creek and street right-of-way areas. R:\S\STAFFRFT~144PAg3.PC 10128/93 klb 7 Densitv Transfer As a part of the Specific Plan Amendment, a zone change and a density transfer is proposed for Planning Areas 7 and 8. The current Specific Plan Zone Designation of Very High Density allows for the construction of 271 multi family units and a 4.83 acre commercial office parcel. The zone change for Planning area 7 and 8 converts the zoning from Very High Density Residential (maximum 14.9 Dwelling units per acre) and Office, respectively, to High Density Residential (maximum of 12.Dwelling Units Per Acre). The density transfer allows the construction of 364 dwelling units within Planning Areas 7 and 8. This density transfer is consistent with the General Plan density for Medium Density Residential (maximum of 12 dwelling units per acre) which could result in 390 dwelling units. The proposed tract map includes 162 single family lots. With benefit of the density transfer, Planning Area 8 could be developed with 202 multi-family dwellings at a density of 20 dwelling units per acre. Since this density is higher than'the usual 14-15 dwelling units per acre approved by the City for multi family projects, a few provisions have been included in the Zoning Ordinance of Planning Area 8 which requires development of a 0,75 acre recreational area which may include basketball, volleyball, barbecue, picnic areas, tot lots and open lawn areas. Moreover, private open space areas such as patios and balconies are required for each dwelling unit at a rate of 150 square feet for first story units and 100 square feet for upper story units. Bufferina The Plannine Areas Since the zoning for Panning Area 8 has been changed from Office to High Density Residential and Planning Area 9 to the west of Planning Area 8 has been approved for retail shopping center, there is a necessity to provide a buffer between these two Planning Areas. Staff and the ap01icant have agreed to a twenty five {25) foot landscaped buffer. It should be noted that a buffer has not been proposed between Planning Areas 7 and 8, since the Zoning Ordinance for Planning Area 8 requires a twenty {20) foot setback for two story buildings and the rear yard setbacks for the single family dwellings proposed on lot 103 through 121 is a minimum of sixteen (16) feet. Therefore, a minimum of 36 feet will separate the buildings within these two Planning Areas. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN, ZONING, AND SWAP CONSISTENCY Specific Plan No. 164. Amendment No. 2 This project will likely be consistent with the future General Plan since the Draft General Plan currently designates the site as Medium Density Residential. This project is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) which designates the site as Specific Plan No. 164. This project is consistent with the intent of Specific Plan No. 164 Amendment No. 1. Tentative Tract MaD No. 27827 This project will likely be consistent with the future 'General Plan since the Draft GenereI.Plan currently designates the site as Medium Density Residential. This project is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) which designates the site as Specific Plan No. 164. This project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2's High Density zone since it meets all the requirements for this zone. R:~S%STAFFRPT~144PAS3.PC 10/28/93 Idb 8 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Initial Study was prepared for Specific Ran No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Specific Plan Amendment and the Tentative Tract Map decrease the number of multi family units from 271 to 202, allow the development of 162 single family dwelling units, and add a fully improved three (3) acre public park. Moreover, the multi family portion of the project includes a 0.75 common open space which was not required in the previously zoned 271 unit project. The environmental impacts of the project have been reduced to insignificant levels with the mitigation measures included in the Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS Soecific Plan No, 164. Amendment No. ~ There is a reasonable probability that Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law, due to the fact that the subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is in substantial conformance with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 1. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan if Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that approval of such an amendment will ensure orderly development of the area and the significant environmental impacts have been mitigated. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residential since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Gertrudis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance· The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the Draft General Plan Land Use Element and the overall density is being reduced. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PAS3.PC 10128/93 Idb 9 Tentative Tract Mao No. 27827 There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map 27827 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law, The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Furthermore, the proposed density of the project is consistent with the future General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium .Density Residential, , There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the City's future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan, since the surrounding land uses are single family dwellings. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning and zoning laws. Reference local Ordinances No, 348,460; and California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law), The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing. needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Section 66412.3) and finds that the project density is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13,000 et seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been conditioned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District's requirements. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and as conditioned. The project is consistent with the intent of the original project approved by the County of Riverside. The project is consistent with the provisions of Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. Said Findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval· R:%S~STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10121/13 Idb 10 Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PC Resolution - Blue Page 12 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 17 Initial Study - Blue Page 34 Traffic Study Summary - Blue Page 49 Applicant's Correspondence on Parkway Landscaping Width - Blue Page 50 Exhibits - Blue Page 51 R:~S~STAFFRFT%144PAI3.PC 10121f83 Idb 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S%STAFFRPT%144PAI3.PC 10128/93 Id~ 12 ATFA~ NO. 1 PC R~OLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECIH~ RECOMM~,NDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO, 92-0145 (SPEC~IC PLAN NO, 164, A.M~.NDIVrF~NT NO, 2) AND PIANNING APPLICATION NO,93-0144 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 27827) TO APPROVE ~MENT NO. 2 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 IN ORDER TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) FROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (20 DW~-I.I3NG UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12 DWm'3.13NG UNX~ PER ACRE), TO ADD A THIzE~, (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST THE BOUNDARH?-~ BETWEEN HANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9; AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827, A 162 SINGI.I?- FAMft-Y LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A THREE (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHrN PLANNING AREA NO. 7. WHEREAS, Leo Roripaugh fled Planning Application No. 92-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Planning Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) in accordance with the Riverside County I-find Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by rdcrcnce; WHEREAS, said applications were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local hw; WtiF-RFAS, the Planning Commission considered said applications on November 1, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WB'F. REAS, at the conclusion of the Commission heating, the Commission recommended appwval of said applications; NOW, THEREFORE, TF!~. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TRY. CITY OF TE1VIEC~A DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOI .I OWS: Section 1. Findm[s. That the Temecuh Planning Commission hereby makes the following fmdings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shah 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 hw that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements arc met: R:~.S\STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 13 general plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The plavning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of buffcling permits, each of the following: a. 1'here is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. Them is little or no probability of substantial detriment to. or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Phn, as mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adoptsi prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside Conmy, 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 pr~!ration of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of said applications makes the following findings, to wit: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 1. There is a reasonable probability that Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law, due to the fact that the subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is in substantial conforrnance with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 1. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan if Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that appwval of such an amendment will ensure orderly development of the area and the significant environmental impacts have been mitigated. 3. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residential since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Genrudis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance. R:%SXSTAFFRPT%144PA~3.PC 10/28/93 Idb I 4 4. The proposal will not have an adverse effea on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the Draft General Plan Land Use Element and the overall density is being reduced. 5. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 1. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map 2782'7 will be consistent with the City' s future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State hw. The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances and development 'standards. Furthermore, the proposed density of the project is consistent with the future General Plan ~ Use Desi~mation of Medium Density Residential. 2. There is not a likely pwhability d substantial detriment w, or interference with the City' s future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan, since the surrounding land uses arc single family dwellings. 3. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law). 4. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has I:mlnnced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Seaion 66412.3) and finds that the pwject density is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. 5. The pwposed project will not result in discharge of waste inW the existing sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13,000 el seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been conditioned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District' s requirements. as conditioned. The pwject has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and 7. The pwjea is consistent with the intent Of the original project appwved by the County of Riverside. Amendment No. 2. The pwjea is consistent with the provisions of Specific Plan No. '164, R:\S\STAFFIRPT~.144PAe3.PC 10128/93 IrJb 15 9. Said Findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein inco, yoaated by xt~fetence, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval. D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, said pwjects are compatible with the health, safety and weftare of the community. Section 2. ~vironmcnt~! ComgiL~nce. A Initial Study was prepared for Spe~.ific Plan No. 1 (34, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been miU~ to an insignificant l=wel. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecuh Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of planning Application No. 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Planning Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) located on the northwest comer of Nicolas Road and North General Keamy .Road subject w the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. S~ction 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOIvIED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN STATE OF CAI-r~ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HERFRy CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1st day of November 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THO~ .l . SECRETARY R:%S%STAFFRPTV44PA93.PC 10/21/93 klb I 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PA93,PC 10128/93 klb 'l 7 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0144, (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) Project Description: A request to subdivide a 22.5 acre parcel into 162 single family dwelling lots and a three (3) acre open space lot for a public perk (Roripaugh Cottages) Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 911-150-035 and 911-150-038 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Bght (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00), which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, 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. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecuia will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. e If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and.approved by the Planning Director. R:%S~STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 18 e This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. e The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Development Agreement No. 37 or any restatements or amendments thereto, 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. e A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits e A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. The plans shall include a note for dust control indicating: A. All active areas shall be watered at least twice a day. Non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacturer's specifications. Ce Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles exit unpaved areas into paved roads. De All dirt hauling trucks shall be covered or they shall maintain at least two (2) feet of freeboard. 10. 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. 11. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Recordation of the final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. A copy of the Final Map B. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: R:%$~I'AFFRPT%144PA~3.pC 10128/93 klb 19 (a) 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, Ordinance No. 655. (b) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. D. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) (a) CC&R's shell be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and ell landscaped and open areas including parkways. No basketball courts shall be allowed in the alleys. No parking shall be allowed on the shared access driveways. All units shall have operating garage door openers at all times. The project shall be consistent with the requirements of the French Valley Airport when the plan is adopted. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscape plans consistent with the following: (a) City Standards. (b) The approved Typical Conceptual Landscape Plans. (c) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas. (d) Complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property. (e) Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots prior to issuance of the first building permits within each of the phases of the Final Map. (f) Change the California Sycamore in the Nicolas Road Conceptual Plans to London Plane Tree. B. Wall and fence plans consistent with the following: (a) All walls and fences shall be a minimum of six (6) feet measured from the highest grade or as otherwise specified below. - - R:~S%STAFFRPT%'144PAR3.PC 10121/93 Idb 20 14. 15. (b) A six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block wall or a combination decorative block wall and berming (measured from the finished pad elevation). shall be constructed on the rear property lines for lots 1 through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. These walls shall have a surface density of at least 3,5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or cracks (Refer to Preliminary Noise Analysis prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, August 11, 1993), (c) Decorative block shall be required for the side yards for corner' lots and along the western property line (lots 103 through 121 ). (d) Wrought iron, decorative block or wrought iron combination shall be required to take advantage of views for rear yards along the northerly property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. (e) Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by 2, 3 and 4 above. (f) The wall along Nicolas Road shall be constructed entirely, including the footings, within fie individual lots and not within the public right-of-' way. Ce Precise grading plans including all structural setback measurements consistent with the approved rough grading plans and the approved plotrings. Elevations, floor plans and colors and materials consistent with the approved plans. E. The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (a) Site Plan with off-street parking (b) Construction Landscape Plans (c) Fencing Plans (d) Building Elevations A Noise Analysis shall be submitted for review and approval for the interior spaces within the project. The maximum interior noise level shall be 45 CNEL. 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 Director approval. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. R:%S%STAFFFFT~144PAI3.PC 10128/93 klb 21 Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 16. If deemed necessary by the Planning Director, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 17. Front yard and slope landscaping and all fencing within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 18. All the Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety. 19. Zero clearance garage doors with automatic garage door openers shall be provided for all units. 20. The wall and the associated .landscaping along Nicolas Road shall be installed prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit within each of the phases of the Final Map that front Nicolas Road. 21. The monument signs for the project shall be maintained by the applicant and shall be removed, if within right-of-way, prior to issuance of the last final release of the project. 22. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency, All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the Tentative Tract Map 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. 24. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on-site fiat work and improvements) grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right- of-way. 25. An EncroaChment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way, R:\S%STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 22 26. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 27. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 28. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submi~ed to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way. 29. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions- of Approval. 30. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway and/or the alley by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 31. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board or the project is shown to be exempt from that agency. 33. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Community Services District (TCSD); General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; and Southern California Gas Company. 34. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations :for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. R:~S%STAFFRtrr%144PAI3.PC 10128/93 Idb 23 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. An Erosion Control Plan in accordance with City Standards, shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineerand submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works, 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 Department of Public Works. 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 Riverside County Rood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit, If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid, The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off- site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A, Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal. of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas, The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site, Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. R:\S\STAFFRFT~144PAe3.PC 10/28/93 klb 24 The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. 43. The site is in an area identified on the Flooo Hazard Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths.' Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 91-12 of the City of Temecula, and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within Flood Zone "A', which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 44. The following storm drain facilities shall be provided along with the facilities as shown on the Tentative Map. The requirement for the underground facilities is to mitigate the surface runoff onto Nicolas Road, the potential maintenance of the nuisance runoff created by this development, and negate the provision of additional drainage facilities downstream since Assessment District 161 did 'not accommodate this development's proposed runoff in sizing the downstream drainage facilities. Catch basins shall be installed at the intersection of "G" Street and Nicholas Road to eliminate the cross gutter. The site shell be designed to minimize the contributory onsite runoff to Nicolas Road at "A' Street by providing additional catch basins and storm drain pipes or by redesignin.c the grades near the intersection of Nicolas Road and "A" Street. Prior to the Issuance of Encroachment Permits 45. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 46. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 47. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A, and 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. R:%S\STAFFFIP~144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 25 48. 49. 50. 51. 5 foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed per City Standard Nos. 400 and 401 specifications. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. All street and driveway centerline-intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through under-sidewalk drains. All driveways shall be located a minimum of 2 foot from the side property line unless otherwise provided for with a joint use easement for ingress/egress. In order for the City to agree to accept and maintain the proposed alleys, they shall be subject to the following conditions: The alleys shall be concrete paved. No utilities shall be installed within the alleys. Parking shall not be permitted along the alleys and they shall be signed accordingly. Lights shall be installed on each garage and/or every house. The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. R:\S\STAFFRP~.144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 26 52, A construction area Traffic Control Ran shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 53, The stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle approach shall be .positioned five (5) feet from Nicolas Road curb line, 54. All required fees shall be paid. Prior to Recordation of Final Map 55, Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 56, The Developer shall construct or post security 8nd enter into 8n agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 57. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board; ' Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Cable 'IV Franchise;, Community Services District; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company: Southern California Gas Company; Department of Fish and Game; and Army Corps of Engineers. R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PA93.pC !0128/93 Idb 27 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works, The draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan calls for an 18 foot wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No. 100. Consequently, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shall be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the improvements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Developer constructs the median, it shell accommodate a left turn pocket into Roripaugh Road. The median shall be continuous at "A" Street tO restrict access to right turn in/out movement if the it is to remain at its currently designed location. The median shall also be designed to accommodate a 150 foot left turn pocket into Warbler Circle and "G" Entry Street and "D" Street and Nicolas Road should the Developer choose to relocate the access to that location. If the median is not constructed, the Developer shall accommodate the above by striping accordingly. Sufficient right-of-way along "G" Entry Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 60 foot full width right-of-way end shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "A", "B", "C", and the remainder of "G" Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 50 foot full width right-of-way including the standard knuckle, and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "D" , "E" , and "F" Streets shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 46 foot full width right-of-way and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 16 feet on both sides of the centerline and 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as deterfnined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along the Alleys shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 20 foot full width right-of-way and the entire width shall be improved' with concrete pavement, or post bonds for the alley improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. R:\S~STAFFRPT~144PAg3,PC 10/2g/~3 Idb 28 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be high enough to meet peak hour signal warrants. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Nicolas Road and so noted on the Final Map as approved by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Nicholas Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at locations as determined by Riverside Transit Agency and the Department of Public Works. The joint use driveway easements shall be shown on the Final Map. No building 13ermits for units with joint use shall be issued until the Final Map has been recorded, 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 for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: A. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. B. Special Study Zones. R:~S~STAFFRPT~144PAI3.pC 10128193 Idb 29 75. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 76. The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 77. The Developer shall notify the City's cable 'IV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 78. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the proparty to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. Ce The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrent with the Final Map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, Use, repair and maintenance of all private areas. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. ' F, The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the proparty and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 79. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Rel~ort addressing compaction and site conditions. ' ' R:%S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 30 80. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 81. The Developer shall pay the Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee as per the amended Development Agreement as reviewed and approved by the City. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy .. 82. All improvements shell be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 83. All signing and striping shall .be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 84. The traffic signal at. Nicolas Road and Winchester Road shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. 85. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 86. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum .sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 87. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 88. In the event that the required improvements on Nicolas Road along the property frontage of this development are not completed by AD 161, the Developer shall construct the required half width improvements per City Standard No. 100 or as otherwise determined by the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements: 89. A Class II Bicycle Lane on Nicolas Road shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan and in concurrence with the completion of the street improvements. 90. Construction of the public park site, perimeter landscaping and medians shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. R:\S%STAFFRPT%144PAS3.PC 10128/93 Idb 31 91. The developer, or the developer's successors or assignees, shall maintain the park site, parkway landscaping and medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 92. All parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public park purposes. A policy of title insurance and soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 93. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space shall be maintained by the individual property owners. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map: 94. Prior to recordation of the first phase, the developer or his assignee shall enter into an agreement and post security to improve lot number 163, a three (3) acre site, as a public park facility, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Lot No 163 shall be identified as a public park site and offered for dedication to the City on the final map. 95. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve the parkway landscaping and landscaped medians within Nicolas Road right-of-way in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. All proposed slopes, landscaping and medians intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the final map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 96. Landscape construction drawings, consistent with the approved conceptual landscape plans, for the public park site, parkway landscaping, and medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of the final map. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy: 97. Actual development and dedication of the park to the City shall be completed prior to issuance of the 34th certificate of occupancy, or within eighteen months of recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever cbmes first. 98. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. OTHER AGENCIES 99. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated July 27, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 32 100. 101. 102. 103. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated September 20, 1993, a copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division Ordinance No. 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated August 3, 1993, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittel dated'July 29, 1993, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittel dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:~S~STAFFRPT~q44PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 33 COUNTY OF RIVE.RSIDE * HEALTH SI~VICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July, 27, 1993 RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43 174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECUIA CA 92590 ATTN: Saied Naaseh: AUG 0 z~ 1993 Ans'd ........;... RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOTS 182 AND 183 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS, SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDS, TOGETHER WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF HAMILTON AVENUE, BANANA STREET, AND APRICOT STREET, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA AS SHOWN PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 37 OF PATENTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL BEING IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (163 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Deparunent of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as a proved bv the wier cornpan and the Health Department. Permanent prints of ~et plans o[ the water system as~all be submitted m triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, locauon of va ves and fire hvdrants' pipe and 'oint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of th~ new s~,stem to ~e existing system. The lans shall compl in all res ects with Div. 5 Part 1, Cha ter 7 of the California izFJalth and Safety ~ode. Cre'a~omia Administrahve Code, ~tle 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. i03 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable.. e 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 Map No. 27827 is m accordance with the water system expanszon plans of the cho California Water Dismet and that the water serwces, storage, and distribution svstem will be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply watZ to such Tract Map at an specific Clarifies flows or pressures for fire rotection or any other purpose. ~t~s certification shift be si ed by ares onsi~Vg official of the water company. The plans must be submittedgrit; the City oTTemecula's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the fin map. providing satisfactory financial arrangements are com leted with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be ma~ prior to the recordation of John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive · Riverside, CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909) 358-501 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 · Riverside, CA 9251 3-7600) City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page 2 Arm: Saied.Naaseh July 27, 1993 the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shah be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to lans and s eci~cations as approved by the District, the Ci of Temeeula anR the He~Department. Permanent ' ts of the lans of~e sewer ~,tem shall be submitted in tri licate, along with ~eo~ri~ ~r~w~g, to the City of Temecula. The prin~ shall ~ow the internal p. ipe diafneter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint s ecifications and the size of the sewers at the jtmction of the new system to ~ ' ' system. A sin e plat indicatin location of sewer lines ~nd waterlines shallmun~e a portion of~e sewage plans an~profiles. The plans shall be signed by a regi'stereit _engineer and the sewer distiiet with the fdllo__wing cmifie~icm: "I certify that the design of the sewer .system in Tract Map No. 27827 is in accordance with the sewer system Eastern expansxon plans of the M~micipal Water District and that the waste disposal stem is adequate at this time to treat the antiei ated wastes from the pro oseds~arcel Map". The plans must be submitted to ~e City of Temecula's O~c~e to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the reeordation of the final map. It will be necessary_ for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincetel3(, / ' .7" Sam Martinez, Environmental Health Specialist IV SM:dr (909) 275-8980 KENNETH L EDVVARDS OBIllALMANAOER-CHIEFININII/R RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT LeA es- |4 5") plan check city land use cases. or provide State Division 'of Fieel Eatme letters or olher good hazard reports Mr suclq cases. District axrwrmms/uc _.,.,~wr.:lations tot such cans ere normally'limited to Items of $xcffic imerest to the Dmetct including District Mane DrWnage Plan facilities. other regiorml flood control and drainage fadlilies e cgmk:l be com'd.rad · logical oc.,(dor~w.~ or extemio~ of m master plan system, end District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation INs). In addition, irdormatim of a genera nature is provided. The District has not reviewed h propoled pr~ in dltlil Ind the fl:iowirlg c/ticked C(,,,,.I.IIS dO not in any way conmjtme or imply ENstri~ [~ This projec~ would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Re radiities nor rare other facilities of Woetel imamst proposed. ~Ns project involves i:Nst~ct Master Plan facilities. The ~ will racemix _L, ~e.d~ip OI such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities 'must be constructed to I:Nstricl standards, and District INan check 8rid inwlrvJian will be required tot Districl aocBptance. Ran check, inspection and 8drninistrmive fees will be required. his project proposes channels, drains 36 inches or ........ and/or a logical extension of the adopted ~.Je,-vAf,, ---~ ownership of such facilhies on wffiten request of me . Facilities must be oonstnjcmd to District standarm, and District pan check and inspection will be required for District 8cceptance. Ran Check, inflr_%~ien 8M Mrninistrative fees will be required. J~'~his proied is Iocaed Mmin me ,m,s of me Distric~'st~-"f" C ....('-"-.,M~L..f.f Arm Drmruge Ran tot whac~ drainage of a parcel map or sutxlivision Imor to recomation of me finaJ map. Fees to be paid should la at ~ me in effec~ aT the lime of recordmion, or ~ deferred, at tm time of i__e~J__mnCe of the aclual permit. GFNFRAI INFtIR,ATP'IN This peqed may require · Nmionml Pollutant Discharge Bmination System (NPDES) pemit from the Stme Wmir Fiesourms Cornfd Board. Clearance for grading, recorclation, or other final approv/, slx}uld not be given unlil lhe City has ddej,,insd tm lhe project has been granted · permit or is shown to be exempt. ~thispr~jec~inv~ivesaFedera~Enm1;emyManagementAgemy(FEMA)maic1adf~dpiain~1~antheCityah~u~drequir~~t~ Wovide all studies, --':ulmiens, IMam and mhe inlormatien required to meet FEMA re~lLt;e.,~, u,, and should turmer require that the applicant obtNn · Conditiona Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, ~ or other 6had ~.~.-~at ot the project. and · Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to i:x:x:upancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this Ixoject the City Ihoe. dd rl(:luire the applicant to obtljn · Section 160111603 Agreeflllnt from the ClJifofflil DIp" b.~;..d Of RIll lad Game lad I Cki4fl Wlter AcI Section 404 pef!~t h'om the U.S. Arllly ~ of Engineers, or ve'fiten i:x~respondert~f from these egef~ies indiclling the txoject is exempt from Iheee rs..j~:.L,~!'.ts. A Qean Water Act Section 404 Water QuaJily Certification may be required from the Iocad Cadifomil Regional Water QuaJity Control Board Icmor Io issuance of the Corps 4o4perrrm. C: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92570 · (909) 657-3183 TO: ATTEN: RE: Temecula Planning DeDartment Saied Naaseh PA93-0144 Tentative Tract 27827 August 3, 1993 With resoect to the conditions of aOOroval for the above refer- the Fire Department recommends the foiiowlno enced land ~IVISIOR? fire ormtection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside Coun~i>~ Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: i :=,cr;e~u .~. e Fi f i re ...-..Irote-~ ~ n · ' ...... ~ ~o . n apmroved standard f i re h';,- ,:~ran':.s, (.~:."::.~4 ..... I ..... 7~ located one at ~acK street inZersection and s~,aced no more, than 330 feet amart or no portion of 1 ot frc:,n~ ac~ more than ~ ~, feet from a hydrant Minimum fire ~Iow sha..]' ._.= iOC, C: '= .... for ~ hours "~ .... n~ ~ the . . ;:Ac.o.~ i c:=. , ~, meveiomer snali furnish one copy of water' o" ans To '~_,he Fire Deoar~ment for rev~.ew. Plans si~ali De signeO be a ;"'ce::asn:ar'ac:', ::i'~'Zl ~nmlneer, ,zon'aainzno a Fire Department am5rovai Slc]:',L';.:'...~rE. oic~ck an~ sna~. ]. conform 'to P',vdrar~t tv'~ . ' ' . P , ic, catiOn, sz. ac~nc and c, znimum fire f low. Cnce plans are s;~neO ~. .... the ' ocal wa~er company, the originals shai I ~e p',-esente6 'to -~h~ Fire DeOartmenz for signature. 3. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in, private s'~ree~s and ~ to , wrive,,~a'.'~. ihdicate location of ~ire hydrants. The)/ shall be mount_~ :..n the middle of the street directly in line with fire .-,-. inclur~in~ fire hydrants. shall be ~ The re~uire~ water- system, . . . ~.ns~alle~ an~ acce~te~ my ~ne approoriate water agency Drier to an':.,' combustioie building materi~.l being placed on an inoividual ::~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3764) 12th Street. Riverside. CA 92501 ~909) 275-4777 * FAX (909) 369-74:51 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PI,ANNIN(; SECTION ~ INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Cuuntry. Club Drive. Suite F. Indiu, CA 92201 ~619) 863-8886 · FAX (619) 863-7072 ~.r~i, ii ~tDO-4 ~' L4it~i ~'~e City Of TemeCLLII~ a cash ~-~m per ~.ot../un~t, as mitigation ~or fire protection ~moac~s. '~']~- developer C~iODSe tO defer ~he ~ime of Da'.~,ment ne.,'sne may enter into a written agreement w~th the Spunky ~ef'er'-in~ ~.a~c oa'yment tc~ the time of issuance of the firs~ bu~i~n~ oercn~=.. · -.~ ~ .=~ions reoarding the mean~no of condiZions ferred to the F'lannino and EnQineerlng Staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planne~- "',, ~~ ~~ Laura Cabral , Fire Safetv Smecieli=t E, stern Municipa} rater District July 29, 1993 RECEIVED .: :2 Saied Naaseh, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Ans'd ............ SUBJECT: Tract 27827 (PA 93-0144) Dear Mr. Naaseh:: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposal to subdivide 22.5 acres located between Nicolas Rd. and the Santa Gemdis Creek at the northwest comer of the intersection of Nicolas and North General Kearney Rds., into 163 single family residential lots with alleys and a 3.0 acre park' site. The subject project is located within the District's sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available service capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must aWange for the preparation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: Mail To: Post Office Box 8300 * SanJacinto, California 92581-8t00 · Telephon~ (909) 925-7676 * Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 S. San Jam Avenue, San Jarjnto · Custotm-r $ervim/Engittnriag Annex: 440 E Oakland Avenue, H~net, CA S~i~:l N~eh City of Temecula Tract 27827 July 29, 1993 Page 2 Written request for a "plan of service". Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits my be required for extensive development proj~ts or proj~ts located in "difficult to ~rve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subj~t project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (TVR~,VRF). The nearest existing TVRWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject project are as follows: 15-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer aligned along Nicolas Rd. between Roripaugh and North General Ke,-u'ney Rds. Other Issues The District requires that onsite sewers be located within the proposed public roadways and not alleyways. Should you have any questions regarding these comments; please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT ~]avid G. Crosley ~ . S Department Senior Engineer-Customer ervice DGC/clz AB 93-835 (wp-ntwk-TR27827.cLz) Inursaay OctolDer 1~,, 1993 Z:lOpm -- From '7166969175' -- Page gl SENT BY:TEIEX::LLA ;10-14-83; 13:02; RANCHO WATER- 90961~6477;12/3 Octobcr] 4, ! 993 ~ of Tcn~pdS 43174 D-.--:,.-a.s Park Drive Tcmcsula, CA 92590-3606 SUIUF, CT: Tmci No. 27827 (in~ I~s crammerlin of all in-lmct and off-ire ~) bstw~n 1~CWD andthspmpmyownet. The esdsting R~ water slxxragc axxl distn*buli{m systcm nury not k sdecluah: m provide dnmpm'~c wM,-,- and fife protection services to Ihe abovc ~ .~sc~'n~ District N,. 161 (AJ:)-I61). l'ac folto~vin8 inronnstima is in~y-k-I |o explain tlz Distdct's lx~sition in providin~ water Thc funms or w-,~-r scrvicc within AD-I61 is dcpesdszt upon thc proi~ ty owncn and the County of Riversick approving .,~Fldcmcntal fnancing of watcr hcili~es to scrvic~ the pmperUes within RCWD boundadcs. The Dislzict Ires _rece_;ivecl several zcqucsts from developen in this an:a for RCWD to rcview the current wan' service sltmaion to dctcrminc if the existing waist s3~tcm can sup[x~t additional dovelopmeut prior to Ihe conslzucdon of addi~omd wat~ supply facilities. Bascd upon an additional hydrau~ nna[ysis perrmTned by Tr~-T~dd~c F-qginc~,ix~ Corporalion nnd anual fidd fx~ flow tcsls,* syslcm can suplx~ an addilioual maximum daily flow of 400 ~an, This flow oqualcs Io silhs, 380 xcsidud hintslug unils o~ 115 acres of commsndal d~v~lopm~t or a combinMion ofbolh, Thc~ a~c somc iimil~ions lhe existing syslcm can scrve; nside~ial dcvclopmmt is limilcd 1~ ansas undcr shc 1,1 5fl-foot elevation and crmunerdal dcvcl~t is limi~nd ~o pmpentls along I~ Wineh~sls* Rnad oon*idor at dsvalions undcr 1,125 feet Under Ihnsc conditions, Uac Dislrict can mcc~ ahc nniduatial daily demands inr, luding a flow of 1,000 glau and lhc commsdal daily demmmds including flow of 2,,500 RCWD will tequin: ihat all n~idr, mia] mcl~ iulends bc 1½ ind~s in d~ametcr and that all rcsiden,'e~ ~ a prcuk"g xcgulalnr for timarc conversion to ~ 1380 o ImmdmlblllmqMm MIUim lbtml - ~OllP~.llm til' * '!Mmmldm, i/rp · IIIIIIHrdl-IIII! · lnursc~ay Oc;ooer 14, 1993 2:101~n -- From '71~6949175' -- Page ~l ~ ~Y:~ ;1~14-~; 1~:~; ~ WA~ 90~~;~ ~/~ cit ef T c,t, Planning Delmrtment October 14, 1993 Pagc Two The District will accept mcter applications on a fint.-cmndfint-scrved basis. Applicants must mcct the flow and elevation conditions stated above. Mctcr q~iiCmioa fees must bc paid in full at the current rate at the timc of applimfiou. If fees should inctea~ prior to installation of thc waur match, the developer will have 90 days Io lave tie au:uws inslalkd or Ihey wiJI be liable to pay the ingnra~ in application fees. For those propc:tics thai miucst service slier the avaihblc capecity i.~ drdic'zete-I or Lf they do not mcct the elevation conditions stated above, the consuuctiml of the implrm,-~dng facilities identifi~ for AD- 16 ! will bc required prior to installation of the meteted I:rvice. Those implementi~ facilities are listed below: 1. A54-inchwatetmah, pandidtaW'nstmtetRmd, fnm~l-151oMatgafimRoad; A 1380 Pressme Zone pump station near the inletsc~itm of Margnrita Road and Wit,,-h,-st~r Road; s A water main in Mmlp~la Road thnt is 30 inelu:s in diameter from the pump station to Rustic Glen Drive, 30 inches 1o Date ~ and 30 inches along ~ b~at:et Io Wi~ React; A 24-inch waterline frown the intetsmkm of lVlmTa~m Road and Windacsta: Road to Noah Genernl Kcnrny Road: 5. A eermection to the 13g0 Pressu~ Zone at North Gc:nc:rd Keamy Road and Nieotns Road. As .etated abovc, it my be necessary rm the developer to uplrade ewe existing wnlet system to fm'ovicl~ sufficient pressure for domestic and fir~ ptmcetion INnTen. It tony also be ncce,saty for the developer to ilTstaU Off-bite f'aCilitics tO DM:Ct the demands of thi~ property. Howcvcr, this does not constitm~ a guarantee tlmt RCWD will ampply wnlx:r to said Fareel al any specie qunntity, ~m,', or l~sure for fire prolecticm or for nny otha purpose. Water ava~bility would be contingent upon the popc, ty owna' sibming an Agency Agreement which a.,,.-~igns wnt~ managmne~ righL% if nny, to RCWT). If you should have asy questions, plc:ee contact us. Sineerdy, RANClIO CAI..IFORN']A WATER DISTRICT Sieve Brannon. P.E. Development ;Engineering Man~er m:SO:eblO/FZG? ATTACHMENT NO. 3 INITIAL STUDY R:\S\STAFFFIPT%144PA93.PC 1012~/93 Idb 34 City of Temecula "l nnin Department Initial Environmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION II. 1. Name of Project: Roripaugh Estates 2. Case Numbers: Planning Application No. PA93-0144 and PA93-0145 , Location of Project: Locat~ on the North-west corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road Description of Project: A Request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164-to Change the Zoning for Planning Axeas 7 ( 22.5 Acres) and 8 ( 10. I Acres) from Very High Densky Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), and Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, a 163 lot subdivision within Planning Area No. 7. 5. Date of Environmental Assessment: Sepmmber 22, 1993 6. Name of Proponent: Roripangh Ranch Inc. , Address and Phone Number of Proponent: P.O. Box 2 Temecula, CA 92590 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section Ill) I. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Maybe N__o Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? X b, Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil? X Change in topography or ground surface relief features7 X The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e, Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? X R:~,SXSTAFFRP'I~144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 35 g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, ground failure, or similar hazards? i. Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?. b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement; temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Wstff. Will the proposal result in: a. 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 mount of surface runoff?. c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the mount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 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 mount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or prol~rty to water related hazards such as flooding? X X Mavl~ X X X X X X X X R:%S~,STAFFFIFT'%144PAB3.pC 10128193 Idb 36 Yes Maybe N_.~o 4. Hunt Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including frees, 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? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, shellfish, 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? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? X X X X X X X X X X R:\S\STAFFRPTV44P/~93.PC 10128/93 klb 37 Yes Maybe No 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticicles, chemicals, oil or radiation)? b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? c. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Trnnsportation/Cireulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement Of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public $ervi~s. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or alm'~l governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire proudion? X X X X X X X X X X X R:~S%STAFFRFT~144PA93.PC 10128/93 kib 3~ Yes Maybe N__Qo b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e, Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X Other governmental services: X 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: Use of substantial mounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities: a, Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? C, Water systems? Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? X X e, Storm water drainage systems? X Solid waste disposal systems? X Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient panera of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive recepwrs (such as hospitals and schools) to toxic pollutant emissions? X X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? -- _ X b, The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X R:XS\STAFFRPT%144PA~3.PC 10128/93 k, lb 39 19. 20. c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or hiswric site? bs Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or objea? Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d, Restrictions W existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes X Mayl~ No X X X X X R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PAS3.PC 10128/93 Idb 40 IH. DISCUSSION OF ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ..,arth 1 .a.d. No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures, destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features since the site has already been Faded and no unique features exist on site. No impacts are anticipated. 1.b. Yes. The project will cause disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of soil, however, the impacts are considered insignificant since the site has already'been graded and additional Fading will be for foundation, street improvements and drainage. 1 .c.g. No. The projea will not result in change in topography or ground surface relid features, or modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake since the projea site has already been graded. The Santa Gemdis Creek will be developed by Assessment District 161 prior w development of this site. The project will have no significant impacts. 1 .e.f. Yes. The projea will result in an increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site and changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. These impacts are mainly short term as a result of construction. The City will require the use of appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. Long-term erosion and deposition from the project site is expected to decrease as a result of the project because of the required paving and landscaping when the site is ultimately developed. No significant impacts are anticipated. l .h.i. No. The project will not result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, and development near an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone, since the General Plan EIR does not identify the site in being in any of these areas. However, the site is within a liquefaction zone as identified in the General Plan EIR. The Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon, Inc., Revised August 1993, identifies the site as having a low potential for liquefaction since the ground water is approximately 47 feet below the existing ground level and the density of the alluvium left in place is generally dense and increases with depth. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated, if the recommendations included in the Geotechnicai report for grading operation are implemented. Air Yes. The construction of the site will ultimately result in the local deterioration of air quality. It will ultimately result in some short-term construction related increases in air emissions and particulate matter when the site is developed; however, these impacts are not considered significant, since dust control measure mitigation measures such as watering the active areas at least twice daily, applying non-toxic soil stabilizers to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacturer's specifications, installing wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onW paved roads and covering all din hauling trucks or maintain at least two (2) feet of fleeboard. In addition, upon development of the site, some long-term air pollutant emissions from increased auwmobile usage could occur; however, this impact is not anticipated to be significant since the number of dwelling units proposed in the pwject (162) does not exceed the 166 unit threshold set by AQMD. -""- R:~.SXSTAFFRFT~144PA93.PC 1012e/93 Idb 41 2.b.c. No. The projea will not create objectionable odors or cause altermion of air movement, temperature or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally because of the nature and location of the pwjea. No significant impacts are anticipated. Water 3 .a.c.d. e.f.g.h. i. No. The projea will not cause changes in currents or the course or direaion of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters, alterations to the course or flow of flood waters, change in the mount of surface water in any waterbody, discharge into surface waters or in any alterations of surface water quality, alteration of the direction or rate of flow of Found waters, change in the quantity of ground waters, reduction in the mount of water otherwise available for public water supplies, or exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because of location and size of this project. The site has already been graded and is adjacent to Santa Gemdis Creek which will be developed by Assessment District 161 . No significant impacts are anticipated. 3.b. Yes. This project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and mount of surface runoff since impervious surfaces will be created when it is ultimately developed. This impact is not anticipated to be significant since the storm water is directed to improved drainage facilkies. Plant Life 4.a.b.d. No. This project will not change the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plant, reduce the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants or reduce the acreage of any agricultural crop since the site has already been graded. No significant impacts are anticipated. 4.c. Maybe. This project may introduce new species of plants; however, when the project is ultimately developed, as new landscaping will be introduced.as a part of the new developmere. No significant impacts are anticipated. Animal Life 5.a. No. The projea will not cause a change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals, since the site has previously been completely graded and no discernible animal communities or species reside on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated. 5.b.c. d.e. No. The project will not cause a reduction in numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals, introduction of new wildlife species inw the area, a barrier to the migration or movement of animals or deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat since the site is already graded and is located in an urban area. Applicable Stephens' Kangaroo rat fees will be paid, since the project is within the fee area.. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:'%S%STAFFRPT~14,4PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 42 Noise Yes. The project will increase the existing noise levels. However, when the site is ultimately developed, short term increases will be associated with the grading and construction of the site which will be mi~ga~i through restrictions in the hours of construction activities. Long term project impacts will be associated with the increased traffic on site and on Nicolas Road. The Noise study prepared for this project (Mestre Cwreve Associates, August I1, 1993) identifies significant exterior noise impacts (over 65 CNEL) that can be mitigated to insignificant levels (under 65 CNEL) by constn~ction of a six foot six inches (6'6") high wall along the Nicholas Road, side yard of lots 22 and 1, and rear yards of lots 103, 104 and 162. Furthermore, the interior noise levels were analyzed and determined to be significant ( 45 CNEL and above). The second floor building surfaces in the project will be exposed to a maximum of 72 CNEL, and will therefore require at least 27 dB noise reduction in order to meet the interior noise level standard. Detailed engineering calculations are needed for building n__n_enuation requirements greater than 20 dB. Specific mitigation measures will be d~ined after the precise grading plans and the construction plans are prepared.. The' noise levels need to be reduced to 45 CNEL in order to reduce the impacts to insignificant levels. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the approval of this project due to the mitigation measures outlined in the Noise Study prepared by Mestre Greve Associates. 6 .b .c. No. The project will not expose people to severe noise or vibrations because of the residential nature of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated. Light and Glare , Maybe. The project may cause an increase in light and glare. However, since the project will be conditioned to comply with the requirements of Ordinance 655, California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory no significant impacts are anticipated. Land Use Yes. The project will cause an alteration of the present land use of the area since when the site is ultimately developed it will change it from vacant to residential which is consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Density Residential. This change is not anticipated to have a significant impact since the area is mostly developed with residential uses and the future use of this site will be consistent with the zoning and General Plan land use designation of the area. 8.b. No. The proposed project will not cause alteration to the future planned land use of this area, when ultimately developed, as described in the draft General Plan which designates the site as Medium Density Residential. Since this project is consistent with the draft General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated. Natural Resources 9.a.b. Yes. The project will result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources and depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources when the site is ultitnately developed, since it will use aggregate materials for construction and petroleum for construction and use. However, since these materials are commercially available, no significant impacts are anticipated. .-"- R:XS%STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 43 Risk of Upset 10.a.b. No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion and/or, the release of hazardous substances, when the site is ultimately developed, since hazardous substances will not be stored on site. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. lO.c. No. The projea will not result in any interference with an emergency response plan when the site is ultimately developed, since proper circulation has been provided on site and adequate access has been provided to publicly maintained streets. As a result, no significant impacts are 'anticipated from this project. Population 11. Maybe. This projea is a residential development and due to its residential nature there may be alterations to the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of this area. However, no significant impnets are anticipated due to the small size of the project. Housi~, 12. No. The project will not affect existing housing and create a demand for new housing when the site is ultimately developed because of the residential nature of the prOjea with no potential for new employment. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. Transportation/Circulation 13.a.f. Yes. The project will generate approximately peak 1609 daily trips, increase traffic hazards to · motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians when the site is ultimately developed. However, the number of trips generated are not significant since the projea abuts Nicholas Road and Winchester ' Road which will be developed by the Assessment District 161. Furthermore. the number of access points is restricted for efficient flow of traffic. All projects increase traffic hazards; however, this project and previous projects have been conditioned to reduce these hazards to an insignificant level (i.e. restricted access, traffic lights). Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. 13.b.c.d. e. No. The project will not cream additional demand on parking, cause a substax~tial impact on existing transportation systems, alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods and alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic because of the residential nature and location of the site. No significant impacts are anticipated. Public Services 14.a.b.c. d.e.f. No. The project will not have a substantial impact on fire protection, police protection, schools, parks and other governmental services since these services are already available for the project area. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:%S\STAFFRPTX14.4PA93.PC 10128/93 ~ 44 ~ Energy 15.a.b. No. The project will not result in substantial use of fuel or energy when the site is ultimately developed. It will not result in substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy because of the small scale of the project and the commercial availability of these resources. No significant impacts are anticipated. Utilities 16.a.b.c. d.e.f.g. No. The project will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to any of the following: power or natural gas, communication systems, water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water drainage systems, solid waste disposal systems and will not result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above because of the project location and its proximity to the utilities and the availability of these utilities. No significant impacts are anticipated. Human Health 17.a. No. The project will not create potential health hazards when the site is ultimately developed because of the residential nature of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated. 17.b. No. The project will not expose people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors such as hospitals and schools to toxic pollutant emissions because of the nature and location of the project which is not in close proximity to these sensitive receptors. No significant impacts are anticipated. Aesthetics 18.a.b.c. No. The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or in a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding area, when the site is ultimately developed, because of the nature and location of the project and the fact that the elevations of the buildings will be consistent with the existing buildings in the area. No significant impacts are anticipated. Recreation 19. Yes. The project will result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities since the project is proposing a public park. This impact is considered positive and no significant impacts are anticipated. ..--'- R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 45 Cultural Resources 20.a.b.c. d. No. The project will not result in alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehiswric, archeological or historic site, adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, sU'ucture or object, any poe~al to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values, or restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area since the project site has already been Faded. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PA93.pC 10/28/93 Idb 46 ~ IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential m either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustnining levels, threaten to eliminate a platIt, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory7 Yes Maybe N__o X Does the project have the potential to achieve short term, to the disadvantage of long mrm, environmem, ai 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 wtal 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 FISH AND GAME "DE MINIMUS" IMPACT FINDINGS Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viabiliry" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code). Yes X .-"'~ R:%S\STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10128/93 Idb 47 ENVIRONMENTAL Dg'rERMINATION 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 effea on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached ~heets and in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the projea will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find the proposed projea MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Prepared by: Signatur~ Saied Naaseh. Associate Planner Name and Title September 22. 1993 Date RASXSTAFFFIFT%144PAJ3.pC: 10128/93 Idb 48 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 TRAFFIC STUDY SUMMARY R:\S%STAFFRI:r~I44PA83.PC 10/21/93 klb 49 Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates I-INTRODUCTIONANDSUMMARy ,4,. Purpose of Report and Study Objeetives The primary purpose of the City's focused-traffic analysis is to respond to the following questions: What is the percentage of impact to intersections within the study area by the proposed project? · If signals are require~ what is the project's fair share contribution? Based on a more detailed discussion of wa.ffic issues related to the Roripaugh Residential Property site, the following specific study objectives were idenzified: 1 ) A review of existing roadway and traffic conditions in the viciniDr of the site; 2) 3) 4) 5) Identification of the probable tra~c generation associated with the current residential land use density (currently proposed density is lower than that the density currently approved for the l~ofipaugh Residential Property site; A review-of anticipated site-related zraffic impacts (increases) at key nearby intersections based. on existing backgound u'affic volumes; A review of the proposed site access street intersections on Nicolas Road; A review of the site layout in terms of genera/on-site circulation; and A review of cumulative development traffic conditions without and with the project. B. Executive Summary This seaion presents an overview of the focused =affic analysis findings, conclusions, and recommendations for mitigating anticipated trafiSc impac~ related to the Koripaug, h Residential project. Roripaugb Residential Property 1 Ci~ of Temuula Focused TralJc Study Wilbur Smith Associates Site Location and Study A~ea - The site is Ionted on the north side of Nicolas Road, generally b~ween Roripaugh Road and North C-enenl Kurny Road (see Figure 1). Acce. ss to and from the site would be served by Nicolas Road- Nicolas Road is currently a two-lane roadway between Winchester Road and Roripaugh Road- Benveen Roripangh Road and General Kearny Road, Nicolas Road has been improved ~o its nllima~ half fight-of way cross- seelion on the south side (ustbound). The north side (westbound direction) portion of tiffs sem'nenl only provides for one u'avel lane. The improvement of the nor~ side of this segment w~uld be accomplished as par~ of the A~sessrnent Disu'ic~ 161 (A.D. 161) Nicholas Road improvements. Winchester Road is currently widened to its designated six-lane Urban Arterial classification from 1-15 m Margarira Road. Northust of Margarira Road, W'mchcs~er Road .provides only two navel lanes. Development Description - The projec~ development proposal consis~ of 162 single-family residcllfiaJ dwelling Units and a three-acre 'neighborhood park located on an approxlma~cly 22 acres. Principle Findings - Key findi'~Es of the focused xnffic analysis arc as follows: · Existin~ t~eak-hour ~raffic volurrtes aI the inwrsccfion of Winchester Road/Nicolas Road warrant signalintion of the inrn-sc~om The Nicolas Road widening/Santa Oernmdis Creek Flood Control project is being funded by A.D.161 and should bc underway within the ne0a three months. This project would improve NiColas Road to iLs ultimate Arterial cross-section from Winchester Road to Jus~ cas~ of General Kay Road. The currently proposed project reflects a reduction in the already appwvcd residential density for the site. This reduction in density would result in an approximale 38 to 40 pcrccm reduction in the potential project u'ip generalion. Projected 1994 traffic conditions with the project would provide peak-hour service lcvcts of "C" or bcucr al the unsignalized Nicolas Road inmrscctions formed by Koripaugh Road, Wcs~ Project Access, and Warbler Circle. Projected Cumulative Development scenario tr~e:ic conditions with and without the project would bc identical except for those movements spcc~cally"rclatcd direct project access. Trifle movements projected to operated at service level "E" or worse under this scenm'io either do not involve project traffxc movements or ~ffcct an insi~nfLficant number of project vehicles. · Assuming siFmlization Roripaugh Ruidentmi Property of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection peak-hour City of Temecuh Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates service levels would be "B" or better for the 1994 With Project scenario and "D" or bener for the Cumulative Development With Project scenario. The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be high eno,ugh zo meet peak hour signal warrants. Proposed access spacing along Nicolas Road would be less than the ideal spacing, but is not anticipated to significantly impact traffic operation on Nicolas Koad. · The .~eomeu7 of Nicolas Road at Warbler Circle is anticipated to cause si=ht distance ~oblems unless additinnsl sighx obs'~;~~" ~-tback recmirements are imuosed- · Proposed on-she circulstion provisions are alerefrained w be adequsxe for the projecL Recommendations - WSA has d~veloped the following recommendations findings of the focused traffic analysis: based on the · Accept the proposed lower residential density to minimiTe project traffic generation. · Provide approximately 150 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movemenu imo the project site at the West Project Access. · Provide approximately 100 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movemenu into the project site at the Warbler Circle access. Roripaugh Residential Property 3 Cii7 of Teme~ula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates In. AREA CONDITIONS This section defines the study area, describes existing land use, addresses the transportation network and current traffic conditions. Study Area Deftned Given the location of the site and the likely .disuibution'of project wartic to and from the east and west on Nicholas Road, a snsdy areS was initially defined (through discussions with Public Works Depaztment staff') ~o include the Nicholas Road corridor se~ornent from Winchester Road to North General Kearny Road. Key lnffic issues associated with the Roripaugh Residential Development are focused on the immediate access intersections formed by the proposed project access drives and the existing intersections along Nicholas Road within the study ares, B. Study Area Land Use Land use within the study area is primarily residential. Existing residential development is comprised of Roripaugh Estates and Meadowview to the south and some partially developed residential subdivisions to the northeast along North General Keamy Road. Anticipated area development is provided in both graphic and tabular form in Appendix B. The majority of the already approved development is residential in nature. However a number of the larger approved specific plan projects include non-residential uses. In the immediate vicinity of the site, approved non-residential uses include the Roripaugh Village Commercial Center and the Rancho Temecula Towne Centre. C. Site Access The existing roadway system serving the project area is depicted in Figure 1. Access to and from the site would be provided by Nicholas Roach Winchester Road is currently a two lane roadway north of Margarita Road. The planned widening of V¢inchester Road to six lanes has been designed, and consm~clion will commence once A.D. 151 has sold the next series of bona. If the new bond series is sold within the next six months the planned widening could be completed in approximately two years. Nicholas P,.oad has been widened from two lanes to three lanes between Roripaugh Road and North General Keamy Road; the easebound Roripuugh Residential Property. 6 City of Temecuia Focused Traflk Study Wilbur Smith Associa2s direction now has two lanes. Between Roripaugh Road and Winchester Road there are ~'o avel lanes on Nicholas Road. The widening of Nicholas Road to four lanes, within the study are~ will be initiated by A.D. 161 in July of 1993 th~ year (as part of a Santa Oertrudis Creek flood control project) and would be completed by the fkrSt quarter of 1994. The future circulation sym is cun'~nfly defined by the Dra~ General Plan Circulation El~nent Map. A copy of the Draft Cin:ulation Element Map is provided in Appendix C. The Draft General Plan Circulation Elm'nent identifies Nicholas Road as a four-lane Arterial. Other .key area roadways idatitled in the Draft Circulation Element include: Winchester Road-(six- lane Urban Amrial northeast of Ynez Road); Margarita Ko~d (four-lane Arterial); and Mumeta Hot Springs Road (six-lane Urban Arterial in the vicinity of Win~ P, oad). D. Traffic Volumes and Conditions - Morning and evexfing peak hour traffic eount~ ar~ depigted in Figure 2. The counts at Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road, and North General Keamy Road/Nicholas Road wer~ taken on May 20, 21, & 22, 1993 respectively. The traffic counts at Winchester Road/Nicholas Road were provided by the City of Temecula Public Works Depatu,~ent and were conducted on February 2, 1993. The traffic counts are presemed in Appendix D. 'he existing traffic controls within the sl'udy area are limited to stop si_mas, and are depiemd m Figure 1. The Highway Capacity Manual CHCM) unsi~aliTed analysis was used to evaluate the intersections of Winchester Road/Nicholas Road, Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, and Warbler Cixcle,rNicholas Road. The intersection of North General Keamy/Nieholas Road was not analyzed because project impacts at the intersection approaches do not exceed the 5 percent project impact threshold, (see Section IV A. Site Tra~e). The results of the HCM analyses of existing conditions are presented in Table 1. All movements at the intersections of Roripaug_h Road/Nicholas Road and Warbler Cirele./Nicholas Road were found to be 'operating at level of service (LOS) B or better. Two movements, both left-turning movements, at Winchester Road/Nicholas Road operate at a level of service worse than LOS C.. The HCM worksheets are provided in Appendix E. ,J'A~ A sim'ml is programmed to be installed at the Winchester Road/Nicholas Road intirsection at - the time that Winchester Road is widened, however the intersection was anal d further to determine whether a signal is warranted based on existing conditions. ysis was accomplished through the use of the planning level Peak Hour Volume Warrant worksheet in the California De~athnent of Tran$onation Traffic Manual. The analysis found tha a signal is ,,,,'artanted today based on existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. The graph used Roripaugh Residential Property 7 Cit7 of Temeeuin Table 1 Levels of Service For Critical Unsignalized Intersections Existing Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh. Residential Development Intersection Nicholas Rd. & Winchester Rd. Nicholas Rd. & Roripaugh Rd. Nicholas Rd. & Warbler Circle Moverlqent Major .{ Minor Street Street I SB Left I IWB Left WB Right WB Left EB Left WB Left NB Left NB Right NB Left NB Through NB Rigm SB Left SB Through SB Rigm AM Peak Hour I I se I A I 12ol Et 172 ~ A I 4 A 31 A 14 A 3 A 12 A 0 -- 7 A 2 A 0 -- I A PM Peak hour Vehicles Approx. Affected LOS 125 D 81 F 89 A 18 A 21 B 14 A 0 -- 6 A 7 A 0 -- 4 A 1 A 0 -- I A Wilbur Smith Associams Focused Traffic Study 'n th~ analysis is presented in Appendix E. E. Planned Signal Locations The only new signal which is curryfly planned at any of the major intersections in the irnmecliate study area will be located at the intersection of Nicholas Road and ~nch~'r~r Roach The new signal is included in the Civy's Five Year Capital Improvemere Prograz~ It should be noted that a portion of the signal ftm~lln~ has alresiy been u-~n~en~i from Riverside County Signal Modification Fees to the CiW of Temecula- Roripaugh .Residential Pro!~'~ S Chy of Temecuia Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associams V. FOCUSED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The focused traffic analyses performed for P, oripauZh Kesidenfial Development conc~nwat~ on respoz~ing to the key trst~c issues raised by City stuff. l~spondin~ to these issues required the 'following analysis to be performed: · A review of anlicipated site-related Um~c hnpacts (increases) at key nearby intersections based on projected 1994 and Cumulative Development scenario background lnffic vol~xmes; · A review of the proposed site access swat intersections .on Nicolas P, oad; · A review of the site layout in terms of general on-site circulation; and · A; review of c,~mulative development lraffic conditions without and with the project- The following sections present a discussion of the issues, their analysis and the analysis finrlin~s. A. Off-Site Traffic Impacts for 1994 Traffic Projections HCM UnsiLmalized Inlersection analyses were performed at the intersections with approaches experiencing traffic increases of five percent or more in existing traffic due w the project. The results of the HCM unsi~nalized intersection analysis are summarized in Table 5. The analysis results indicate that all movements at the intersections of Koripaugh Road/Nicholas. Road, West Project Access/Nicholas Road, and Warbler CircleYNicholas Road would operate at Level of Service [LOS) C or bet~r during the peak-hour periods both "without" and "with" the project Two movements, the southbound and westbound lcft-turn movements at Winchester Road/ Nicholas Pu3ad are, however, expected to operate at LeveLs of Service B and F, respectively during peak waffic periods. As mentioned carlier, signal warrant analysis performed for exisdng war:tic conditions found that a siSz~l is currently n~cessary at this into-section. When siimalization is assumed at the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection along with only m~nor intersection improvements (the provision of a seperate right-turn lane at the northbound approach), the intersection would operate at service level 'B" or better during peak tnffic pa'iods. The HCM worksheeu for the 1994 scenario analysis are provided in,Appendix F. RoripsuSh l~esidentisl P~opert7 12 Cit? of Temeculs Focused Trsffic Study Wilbur Smith Assotiatu B. Off-Site Traffic Impacts for Cumulative Development Traffic Projections Table 6 presents the results of a general determinntion of project traffic knpacts at area intersections based on the Cumulative Development scenario background traffic forecam. The results of thi~ comparison indicate that the project-related increment of traffic increase would become much less significant in the Cumulative Development scenario than was evaluated based on existing traffic volumes. HCM LInsi~trn~liTed Intersection analyses were performed on the Nicolas Road intersections at Roripaugh Road, West Project Access, and Warbler Circle. The Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection was not included in thi~' analysis since it was already determined that a si_maal would be required at a much earlier dale. 'Results of the HCM Unsigv~liTed Intersection analysis are summarized in Table 7. Since the proposed project would not add any new traffic to the critical turning movements at the intersection of Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, the "without" an "with" project Levels of Service for the critical mining movements would be identical. The northbound left-turn movement, which is projected to operate at LOS F (~th or without the project) is associated with traffic generated by the existing Roripaugh Estates residential development. Traffic movements at the project access intersections at West Project Access/Nicholas Road and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road should overate at LOS C or bener except for the southbound left-turning movement at both intersection locations and th& northbound left-turn movement at Warbler Circle, which would operate at LOS ~: a~,r~Rg the evening peak-hour. While this is generally considered an unacceptable level of service, it must 'be considered that only one project vehicle would be affected at each location during the peak hour. A relatively small number {seven) vehicles at the northbound Warbler Circle approach would also experience delays while attempting to turn left. Note that other than the project related turn movements, Level of Service would be the same "with" or "without" the project. The HCM Unsi_mmIized Intersection analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix G. Cumulative development evening peak hour traffic conditions at the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection were anal)~ed using HCM Si.mnlized Intersection Operational methbdology. Results of this analysis indicate that the intersection would operate at service level "D." C. Si,~nal Warrant Analysis Planning level signal warrant analyses were performed for the following intersections for the cumulative scenario: Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, West Project Access/Nicholas Road, and Warbler Circle/Nicholas RoacL The results of the analysis indicate that the Cumulative D.-velopment plus project waffle conditions would not satisfy the si_m:xal warrant during the eve.ring peak-hour at any of the intersections. As discussed e~rlier, a similar analysis was Roripaugh Residential Property City of Temecuta 1 I 1 I 1 i I I I i I I Table 6 Determination of Project Impact at Area Intersections Cumulative Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh Residential Development Intersection Winchester Rd ~ Nicholas Rd Roripaugh Rd ~ Nicholas Rd West Project Access ~ Nicholas Rd Warbler Circle @ Nicholas Rd N. General Kearny @ Nicholas Rd PM Peak Hour Cumulative Background Project Percent Approach Volume Increment Added Westbound 723 S3 7.3% Northbound 2801 59 2.1% Southbound 2489 39 1.6% Eastbound 1166 104 8.9% Westbound 804 56 7.0% Northbound 86 0 0,0% Eastbound 1072 104 9.7% Westbound 804 25 3.1% Southbound 0 34 -- Eastb o und 1072 44 4.1% Westbound 803 4 0.5% Northbound 11 0 0.0% Southbound 0 24 -- Eastbound 1057 I 0.1% Westbound 669 2 0.3% Northbound 141 0 0.0% Southbound 374 2 0.5% Table 7 Levels of Service For Critical Unsignalized Intersections Cumulative Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh Residential Development linersection Nicholas Rd. & Roripaugh Rd. Nicholas Rd. & Wes! Project Access Nicholas Rd. & WarDler Circle Movement Major Street WB Left EB Left EB Left WB Left Minor Street 8 NB Left 65 NB Right 21 NA SB Left NA SB Right NA NA NB Left 7 NB Through NA NB Rigm 4 SB Left NA SB Through NA SB Right NA Without Project With Project. PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour C F A NA NA NA C E NA A NA NA NA 8 C 65 F 21 A 61 1 33 43 6 7 0 4 1 0 23 B B C E A E Wilbur Smith Associates Focused Tra~c Study ncrformed for existing traffic conditions at the intersection of W'mchester Road/Nicholas Road, d it was found that the peak-hour signal warrant was satisfied at that location. Planning level signal warrant worksheets are provided in Appendix G. D. Other Site Access Traffic Issues This section discusses two additional site access issues which have been raised by City Staff. .Intersection Svaein~ A!on~ Nieolas Road- Some concern has been expressed by City staff regarding the Spacing Of access points along-Nicolas P,.oad which would result frQm the proposed site access plan. Principal access points along Arterial classification roadways are ideally recommended at one quarter-mile (1,320-foot) spacing. Existing intersection spacing along Nicolas Road is generally 1,200 feet or greawr for the more si~ornificant residenti~ collector street in,,ersections such as Eo~paugh Road, General Keamy Road, and Calle Medusa- Existing intersection spacing for minor residential collectors such as Via Valencia, and Warbler Circle range from 630 feet w 950 feel The proposed Roripaugh Residential Project access plan would utilize the existing Warbler Circle inmrsection location and would introduce one new minor residential collector intersection (West Project Access) between Roripaugh Road of and Warbler ; !^ The new intersection would result in an intersection spacine approximate0 '~e[t)between Roripaueh Road and the West Proiect Access Jaxxd ~pr0:ate~- x,o~s~(~t ber~-~ the West" ~[~ct'Xccess ~ Warbler O~ie. The desire for ~eater access spacing (e.g. degree of access controD is directly rotated to several factors: · The ultimate traffic volume expected to served by the faciliD' and the relative proximity of this volume to the roadway's capacity (volume to capacity ratio); · The volume of warfie expected to be served by the intersecting street; · Desired speed limit on the major street; · The anticipated interruption of traffic flows on the major strut r~sulting from traffic control devices ultimately needed at the inmrsection or from conflicting waffle movements inu-oduced by the presence of the intersecting minor ~ In the case of Nicolas Road, the volume to capacity ratio at build-out of the City's General Plan is projected to be in the 0.5 to 0.6 range which represents Level of Service A. Traffic volumes projected to be introduced by the project at the proposed project access intersection locations are quite low and do not warrant si_m~alization at either intersection- The volume of project traffic projected to be involved in conflicting u-a/fie movements is also very low. P, oripnuJh Residential Proper~.' 14 City. of Temecul~ · Vilbur Smith Associsms Focused Traffic Study Based on the projected service level for the most significant of these movements, (as determined in the Unsi~nalizcd Intersection analysis), the potezxtial for measurable disruption to traffic flows on Nicolas Road is highly unlikely, even during peak tra~c periods. The proposed 350-foot spacing between Roripaugh Road and the West Project Access was checked for adequacy in providing back-to-back left-turn storage for westbound left turns from Nicolas Road into Roripaugh Road and eastbound left-tttrns into the West Project Access. The highest back-w-back left turn volumes arc projected to occur during the evening peak-how 'when approximately 20 westbound left turn vehicles (into Roripaugh Road) would be combined with approximately 61 eastbound left-turn vehicles into the West Project Access. Even with the provision of very conservative storage bay lengths of 100 feet (for westbound left turns) and 150 feet (for eastbound left urns), no overlap of the left-turn bay tapers would be necessary. It should be noted that the-22-foo~ wide cent~T median width would allow for a considerable amount of left-turn bay taper ov-..-iap. Although we did not find a compelling need to modify the location of the West Projec; Access, it should be noted that a more uniform intersection sp.~cin~ could be achieved alon~ Nicol~, P.-,.ad by .~,;;~ng the West Proicct access ~o the e~ ~tpproximately 235 fc~ to align with the second on-site north-south street from the western project boundary. Si,,ht Distance At Warbler Circle Access Intersection- Given the location of the southbound project access approach to Nicolas Road at Warbler Circle, (on the inside of the Nicolas Road Curve) outbound motorists may have limited visibility to the ez~-t and west. A closer review of This situation indicated that sight distance within the Nicolas Road right-of-way would be approximately 325 feet to and from the east and approximately 400 fcct to and from the west. This assumes that the stop bar at the sotrthbouncl Warbler Circle (project access) approach is located 10 feet behind the Nicholas Road curb-line. The recommended stopping sight distance for approaching traffic on the major through street is 360 feet for a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour and 430 feet for a 'posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour. Sight distance firore the west would be adequate for a speed limit of 45 miles per hour but sub-standard for a posted 'speed limit of 50 miles per hour. Sight distance from The east would only be adequate for posted speed of 40 miles per hour. Sight distance requirements for a posted speed of 50 miles per hour could be met if the stop bar at the souThbound Warbler Circle approach is l~ositioncd five fe~ from the Nicholas Road curb-line. ~ minor striping adjustment would lxovide for the recommended 430-foot stopping sight distance. Roripsugh Residenziai Property 15 City of Temecula Focused Tomc Smd.v Wilbur Smith Associams E. Analysis of Proposed Site Plan WSA has reviewed the proposed on-site circulation system depicted on the project site plan. Given the low volumes of u-a~ic projected for the site, we do not anticipate any on-site circulation problems associated with proposed confi~u'ation of on-site local residen~al streets. The proposed 36-foot curb-to-curb cross-section would provide adequate width at the outbound approaches to Nicolas Road to serve the projected site u-affic. The approximate 80-foot storage provision for outbound project waffic should be adequale for peak period egress needs. F. Off-Site Parldng For Project Park Site WSA has cstimamd the number of vehicleS which could park off-site along the north side of Nicholas Road and the west side of General Kearny Road. Based on standard parallel parking dimension requirements, it is estimated that curb-space along the north side of Nicholas Koad would accommodate approximately 16 parking vehicles and curb-space along General Keamy I~oad (immediately adjacent to the park site) would accommode 4 parked vehicles. A total of approximately 20 vehicles could be accommodamd along the street curbs which are immediatley adjacent to the park. It should be noted that these estimates take into account sight distance requirements in the vicinity of the Warbler Circle project access road. Roripaugh Residential Property City of Temecuh Wilbur Smith Associates l;ocused Tr, fiic Study mineral, VI. FINDL'qGS AND RECOMlVlENDATIONS A. Summary of Findings Key findings of the focused trs,ffic analysis are as follows: · Existing peak-hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Winchester Road/Nicolas Road warrant sign~li~tlon of the intersection. · The Nicolas Road widenlng/Sanm ~zn-uclis Creek Flood Control project is being funded by A.D.161 and should be underway within the ne. Ja three months. This project would improve Nicolas Road to its ultimate Arterial cross-section from W'mchcst~ Road to just cast of General Kcarny Road. · The currently proposed project reflects a reduction in the already approvcd residential densit7 for the site. This reduction in density would result in an approximate 38 to 40 percent reduction in the potential project trip gcneratiom · Projected 1994 traffic conditions with the project would peak-hour service levels of "C" or bcncr at the unsi_~nalized Nicolas Road intersections formed by Roripaugh Road, West Project Access, and Warbler Circle. Proiected Cumulative Development scenario traffic conditions with and without the project wo~ld be identical except for those movements specifically related direct project access. Traffic movements projected to operated at service level "E" or worse under this scenario either do not involve project ~affic movements or affect an insignificant number of project vehicles. Assuming si~nalization of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection peak-hour service levels would be "B" or better for the 1994 With Project scenario and "D" or bctt~ for the Cumulative Development With Project scenario. The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be high enough to meet peak hour signal warrants. Roripaugh Residential property 17 Ci~ of Temecuin Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Assocmms · Proposed access spacing along Nicolas Road would be less than ~e ideal spacing, but is not anticipated to si,~nificantly impact traffic operation on Nicolas Road. · The eeometry of Nicolas Road at Warbler Cirfie is anticipated to cause sight distance problems unless additional sight obsn-uction s~ba~k requirements are imposed. · Proposed on-site circulation provisions arc d~'mlned to bc adequate for the project. B. Recommendations WSA has developed the following recommendations based on the finclings of the focused traffic analysis: · Maintain the proposed lower r~si~n~al density to minimize project trsf~c generation- - Provide appro~dlllately 150 f~t of vehicle storage for eastbotlnd left mrn mov~nen~s into the project site at ihe. West Project Access. · Provide approximately 1 O0 f~t of vehicle storage for e~stbound left mrn movements into the project site at the Warbler Circle access. i I i I I Roripaugh Residential Property 18 Ci~ of Temecuh ATTACHMENT NO. 5 APPLICANT'$ CORRESPONDENCE ON PARKWAY LANDSCAPING WIDTH R:~S\STAFFRPT~144PAe3,PC 10121/e3 klb 50 September 16, 1993 Mr. Saied Naaseh City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SEP 2 2 CiTY OF TE~.'I~IJLA P&D Environmental Services A Division of P&D Technologies 1100 'Town & Country Rosa Su,te 300 Orange. CA 92668 P.O. Box 5367 Orange, CA 92613-5367 FAX 714/953-6989 714/835-4447 An EmOloyee-Owned ComOany Re: Nicolas Road Parkway (North Side)' PA 93--0144 (Tentative Tract Map 27827) and PA 93-0145 (S.P. Amendment No. 2), Roripaugh Dear Mr. Naaseh: As you requested during our telephone conversation today, I am writing this letter to document the design considerations which influenced proposals for the Nicolas Road parkway adjacent to the referenced project. I am aware that the parkway width on the south side of Nicolas Road is approximately 10' wide; however, given the design considerations described below, I am confident that we will create an attractive landscape image within the 6' parkway proposed for the north side of Nicolas Road. Basically, the following issues influenced our design recommendations: The existing houses adjacent to the south side of Nicolas Road are situated at elevations significantly higher than that of Nicolas Road. We estimate that these elevation differences range from 5'-10'. In contrast, the proposed pad elevations adjacent to Nicolas Road within the Roripaugh Cottages development will be situated at approximately the same elevation as that of Nicolas Road. The proposed houses for the Roripaugh Cottages development are significantly smaller than those located on the south side of Nicolas Road, including both massing and square footage. In fact, several of the housing types are single story units rather than the two story units prevalent to the south. Because of the various design configurations of pwposed houiing types, the houses proposed to back up to the north side of Nicolas Road will be located a distance of 15'-20' away from the Nicolas Road R.O.W. As a result, the homes in the Roripaugh Cottages project will not make as significant .a visual impact as the homes located to the south side of Nicolas Road. In light of the smaller housing size, the variation in distance from Nicolas Road, and the lower. pad elevations, the landscape concepts proposed for the north side of Nicolas Road will create an attractive streetscape image which will provide an adequate balance to the existing south side parkway. As a result, when combined with a stwng vegetative buffer, the existing 6' parkway will be more than adequate to cream a consistent landscape character along Nicolas Road. If you have additional questions regarding the streetscape proposals described in this letter or on the submitted planting plans, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience. I look forward to working together with you and the City of Temecula to implement a low maintenance, drought tolerant parkway design for the Roripaugh Cottages development. Sincerely, Par/) TECHNOLOG E. Patrick Callihan, RLA, ASLA Senior Landscape Architect CC: Mr. Steve Doyle Mr. Sanford Edward Mr. Don Lohr ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS R:%S\STAFFRPT%144PAI3.PC 10/21/93 klb 51 CITY OF TEMECULA ROAD CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P' DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145), Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) A VICINITY MAP November 1, 1993 '. ~ R:\S%STAFFRPT~144PAi3.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA RIR 'k ,...- :S(~ ~x~,\ SITE CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145), Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) B ZONING MAP November 1, 1993 '-'- R:%S%STAFFFtFT~144PA83.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: r' DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145), Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) c FUTURE GENERAL PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S%STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA .,.,- CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) D TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27827 November 1, 1993 R:%S~STAFFRFT~44PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) E November 1, 1993 PARK R:%S%STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) F TYPICAL FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING November 1, 1993 R:%S%STAFFRFT~144PAJ3.pC 10127193 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) G TYPICAL PLOTTINGS November 1, 1993 R:~S~STAFFRPT~144PAI3.PC 10127fl3 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA War'oler Cirde [/' ,_~ CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) HCONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING FOR NICOLAS RD November 1, 1993 R:%S%STAFFRPT~q44PA93.pC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) H2CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING FOR NICOLAS RD November 1, 1993 R:~S~,STAFFRF'r~144PAI3.PC 10127/'B3 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Mep No. 27827 (PA93-0144) I November 1, 1993 RENDERING R:%S%STAFFRPT%144PA93.pC 10/27/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative TrBct Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J PLAN 1 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRP"R14,4PAI3.pC 10/27193 kib CITY OF TEMECULA E m CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J1 PLAN 1A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S\STAFFRPT%144PAI3.1~ 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA FR LCrT rr-oNT FTIIT1m CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J2 PLAN 1B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S%STAFFI~.144PAI3.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA LI~rT ITIFRm Kle, HT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J3 PLAN 1 C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:~S~STAFFFIPT~144PA83.PC 10127/93 idb CITY OF TEMECULA . eka.v. · as, iv. 'S,i CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K PLAN 2 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRI:rr~1.44PAS3.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Trect Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K 1 PLAN 2A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S\STAFFRPTVi44PA93,pC 10127/93 idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K2 PLAN 2B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%.S~,STAFFFI~1UPAI3.PC 10127t93 klb CITY OF .TEMECULA IZPl' rlej;~T FFIEDm CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K3 PLAN 2C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S%STAFI=I~144PA93.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA 1. CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L PLAN 3 -FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:~S~STAFFRPT~144PA93.pC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA ir-rT ..... r"K~NT ~T CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L1 PLAN 3A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S\STAFFRPT%144PA93.pC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA L~,..l""r' CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L2 PLAN 3B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S%STAFFRFT'%144PA93.P(: 10127/93 CITY OF TEMECULA I I I [] ..... r'~P, oN1- CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L3 PLAN 3C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:~S\STAFFRFT~144PAI3.pC 10/27/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA C m..__,J i.,. ,J · !c c~ .,~ -* j j. · ..J pllg,r-/T' F'L..,eIIL ~eL,,dkN CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M PLAN 4 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 RAS%STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA r,-J I I I L,E:.PT I rnq nnsnl F ~ CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M1 PLAN 4A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S~STAFFRFT~144PAB3,PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA | I ! I I I s r,,J I "' I L,P.,r-I' i= .e, o N r ~*. t L,_ CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M2 PLAN 4B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:%S\STAFF.RI~144PAI3.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA ~ I I I I I I I I I I i -.I 'ITImFFIE ED CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M3 PLAN 4C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S~STAFFRPT~144PA93.pC 10/27/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA -I CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M4 PLAN 4D - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT%144PAi3.PC 10128/93 idb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N PLAN 5 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:~S\STAFFRPT~44PA93.pC 10127193 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA I CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N1 PLAN 5A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:~S~,STAFFRPT~144PAI3.PC 10127/93 Idb CITY OF TEMECULA FR F" FqF!RM L~T FR B A CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Trect Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N2 PLAN 5B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S~,STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA EBEB L~rT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N3 PLAN 5C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:~S\STAFFFIP~144PA93,PC 10127/93 Idb A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 7 UPDATED TRAFFIC REPORT R:~S~FAFFRPT~I44PA93.CC 12~6/93 IrJb 36 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS , PLANNERS 3600 LIME STR--'~ . SUIT~. 220 · ~i\;_:RS;DE. C:.. ¢2501 · (q0q] 27z:-050c · ;Ax (o3c' November 22, 1993 Mr. Raymond A. Casey, P.E. Principal Engineer/Land Development Department of Public Works City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Tract 27827-Leo Roripaugh Property Access Needs / Conditions of Approval Dear Mr. Casey: Wilbur Smith Associates has reviewed the possibility of establishing a restricted access intersection at the westerly project roadway intersection with Nicolas Road. This proposal would differ slightly from the City's proposed condition of approval for this access point in that eastbound left turns from Nicolas Road into the site would still be allowed. Left rams out of this westerly access would be prohibited. As you know, the Traffic Study prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates, determined that for the cumulative development scenario, all traffic movements at the westerly project access intersection would operate at Level of Service B or better during peak periods except for the outbound left turn (heading east on Nicolas) which would operate at Level of Service E. The inbound left turn (projected to operate at Level of Service B) would encounter sufficient gaps in the westbound Nieolas Road traffic and would not experience significant delay. Peak period traffic flows on westbound Nieolas Road would not be dense enough to ereate problems for the inbound left turn to be completed. From a traffic engineering perspective, these findings also suggests that the inbound left turns could be negotiated in an un-forced manner without cornpromising safety. Conversely given the poor level of service (Level of Service E) which the outbound left turn vehicles would be subjected to, we would concur with the City in their desire to prohibit this movement. ,c-...BAr,:v. Nv · ATLANTA. GA * CAIRO. EGV;' .- C.-iA,~LESTOr',.. SC · COLUMBIA. SC · COLUMBUS. Oh · DES MO~NES IA · FALLS CriURC_."" VA ~Or',;G i.:ONC~ · HOUSTON, TX · KNOXVILLE. TN · LEX!NGTO,",. KY .. LONDON. ENGLAND · LOS ANGE,.ES. CA · 1',,4IAMi. ;. · r,IEENA~., VV: :,;EW HAV:.h; C': · OAKLAND, CA · ORLANDO. FL · DrFi'SBURGH PA · PORTSMOUTH. NH ,, PROVIDENCE. P~; · RALEiGh. NC · R',CFiM, CND VA ~,VE~5;:.:_. CA . ROSELLE. IL · SAN FRANC~SCC, CA · SAN JOE. CA · 5~NGAPORE · TAMPA. F: · TORONTO. CANADA · WABH'.NGTOh.. ""' EMPLOYEE-OWNED COMPANY It should also be considered that the prohibition of left turns into the site at the westerly access point would increase ~affic circulation and associated impacts on the residential streets near the easterly project access. Accessibility to the site by fire trucks would also bc somewhat cornpromised by the prohibition of left turns into the site. Based on the arguments presented above, wc request that the City consider the proposal to limit the prohibition of turning movements at the westerly project access to outbound left rams. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely yours, Wilbur Smith Associates Robert A. Davis Principal Transportation Engineer cc. Sanford Edwards 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST R:~S~STAPPRPT~I4~PA93.CC 12/8/93 kJb 37 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST PLANNING APPLICATION NO.: 93-0144 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan Condition of APprOval Condition No. 10 Condition No. 93 Condition No. 80 Condition No. 75 Condition No. 6 Condition No. 100 Condition No. 38 YES YES R:~S~TAFFRF~I44PA~3.CC 12/I/93 IrJb 38 ATTACHlVIEN'T NO. 6 LIST OF HOMEO~' CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS R:\STAFFRP'P,144PA93.CC2 1118/94 tjs 3B QU'F_~TIONS AND CONCERNS EXPRESSEn AT ~ NEIGI:mORIIOOD MEETING REGARDING THE RORIPAUGH PROJECT Property values will decease as a result of thi.~ project. Multi-family is preferred to the proposed Single family. Lot sizes, front, rear and side yards are too small. The restroom in the park is undesirable. The total number of units are increasing; therefore, the density is increasing. The construction of this project will further increase the traffic problems in the area. The project should be a gated community. Unrealistic prices are proposed by the developer for the type of product offered. Location of the park should be centerlized. Why do we need more multi-family zoning when there is no market for it? Will Winchester road be improved prior to construction of this project? The whole site should be developed as offices. What is the relationship between the City and Assessment District 1617 What improvements are the responsibility of Assessment District 161 and the City? What are the planned improvements to Nicolas Road prior to construction of this project? Will a traffic signal be installed at the dangerous intersection of Nicolas and Winchester Roads? Are there plans for a traffic light at the intersection of R_oripaugh and Nicolas Roads? What are the details of the Development Agreement and the CC & The width of the proposed streets are narrower than usual. The width of the proposed alleys are too narrow. There will not be enough parking spaces within the development and a study'should be completed. How will "No Parking" be enforced in the alleys? If the project was proposed as seniors housing, the properties would be better maintained. Alleys and the park should be mnintnined by the Homeowners Association not the City. Is this project the first ~alley" project in the City? Law enforcement will be difficult in the alleys. If this project is not completed by this developer for financial reasons, the unfinished project will become an eyesore for the area. Why are the flood channel improvements.necessary? The parking in the park should be eliminated since it may draw the "wrong crowd" to the park. Will the developer provide landscaping for the front yards? There will be illegal alien problems in the alleys. How are the school impacts mitigated for this project? How will the home owners be assured that the conditions of approval will be met? (i.e. problems with the Roripaugh slope) Broken lights in the alleys could cause an increase in crime. Has the availability of water and water pressure been approved by Rancho Water? This is good project and provides a creative solution to this site. The alley concept is f'me; the garbage will be picked up from the alleys. The proposed project provides a better option than multi-family apartments. The multi-family should not be located directly across the street from the Roripaugh Hins' private park. Do apartments generate more traffic than offices? What is the timing for the completion of the Santa Gemdis channel? (The homeowner pays flood insurance.) The police Depamnent is doing a good job in Temecula. · - Multi Family projects increase crime. Other alternative land uses should be explored. Is it possible to change the park to a private park and hold the Homeowners Association responsible for maintaining it? The buRders should be required to provide disclosures to the home buyers regarding the surrounding land uses. The size of the park should be decreased, the alleys eliminated and instead the lots should be made larger. What type of amenities are proposed in the park? Who are the targeted buyers? Will the developer sell to investors interested in buying several houses? What happened to the Quimby fees collected for the Van Dalae and Ponofmo projects? ATTA~ NO. 7 DEVELO~NT FEE CI:!~CKLIST R:~'TAFFRF~I44PA93.CC2 1/18/94 tj. 36 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST PLANNING APPLICATION NO.: 93-0144 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan Condition of APProval Condition No. 10 Condition No. 93 Condition No. 80 Condition No. 75 Condition No. 6 Condition No. 100 Condition No. 38 YES YES R:~S~"rA~441~A93.CC 12/8/93 klb ITEM NO. 1~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPRO~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ,. CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning January 25, 1994 Ordinance Amending the Land Use Code Regarding the Term of Plot Plans, Conditional Use Permits, and Public Use Permits Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske RECOMMENDATION: 1. Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitied: ORDINANCE NO. 94--- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS." 2. Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- "RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND .USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS." BACKGROUND At the April 5, 1993 Planning Commission meeting, staff recommended the Commission amend Ordinance 348 to allow for two additional one year extensions of time for Plot Plans, Conditional Use Permits, and Public Use Permits. At this meeting, the Commission expressed a concern relative to extending the life of permits they had never seen and requested staff research the number of Council approved projects which had not expired and bring it back to the Commission. Staff researched City approvals for the period from April 1990 to June 1990 which was the period of time the City Council acted solely to approve or deny projec. ts. During this period, the City Council acted on eight County transferred plot plans and no conditional use permits or public use permits. Of the eight plot plans acted on, all have either R:~STAFFRFF'xI,ANDUSI~.CC 1119/94 tjs 1 been constructed or have expired. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an Ordinance providing for two additional years to allow applicants additional time to construct their projects. Commissioner Hoagland was opposed to such an Ordinance. He felt giving applicants an additional two years was not in the City's best interest. At the December 6, 1993 Planning Commission meeting, the Ordinance was presented and approved by the Commission three to one with Commissioner Hoagland in opposition. Pursuant to prior Council direction, Section 4 of the attached Ordinance allows permittees to request reinstatement of expired City approved applications within six months of the date the Council adopts this Ordinance. The reinstatement hearing will be conducted by the Planning Director. For example, if the City had approved a conditional use permit on the date of incorporation, December 1, 1989, the-permit would have expired on November 30, 1991. Under Section 4 of this Ordinance, the Planning Director could grant the permittee up to three one-year extensions of time. The effect of this would be to extend the permit to November 30, 1994. If the conditional use permit had been approved on December 1, 1990 and had expired on November 30, 1992, the Planning Director could now grant two additional extensions in the following years to extend it up to November 30, 1995. Staff will contact all applicants who will be able to avail themselves of these additional time extensions. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of this Ordinance could result in a positive fiscal impact in that it will provide businesses additional time in which to obtain funding and begin construction of their projects. Attachments: Resolution No. 94- - Page Ordinance No. 94- - Page Planning Commission Staff Report - Page R:~STAPFRPT~LANDUSE.CC 1119/94 tjs 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 94.- R:\STAPPRPT~ANDUSB~CC lll~J~, t~s :~ RESOLUTION NO. 94- RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEME~ RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ~ LAND USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS. ~, City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain portions of the non- codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348("Land Use Code"); and WItEREAS, such regulations provide for extensions of time for plot plans, conditional use permits, and public use permits; and ~, the City of Temecula wishes to provide for an additional period of time to allow for the development of approved projects; and Wtff~REAS, a public hearing was conducted on December 6, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; and WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City HM1, County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and NOW, T!tEREIi'ORE, T!tY. CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLII)WS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby fmds that there are no County cases remaining that would be able to avail themselves of these additional extensions of time. Section 2. That the City Council. of the City of Temecula hereby finds that the proposed Ordinance pwviding for two additional one year extensions of time wffi benefit businesses in the City of Temecula. Section 3. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds that this Ordinance is exempt through Section 21080 of the CMiforllia Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby recommends adoption of the proposed additional extension of time Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference. Section S. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January, 1994. R:\STAF~U81~.CC 1/1S/94 tjs 4 RONALr~ ROBHRTS MAYOR I [IER!~,Ry CERT~Y 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 January, 1994 by the following vote of the Council: COUNCu-M~MBERS: NOES: COUNTERS: CO~CH,MEMBERS: IUNE S. GRIIk"K CITY CLERK R:'~rA~USE.CC 1/18/94 tjs 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 94- R:\STAPPRPT~ANDUSLCC I/II/N tjs 6 ORDINANCE NO 94-_ AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ~ LAND USE CODE REGARDING ~ TERM OF CONDITIONAL USE' PERMITS, PUBLIC USE PERMITS AND PLOT PLANS ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES I:!~RI~'.Ry ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Article XVIII, Section 18.30(0 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by reference pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, and as amended pursuant to City Ordinance No. 91-09, is hereby amended to r~n_~d as follows: "f. APPROVED PERIOD. The appwval of a plot plan shall be valid for a period of two years from its effective date within which time the construction authorized must be substantially begun or the occupancy authorized be in use; otherwise, the approval shah be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permittee may, prior to the expiration of the plot plan, apply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each extension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made to the Planning Director, on forms provided by the Planning Depamnent and shall be filed with the Planning Deinmnent, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. Within thirty (30) days following the filing of an application for an extension of time, the Planning Director may approve, conditionally appwve or deny the application. An extension of time may be granted by the Planning Director only upon a determination that the property and use are consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Ordinance, and all other City Ordinances and reguh~ons. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the approval shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calcuhted from the effective date of the approval. The term "use" shah mean the beginning of a substantinl construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must theP, After be pursued diligently to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective date of a plot plan shall be determined pursuant to Section 18.26 of this Ordinance." R:\STA~USP,.CC 1/18/94 tit 7 Section 2. Article XVIII, Section 18.28(f) of Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by reference pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby amended to read as follows: "e. APPROVED PERIOD. The approval of a conditional use permit shall be valid for a period of two years from its effective date within which time the construction authorized must be substantially begun or the occupancy authorized be in use; otherwise, the approval shall be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permittee may, prior to the expiration of the conditional use permit, apply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each extension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made to the Planning Director, on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be filed with the Planning Department, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. Within thirty (30) days following the filing of an application for an extension of time, the Planning DLrector may approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. . An extension of time may be granted by the Planning Director only upon a determination that the property and use are consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Ordinance, and all other City Ordinances and regulations. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the approval shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calculated from the effective date of the approval. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of a substantial construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must thereafter be pursued diligently to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective date of a conditional use permit shall be determined pursuant to Section 18.26 of this Ordinance." Section 3. Article XVIII, Section 18.29(e) of Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by reference pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby amended to read as follows: "e. APPROVED PERIOD. The approval of a public use'permit shall be valid for a period of two years from its effective date within which time the construction authorized must be substantially begun or the occupancy authorized be in use; otherwise, the approval shall be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permittee may, prior to the expiration of the public use permit, apply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each extension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made to the Planning Director, on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be filed with ~e Planning Department, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. Within thirty R:XSTAFPRPT~ANDUSI~..CC 111S/94. tjs 8 (30) days following the filing of an application for an extension of time, the Planning Director may approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. An extension of time may be granted by the Planning Director only upon a determination that the property and use are consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Ordinance, and all other City Ordinances and regulations. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the approval shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calculated from the effective date of the approval. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of a substantial construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must thereafter be pursued diligen~y to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective date of a public use permit shall be determined pursuant to Section 18.26 of this Ordinance." Section 4. Notwithstanding thc above, any plot plan, conditional use permit or public use permit which the City approved since incorporation and which has expired, may be reinstated pursuant to the procedure set forth above. In order to reinstate any such permit, the permittee must make an application w reinstate within 180 days of the effective date of this Drdinanceo Seaion 5. Severability. ff any pwvisions of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any period or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other pwvisions or applications, and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. R:%.STAFFRPT~LANDUS~.CC 111S/94 ~js 9 Section 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ontinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by hw. ATTEST: Ronald Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) SS I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecuh, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 94-_ was duly introduced and phced upon its fwst reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the__ day of , 1994, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecuh on the__ day of , 1994, by the following roll call vote: CO~CILMEMBERS: NOES: CO~C~ERS: CO~CII2vIEMBERS: R:~STAFFRFnLANDUSF_CC rig/94 ~, 10 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT R:\STAFFRF~.ANDUSP.,CC 1/1~/94 tjs '~ ~ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning~'~' December 6, 1993 Ordinance Amending the Land Use Code Regarding the Term of Plot Plans, Conditional Use Permit.s, and Public Use Permits Prepared by: Debbie Ubnoske RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND Adopting Resolution 93- adolotion of an Ordinance entitled: recommending "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERMITS.'' BACKGROUND At the April 5, 1993 Planning Commission Meeting, staff recommended that the Commission amend Ordinance 348 to allow for two additional one year extensions of time. Some concerns were expressed by the Commission at the meeting relative to extending the life of projects the Commission had never seen. Staff researched City approvals for the period from April 1990 to June 1990 which was the period of time the City Council acted solely to approve or deny projects. During this period, the City Council acted on eight County transferred plot plans. No conditional use or public use permits were acted on. Of the eight plot plans acted on, all have either been constructed or have expired. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission Meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an Ordinance providing for two additional years to allow applicants additional time to construct their projects. Commissioner Hoagland was opposed to such an Ordinance. He felt giving applicants an additional two years was not in the City's best interests. DISCUSSION It is staff's opinion that the five yearapproval process would benefit businesses by providing them additional time in which to obtain funding and begin construction. It is further staff's opinion that there are no cases remaining from the County which would be able t0 avail themselves of this additional time. R:~S~STA~NDUIE.PC 1112g/tl Mb Section 4 of the attached Ordinance allows permittees to request reinstatement of expired City approved applications within six months of the date the Council adopts this Ordinance, The reinstatement hearing will be conducted by the Planning Director. For example, if the City had approved a conditional use permit on the date of incorporation, December 1, 1989, the permit would have expired on November 30, 1991. Under Section 4 of this Ordinance, the Planning Director could grant the permittee up to three one-year extensions of time. The effect of this would be to extend the permit to November 30, 1994. If the conditional use permit had been approved on December 1,1990 and had expired on November 30, 1992, the Planning Director could now grant one extension at this time to extend the permit to November 30, 1993, and then grant two additional extensions in the following-.years to extend it up to November 30, 1995. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Adoption of this Ordinance is exempt ~hroUgh Section 21080 of the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 3 Ordinance No. 93-__- Blue Page 6 R:\S~TA~NDUSE. PC 11129193 Idb 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:%S~STA~NDUgE. PC 11129/93 Idb 3 RF_~OLUTION NO. ~2~ KESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ C1TY OF TEMECULA RECOIVIR4ENDING ~ CITY COUNCIL ADOFr AN ORDINANCE ~iNG ~ LAND USE CODE REGARDING ~ TERM OF PLOT PLANS, CONDrflONAL USE PERMITS, AND PUBLIC USE PERM1TS. ~, City Ordinanc~ No. 9004 adopted by reference cer~in portions of the non- codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ("Land Use Code"); and WI:r!~REAS, such regulations proVide for e, xmnsions of time for plot plans, conditional use permits, and public use permits; and W H ~:KEAS, the City of Temecuh wishes to provide for an additional period of time to allow for the development of appwved projects; and WNEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on December 6, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; and WIq'EREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library, ~"' 'zncho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecuh Valley Chamber of Commerce; and NOW, TI:rk-REFORE, TFrE PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEVIE~A DOES RESOLVE, DETER,MINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecuh hereby finds that there are no County cases remaining that would be able to avail themselves of these additional extensions of time. Section 2. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby finds that the proposed Ordinance providing for two additional one year extensions of time will benefit businesses in the City of Temecula. Section 3. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecuh hereby finds that this Ordinance is exempt through Section 21080 of the Csllfornia Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecuh hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the proposed additional extension of time Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference and marked Exhibk "A" and dated December 6, 1993, for identification. I~:%S~'TAr-f-FIFrfB_ANDUSE. PC 11/30~3 Idb 4 Section S. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTE~ this 6th day of Deccrnbcr, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN I I~-MERY CERIlFY'that the foxygoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of TemeCula at a r~gular meeting thereof; held on the 6th day of December, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING CO~SIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY TI-IORNI4Tr-L SECRETARY R:%.S%STAFFtqPT%I.ANDUSE.P(: 11/29/93 klb 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 93- R:~.S~STA~USE.PC 11/29/93 Idlm 6 ORDINANCE NO 93-_ AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF Tm~, crrY OF TEMECULA AMEVDING ~ LAND USE CODE REGARDING ~ TERM OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMrrS, PUBLIC USE PERMrfS AND PLOT PLANS TH;~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEM~~ DOES ORDAIN AS FOIJ-OWS: Section 1. Article' XYIH, Section 18.30(f) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by referenc~ pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, and as mended pursuant to City Ordinance No. 91-09, is ber~by mended to ~ as follows: "f. APPROVED PERIOD. The approval of a plot plan shall be valid for a period of two years from its effective dale withl- which time the construction authorized must be substanfi.lly begun or the occupancy authomed be in use; otherwise, the appwval shall be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permitme may, prior w the expiration of the plot plan, apply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each enension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made w the Planning Director, on forms pwvided by the Planning Depamnent and shall be fried with the Planning Deparanent, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. Within thirty {30) days following the filing of an application for an extension of time, the Planning Director may approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. An extension of time may be granted by the Planning Dir~,aor only upon a determinntion thai the property and use are consistent with the General plan, Land Use Ordinance, and all other City Ordinances and regulations. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the appwval shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calculated from the effective date of the approval. The term 'use" shall mean the beLHnnlqE Of a substantial construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must thereafter be pursued diligentiy to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective date of a plot plan shall be detcxMued pursuant to Seaion 18.26 of this Ovtin~nce. * R:~.S'tSTAF:~NOUSE. PC 11/29/93 Idb 7 Section 2. Article XYIII, Section 18.28(f) of Ordinance No. 348, as adoptexi by r~ference pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby mended to read as follows: "e. APPROVED PERIOD. The approval of a conditional use permit shall be valid for a period of two years from ks effective date within which time the construction authorized must be subs~nti~,I]y begun or'the occupancy. authorized be in use; otherwise, the approval shall be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permittee may, prior to the expinfion of the conditional use permit, apply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each extension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made to the Planning Direaor, on forms pwvided by the planning Depaxtlnent and shall be filed with the plRnn~ng Depaltxne~lt, accompanied by the appx'opxhte filing fee. Within thirty (30) days following the f~l;ng of an application for an extension of time, the Planning Director may appwve, conditionally appwve or deny the application. An extension of time may be granted by the Planning Direaor only upon a determination that the property and use are consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Oniinance, and all other City Ordinances and reguhtions. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the approval shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calculated from the effective date of the approval. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of a substantial construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must thereafter be pursued diligently to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective date of a conditional use permit shall be determined pursuant w Section 18.26 of this Ordinance." Section 3. Article XVIH, Section 18.29(e) of Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by reference pursuant w City ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby mended w read as follows: "e. APPROVED PERIOD. The approval ofapublic usepennit shall be valid for a period of two years from its effective date within which time the construction authorized must be substantially begun or the occupancy authorized be in use; otherwise, the appwval shall be void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the permittee may, prior w the expiration of the public use permit, al~ply for up to three (3), one (1) year extensions of time in which to use the plot plan. Each extension of time shall be granted in one (1) year increments only. An application for an extension of time shall be made w the Planning Director, on forms pwvided by the Planning Deparunent and shall be filed with the- Planning Deparnnent, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. Within thirty R:~'~STAFFRP'll,.ANDUSE-I~C 11 ,'21/~3 Id~ 8 (30) clays following ~ filing of an application for an extension of time, the Planning ~r my approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. An extension of time may be grannsd by time Planning Director only upon a determination that the property and use arc consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Ordinance, and all other City Ordinances and regulations. If an exmnsion is grante~, the total time allowed for use'of the approval shall not exceed a period of five ($) yean, calculated from the effective date of the approval. The term "~,~" 'shall mean the beginning of a subsmti.1 construction c~f the use that is authorized, which construction must ~r be pursued diligently to completion, or the acm-I occupancy of existing buildings or land under terms of the authorized use. The effective dam of a public use permit shall be determined pursuant to S~-tion 18.26 of this Ordin. nce." Section 4. Notwithstanding the above, any plot plan, conditional use permit or public use permit which the City alyproved since incorporation and which has expired, may be reinstated pursuant to the procedure set forth above. In order to reinstate any such permit, the pcnnincc must make an application to z~nstatc within 180 days of the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 5. Sevembilil3. ff any provisions of this ~ce or the application thereof to any period or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications,. and to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance arc declared to be "' '~,vcrablc. R:~S%STAFFRPT%LANDUSE. PC 11/29/t3 ken 9 Section 6. This Ordinanc~ shall be in full force and effea thirty C30) days after its passage. The City Clerk sb~ll certify to the adoption of thi,~ OrdinanCe and cause copies Of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law. I. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor A~T: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAT..] STATE OF C,Av-n:~ORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEIVl]ECULA ) I, lune S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecuh, C. llfomia, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 93-_ was duly introduced and phced upon its first ruding at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 1993, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a r~gular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecuh on the __ day of , 1993, by the following roll call vote: COUNC'rr-M~=~IBHRS: NOES: C OUNC'Tr -~mMBERS: COUN~~: ~:~S~,~TAI:~F~qFr~.~NOU,~E. PC 11F~/1~ klb 10 ITEM NO. 15 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROV~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning January 25, 1994 Old Town Specific Plan PREPARED BY: David W. Hogan, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Approve the Negative Declaration. 2. ADOPT Resolution No. 94- entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN." 3. ADOPT Ordinance 94- entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING PORTIONS OF THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AMENDING CITY ORDINANCES 90-04, 92-16, AND 93-12." Direct staff to begin implementing the First Year Implementation Program. Direct the City Clerk to advertise for positions on the Old Town Local Review Board to begin the process of filling the vacancies on the Board. 6. Provide direction regarding the requested boundary change amendment to the Specific Plan. BACKGROUND: The City Council approved the contract with Urban Design Studio in April 1992, to prepare a Plan for Old Town Temecula. The purpose of the Plan is to enhance the economic viability of Old Town, preserve the historic structures, address parking and public improvement needs, and establish design standards. OLDTOWN\OTSP. CC1 DISCUSSION: The Specific Plan for Old TownTemecula will establish regulations and programs to address the following issues: land use, architecture and design, economic development and business revitalization, historic preservation, and public improvements and infrastructure. The Plan represents a community-based preservation and revitalization plan which implements the General Plan in the Old Town area. During the plan preparation process, staff has strived to maximize public involvement and to solicit the comments and concerns of local merchants, property owners, and general public. All meetings of the Old Town Steering Committee (OTSC) were open to the public and properly noticed. In addition, there was a storefront workshop in Old Town and an evening public meeting. All of the public comments, concerns, and suggestions which were provided to staff were reviewed and acted upon by the OTSC. A summary of the public comment and the OTSC's response are included in Attachment 8. The goals of the Old Town Specific Plan are as follows: To create a high quality and distinct Western image and a functional, vibrant and aesthetically pleasing Old Town for Temecula; To develop Old Town to provide a variety of local and tourist oriented retail services, office, cultural/civic, and residential opportunities; To facilitate the efficient and safe movement of people and vehicles within and through Old Town and provide safe, adequate, and accessible parking; and, To create technically sound and safe creek improvements which will reduce the threat of flooding and adds to the vision for Old Town. The Steering Committee recommended the approval of the Old Town Specific Plan to the Planning Commission on April 8, 1993. The Planning Commission considered the Plan and Negative Declaration at a June 7, 1993 public hearing. No testimony opposing the draft Specific Plan was presented to the Commission, and the Old Town Specific Plan and related Negative Declaration at its June 7, 1993 meeting. The Planning Commission Resolution and Staff Report are included in Attachments 6 and 7, respectively. Land Use ReQulations Chapter III of the Specific Plan contains the land use and development standards for the Plan. The Plan identifies nine different land use districts. Six commercial districts, two residential districts, one public district, and an open space district. All the districts have specific land use, development and building standards. The Ordinance contained in Attachment 2, adopts Section III of the Plan as a City Ordinance. OLDTOVVN\OTSP:CC1 2 Desian Guidelines Chapter IV of the Specific Plan contains the architectural and design guidelines for the Old Town area. The Plan envisions a diverse Old Town area which will allow a number of turn-of- the-century architectural styles. The Plan contains the design guidelines which will be used by the Old Town Local Review Board and City to review building applications in Old Town. Implementation Proaram Chapter V of the Specific Plan contains the Implementation Program for the Specific Plan and will guide the private development and public improvement processes within the Old Town Area. The implementation measures in the program can be grouped into the following categories: Special Studies, Economic Development Programs and Activities, Physical Improvements, and Business Recruitment and Retention The measures and actions in the Implementation Program are intended to accomplish the following goals over the next six years. 3. 4. 5. 6. Create a turn-of-the-century, pedestrian oriented commercial area along Main Street and Front Streets between Second and Fourth Streets; Address circulation and drainage needs in Old Town; Create public parking areas; Support the initial operation of the local Main Street Program; Attract and retain the appropriate types of businesses in Old Town; and, Encourage area residents to patronize businesses in Old Town. A summary of the initial Implementation Program in the Old Town Specific Plan is included in Attachment 9. Revisions to the Implementation Program based upon updated cost estimates for the First Street Bridge and the Realignment of Felix Valdez and the Improvement of the Sixth Street Lot are included in Attachment 10. Staff requests that the Council direct staff to take the steps necessary to begin doing the following components of the first year implementation program. Prepare the Requests for Qualifications and Proposal to prepare the Parking District Feasibility Study. Prepare the Requests for Qualifications and Proposal to design and prepare the specifications for the West Main Street Demonstration Project, $250,000 in CIP for Fiscal Year 1994/95. · Organize the design competition to select a Logo for Old Town. Prepare the Requests for Qualifications and Proposal to prepare the Underground Utility Feasibility Study. Prepare a Memorandum of Understanding with the Old Town Mainstreet Association to fund the Main Street Program, ~37,500 in CIP for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Begin to organize the Business Recruitment and Retention. Group and make recommendations to the Council on its composition and membership. OLDTOVVN\OTSP. CC1 3 Incorporate the Implementation Program into the City's Capital Improvement Program when it is revised this year. Consistency with the Riverside County Ordinance 578 The Board of Supervisors approved Ordinance 578 establishing the Old Town Historic District on October 14, 1980. The original boundaries for the Historic District were 6th Street, Interstate 'l 5, 2nd Street, and River Street (Murrieta Creek). The boundary of the Old Town Historic District was expanded by the Council on November 12, 1991, and is consistent with the boundary of the Old Town Specific Plan. The Specific Plan incorporates much of Ordinance 578, including the need for an Old Town Local Review Board (OTLRB) to advise the Planning Department on architectural and design matters in Old Town. Reaooointment of the OTLRB Adoption of the Specific Plan will result in a need to reappoint the Old Town Local Review Board. At present, the OTLRB presently consists of two standing members and two members whose terms have expired but who continue to serve pending the Council's reappointment of the positions. The fifth member of the Board has resigned. To appoint a new Board and prevent disruption of the development process in Old Town, Staff recommends that the City Council do the following: Reappoint the two standing members of the Local Review Board to continue to serve the remainder of their terms; Authorize the two interim members of the Local Review Board to continue to serve in their present capacities until a new Board is appointed; 3. Direct the City Clerk to advertise for applicants interested being on the OTLRB; Authorize the Council's Old Town Steering Committee to review the applica- tions and make a recommendation to the other members of the Council; and, At a future meeting of the Council, appoint three new members of the OTLRB pursuant to the provisions of the Old Town Specific Plan. Main Street ProQram The main street program will addresses the overall marketing, advertising, promotion, and business retention activities in the Old Town area. The organization of the future main street program was considered by the Steering Committee at its' April 8, 1993 meeting. The Committee referred this issue to the Temecula Town and Old Town Merchants Associations. The Boards of Directors for both groups have met several times to discuss this issue. It is the consensus of both Boards that the future main street organization should be based upon the current Merchants Association with the involvement and assistance of the Town Association. Staff is working with the Merchants Association Board to develop revised By-Laws to transform the Merchants Association into the Old Town Mainstreet Association. These changes are expected to be completed and approved by the members of the Merchants Association later this spring. OLDTOWN%OTSP,CC1 4 After the Plan is adopted and the bylaw changes have been epproved by the membership, it is envisioned that the Board of Directors of the Old Town Mainstreet Association would, with the City's initial financial support, would advertise, interview and hire an Executive Director to operate the Association's programs. Additional Revisions to the Draft. Specific Plan There are a number of proposed changes to. the Specific Plan. which are contained in the Revision Addendum located in Attachment 3. Most of the proposed changes represent minor revisions which have been identified since the Planning Commission's approval. The only substantive change to the draft Plan is discussed below. Vending Carts The only controversial component Of the Plan was the provision allowing vanding carts in the public right-of-way. This issue was raised by a number of Old Town merchants in September, 1993. To resolve this issue and address their concerns, staff has met with several. concerned members of the Old Town business community. This Ad-hoc Vending Cart Discussion Group met on December 6th and 13th to discuss vending carts. As a result of those meetings, the Group has recommended the following: I That vending carts not be allowed in the public right-of-way; That the carts be allowed only as an secondary use on developed commercial property; and, That the regulations controlling vending carts on the public right-of-way be reconsidered in five years. Staff has included the Ad-hoc Vending Cart Working Group's proposed amendments to the Specific Plan in the Revisions Addendum and recommends that the Council approve changes to the Plan. Proposed Revision to the Old Town Boundary On November 4, 1993, the Temecula Town Association requested that the City Council amend the Specific Plan to expand the current boundary of Old Town to include both sides of Pujol Street south from First Street to the end of the pavement. Their request was supported by the Old Town Architectural Review Board. The Town Association stated that it believed that this area is an integral part of Old Town. This request was made after the Planning Commission had considered and recommended approval of the Specific Plan. As a result, there is no Planning Commission recommendation on this request. The letters of support and a map of the request, are located in Attachments 4 and 5. This area was considered, and ultimately rejected by the City Council, for inclusion into the Old Town Historic District in February, 1992. At present, the area is occupied by Community Center, the future Boys and Girls Club, the VFW building and the BMX racetrack on the east side of Pujol Street. The west side of Pujol Street is occupied by two apartment complexes and a vacant lot. While the area is adjacent to Old Town, its inclusion into the historic district does not appear to be critical to the success of Old Town and the Specific Plan. In .addition, according to the Public Works Department, Pujol Street will not connected to the Western Bypass. OLDTOWN~OTSP.~C1 5 If the Council wants to proceed with this requested amendment to the Plan, staff recommends that the matter to sent to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The Old Town Specific Plan is an implementation program of the General Plan and will guide the private development and public improvement processes within the Old Town Area. Staff reviewed the Specific Plan and compared it to the Draft General Plan. The Old Town Specific Plan is consistent with: Land Use Goal 6, Circulation Policy 5.3, Open Space/Conservation Goal 6, Community Design Policy 1.2, and 'Economic Development Policy 6.3. VILLAGE CENTER CONCEPT: The Old Town Specific Plan will provide development standards to guide development in the Old Town area which has been identified as a Village Center in the General Plan. As a result, the adoption of the Old Town Specific Plan is consistent with the Village Center Concept of the General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A preliminary evaluation of the Old Town Specific Plan indicated that the Specific Plan would have no significant environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified and addressed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City General Plan. As a result, the proposed Negative Declaration for the Specific Plan is "tiered" with the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. Specific impact discussions on land use, housing, transportation and circulation, public services, and cultural resources were added to the Negative Declaration. The Planning Department prepared an Initial Environmental Study (IES) for the OTSP on May 4, 1993. The IES stated that a Negative Declaration, tiered with the Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan, would address all the potential impacts of the Old Town Specific Plan and that no significant impacts to the environment were anticipated. As a result, the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was circulated for public comment between May 5 through June 4, 1993. The IES and Notice of Intent for the Negative Declaration are included in Attachment 11. The City received a two comments on the proposed Negative Declaration. One from the Union for a River Greenbelt Environment (URGE) and one from Caltrans. The comment from URGE focused on the need for the Elements of the General Plan to be internally consistent and the importance to the City that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's floodway requirements be implemented. The comments from Caltrans stated that the City's General Plan did not adequately address future traffic impacts on Interstate 15. Both organizations were contacted and informed that the Notice was for the Old Town Specific Plan, not the City General Plan. The representative for URGE stated that they did not object to the project but that they were still concerned with the channel encroachment and flooding issues along Murrieta Creek. When contacted, Caltrans staff stated that they were still concerned with the.growing urbanization in southwestern Riverside County. In their June 24th letter, they statedthat'the City needs to ensure that all development participate in the funding of any needed future OLDTOWN~OTSP. CC1 6 transportation improvements. These issues were addressed in the City General Plan and EIR. As a result, it is recommended that the Negative Declaration for the Old Town Specific Plan should be adopted. FISCAL IMPACT: The total six-year Implementation Program is estimated to cost $4,522,500. If the Specific Plan is implemented as described in the Implementation Program, the costs of the Specific Plan will be as follows: Fiscal Year 1993/94 $ 599,000 Fiscal Year 1994/95 630,000 Fiscal Year 1995/96 1,428,000 Fiscal Year 1996/97 837,500 Fiscal Year 1997/98' 567,000 Fiscal Year 1998/99 461,000 Since the Plan was prepared, there has been a change in the cost estimates for the First Street/Santiago Road Bridge, and two additional projects (the realignment of Felix Valdez and the improvement of the sixth street lot) have been identified in the Program. The revised annual costs for the Implementation Program are shown below. REVISED ANNUAL COSTS FOR OTSP IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM Fiscal Year 1993/94 8 764,313 Fiscal Year 1994/95 1,180,000 Fiscal Year 1995/96 428,000 Fiscal Year 1996/97 4,302,180 Fiscal Year 1997/98 567,000 Fiscal Year 1998/99 461,000 As a result, these revised preliminary cost estimate for the Specific Plan is now e 7,702,493. The Implementation Program will be undertaken using Redevelopment Agency funds, Community Development Block grants, other special grants and loans, and/or the General Fund. Attachments: 1. Resolution 94' - blue page 8 2. Ordinance 94- - blue page 11 3. Revisions Addendum - blue page 16 4. Letters supporting proposed boundary change - blue page 18 5. Map of the proposed boundary expansion - blue page 19 6. Planning Commission Resolution PC No. 93-11 - blue page 20 7. June 7, 1993 Planning Commission Staff Report - blue page 21 8. Summary of the public comments on the Old Town Specific Plan - blue page 22 9. Summary of Implementation Program for the Old Town Specific Plan - blue .page 27 10. Summary of the Revised Implementation Program - blue page 28 11. May 5, 1993, Negative Declaration and Initial Environmental Study - blue page 29 OLDTOWN~OTSP. CC 1 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION 94 - OLDTOVVN%OTSP, CC1 8 ATI'ACHMENT NO. I RESOLUTION NO. 94 A RF.,SOL~ON OF 'Fl:ff. CITY COUNCIL FOR TFff. CITY OF TEMEC'ULA ADOPTING ~ OLD TOWN SPECIYIC PLAN, WRER!?.AS, The maintenance and protection of historic Old Town Temecula has been an important issue and concern to the citizens of Temecula; and W!~REAS, The General Plan for ~e City of Temecula calls for the preparation of a Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula; and W!~REAS, The City Council directed the preparation of a detailed Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula; and WFff~REAS, The Specific Plan for the Old Town will establish regulations and programs to address the land use, architectural design, economic development, business revitalization, and historic preservation issues in and around Old Town; and Wfflg~AS, the City Council appointed the Old Town Steering Committee to oversee and assist in the preparation of a Old Town Specific Plan; and WH~~, the Old Town Steering Committee provided guidance and direction on the substance and details of the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Old Town Steering Committee appmved the Plan on April 8, 1993; and WffEREAS, the Planning Commission and recommended that the City Council adopt the Old-Town Specific Plan on June 7, 1993; and WHEREM, notice of the proposed adoption of the Plan was posted at City Hall, County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and W!~RRAS, a public hearing was conducted on January 25, 1994, at which time interested persons has an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; NOW, THE~EI~RE, THI?~ CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF MECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLI~OWS: Section 1. Enviromental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this project. The Initial Study identified no additional significant impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report .for the General Plan. Therefore, the Negative Declaration for the Old town Specific Plan is hereby certified. OLDTOWNXOTSP, CC1 9 Section 2. Adoption of the Plan. The Old Town Specific Plan, as amended, including the Implementation Program is hereby approved and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTEr}, this day, the _ day of __, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR A~TF_.ST: 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, I-~]~I:~Ry DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 94- .was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , 1994, and that thereafter, said Resolution was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of ,1994, by the following roll call vote: CO~CH/WRMBERS: NOES: CO~-M'RlVlBE, RS: CO~CH-MEMBERS: OLmOW.XOTSP. CC, 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE 94 - ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN om'row~o'rs..cm 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECLIA ADOPTING PORTIONS OF SPECWIC PLAN, AMENDING T!tY. OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AMENDING CITY ORDINANCES 9004, 92-16, AND 93-12. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES I-Ik'R~y ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findint, s. The Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. The City Council adopted the General Plan on November 9, 1993. B. The maintenance and protection of historic Old Town Temecula is an important issue and concern to the citizens of Temecula. C. The General Plan for the City .of Temecula calls for the preparation of a Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula. D. The Specific Plan for the Old Town will establish regulations and programs to address the land use, architectural design, economic development, business revitalizafion, and historic preservation issues in and around Old Town. E. The Planning Commission has determined that the Old Town Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan for the City of Temecula. F. The City Council approved and adopted the Old Town Specific Plan on October 26, 1993. G. The Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance 578 which provided for the protection of historic resources and the creation of Historic Preservation Districts on October 23, 1979. H. The Board of Supervisors designated portions of Old Town Temecula as a Historic Preservation Districts on October 14, 1980. I. The City Council adopted Ordilnance 9004, which adopted by reference Riverside County Ordinance No. 578, which the Council has subsequen~y amended through various City Ordinances. J. The City Council expanded the boundary of Historic District on November"12, 1991 to include all the areas which are curren~y covered by the Old Town Specific Plan. omtovwxotsv.cc~ 12 K. The City Council adopted Ordinance 92-16 providing standards for temporary signs in commercial and service districts on October 16, 1992. ~ce 92-16 was amended by Ordinance 93-16 on June 8, 1993. L. To ensure compatibility with and consistency between the various City Ordinances and the Old Town Specific Plan it will be necessary to repeal or amend some of these Ordinances. M. The Planning Commission approved the Plan and recommended that it be adopted by the City Council on June 7, 1993. N. The notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce. O. A public hearing was conducted on January 25, 1994, at which time interested persons has an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition. P. The Negative Declaration for the Old Town Specific Plan was certified by the City Council on January 25, 1994. Seaion 2. The Land Use and Development Standards contained in Section HI of Attachment 1, the Old Town Specific Plan, are hereby adopted as the Development Standards for this Specific Plan (SP) Zone pursuant to Section 17.28 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, as adopted by reference pursuant tO City Ordinance 90-04. Section 3. The Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula is hereby amended to change the Zoning Districts within the boundary of the Specific Plan as shown on Exhibit 2 of Specific Plan, from C-1 (General Commercial), C-P (Restricted Commercial), C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial), M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial), R-I (One Family Dwellings), R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings), R-3 (General Residential), R-R (Rural Residential), and W-1 (Watercourse, Watershed & Conservation Areas), to "SP Specific Plan". Section 4. Section 15 of Ordinance No. 90-04 is hereby amended to read as follows: "Ordinance Nos. 575, 576, 577, 579, 580 and 581, are hereby adopted by Section 5. Subsection z. of Section 19.2. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16 is hereby amended to read as follows: "z. "Temporary Sign Event" means any number of consecutive days, up to thirty (30), for the display of any promotional sign." ou>'row,~o'rs..cc~ 13 Section 6. Subsection cc. of Section 19.2. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16 is hereby amended to read as follows: "cc. "Historic Old Town Temecula" means all the land use districts within the Old Town Specific Plan, except for the Highway Tourist Commercial and Community Commercial Districts." Section 7. Subsection C.2. of Section 19.10. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16, and amended by City Ordinance 93-12, is hereby amended as follows: Portable signs, including but not limited to animals, human beings, A- Frames, T-Frames, and those of a s'nnilar nature located on private property, except as permitted by the Old Town Specific Plan." Section 8. Subsection C.9. of Section 19.10. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16 is hereby Section 9. Subsection cc. of Section 19.2. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16 is hereby amended to read as follows: 'D. Promotional Signs in Historic Old Town Temecula. Promotional signs in Historic Old Town Temecula are permitted in the Community Commercial, Tourist Retail Core, Community Commercial & Tourist Support, and with approved commercial uses in the Tourist Serving Residential Districts and shall comply with the requirements of the Old Town Specific Plan. Window signs which are consistent with the provisions of the Old Town Specific Plan do not require a permit." Section 10. The introductory paragnph of Subsection E. of Section 19.10. of Article XIX of Ordinance No. 348, which was adopted by City Ordinance 92-16 is hereby amended to read as follows: "E. Grand Openin[, and Interim Sifns in Historic Old Town Temecula. Grand opening and interim signs in Historic Old Town Temecuh are permitted in the Community Commercial, Tourist Retail Core, Community Commercial/Tourist Support Districts, with approved commercial uses in the Tourist Serving Residential District, and shall comply with the requirements listed below:" Section 11. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this pwject. The Initinl Environmental Study determined that no additional impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. Therefore, a Negative Declaration is hereby certified for this project. Section 12. Effective Date. This Ordinance shah he in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordin.ance.and cause copies of this Ordinance to he posted in three designated posting phces. ow'rowN~o'r~p. cc~ 14 PASSED, lOVED, AND ADOPTED, this day, the__ day of __, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALmORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITYOFTEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, I-mREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 94- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , 1994, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of ,1994, by the following roll call vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNTERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk OU~TOWN~OTSP. CC~ I 5 ATTA~ NO. 3 REVISIONS ADDENDUM OLDVOW.XOTSP.CC'~ 16 ATFACHMENT NO. 3 REVISIONS ADDENDUM Since the consideran'on of the Old Town Specific Plan by the City Planning Commission, a number of additional issues have been identified as well as several needed minor items which should be amended to further clarify the text of the Plan or make the Plan consistent with other City programs. The following changes to the Draft Old Town Specific Plan are recommended to the Specific Plan. Change the minimum lot sizes in the Community Commercial/Tourist Serving Commercial District from 3,500 square feet to 8,000 square feet to facilitate larger transitional lots between the Tourist Retail Core and the Service Commercia] area along Front Street. The minimum width of the boardwalk needs to be changed from 3 feet to 4 feet to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, That the standard meet light design, as depicted on Page IV-62 be changed from one fight per pole to two lights, on opposite sides of each pole, to the enhance the street lighting. The boundary for the parking district be expanded from the area as shown in Exhibit 11. This will allow more businesses to participate in the program and will make it easier for the owner of a single 25 foot wide lot to develop their property. That the density of the Medium Density Residential District of the Plan be changed from 3,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit to 3,300 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. Add the requirement for Private Open Space for residen~nl units in the Tourist Retail Core (TRC) and The Shoot Out Zone (TSO) Districts. It is recommended that every unit be provided with at least 150 square feet of private open space. This is identical to the requirement in the High Density Residential District. Modify Section HI.F.5. as shown on the attached pages. It is also recommended that provisions be added to the Implementation Program to remind the City of its intent to reconsider Sidewalk Vendors (in the public right-of-way) in about five years. OLDTOWN\OTSP.CC1 17 5. ~,idcwalk Outdoor Vendors a. Purpose Outdoor vendinS on the e t:lic a'u t ar, d sidcwall<s pr/vate property promotes ~:. public infest by contributing to an active at':a~ve pedestrian environment. However, reasonable regulation of slseet and aidewalk outdoor vending is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare The purpose of this section is to set forth the conditions and requirements under which 0idcwJk outdoor vendors may be permitt~ to operate on priuate property within the Specific Plan area. b. Definitions For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply: "Stand" men any tablc, show _~, ben& rack, apushcart, wagon or any other wheeled vehicle or device which may be moved without the assistance of a motor and which is not required to bc liccnsed and ngist~ed by thc Depn--tment of Motor Vehidcs, and /s used for the displaying, storing or transporting of articles offered for sale by a vendor. "Vending" means the sale of food or merchandise from a cart or other approved mobil dcvicc stand operating in thc public right of ~ay on private property within the Specific Plan area. c. Vendors License Required It shall be unlawful to sell, or offer for sale, any food, beverage or merchandise on any street or sidcwcdk property within the Specific Plan area without first obtaining a Vendors License. However, existing businesses which legally operate outdoor displays of merchandise within th~ public right of ~ay prior to the adoption of this Specific Plan, are not required to obtain a license for a period of one year from adoption. City of Temecula Old Toum Specific Plan 111-34 Rev d. Applications Tb~ application for a Vendor's License shall be signed by the applicant and shall include: 1) The name, home, and business address d the applicant, and the name and address d the owner, i/other than the applicant, of the vending buoincoo, stand or wheeled vchidc to be used in the operation of the vending business. A description d the type d food, beverage, or merchandise to be sold. 3) A description and photx}graph (including signage and colors) o/any stand or wheeled vchictc to be used in the operation of the business. ~) l~cef d an inoumncc poliey, in0ued by an insurancc e~_,pany licer~ed B do buoincso in thc ~a~ d California, protect_rig thc liecnooc and thc City from all ctnlrn~ for damagco to prol~crty and bodily injm?,, including death, which may ariac from ora ationo under o~ in connection with thc llccnoc. Such inourancc shall namc a~ additional ir~urcd~ thc City and shall ~,~3vidc that thc policy ~hal] not tctminatc or bc canccted prior ~o flu: c~pira~on datc without 30 days advancc wri'[~cn nolicc t~ ltxc City. Issuance and Fees Not hter than 30. days aft~ the filing d a completed application for a vendor's Hcense, the applicant shall be notified of the decision on the issuance or denial of the license. 1) Fees shall be determined by Resolution d the City Council and shall be paid prior to issuance d a permit. 2) Licenses to vend within the Specific Plan area shall be reviewed and approved by the Director in conjunction with the Business License Registration Program, Building and Safety and the ~ngineering Department. 111-35 Rev Temec out Tomn sped~ PIrm 3) There should be at least 200 square feet of useable or recognizable plaza or courtyard area for each allowed outdoor ventling cart. The rending should be free of all obstructions within a six foot 4) ~ o~llons for vending within the Specific Plan area shall be c~tabli~hed approved by the Director. and approved by means o{ Rtin aec~Zon. Vending locations shall be furthc~ designated by thc typ~ of vet,fling pcrmi,~'t~,d at cach location based on the ability of the site to safely accommodate the use ---~d ':, a~,u~., ag mu--h as praetieal, that thc sidcwallc vcndor is not selling mc~chandim: that i~ primarily sold "on pn:misc" within ~00 fec~ of thc vending lomtions by not interfering with pedestrian circulation and access or whide circulation or parking. The Director may require that the stand be removed from the location and stored out of public ~ when not in use. 5) Vending locations may change only upon thc cxpirafion of an c~ting vending liccnsc and/or wr/tten request by an applicant ;~-?,h and approval by the Director. 6) All loc~tions of vcnding 5tand~ 5hall bc in conjunction with right of way c, ormiderationg, pc, des~'-ian safety, and proximity to cxioting vendors. All yencling locations shall be on privately owned, developed, corninertial property within the Specific Plan area. with primary emphasis at major intc, r~dz~tions in the Tourist Rot-~il Corc District and thc Shootout District. As an initial pilot program, it is rccommended that a maximum of ten (10) sidcwalk vcndors bc allo~-,d in thc Specific Plan area, Term and Renewal All licenses are valid for one year unless revoked or suspended prior to expiration. An application to renew a license shall be made not hter than 60 days before the expiration of the current license. License fees and renewal procedures shall be established in accor- dance with the Business License Registn~on Program procedures outlined in the Municipal Code. City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan 111-36 Rev Prohibited Conduct and Hours of Operation It shall be proMbited for any 0ide~vnlk outdoor vendor to operate under any of the following conditions: 1) V='.d Operate between 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. of the following day unless in conjunction with a special event. 2) Leave any yencling stand or moear vchidc unattended. 3) Store, park, or leave any ventling stand ovcrnight on within any pubic sine r/t~ht-of-way. or aidcwalk, or park any motor vehidc o~b.e~ than in a hwful parking plaec or on any undeveloped or othenvise vacant property. 4) Sell food or beverages for immediate consumption unless there is a litter receptacle available nearby for public use. a lit~ receptmdc wMch i~ avaihblc for his patrons' usc. s) Leave any location without first picking up, removing and rli-~posing of all trash or refuse remaining from sales made by ,~ from the sta~a. 6) Allow any items relating to the operation of the ventling business to be placed anywhere other than in, on or under the stand. Set up, maintain or permit the use of any additional table, crate, carton, rack, or any other device to increase the ~ll~ng or display capacity of ~:.:. the stand where such additional items have not been dcs~k,d in his application. approved in the by the Director. 8) Solicit or conduct business with persons in motor vehicles. 9) Sell anything other than that which he-is the licensed to vend pe# mits. ~o) Sound or permit the sounding of any device which produces a loud and raucous noise, or use or operate-any loud speaker, public address system, radio, sound amplifier, or similar device to attract the attention of the public. 11) Vcnd without thc insurancc eovcngc prcviously spedtied. 111-37 Rev Old Town Specific Plan h. Vending C=tt~ Stand Requirements Vendor shah be required to submit a photograph or drawing of the rending ------'~, stand to be used for review during application approval process, including mater/a/s, colors and The design and appearance of the rending cart shall be consistent rzffth the carts in use betumen 1890 and 1920 in a character consistent uffth the Design 5tan~rds. 3) No stand shall exceed 4 feet in width, 8 6 feet in length, and 8 feet in height. Safety Requirements All vehicles stands in or from wMch food is prepared or sold shall comply with the following requirements: 1) All equipment installed in any part of the vehidc stand shall be secured in order to prevent movement during ~'ansit and to prevent detachment in the event of a colli-~ion or overturn. 2) All utensils shall be stored in order to prevent their being hurled about in the event of a sudden stop, collision or overturn. A safety knife holder shall be provided to avoid loose storage of knives. 3) Compressors, auxiliary engines, generators, batteries, battery chargers, gas fueled water heaters, and similar equipment shall be installed so as to be hidden from view to the extent possible and be easily accessible. Display of License All Hcenses shall be displayed in a visible and conspicuous location at all times during the operation of the vending business. Adnrttsing No advertising, except the posting of prices, shall be permi~ on any stand, except to identify the name of the product or the name of the vendor. Denial, Suspension, and Revocation of Te .ula Old Toura Specific Plan 111-38A Rev Any license may be denied, suspended, or revoked in accordance with the procedures in the Municipal Code f~r any of the following 1) Fraud or misrepresentation contained in the application for the license. 2) Fraud e~ or miRepresentation made in the course of carrying on the business of vending. 3) Conduct of the licensed business in such manner as to create a public nuisance, or constitute a danger to the public health, safety, welfare, or morals. 4) Conduct wMch is contrary to the provisions of this section. 111-38B Rev of rernecu Old Town Speciftc P!~n ATTACHMENT NO. 4 LETTERS FROM THE TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION AND LOCAL REVIEW BOARD OLDTOM/N\OTSP.CC1 I 8 TnimlaTowa, nociation RECeIVeD N 0 V O 8 I~9.3 An~ 'd ............ November 4, 1993 City of Temecula Planning Department' 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attn: Dave Hogan Dear Dave: By this letter, the Temecula Town Association wishes to be on record as requesting that the boundaries of the Old Town Temecula Historic Preservation District be expanded to in- clude both sides of Pujol Street from First Street on south to the end of the pavement. We feel this area is definitely a part of Old Town and would like any future development subject to the same historic preservation controls and regulations as the rest of the area included in the district. Your favorable consideration to this request will be most appreciated. William A. Harker General Manager cc: Old Town Temecula Historical Preservation District Local Review Board P.O. Box 435 Temecula, CA 92593 (714) 676-4718 Fax (714) 694-9216 Temecula Community Center 28816 Pujol Street Temccula, CA 92590 OLD TOWN TEMECULA HISTORICAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT LOCAL REVIEW BOARD November 9~ 1993 City Council City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula~ CA 92590 Members of the Council:. At the Nov. 8, 1993 meeting of the Local Review Board a motion was made~ seconded~ and passedt that the Board supports the Temecula Town Associationss written request to extend the Old Town Temecula Preservation District area to include both sides of Pujol Street from First Street south to the end of the pavement. By this letter the Review Board wishes to go on record with the City as being in support of the above request from the Temeula Town Association. William A. Harker Recording Secretary ATTACHMENT NO. 5 MAP OF THE PROPOSED BOUNDARY EXPANSION ou~'row,~o'r~.cc~ 19 Addition II \~ · <\ ATTACHMENT NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION PC 93-11 OLDTOVVN\OTSP.CC1 20 PC RESOLUTION NO. ~3-11 A RESOLUTION OF THY, PLANNING COMMT,~SION OF Tn'F, CITY OF TEMECUIA RECOh!MEXTDING THAT TITF, CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE 93.- ; ADOPTING Tn'F~ Ot-D TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDING Tl:!V, OFFICIAL ZONING WF!'EREAS, The maintenance and protection of historic Old Town Temecula has' been an important issue and concern to the citizens of Temecula; and WHERe, AS, The City Council directed the preparation of a detailed Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula; and WITER'~AS, The Specific Plan for the Old Town will establish regulations and programs to address the land use, architectural design, economic development, business revimliTation, and historic preservation issues in and around Old Town; and Wl:rk'~4S, the City Council appointed the Old Town Steering Committee to oversee and assist in the preparation of a Old Town .Specific Plan; and WtW~REAS, the Old Town Steering Committee provided guidance and direction on the substance and derails of the Specific Plan; and W'FtEREAS, the Old Town Steering Committee approved the Plan on April 8, 1993; and WVW~REAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temeeula Valley Charnher of Commerce; and WFr~.RF. AS, a public hearing were conducted on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Specific Plan; NOW, TITERI~-I~ORE, ~ PLANNING COMIV!T-~SION OF TItle, CITY OF TEMECUIA DOES RESOLVE, DETER_MINE AND ORDER AS FOtJ'-OV~S: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated. city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that '30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan he adopted or the OLDTOWN\OTSP. PC 1 requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements arc met: general plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The phnning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, that there is a reasonable probability that the Specific Plan will be consistent with, and that there will be little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with, the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. B. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends to the City Council that the CounCil adopt'the Ordinance en~~ed ".An Ordinance of the City Council for the City of Temecula adopting the Old Town Specific Plan, amending the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula, and amending City Oxdinance 90-04. The Specific Plan is incorporated into this Resolution by reference and is marked Attachment "1" for identification. The Ordinance is incorporated into thi.~ Resolution by thin reference and marked Attachment "2" for identification. Section 2. Environmen~l Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this project. The Initial Study identified no additional significant impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. Therefore, staff has recommended a Negative Declaration be certified for this pwject. OLDTO~/N%OTSP.PC1 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND AIN3t'l'~:H/this_7th day of June, 1993. LINDA F~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS crrY OFTEMECULA) I tn~'.Ry CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commigsion: AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: BLAIR, CHINIAHFF, FAHEY, FORD, HOAGLAND NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: OLDTOWN~OTSI~.PC1 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 June 7, 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND MINUTES OU~TOWN~OTSP. CC~ 21 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION June 7, 1993 Case No.: Old Town Specific Plan Prepared By: David Hogan RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission: Open the Public Hearing and receive public testimony on 'the draft Specific Plan and proposed Negative Declaration; 2. Close the Public Hearing; 3. Approve the Negative Declaration; and, 4. ADOPT Resolution No. 93- entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE 93- ; ADOPTING THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND AMENDING CITY ORDINANCE 90-04." APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Temecula PROPOSAL: The Old Town Specific Plan is an implementation program of the General Plan and will guide the private development and public improvement processes within the Old Town Area. The SpeCific Plan for the Old Town will establish. regulations and programs to address the following issues: land use, architecture and design, economic development and business revitalization, historic preservation, and public improvements and.infrastructure. LOCATION: The Old Town Specific Plan area is generally located south of Rancho California Road, east of Interstate 15, north of Santiago Road/First Street, and west of Pujol Street, in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. EXISTING ZONING: C-1 (General Commercial), C-P (Restricted Commercial), C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial), M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial), R-1 (One Family Dwellings), R-2 (Multip!e Family Dwellings), R-3 (General Residential), R-R (Rural Residential), ~nd W-1 (Watercourse, Watershed & Conservation Areas). OLDTOWN%OTSP. PC 1 SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: C-1 (General Commercial), M-M (Manufacturing-Medium), and M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial). C-P (Restricted commercial), R-R (Rural Residential), R-3 (General Residential), R-4 (Planned residential), and W-2 (Controlled Development Areas). SP-180 (Rancho Highlands). R-A-20 (Residential Agricultural, 20 acre Minimum Lot Size), and I-P (Industrial Park). PROPOSED ZONING: SP (Old Town Temecula) EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial, residential, public, creek channel (floodway), vacant and undeveloped. SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Highway commercial and floodway. Commercial, vacant, floodway, multiple family residential, and vacant and undeveloped. Freeway. Light industrial and commercial, and vacant and undeveloped hillside. PROJECT STATISTICS Gross Area: Approximately 220 acres contained within the Old Town Temecula Historic District. BACKGROUND The City Council approved the contract with Urban Design Studio to prepare the Old Town Specific Plan (OTSP) in April 1992, in order to address historic preservation and building reuse; economic revitalization and marketing; circulation, parking, and flooding issues; and address building, landscape, and streetscape guidelines for the Old Town area. The process for developing the Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula consisted of three distinct work phases. These work phases are as follows: Inventory and Analysis of Old Town Temecula. Development and Selection of the Preferred Plan. Preparation and Adoption of the Specific Plan. To ensure community involvement in the preparation of the Specific Plan, the City Council appointed the Old Town Steering Committee (OTSC) to oversee the process. The mission of the OTSC was to work with the consultant and provide input into the Plan. The Old Town Steering Committee consists of eleven (11) members representing local merchants and residents, the City Council and Planning Commission, as well as the Old Town Local Review Board, Economic Development Corporation, Temecula Town Association, and Old TO~vn Temecula Merchants Association. OLDTOWN%OTSP,PC! 2 The Old Town Steering Committee, with the assistance of Urban Design Studio, have developed goals, objectives and policies for the Specific Plan, selected preferred Land Use and Circulation Plans, and have prepared land use regulations, design guidelines, and an implementation program for the Specific Ran. A copy of the Old Town Specific Plan was previously distributed to the Planning Commission on May 18, 1993. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The purpose of the Old Town Specific Plan is to prepare a Plan for Old Town Temecula that enhances economic viability, preserves historic structures, addresses parking and public improvement needs, and establishes design standards to enhance and maintain the character and economic climate of Old Town (Goal 6, General Ran Land Use Element). The format and organization of the OTSP is as follows: II III. IV. V. Introduction Development Framework Land Use and Development Standards Design Guidelines Implementation Program The key aspects of the goals and policies for the Old Town Specific Plan are as follows: To create a high quality and distinct Western image and-a functional, vibrant and aesthetically pleasing Old Town for Temecula; To develop Old Town to provide a variety of local and tourist oriented retail services, office, cultural/civic, and residential opportunities; To facilitate the efficient and safe movement of people and vehicles within and through Old Town and provide safe, adequate, and accessible parking; and, To create technically sound and safe creek improvements which will reduce the threat of flooding and adds to the vision for Old Town. ANALYSIS The Old Town Specific Plan represents a community-based preservation and revitalization plan which implements the General Plan in the Old Town area. During the process, staff has strived to maximize public involvement and to solicit the comments and concerns of local merchants, property owners, and general public. All meetings of the Old Town Steering Committee were open to the public and properly noticed. In addition, there was a storefront workshop in Old Town and an evening public meeting. All of the public comments, concerns, and suggestions which were provided to staff were reviewed and acted upon by the OTSC. A summary of the public comment and the OTSC's response are included in Attachment 2. In addition to the concerns raised by the general public, there are a number of issues relating to the implementation of the Plan which also deserve special consideration. These additibnal implementation issues are listed below. OLDTOWN~OTSP. PC1 3 Consistency with the Ordinance 578 The Board of Supervisors approved Ordinance 578 establishing the Old Town Historic District on October 14, 1980. The original boundaries for the Historic District were 6th Street, Interstate 15, 2nd Street, and River Street (Murrieta Creek). The boundary of the Historic District was expanded by the City Council on November 12, 1991. The boundary of the Specific Plan is consistent with the Old Town Historic District boundary. The Specific Plan will replace Ordinance 578 with similar provisions, including the retention of the Old Town Local Review Board. The Plan will also create additional historic designations for structures which were formerly outside the historic district. The Plan should improve the development review process for the Old Town area by clearly defining how the OTLRB will operate and by providing detailed design guidelines. Implementation Program Chapter V of the Specific Plan contains the Implementation Program for the Specific Plan which consists of the following items: · · · · · · The Economic and Promotional Strategy The Old Town Historic Preservation Incentive Ordinance Old Town Traffic Improvements Old Town Infrastructure Improvements Old Town Capital and Promotional Improvement Programs (1994-2000) Improvement Project Financing Methods A major component of the Implementation Program is the list of feasibility studies and assessments, physical infrastructure improvements, and economic development programs which will be needed to implement the Plan. The improvement program outlines a 6 year plan to implement the Old Town Specific Plan. Main Street Proaram Much of the success of the Old Town Specific Plan will come from the efforts of a local main street program. The main street program will addresses the overall marketing, advertising, promotion, and business retention activities in the Old Town area. The organization of the future main street program was considered by the OTSC at its' April 8, 1993 meeting. The Committee deferred this item to the Temecula Town Association (TTA) and the Old Town Merchants Association (OTMA). The Boards of Directors for both groups met on May 6, 1993 to discuss this issue. At the meeting it was decided that the future main street organization should be based upon the by- laws and charter of the OTMA with the involvement and assistance of the TTA. 'The Boards requested that City staff evaluate the Old Town Merchants Association Charter and determine the feasibility of expanding it into a Main Street organization. This approach appear to be feasible and would also ensure that currently active business people continues to be involved in Old Town. OLDTOWN ~OTSP. PC 1 4 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Staff reviewed the Specific Plan and compared it to the Draft General Plan. Staff finds that the Specific Plan is consistent with, and directly implements the following goals and policies of the General Plan: · · · · · Land Use Element Circulation Element Open Space/Conservation Element Community Design Element Economic Development Element Goal 6, Policies 6.1 through 6.5 Policy 5.3 Policies 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, and 6.9 Policy 1.3 Policy 6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Specific Plan is an implementation program of the City General Plan. A preliminary evaluation of the Old Town Specific Plan indicated that the Specific Plan would have no significant environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified and addressed in the EIR for the City General Plan. It is recommended that the proposed Negative Declaration be "tiered" with the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. The Planning Department prepared an Initial Environmental Study (IES) for the OTSP on May 5, 1993. The IES recommended that a Negative Declaration, tiered with the Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan, would address all the potential impacts of the Old Town Specific Plan. The IES indicated that the Specific Plan would have no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration should be adopted. The IES and Notice of Intent for the Negative Declaration are included in Attachment 3. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Old Town Specific Plan represents a broad-based community consensus on the future of Old Town. The Plan provides the foundation for future activities of the City and the future main street organization in and around Old Town Temecula. The Plan contains an implementation program to guide the initial six years of public infrastructure and marketing activities for the Plan. FINDINGS 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the General Plan which is currently being considered by the City Council, since the project will implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. e The project complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances, including Sections 65450 through 65457. e The project is closely related to the General Plan and the environmental documentation (Negative Declaration) for the project is being tiered with the environmental documentation (Environmental Impact Report) for the General Plan pursuant to Section 15152 of the CEQA Guidelines. OLDTOWN~OTSP.PC1 5 The potential environmental impacts of the project were examined and found to be comparable to the impacts associated with the General Plan. The impacts of this project were found to be identical to the impacts identified in Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the General Plan EIR are expected to mitigate any adverse impacts which may result from this project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Old Town Specific Plan and ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 93- entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE 93- ; ADOPTING' THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND ANII~DING CITY ORDINANCE 90-04." Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution 93- - blue page 7 Ordinance 93- - blue page 10 Summary of the public comments on the Old Town Specific Plan - blue page 14 May 5, 1993, Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration and the Initial Environmental Study for the Old Town Specific Plan - blue page 19 om'row~o'rs'..~ 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7. I 'rman Fahey expressed concern that there is not sufficient evidence t~,-' "ant a and the City may be setting s precedent by approving the sign--- stated he is concerned about the height of the- .., and suggested that the sent beck to staff to investigate whether ~-" ..el Trans sign could be moved and could be decreased in height an~- '.hension. It was moved by ir Hoegland, secondr- uy Commissioner Blair to close the public hearing at 7:15 recommend r".dal of Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. Deny .solution No. 93-{next) recommending Approval of Plot Plan No. 249, recommending Approval of Variance-' large and is aesthetically diSpleasi" ',nd ~ because of its size, bulk and"; .nsity. The motion was caffie "'jy the following vote: AYES: -~---" COMMISSIONERS: NOES: -' 2 COMMISSIONERS: ~" ".,ENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: .do. 2, and Deny Resolution No. 93-lnextl besed on the findings that the sign is too I · negative impact on the community Blair, Hoegland, Chiniaeff, Ford None Old Town Soecific Plan Proposal to adopt a Specific Plan adopting Land Use standards and design guidelines in and around the Old Town area. Senior Planner John Meyer and Associate Planner David Hogan presented the staff report. Mark *Brodeur, owner and principal of Urban Design Studios, land use and design consultant, provided an overview of the Old Town Specific Plan process, highlighting · the circulation element and the Shoot-Out Zone. Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M. John Moremarco, P.O. Box 906, Temecula, expressed his support of the Old Town Specific Plan. Mr. Moramarco suggested that the proposed wood plank boardwalks are not the most practical and an alternative design should be considered. Bonnie Reed, 42050 Main Street, Temecula, owner of Country Cellar Antiques and member of the Old Town Steering Committee, expressed her support of the plan. PCMINO6/O7/B3 ~ ~jl 3/13 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7, 1993 Bonnie Corbin, 225 Avenue D, Redohalo Beach, Old Town property owner (Mercedes and 3rd Street), expressed support of the Old Town Specific Ran. Ira Dixon, 2016 Gird Road, Fallbrook, Old Town property owner (Mercedes and Main Street) expressed support of-the Old Town Specific Plan and asked that the Commissioner consider allowing automotive repairs as a permitted use in the "Tourist Retail Core", Donald Martin, 12132 Woodlawn Avenue, Santa Ana, Old Town property owner (Front Street and Felix Valdez) expressed his support of the Old Town Specific Plan. Charles March, Old Town property owner, (Main Street and Front Street) expressed his support of the Old Town Specific Plan. Jo Hansen, 42251 Sixth Street, Temecula, expressed support of the Old Town Specific Plan however, she expressed opposition to the extension of high density housing along Pujol. Ms. Hensen suggested that prior to approving more high density housing, the City should research the impacts with fire, police and emergency services. Bill Harker, 31130 North General Kearney Road, Temecula, representing the Temecula Town Association and a member of the Old Town Steering Committee, expressed the Association's support of the plan. Planner David Hogan advised the Commission that letters were received from Evelyn Zinn, Robert Dawes and Marion Raish, all Pujol Street property owners, requesting that their properties be excluded in the Old Town Specific Plan and as part of the historical district. Staff received a letter from Robert Lord asking that the Commission support the plan and that the plan be implemented as soon as possible. A letter was received from U.R.G.E. asking that the Old Town Specific Plan address the flood control problems of the Murriata Creek. Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested that a resolution would be more appropriate in adopting the Financial Marketing Strategy. Planning Director Gary Thornhill concurred. It was moved by Commissioner Hoegland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close the public hearing at 8:15 P.M. approving the Negative Declaration and approving the Adootion of Resolution No. 93-11 recommending that the City Council. approve the Old Town Specific Plan and amend the Official Zoning Map City Zoning Ordinance, and referring the implementation of the financial marketing strategy as an appendix so that it is not part of the Ordinance. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN06/07/93 e/13/e3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7, 1993 ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Planning Director Gary Thomhill thanked and recognized the following members of the Old Town Specific Plan Ad-Hoc Committee: Helga Berger Susan Bridges Carlee Danielsen Linda Fahey Christina Grina Bill Harker Larry Markham Former City Councilmember Peg Moore Laveme Parker Bonnis Reed Steve Sander Environmental Imoact Report No. 340 Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 263, a S proposing a I square foot commercial core, 298,000 square general retail, 810 feet of office/industrial and possible residential uses on 201.3 on the southeast comer of and Ynez Roads. Planner Steve presented the staff re; Mr. Jiannino advised the Commission that getion of the impacts, significant impacts remain as to noise, air quality, and circulation. Mr. Jiennino 'stated that on a cumulative specific plans proposed in the area and the ultimate build-out for on all three projects and other City projects will have a significant 13 issues identified in the E.I.R. e Chanae of Zone No. 9; Plot Plan No. Amd. No. 4. and Variance No. 9 Change of Zone R-R (Rural Residential) to a 340,400 s foot commercial center (Wal-mart) number zones from seven to two. Located Wir and Ynez Roads. Inic Highway Commercial), Variance to reduce the southeast corner of Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. PCMINO~/07/93 N13/93 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN OLDTOVVN%OTSP. CC1 22 ATTACHMENT 8 SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN The Old Town Steering Committee has received a number of comments and concerns through out the process. Listed below are the public comments on the Plan and the OTSC's response. GOALS AND POLICES 1. Include "residential" into the Overall Goal. OTSC Decision: Add to Overall Goal. 2. Change the boundary of the pedestrian atmosphere area from 2nd to 6th and Mercedes to the Creek, to I st Street to Rancho California Road and Interstate 15 to the Creek. OTSC Decision: No change recommended. 3.Encouraging the use of graffiti resistant materials whenever feasible. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. 4.Eliminate of overhead utility lines throughout Old Town. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. 5. Amortize existing billboards and incorporate signs into period structures and facades. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies with "when economically feasible". 6. Include single and multiple family, hotel or bread, and breakfast uses in Old Town. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. 7.Provide appropriately located public restroom facilities. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. 8.Provide additional pedestrian crossings over Murrieta Creek. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. 9. Provide parking areas at the north and south ends of the district with horse drawn wagon/trolley serving Front Street during high traffic use periods. OTSC Decision: Add to the Goals and Policies, with language that states it would ideafly not operate on Front Street. 10. Coordinate the Specific Plan with other City approved plans for Murrieta Creek. '. OLD'rOW.~O'rSP.CC~ 23 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. OTSC Decision: Add to Goals and Policies. LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Old Town need some form of "anchor" like a couple of good restaurants or some other local attraction. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Encourage office uses in old town which are similar to the types of offices which were active in the early 1900's. OTSC Decision: Add to the Plan on side streets and on the second floors along Front Street. The area west of Mercedes Street should consist of residential appearing business and professional uses. OTSC Decision: Add to the Plan, but this area is not limited to these uses. Change the designation of the property located at the corner of Main and Mercedes Streets from Tourist Serving Residential to Tourist Retail Core. OTSC Decision: Change the area between Mercedes Street, Interstate 15, and the middle of the block between 4th and Main Streets from Tourist Serving Residential to Tourist Retail Core. Old Town cannot rely on tourism to thrive economically; local serving businesses should be of primary concern and importance. OTSC Decision: Do not include in the Plan. The Committee believes that a mix of local and tourist serving uses are needed. Small and individually owned businesses should be encouraged in old town. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Need to provide public restrooms. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Need public spaces for outdoor events and activities. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan; the exact locations will be evaluated and selected after a detailed feasibility study. Need to improve the security with additional lighting and/or foot-patrols. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. OLDTOVVN~OTSP. CC1 24 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. CIRCULATION PLAN The need to change the configuration of the traffic lanes on Front Street south of Rancho California Road (as well as the configuration of the access to Moraga Road). OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. The need to put traffic signals at Main and Front Streets. OTSC Decision: Not included in the Plan. The need to put traffic signals at Santiago/First Street and Front Street. OTSC Decision: Included in the. Plan. Front Street needs to be 4-lanes for Old Town to be economically successful. OTSC Decision: 'Not be included in the Plan. Need to provide additional parking so that smaller sites can be developed; preferably in areas behind, or off of, Front and Main Streets or along Murrieta Creek. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Parking along Murrieta Creek will be considered if it can be done without causing additional problems or adverse impacts to the Creek. Retain curb parking in Old Town. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Streets should not be closed if existing businesses rely on those streets for their access and customers. OTSC Decision: No decision made by the Committee, this option should be kept open. Wooden pedestrian bridges across Murrieta Creek should be considered. OTSC Decision: Wooden bridges are not precluded by the Plan, the precise design of the future bridges will be made consistent with architectural design for Old Town. Investigate the feasibility of planting of trees in the middle of the turn around areas in the cul-de-sacs along Mercedes Street. OTSC Decision: Not prohibited by the Plan. Underground parking should be allowed. OTSC Decision: Underground parking is not prohibited by the Plan. OLDTOVVN%OTSP. CC1 25 30. 31. 32. 33. 34.- 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. Move the location of the proposed Sixth Street Bridge. OTSC Decision: Not included in the Plan. DESIGN GUIDELINES Additional detail for the architectural standards along Pujol Street needs to be provided. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. All the streets in Old Town should be converted from asphalt to decomposed granite or a similar material which gives the appearance of dirt streets. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan if it can be done safely and economically. Building rehabilitation guidelines need to be provided for the area north of 6th Street to ensure that these buildings are converted to the Old Town theme. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Walkways need to made of highly durable materials to prevent high maintenance costs and possible legal liability. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM The desirability of using the Old Town Merchants Association to be involved in implementing the Plan. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Need freeway signage to both announce and advertise Old Town Temecula. OTSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Businesses in Old Town need to stay open later. OTSC Decision: Will be addressed by the Main Street Program. Low interest loans should be provided for building facade improvements. 0 TSC Decision: Included in the Plan. Allow outdoor alcohol consumption during special events. OTSC Decision: Not prohibited by the Plan. O"",TOW.',O'rSP.CC'~ 26 ATTACHMENT NO. 9 SUMMARY OF THE ORIGINAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN OLDTOVVN\OTSP. CC1 27 SUMMARY OF O.T.S.P. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM SPECIAL STUDIES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION TOTAL $4,522,500 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 FY'93 FY'94 FY'95 FY'g6 FY'97 FY'98 $22,000 $70,000 $0 $10,000 $20,000 50 $173,000 $160,000 $148,000 $107,500 $45,000 $0 $.387,000 $400,000 $1,280,000 $720,000 $502,000 $461,000 $17,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $599,000 $630,000 $1,428,000 $837,500 $567,000 $461,000 SPECIAL STUDIES Parking Assessment Diet Fees Study Underground Utility Fess Study Felix Valdes-Diaz Road Fe· Study Santiago Road Feasibility Study Old Town Shuttle Feasibility Study 'Sixth Street Bridge Fees Study $12,000 $1 O, 000 $40,000 $30,000 $10,000 $20,000 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT pROGRAMS Main Street Billboard Lease B.I.D. Education Program Old Town Logo Design Competition Facade Improvement Special Events Graphic Maketing M=terials Business Owner Workshops Non-Conforming.Sign Removal $75,000 $80,000 $40,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $7,500 $15,000 $8,000 $50.000 $50,000 S50,000 $50,000 $10,000 $0 $20,000 $3,000 $40,000 $20.000 $50,000 $15,000 PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS Gateway Arch West Main Street Reconstruction Drainage Improvements Residential Rehab Program ' Parking Lot Acquisition Parking Lot/Restrooms First Street Bridge (37'X 200'} First Street/Santiago Intersecton Public Signage Front Street Reconstruction Front Street Upgradss Street Furniture/Public Lighting Progra North Gatemway Landscaped Improve General Curb and Gutter Improvements 12' Sewer Main in Front Street Shopping Center Facade Improvments 10' Water Main in marcedes a~qd Secon 4 Bus Shelters Main Street Pedestrian Bridge $12.000 $275,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $50,000 $300,000 $180,000 $1,000,000 Unknown $35,000 6370,000 $100,000 $145,000 $20,000 $42.000 $100,000 $300,000 $60,000 $132,000 $4,000 $325,000 BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION Materials for BRAG Team $17.000 Establish Old Town BRAG Team(Bus R $0 DayaiD; Business Attraction Program $0 Business Attraction Program So $o $o $0 $o $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 S0 S0 $o · - $o $0 ATTACHMENT NO. 10 SUMMARY OF THE REVISED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN o,-'row,~o'r~cc~ 28 SUMMARY OF O,T.S.P. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM WITH ADDITIONAL CIP PROJECTS 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 F'Y '93 F'Y '94 F'Y '95 FY 'g6 FY '97 FY'98 SPECIAL STUDIES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION TOTAL - $7,702,493 $22,000 $70,00C) $0 Sl 73,000 $180,000 Sl 48,000 $552,313 $950,000 $280,000 S17,000 $0 S0 $10,CXX) $107,500 $4J84,680 $8 $0 $0 $461.000 S0 $764,313 $1,180,00Q $428,000 $4,302,180 $567,000 $461,00O SPECIAL STUDIES Parking Assessment Dist Feas Study Underground Utifity Fe~s Study Felix Vaides-Diaz Roid Fees Study Santiago Road F~islbility Study Old Town Shuffle Feasibility Study Sixtin Street Bridge Fees Study $12,000 $10,000 $10,000 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Majn Street Billboard Lease B.I.D. Education Program Old Town Logo Design Competition Facade Improvement Spectal Events Graphic Makellng Materials Business Ownel' Workshops Non-Conforming Sign RemovaJ PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS Gateway Arch West Main Street Reconstruction Drainage Improvements 6TH STREET LOT IMPROVMENTS (NEW) ResldenMI Relqab Program Parking Lot Acquisition Parking Lot/Restrooms First Street Bridge (REVISED) First StresUSan~'"go Intersecton Pul~lic S~gnage Front Street Reconstruction Front Street Upgrades Street FumituretPublic Lighting Program FELIX VALDEZ REALIGNMENT (NEW) Nottt Gatemway Landscaped Improvement Generaj Cure and Gutter Improv~mants 12' Sewer Mmn in Front Street Shopping Center Facade imprownants 10' Water Main ~n marcedes and S®cond Str 4 Bus Shelters IV~n Street Pedestrian Bridge $75,000 $80,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $8,000 $50,000 $50,000 $10,000 $20,000 $12.000 $275.000 $100,000 $65,313 $40,000 Sl 5.000 $50,000 S100,000 $180,000 Unknown $50,000 $20,000 $35,000 $370,000 $100,000 $145,000 $312,500 $20,000 $15,000 $42,O00 $132,000 $4,000 $325,000 BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION Matenats for BRAG TIara $17,000 EstN:}lish Old Town BRAG Teem(Bus Recrui Develop Business Arb'acl~on Program Business Attraction Program ATTACHMENT NO. 11 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THE INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN OLDTOVVN%OTSP. CC1 29 City of Temecum Planning Department Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration PROJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Old Town Specific Plan. City of Temecula. The Old Town Specific Plan area is generally located south of Rancho California Road, east of Interstate 15, north of Santiago Road/First Street, and west of Pujol Street, in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. The Old Town Specific Plan is an implementation program of the General Plan and will guide the private development and public improvement processes within the Old Town Ares. The Specific Plan for the Old Town will establish regulations and. programs to address the following issues: land use, architecture and design, economic development and business revitalization, historic preservation, and public improvements and infrastructure. The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the City Council intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project. The Negative Declaration for the Old Town Specific Plan (OTSP) is tiered with the City of Temecula's 1993 General Plan EIR (GPEIR). The Specific Plan is an implementation mechanism for the General Plan and based upon the preliminary evaluation to the Initial Environmental Study, the OTSP will generally not have any environmental impacts beyond those impacts described in the GPEIR. The additional impacts discussed in this Negative Declaration are related to: Land Use, Housing, Transportation/Circulation, Public Services, and Cultural Resources. The mitigation measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project are included in the Initial Environmental Study for the Old Town Specific Plan and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the GPEIR which is included by reference as part of this document. The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is May 5, 1993 to June 4, 1993. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through: X The Local Newspaper. _ Posting the Site. _ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact , ' (909) 694-6400. ' (Signature) (Name and Title) CEQA~OTSP.PND Revbed 11/2/92 City of Temecula Plgnning Department lniti,i Ellvironmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of Project: Old Town Specific Plan 2. Case Numbers: Not applicable Location of Project: The Old Town Specific Plan area is generally located south of Rancho California Road, east of Interstate 15, north of Santiago Road/First Street, and west of Pujol Street, in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. The boundary is coterminous with the Old Town Historic District Boundary. Description of Project: The purpose of the Specific Plan is to guide the private development and public improvement processes within the Old Town Area. The Specific Plan for the Old Town will establish regulations and progrnm-~ to address the following issues: land use, architecture and design, economic development and business revitalization, historic preservation, and public improvements and infrastructure. The Specific Plan is an implementation program for the General Plan and this Initial Environmental Study is tiered with the EIR for the General Plan. A *no * answer meanz there is either no impact or no additional impact beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR. Only those potential impacts beyond the impacts addressed in the EIR for the General Plan will be answered with a 'yes ° or 'maybe. ' In addition, only the 'yes' and 'maybe' answers will be discussed in Part III of this Initial Environmental Study. 5. Date of Assessment: April 28, 1993 6. Name of Proponent: City of Temecula , Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 694-6400 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section HI) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Yes Maybe No _ X cnQAxo'rm,.m~ 1 ~ nrzn~ Yes Maybe No d, e, The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? Any increase in wind or water erosion of sobs, either on- or off-site? f. g. h. 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, liquefaction, Found failure, or similar hazards? i. Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? Air. Will the proposal result in:- a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?. b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: a. 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? d, f, Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ho Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? 4. Plant 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)? X X X X X .X X X X X X X X X X X CF~A~OT~P. IBS 2 Rssmd !1r2/~2 Yes Maybe No 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? _ S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of s ies, or numbers of any species of al (animals includes ~1~ snimnls, birds, reptiles, fish, anim s amphibians, 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? _ 6. ' Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? __ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? _ c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? __ 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a.' Alteration of the present land use of an area? X b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? __ 9. Natural Resourees. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? _ b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? _ 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals, oil or radiation)? _ b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? X X X X X ,X X X X X X X -X t"'!iQA~'OT$~'I!$' 3 ~ ll/,j/f2 c. Possible in~rference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Homing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on exi~ing parking facilities, or demand for new paridng? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police proteaion? c. Schools? d.. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Ener~. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial mounts of fuel or enerEy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations W any of the following utilities: Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water systems? Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? Y~ Maybe No m m m X X X B X _ X X X X X X X X X X _ X Y~ e. Swrm water drainage systems? _ f. Solid waste disposal systems? _ g. Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system impwvements for any of the above? _ 17. !tumsn Heslth. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? _ b. The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as hospitals and schools) to toxic pollutsnt em~ions? _ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? __ b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? _ c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding nru? _ 19. Recnntion. Will the proposal result in an impsct upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? __ 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehisWric, archaeological or historic site? __ b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a preh iswric or hiswric building, structure, or objea? _ c. Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? __ d. Restrictions W existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? _ Maybe X X No X X X X X .X X X X X C'BQA~OT~'nel ~ Ren~ml lltl/f2 trl. DISCUSSION OF TBE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The Old Town Specific Plan (OTSP) is being prepared to implement the goals, licies and programs of the City General Plan that apply to the Old Town Area. The majority of potenti~°e~flvcironmental impacts and associated mitigation measures which could apply to the Specific Plan have been discussed and evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City General Plan. As a result, this Initial Environmental Study has focused on the impacts which were not adequately discussed within the General Plan EIR. The probable environmental impacts of the OTSP which are discussed in the EIR for General Plan are as follows: · Earth · Air · Plant Life · Animal Life · Noise · Light and Glare · Natural Resources · Risk of Upset · Population · Energy · Utilities · Human Health · Aesthetics · Recre~ion · Water In addition, the probable environmental impam. of the OTSP on the following impact issues are partially discussed in the General Plan EIR. The components of these impact discussions which are not completely addressed in the General Plan EIR are as follows and are discussed below: · Public Services · Land Use · Housing · Transportation/Circulation · Cultural Resources provisions of the Old Town , specific and appropriate environmental review during their respective approval processes. Except as discussed below, all the environmental impact associated with the implementation of the Old Town Specific Plan have been previously addressed in the EIR for the City General Plan and will not have an additional impact on the environment. The following are the additional environmental impam are associated with the OTSP. Land Use 8.a. Yes. The Old Town Specific Plan will result in some land use changes in Old Town Temecula. Most of the existing commercial, residential and civic areas will generally remain in those land use categories. The Specific Plan may result in new development on in Old Town. However, any changes in land use will be consistent with both the General and Specific Plans and no additional significant impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b. Housin~ Maybe. The Old Town Specific Plan may result in some minor alteration of the land use in the City' s General Plan. The Specific Plan represents a supplemental Village Center Plan for a portion of the General Plans area. As a result, the Specific Plan may result in some new development which could be somewhat different from the basic underlying land use identified in the General Plan. However, the overall land use changes in land nse will be consistent with both the General and Specific Plans and no additional significant impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated as a result of this project. 12. Maybe. The Old Town Specific Plan may have some impact on existing the honsing stock in the Old Town area. The overall supply of housing units in the Old Town area ' ' Mercedes Street because the Specific Plan envisions second floor residential units in the Tourist Retail Core. Any impam on housing stock or units are anticipated to be positive. As a result, no significant impam are anticipated from this project. CT~A~.OTSP.IB$ Transportation/Circulation 13.b Yes. The Old Town Specific Plan may result in the additional demand for parking in the Old Town area. At present, many areas in Old Town consist of older developments and buildings which did not always require onsite parking facilities when they were constructed. According to the Traffic Study for the Specific Plan, approximately 300 additional parking spaces will be needed in Old Town at "build-out". However, the Plan contains programs to provide additional parking facilities W satisfy both the current and future demand for parking in Old Town. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Public Services 14.e Yes. The Old Town Specific Plan contains programs and policies which will probably result in some additional incremental maintenance costs in the Old Town area. The Specific Plan includes mechanisms W address the funding of these incremental public maintenance costs. It is expected that the overall cost to the City for these additional services will be minimnl and will be primarily paid for by the merchants/property ownen who will dh'ectl~t benefit by these improvements. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Cultural Resources 20.b Maybe. The Old Town S_p~eci~c Plan contnln.~ programs and policies to protect the existing hisWric structures with the Specific Plan area. However, it is possible that over time some hisWric structures or sites may be affected by im~,iementafion of the Plan. One of primary goals of the Specific Plan is to protect historic structures and to continue their reuse. The overall impact of the Specific Plan on local historic su'uctures or sites will be beneficial because the Plan will encourage and facilitate the continued use of these facilities and will provide dis-incentives to their removal. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Cr~A~OT~P .IBS MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehismry? Maybe X Does the project have the potential W 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 projea have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A projea's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X Does the project have environmental eftera which will cause substantial advene effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X V. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE IMS" IMPACT FINDINGS Does the projea 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" (Seaion 711.2, Fish and Game Code). Yes X 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. X I find that although the proposed pwject could have a significant effea on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the amiched 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 projea MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Prepared by: David W. Ho~sn. Associate Planner Name and Title May 3. 1993 Date 9 LUt,.;A 1 ION MAH OLb TOWN SPECIFIC PLAJ~ I SITE ,RNtA RD, .tI 2000' ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: City Manager/City Council June S. Greek, City Clerk DATE: January 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Ordinance Adopting Temecula Municipal Code RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing to consider adoption of the Temecula Municipal Code and the following secondary codes: Ae Riverside County Ordinances adopted by reference; Uniform Building Code, 1991 Edition with appendices in California State Amendments. Uniform Buildinc~ Codes Standards, 1991 Edition Uniform Mechanical Code 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments· Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 Edition, with appendices in California State Amendments. Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 Edition· Uniform Code for the Abatement of Danoerous Buildings, 1991 Edition. Uniform Housinc~ Code, 1991 Edition; and Uniform Swimming Pools. Soa and Hot Tub Code, 1991 Edition 1. Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ADOPTING THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BACKGROUND: The City Clerk, working with the City Attorney's office and the firm of Book Publishing Company of Seattle, Washington has completed the task of editing, compiling and publishing the permanent and general ordinances of the City of Temecula in a document R:~gende.r;tVt~e~icede I AGENDA REPORT - Adoption of Municipal Code January 25, 1994 Page 2. to be known as the Temecula Municipal Code. This process has resulted in a single loose-leaf reference book which sets forth the existing body of law in chapter fashion. Government Code Section 50022.6 requires that true and correct copies of the Codes to be adopted by reference be available at least 15 days prior to a public hearing to consider adoption of the Ordinance. The required advertising was placed and met the 15 day publication requirements. After adoption of the Municipal Code, all future City ordinances will be forwarded to Book Publishing Company who will continue with the compilation and who will issue annual or semi-annual supplements which can be inserted into the code book binders. These supplements will also include revised index pages. JSG R:~eenda.rl~t~micede 2 ORDINANCE NO. 9443 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ADOPTING THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has conwacted with Book Publishing Company (BE), Seattle, Washington to compile, edit and publish a codification of the permanent and general ordinances of the City of Temecula; and ~, there is now, on file in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection, one copy of a document entitled Temecula Municilml Code;* THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF T!~tECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption There is hereby adopted the "Temecula Municipal Code," as compiled, edited and published by BPC. Section 2. Title-Citation-Reference This code shall be known as the Temecula Municipal Code and it shall be sufficient to refer to said code as the "Temecuh Municipal Code" in any prosecution for the viohtion of any provision thereof or in any proceeding at hw or equity. It shall be sufficient to designate any ordinance adding to, amending, correcting or repealing all or any pan or portion thereof as an addition to, amendment W, correction or repeal of the Temecula Municipal Code. Further reference may be had to the rifles, chapters, sections and subsections of the Temecula Municipal Code and such references shall apply to that numbered rifle, chapter, section or subsection as it appears in the code. .Section 3. Reference Applies to All Amendments. Whenever a reference to this code as the "Temecula Municipal Code" or to any portion thereof, or to any. ordinance of the City of Temecula, codified herein, the reference shall apply to all amendments, corrections and additions hereWfore, now or hereafter made. Section 4. Title, Chapter and Section Headini~s. Title, chapter and section headings contained herein shall not be deemed to govern, limit, modify or in any manner affect the scope, meaning or intent of the provisions of any rifle, chapter or section hereof. Section S. Reference to Specific Ordinances. The provisions of this code shah not in any manner affect marten of record which refer to, or are otherwise connected with ordinances which are therein specifically designated by number or otherwise and which are included within the code, but such reference shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within this code. 5~m1~\~1-o3 I Section 6. Ordinnnces pn.~.~sl Prior to Adoption of the Code. The last ordinance included in this code was Ordinance 93.16 passed August 24, 1993. The following ordinances, passed subsequent to Ordinance 93.16, but prior to adoption of this code, are hereby adopted and made a part of this Code: Ordinances 93-17, 93-18, 93-19, 93-20 and 93-21. Section 7. ~.ffect of Code on P~.~t Actions nnd Obliptions. The adoption of this code does not affect prosecutions for ordinance violations eommitted prior to the effective date of this code, does not waive any fee or penalty due and unpaid on the effective date of this code, and does not affect the validity of any bond or cash deposit posted, filed or deposited pursuant to the requirements of any ordinance. Section 8. Constitutionality.. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this code is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this code. Section 9. Tnidng Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of January, 1994. ATTEST: Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] 5~rds\94-03 2 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. 94-03 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the llth day of January, 1994, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of January, 1994 by the following roll call vote: AYES: CO~CH, MEMB~: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Stone, Roberrs NOES: 0 COUNCH. MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None June S. Greek, City Clerk 5~ords\94~3 3 ITEM 17 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVe, r. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Mary Jane McLarneyj Finance Officer January 25, 1994 Establishment of a Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A VEHICLE IMPOUND COST RECOVERY FEE DISCUSSION: Section 22651 of the California Vehicle Code authorizes the removal or tow of a vehicle by a police officer. The Temecula Police Department impounded approximately 1300 vehicles during the period of January 1,1993 through October 10, 1993. The towed vehicles account for traffic violations; driver's arrested for various criminal offenses, and vehicles towed for miscellaneous parking violations. The tow and subsequent release. of a vehicle involves completion of an impound form; issuance of a case number; calling and waiting for the tow; data entry of vehicle information onto police and state computer systems; preparation of tow notices to the registered and legal owners of the vehicle; verification of valid driver's license, vehicle registration and ownership, and/or consent of owner for another person to operate the vehicle prior to release; preparation of the release and follow-up report; and verification of tow release. Effective January 1, 1994, cities are specifically authorized to charge fees to cover the administrative costs relating to the removal, impound, storage or release of impounded vehicles. AB 481, Chapter 614 Statutes 1993, added Section 22850.5 to the Vehicle Code which specifically authorizes the charging of these fees as long as the charges are reasonably and directly related to the provision of the service. However, the City of Temecula does not currently have a process for recovering these costs. The implementation of an administrative fee, which corresponds to the costs of the service, provides a cost recovery mechanism. The tow and release procedure requires administrative support from police officers, communications operators and public safety clerks. The average accumulated time spent on the tow and release is one hour. Administrative cost recovery is recommended for'.the following four circumstances in which a vehicle would be towed: When a vehicle is perked or left standing upon · highway for 72 or more hours in violation of a local ordinance authorizing removal and after adequate warning has been posted on the vehicle, When a vehicle is found upon a highway, any public lends, or an off-street parking facility with a registration expiration date in excess of one year before the date it is found. When an officer issues the driver of a vehicle a notice to appear for being unlicensed or driving with a suspended license and there is no passenger in the vehicle who has a valid driver's license and authorization to operate the vehicle. When an officer arrests any person driving or in control of a vehicle for an alleged offense and the officer is, by this code or other law, required or permitted to take, and does take, the person into custody. It should be noted that, Section 22852 of the Vehicle Code provides the registered and legal owners of a towed vehicle the opportunity for a hearing to determine the validity of the vehicle storage resulting from the tow. If reasonable grounds ere not established in the hearing, the Police Department is responsible for the administrative fee and tow charge. Currently, the owner of an impounded vehicle must have current registration, no outstanding parking citations, and a valid driver's license, prior to release. The administrative fee would be imposed prior to release. The fee would be collected at the same time that other outstanding charges are satisfied in conjunction with release of the vehicle. It is proposed that the City of Temecula impose a $45 fee to cover the administrative costs of impounding a vehicle. The fee would only be assessed on those vehicles whose owners had some degree of negligence. The City would reserve the right to waive the fee due to extenuating circumstances, such as the towing of a disabled vehicle. FISCAL IMPACT: A conservative estimate of the projected revenue is $45,000, based upon 1,000 impounded vehicles per year. RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A VEHICLE IMPOUND COST RECOVERY FEE WHEREAS, the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, acting as the Temecula Police Department impounds or stores numerous and various vehicles from highways, public property, or private property, in the City of Temecula during the normal course of duty; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Sheriff's Department acting as the Temecula Police Department impounds or stores vehicles pursuant to its authority under California Vehicle Code sections 22650 through 22669; and WHEREAS, Vehicle Code Section 22850.5 added byAssembly bill 481, Chapter 614 Statutes of 1993, became effective January 1, 1994, specifically authorizing cities by ordinance or resolution to establish an administrative charge relating to the removal, impound, storage, or release or vehicles; and WHEREAS, stolen vehicle victims should be exempt from service fees for impoundment and release of stolen vehicles; and WHEREAS, situations may arise that warrant the exercise of prudent discretion to forego or excuse the proposed service fee. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 22850.5, that the fee for this service charge shall be Forty-Five Dollars ($45.00) and fee shall be effective upon the adoption of this Resolution. Section 2. That victims of stolen vehicles shall be exempt from paying said service' fees when their vehicles are released from impound. Section 3. That the Riverside County Sheriff's Department acting as the Temecula Police Department may in the exercise of its discretion forego or excuse the service fee when deemed appropriate. Section 4. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to review and adjust said fee annually or as costs of services increase. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,1994. Roneld H. Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June So Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution 9~__ was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 25th day of January, 1994, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk ITEM NO. 18 APPROV~T. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Scott F. Field City Attorney DATE: Janua~ 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Expenditure of Funds from CFD 88-12 for the Purchase of a Park Near the Intersection of Margarita Road and Moraga Road PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGARDING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FROM CFD 88-12 FOR THE PURCHASE OF A PARK NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD BACKGROUND: Staff will finalize a staff report on this item and forward it to you under separate cover. swj DEPARTMENTAL 'REPORTS APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER /~- TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning January 25, 1994 Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION: Discussion: Caseload Activity: Receive and File The following is a summary of the Planning Department's caseload and project activity for the month of December 1993: The department received ten (10) applications for administrative cases for the month of December. Ongoing Projects: Old Town Soecific Plan: The Plan, with Design Guidelines and Implementation Program, are scheduled for City Council review in January 1994. Development Code: The consultant is working on a Public Hearing Draft. A final Advisory Committee meeting will be scheduled and a joint Planning Commission/City Council workshop will be scheduled in February. French Valley AirPort: A preliminary draft of a portion of the Airport Facility Master Plan for French Valley Airport has been sent to the City for review. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance A public workshop to review the draft ordinance was held on November 24, 1993. This item will be scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission in February. Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: This Specific Plan was presented at a Planning Commission Workshop on May 4, 1992 where the Commissioners gave direction to the applicant and staff. The Specific Plan is currently being scheduled for a DRC meeting in February. Environmental Impact Report 340 prepared for the Temecula Regional Center R:~MONTHLY.RPT~1993\DEC.93 1/18/94 vgw 1 was approved by the Planning Commission on June 21, 1993 and certified by the City Council on July 13, 1993. Winchester Hills and CamDos Verdes SPecific Plans and Environmental Imoact RepOrtS: These Specific Plans were discussed at a Planning Commission Workshop on May 4, 1992 where the Commissioners gave direction to the applicant and staff. The Notice of Completion for the Campos Verdes EIR went to State Clearinghouse July 10, 1992. Both of these Specific Plans went to the DRC meetings on January 5, 1993. These Specific Plans are currently being scheduled for a DRC meeting in February. Murdv Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Reoort: This Specific Plan was presented to the Planning Commission at a Workshop on April 6, 1992. The Commission provided Staff and the applicant direction relative to design issues. The applicant has incorporated these changes into the Specific Plan. This Specific Plan will be scheduled for a Planning Commission meeting upon completion of the Development Agreement and the Congestion Management Plan. An addendum to the EIR is currently being reviewed by staff. Johnson Ranch Specific Plan: The Specific Plan has been to a Development Review Committee meeting and is currently being amended to incorporate staff's comments. The EIR has been submitted and is being reviewed by staff. Attachments: 1. Count & Valuation Summary by Type - page 3 2. Revenue and Status Report - page 4 R:~/IONTHLY.RPT%1993~,DEC .93 1/18/S4 vgw 2 A'I'i'ACHMENT NO. I COUNT AND VALUATION SUMMARY BY TYPE DECEMBER 1993 R:~,MONTHLY. I~P'r~l 993\DEC .93 1/18/94 vgw 3 REPT155 COUNT & VALUATION SUMMARY BY TYPE PAGE 1 01/12/94 16:18 SubtotaL: Cnstr Type Date Range 11Z/01/~ Thru 12/31/~ DECEMBER 1~3 Date Type: 1 Typ~s~(Setect ):PLAN ALP/, . ype Construction type Count $q Feet VaLuation Fees Paid A PLANNING CASE-619193 PHASING NAP-LND DIV UNT LOT LINE ADJUSTENT MAJOR EVENT - liON PROFIT MINON EVENT - NON PROFIT PARCEL NAP"SCHED E'StiRS PLOT PLAN $UBJ TO CEQA PLOT PLAN ADMINISTRATIVE $1JBSTAN CONFONH-GENERAL I 0 .00 453.00 2 0 .00 1,920.00 1 0 .00 157.00 1 0 .00 107.00 1 0 .00 .00 2 0 .00 4.~0.12 2 0 .00 780.00 1 0 .00 3?0.00 11 0 .00 8,537.12 TOTAL 11 0 .00 8,537.12 ** ATTACHMENT NO. 2 REVENUE STATUS REPORT R:~tONTHLY.RP'T~,1993%DEC.93 1/18/94 vgw 4 REVPR1N2 01~2/94 ,1 161 ACCOUNT # 4101 4102 4103 4104 4105 4106 4107 4108 6109 4110 4111 4112 4113 4114 4115 4116 4117 4118 4119 4120 4121 41~ 4125 4126 4127 4128 4129 4130 4131 4132 4133 4134 4135 4136 4137 4138 4139 4140 4141 4142 4143 4144 4145 4146 16:10:33 GENERAL FUND PLANNING DESCRIPTION ANEMDED FINAL NAP APPEALS CERT. OF LAND DIV. C014PLIANCE EXTENSION OF TIME SINGLE FAMILY TRACTS HULTI-FAMILY TRACTS PARCEL NAPS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NINON CHANGE PARCEL MERGER (2-& LOTS) RECORDABLE SUBDIVISION flAPS REVERSION TO ACREAGE (5+LOTS) SPECIAL SERVICE LETTER SECOND LIMIT PERMITS CHANGE OF ZONE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONSISTENCY CHECKS GENERAL PLAN AMENONENT PLOT PLAN PUBLIC USE PERMIT REVISED PERMIT SETHACK ADJUSTMENT SPECIFIC PLAN SUBSTANTIAL CONFONHANCE TEHORARY OUTDOOR EVENT TEMPORARY USE PERMIT VARIANCE ZONING INFONNATION LETTER CEQA (INITIAL STUDIES) CEGA ENVIRONENT IMPACT REPORT OEVELOPI4ENT AGREEMENT GEOLOGY CEGA GEOLOGY ON0. 547 APZ LAFCO PARCEL NAP/WAIVER MERGER AMENDED FINAL TRACT/PAR. HAP CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION CONOO TRACT HAP REVERSION TO ACREAGE LOT REVISION AFTER CHECK LOT LINE ADJUST. PLAN CHECK CERT. OF CORRECT. PLAN CHECK CERT. OF CDI4PLIARCE PLAN CHECK COND. CERT. OF CCI4PL. PLN. CK. CERT. OF PAR. MERGER PLAN CK CITY OF TEMECULA REVENUE STATUS REPORT DECEI4BER 19F3 ADJUSTED ESTINATE .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 150,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 DECEMBER REVENUE .00 .00 .00 .OG .00 .00 113.00 460.OG .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 352.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 1,268.00 80.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 REVENUE .00 975.00 1,272.13- 2,57'7'.00 18,466.00 .00 2,041.00 2,21'0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 260.00 2,746.00 9,985.00 .00 .00 1,056.75 3,707.00 273.00 500.00 .00 3,619.00 484.00 .00 571.00 18.00 3,70~.35 4,200.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ..00 .00 .00 .00 .00 PAGE BALANCE .00 975.00- 1,272.13 2,577.00- 18,466.00- .00 2,041.00- 2,270.00- .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 260. O0 - 2,746.00- 9,985.00- .00 .00 148,943.25 3,707.00- 273. O0 - 500. O0 - .00 3,619.00- 4~.00- .00 571.00- 18.00- 3,704.35- 4,200.00' .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 COL 0.7 REVPRIN2 01/12/94 001 161 ACCOUNT # 4147 4148 4149 4150 4151 4152 4153 4154 4155 4156 4157 4169 4170 4180 4200 4206 4226 4260 4261 4262 4369 4370 16:10:33 GENERAL FUND PLANNZNG DESCRIPTZON VACATIONS PLAN CK DOCUI,ENT PROCESSING CONDITION PLAN CHECK REVERSION TO ACRE, PLAN CHECK PARCEL MAP PLAN CHEat TRACT KAP PLAN CHECK ANENDED NAP PLAN CHECK ~TH & SUBS, ~tJ~ITTAL$ FENA STUDY REVIEU LONA REVIEU DRAINAGE STUDY REVIEU INPROVE INSPECTION ON-SITE K-RAT STUDY FEES FAST TRAil( PLANNING FORHA FAST TRACK IN HOUSE PIJUi CHECKS ANNEXATION FEES TENPORARY USE PERHiT ACCESSORY VIi) ENERGY LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HAZARDOUS k/ASTE FACILITY LAND DIVUNIT NAP LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK REVENUE TO DATE GENERAL FUND CiTY OF TEleECULA REVENUE STATUS REPORT DECEMBER 1993 ADJUSTED ESTINATE ,00 ,00 .00 ,00 .00 .00 ,00 ,00 .00 ,00 .00 ,00 ,00 .00 ,00 .00 .00 ,00 ,00 .00 ,00 .00 .00 150,000.00 150,000.00 DECEMBER REVENUE .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ,OO .00 .00 .00 ,00 .00 .00 .00 ,00 280.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 187.00 400.00 3,140.00 3,140.00 l~tJ-W, REVENUE ,00 ,00 ,00 .O0 ,00 ,00 ,00 .00 .00 ,O0 ,00 ,00 ,00 .00 ,00 2,240,00 ,00 ,00 ,00 ,00 ,00 561,00 6,535.00 65,516.97 65,516.97 BALANCE .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 2,240.00- .00 ,00 .00 .00 .00 561.00- 6,535.00- 84,483.03 PAGE 2 .Y, COL 43.7 43.7 REVPR 1 N2 01//Z~12/94 16:10:33 GRAND TOTALS DESCRIPTION CITY OF TENECULA REVENUE STATUS REPQIIT DECENBER 1~3 PAGE 3 ADJUSTED DECENBER 1993-~6 BALANCE % COL EST IllATE REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE TO DATE 150,00.Q0 3,140.Q0 65,516.97 8~,483.03 43.7 GRAND TOTALS 150,000.00 3,140.00 65,516.97 8~,,483.03 43.7 REVPRINZ 01/12/94 001-161 16:10:33 DESCRIPTION PLANNING GRAND TOTALS CITY OF TENECIJLA REVENUE RECAP REPORT DECLq4BER 19gr5 N) JUSTED ESTIHATE 150,000.00 150,000.00 DECEMBER REVENUE 3,140.QQ 3,140.00 REVENUE 65,516.97 65,516.97 PAGE 4 BALANCE X COL 84,~.03 43.7 8,&,4U.Q3 43.7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 25, 1994 Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for December, 1993. pw 15~egdrpt\94\0125%rnoectrpt CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report December, 1993 Submitted by.'~T~m D. Serlet /~Prepared by: Don Spagnolo Date: January 18, 1994 WORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION: Ynez Road: The Contractor has completed the final items of work, including striping, restoration of the landscape and irrigation and site clean up. CRC: The Contractor has installed all exterior building doors and is finishing the installation of glass window walls in the gallery. Installation of the interior cabinetwork, suspended ceilings, fire and security systems are on going. Exterior landscaping is on going and will be completed next month. The exterior Iouvers and the wood floor in the gym are scheduled to be installed this month along with the carpet and vinyl floor in the multi-purpose room. Riverton Park: During the January 11, 1994 City Council Meeting, the Community Services Board of Directors authorized the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion. The 120 day maintenance period began on December 30, 1993. It is anticipated that the park site improvements will be accepted by the end of April. Pala Community Park: The contractor, Martin J. Jaska, Inc. has encountered subsurface soil conditions that have delayed construction of the project. Ground water has been discovered at depths ranging from 1.5 to 4 feet below the existing surface. The City and the contractor are working together to find a mutually acceptable means of constructing :the project within the existing contract and time constraints. Pujol Street Improvements: A contract was awarded to IPS Services at the November 23, 1993 City Council meeting. The pre-construction meeting was held on January 5, 1994. Construction will start once the Riverside County Economic Development Agency approves all of the contractor's Community Development Block Grant Program paper work. pwO4%moaetrpt~ip~Deoember 01 I18/94 PROJECTS BEING BID: SpOrtS Park Slooe Repair: During the January 11, 1994 City Council Meeting, the Community Services Board of Directors approved the improvement plans and specifications for the Sports Park Slope Repair, Project No. PW93-06 and authorized the City Clerk to solicit bids. The bid opening is expected to take place at the end of February. Margarita Road Sidewalk Improvements: Construction documents and specifications have been prepared for sidewalk improvements on the east side of Margarita Road between Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road. This project will be constructed with SB821 funds. The bid opening date is January 13, 1994. Solana Way Street Improvements: Construction documents and specifications have been prepared for street improvements on Solana Way between Motor Car Parkway and Margarita Road. This project will be constructed with CFD 88-12 funds. The bid opening date is January 20, 1994. WORK IN DESIGN Winchester Road Looo: The consultant has submitted the revised Project Report to Caltrans and the plans were submitted to Caltrans on December 27th for their review. Ynez Road Landscaoe Iml;)rovements: Final plans were submitted at the end of December for review. Construction is schedule to start in early spring. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Liefer Road. John Warner Road, Santiago Road and Walcott Corridor: Staff is now in the process of reviewing the proposals for the above road projects which were submitted on January 6, 1994. pwO4%moetqet%r. ip%December 01118/94 LAND DEVELOPMENT Monthly Activity Report Special Projects December, 1993 Submitted b.y~Tim D. Serlet Prepared by: Raymond A. Casey FEMA/OFS RFIMBURSEMFNT: Staff is continuing to coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the State Office of Emergency Services (OES) representatives in seeking reimbursement for costs incurred by the City due to the January 1993 floods and ensuing disaster declaration. OES has reimbursed the City an additional $197,749 as of December 13, 1993, for a total of ~201,254. LIEFER ROAD/BRIDRF: The project is under construction and the existing utilities are being relocated. The next stage of the construction would be the construction of the bridge abutments. ~e City Council has approved the $20,000 RCWD water line relocation reimbursement agreement. pwOS~moectrpMev%deoember 010694 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~¢t~Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent January 4, 1994 Monthly Activity Report - December 1993 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of December, 1993: II. III. IV. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced B. Total signs installed C. Total signs repaired TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns POTHOLES A. Total square feet of potholes repaired CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations A. Total S.F. VI. 16 33 25 58 48 109 374,561 15 3,445 Also, City Maintenar~ce staff responded to 17 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 27 service order requests for the month of November, 1993. The MainTenance Crew has also put in 95 hours of overtime which includes standby time, P.rvl. surveillance (weekends only), and response to street emergencies, MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - December, 1993 Page 2 ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING AND STENCILING COMPANY has comoleted the foliowine: · 274,275 L.F. of new and repainted striping · 0 L.F. of sand blasting · 1,080 L.F. of red curb · 574 new and repainted legends The total cost for Orange County striping service was $36,362.49 compared to $2,479.40 for November, 1993. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of December, 1993 was $54,809.61 compared to $139,032.68 for the month of November, 1993. Account No. 5402 Account No. 5401 8,447.12 $0.00 CC: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects Raymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer - Land Development Martin C. Lauber, Traffic Engineer -2- pwO5Voede%a~trpt\93%12 01118 MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - December, 1993 Page 3 STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following project for the month of December. DEL RIO CONTRACTORS Account No. 5402 Date: December 6, 1993 "Haz-Mat" Emergency Work on Winchester QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT · 4.00 Dump Truck 12 C.Y. HR 4.00 Skiploader HR 2.00 Operator Standby HR 4.00 Foreman w/Truck HR 12.00 Sand CY 1.00 Overhead/Profit @ 15% UNIT PRICE 113.00 129.30 87.00 108.00 8.00 250.68 AMOUNT 452.00 517.20 174.00 432.00 96.00 250.68 TOTAL COST: $1,921.88 Account No. 5402 Date: December 17, 1993 Pujol @ 6th Street and Pujol @ Main 1.5" Overlay on exiting A.C. Total S.F. 6,288 Total A.C. 99.5 Tons TOTAL COST: $8,476.00 -3- ;>wOS~rocas~a=trt,; .-;3~1; 011 le MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - December, 1993 Page 4 C & C PAVING Account No. 5402 Date: December 14, 1993 Nicolas Road between Winchester & Calle Medusa 9,408 S.F. of I 1/2 A.C. Overlays 654 S.F. of R & R 3" A.C. & 4" Base. Total S.F. 10,062 Total A.C. 90 Tons TOTAL COST: ~8,049.24 -4- pw0:3 .;oad,,~,~ct:~t',9,~'.'.. 2 0~ i le I DATE 12-02-93 12-03-93 12-07-93 12-08-93 12-09-93 12-10-93 12-13-93 /j12-13-93 z-13-93 12-14-93 12-16-93 12-17-93 12-17-93 12-21-93 12-27-93 12-29-93 12-30-93 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG I LOCATION 29941 Ave. Sima del Sol 31465 Corte Montiel 29848 Villa Alturas 41883 Borealis Drive 40925 Alton Court 41945 Fifth Street Riverside County Flood Control 30121 Via Arboleda Northside Solana Way 27280 Jefferson 44115 Highlander Rainbow Canyon Road 40765 La Colima Road Rainbow Canyon Road Diaz @ Rancho California Road 40755 La Colima Road 29826 Via Puesta REQUEST Sweeper concern Wants trees removed Pothole Trash Concern Trash Concern Potholes Plugged outlet Trash concern Tumbleweeds R & R driveway Catch Basin Plugged culvert Water Main Works Plugged culvert Street failure New paving requested Sweeping concern ~WORK COMPLETED I 12-02-93 12-07-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-09-93 12-10-93 12-13-93 12-13-93 12-13-93 12-14-93 12-16-93 12-17-93 12-17-93 12-21-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-30-93 TOTAL SOR'S 17 - 1 PWO3~ROADS%WKCMPLTD%12.SVR 010494 '~' DATE 12-02-93 12-07-93 12-07-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-15-93 12-16-93. 12-20-93 12-20-93 12-20-93 12-21-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 GRAFFITI REMOVAL LOCATION ~ WORK COMPLETED Margarita S/O Stonewood Removed 35 S.F. of Graffiti Solana Way @ Margarita Removed 64 S.F. of Graffiti Overland @ Winchester Square Removed 2 S.F. of Graffiti Loma Linda @ Pala Channel Removed 40 S.F. of Graffiti Vail Ranch Parkway @ Via Removed 30 S.F. of Greffiti Cordova Calle Argo @ Rancho Vista Removed 6 S.F. of Graffiti Palm Plaza behind K-Mart Removed 1 O0 S.F. of Graffiti Margarita Between Rancho Calif. Removed 340 S.F. of Graffiti Rd. and Rancho Vista 28860 & 28900 Front Street Removed 834 S.F. of Graffiti Winchester @ Winchester Creek Removed 40 S.F. of Graffiti Chardonay & La Serene Removed 4 S.F. of Greffiti 28900 & 28860 Front Street Removed 1,695 S.F. of Graffiti 28900 Front Street Removed 240 S.F. of Graffiti 28545 Front Street Removed 10 S.F. of Graffiti Rancho Calif. Rd. 500' W/O Tajo Removed 5 S.F. of Graffiti TOTAL LOCATIONS 15 TOTAL S.F. 3.445 -1- pwO3%roade'twkempltd~33',;~.Gr~fEiti 010 '94 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 SIGNS DATE 12-01-93 12-02-93 12-02-93 12-02-93 12-02-93 12-03-93 "'/03-93 12-06-93 12-07-93 12-07-93 12-08-93 12-09-93 12-09-93 12-13-93 12-14-93 12-14-93 12-14-93 12-20-93 12-22-93 '~ ,.'.-2' -93 LOCATION 30858 Weillington Court Margarita N & SIO De Portola Via Del Campo ~1) Rancho Vista Mira Loma ~) Rancho Vista Lake Village H.O.A. Tierra Roblee @ Rancho Vista Rancho Vista E/O Mira Loma Solana Way EIO Ynez Margarita NIO N. General Kearney Margarita NIO N. General Kearney Solana Way N/O Margarita Ynez SIO Rancho Calif. Road Solana Way E/O Ynez Del Rsy Road WIO Pina Colada Front Street 140' SIO Rancho California Road Solana Way EIO Margarita Margarita @ N. General Kearney N.W.C. Solana Way ~i) Via Norte Fire Station #12 Front Street ~) Del Rio Via Montezuma @ Commerce Center Drive WORK COMPLETED Repaired N.H.W. Installed 2 W-6 "35" Replaced R-1 "Graffiti" Installed R-7 & R-7A Installed 6 N.H.W. Signs Installed 2 N.H.W. Signs Repaired R-2 "45" Replaced W-41 R-18-2 R-7-R7A Repaired 15 "L" Markers Installed 6 Carsonites Replaced R-18-2 Repaired 2 C.I.P. Signs Installed 5 Carsonites Replaced 2 Carsonites (Knocked-down) Installed R-2-40 Replaced Installed Repaired Installed Repaired Repaired Type "N", carsonite Graffiti 6 Carsonites R-1 (Knocked-d3,./r.; 2 Specialty Si,nns I R-18-2 (~tr'~ght~ned poci) SNSIR-1 (L~-:;~.:e ~noun~c Straightened posl) pwO3'~mede%wkenldtd~3%sgn 011394 SIGNS - December, 1994 (Continued) 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 Enterprise Circle S. ~) Winchester Road Enterprise Circle N. @ Winchester Road Marhill ~i) Rycrest Rio Nedo ~i) Aqua Vista Business Center Rancho California Road Margarita Road S/O N. General Kearney Pine Colada NIO Via Norta Business Park Drive ~i) Single Oak Drive 12-30-93 12-30-93 Riverton ~i) Calla Medusa N. General Kearney N/O Nicholas Replaced R-1 (Faded) Replaced R-1 (Graft|t|) Straightened S.N.S. (TC) S.N.S. Straightened. (TC) R-1 (Faded) (2) SPS R-18-2 (Knocked down) (TC) Replaced Post Specialty Sign (Horse) (TC) Replaced R-1 (Faded) (Straightened Post) (TC) Replaced R-1 (Graffit|) Installed 2-R-225 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 16 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 33 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 95 pwO3\g.-',dsV.'hcn~p!~.d\33\sgn 011394 DATE 12-02-93 12-02-93 12-03-93 1-01-93 ' ~07-93 2-07-93' 2-07-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-09-93 12-10-93 12-13-93 12-13-93 12-13-93 12-13-93 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 LOCATION Margarita S/O De Portola Rancho California Road between Margarite & Kaiser Santiago between Front & "C" Street N&S La Serene between Rancho Ca!if. Rd. & Margarita Margarita ~i) N. Gen'l Kearney Pale Road ~i) Loma Linda La Serena between Margarita & S. General Kearney De Portola between Santiago & Margarita Las Coilrues 0 Calls Madero De Portola between Jedediah Smith and Margarita Solaria Way E/O Ynez Calla Medusa S/O Nicholas Via Lobo Channel S/O Deer Meadow Winchester 0 Roripaugh De Portola between Santiago & Margarita WEED ABATEMENT WORK COMPLETED Abeted Abated Abeted Abated Abated Abated Abated Abeted Abated Abeted Abated Abated Abeted Abated Abated 1,500 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 191,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 6,500 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 80,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 7,500 S.F. 8,500 S.F. 22,000 S.F. R.OoW. Weeds R.O.W. Weeds R.O.W. Weeds 5,275 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 170 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 4,180 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 50 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 1,200 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 1,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 50 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds 6,275 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds - 1 - pwO3'~road~\wkcn'~l~d% i 2.Wc.e 0 11294 Weed Abatement - December, 1993 (Continued) 12-13-93 '12-14-93 12-14-93 12-14-93 12-14-93 12-15-93 12-15-93 12-16-93 12-16-93 12-16-93 12-20-93 12-20-93 12-20-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 Margarita between Hwy. 79 & Pauba Road Solana Way E/O Margarita Valle Olvera ~i) Calle Madero Luz del Sol ~i) Via Norte Ave. del Reposo Via Norte ~i) Fe!icita Kahwea ~)Via Norte Kahwea ~j) Del Rey Road Calle Felicidad Calle Fiesta Calle Torcida Via Norte & Del Rey N.W.C. Solana Way ~) Via Norte Enterprise Circle North Enterprise Circle North Enterprise Circle South Enterprise Circle South W/O 27640 Diaz Road S/O Ave. Alvarado Abated 12,750 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 750 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 750 $.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 2,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 750 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 250 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 4,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 5,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 200 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 500 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 250 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 1,500 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 250 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 1,000 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 5,650 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 2,880 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 481 S.F.R.O.W. Weeds Abated 400 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds TOTAL S.F.R.O.W. WEED AB~.'i'!:~;'~-'.,,.'-.NT 3'/4,~._';._ -2- pwO3%roede%wkempltd%l 2.Wee 011294 DATE 12-13-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 '12-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 r"~I~-27-93 ~ ~2-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-27-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 ~"'~.-28-93 LOCATION Area I & 2 Margarita NIO Pine Colada Via Puerta at La Serene Via Puerta at Camino del Este Camino del Este EIO Via Puerta La Serene between Via Puerta and Camino Corto Meadow at Cafera Vintage at Cafera Alton East end of Cul-de-sac Parkway Chardonnay at La Serene · Via Puerta end of Cul-de-sac 31071 Camino Verde Camino del Este & Camino Verde Calla Medusa at Windsor Kahwea at Nob Court Kahwea 75 feet $/O Calla Medusa 40613 Calla Medusa 31078 Yardlay 39822 Amberlay 31226 Enfield CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 CA TCH BASINS WORK COMPLETED Basins cleared of debris "rain" Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned QUANTITY 14 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 -1 - pwO3%roede%wkcfnldtd~93%12.CC G~ 1194 Catch Basin-December, 1993 (Continued) 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-28-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 40244 Deer Meadow 30455 Dono More 40255 Ben Wood N. General Kearney 300 feet W/O Deer Meadow 30165 Deer Meadow Wellington 620 feet N/O Calle Medusa Ashmill at Enfield Via Lobo at Nicolas Deer Meadow at Via Lobo Holden Circle Deer Meadow at Vidette Deer Meadow at Tuolomine Deer Meadow at N. General Kearney N. General Kearney at Deer Meadow N. General Kearney at Salerno La Serena ~i) Meadows Caile Medusa 200 feet W/O Everest Calle Medusa 200 feet E/O Riverton Yardley East end of Cul-de-sac Calle Medusa 300 feet N/O Riverton 39517 Warher 39532 Terrill 39560 Linnit Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 ~ 2 / 2 2 2 2 1 pwO3%roede%wkcmpttd%93%12.CB 011194 ~-~tch Basin-December, 1993 (Continued) 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 ' 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 ~-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 12-29-93 39570 Canary 39648 June 39680 Roripaugh 39710 Roripaugh 27584 Dandelion 27593 Swallow Rainbow Canyon end of. Cul-de-sac Willow Crest 50 feet WIO Oak Cliff Milano Nicolas at Via Venecia Sierra Madre at General Kearney Jon Christian at Warbar Jon Christian at Roripaugh Roripaugh at Nicolas 27420 Bolandra Roripaugh at Senna Mimulus Roripaugh at Mimulus Winchester Creek at Springtime Springtime at Winchester Creek Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleaned Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured Cleared and secured 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED AND SECURED 109 -3- pwO3~.roade%wkcntpltd~3%12.CB 011194 ~DATE 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-08-93 12-13-93 12-15-93 12-15-93 12-15-93 12-15-93 12-16-93 12-29-93 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION WORK COMPLETED DECEMBER 1993 I LOCATION Caile Madero 29615 Valle Olvera Via Val Verde 29960 Del Rey Road Calle Medusa S/O Nicholas Luz del Sol ~ Via Notre Via Media ~ Del Rey · Ave. del Reposo Via Los Altos Calle Fiesta Via Dos Picos ~ Diaz Road TREE TRIMMING I WORK COMPLETED Trimmed 3 trees Trimmed 2 trees Trimmed 3 trees Trimmed I tree Removed I tree Removed 19 trees Trimmed 5 trees Trimmed 9 trees Trimmed 9 trees Trimmed 5 trees Trimmed I tree Sight Dist. ~) R-1 TOTAL 58 tree,,' ':.-~;;::~e:_~ pwO3Voads~wkc~tplt~93~,12.tre 01 '1394 U..I I-- U..I ,.J O, 0 0 r,) ~' tI) ,_ C) TRAFFIC DIVISION Monthly Activity Report For December, 1993 Submitted b~Tim D. Serlet Prepared by: Marry Lauber Date: January 13, 1994 I. TRAFFIC REnUESTS TRAFFIC REQUESTS: Nov Dec Received 7 17 Completed I 9 Under Investigation 6 6 Scheduled for Traffic Commission 3 2 II. ON GOING PROJECTS: Applied for Traffic Control Device Inventory Funding- ($40,000) Office of Traffic Safety. Met with Caltrans to discuss potential interim improvements along the S.R. 79 corridors. Items discussed: Temporary 4-Way stop control at S.R. 79(S) and Margarita Road. Additional right turn lane on S.R. 79(S) at Pala Road. Right turn lane on west bound Rancho California Road approaching I-15 northbound on-ramp. C. Status of Design Projects - (See table below) Location Design Nicolas Road/Winchester Road 100% Avenida Barca/Margarita Road 100% Margarita Road/S.R. 79 (S) 40% Emergency Vehicle Pre- 30% Eruption System Drafting 80%. 80% 0% Preparing RFP D. Completed quarterly update for Traffic Census Report pwl 5~noecttpt~traffic~deeernber CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL: CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official'F_ January 25, 1994 Building and Safety December 1993, Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. DISCUSSION: The following is a summary of activity for December 1993: Building Permits Issued ............................................ 162 Building Valuation ......................................... $7,455,990 Revenue Collected ......................................... $70,084.01 Housing Starts ................................................... 60 Commercial Additions/Alterations ........................ 14 -- 24,897 Sqo Ft. Building Inspections ............................................. 2232 V:~TONY~REPORTS~DEC'B3.Rpt Agenda Report January 25, 1994 Page 2 Code Enforcement Actions .......................................... 472 Active Cases Pending .............................................. 73 Closed Cases .................................................... 36 V:~TONY~REPOM~DEC'83.Rpt TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ,,./--.- ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD JANUARY 11, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:44 PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsell, Parks, Mufioz, Roberrs, Stone PM. ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field and June S. Greek, City Clerk. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Outgoing CSD President Birdsell presented the gavel to incoming President Jeff Stone. President Stone thanked the Board for the opportunity to serve. PUBLIC COMMENT None given. CONSENT CALENDAR Director Parks requested Item No. 2 be removed for brief comment. It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Parks to approve Consent Calendar 1, 3-8. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 1.2 licetee/011114 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts, Stone DIRECTORS: None DIRECTORS: None Approve the minutes of November 30, 1993; Approve the minutes of December 14, 1993. -~- 01119/94 CSD Minute Jew 11, 1994 3 Contract Amendment - California Landscape. Inc. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award contract for landscape maintenance services with California Landscape, Inc. to include the addition of Paloma Del Sol Park. 4 ~rRnt Deed for Paloma Del Sol Park - Kemoer Communitv neveloDment Comoanv RECOMMENDATION: 4,1 Accept a grant deed from Kemper Community Development Company for Paloma Del Sol Park, a 9.50 acre sports complex within the Paloma Del Sol Development, subject to the vacation proceedings of Campanula Way. Acceotance of the nuitclaim Deeds for the Parkino Lot adjacent to Kent Hinteroardt Memorial Park RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept the quitclaim deeds from the Murdy Foundation and Kemper Community Development Company for the parking lot adjacent to Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park, 'ComPletion and Acceptance of the Riverton Park Imorovements Project No. PW93- 04CSD RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Direct City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion and release the Performance Bond; Accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract value upon acceptance of the improvements, Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after acceptance of the improvements if no liens have been filed to that date, 6.2 Authorize the Director of Community Services to accept the .perk site improvements upon completion of the maintenance period, Mleutee/O11114 -2- 01119/14 ~ ClDMinutee JenueY 11. 1994 7 Amendment No. ~ to the Professional Services Aareement for a Proiect Coordinator Durino Construction of the Community Recreation Center Project No. PW92-0~9B RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve Amendment No. 2, extending the Professional Services Agreement for a Project Coordinator during construction of the Community Recreation Center, Project No. PW92-29B in an amount not to exceed $10,240.00. 2 Contract Chanoe Orders No. 10 throuoh No. 11. Communitv Recreation Center - Phase II. Project No. PWg~-~9B RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Contract Change Orders No. 10 through No. 11 for the Community Recreation Center - Phase II, Project No. PW92-29B, for labor, material, and equipment in the amount of e34,519.14. Amendment to the Solicitation of Construction Bids for Soorts Park Slope Repair Project (PW93-06) (Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93) Director Parks announced that he asked this item be continued at the last meeting, and as a result changes have been made which will represent cost savings. It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 2.1 Approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for the Sports Park Slope Repair Project (PW93-06). The motion was unanimously carried. Mlemee/0111H ..2- 0111NI4 CID Mimetee GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon Jarnaev 11. 1994 General Manager Dixon stated he feels the Community Services Department has shown a keen awareness for the need of parks in various parts of community, as demonstrated by Riverton Park, and stated it will be a real benefit to the community. He commended staff for an outstanding job and thanked the Board for their participation. He reported that in February the Community Recreation Center will be dedicated, which represents a dream come true for many. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson Director of Community Services Nelson thanked the Public Works Department who administered Riverton Park, within budget. He announced a meal program has been instituted for homebound seniors, with volunteers delivering these meals on a daily basis. He requested that the newspaper become involved in promoting this program and announced that any seniors interested in this program can contact the Senior Center Nutrition Office at 694-6465. He also announced dedication ceremonies for three parks, Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park and John McGee Park on Monday January 24th and Paloma Del Sol Park on January 25th. BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS Director Parks asked for the projected CRC completion date. Mr. Nelson answered that the end of February is the target date. Director Parks commended staff and Steve Ford on an excellent job of administering the CRC project with a minimum of change orders. President Stone reported that on January 7 end 8, Director Roberts, Director of Community Services Nelson, members of the Community Services Commission and himself took a trip to Northern California to tour skateboard facilities. He invited the public to a workshop on January 31st, Old Town Temecula Senior Center at 7:00 PM, to give input on planning. Director Mu~oz suggested that neighboring cities be invited to the opening of the Community Recreation Center as it is a major showpiece for the entire valley. Director Birdsall complimented CSD staff for the newest publication of the Directory for Community Services end activities, and thanked them for their efforts. Director Birdsall also announced the League of California Cities Community Services Conference will be held on April 14, 15, 16 in Sacramento. She recommended this conference to anyone able to attend, stating it is a valuable tool in the area of community services. . . Minelee/011114 -4- 01119/14 /-~ CID Minute Jenuerv 11. 1994 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director Roberts, seconded by Director Mur~oz to adjourn at 8:56 PM to a meeting on January 25, 1994, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. Jeff Stone, President ATTEST: June S. Greek, District Secretary/City Clerk Mlnmee/011194 4.- Ollll/N ITEM. NO. 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY~ FINANCE OFFICE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: David F. Dixon,' General Manager DATE: January 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Release of Bond for Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park PREPARED BY: ~};/..~'~Beryl Yasinosky, Management Assistant RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Authorize the release of the Parkland/Landscape Faithful Performance Bond for the construction of Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. BACKGROUND: On May 11, 1993, the Board of Directors entered into a Parkland/Landscape Agreement with: The Presley Companies of San Diego 15090 Avenue of Science #201 San Diego, CA 92128 for the construction of a 9.2 acre neighborhood park within Tract No. 23267-2, currently known as Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. Accompanying the parkland agreement were surety bonds issued by The American Insurance Company, as follows: 1. Faithful Performance Bond No. 111 1925 7738, in the amount of $252,240. 2. Labor and Materials Bond No. 111 1925 7738, in the amount of $126,120. 3. Parkland Warranty Bond No. 111 1925 7738-M, in the amount of $25,224. On October 26, 1993, the Board of Directors accepted the grant deed for Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. Upon receiving clear title to the park property, the TCSD assumed the maintenance of this facility on January 3, 1994. The park has been constructed per the approved plans and inspected and approved by the City's Maintenance Superintendent. Therefore, staff is recommending a total exoneration of the Faithful Performance Bond for this facility. The Warranty Bond, in the amount of ten percent of the Faithful Performance Bond, shall be retained for a period of one year and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. yasinobk~h. IHJr 122993 Pursuant to the Parkland/Landscape Agreement, the Labor and Materials Bond shall be retained for an additional six months to allow for the settlement of all claims and obligations concerning those persons furnishing labor and materials for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is anticipated from 'the release of the Parkland/Landscape Faithful Performance Bond· ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity Map Parkland/Landscape Improvement Agreement Surety Bonds yeelnolek~dt.bdr 122993 crrY OF TEMECULA PAKKLAND ! LANDSCAPE IlV[PROV'~Vtk'NT AG~ DATE OF AGR~fltN'T: &pr~l 12, 1993 NAM]~ OF SUBDIVIDER.: The Presley Caxpe~es ('P, efen'ed to as "SUBDIVIDER') NAME OF SUBDIVISION: (l~ferrcd to as "SUBDIVIDER") TRACT NO.: 23267 and. 26861 TENTATIVE MAP RF3OLUTION OF APPROVAL NO.: (Refern*,d to as "Resolution of Approval") p~ IMPROVEMENT PLANS NO.: (Referred to as "Resolution of Approval") ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF PARKLAND IMPROVEM~-~rS: $ 252,240.00 COIv[PLETION DATE: June 30, 1993 NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND: The AJnerican Insurance Co. - 111 1925 7738 NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR FAITfIFdL PERFOKNIANCE BOND: The ~anerican Insurance Co. - 111 1925 7738 NAME OF SUREI~ AND BOND NO. FOR WARRANTY BOND: The American Insurance Co. - 111 1925 7738-M This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the Sate of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. RF. C1TALS A. SUBDIVIDER has present~ to CrfY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of Cnliforllia and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the f'~ing, approval and recordation of subdivision'maps. The Subdivision Map A~t and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are 'collectively referred to in this Agreement as the 'Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDM SION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDMSION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has securP.~d this agreement by Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by the subdivision-Law-s and appwved by the City Anomey. The term *Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be mainned by the Temecuh Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction. installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and appwved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references . in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications for the Improvements as approved by the Director of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Impwvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Impwvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CiTY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDMSION, CITY has conferrexl substantial fights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the fight to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the fmal act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement, including, but not limited W, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. '.CITY F,ie: I~:~C;onneir%Lanem~..eg :3 shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDIER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acrea~ or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval and recordation by Ithe City Council of the f'mal map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows; 1. SUBI'~IV1T~i:~R'S Obi'.~ations to Construct Parldnnd/l~ndscape Improvements. SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Re,solution of Approval, amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision and any Laws. b. Complete by the time estabfished in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the ParklandFLandscape Improvement Work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformante with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: c. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. d. Except for easements or other interests in real property to be dedicated to the homeowners association of the SUBDM SION, ac~luire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all fights-of-way, easements and other interests in real proIx~rty for construction or installation of the Parkland/landscape Improvements, .free and clear of all liens and Fde: R:~Ce'w~r~erme~seeg 44 encumbrances for the SLvRDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off-site rights-of-way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SLrBDIVH3ER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedit~tion of ~a-~nents or l~il, hts-of-Way.. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land dtwelopment work conten~htod by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY' or appropriate rights-of-way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization fwm the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or b. The dedication to, and ~c~ by, the CITY of appropriate rights-of-way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as dearmined by the Director of Community Services. c. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an orc~r of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVID]~R shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: - - a. to assure faithful peffmmam:e of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and mount of 100~ of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landsca~ Improvemeats; and b. to s~cure paym~t to any contractor, subconwactor, persons renting equipment, or furnishlag labor mamrials for Parklan~dscap~ Improvements requLred to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimamd cost of the Improvements; and c. to.guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CFFY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this ~ent shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Pa~e I of this Agreement are incorporated into this Agreement by this Reference. If any security is replaced by another approved security, the r~placement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon f'rling, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland ImJ~rovement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10 % of the original estimated cost ff the improvement, which ar~ mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shah not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost Of the File: R:~Cormetr~rll~ 6 improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall. provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100 % of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall conmuct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the RBsolu~on of Approval. CITY rese~es the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDM SION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or weftare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY. zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER r~luests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, crrY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. Inspection and M3intenance Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. If the Director of Community Services, or the designated r~pres~ntative, determine that the work has been completed in accordance with this Agreement, then the Director of Community F.e: R:%Conner~sneN~l *7 Services shall certify the completion of the Pardscape Improvements to the Board of Directors. b: SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No impwvements shall be finally accepted unless the maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/landscape Improvement Plans and CITY sUmdards. certification. Release of Securities. SUBDIVIDER shah bear all costs of-inspection and Subject to approval by the Board of Directors of the Community Services District ofthe CITY, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection Co) hereof. b. The Director of Community Services may release a portion of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25 % of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50 % of the total Landscape/Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completiOn and. acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security which would reduce such security to an amount below that required. to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obli[~ation imposed by this Agreement. c. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the compl.etion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all cinimnnts for whom lien have been f'ded and of which notice has been given to the leEis!~tive body, plus an amount reasonably determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shah be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims f'ded during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence *until fmal acceptance of all work and improvements by the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. F.e: R:%~'onnllr~Llndlclelg 7.' Injury to Public Improvements. Public hQ~'tY or Public Utilities Facilities. SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destwyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacment or repairs of any and all public property on public utility pwperty damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such prolxaty is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the ..State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such ownen. Any repair or replacement shall be w the satisfactio. n, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER"S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by hw. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER. a. Default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely complete construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure any defect in the Parkland/Landscape Impwvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after commencement of the work; SUBDIVIDER'S insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDM SION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER's failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself nll remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBD1VIDBR's obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the riffht, subject to this section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damaffes in event of default by SUBDIVIDIng.. The fight of CITY to dlllw lipOil or utiliTe the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy avni!able to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security mounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shah be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDHR'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDHR'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion. by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDHR'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for any excess cost or damages ~ioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY, without liability for so doing, may take_possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, spplisv~ces, plant and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. c. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the .terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDM SION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy pwvided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in Hen of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDIKR agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER 'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. I 0. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period and final acceptance by the City Council of the work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where ParklandfLandscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after City acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed o~' caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fuhedl any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or pans of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to ~ promptly or in aecordanc~ with this requirement, SUBD/VIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER's Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be mad~ beforo SUBDIVIDER can be notified, ~ may, in its sole discretion, make the ne~.essary repairs or replacements or perform the necessa~ work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY. the cost of such repah's. 11. SUBDIVID~:-R Not Ai, ent of CITY. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. Injury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall no~, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occumng to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the apponionment'0f costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Oblipfion to Warn Public During Construction. Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shah give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownersh~: Upon ~ce of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceplance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Ham less. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shah not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of- this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER further agrees to protect and hold harmless CITY, its officials and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any son, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss_ because of, or arising 'out of, in whole or in pan, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and Agr~ment to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the hrkland/l~sndscape Improvements as provided heroin, and in addition, to adjacent propony owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acc~tance of any of th~ Parkland/landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking ,: covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be rP.~sonsible for the design or construction of the Parkind/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any .negligent action or inaction taksn by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over wrinen objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect. however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph shall remain in full force and effect for ten years foliowing the acceptance by the CITY of Parkland/Landscape Improvements. It is the intent of this. section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability for design and construction of the Parkland/Landscape Impwvements installed or work done punuant to this Agreement and that CITY shall approving, reviewing not be liable for any negligence, nonrepartee, misfeasance or malfeasance in reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, or inspecting any work or construction. The improyement security shall 'not be required to cover the pwvision of this paragntph. 18. Sale or Dilposition of SUBDIXrISION. Sale or other disposition of this pwperty will not relieve SUBDIVIDBR from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDBR sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDIVISION W any other person, the SUBDIVIDBR may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novafion and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDBR may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novafion shall relieve the SUBDIVIDBR of the obligations under Pangraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDBR. 19. 20. Time of the ~-q,~nce. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Time for Completion of Work Bxtensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete June 30, 1993 construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than · In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDBR'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDBR to an extension. Delay, other than dehy in the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an aa of God, which SUBDIVIDBR could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or hbor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDBR, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased mount as necessary to compensate for any increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesthlg of Rii,hts. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDBrlDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, ff mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a wrinen change of address is fried with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92390 NOtice to SUBDIVIDER: The Presley Companies 15090 Avenue of Science #201 San Diego, CA 92128 Attn: Project Manager 23. Severabili~. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless mended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. - F,le: I~:'~Cor~r, elr',,Lanlm~lla~ 1 '7 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. l-iti~tion or Arbitrs, tion. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the pRnr~iling patty shall be entitled to H~ga~on costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. ]~qtire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representative of the · parties. In the case of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. IN WITNESS Ww;tREOF, this Agre,:memt is e,x:cute~ by CITY, by and through its Mayor. The Presley Companies SUBDIVIDER By: ~~~k,~ ]~,. - N~me: Gerald P. Norrisman Title: Serlior Vice Pre.~i dpnt By: Name: Title: By: Mayor · ~per. Nomxiz~.~gnlo.f_S_UBDIVIDER'S simmmr~ ~ OF CALIFORNIA } SS. TY OF SAN DIEGO } FOR NOTARIAL STAMP ~/"/o~- 'P3 . before me. Nancy J. Webb. ·Nomry ~n and for sa,d Slate. personally appeared Gerald P. Nordemllt and John bore. Jr., personaJly known to me (or pmveO on trm IDaam ot saustactory ~ce) to De the persons who executed t~e wi~m msuument as Sr. Vice dent and Vice Prmident on behalf of the comoral~on ~'",emln namea and ,wleaged to me Wit such coqDoraaon executed the within instrument pumuant bylaws or a resoiu'aon of its Bo·ml of Directors. TNESS THEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand ana affixed my official for sa~d County and Stale. me clay ·nO year first aiDova wnllen. OFFICIAL SEAL NAN(Y J. WBB ~ :~mm,ss,on exams f, J3/94 U APPROVED A~ 'l u Z"LIA%AVA. By: ~ ~ Scott F. Field City Attorney ::ATTACH!d]ENT CONSTRUCTION Conacte walk Flay toys (mrfridcx~) and Play stmcturc Concrete ~"ade be. am . Piafic table Trash receptacle Tot lot drnin-~e/subgra~ Drinking fountain Sub-total IRRIGATION Turf gear rotor Tuff pop=up Shrub pop-trp Shrub spray- Hunter Shrub spray - Toro Water meter - Point of COnnPCfiOD Reduced pressure backflow preyenter - 2* Ball valve - 2-1FZ' Automatic controller Antomadc controller 8st=, Remote control valve 3/4' Remote control valve Remote control valve 1-1/4' 2830 SF 2.70. 7,640.00 · 1 AILOW 37,000.00 37,000.00 325 LF 1~.60 5,070.00 3 EA. 955.00 2,870.00 1 EA 530.00 530.00 1 ALLOW 1,800.00 1,800.00 I EA 1,500.00 1.c~0.0Q 196 EA 19.00 3,720.00 9 EA 5.60 50.00 94 EA 2820 2,650.00 251 BA 15.~0 -3,990.00 85 EA - 4.30 370.00 1 EA 2,000.0O Z000.00 1 ALLOW 80.00 80.00 1 EA 660.00 660.00 4 EA 200.00 800.00 1 EA 3,000.00 3,000.00 7 EA . - 250.00 1,750.00 16 EA 304.00 4,860.00 8 EA 307.00 2,460.00 $ 56,410.00 ~00'39~d BNl~I NUIQI~]d M0~ 91:II 'E6.62 ~d~ ProsIcy of San Diego Vazlwood Neighborhood Park B Page Two UNIT PRICE Re, note control valve 1'7 1-1/2' Pressure reducing valve 1 Quick coupler valve 3/4'. Valve boxes 45 FVC CL 315 msivmllne 2,450 PVC CL 315 11/2' 540 PVC SCX-I 40 hzeral line 4,4?0 PVC SCH 40 htcral line 5,380 3/4- PVC SCH 40 latsnl line 4,430 PVC SCH 40 lateral 1he 1740. PVC SCH 40 hteral line 695 PVC SCH 40 htcral line 940 PVC SCH 40 htcral line 260 Trenrhlng/ba~ 17,910 12" deep Tren,-hlng/b~ 2,990 18' deep Control wir~n~ 22,200 Sub-total PLANTING Soil prcp./aue grade Hydroseeded turf Rooted grom,dcover Hydroseed grcnmdcover 423,140 260,000 109,420 53,720 350.00 350.00 55.00 19.00 2.75 .42 .48 .62 .30 .33 .08 860.00 6,740.00 1,350.00 980.00 330.00 580.00 330.00 5,370.00 S .~7,310.00 ~00'39Ud 3NIA~! N~IOl~)d WOB~ &l:[l ~G, 62 td~ Preslcy of San Diego Vailwood N~ghborhood Park B Pa~e Three SUB- TOTAL Redwood header 1530 LF L30 !5 San trees 61 EA 50.00 Transplanted trees* $~ HA ~50.00 5 gallon shrubs 502 EA 10.00 1.20 d~y mnintpn~nCe 1 ALLOW 18,000.00 Sub-tota] SUB-TOTAL I0~ CONTINGENCY TOTAL $ LO,2S0.00 s, o. oo · Note: Price for n'=n~planted trees/shrubs per Southwest Growers' bid 6/30/92 (tree spade method). S115,~90.00 310.00 9-40.130 VNLWOOOJ~T v0e'39ed ]NI~I NHlal~3d ~OB~ ~I:!I Ci!T~Z'- OF ~CLT'r_.~,. Bond {illl 1925 7738 · P~el~.u~: S2,270.00 PARICL~ND/ZANDSCApE F~~ P~O~CE BON~ WI-T~'RRAS, the City.of Tmmecuk. Stare of C={'-'form~ and TSE PILESLEY COMPANIES (hcrc4.nal%~r dcsie~mxed as "Pzincipa!') ,have entered m:o an A~rcc,nent. whereby Principal a~m,,,s :o ixxsmll at4 comple:e ccai~ park-I~-d Irrrprovcmenrs, which said A~'mcment, dazed April 12.19..~.3 alld id~'~e)d as Project 23267 and 26861 , is hereby mferrm:i to and made a pan hereof: znd V,'B~--REAS, Plincip. al is r-,,quimd under fie letins of the Agruzmersz ~o fiu,nish a bond for the Faithful ~rforxn, anc~ of ~e Agrm:xncnr; · 'qow, TEF,/LEFOU, wc the Principal and L 'laz cAN XNSURANCaSZ surety, am and firmly bound untb ;he Cit3, oI Temecula, Cs/i.fornia. iu file pcnai sum of S 252,240.00 lawful money of the Ur-ile.~t Smv. es, for ri~ payment of such sum ~x, cll and L.u!y ~o be made. we bind ourse!vcs, our hcin, successors. executors ann axlminisnr. ors, jomdy a.nc s~verally. .-"i~ toadtalon of rhi,j obligation is such rhax zhe obli.zalion snail become nun and void the acovc-~ouncicd Principal. ida or its heart, execmors. ac{minisxmr. on, successors, or shall in sii ~hinEs sxand ~o~ abide by, well and uuly kcp, -,ad .Dcrfo.,u mC covcnnms, conciifions, ~md provisions in rh,- Agr~m~,n~ and any a{emraon ~emof mad,, as .'.heroin provided, on lUs or their pan, to be k=p{ and pcrformexi ax the d. mc and in ~.t~c mannT 'jmer-,in .r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.~cificd, and in resp~:s according to his or ~cir uuc intcn: and meaning, and shall imicmnify and save haxmlcss the City cf Tcmecula, its offlacE, agenU, an.~ employees, as :hcrem sUp. ular~d: o~hcrwisc, obligaUon shag b~ and mmam in ~11 force ~nd effect. As a part of th~ obljgar. ion secm'ed h~'eby znd ~ addition :o {he fac~ amount specix'icd ~h~r~.for, there shall be: inciud~-d co~s and '.r~,~jnabl~ exp~se,s anti atzorn~y'~ fe~s, in~'urr~d by C.i~y in suc.~.ssfully e.,,,;brc:ing svch obligalion. al! to be taxed costs and included in any judgment r~nct~rgd. Th: sur~tS.' h:r~by stipulates and a~re~s that no change, extension of time. alteration or addition to th: t:m of th: Agreement or to tha: work to be performed th:reunder or the sp~chgcations accompanyinN[ th~ s:,,n_~ mall in anyway aff~.ct its obligations on this bond. and it do~ her:by waive notice of any sur.,h :ha/,,g:,, :xtension of tim:, altention or addition to th~ terms of '.he Agr~m:nt or rlz work or to the specii:ir..ations. /// /// /// /// ! #/ /// /// /// ~// / · /// (s d) (scum · SURETY THE AI~RICAN INSURANCE COleANY VT~..T~RTA M. ~A~fPRI::T.T, ATTO~TEY-~-FAC:T Cerz: c e of ,- cl towied emenf- P [NC] AL THE PEESLEY C0}eANIZS STATE OF CAL~0ENLA Count7 of C'r~ng~ On A~ril 8, ,.~.ona~ly ~pem'ed ) i 1993 b~0~ me, ~at. hleenViodes, Notary Public Victoria M. Camobell pe.,sonally known to me I ........ o~---:- -,~ to 0e me personm~ whose na~ez) ~sr~e stmscrmed co me witran xnstrumen: and ac~nowieo~ted to me thalll~,she~vJ~ executed me same mlill/her/tltlf autaome~ capacz~ and tl~ by ~her/-,~w~ slgnature~ on me lnstrumen~ the person,s), or d'te entity upon Denair of which me person{~ acted. executed the mstrument. WITNESS my nanu aria official seal. (Sell/ ,,,,~.~,~ OFFICIAL SEAL ~:"-L-.~..~':'- KATHLEEN VIODES · :::'~,~ L'~::]" NOTARY PUDLIC · CALI/ORNIA~ '~.a;':-', PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN x':.. ~.' '~.;'/' ORANGE COUNTY M~ COMMISSION ~PIRES MAY 4, 19~ ...................................................................... STATE OF CALIF RNIA ' COUNTY OF fian Die o stud State, Personally aPPeareel John H Nak)d~,be;°re mi~lhe unOers~gned ----- ~ . . a Notary puhhC en end for /~acto~ev~ence~ to~ me ~s~s of sahs- Oersonally known to me ~or Proved Io me on scnOed to ~e w~thm mstru ) whose namffiS} ~S/are :j:rZ ~jO acknowledged ~he/mey execmed the same. NESS my han~ and official seal. Y V ~ ~"~ '~ ' ~ ~ ~ RNIA , , , - ' '-. IN WZIlqBSS WHiER~O.F, this mr.n, mer= Ires been duly e.-:.ecute,~ Su~.above named, on April 8, 19 93 (seam) SURETY THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY VTC. TrlRTA M_ CAMPl%F.T.T. ATTORNEY- IN-FACT PR/NC.T. PAL THE PP, F. SLEY COMPANIES trine) APPROV='aD AS TO FOR~I: Scott F. Field City Armmy CITY, OF TE~r~~ PARKLAND~-AbrDSCA.12-= LABOR AND MATERLit -~ 30ND Bond #111 1925 7738 Premium included in Periormance bond ~,/tie City of Temecull. SI~ of Cslit~ol-lli, ~ THE PKES LEY C0HPAN TE S : (hrx¢~ ¢t~igrtate~ a~ 'larin~}a.~") have entert~i into an .-~gre,-,ment whereby Prim:ipa.[ agzc:es to install am:i complete :..-min Pitkind Improvements, which said AgP~ment, dated Apt13. Z2t 19.93, aadideatificd as PzojP.~ n #23267 and 26861 tS hereby re/erred to a~ made a pan hereof; and W'I-rl:J~.rmA5. urnS- the terms of said AJTeemep~t, P.-~acipa! i~ ~cluLr,,d before enter~g upon the pez/Ormart~ Of tbc work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the Cit3, of Temecul~, to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commgncirzg with 3082/oi Pan J, of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the Sta:e of C:d~.fomi~; TI:tE AEEIZCAI~ Iltb'133ANCE NOW, TEERE~OI~, we the ptin'.eipll and CO~rPAN-Y as -surety, are held and ff.?rtly bound unto the City of Teme,.-~tla, Ca.Efomia, and 3Jl corn'racers. subcontractors, ]aDore.s, mat~.'~a. tmen. ~ other pr. rsons employed in tho pe:Zormance of the a.for~said Agr-..-em*.nt and xe.;erred to in Title 15 of tile Civil Code, in tim penai sum of $126,3.20. Pq)awfu[ rno~.-.v of c~-.. urnted stltes, ~br mateti.n:s ~t.mshed or labor thereon of any kind, or ior amounts due ur~er :he Unemptoym:gt ,-~t~ut'a~c= Ac: With respect to such ';ork or laDor, thzt Surer.! will ' pay ~h~ ~me m art amount nnt exceeding ',he mount set As a paxt of tim obligation secuz'~d h~reby and m addition to ti~ fCar~ mount specked therefor, ~=.--{: shall be inc!ucled costs and reasonable expenses and fP~s. ;.:tclu~Ling t'easormble attomev's fees. incurred by City ~ succ.~ss/ully en/ort:~g st~ch obLigaxion, ~ to be taxed as costs ~z.nci kncluded in any judgcmcn~ nmclc,*ed. it is hereby c. xprcssly sUpulatcd and agreed tha~ this bond shall insure to the benefit of any an~ all persons, compani~ ~d corpcrattons entitled to fxlc claims utxaer Title 15 (commencing with Section3082) of part ~$ of Division 3 Of the Civil COde, s0 U to give a right Of ac'jon to them or their assigns m an.v suix brought ul3on tl~ bond. If the condition of this bond is f'tgly tP. ffonned, then tl-,~s obligation shsll bccomc nul2 and · /old; othc,"wis~, it shall bc and r~main in full forc~ and cffcct. The surety. hcreb), stit~ulaxes and agre-.s that no change, extension of time, alteration ~ addition to the terms of the A_~feement or to the work to be pe.~ormed thereunder or the spec~.fi~--ttions accompanying the sanlc.. shaft in anyway affect its obligations on ~ bond, ann it'.does he.-'~by waive notice of any such changc~, --,xr.~ion of time, altct-axio:~ or addition to the tens of ~he ..~,greement or t0 the work or ,.o xhc spcchexcaxiorks. IN WITN.P.~S WI.IE~Ol·, tlxix insu'ument 'has been duly c.v. cculed by the Principal and Surety ~,bov-. named, on april 8, , 1993. · (n,~D PP-L~CLPAL By: THE PRESLEY C0HPANIES STATE 0F CALIFOENIA County of Cn-ang~ On April penonaily appear~ 1993 baonme. Kat_hleenViodes, Notary Public Victoria M. Campbell penonaily Known to me e.~ ' L; --r = w' --,4 ta be ~e persos) wnme nam.eX) m suO~nn m me w~thxn instramenc ana acgnowt~g~ m ~ ~sh~ ~ ~e ~e ~h~ ~o~M ~~ ~a ~ by her/~ sa~acure~ ~ on me z~ent the ~mn~), or me en~ ~n ~ ~ w~ me ~ a~ ~x~ me ~ment. (Seal) ~' ..........or~,'c, ,.,, sii~U ...... {eKATNLEEN V|ODE5 r;;,lAP~Y ~UBLIC · CALIFOiiNIA! FK:f-ICIPAL OFFICE O~rANGE COUNTY t,,MY C0:,!MISSION EXPIRES MAY 4. 1994 on_A, pri 1 9, I 99t sa~a Stale. Dersona,y aooeare~ ~OhIl I-I o .before me. the unOersagneO. a Notin/Public mn arR:l for Nahor~, Jr _ personally Known To me Ior proreel to me oR the bales of Sltis- taCtory ewOence) to De The DersoniSl wr~ose nameis) is/are sub- scrsoeO to The w~tmn instrument InO ac~nowleOge0 to me he/she/they execu;eO the same. 7WITN5SS my nanO ann official se~l. PRE~CIPAL By: TBZ PRESLEY COIeANIES By: APPKOVED A~ TO FORM: Scon F. Fmld City Anomcy 3 .C:'F,." OF TS~CULA PARXI~ND/LA};DSCA?]: W~NTY ]]OND Bond #Ill 1925 7738-M Pre~ included in Periomnce bond ~p~eme~, w~ 'P~j~t ~ ~23267 & 26861 Ag~mcnt f~ ~ a:f~tive work or (10%) of the esz~ed~eo~ of ~he ~p~vem~; . ~ iu~ty, a~ head ~d f~ly bound unw m: City of T~a~. C~mia, in ~he ~en~ ium of S 25,22~. 00 ~al money of ~e UniM brad our~!¥:;. our he~. con~non of t~s ob~non ~s such ~at C~e ob~gl~n si~ become nu~ ;d void if th~ ~e- bound~ 'P~cip~. ~s s~d to, abi~ by, well ~d truly k~p, ~d p~o~ m~ cove~5, condifiom, ~d provisions in the A~ment p~, ~o hc k~c ~sp~=s ;c;o~Lq~ to ~s or c~ Cky of Temecul, obJigation shall be and remain/n full ~o~c ~ e~t. ~ a p~ or ,~ obU~n ~ h~ ~ in ~ion to mc ~a= ~oun~ ~p~ ~hcm~or, u:~ s.~ be includ~ c~ns ~d ~so~ exp~s ~ i~, inclu~ r~abic ~om~'~ fc~, ~u~ by City in su~Uy ~ing such obUg~n , ~ to be ~ ~ ~oszs md m~ud~ in ~ jud~:m~: '~ sm~ h~ 3~ulazs ~ ~ ~a~ no ~c, exxe~sion of ~ne, ~on or ad~don to the ~m of ~hc A~m~n ~ W ~c wvrk to bc p~o~ :h~cun~ ~ mc 3pc~a~ions ac:om~y~ ~e nine sh~ ~ ~y ~; i~s oBl~dons on ~1~ bond, ~d i~ d~ }ze~by w~vc nodco. of ~y such 'c~g:, ~z~iion of ~. ~Ic~n or ~ddi~n [o [l~c ~ms' of ~he A~e~cnt or ~o [hc wo~ ~ ;o ~e I:Nr W1TNF~S WI'IBRBOI:, tJ~ ~ucrumc~t h,q~ been duly eyecured by the Prirtc.:.=ni and SureW above hamcoL on (seal) TB~ ~CA~ TNSO1A!IC~ COI~A,NI Z=gZ rL" AL T~ PPaSEEY CO~YANIES STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of tgP'~ng~ On April ~eBonaiiy appeared b~o~ me. r, athZeenViodes, Nocaz,'7 Public Campbell aersonaUv Known to me (.~ :; ~ -at, aaei~ - . . . , ~heu ~ si~acurel ~ on me j~ent me ~mn~), or me enU~ u~n ~ of whi~ me ~m~ m~. ex~ me ~ment )VjT~ESS my hand and of~ci~ s~. ~ [S~) ~TNLE~N ViODES ;~?T2-~-;! ] ~~ r;CTARY PUBLIC ·CALIFORNiA] PRINCIPAL OPFICE ORA~'~GE COUNTy L~Y C0~MISSION EXPIRES MAY 4 ~994 STATE OF CALIE RNIA . ; COUNTY OF ~ Diego tss. Or~ Apt 'i 1 9, 19 9 3 .betore erie. the unaersigned. a Notary Public in and for saad State. Personally aDDcared John H. NA hcsr~, fir. Personally known tO me (or Proved tO me on the bills el litis- tactpry eveOence} to De the Personis) whose himdis) is/are su~ echoed to the wetbin instrument Ind Icl~nowledged to me that I~e/she/they executed the ume. /~' 'NESS my hand and official seal. S~mn th,,,_heth Bowers[  Coma. 868 .. ;Ally PUSJC -,CAUFORN|A_g~ · SAN omc-eo c~ O 'T MY~.~Fab. 9.~m~ (This am Ior off~ml riofermi Hal) IN Vv'IT~*ESS WI-IZEI~OI:, fh~s ~nzrumenr b,~s been duly ~xc~utcd by xhc l~nci.~-~l and Rurcry alx>ve namccL on A.aril 8, lP... 93 (Su/) (Scal~ S~ BY: VTP'TflRTA H, CAMPR*r.T.T. ATTOENEY-ZN-FACT THE PEESLEY COIeANIES fName) (Tit/s} By: APPROV~:_D AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. Fr'm_n Cky Anorn~y (Name) 3 [NOW ArT` ME:~I .BY THESE PRESENTS: That THF. AJvlERJCAN INSUR. AN(~ COMPANY. a ~uon ~m~ uno~ me mm a~ t~ ~e o~ Nemga. ~ mac. ~utut~ ~ a~ntm. ~O ~ ~ mm m ~ ~tm n mint T~bp~wew~fatt~meyu~ma~dpur~umt~Amc~e~L~:u~as45~d~6~fBy.~fTH~~~aC~MP~mf~fa~ e fro=. Sectjoa dS. ad~i~', "f- 71m Cbeknm el tae loam of Dbmofs. die !tTmkl~ any Vieo-Pmddem oe any omw lmme ramwind by me Bonn of Dimm, me Cbmmn of me loam of Difmma, me Pumdm or nay Vk F.. '~ vmmY, fmm um to Um, nolm Remmat AmmSmnmsmm CoepoaUoe. .S4m2Ma d6. AeBm~y. Tim natlof~'y of mci RmidmAnim S , '-' '. ,~M ...... ~ Fmml AIm MIm mm h, me immm evdaanl tbartppomtmeet. Any suca tppemtmemamd dmmbentyBnated tbeeymmylmffeekad mamyUamebytimBeeni ef~w~~F:__ ~ Dower of attorney is sil~egi anti sealed uder az~ by Use autlmm~ of Um foaom~ Kemiur~en adoreed by Um Boe.~ of Dir~n of ~ ~CAN [N-~UR.A. NC~ CC)MPA.NY at a meetml cKUy a IM Mid on me 31st ~ of July, 1914, azmi azd P, emiu~on Kee not I~m amenaed or rgmm~t: 'R~OLV'r.D. maz mc nmamre of aw~ via-P¥ '~ _ Anmaza 5egnn~, aSl itmdem ~or~orauon my em agfix~O or ~ o~any ~ of artram% on tny m~mm o[ any Immmr of upon me ~or~orauon:' IN wrl'brES5 WI~']LEOF. TH~ AJ~E]tICAN INSIJ]tAN~ COMPANY Int m~mcl tJae~ bebe~unzoa~fixectf~s ~.SC dayof june 19 90 ay "~ t 5'TATE OF CALIFOR~ IA COUNTY OF .MARIN OaUm ; ~r ayo( T,,s~ 1~ el1 i~feteme~.~oeally~me R.D. Farnsworth to me uo~. wao. ~ fly me amy ~ ~ ael~ee-,mar. ,~, M~ Vke-HmUma efTHE ram: umt n wu me.ffu~e~ by oreere[me Beam of Dimae~e~mid~am,N,,beml~dNi, name metem ~y [ike eme~. LN WI'Z'NF. aS W1-~R.EOE I bavet~:teeam~,mybmmm~agfazamyeffla~, Ll~et, ya~iyea~bet~a fu'sxabevewrme~. ..~60711 -TA-6-q4} r 1989 City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive · Temecula. Cairothe 92590 Ronald .L Parkl Patrlcla H. Birdsall /Vlayor P~o Tern Karel F. Undemam Councilmem0s Peg Councilmetal:el J. Sal Muftoz Counciimeml~r David F. Dixon City Manager (714) FAX i714J September 30, 1991 Ray casey " Presley of san Diego 15090 Avenue of Science, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92128 RE: TRACT MAP NO.. 23267 AND 26861 CLEARANCE AS TO PARK1 LAND DEDICATION AND/OR IN UEU FEES. Dear Mr. Casey: TCSD Staff has reviewed the conditions as set forth in the County of Riverside/City of Temecula Conditions of Approval and recommend that the City Council APPROVE Tract No. 23267 and 26861 subject to the developer or his assignee entering into an agreement with the Temecula Community Services District to. conform to the following: 1o Neighborhood Park 'A' which consists of a One acre park located within Sub Tract No. 23267-4 shall be developed to TCSD standards and the attached conceptual design prior to the issuance of the 50th building permit. e Neighborhood Park "B' located within Sub Tract No. 23267-2 consists of an approximate 2.9 acre reservoir which the d~veloper has agreed to drain and level to be contiguous with the remaining 6.3 acres of proposed park land to meet his current QuimbY Requirement and to allow for a total !and dedication within this tract of approximately 9.2 acres. The total 9.2 acres shall be developed to TCSD standards and the attached conceptual design prior to issuance of the 50th building permit for Tracts No- 23267-1,2, and 3~ .- :'- "- To date. 'all known inted~'sk;l~ areas are hereby ~0ndiTioned to:: be mainmiNd by an established Home Owners Association (HOA)-' Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards an completion of the application process. Should you have further questions my telephone ~umber is (714) 694- 6480. - - Applicant or hi assignee agrees to the aforementioned conditions as signified below. , Yours truly, -. CITY F TE ' CI~~s Administrator ITEM. NO. 3 APPRO~,y~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: David F. Dixon,' General Manager DATE: January 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Release of Landscape Warranty Bond Amount for Tract No. 22915-0 - TCSD Slope Maintenance Areas/Vintage Hills. PREPARED BY: i Beryl Yasinosky, Management Assistant RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Authorize the release of the remaining landscape bond amount for TCSD slope maintenance areas within Tract No. 22915-0 - Vintage Hills· BACKGROUND: On January 12, 1993, the Board of Directors authorized the reduction of the Landscape Improvement Bond No. PB 300 11 469 for the TCSD slope maintenance areas within Tract No. 22915-0. The bond was reduced from ~63,000 to a ten percent warranty amount of ~6,300 for a period of one year· The perimeter slope areas for which this bond insures, have been successfully maintained by the TCSD for the one year warranty period. Therefore, the TCSD is recommending that the remaining amount of the landscape bond for TCSD slope areas be completely exonerated. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report dated 1/12/93. Rider and Landscape Bond. yelinobk~.bond .tel 122883 / APPROV~T, CITY ATTORNEY TO: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER DATE: JANUARY 12, 1993 SUBJECT: REDUCTION OF LANDSCAPE BOND FOR TRACT NO. 22915-0, VINTAGE HILLS PREPARED BY: SENIOR DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Authorize the reduction of Landscape Improvement Bond amounts for TCSD maintenance areas within Tract No. 22915-0 - Vintage Hills. DISCUSSION: On August 21, 1989, Landscape/Erosion Control Agreements and Surety Bonds for the above referenced development were posted with the County of Riverside Building and Safety Department by: TayCo, a California General Partnership 3991 MacArthur Boulevard, Ste. 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 The developer has provided a rider for the original bond which changes the obligee from the County of Riverside to the City of Temecula. The surety bond was issued by American Home Assurance Company and is identified as follows: 1. Tract No. 22915-0; Bond No. PB 300 11 469 in the amount of $63,000. =o be attached to Bond No. PB 300 11 469 '-MER I CAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY Surety) in the amount of SI XTY-THREE THOUSANO ANO NO/1QOTHS Dollars, effective the 23RD day d AUGUST ($ 63,000.00 · 19 issued by ON BEZ-LA. LF OPTAYCO (JOINT VENTURE OF TAYLOR'WOODROW HOMES & COSTAIN HOMES INC.) 13~ FAVOR OFCOUNTy OF R I VERS I OE In consideration of the premium charged for the attached bond, it is mutually understood and agreed by the Principal and the Surety that: OBL I GEE NAME I S HEREBY CHANGED FROM: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO: C I TY OF TEMECULA All other items, limitations and conditions of said bond except as herein expressly modified shall remain unchanged- This rider shall be effective as of the 21ST day d JULY ,19..9-2.-' SiF, ned, sealed and dated this the 21 ST day of JULY o1992- NOTARy SEAL ' his/her/ffieir authorized capadqrCies), and that by his/her/their sib, na- L , J~n'Pu~--c, asm~ (s) on the inslrurnen[ lhe person(s), or the en NJCSOl. SSSS hi · Person(S) - d executed the z - - - ', S my hand orfidal sealnscrurnent. ' , · po.'b , ror ...,,. ~""-" "-"-"-"-' ;' : , ,_, ? ,_, ,., ....... ' ;n ~ : ~ ' _ '.,,.,?,.,,.,:.,,_,:,,_,,.,_,.,,.,.,,_, ,.,,.,,.,_,.,_,.,,.,,.,,..,.,,.,,.,,., ........ .......... . _ _ - _. '-,:,:.,., ,., ,_, ,.,~.,, · . .. ..... ,. .:..:..: .:-. - ...:,. ~.. FOR EROSION CONTROL' AND L'ANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS .. . ......... - · ' - - ~' '- · '-" - ' · '" - .' '- ::"" ' 'Z ' !~ .,. ~-- . .. .. :. ...... .. .- , . ., ...~ COUNTY OF .RIVERSIDE "..'.".' · '.:' 'L-- . ... ~ere~ ~"'~he Cotintg"of-' Ri.v~rSide;yState~Of ZCal iforp~ a;~and .TavCo '(Joint '~enture of Taylor Wood :~cmes & Costain Homes Inc.):',;~.~.%:~'(h'~ein~fter':-:~esionated ~_as ._,~'Principal".)..:,-has .~:entered :s heirs, executors, 'adm~ni strato~,':' successors'~'o~ ..ass~gns,'.-'.'shal 1 '~.in all 'things 'stand .o and ab~de by, and well and truly.keep and'perfom'the 'cov~nintB~"~'cond~t~ons':and p~o-.- · isions in ~he said Agreement and .any alteration thereof made-.as""therein .proVided, on '.' ~is or their par~, to be 'kep~ '.and perform~d'at'the':s~e ~me'i~d in'.:the manner.'.~here~n"". soec~fi ed and -in ..all respects' <'accord~ng "-tb'~:thei rC~'' true~i nte'~t'~;:a~d ;~eaning~z~and .shall -~sonabl~-'a~torney's fees, ~ncurred by County ~n .successfully enforcing such obT~gat~on, ~.~ be'taxed ;as costs and ~nc~uded ~n any judgement rendered...- .'- - .. 284-44-1 11/87 294~44 & Cas;8in Homes ~n .~ ' " " ' ' -::'. -- ' "","' ....... ": :" pemtts'~n the deve~o~ent o - . It Contr=ctor's'own cost ln~ expense, ~o f~~ .~::-~,..~ . ' ' - ~n the Office of the R~vers~de'Coun~ ~tandl~s se= for=h '4n RIverside County Ordtnince '=~' -:.. '- tnc~denti] thereto ~n Icco~lnce ~tth t · . · he''':~: "-'-:.:-.:'.the County Bu~dtng"Otrector ~ind:shl~l:,not'-be de~ed-C~p~ete Unt~ lgprovi} ,of-t , . .- . . , . . ,. ,- ... '.: ':' : finl~ ' p]lnt~ng ,~nspect~on'ts side by ~the .Bufid~n9 DIrector- ~Contr~ctor further .- ..'F ' ~o ma~n=a~n the lbove required tmgrov~entS,"fo}~o~n9 .the 6pp~ovi] 'of the' f~nl~ ..... :~nspec=lon,~'un~t~ ~he structurs ~s Occ~ed'.and,:'during this-period to'restore "" .... · .or replace,' to .the '-sattsfact~on".of~the .Building ~O~ecto~,'.:'a~.defecttve"work .:~r':~abo~'. ' '.:'~.? ._. tS-,~"the ,,s~ t'of =S~-t~ .~us~d--- "' '. ":' $EEON~{';'~:'Co~t~'i'~t~' "'~g~e~';t° ::'P~'~ ~th~' 'C~Un~Y;~the' actu,~. ~ost'~of ::'such ~nspeCtton .-of the .works and .~mgroveents: as may'-be: required · by :the '.Bu~ ]d~ng 'D~rec=or:'~-' Contractor ~ ' ""' ~-:..~:~: further .agrees :.that tf su~t ~s .brought ugon th~s :'agre~ent .'or tiny bond 'gGarantee~ng"~ "'.' .- ,. the c~p]etton ='of the 'landscape '~d ~rr~gat~on ~rovment$,"" all~ costs - ~d reasonable: ' expenses 'and fees~tncuPred 'by the"CountY tn';'successfu]~Y enfordng-such .obllga~ton~ ": shill be paid by Contractors 'including :reisO~able 'attorney's'fees 'and .th~t',upon en~Py ..... :"' '~' .of Judg~ent, 'such costs~"expenses ind fees-shall be . tixed 'as ~osts and ,included .,in . -,:-,,., - . . . any Jud~ent pendered. ': · ., .,.:,:. .. .... ' responsible for any ic~tden~, .loss 'or :d~lge hangentng r occu~tng to .the works Specified · .."-' ..' -~:'tn .this agre~nt prior '=to :the ,c~letton 'lnd lpprovll :thereof,':nor :shall .Count~ or.~ ' :=' .1' '-:{" ~ny' officer or ~]oyEe .~hereOf ~b~ ltible for l~ person~"or'propert~=~nJu~d'bY · :':.':." ",:: lgents ' or .~p]oyees, ~n h P or"l reds ~o ~rotect ~Tdefend ~nd '.hold ..,him}es$' . ..:'... :--":.~,,su=ed by Contric=or~:,':~Contr,ct ~-. ~f fr~ 'l~ :los;:'4~bfilty ':or c]l~=-bec,use of, '::.'."::' ~": ::' lnd the' officers'end mptoyess ~there .L _ f'.Co~rict~,~h~s "~9ents ~nd ~o~ees ""1~ -" .': ":' the C~u~ty, the lrrevoc~]e pemtss~on'to '~nter upon the lanes of the above referenced ,~-.. :.-.. :-:~and d~v~s~on .for the ~urgose of.-c~p]et~ng =the tmprovse~ts. ,:-~ts pem~sston shah .- :.:: ..~2~..';:..piin~9 ~nspectton by the Bu~d g erous ~o~dttton c~sed ~.by""-the :,'constockton ' ':'. :'. ~ .::':~--' trive'~ng ~ub~c of elch lnd ever~ d~g ~ave~n ub~c fr~=~such'''defec=~ve or dangerous :~": .... :':'. -'.?'. '..j:~the ~mprov~ent$, .&rid to p~otect the ,--,~ ....~ ... .... . ......-..... · .' ,'..%r:.~: ~.: E:::::.i~':~--;:~.-~'~,~:~~'~.~ '¥:::: ':::~::?"' ':':':':" "::" r ~-.. .. -'- . ..... '-. .' . tar at least 48 hours'before beg~nnt~ any wor~' End shal] furnish sa~d But]dtng Otrec:'or ""': .:. ..,, ........,. ,..,,,,,.. ,...,,.,.,.. ,.,, ,.,...,,....,,...,., ,,. ,.,.....,....: manner of work... ' · "' ' ~ "' ': '" ' "' "" - ' ·: ' "' " ' · ' : ""' ' '; ,;~ ..-.:.. :" '.~ "'-;- -' ':'.'~ "" "' :' "' ' ' "or failS.' j~ · .- SEVENS: If the Co.t~Ector,' Or hts ;genre or mgloyees, neglects, refuses, specified .: .. to prosecute the work with such diligence as to tnsure tts cmplet~on wtth~n the ttme,' or wtth~n such extensions of ttme as have been granted ~Y ~he Building DIrector, · ~ ' or tf {he Co~actor VIOlatES, ne9lec~s· refuses or fa~]s to perfom satisfactorily any .: of the ~rovtstons of the plans and sBec~f~cat~ons, 'he shal] ~e In default' of thts : Ag~e~en: and no~lce tn wrt~tng of such defaul~ shall be served upon h~m. The Building .-, 11~87 . ' ' DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: David F. Dixon, General Manager DATE: January 25, 1994 SUBJECT: Departmental Repor~ PREPARED BY: ~,~rShawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services DISCUSSION: Staff has been working with the Temecula Museum Foundation to determine a permanent location for the Temecula Museum. The Museum Foundation requested to construct the museum facility and rehabilitate the church building at Sam Hicks Monument Park utilizing the ~500,000 budgeted in the City's Redevelopment Agency. In return, the museum will provide access from Moreno Road to the Senior Center as a part of the project's improvements. Further, the Museum Foundation has stated that no additional rent monies will be requested from the City if the museum can be constructed at the park. This request was approved by the Board of Directors on November 9, 1993. Staff scheduled a Project Committee meeting for December 7, 1993 to discuss the design components for this project. A follow-up project committee meeting has been scheduled for January 18, 1994 to discuss various schematic designs for this site. The Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park located in the Presley Development has completed the 90 day maintenance period. A park dedication is scheduled for Monday, January 24, 1994 at 2:00 p.m. The construction of Paloma Del Sol Park is completed. This park consists of two lighted ballfields with soccer overlays, restroom/snack bar facility, and parking improvements. The City was able to resolve the assessment lien issue concerning this park site. Therefore, a park dedication ceremony is scheduled for Tuesday, January 25, 1994 at 4:00 p.m. Phase II of the Community Recreation Center (CRC) Project is moving forward at an excellent pace. Staff is now working with the CRC Foundation to determine equipment and furniture needs for the CRC. It is anticipated that the CRC will be completed towards the end of February, 1994, with a dedication date tentatively scheduled for the end of February or March, 1994. c~geftd~del~OO3.~in 01 levi REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD JANUARY 11, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopmerit Agency was called to order at 8:56 PM. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsell, Mufioz, Roberrs, Stone, Parks ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were Executive Director David F. Dixon, ~enerel Counsel Scott F. Field and Agency Secretary June S. Greek. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCI AMATIONS City Manager Dixon presented Chairperson Ronald J. Parks with a Gavel as the incoming Chairperson of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency for 1994. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. AGENCY BUSINESS I Minutes It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Robarts to approve staff recommendation as follows: 1.1 Approve the minutes of November 30, 1993; 1.2 Approve the minutes of December 14, 1993. The motion was unanimously carried. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'$ REPORT Executive Director Dixon reported he has received the draft of the modification of the stipulated judgement that has been distributed to the City Attorney for review, and will bring this matter to the Board and Council within the next 30 days. ITEM+ NO. 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Redevelopment Agency Mary Jane McLarney Finance Officer January 25, 1994 RDA Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program City Clerk June S. Greek Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM FOR REHABILITATING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AND FINANCING MANUFACTURING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT 2. Approve loan requests per Attachment A. BACKGROUND: you under separate cover. sjw The staff will finalize a staff report on this item and forward it to APPROVA~ CITY ATTORNE FINANCE OFFICER"'~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY · AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Agency Members Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer January 25, 1994 RDA Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members 1) Adopt Resolution No. 94- program, and establishing a commercial rehabilitation loan 2) Approve loan requests per Attachment A. D~'SCUSSION: On May 11, 1993, the City Council approved in concept a' small business loan incentive program. In accordance with AB 1290, staff is recommending that the Agency.establish a Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program to comply with the new law. Parameters ~f the program are included on the sample application attached. To date, the City has received six loan applications. Currently, staff is recommending approval of the loans listed on Attachment A. The loans have been reviewed by a committee consisting of a local bank official and a CPA. Based on their recommendations, and comments, staff completed the loan files and reviewed them with the council's ad hoc loan committee, Jeff Stone and Pat Birdsall. The terms of the loans are tied to the useful life of the asset financed. The existing RDA judgment provides for an interest rate of Prime plus 2%. Attachments: Attachment A Sample Application Sample Promissory Note Sample Loan and Security Agreement '~.:-.'{il~E~' ,-. .,,., 'F:: m .... ::::'¢:::' '::' (/) 4-/ k ii~ = =~ o E "' 5 o c .J:= ~ ~0 .-- =u ~ 0a = a RESOLUTION NO. RDA94- A RESOLUTION OF TItE REDEVELOP1VI'ENT AGENCY OF TIlE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM FOR REHABILITATING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AND FINANCING MANUFACTURING FACILITIES AND EQIJI2PM'F~NT WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33344.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency may establish a program under which it loans funds to owners or tenants for the purpose of rehabilitating commercial buildings or structures within the Project Area; WFFF~REAS, pursuant to Section 33344.6 of the California Health and Safety Code, the Agency may assist with the financing of manufacturing facilities and capital equipment pursuant to an agreement that provides for the development and rehabilitation of property that will be used for industrial or manufacturing purposes; NOW THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula resolves as follows: Section 1. The small business loan program for rehabilitating commercial buildings and structures and financing manufacturing facilities and equipment is hereby established. Loans shall .be reviewed and considered by the Temecula Redevelopmerit Loan Committee. The Committee shall be appointed by the Agency, an consist of two Agency Members, one representative from a local commercial banking institution and one certified public accountant. The Loan Committee shall meet pursuant to the California Brown Act (Government Code § 54950, et. seit.). Section 2. In considering of whether to recommend loan applications for approval, the Committee shall apply the loan criteria set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 3. All loans shall be approved by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula. Prior to the approval of any loan for the purpose of financing manufacturing facilities and equipment, a public hearing shall be conducted. Notice of the public hearing shall be provided at least 10 days in advance of public hearing by posting notice at the locations established by City Council Resolution, and by publishing notice in the newspaper established by City Council Resolution for public notices. Section 4. No loan may be made at an interest rate less than that established pursuant to Stipulated hdgment in the case entitled Dawes v. City of Temecula and Ternecula Redevelopment Agency, Riverside Superior Court Case No. 194468MF (consolidated with Case No. 194948). 5~r~sos.rda~O09 1 PASSED APPROVED AND ADOFrED at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula on the day of ,1994. ATTEST: Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor lune S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] 5h~sos.rda\009 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 93-__ was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the day of , 1993, by the following roll call vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June.S. Greek, City Clerk 5L.~sos.rda~,{X)9 3