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