HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/14/2004 CC Reports
<~,;"<<
r
CITY OF LAKE ELSINQq
:TY COUNCIL AGENDA
"
THOMAS B1JClCLEY~MAYOR wWw~u.ORG
GENIE KELL~~ MAYOR PRO TEM (951) 67"'~124 PH9NE
, DARYL BICKMAN. COUNCILMAN, (951) 674-2392 FAX
~ERTI. "B08"MAGu,COIfNClLMAN LAKE ELsINORE ~ ,
ROBERTL sCHIFFNER, COUNCILMAN 183 NORTllMAIN
RICIWtD'WATENPAUGH,CrrYMANAGER LAKEELSINOaE,CA92530, ' ',' " '
***********************************************************..*-:****
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2004 ~ 5:00PM.
If you are tlttetldllig this City Council Meeting please p.,~ in ",Pilr/dngLot
across ,the str.eet from ,the CultUral Center. This will ~ liS in, liJtJ#bJgthe
impact, of' ',' ,~on ,the Downtown Business District. 1:1:uuI4: " your
cooptr4donl
-'"
,.....:,' " " , , ' '" ,
~. . ~~ . .. :
. ":,,.,,-. ,"" _" '.,' ',_. .....,.._.'.",._L-.
,.,.,:>' " ,_ ',__..i. r;:)>-:-,
a. CO, ,,' " ,~CE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIA 'tD",f:'~~::',,{ " '
'(GQvetntnent Code ~ 54956.8)
PrQperty;Lak~ ~lsinore Campground and ~y Use Facility
Negotja' Parties: City of Lake Elsinore and Destination Reso
CaliCo" , ,"ted liability company. ,
Under N~tion: price and terins of payment
CO~~CE WITH LF;GALCOUNSEL-ANTICIPATED
LITIG ," 'QN Significant expo~to'litigation pursuant to subdivision
(b)(3)(C):Oovernment Code ~ 54956.9.(1 potential case)'
, '
c. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE .PERFORMANCE EV ALUATlON- City
Manager (GO'Yernment Code ~ 54957) , " .
, - " , '~- , ~
c. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION -.City Clerk
(Government Code~ 54957) .
RECONVErQJ".mtlmt~JC SESSIONJ7:0Q tM.)
- :"~1'''_:~i:.<',,,,_,,.:_
.-"-'C,"" ,~;';1'-\:.",
. .
Page Three ~ CIty CIl1Jheil AgeDda - neee"'1.4t.
',,'~
2. Warrant List ~Novernber 30,2004.
RECOMM1tNDATION:
Ratify.
3. Claim~nstthe City - Cameron Hamilton (CL #2004-11).
Reject & refer to Claims AdminiskatOrfor
handling.
4. Pinal Map 30493-J-,Canyon Hills Specifi~ Plan.
/
RECOMMBNDATION:
. .
REC0~ATION:
Approve subject to City Engineer .
acceptance' and authorize recordation:, '..
. "
. Pinal Map ,30493-2'- Northwest of Canyon Hills Road.
. RECOMMJ!NDATlON:
Approve subject to City Engineer
. acceptance and authorize recorda~,OIi'. .
. ' . .' -_.' ."
. "..__ ,.,"""i,'
P~lMap;jQs46 - Rancho La Laguna Specific Plan.
~>" '.' " _, c
REC<>>AiENDATION:
Approve subject to City Engineer ,
acceptance and authorize recordati~ ,.
. Pinal Map 31917 - North of McVicker Canyon Park Road.
Approve subject to City Engineer
acceptance and authorize record8tion. ..
8. Acceptanceof$3 million Boat Launch Facility Grant.
.. RECO~ATION: "
RECOMMENDATION:
Accept the $3 million grant award and
approve agreement yvith 'California'
Dep~ent of Boating &. Waterways.
~. ,
Page Five - City.<:....Ag~da ~DeeeDJber,14~ 1004
PUBLIC BE~~S
21. Annexati9Jl NQ. 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004..09, Zone Change
No. 2004-~,'vesfu1g Tentative Tract Map No. 32503and Mitigated '
Negative,Deelaration No. 2()O4.=09. .
RECOMMENDATION:
, "
Adopt Resolution No. 2004-72.
Adopt Resolution No. 2004-73.
AdOpt ResolutiQn No.2004~74~.". .
Adopt Ordinance ,No. 1134, Upon First
Reading by Title Only.
Adopt Resolution No. 2004-75~
BUSINESS l~MS
. "' 0,
31. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1133 - Change in Election Date and
Extensionorrerms. '
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Ordinance No. 1133, Upon'SeC01ld
Reading by Title Only.
, .
32. First Readifig- Ordinance No. 1135 - Amending Chapter 8.32 oftheLEMC.
tegar~Weedand Rubbish abatement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Ordinance No. 1135, Upon First
Reading by Title Only.
.33. Contract A.ward:- General Plan Update - Mooney-Jones & Stokes -': Not 'to
exceed $825,OOQwith a contingency of$47,544 or 6.1 percent.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve agreementwitb Mooney-Jones &
Stokes.
34. .AnnUal A<ljystmentofTr~sportatiolltJniformMitigation Fee (TUMF).
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Ordinance No. 1136, Upon First
Reading by Title Only.
~
MINUTES
JOINT CITY COUNCILIREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
STUDY SESSION
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2004
******************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER
The Joint City CouncillRedevelopment Agency Study Session was called to order
by Mayor Buckley at 4:07 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
,......
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best,
City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community
Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp,
Lake/Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Engineering Manager Seumalo,
Finance Manager Magee, Information/Communications Manager Dennis,
Parks & Open Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Public Works
Manager Payne, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources
Director Kasad.
BUSINESS ITEM
Ae:enda Review
".-.
Mayor Buckley advised that since there was no Proclamation for Veteran's Day, he
would have all Veterans and those who have served come forward to participate in
AGENDA ITEM NO. j Cl
PAGE-LOF~
Page Two - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
......,
the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Buckley indicated that there would be presentations to the Electoral
Reform Committee Members followed by a brief report.
City ClerklHuman Resources Director Kasad advised that the representatives
would not be present to receive the Lung Cancer Awareness Proclamation.
Mayor Buckley inquired if the Chamber of Commerce would be present for their
presentation. City Clerk Kasad confirmed.
Consent Calendar
Councilman Hickman questioned item no. 1. d. - Planning Commission Minutes
of October 19,2004, and inquired if the Pulte Homes drainage issues had been
resolved. He stressed that the retention basin was a horrible problem.
Community Development Director Brady indicated that staff was addressing the
problem and it would be corrected.
......,
Mayor Buckley apologized that he had missed requests to speak on Item D Closed
Session and one Non-Agendized item, and recognized those speakers.
Bill Tiitto, 32296 Machado Street, noted that the City Manager's contract was a
matter for Closed Session, but questioned if it would be the same contract with
mileage, cars and a bonus program. City Attorney Leibold indicated that at this
point the City Manager was employed under the existing contract, but noted the
recent action which provided a notice of non-renewal. She noted that whether the
Council took action at this meeting was yet to be determined as part of the
evaluation process. Mr. Tiitto referred to the Minutes and noted that he
mentioned the landscaping fees for which $18,000 was spent on the center divider;
which seemed high. He noted that someone commented on using boy scouts and
officer parole program, but he was talking about dollars paid to the contractor. He
questioned if there was any negotiation for contracts and bids. Community
AGENDA ITEM NO. , Q
PAGE ~ OF , 'S
......,
~
Page Three - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
Services Director Sapp indicated that the contract for the landscape program was
just awarded to the lowest bidder about two or three months ago. City Manager
Watenpaugh noted that the contract was based on a square footage basis.
Community Services Director Sapp commented that Excel Landscape was doing
the parkways, but Greenscape was doing the parks.
Mr. Tiitto also questioned the minutes where there was discussion of the Stadium
and noted the comments by Councilmembers Schiffner and Kelley that it occurred
before they were on the Council; he indicated that the bonds were in 1999 and
1995 and suggested that both Councilmembers were on the Council. The
Councilmembers clarified that they were not on the Council when the Stadium was
built, but were on the Council when they had to figure out how to pay for it. Mr.
Tiitto stressed that they participated in the approval of the bonds. He stressed that
the cost had always been $38 million.
~
Mr. Tiitto expressed concern with the "special services" the City Attorney provides
to the City and questioned what they were. City Attorney Leibold indicated that
special services included existing litigation against the City such as the County
litigation against the City/Laing Homes, the EVMWD litigation, Stadium matters,
etc. Mr. Tiitto questioned them being so high. City Attorney Leibold indicated
that there had been a great deal of litigation. Mr. Tiitto inquired if the Council
approved all special services. City Attorney Leibold indicated that in many cases
there were ongoing services, as every litigation matter was a special service.
Mayor Buckley confirmed that the Council approved the expenditures. Mr. Tiitto
indicated that the contract said the City Manager or the City Council could
authorize them, and suggested that the contract should be changed for
clarification. Mayor Buckley indicated that any significant expenditure had to go
to the City Council for approval.
Mary 10 Ramirez, 33051 Macy Street, Program Director for Planet Youth,
indicated that she was concerned to read that there was consideration of not
,....... renewing the City Manager's contract. She advised that she had been a resident
since 1990 and had seen the City change, as well as the City Manager. She
AlIeNOA ITEM NO. i ~ ...
PAGE .3 OFJ ~ .
Page Four - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
"""'"
indicated that she felt there were a lot of very good things as a result of the change
in City Manager and leadership. She stressed that the City was on the verge of a
lot of good changes and implored the Council to carefully consider any drastic
changes. She indicated that she appreciated the City Manager and the things she
had seen as a citizen, and expressed surprise that there were not more people
present to support him. She noted that she left a meeting to be present and voice
her concerns. She commented that the City was on the move in the right direction
and recommended that the Council keep !t on the right track. She thanked the City
for their support of Planet Youth, and invited the Council and Staff to visit and see
what was occurring there.
2. Warrant List - October 28, 2004.
Councilman Hickman questioned the Kangaroo Rat Trust Fund on the income side
of the Warrant List. Mayor Buckley clarified that it was a pass thru from the RCA
similar to TUMF and the MSHCP.
"""'"
Councilman Hickman questioned Warrant No. 79596 for Barrett, Ltd. City
Manager Watenpaugh indicated that was the real estate appraiser for the property
behind the Cultural Center. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated
that this appraisal would be coming back to the Council at the next meeting in
Closed Session.
Councilman Hickman requested clarification of several additional warrants, which
Council provided. He noted that the check in his name was for the use of his
personal credit card.
Councilman Magee questioned the fund 370 Camino Del Norte Debt Service.
Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that this was a partial payment
to Harris & Associates for work in relation to formation of a CFD. He explained
that there were sixteen property owners in the area, some of which would like to
form a CFD. He advised that there were ongoing meetings to determine the cost
and design, and reach a meeting of the minds. Assistant City Manager Best added .~
AGENDA ITEM NO. I ~
PAGE-':L ;-rs--
~
Page Five - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
that the intent was to complete the roads through the area. Councilman Magee
requested clarification that they were paying in to this fund. Assistant City
Manager Best indicated that Harris & Associates was under contract with the City.
Councilman Magee inquired where the funds came from. Assistant City Manager
Best indicated that at this point it was a City contribution. City Manager
Watenpaugh clarified that the property owners had funded design and engineering
work on their own.
Mayor Buckley noted the "No Parking" issue on item no. 3 and questioned the
parking issue across from the Grand Avenue Apartments. City Manager
Watenpaugh noted that it was a matter of determining the City boundary line.
Community Development Director Brady indicated that the matter was being
reviewed to assure the correct boundary.
-----
Councilman Magee noted that the applicant was not listed on the staff report for
the Parcel Map in item no. 4. Community Development Director Brady advised
that the applicant was Near Cal Corporation.
Councilman Magee indicated that the original Map in item no. 5 was approved
prior to him being on the Council, so he would be abstaining from vote.
Mayor Buckley inquired how many bids were received on item no. 6.
Information/Communications Manager Dennis indicated that the thrust of this
report was to use the CMOS process in lieu of the bid process.
Public Hearings
21. Zone Change No. 2004-11 and Commercial Design Review No. 2004-06 for
the Best Western Hotel - Ordinance No. 1131.
Councilman Magee inquired if there would be a representative of the applicant
~ present at the meeting this evening. City Manager Watenpaugh confirmed that
Sashi Engineer would be present. Councilman Magee commented that the plan
AQENDA ITEM NO. I Q
,/
'"", PAGE....5.- OF l-)
Page Six - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
.....,
was for a beautiful building, but when he looked at the floor plan the lobby area
was missing a golden opportunity for a restaurant and bar with a great view. He
indicated that he was wondering why the business strategy did not take advantage
of that opportunity. Community Development Director Brady indicated that it
was discussed, but it was a decision they made, as it would not make sense at this
time. Councilman Magee noted that earlier this month, his company had to house
a vendor at the Lakeview Inn, and the person ended up at The Hideaway to eat.
He stressed that a restaurant and bar should be considered at thi$ location.
Councilman Schiffner indicated that when he spoke with this group, he was told
that Best Western's don't have restaurants, but they do provide continental
breakfasts. Councilman Magee noted that it was a factor of their corporate model.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley noted that the applicant's concerns at the Planning
Commission meeting were the TUMF and the TIF, with the argument that they had
an existing agreement with a waiver of some fees. City Attorney Leibold noted
that the City Manager had more recent information from the applicant. City
Manager Watenpaugh indicated that he spoke with the applicant today and his
request was that they be able to pay the fees in stages. He expressed belief that
would be possible with the way the ordinance was written. He noted that
Community Development Director Brady would be meeting with the applicant
during Council's Closed Session. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley requested clarification
that it was probably not an issue at this point. City Manager Watenpaugh
confirmed that it should not be an issue.
......"
Mayor Buckley questioned the reimbursement. City Manager Watenpaugh
clarified that it would cover the portion in front of the facility, but the applicant
would still have to pay the TUMF and TIF. Mayor Buckley noted that the
reimbursement was up to 500/0 of the local sales tax. City Manager Watenpaugh
indicated that if the applicant wanted to pay over time, the costs would continue to
rise. Mayor Buckley inquired why this project took so long to move forward.
City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the applicant had been working with
Engineering and Fire Department staff, but there were some issues with the grade
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. I Q
PAGE-1- ;)S
,....
Page Seven - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
of the property.
22. Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center
and Settlement Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Castle &
Cooke - Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. - Ordinance No. 1132.
Mayor Buckley noted that this item would be discussed in Closed Session.
/""
City Treasurer Weber addressed Page 1 below Analysis, and noted that this was to
settle claims from threatened litigation. He questioned how much the cost would
be if it went to litigation, and how the City got into this situation. City Attorney
Leibold explained that there was an agreement in 1995 with this Company's
predecessor, and there had been some disputes with it. She noted that one
provision was that the City would reimburse the developer $3 million plus interest
for infrastructure improvements; however this action would reduce the
reimbursement to $1.5 million and eliminate the interest component. She
indicated that this was a better and more secure agreement.
Councilman Magee questioned the signatories to the original deal. City Attorney
Leibold indicated that it was Horizon Glen and the City. Councilman Magee
inquired who signed on behalf of the City. City Clerk/Human Resources Director
Kasad offered to verify that information during Closed Session.
City Treasurer Weber addressed Page 27, commenting that they were not going to
pay TUMF or any of those fees. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the
agreement was to obtain the best land use; but the 1995 Development Agreement
vested the Developer, and they were not subject to TUMF or TIF or MSHCP.
City Treasurer Weber inquired if it would cost the City a lot of money for the road
work. City Attorney Leibold indicated it would not cost the City, but there would
be a reimbursement obligation.
,... Councilman Magee responded to City Treasurer Weber that he concurred with his
concerns, noting that the MSHCP did not apply to the property, but they could take
AGENDA ITEM NO. , ct
"'- PAGE-.:l OF J 5
Page Eight - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
,...,
advantage of it, if it worked to their advantage. He further noted that the
applicant opposed the MSHCP.
Councilman Magee referred to page 26 regarding the fees, and noted that there had
been discussion of the possible addition of a City Hall fund and some funding
mechanism to assist with the animal shelter. He inquired if those items had been
discussed in relation to this agreement. City Attorney Leibold indicated that they
had not been discussed. Councilman Magee noted that this agreement would run
with the land and could be sold with the land. City Attorney Leibold confirmed.
Councilman Magee referred to pages 24 and 25 regarding potential development
of the property, and indicated that the language in this agreement was much better
than that in the Laing Agreement. He thanked the City Attorney for firming that
language up.
......"
Mayor Buckley acknowledged that the MSHCP, TUMF and TIF would not be
required of this applicant, but suggested that there was at least some minimal
roadway fee requirement. City Attorney Leibold commented that in 1995 there
were some library or other fees to which the applicant would be subject. City
Manager Watenpaugh noted that there was a clause that subjected them to City-
wide fees, and noted he would need to verify that requirement. City Attorney
Leibold suggested that it could be addressed in Closed Session.
Business Items
32. Fee Deposit and Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Centex
Homes.
Councilman Magee referred to the Discussion Section, where it said" . . . will hold
as a deposit the developer fees, and they will be paid from the future bond fees
and reimbursed to the developer...." He requested clarification of that second.
Administrative Services Director Pressey clarified that they would provide a
check up front.
......"
AQENOA ITEM NO. I 0...
.". PAGE <6 OF ) 5
,.....
Page Nine - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
Councilman Hickman questioned the amount of the CFD. Administrative
Services Director Pressey indicated that they had not yet determined that
information, but they had run some numbers. He indicated that they had only
presented a draft, which they were working to finalize, after they had reviewed the
rate and method.
Chris Holmquist, representing the applicant, indicated that they were getting to the
point that they would be coming to the City with a letter of intent He indicated
that the maximum bonds would be in the $40 million -range. Mayor Buckley
inquired how much would be paid. Administrative Services Director Pressey
indicated that it would be below the City's 20/0 rate. Mr. Holmquist indicated that
it would vary by household from $1,100 to $2,000 depending on the square
~ footage. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Mr. Anderson from Harris &
Associates was working on those numbers. Administrative Services Director
Pressey noted that they met recently. City Treasurer Weber suggested approximate
costs. Mayor Buckley noted that a typical house would be in the $800 or $1,000
per year range. Mr. Holmquist indicated that they had a lot of facilities that were
master planned within the project and they needed to get as much as they could to
support the facilities.
City Treasurer Weber questioned the overlapping debt. Administrative
Services Director Pressey indicated that would be incorporated. City Treasurer
Weber noted that there was $1,000 on the school bond and noted the potential total
costs. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that there was a joint
agreement with the Water District and the estimates incorporated all of the existing
debt. City Treasurer Weber inquired with regard to the bonds, if there had been a
meeting with the Water District, School District and the Developer, or whether
there had been an assumption of the amounts. He questioned the school bond
debt. Mr. Holmquist indicated that it was $3.10 per square foot. City Treasurer
Weber indicated that would be $1,000 just to the schools.
,,-...
Mayor Buckley noted that the Development Agreement had a fee of $1.3 million
for the fire station and $1.8 million for the park. He inquired if they were going
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 0.... ..
'-, PAGE.3..... OF \ S-
Page Ten - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
to combine those to pay for everything. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that
normally the developer is asked to build the facilities. Mayor Buckley addressed
the Development Agreement fee. Mr. Holmquist indicated that he believed per
the Development Agreement, Centex was part of the Specific Plan and owed $1.3
million in Development Agreement Fees, as well as $2.85 million for the park.
He indicated that there was a separate part of the Specific Plan that paid part of the
fees, which would be used for the park and fire station. He noted that the normal
Park and Recreation Fee of$I,600 per lot was for the Quimby Fee requirement.
City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that the Quimby Fees were required to go
directly to the park, per the agreement. Mayor Buckley commented that there was
$4.5 million for the park. Mr. Holmquist clarified that there was the $2.85 million
plus the $1,600 per lot; and $1.3 million arid $300,000 for the Fire facility. City
Treasurer Weber noted that the Fire Station would cost $4.5 million. City
Manager Watenpaugh noted that there was also the $300 annual fee for the fire
station operations. Mr. Holmquist indicated that when they pay the building
permits they have a $300 per lot fee for the building, and they are putting all of the
initial fees into the financing. He explained that the benefit of paying them with
the CFD was so they would not pay them over the span of 1,000 building permits.
Mayor Buckley questioned the cost of the fire station and the amount of the traffic
impact fees. Mr. Holmquist indicated that the TIF was required of all developers
at the time of the building permit, but they were working with the City Attorney on
a reimbursement of a portion of those fees for Rosetta Canyon Road, as well as a
credit. Mayor Buckley inquired if they got money from the CFD to build parks
and a road, if they would build them separately and get paid back. City Attorney
Leibold clarified that the concept was that they would not finance the fees they
were getting credits for, but rather they would finance the cost of the
improvements they were doing. City Manager Watenpaugh confirmed that only
actual expenditures could be reimbursed; so if they did not show expenditures they
did not get reimbursed. Administrative Services Director Pressey confirmed that
if they did get less expensive or there was not sufficient infrastructure, then there
would not be a use for all of the bond proceeds; but expressed believe that there
was sufficient infrastructure for the $40 million. He noted that each
reimbursement request would be audited and the costs would be verified for the
AQENOA ITEM NO. ~
'" PAGE '0 OF 15-.
""""
""""
,...,.,
,-...
Page Eleven - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
public facilities. He noted that Harris & Associates does a very detailed job of
auditing.
Councilman Hickman questioned if Wasson Canyon and Rosetta Canyon were the
same area. Mr. Holmquist indicated that Wasson Canyon was the name of the
area, and Rosetta Canyon was the marketing name. Councilman Hickman
inquired if they were separate for tax purposes. City Attorney Leibold indicated
that they were completely different.
",........
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley questioned the time line for the houses. Mr. Holmquist
indicated that they had permits for the model homes and they hoped to have the
models ready in the February time frame. He further indicated that if the final
map was approved tonight they would pull the building permits shortly thereafter,
having them ready to move into in the June time frame. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley
questioned the starting prices for the homes. Mr. Holmquist indicated that he
would have to come back with that information, but noted that the first homes
were the most affordable.
Councilman Magee commented that a lot of grading had been completed over the
last eight months, and questioned when the sewer and water lines would be
coming across. Mr. Holmquist indicated they would proceed as soon as they got
the permits, as the project was out for public bid. He suggested that they should
get the notice to proceed in early December. He noted that the pump stations
were through their second plan check and should be contracted out by February
and turned on in the July time frame.
34. Increase Fees for Lake Use Passes - Resolution No. 2004-66.
",........
Councilman Magee indicated that he had questions with respect to proof of
residency, and the current practice. Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy
indicated that generally it required a Driver's License or Certificate of Renewal for
the Vessel. Councilman Magee questioned the suggestion of a utility bill or
Driver's License; but stressed that he wanted to be sure the lower rates would
AGENDA ITEM NO. J CA
PAGEJ.L OF \:)
Page Twelve - Study Session Minutes - November 9,2004
~
benefit the City residents. Community Services Director Sapp clarified that
people seeking Lake Use Passes were supposed to bring in the current
registrations for the vessels. Councilman Magee concurred that was a better idea.
He commented that with regard to increasing the fee, he would not have a problem
with the out of City resident portion, but would prefer to leave it a little lower for
City residents. He noted the proposed increase to $100 for City residents and
suggested the Council consider dropping it to $75, which was still an increase of
$10, but would prevent the sticker shock that $100 would cause. He suggested
that the $3,200 reduction in revenues would not be substantial.
Mayor Buckley commented that he had written down $75 instead of$100 and $8
instead of$10. .
Councilman Schiffner inquired how many residents buy the passes. Lake &
Aquatic Resources Director KilrQY indicated that they purchase about half of the
annual passes or about 165.
~
Councilman Hickman commented that if he was reading the material right it costs
the City $1.7 million to operate the Lake and raises only $300,000, so it costs $1.3
million. Staff confirmed.
35. Elsinore Water District Liaison
Mayor Buckley noted that the City had received a letter from the Water District,
but stressed that there should have been a Liaison such as this a long time ago.
Councilman Magee indicated that the letter was pretty clear that they did not want
a liaison. He stressed that it told the City to mind its own business. Councilman
Schiffner concurred that the letter was pretty firm about that. Mayor Buckley
indicated that he wanted to be sure that the home owners and business owners
were represented. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley noted that they had left the matter open
for a study session, and suggested starting there and easing into a relationship.
Councilman Hickman indicated that this reminded him of EVMWD and the ~
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE..l2:0F _, S
~
Page Thirteen - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
School District, and suggested it might be wise to work with them. He offered to
go and work with them. Councilman Schiffner commented that three of their
Board members had not been to a meeting in years. Mayor Buckley stressed that
the Council owed it to the business and property owners to intervene.
Councilman Hickman reiterated that he would serve as the liaison.
36. Memorandum of Understanding for the Acquisition of Property within the
City of Lake Elsinore for Conservation Purposes.
City Attorney Leibold noted that on Page 11 of 13, the proposed addendum
included the potential for an east-west corridor. She explained that when the
County acquires the property, it will refrain from recording any easement that
~ would interfere with and east-west corridor for up to six years.
Councilman Magee indicated that a few people needed to be recognized for their
diligence on this item, including the City Attorney, Ed Sauls and Supervisor
Marion Ashley. He noted that Supervisor Ashley stepped up and directed his staff
to make this happen. He also thanked RCTC for allowing proper flexibility.
Redevelopment Agency Items
Boardmember Magee questioned the Warrant List on page 2 of 2, the warrant to
the Mark Fisher Company. Assistant Executive Director Best indicated that was
the firm assisting the RDA Committee with the design for the RDA Brochure.
Legal Counsel Leibold noted the proposals for the RDA Consultant Services.
Boardmember Magee noted that the Committee received responses from two
companies and inquired if the Legal Counsel had worked with either of them.
Legal Counsel Leibold indicated that she had worked with both of them, although
one she had not worked with in about 13 years; but both with very good
expenences.
~
Boardmember Magee addressed alternative 3.a. and suggested that the intent was
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGEnOF l S .
Page Fourteen - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
to exempt owner-occupied property. Legal Counsel Leibold indicated that the
reason it was presented was in order to get an apples-to-apples response. She
indicated that as a policy matter the Board could define the matter broadly or
narrowly. She indicated that for the purposes of plan amendment services, if
residential properties are included in the scope of eminent domain authority, with
the likely displacement of homeowners, there was an added scope of services.
Boardmember Magee commented that he did not remember setting anything aside
in the budget. Administrative Services Director Pressey clarified that it was
included in the City Attorney budget. Boardmember Magee addressed the
documents submitted by Keyser Marston, under scope of services, item 1.b., which
indicated the potential cost for an EIR. Legal Counsel Leibold indicated that
related to the possible addition of territory to Project Area 1, but clarified that at
this time there was no property under consideration. She advised that this would
not be an issue, if the intent was to simply work on increasing the cap in Area 1.
Boardmember Magee noted that he would want to avoid the need for the EIR, as
he had worked with LSA before and they were very expensive and would escalate
the costs. Legal Counsel Leibold clarified that the action before the Board was
the selection of the consultant, but the actual scope and decision on the
amendment were yet to be determined. She advised that there would be many
opportunities in the process to broaden or narrow the scope of the amendment.
Boardmember Kelley inquired ifboth firms were introduced to the Committee.
Legal Counsel Leibold indicated that the proposals were presented to the
Committee, but the firms were not present. Boardmember Kelley noted that the
Committee was impressed with the team. Legal Counsel Leibold clarified that
based on the material presented there was a gap in the team proposed to do the
work by Katz Hollis, while the Keyser Marston team included very Senior
Principals through to more Junior Analysts. Boardmember Hickman noted that
nine companies were solicited and two proposals were received. Legal Counsel
Leibold confirmed, noting that two other firms had said they would submit, but
may not have had sufficient time. She reiterated that both of these companies
were very well established in the field. Boardmember Schiffner questioned their
willingness to modify the scope of work. Legal Counsel Leibold confirmed that
they were willing.
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE I Y OF I 5
'-'
'-'
......,
"'"
Page Fifteen - Study Session Minutes - November 9, 2004
Closed Session Items
City Attomey/Legal Counsel Leibold announced the Closed Session Items as
listed on the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Agendas.
ADJOURNMENT
The Joint City CouncillRedevelopment Agency Study Session was adjourned
at 5:15 p.m.
~,
THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
DARYL HICKMAN, CHAIRMAN
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK!
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR!
CLERK OF THE BOARD
,.......
AGENDA iTEM NO.~
PAGE~:5. OF J ~
,--
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2004
******************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER
The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Buckley at 5: 15
p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
~
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best,
City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community
Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake &
Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Building & Safety Manager Chipman,
Engineering Manager Seumalo, Finance Manager Magee, Parks & Open
Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Public Works Manager
Payne, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources Director
Kasad.
CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING
LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Govemment Code Section 54956.9)
County of Riverside, et al v. City of Lake Elsinore and Laing-CP Lake
Elsinore LLC (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RlC 418775)
~
b. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING
AQENDA ITEM NO.--Lb......
PAGE \ OF 3~
Page Two - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
~
LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9)
Camelot Property Counselors, Inc. vs. City of Lake Elsinore/
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Ellsinore (U.S. Bankruptcy
Court Case No. RSOI-14823DN)
c. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b)
(3) ( C ) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 case)
d. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - City
Manager (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957)
City Attorney Leibold announced the Closed Session discussion items as listed
above.
THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 5:16
P.M.
~
The Closed Session discussion was completed at 6:55 p.m.
RECONVENE IN PUBLIC SESSION (7:00 P.M.)
Mayor Buckley reconvened the Regular City Council meeting in public session at
7:11 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Buckley noted that Thursday is Veteran's Day and invited those who have
served or have family serving to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance. He
presented each Veteran and representative with a City pin.
INVOCATION - MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER
Mayor Buckley led the meeting in a moment of silent prayer remembering the ~
AGENDA ITEM NO. J b
GE ;l. OF 3Cc
PA
,-- Page Three - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
Country's Veterans.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
/""'"'"'
Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best,
City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community
Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake &
Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Police Chief Fetherolf, Building & Safety
Manager Chipman, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Finance Manager Magee,
Parks & Open Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Public Works
Manager Payne, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources
Director Kasad.
PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS
A. Presentation - Electoral Reform Committee.
Mayor Buckley noted the yeomans work done by the Committee, and
introduced Committee Members Judziewicz, Flores, Hohenadl and
Chairwoman Atkins. He noted that Committee Member Maskell was not
able to be present at this meeting. He presented each member with a
Certificate of Appreciation and City pin.
Chairwoman Atkins read her report and detailed the recommendations
including the Council direction from the Study Session of November 3rd.
/""'"'"'
Mayor Buckley requested that a link be placed on website to access the
Committee recommendations.
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAGE 3 OF '2> <;,
Page Four - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
'--'
B. Proclamation - Lung Cancer Awareness Month.
Representative was not present for presentation.
C. Presentation - Chamber of Commerce Update.
Kim Cousins, Executive Director, Chamber of Commerce, noted that the
Chamber had been very active over the last month. He indicated that there
had been a fantastic EDC Program with about 750 high school programs
looking at career options. He also indicated that they held the last business
mixer of the year at Coco's Restaurant; and held a ribbon cutting on
November 8th at Main Street Pizza. He advised that they registered sixteen
new members in October, and announced that the last EDC Luncheon of the
year would be a Legislative Summit on November 18th from II to 2. He
announced that their non-perishable food drive was continuing; and advised
that the second edition of their newsletter was available on their website.
""""
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Leibold reported that the City Council met to discuss four items as
listed on the Agenda. She advised that with regard to the first item there was no
reportable action. She further advised that with regard to the second item,
litigation with California Bank & Trust, involving the Camelot action against K-
Mart in Bankruptcy Court, a Settlement Agreement had been reached with
Camelot, so the City Council and RedevelopmentAgency would be receiving
about $15,000 on the liquidated stock. She indicated that the third item was
discussed briefly with no reportable action. She further indicated that the fourth
item was discussed briefly and continued for two weeks.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS - 1 MINUTE
Ron LaPere, 16867 Wells Street, commented that as Chairman of the Palm Tree
Preservation Committee some years ago, they were not expecting approval of
every action recommended, but the Council consistently protected the palm trees. "'"
AQENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE~OF 3c'
16
r" Page Five - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
He compared this situation to the Electoral Reform Committee and indicated that
he felt the Council should also be consistent in this area. He suggested if there
was a citizens ballot to decide if the City Treasurer should be appointed or elected,
he thought that the citizens should vote on changing the term of office as well.
He stressed that it should be left in the hands of the citizens.
r"
Jerry Harmatz, 512 N Spring Street, indicated that he came to Lake Elsinore in
1962, when there was a population of 600. He indicated that after being in the
Community for 42 years, Ron Molendyk and Dick Watenpaugh had been the City
Managers for half of the that time. He indicated that with the current
administration he saw a light at the end of the tunnel, as Dick Watenpaugh has
brought parks, law enforcement and fire services. He further commented that Mr.
Watenpaugh has shown courage, grace under pressure, has been articulate and
honest, and carried policies to completion. He indicated that he was grateful for
Mr. Watenpaugh's contributions and suggested that his departure would be the
City's loss and his gain.
Donna Franson, 7 Villa Valtelena, indicated that she now had 250 membership
cards, and would be mailing membership kits in the next few ~eeks. She noted
that after the first of the year they would be holding a membership meeting. She
announced that newsletters would be mailed in early December, and thanked the
Council for the opportunity to relay this information to their members.
Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest Drive, told the community about the wonderful
event on Halloween night that was on Main Street. She indicated that they passed
out over 1,000 packets of cookies and candies. She noted that several years ago
she had requested that the streets be closed for such and event and thanked the
businesses for participating in the event.
"........
Pete Dawson, 18010 Grand Avenue, noted that while he was out of town, the wet
season had begun early. He commented that seldom happens before January. He
noted that assuming the rain continues, and continues faster than EVMWD pumps
the water, then Lake Elsinore will continue to rise faster. He suggested that this
could be a very wet winter and encouraged the water front public to remove
AGENDA ITEM NO. J b
PAGE 5 OF 3<.a
Page Six - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
,..."
debris, junk and fences from lake front property. He indicated that the clean up
crew had already done an admirable job and commended Pat Kilroy, Leo
Solorzano, Ed North, Dennis Waite, Sally Davis, Armando Villa, Carol Gordon,
and Shawn Slater on a great job.
John Harry Wise, 33200 Allis Street, representing LEUSD, indicated that he was
responsible for negotiations with the County for the Library/Media Center at the
new high school. He advised that the intent of the school and the County was to
provide a safe secure environment for the students and address the concerns of the
community. He indicated that he felt the Community would be proud of the
facility.
Nancy Johnson, 4385 Houghton Ave., Riverside, indicated that she was the
Riverside County Librarian that addressed the proposed library. She explained
that the building would be a joint use facility with the School District. She noted
that there were several other joint use facilities up and running and the method
was seen as a win-win situation for both sides. She stressed that control of the
library and safety were very important issues, but there had not been problems at
the other facilities.
'--'
Loy Stephens, 112 S. Lowell Street, requested that the streets be repaired. He
stressed that major repairs were needed. He suggested an interlink system of bike
lanes throughout the City, noting that the streets were dangerous for bike riders.
Ralph Cressini, 2801 Ocean Park Blvd., Santa Monica, indicated that starting in
June they had submitted preliminary proposals for work in the historical area of
Ellis and Franklin. He advised that the proposals have stopped, and requested
Council assistance to arrange meetings to advance the projects and set up
negotiations.
Mayor Buckley addressed the bike lanes and indicated that when the General Plan
was updated that would be included. Community Development Director Brady
confirmed that would be part of the Circulation Element.
'--'
AGENDA ITEM No.lh
PAGE Co OF ~~
/"'"' Page Seven - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
Mayor Buckley commented that with regard to Ellis and Franklin, staff would
meet with them.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES
Requests were received to address the following items:
Item Nos. d (Closed Session) & A (Presentation).
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Magee indicated that he would be abstaining from vote on Item No.5.
/"'"'
MOVED BY HICKMAN, SECONDED BY MAGEE AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED.
1. The following Minutes were approved:
a. Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency Study Session - October
12, 2004.
b. City Council Study Session - October 14, 2004.
c. City Council Study Session - October 21, 2004.
The following Minutes were received and ordered filed:
d. Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004.
2. Ratified Warrant List for October 28, 2004.
3. Adopted Resolution No. 2004-65, Approving Request for No Parking on
Grand Avenue at Windward Way and Shoreline Drive.
/"'"'
AQENDA ITEM NO.-1b-.
PAGE~OF 3Co
Page Eight - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
.....,
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE ESTABLISHING NO PARKING ZONES ON CERTAIN
STREETS.
4. Approved Final Parcel Map No. 31963 located at the intersection of
Pasadena Street and Crane Street, accepting all dedications at the time of
recordation and authorizing the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for
recordation.
5.
Approved Final Tract Map 25479, Centex Homes located south of State
Route 74, two miles east ofI-15, accepting all dedications at the time of
recordation and authorizing the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for
recordation. (The vote on this item was 4 Ayes with Councilman Magee
Abstaining from vote.)
'-'
6. Determined it was in the best interest of the City ot utilize the CMAS
pricing process in lieu of the formal bid process and authorized the City
Manager to execute a purchase order with Logical Design, Inc. for
Replacement of IBM AS 400 Enterprise System with Purchase of New IBM
System I Series Model 520 at a cost of$59,000.95.
PUBLIC HEARING
21. Zone Change No. 2004-11 and Commercial Design Review No. 2004-06 for
the Best Western Hotel - Ordinance No. 1131.
Mayor Buckley opened the Public Hearing at 7 :40 p.m.
Community Development Director Brady highlighted this item and detailed
each component of the approval process. He noted the topography of the
site, and detailed the Planning Commission consideration. He advised that
the Hotel would have a Mediterranean design with a fountain feature in the
'-'
AQENOA ITEM NO. \ b
PAGE ~ OF 2> <0
"'"
Page Nine - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
front and a covered drive-thru for the guests. He noted that the TIF, TUMF
and MSHCP fees were discussed during the Planning Commission Meeting;
and indicated that he met with the applicant regarding the times that those
fees would need to be paid. He explained the timing for each fee and noted
the flexibility that could be allowed in paying them. He detailed the
recommendations and noted that the applicant was present to respond to
questions.
Mayor Buckley noted that this would be the hotel across from the Lakeview
Inn behind the Casino on Casino Drive.
Mayor Buckley asked those persons interested in this item to speak. The
following person spoke:
,,-..
Sashi Engineer, Applicant, addressed the plans and thanked staff for their
continued support and assistance.
Councilman Magee asked staff if they had received comments from the
adjacent property owners. Community Development Director Brady
indicated that he was not aware of any comments. Councilman Magee
thanked Mr. Engineer for his investment in the City. He expressed concern
with the lack of a restaurant and bar in the project. Mr. Engineer indicated
that he would be glad to include one, but Best Western does not allow it
unless the facility is over 100 rooms. Councilman Magee inquired if there
was a way to correct this situation. Mr. Engineer indicated that there was
also an allowance if there was not restaurant in the area, but at this point it
was not possible. Councilman Magee stressed that he would like to see that
reconsidered.
~
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley noted that from the study session, her question was
regarding the applicant's concerns with the fees. She noted that the matter
was discussed, but she was assured that the issue had been worked out. Mr.
Engineer confirmed that it had been worked out. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley
indicated that she liked the design, and the project was a welcome addition
AQENOA ITEM NO. 1 b
PAGE~ OF 3l::>
Page Ten - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
'-'
to the community. She commented that she had heard from sports leagues
that there were not enough hotels for their tournaments.
Councilman Schiffuer inquired when they would have the ribbon-cutting
and first renters. Mr. Engineering indicated that he wished it would be
tomorrow, but would depend on the planning process. He advised that they
were working on construction drawings, and hoped to be approved in about
nine months.
Councilman Hickman thanked the applicant for selecting the City of Lake
Elsinore. Mr. Engineer indicated that it was his pleasure.
Mayor Buckley indicated that the project would be a nice addition to the
City. He commented that with regard to the fees, the faster the project is
built, the lower the fees will be.
'-'
Mayor Buckley closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY HICKMAN TO ADOPT
ORDINANCE NO. 1131, UPON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY,
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-11:
ORDINANCE NO. 1131
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-
11 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS
SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN(S) 363-172-004, 013 AND 020
FROM C-l NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C-2 GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
AGENDA ITEM NO.---1.b.-.
PAGE \() OF ~(o
'-'
,-.., Page Eleven - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
NO. 2004-06 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND EXHIBITS AND SUBJECT
TO THE ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
/"'"'
FINDINGS - ZONE CHANGE
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general
welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment
or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within
the City.
The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the
health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood
of the proposed amendment. Considering that the General Plan has designated the property
General Commercial, staff concluded that the area will not be degraded as a result of this
project.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General
Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC).
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the Zoning Map is
consistent with GOAL 1.0, Objective 1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element, obligating the
City to encourage the development of commercial land uses and revitalization of existing
commercial uses that strengthen the city's economic base and offer a range of enterprises that
serve the needs of the residents and visitors.
FINDINGS - DESIGN REVIEW
,-..,
1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the
Zoning District in which the project is located.
AGENDA ITEM NO...J.h....
3Coi
Pbf),C. \ \ OF
t~~-"..tt.....~-
Page Twelve - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
...,
The proposed Commercial Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363-172-
004, 013, and 020 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the
approval of this hotel will assist in achieving the development of a well-balanced and functional
mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses
as well as encouraging commercial land uses to diversify Lake Elsinore's economic base.
2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other
applicable provisions of the Municipal Code.
The proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363-172-004,
013, and 020 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the hotel project
has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby creating
interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further the hotel site as proposed
will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-
detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects in that the architectural
design, color and materials and site design proposed evidence a concern for quality and
originality.
3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result
in any significant adverse environmental impacts. ...,
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Commercial
Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363-172-004, 013, and 020, as reviewed
and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, will not have a
significant effect on the environment pursuant to attached Conditions of Approval.
4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including
guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval
of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of
Chapter 17.82.
Pursuant to Section 17.82.070 (Action of the Planning Commission) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel
Number(s) 363-172-004, 013, and 020 has been scheduledfor consideration and approval of the
Planning Commission.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the
City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the
City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of
the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the subject project
known as Best Western Hotel located at 363-172-004, 013 & 020, which action is bought within the
...,
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE~OF 3<0
/'"' Page Thirteen - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and
Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim,
action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to
promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City.
DESIGN REVIEW FOR COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 2004-06
2. The Design Review approval located at Assessor Parcel No. 363-172-004, 013 & 020 shall
lapse and become void one (I) year following the date on which the Design Review became
effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit related to the Design
Review is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. The
Design Review granted herein shall run with the land for this one (I) year period and shall
continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site.
3. Prior to the certificate of occupancy of the first building, the entire site parking lot, entry
driveways, perimeter and internal landscaping shall be completed as indicated on the approved
plans attached hereto.
/"'"'-
4. Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans submitted to the
Building Division Plan Check. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of
a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities.
5. All site improvements approved with this request shall be constructed as indicated on the
approved site plan and elevations. Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall
be subject to the review of the Community Development Director. All plans submitted for
Building Division Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by Conditions
of Approval, or the Planning Commission/City Council through subsequent action.
6. Any alteration or expansion of this Design Review approval shall be reviewed according to the
provisions of Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
7. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment
incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so that
they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Any material covering the roof
equipment shall match the primary wall color.
8. All exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and directed on-site so as not to create glare onto
neighboring property and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the fixture.
All light fixtures shall match the architectural style ofthe building.
9. Applicant shall meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements.
,-....
10. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community
Development Director or Designee.
AQENOA ITEM NO.--1.b--
PAGEBOF 3C,
Page Fourteen - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
......"
II. No exterior roof ladders shall be permitted.
12. All downspouts shall be concealed or architecturally screened and painted to match the exterior
color of the building.
13. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during
construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond in the amount of $1,000.00 to
be processed through the Planning Division.
14. Materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by
the Community Development Director or designee.
15. On-site surface draiQage shall not cross sidewalks.
16. Parking stalls shall be double-striped with four-inch (4") lines two feet (2') apart.
17. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system
and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division.
PRIOR TO BUILDING/GRADING PERMITS
......"
18. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall pay the applicable Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fee recently adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore. The fee
shall be calculated as "Commercial-$5,620.00 per acre". (2.92 acres x $5,620.00 = $16,410.40)
19. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permits, the applicant shall sign and
complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shaH return the executed original to
the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records.
20. Three (3) sets of the Final LandscapinglIrrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and
approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development
Director or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. A Landscape Plan Check &
Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee
plus forty percent (40%) City fee.
a) AH planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100%
plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation
methods.
b) Applicant shall plant street trees selected from the City's Street Tree List, a
maximum offorty feet (40') apart and at least twenty-four-inch (24") box in size.
......"
AQENDA ITEM NO..Jh-
E \ L\ OF 3 Cc_
PAG~
,-.. Page Fifteen - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
c) All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6") high and
six inch (6") wide concrete curb.
d) Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than
thirty-six inches (36").
e) Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree
pursuant to the LEMC and Landscape Design Guidelines.
f) Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on
landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan.
g) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all
requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the
use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation
system to be used to prevent excessive watering.
h)
All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two
years from installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be
requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with
approval/acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development
Director or Designee.
,-..
i) All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase
at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building. All planting
areas shall include plantings in the Xeriscape concept, drought tolerant grasses and
plants.
j) Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan.
k) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details.
21. Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
Proof shall be presented to the Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits and
final approval.
22. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to
the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid.
23. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of
the Riverside County Fire Department have been met.
,-..
AQENDA ITEM NO. ( b
PAGE~ OF 3 rn
Page Sixteen - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
"'"
24. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fee in effect at time of
building permit issuance.
ENGINEERING
25. Outlet of storm drain adjacent to Casino Drive shall maintain undeveloped peak storm flow
volumes, velocity and flow characteristics (example: sheet flow).
26. Dedicate full half-width right-of-way (50-feet center line to right-of-way line) for project
frontage of Casino Drive. Right-of-way dedication shall be consistent with the general plan
circulation element.
27. Construct interim roadway cross-section consistent with the projection ofthe existing curb line.
28. Pay cash-in-lieu of construction for ultimate roadway cross-section along the project frontage.
Cash-in-Iieu shall be in addition to the cost of the interim improvements.
29. Provide a hydrology study specifically addressing the effects of the grading and drainage to
adjacent properties.
.---,
30. Street improvements shall include transitions from the proposed improvements to the existing
roadway.
31. V -gutter outlet located on the west end of the project shall not exceed the peak storm runoff for
the undeveloped condition as shown in the approved hydrology study. Construct an energy
dissipating structure to reduce the outlet water velocities to a less than erosive condition.
32. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as
specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to final map approval.
33. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section
16.52.030 (LEMC) and be consistent with the City's agreement with the Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District.
34. All street improvements, including traffic signals, shall be installed and functioning prior to
certificate of occupancy.
35. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85-26), mitigation
fees, area drainage fee, T.U.M.F ($107,484.00), traffic impact fee ($149,237.00), encroachment
permit fees and inspection fees associated with the project and its development. The TUMF fee
will increase approximately 7.31% on January 01, 2005.
---'
AQENOA ITEM NO.--1.b...
PAGE \ ~_OF 3~
~ Page Seventeen - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
36. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency
stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit this letter
prior to final map approval.
37. Construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC 12.04). Plans must
be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to final map approval (LEMC 16.34).
38. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a California Registered Civil
Engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road
Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34).
39. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of public works
improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final map approval.
40. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated
on 8 W' x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of
public works improvements will be scheduled and approved.
,--..
41. The applicant shall install permanent survey monuments III compliance with the City's
municipal code.
42. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading or construction from
the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval.
43. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the
roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent.
44. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the Riverside County Fire
Department.
45. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as
required by the City Engineer.
46. Developer shall install blue reflective pavement markers III the street at all fire hydrant
locations.
47. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Certificate of Occupancy applicant
shall submit tapes and/or disks which are compatible with City's ARC Info/GIS or developer to
pay $300 per sheet for City digitizing.
48. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving
utility .
,--..
AGENDA ITEM NO..-Lb.--.
PAGE.lj OF~lo
Page Eighteen - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
....."
49. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance.
A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be required
if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as
determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is
not required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern
inspection can be conducted before grading begins.
50. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide
final soils report showing compliance with recommendations.
51. An Alquis-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults
and/or liquefaction zones present on-site.
52. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify
all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. All manufactured slopes
greater than 30 ft. in height shall be contoured.
53. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City with a map of all
proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. Such routes shall be subject
to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
,....."
54. Applicant to provide to the City a photographic baseline record of the condition of all proposed
public City haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of
restoring public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of
damages to the public right-of-way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
55. Individual lot drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property
owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement.
56. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way should be contained within
drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating:
"Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions".
57. All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and
conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
58. Meet all requirements ofLEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations.
59. Meet all requirements ofLEMC 15.68 regarding flood plain management.
60. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer and the
Riverside County Flood Control District. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion
caused by development of site and diversion of drainage.
....."
AQENOA ITEM NO. I b
PAGE \ y;: OF?:> <.0
r-- Page Nineteen - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
61. All drainage facilities in this site shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control
District Standards.
62. Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegal dumping in the
drain system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the City Engineer.
63. 10-year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100-year storm runoff should
be contained with the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage
facilities should be installed.
64. A drainage acceptance letter will be necessary from the downstream property owners for
outletting the proposed storm water run-off on private property.
65. Applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any
urban pollutants from entering the watershed.
r--
66. Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their
storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan
prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction
which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including
maintenance responsibilities.
67. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of
the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers as well as other environmental
awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of
storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County
NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan.
68. Applicant shall provide first flush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce
storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveways.
69. Ingress/Egress site distance shall meet the design criteria of the CALTRANS Design Manual
(particular attention should be taken for intersections on the inside of curves). If site distance
can be obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of
landscaping and wall placement.
70. All parcels shall have direct access to public right-of-way or be provided with a minimum 30 ft
ingress and egress easement to public right-of-way by separate instrument or through map
recordation.
71. Existing access easements over property must be addressed to the satisfaction of the easement
owners prior to final map approval.
,.....
AQENOA ITEM NO. I h
PAGE J.1.. OF ..lk-
Page Twenty - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
'-'"
72. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal and recycling, the
applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R, Inc., for removal and disposal of all waste
material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and
grubbing or all other phases of construction.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
73. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into the Lighting, and
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project
on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the
public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern
California Edison.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
74. The applicant shall comply with all Comments and/or Conditions of Approval from Riverside
County Fire Department.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
75. The developer to pay park fees of$0.10 per square foot of interior space.
.....",
76. The developer shall comply with City Ordinance 8.16.010 for the removal of all construction
debris. Developer shall utilize CR&R for all recycling.
77. All drainage and/or flood control facilities to be maintained by developer.
78. The City Landscape Architect shall review all landscape plans.
79. All landscaping shall be maintained by the developer.
80. No park credits shall be given for the swimming pool or jacuzzi.
Mr. Engineer thanked the City Council for this approval.
22. Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center
and Settlement Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Castle &
Cooke - Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. - Ordinance No. 1132.
Mayor Buckley opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
City Attorney Leibold eXplained that this item related back to a 1995
'-'
ACiENDA ITEM NO. ~
'''-, PAGE2t) OF 3'-
-
____ Page Twenty-One - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
agreement between the City and the predecessor to Castle & Cooke. She
further explained that this agreement would resolve outstanding issues
between the parties and provide for an initial DAG fee of $50,000, and
additional fees for commercial development. She indicated that it would
provide reimbursement by the City to Castle & Cooke for $1.5 million,
which is half the original obligation. She advised that the term of the
agreement was up to fifteen years with clauses for earlier termination. She
indicated that the agreement was acceptable to Castle & Cooke, and staff
was recommending approval. She clarified that the agreement was for
public infrastructure which was secured by sales tax performance over time.
Mayor Buckley asked those persons interested in this item to speak. The
following person spoke:
,-..
Bill Samson, representing Castle & Cooke, requested approval of this item
and noted that the City staff, City Manager and City Attorney had been
working diligently to perfect this agreement.
Councilman Hickman addressed the location of this development, and
inquired if it was on the other side of 1 -15. Mr. Samson indicated it was the
200 acres on the east side ofl-15 at Nichols Road. Councilman Hickman
inquired how soon it would be under construction. Mr. Samson expressed
hopes that it would begin right away, as soon as the vested rights were
secured.
Mayor Buckley closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
MOVED BY MAGEE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO ADOPT
ORDINANCE NO. 1132, UPON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY:
ORDINANCE NO. 1132
~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED
AGENDA ITEM NO. J..h
PAGEJLOF 3~
Page Twenty-Two - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
~
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CASTLE & COOKE LAKE
ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC.
UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
BUSINESS ITEMS
.......,
31. Meetings of November 23 and December 28. 2004.
Mayor Buckley noted that this item was placed on the Agenda due to the
proximity of these meetings to the holidays. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley
inquired if the Councilmembers had travel plans. Councilman Schiffner
suggested that would be the only reason to change the meeting in December.
Mayor Buckley noted that the December meeting was the Tuesday after
Christmas. Councilman Magee inquired what business items would be on
that agenda, and suggested waiting at least two weeks to make that
determination. Mayor Buckley questioned if it was the consensus of the
Council to have the November 23rd meeting and decide on the December
28th meeting at a later date. Council concurred.
32. Fee Deposit and Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Centex
Homes.
Administrative Services Director Pressey noted this agreement and
.......,
AGENDA ITEM NO. I h
PAGE ~2 OF '3 Co
/"'"
Page Twenty-Three - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
,,--
indicated that Chris Holmquist, representing the applicant was present at
this meeting. He detailed the fee arrangement, with the City to be paid
from the CFD bonds issued at a later date. He explained that at the time of
the bonds the City would release the deposit back to the developer. He
explained that the City would get all of its fees at once and the cost of the
CFD would pe significantly lowered for the homeowners by the simplicity
of auditing the funds. He advised that the Bond Counsel had prepared the
agreement, the developer had reviewed it, agreed and executed it. He
indicated that the development was 1,012 homes in Rosetta Canyon to be
built in a variety of phases. He commented that the CFD would come
forward as part of the Resolution of Intention, after the rate and method has
been reviewed, at the meeting of November 23rd, so the Council can look at
the whole structure. He clarified that until the bonds were issued the CFD
would not be formed and there would be no exposure for the City. He
noted the process as outlined in the staff report.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY MAGEE TO APPROVE THE
FEE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CENTEX
HOMES.
Councilman Hickman indicated that he had the pleasure of working with
Rod Gunn and Don Hunt; and they explained that the requirements have
changed drastically since the early 1990's, for release of money. He
commented that he felt very comfortable with this arrangement.
Mayor Buckley noted that there were questioned about what this funding
was going for, but it looked pretty much in line for parks and fire stations.
THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
33. Deposit and Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Centex
Homes.
/"'"
Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that this was an
AGENDA ITEM NO....J..b-.
PAGE 2~ OF 3 fa
Page Twenty-Four - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
....."
agreement for a $50,000 fee to explore the possibility of forming a CFD,
which would pay for the appraisals and study by Harris and Associates; as
well as an absorption study. He clarified that the Bond Counsel would not
be paid out of this deposit.
Councilman Schiffner commented that this was a routine procedure.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE DEPOSIT AND
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CENTEX HOMES.
34. Increase Fees for Lake Use Passes - Resolution No. 2004-66.
Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy noted that this would increase
both daily and annual lake use passes. He commented that the City had not
increased these rates in four years, however there had been a significant
increase in the cost of operations. He noted that the increase was
substantial, but would shift the costs to the users of the Lake, and increase
revenues by about $108,000. He explained that the staff recommendation
was to increase day use passes from $7 to $10 and annual passes from $105
to $150 for non-residents and from $65 to $100 for residents, but noted that
the Council had recommended that those rates be reduced.
....""
Councilman Schiffner suggested that the permits sold would not make or
break the lake. He indicated that he would support a small increase, like
$10 for City residents and increasing non-residents to $150.
Councilman Magee indicated that he would concur with Councilman
Schiffner, as he would want to encourage lake use by residents and make it
affordable. He echoed the Mayor's comments that the daily passes would
be the most expensive in the area and suggested changing it to $8 per day.
MOVED BY MAGEE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-66 WITH THE CHANGES AS PROPOSED BY ...."
AGENDA ITEM NO. --1 h
PAGE~OF 3c.o
~
Page Twenty-Five - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
STAFF WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DAILY INCREASE GOING TO
$8 AND THE ANNUAL PASSES FOR RESIDENTS BEING INCREASED
TO ONLY $75.
Councilman Hickman noted that the City spends $1,750,000 for the Lake
per year and generates only $400,000 in revenues. He stressed the cost and
encouraged everyone to pray for rain.
Mayor Buckley concurred with the recommendation that the jump from $65
to $100 for residents would cause sticker shock.
City Manager Watenpaugh reminded the Council that staff was about to
come back with a draft campground agreement.
,.,- THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPEALING
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-51 AND ESTABLISHING FEES FOR USE
OF LAKE ELSINORE.
Councilman Schiffner commented that the last rain, at the lowest price, put
1;2 million dollars worth of water in the Lake.
Mayor Buckley suggested that when the Lake was showing obvious
improvements, this issue could be revisited.
35.
Elsinore Water District Liaison.
,.......
Mayor Buckley indicated that he put this item on the agenda based on the
problems over the last few months. He noted that the City Council had
representatives to RCTC, EVMWD, and numerous local agencies, but did
not have one to Elsinore Water District. He indicated that he felt it would
AQENDA ITEM~. III
PAGE2:S _ OF 3L:.
Page 1\venty-Six - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
'-'
be a good idea for communications between organizations, especially with
the Country Club Heights Citizens Committee's efforts. He noted that he
received a letter from the Water District regarding the idea and they said "no
thank you". He suggested that having a permanent point person would be
a better idea, and noted that he could not do it because he lived in the
District. He suggested that Councilman Hickman serve as the liaison since
there was an existing agreement between the RDA and Elsinore Water
Di stri ct.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley noted that the Council received a response to the
Mayor's letter from Elsinore Water District and they don't want a liaison,
but suggested a study session. She suggested that the difference between
this and RCTC was that the City was invited to have a liaison with RCTC.
She noted that they were told from the beginning that it would not be she or
Mr. Schiffner from the beginning. She recommended holding a study
session on specific issues and work that angle.
'-'"
Mayor Buckley indicated that he was thinking about it this afternoon, and
while he was thinking of doing it himself, he lives in the area. He
commented that he was not sure where they asked for a study session.
Councilman Schiffner concurred with Mayor Pro Tern Kelley that there
should be a joint study session to see if there was anything that could be
worked out with them. He suggested if it looked like it would be helpful,
then a liaison could be appointed.
Councilman Magee offered a happy medium. He noted that Mr. Flores was
one of the most adversely impacted by the situation He further noted that
the Mayor would like to help the two agencies get along. He suggested
prevailing on Councilman Hickman to volunteer as a non-official party to
extend a friendly hand to bring the two together and work on an agenda for
discussion in a study session. He suggested that if it was done in an
informal non-threatening way, it might start a dialogue. Councilman
Hickman suggested giving him a chance to contact them and report back.
AGENDA ITEM NO. I h
PAGE~OF.3 k,
"-'
/""'
Page Twenty-Seven - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley commented that was probably a good solution in
between the two extremes.
MOVED BY MAGEE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO HAVE
COUNCILMAN HICKMAN EXTEND A FRIENDLY HAND TO THE
ELSINORE WATER DISTRICT AND REPORT BACK
Mayor Buckley noted that the Elsinore Water District Meetings are held on
the first Tuesdays.
THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
36. Memorandum of Understanding for the Acquisition of Property within the
City of Lake Elsinore for Conservation Purposes.
~
City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Mr. Sauls and other representatives
were in attendance at this meeting.
City Attorney Leibold explained that this item was for 598 acres of habitat
acquisition; but noted that the issue was raised at the October 1 th meeting
regarding the lost opportunities for the east/west transportation corridor in
this area. She clarified that this would provide that the land could be
acquired but it would not be encumbered for up to six years or until the
corridor is sited. She stressed that it would not hamper the ability to design
such a corridor. She noted that representatives of the Tri- Valley group were
present.
/""'
Councilman Magee indicated that he needed to thank a few people for this.
He noted that this matter came to the Council some time ago, but the Orange
County corridor had been neglected. He thanked the City Attorney and Ed
Sauls as the property owners representative for his patience. He recognized
the staff members at RCTC that worked with all parties to make sure the
timing would be appropriate. He thanked Supervisor Ashley for directing
his staff to do what they had promised.
AQENDA ITEM NO..-J b
PAGE ?-1.. OF 3 <0
Page 1\venty-Eight - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
.....",
MOVED BY MAGEE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WITHIN
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FOR CONSERVATION PURPOSES AND
THE ADDENDUM, AND AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE
DOCUMENTS.
THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 8:19 P.M.
THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 8:25 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES
Paula Graver, 117 Poe Street, read a story about the relevance of a deck of cards in
church. She reminded everyone that the Support the Troops rallies were
continuing. She also recognized the birthday of the Marine Corps.
.....",
Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh Street, indicated that there were contradictions from
the Electoral Reform Committee. She commented that an auditor had never
exposed the improprieties the City Treasurer found. She addressed a comment by
the City Attorney and the Committee that the Finance Director could do what the
Treasurer had done, but stressed that none had exposed what the Treasurer had,
such as health and wellness. She noted that the Finance Director had collected
Health and Wellness in June and September. She suggested that as the advisor to
the Committee, the City Attorney was the culprit to misinterpretations. She
requested a revote on the City Treasurer item. She questioned closed session item
d, noting that last time the Council voted not to renew his contract; and how there
could be no reportable action tonight.
City Attorney Leibold indicated that the action of several meetings ago was for a
notice of non-renewal, but he was continuing to work under that his agreement.
She advised that the discussion tonight was continued on his performance
evaluation. She commented that with respect to the Electoral Reform Committee,
she served as staff to the committee.
.....",
A9ENOA ITEM NO.--1h......
PAGE ~~ OF 3-6
,,-....
Page Twenty-Nine - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
Woodrow Rogers, 31646 Saddle Ridge Drive, questioned CFD 90-3 and CFD
2003-h, noting that it was his understanding that 2003-h included Summerhill,
West Lake Elsinore, 97-b, 97, 90-3 and 90-1, for a total of$30.9 million. He
questioned who was paying 90-3. He expressed complete agreement with Mrs.
Stafford, noting that he could not believe that the City Treasurer's position should
be appointed. He indicated that it had to be someone totally objective, and
stressed the need for increased disclosure. He suggested that things were too easy
to hide. City Manager Watenpaugh responded that City Treasurer Weber and
Administrative Services Director Pressey would be happy to assist Mr. Rogers in
obtaining information.
Bill Arnold., 31556 Sagecrest Drive, addressed Mello-Roos, noting a public
meeting on January 28t\ when he was assured that the increases for 2004-05
would be limited to 20/0. He indicated that he got his tax bill and his taxes were
,,-.... up 8.5% this year; and requested information from the City ten days ago, but had
not received any information. He indicated that he was concerned about the
information because the December 10th deadline was approaching. He
commented that if there was an issue, he would like to prevent having the
collection of a very large amount of money. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated
that he was not aware of Mr. Arnold's request, but offered to meet with him.
Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that he received Mr. Arnold's
call and request for information. He advised that he explained the condition of
Mello-Roos, and agreed to have Mr. Anderson explain the maximum tax and
special tax. He clarified that in this case the special tax was up to the maximum
tax. City Manager Watenpaugh noted the explanation at the previous meeting at
Railroad Canyon Elementary School, but indicated that he would follow-up on the
questions tomorrow.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
City Manager Watenpaugh commented on the following:
1)
Noted that the Council requested a study session on CFD's, and
indicated that Administrative Services Director Pressey had been
,,-....
AGENDA ITEM NO. I b
PAGE_~~~ OF _ '6 "
Page Thirty - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
......."
working on dates with the Finance Team. He questioned the
Council's availability on December 1st, 6th or 13t\ with possible
alternates of December ih or 14th. Council consensus was to hold the
meeting on December 13th at 5 p.m. City Manager Watenpaugh
indicated that staff would notice the meeting.
2) Thanked the citizens and staff for their calls and letters in his absence.
He particularly thanked staff and the Chamber of Commerce for
sending flowers.
3) Thanked Jerry Harmatz for his comments.
4) Expressed appreciation to Mrs. Hyland for her years participating in
the Main Street event, and noted that things were changing.
5)
Noted the comments by Mr. Wise on the public use of the joint use
high school. He thanked staff for working with Sharon Lindsay to
address the concerns.
......."
CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS
City Attorney Leibold commented on the following:
1 ) Addressed the Electoral Reform Committee, and clarified her role to
provide research materials, while the City Clerk served as the minute
keeper. She stressed that the Committee Members were capable of
making their own decisions.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
No Reports.
CITY TREASURER COMMENTS
......."
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE 30 OF ~6
~
Page Thirty-One - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
City Treasurer Weber commented on the following:
~
1)
Noted that he met with the Finance Team on November 4th and
addressed the Series H bond. He indicated that he found out that the
2003 Series H bonds were issued in 2004, as a refinance of five
bonds. He indicated that he would like to request an item at the
next meeting, for an audit by an outside firm on this complex issue.
He advised that he wanted to go back to 1990 with a series A issue,
to find out how things were paid from 1990 to 1997 with the workout
plan. He further advised that he wanted to find out how it applied
the monies, what was done with the reserve and the 2003 Series H.
He indicated that he would request $10,000 which could come from
the administrative funds in the bonds. He noted that he understood
that there were annual audits, but they were very cursory, when it
came to the bonds. City Manager Watenpaugh requested that Mr.
Weber meet the Agenda timeline for the next meeting.
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Magee commented on the following:
~.
I) Indicated that he was approached by a representative from Caltrans
with concerns about the Costco development and line of sight and
drainage in the area. He commented that he did not want to hold
that project up, but wanted it to be safe for everyone.
2) Noted that several weeks ago he was advised that the Stadium had
undergone a video catalog of the grounds of what was there and what
needed repairs. He requested that video be shared with the Council,
so they could understand the potential liabilities.
3)
Requested a Study Session on Animal Friends, and suggested it
needed to be done before the end of December.. He noted that
another study session had just been set for December 13th.
AGENDA ITEM NO.-lL
PAGE.-J.i. OF 36
Page Thirty-1\vo - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
""""
4) Requested that staff look at the development of two new possible
fees, one to assist with the animal shelter fees and one to begin a
construction fund for a new City Hall. He commented that if the
Council never started setting funds aside, it would never get started;
and stressed that even with the recent changes it was still crowded.
5) Noted a memo from the City Manager regarding the General Plan
Consultant, with a time table that ended tonight. City Manager
Watenpaugh noted that staff set a meeting for the day he returned,
which had been rescheduled to tomorrow. Councilman Magee
inquired if it would be ready for consideration on November 23rd.
City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that it was his understanding it
would start in December.
6)
Noted an e-mail from Ms. Jamie Francis, and requested a hard copy.
City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Information/Communications
Manager Dennis had been corresponding with her. He eXplained that
Ms. Francis was on AOL and due to a spam filter, the information was
not getting through.
'"'"
7) Noted a package of information and photographs he had received
showing significant road problems in the four corners area, and
requested that the City Manager address the items and get back to
Council.
8) Noted the presence of the two individuals regarding the joint use of
the library. Suggested that people who still had concerns contact the
City Clerk's Office for contact information.
Councilman Schiffner commented on the following:
1)
Noted the Electoral Reform Committee recommendations and
indicated that most of them were pretty good and he would have been
willing to accept them as they were, but the Council did some fine
'"'"
AQENDA ITEM NO.--L6-.
PAGE '3 :lOF 3 k,
",-....
Page Thirty-Three - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
",-...
tuning. He indicated that one he objected to was regarding the dates
of elections. He noted that the Committee suggested that starting in
2005, the next two elections would be for terms of three years,
shifting the elections to even years. He indicated that he thought that
was a good solution, but the majority of the Council requested an
ordinance to extend the terms of the entire Council by one year. He
stressed that he disagreed with this action and did not vote for it; and
suggested that it should be put on the ballot for the citizens to vote
on. He expressed hopes that all of the citizens would consider what
had been proposed. He ip.dicated that he wanted everyone to know
what had happened, as he did not think that it was the right for the
Council to extend their term. He stressed that he thought the voters
should decide, and indicated that he would continue to push to put
that matter on the ballot at the next election.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelley commented on the following:
/"""'
1)
Told the Electoral Reform Committee Members that she appreciated
their efforts very much. She noted that based on their presentation, it
was apparent that they had given thoughtful consideration to all of the
issues assigned to them, while being objective and looking at the best
interest of the City. She indicated that their lengthy discussion was
evident. She commented that she had a couple of issues on this
matter that she personally wanted to raise. She indicated that when a
committee makes a recommendation, it is generally done in a study
session so there is time for questions and responses; followed by a
presentation on camera. She advised that she would have preferred
that process, because the presentation could have been more in depth
than was possible tonight. She suggested that it would have
answered more questions. She indicated that the other issue was
moving the election, and concurred with Councilman Schiffner. She
noted that on one hand, the entire Council voted to put the City
Treasurer position on the ballot for public input, but on the other
hand, when it came to extending terms it was a 3 to 2 vote to have it
AQENDA ITEM NO.--LL..-.
PAGE.33 OF 3 b
Page Thirty-Four - City Council Minutes - November 9,2004
~
come back to extend. She stressed that she did not feel comfortable
extending the positions, as the voters elected the Councilmembers for
four years, not five years. She indicated that the recommendation of
the transition was fair to the citizens of the community. She
commented that she was disappointed with the motion, but as
Councilman Schiffner said it would be coming back to future
meetings. She stressed that she would like to hear from the
constituents; and noted as a matter of clarification that the City
Treasurer's term would be moved also. She noted that the City
Treasurer issued would be on the ballot in 2006, and if it stayed
elected that would be fine, but if it changed to appointed, it would
still extend two years past that, as it would extend the same as the
Council, beyond the wishes of the voters. Mayor Buckley clarified
that he would stay to the end of his term. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley
questioned how far the term would extend. City Attorney Leibold
clarified that the term would run to 2008. '-'"
Councilman Hickman commented on the following:
1) Indicated that if there was an election in 2005 it would be an
additional $40,000. He stressed that the whole intention was to
save money with even years.
2) Wished everyone a happy Veteran's Day or Armistice Day.
3) Requested information on the retention basin at Pulte Homes.
4) Noted that Ms. Francis was wanting street light due to burglaries in
the area.
5) Concurred that the Halloween event was nice.
Mayor Buckley commented on the following:
~
AQENDA ITEM NO. J b
PAGE.3..:i OF 3 b
/""' Page Thirty-Five - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
2)
/""'
--
1) Addressed the discussion of the videotape of the Stadium, and
suggested having staff look at what to do with it.
Noted the Election Committee issue, and Mr. LaPere's suggested to
vote on the term. He suggested the public should also vote on
directly electing the Mayor and Districts; but reiterated that the only
vote was to be regarding the Treasurer. He indicated that as for
shifting the term, it would save money and result in more than double
the turnout. He commented that it had nothing to do with extending
or decreasing the term. He suggested that if the c.ommittee had
considered it last year and recommended shortening the terms he
would have voted for it just the same. He indicated that the reason
the meeting was held on Wednesday was because it took three hours.
He stressed that it was very detailed and important to go through the
brainwork of the committee. He addressed voting on things by the
public, and noted that there was a petition on the same issues, that the
Council refused to put on the ballot. Councilman Schiffner indicated
that was not the reason it was not on the ballot.
3)
Congratulated Harvey Ryan and Phil Williams on their election to
EVMWD; and Jeannie Corral and Jon Gray on their Election to the
School Board.
4)
Announced the Elsinore Grand Prix on November 13th and 14th,
noting that there would be some traffic issues in the downtown area.
5)
Thanked Elsinore Middle School and Mrs. Dunlap's Class for
invit~ng him to visit their class.
6)
Announced the following upcoming events:
November 18th Chamber EDC Lunch with Legislative Summit
November 19th and 20th - Women's Club Melodrama
November 20th: Unity in the Community Run - 7:30 a.m.
AQENDA ITEM NO. _I b
PAGE~OF 3b
Page Thirty-Six - City Council Minutes - November 9, 2004
~
November 20th
December 3rd
December 5th
Decem ber 9th
Unity in the Community Parade - 10 a.m.
Winterfest
Open Air Market
C.D.B.G Application Deadline
7) Noted that the Chamber of Commerce was still accepting canned food
for HOPE; and unwrapped toys and grocery certificates for Cops for
Kids and HOPE.
ADJOURNMENT
THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:05
P.M.
.....,
THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK!
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
'--'
AGENDA ITEM NO. J h
PAGE..J.1.. OF 3 fo
/'"
MINUTES
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2004
******************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER
The Special City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Buckley at 5 :00
p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, KELLEY,
MAGEE, SCHIFFNER,
BUCKLEY
/'"
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best,
City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community
Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake &
Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Parks &
Open Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Public Works
Manager Payne, Recreation & Tourism Manager Fazzio, City Treasurer
Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad.
CLOSED SESSION
A.
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
(Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property: A.P.N. 377-180-037 (Silver St./Minthorn Street)
Negotiating Parties: Forward Properties, LLC & Southern California
Investors, Inc. and the City of Lake Elsinore.
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
/'"
AQENOA ITEM NO.lL-
PAGE I OF).
Page Two - Special City Council Minutes - November 23,2004
.....,
THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 5:01 P.M.
THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 7:01 P.M.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Leibold announced that the Real Property Negotiations, as listed
above were discussed in Closed Session with no reportable action.
ADJOURNMENT
THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:10
P.M.
,..."
THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ATTEST:
VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK!
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
MINUTES
/'"'.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
aTY OF LAKE ELSINORE
183 NORTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2,2004
CALL TO ORDER:
d1airman LaPere called the Regular Planning Gmunission Meeting to order at 6:00 PM
Gmunissioner Ryan led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS:
LAPERE, LARIMER, O'NEAL, RYAN AND
UHLRY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE
,-.-.
Also present were: Director of Community Development Brady, Planning and Code
Enforcement Manager Villa, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Planning Technician Hennings,
Associate Planner Coury, Senior Planner Morita, and Rental Housing Oerk Alexen.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes
· October 19, 2004 - Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
Vice Olairman O'Neal added the word "apparently" to page 4 of 11, paragraph 3 to read,
"Commissioner O'Neal noted that the issues raised by all parties concerned had been apparently
addressed and resolved." He had no further corrections.
Commissioner Uhlry pulled Item No.2 from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.
,--...
ACr::,NDA ITEM NO.~
PACE \ OF7
PAGE 2 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES - November 2, 2004
MOVED BY LARIMER, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS
VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND THE OCTOBER 19TII, 2004
MINUTES WITH THE NOTED CORRECTIONS.
~
2. Minor Design Review of a 1.760 square foot manufactured home with a 462 square
foot attached garage and a 57 square foot front porch area. located at 16367 Arnold
Avenue. Assessor Parcel Number(s) 378-2U-028 and 378-2U-037.
Community Development Director Brady gave a brief overview of the project and requested
Associate Planner Coury to address the Commission with any additional information.
Associated Planner Coury provided an overview of the project location and design.
Chairman LaPere requested the applicant approach the podium for comments.
Carlos Padilla, 1516 E. Upper Dr. Corona, stated that he read and agreed with the conditions of
approval. He noted that the home would be an improvement to the area.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Uhlry requested clarification as to the classification of a mobile or manufactured ~
home.
Mr. Padilla addressed the use of the words mobile and manufactured home and explained that the
term "manufactured" had replaced the term "mobile" in 1984. He further indicated that the home
would be set on a permanent foundation of masonry block. There was further discussion pertaining
the differences between mobile homes and manufactured homes.
Alicia Padilla, 1416 Pinewood Dr. Corona, indicated that she could provide a letter from the State,
which would confirm that a mobile home is a manufactured home. She further explained the
pwpose of changing the verbiage.
Commissioner Ryan commented on the markings on the landscape plans and requested clarification
on any changes to the landscaping plans. Associate Planner Coury provided clarification.
Commissioner Ryan further addressed the drainage off Stevens St. to the propenies below. He
noted his concern for the water drainage from the above residents.
Commissioner Larimer had no comments.
Commissioner O'Neal had no comment.
Agenda Item NO~
Page~of I
~
PAGE 3 - PLANNING mMMISSION :MINUTES - November 2, 2004
- /""""'
d1ainnan LaPere requested clarification to the drawings. He addressed the frontal elevations on
page 16 of 18 and noted the placement of the shutters. There was further discussion pertaining to
the location and addition of shutters on the remaining windows on the home.
MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF 5-0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-153, A RESOLUTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE OTY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING OF MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED 16367 ARNOLD AVENUE.
PUBLIC HEARNINGS
3. Zone Change No. 2004- 10 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004- 16 (APN 377- ttO-
052 and -053). (Continued from August 17. 2004)
d1ainnan LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 6:16 pm. Community Development Director Brady
provided a brief overview of the project and invited Planning Technician Hennings to summarize
the project for the Commission. Planning Technician Hennings provided an overview of the
project and noted the proposed zone change from M-1 to G2. She noted that the project had been
/"""', presented to the Planning Commission in August 2004. She provided a summary of various
meetings staff had with the applicant since that meeting. She indicated that the applicant had made
several major changes to the original application that has rendered the project" more intense" .
She indicated that the revised site plan increased the proposed number ofRV display spaces from 14
units to 56 units. She further indicated that the plan proposed by the applicant had increased
significantly and staff was raising even greater concerns dealing with aesthetics.
William Maisel, P.O. Box 686, Lake Elsinore, addressed the conditions of approval and noted his
disagreement with those conditions. There was extensive discussion pertaining to the use and visual
impa(t of the project.
Maria Maisel noted that she and Mr. Maisel have been Lake Elsinore residents for many years.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Vice d1ainnan O'Neal stated that he could not support the zone change for the project. He
expressed his disappointment with the project and he noted that the drawing was confusing. He
further noted that the project as a whole was unacceptable. He suggested that the applicant seek the
services of a professional designer.
",-...
Agenda Item NO~
Page ~ of ...,
PAGE 4 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES - November 2,2004
'-"'"
Commissioner Uhlry concurred with Vice Chainnan O'Neal's comments. He addressed the
applicants concerns with the conditions of approval and clarified the putpose of those conditions.
He emphasized conformity with existing Gty codes and requirements. He indicated that he
supported the Zone Change request.
G>mmis~ioner Ryan stated that there were too many issues with the project and he could not
support It.
Commissioner Larimer stated that the project did not look good to her and she could not support it.
Olainnan LaPere addressed the conditions that had been contested by the applicant and provided
clarification as to the putpose of those conditions as they related to the proposed project. He noted
that there were no significant changes or improvements to the proposed project since it 'WaS
presented to the Planning G>mmission in August 2004. He indicated that he could not recommend
the proposed project to the Gty G>uncil and suggested that the applicant work with staff for an
additional 60 days. The applicant concurred.
There 'WaS discussion as to the intention of the applicant to improve the proposed project in 60
days. There 'WaS speculation as to the applicant's plan to resolve the issues in 60 days.
Olainnan LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 6:45 p.m.
MOVED BY LARIME~ SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND DENIED BY A VOTE OF 1-4
TO DENY THE CONTINUATION OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004- 10 AND
CONSIDERATION OF CUP 2004-16.
'-"'"
MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1 WITH
LARIMER CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE, TO CONTINUE ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-10 AND CUP 2004-16 FOR 60 DAYS.
G>mmunity Development Director Brady noted that over the 60-day period, the conditions of
approval are non-negotiable and that staff 'WaS moving forward with improving the project, which
would include additional conditions and requirements.
4. Amended Tentative Tract Map No. 30493
Chainnan LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 pm. G>mmunity Development Director Brady
provided a brief overview of the proposed project.
Agenda Item NO~
Page~of '/
'-"'"
PAGE 5 - PLANNING CD:MMISSION MINUTES - November 2,2004
- /""'
Senior Planner Morita provided a brief overview of the proposed Amended Tentative Tract Map
No. 30493. He noted the differences between the original Tentative Tract Map and the Amended
Tentative Tract Map. He noted that the grading plans had been redesigned to include seven
additional lots.
Jim Stringer, Pardee Homes, Corona, agreed with the conditions of approval as presented.
Conunissioner Uh1ry noted that he was in favor with the proposed project.
Conunissioner Ryan concurred with staff's recommendations.
Conunissioner Larimer stated that she likes the Canyon Hills area; however, she did not like the
street name Lost Rd. She jdeinJy requested that the applicant name a street after her in the project.
Vice Cbairman O'Neal noted that he was in favor of the project.
Cbairman LaPere stated his approval of the project.
Cbairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 7:18 p.m.
MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
____ ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-154, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE OTY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE OTY COUNOL OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF
AMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 30493 WHICH SUBDIVIDES
APPROXIMATELY 1,075 ACRES OF THE CANYON HILLS SPEOFIC PLAN AREA
INTO 451 TOTAL LOTS
INFORMATIONAL
. None
ST AFF COMMENTS
Engineering Manager Seumalo commented on the following:
. Stated that the Conunission would receive copies of the letter drafted in response to the
concerns raised by the residents of the Gty of Canyon Lake at the previous meeting.
----
Agenda Item No J J
Page~of -,
PAGE 6 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES - November 2, 2004
Community Development Director Brady commented on the following;
......,
· Stated that the Deputy Gty Attorney indicated that he would provide a letter to the
Commission pertaining to the anticipated litigation, subject to Gty Council approval.
Vice Chairman O'Neal noted that he was troubled with the Commission voting on an item that they
did not have all of the pertinent information on. Commissioner Uhlry concurred.
Community Development Director Brady indicated that the G>mmission could exercise the option
of voting on an item that they did not feel comfortable with. He further indicated that if the
litigation in question had any relevance to the Development Agreement presented to the
G>mmission at the October 19th meeting, the G>mmission would have been provided with the
appropriate information. He stated that the information would be provided to the Commission
from the Gty Attorneys Office.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
Vice Chairman O'Neal commented on the following;
· No comment.
G>mmissioner Larimer commented on the following:
....,,;
· She noted that she attended the AP A Conference during the last Planning Commission
Meeting.
· She asked G>mmunity Development Director Brady if a study session for the sign program
had been scheduled.
G>mmunity Development Director Brady indicated that a time had not been scheduled due to the
large number of projects currently in process. He further indicated that if the Commission had a
date or time preference, staff could schedule the study session.
Commissioner Ryan commented on the following:
· He noted that it was election night and he was eager to learn the results of the historical
significance of the Presidential Election.
Commissioner Uhlry commented on the following;
· He noted that there was a school bus accident and requested that the victims be remembered
ill prayers.
-
Agenda Item No
Page~of "/
\d
......,
PAGE 7 - PLANNING mMMISSION MINUTES - November 2,2004
<~
O1ainnan Were commented on the following:
'--
. He addressed Item No.3 and commended staff's efforts and hard work
AD]OURNMENT
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, CHAIRMAN LAPERE ADJOURNED
THE MEETING AT 7:30 PM ON NOVEMBER 2,2004.
Respectfully Submined,
~~c~
Lisa C. Alexen
~ Rental Housing Oerk
ATTEST:
~
Agenda Item No \ J
Page~of .,
NOVEMBER 3D, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
WARRANT
SUMMARY
,-... FUND#
FUND DESCRIPTION
TOTAL
100
110
130
150
257
358
359
362
363
369
606
608
620
GENERAL FUND
STATE GAS TAX FUND
LIGHTING / LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FUND
C.D.B.G. FUND
C.F.D. 2003-02 CANYON HILLS FUND
C.F.D. 91-2 DEBT SERVICE FUND
C.F.D. 90-3 DEBT SERVICE FUND
C.F.D. 95-1 (1996-E) DEBT SERVICE FUND
C.F.D. 88-3 III (A)/97 SERIES A DEBT SERVICE FUND
C.F.D. 2004-3 ROSETTA CANYON DEBT SERVICE FUND
MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION FUND
TRUST DEPOSITS & PRE-PAID EXP. FUND
COST RECOVERY SYSTEM
580,104.45
16,639.35
46,196.41
47,284.19
5,860.00
1,350.00
1,350.00
900.00
1,350.00
14,500.00
998.88
6,150.00
50,544.27
773,227.55
GRAND TOTAL
/"'"',
,-...
AQENOA ITEM NO. Cl.
PAGE-LOF ,1)'
11/30/2004 P:\WARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 113004
NOVEMBER 30. 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
WARRANT LIST
CHECK# VENDOR NAME
79765 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION
79919 WEST COAST COMPUTER SERVICE
79920 LAKE ELSINORE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
79921 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S.
79922 AL TURA CREDIT UNION
79923 I.C.M.A. RETIREMENT TRUST
79924 THE MARK FISHER COMPANY
79925 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
79926 2004 WEST HUG ANNUAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE
79928 VOID
79929-79930 A & A JANITORIAL SERVICE
79931 ACTION PARK ALLIANCE, INC.
79932 ADVANCED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE, INC.
79933 ALBERT WEBB & ASSOCIATES
79934 ALLIED TRAFFIC EQUIPMENT
79935 ALPINE PREMIUM WATER-NATHAN GARNER
79936 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
79937 AQUATIC SAFETY RESEARCH GROUP, LLC
79938 ARCTIC ICE CO.
79939 ARTISAN GOLDSMITHS & AWARDS
79940 THE BAG LADY SANDBAGS
79941 IRWIN BARR
79942 BARRETT, LTD.
79943 BELSON OUTDOORS, INC.
79944 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES
79945 BOATS PLUS
79946 C ALE 0
79947 C. R. & R. DISPOSAL, INC.
79948 CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
79949 CALIFORNIA RESOURCE RECOVERY ASSOCIATION
79950 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S.
79951 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
79952 CANYON TIRE SALES, INC.
79953 CCP INDUSTRIES, INC.
79954 CHMP, LLC
79955 CHMP, LLC
79956 CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE, INC.
79957 COMMERCIAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
79958 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS, INC.
79959 KIRT A. COURY
79960-79961 CUTTING EDGE STAFFING, INC.
79962 0 & SELECTRIC
79963 D.R. HORTON
79964 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING
79965 SALLIE DAVIS
79966 DAY-TIMERS, INC.
79967 DEL T BUILDERS
79968 DESERT STAR ATTRACTIONS
79969 DO IT CENTER
79970 CAROLE K. DONAHOE
11/30/2004 P:\WARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 113004
1 OF 4
AQENOA ITEM NO.
PAGE ~ OF
AMOUNT
60.00 ....."
108.75
330.00
30,406.99
1 ,325.00
3,781.82
1 ,340.50
21,590.26
75.00
0.00
3,102.24
4,166.00
4,414.84
1,426.00
219.81
188.60
958.10
56.00
1,310.00
734.60
1,360.00
907.00
2,000.00
3,725.00
684.41
198.61 ....."
465.00
31,258.24
4,740.00
181.00
369.4 7
525.00
144.39
182.68
3,274.00
2,404.00
770.41
2,538.64
150.00
3,991.74
7,781.70
4,256.50
2,500.00
420.11
64.00
52.78
46,829.19
1,500.00
454.85
2,719.65 ~
:1.
[;
NOVEMBER 30. 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
~HECK# VENDOR NAME
,9971 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING, INC.
79972 DOWNS OIL CO., INC.
79973 D3 EQUIPMENT
79974-79977 E. V. M. W. D.
79978 EBERHARD EQUIPMENT, INC.
79979 ELITE ELEVATOR, INC.
79980 ELSINORE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY, INC.
79981 ELSINORE READY MIX CO., INC.
79982 ELSINORE VALLEY RENTALS
79983 EMPIRE ECONOMICS, INC.
79984-79985 EXCEL LANDSCAPE. INC.
79986 EXXON MOBIL
79987 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
79988 FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTION
79989 K. HOVNANIAN FORECAST HOMES, INC.
79990 MAUREEN FOSTER
79991 GEARHART'S GARAGE, INC.
79992 GEO SEC, INC.
79993 OFFICER WILLIAM GORHAM
79994-79996 GREENSCAPE
79997 ARLINE GULBRANSEN
79998 HARDY & HARPER, INC.
79999-80001 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
,.....aQ002 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
003 HARTZOG & CRABILL, INC.
00004 HDR ENGINEERING, INC.
80005 MARCI HOBBS
80006 INLAND EMPIRE LOCK & KEY
80007 INTERSTATE SALES
80008 INTERSTATE SWEEPING SERVICES
80009 DE JANDA
80010 JEFF HAUSER MOBILE WELDING
80011 KB HOMES
80012 VIVIAN KIM
80013 L & M FERTILIZER, INC.
80014 LA SIERRA FIRE EQUIPMENT
80015 LAKE CHEVROLET
-..-.------..-
80016 LAKE ELSINORE PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY
80017 LAKE ELSINORE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
80018 LAKELAND MARINE
--
80019 THACH LE
~---_.-
~0020 M. LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS, LLC
80021 KIM MAGEE
80022 MARGARET MARTINEZ
80023 MAYHALL PRINT SHOP
80024 ALLISON MCDORMAN
80025 LINDA M. MILLER
80026 DUANE A. MORITA
~027 MORROW PLUMBING. INC.
J28 NELSON PAVING, INC.
WARRANT LIST
AMOUNT
2,115.28
748.17
1,155.04
12,842.47
40.91
312.00
142.52
2,968.52
783.05
14,500.00
31,532.68
39.42
170.43
125.55
1,682.70
179.11
444.09
10,830.16
40.00
10,889.46
337.60
21,057.60
89,370.37
652.50
3,255.63
27,783.13
20.00
393.54
213.03
1,360.00
397.50
1,020.00
6,919.97
52.50
248.94
46.60
4,321.14
20,000.00
12,500.00
310.13
716.50
487.00
79.35
625.00
1,078.85
30.00
3,350.00
4,253.13
368.38
4,391.80
11/30/2004 P:\WARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 113004 2 OF 4
AQENOA ITEM NO. :;
PAGE..-lOF !:>
NOVEMBER 3D, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
CHECK# VENDOR NAME
80029 NETCOMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
80030 NEW HOLLAND CREDIT, LLC
80031 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
80032 NORTH COUNTY TIMES
80033 EMMA ORTIZ
80034 PAL OFFICE PRODUCTS
80035 PHD PENSKE LEASING
80036 THE PLANNING CENTER
80037 POSITIVE PROMOTIONS
80038-80039 THE PRESS ENTERPRISE
80040-80041 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY
80042-80043 QUILL CORPORATION
80044 R & R PRODUCTS, INC.
80045 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS, INC.
80046 RANCHO RUNNERS
80047 RIGHTWAY
80048 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR-CONTROLLER
80049 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
80050 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF, LAKE ELSINORE SHERIFF STATION
80051 ANTHONY ROMERO
80052 SADDLEBACK MATERIALS COMPANY, INC.
80053 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF, EVOC TRAINING CENTER
80054 SCOTT FAZEKAS & ASSOCIATES,INC.
80055 SERVICE ONE SERVICE, INC.
80056 SHARE CORP.
80057 SIGNS PLUS
80058 TRACI SIGW AL T
80059 DAVID S. SOLOMON
80060 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
80061 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.
80062-80068 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.
80069 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO.
80070 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN
80071 STAUFFER'S LAWN EQUIPMENT
80072 PEGGY J. STORAASLI
80073 BOB STOVER, INC.
80074 TEAM AUTOAID, INC.
80075 TEMECULA COPIERS
80076 TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION
80077 TIDES CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP
80078 UNITED GREEN MARK, INC.
80079 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
80080 VALLEY CENTER AUTO PARTS NAPA
80081 VERIZON EQUIPMENT SALES & SERVICES
80082-80085 VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC.
80086 VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC.
80087 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTIONS
80088 DENNIS WAITE
80089 WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC.
80090 WEST COAST WINDOW CLEANING
WARRANT LIST
AMOUNT
.....,
1,633.09
3,251.42
1,536.61
514.64
570.00
148.09
898.58
11,195.99
9.95
11,370.72
413.88
785.58
63.99
53.66
55.00
861.92
35.00
437.10
17,076.59
200.00
1,552.00
600.00
6,701.14
1,765.00
1 ,464.02 ~
125.00
90.00
3,445.00
1,000.00
3,224.59
16,851.42
386.30
603.18
368.22
495.00
4,670.72
118.47
123.91
987.13
150.00
972.58
84.37
241.13
613.93
3,718.12
4,708.28
164.40
64.00
6,977.70
450.00 -......."
11/30/2004 P:\WARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 113004 3 OF 4
AQENDA ITEM NO. J.
, /J ,/
, PAGE --=::I.- OF ~
NOVEMBER 30, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
WARRANT LIST
,,-cHECK#
,0091
80092
80093
80094
80095
80096
VENDOR NAME
2004 WEST HUG ANNUAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE
WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS, INC.
WOODCREST UNIFORMS
ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY
ZONES. COM
2004 WEST HUG ANNUAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE
AMOUNT
75.00
835.88
51.76
184.77
1,611.08
75.00
TOTAL
615,885.54
PIE DATE:
11/12/04 PAYROLL TAXES
11/12/04 PAYROLL CASH
43,921.96
113,420.05
GRAND TOTAL
773,227.55
,...-..
.--...
11/30/2004 P:\WARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 113004 4 OF 4
AQENOA ITEM NO. d
--'
PAGE...5.- OF ~
~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
RICHARD J. W A TENP AUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
Decem ber 14, 2004
SUBJECT:
Claim Against the City
BACKGROUND
Claims filed against the City of Lake Elsinore are reviewed and handled by Carl Warren &
Company, Claims Administrators. When received, each claim is logged in the City Clerk's
Office and forwarded to this company for investigation. After initial review and
investigation, direction is issued to the City to take one of several actions such as rejection,
notification of late claim or reservation of action until further information is obtained.
The following claim has been recommended for rejection by Carl Warren & Company:
,-....
CL#2004-11 - Cameron Hamilton
FISCAL IMP ACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Reject the Claims listed above and direct the City Clerk to send letter informing the
Claimant of this decision.
PREPAREDBy:2\&W
VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK!
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
APPROVED FOR . Wlr /. ~
AGENDA LISTING: . Wl
RICHARD J. W TENP AU H, TY MANAGER
~
AQENOA ITEM NO. 3
PAGE--L-OF lc
1~~.4
......"
December 2, 2004
TO: The City of Lake Elsinore
ATTENTION: Vicki Kasad, CMC, City Clerk
RE: Claim
Claimant
D/Event
Rec'd Y /Office
Our File
Heirs of Sarah Lynn Hamilton vs. The City of Lake
Elsinore
Heirs of Sarah Lynn Hamilton
6/15/2004
11/17/2004
S-282348-RQ
We have received and reviewed the above claim and request that you take the action indicated below:
CLAIM REJECTION: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant.
Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions please
contact the undersigned.
"WII.
V ery truly yours,
CARL WARREN & COMPANY
~{d ~n(cu~
~
~
Richard Marque
cc: CJPIA w/enc.
Attn.: Executive Director
CARL WARREN & CO.
CLAIMS MANAGEMENT CLAIMS ADJUSTERS
750 The City Drive . Ste 400 . Orange, CA 92868
Mail: P.O.Box25180.SantaAna.Ca 92799-5180
Phone: (714) 740-7999 Ext. 140.(800) 572-6900 . Fax: (714) 74D-9412
-.""
ACrvNDA ITEM NO.
PACE. .~
3
OF lfJ
/"'""'
/"'""' 1
~
walcfr
& Olson'2
1
1
1
1
c.. L ~ :!OOl-\ -\ \
1 Claim of CAMERON HAMIL TON, father, on behalf of minor SARAH LYNN
HAMILTON
2
3 CAMERON HAMILTON, father, on ) NO.
behalf of minor SARAH LYNN )
4 HAMILTON ) CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURIES
) (WRONGFUL DEATH)
5 Claimant, ) (Govt. Code ~91 O}
v. )
6 ) ~ ~~~O\ltl~ ~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) NOV 1 7 200~ 0
7 )
8 Respondent. )
)
) CITY CLERKS OFFICE
9
0 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT a Claim is hereby submitted by CAMERON
1 HAMILTON, father on behalf of minor SARAH LYNN HAMILTON, to the City of Lake
2 Elsinore as follows:
3 Name of Claimant: Cameron Hamilton, on behalf of Sarah Lynn Hamilton
4 Mailing Address & Phone: 217 S. Pennsylvania Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530; (909)
5 210-7916
Is claim filed on behalf of a Yes
6 mmor:
7 Relationship to the minor: Father
8 Date of Birth of Minor: April 1, 1995
9 Incident Date: June 15,2004
Dollar Amount of Claim: $500,000
0
Type of Civil Case: Non-limited civil case, wrongful death of minor
1 Explain how the dollar Approximately $30,000 in medical, funeral and family
2 amount claimed was counseling expenses; pain and suffering.
computed (attached copies
3 of the supporting
documentation for the
4 amount claimed with this
form):
5 Describe specific damage or Death of nine-year-old daughter, Sarah Lynn Hamilton, as a
6 injury incurred as a result of result of motor vehicle accident wherein she was a passenger.
the incident:
7c Location of incident: Corner of Gunnerson Street and Riverside Drive (Route 74),
..J" n Lake Elsinore. ar.r.tJnll ITr:M Nn'3
If" 3 OF ltJ
PACE
Q:\HOME\CLIENTS\Hamlil~on\CLAIM-FORMS\City-Claim.frm
CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY (WRONGFUL DEATH)
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
24
25
26
walJl
& Olson'2 P
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Explain circumstances that
!e~ to the alleged damage or
IllJury:
Has the claim for the
alleged damage/injury been
filed or will it be filed with
your insurance carrier?
Name, address and phone
number of attorney/
representative:
23 DATED: November 15,2004
On June 15,2004 at approximately 7:15 a.m., a traffic accident
occurred at the intersection of Gunnerson Street and Riverside
Drive (also known as SR-74) involving a Ford Van and a dump
truck. The van was driven by Debra Bare, a teacher at
Butterfield Elementary School, and was occupied by her three
children and a neighbor' s daughter, Sarah Lynn Hamilton. Ms.
Bare was driving the children to school traveling southbound on
Gunnerson Street approaching the intersection of Riverside
Drive. That intersection has a two-way stop sign on Gunnerson
Street. Bare allegedly stopped her van for the posted stop sign,
and then proceeded to make a left turn, eastbound onto
Riverside Drive. At approximately the same time, the dump
truck was approaching the intersection of Riverside Drive and
Gunnerson Street from the east. It collided with the van,
striking on the driver's side and pushing the vehicle offthe road.
As a consequence of the coilision, Sarah Lynn Hamilton, Bare's
nine-year-old neighbor, sustained blunt force cranial trauma
resulting in her death. The intersection of Gunnerson Street and
Riverside Drive is known by the City of Lake Elsinore, the
County of Riverside, and the State of California to be a
dangerous intersection which should have at the very least a
four-way stop sign. If it had either a four-way stop sign or a
signal, Sarah Lynn Hamilton would still be alive today.
Ms. Bare was uninsured at the time of the incident.
'-'"
"""
Gary A. Waldron, Esq.
Sherry S. Bragg, Esq.
WALDRON & OLSON, LLP
26 Corporate Plaza Drive, Suite 100
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 760-0204
Please direct all notices or other communications with
regard to this claim to attorneys at the above address and
telephone number
WALDRON & OLSON, LLP
Sherry S.
Attorney r Claimant CA E ON
HAMIL N, father, on be aU of minor 3
SARAH LYNN H~~M NO.
. PACE L-\ OF l.P
'-'"
Q:\HOME\CLIENTS\Ham~l~on\CLAIM-FORMS\City-Claim.frm
CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY (WRONGFUL DEATH)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
STATE FU I\UlIBER
t.".,..we OF OECEQENT ARST fGMnt
CERTIFICATE OF DEATH
JJAnrs~
US( ao_ Dtl.J /tI')lMS&IIB JHl'EQn5Clft.rw1OlS
ft." . .
j zoo~ 3 3 0 t:) 5 9 '4
LOCM.MQlStRATICH .......
~ IOIllOU
~
.J
..
i!i
'"
~
~
Iil
III
co
..
~~
:>co
~i3
I<
~i
;0
~
...
:~
co"
%'"
=~
"';5
~.
...
ill<
~..
d
...1<
.....
.15"
%8
~ ji!'"
~i!:
~~
~co
SARAH LYNN
NiIA ALSO JiU'IOWH AS ....... /IJ/(/4 (ARST.MDOLE. LA51)
.0. socw. SECUNTY NI..tteEJII
CA
623-80-4256
3
a. STATfJfOAE1GNc;ourmrr
...Csrt
CA
LAKE ELSINORE
_~frWlE.AB..A11ONSHlI'"
CAMERON HAMILTON/FATHER
.. I\WoIlE Of ItJ'MYlNG 5I"OU5f - FlRST
aa.,1IATH STATE
3\. NAME OF FATHER - FtRST
CA
CAMERON
.. Mmt STATE
315. frIAWE O#..oTME" - RAST
CA
JENNIFER
.. Dt$POSfTION DllTE ~
92869
06/18/2004
.,. TYPE ~ DISPC)SmONtS)
0. uc:EHSE ......,.
BURIAL
...~0F"fUlEM.E$T~
SADDLEBACK CHAPEL MORTUARY
,Ot. rt...ACl OF DEATH
INLAND VALLEY REGIONAL 'MEDICAL
,0l.(X)l.N1'Y.:
''';=7~;Ai~-;ii'vi'~~~i;;'~.1~GF-~~.y,- ,/.
EnW.......-...-;...................~ .....~____o.d\. DONOY --..............,r
BL~;;~;;S~:~:;~~q:;.~~0TS~:>~.
......,..."......,......"
DYES 1iI..,
,to. Mn'ClPSV~
[!]YES 0'"
'n.USED.~C;MI5(l
[!]... 0'"
RIVERSIDE
aDU1MiJlEP'CltTlDlOCIClfID8rt
ffJvu . 0'"
20Q4:37:H
107. CAUSE: Of DEATH
~n CAUSE .....
~':,-.::. -+
..- III
_...
j: ............,.
~ ==~i: R
~ =-.::...
:: =:-......... p
:::t ,...,. lit..... LAST
..
<>
f""1-'J
......#''-- t
''"''
I
I
,
'lOll
I
I
Ill. OTHER StQHIFICANf(:oHDl1lON5COf1JRNIUTIl<<i TO DEAtHall' NOT AESU.nNO...... \I'IOEJIll.TlNG CAUSE GJVEM'" 107
NONE
111 wAS OPE~TJOH ~ FOR IlH'I CQHDfllON...fTEN '07 Oft 1127 ~)i'III...."...,.,.... ........J .
NO
d
B~
~li
......
<>
'M. I eann nut 10M .srtl'" IlJIOMJDGf gp1MCJCQJfIJIED
..'1Ml NOlA 1M1t.... PUCE 51'..1& IftOIlIM tlUSESSf_nt..
~___~ ~u.S-"'"
",- -
us. StGHATUAE Nfl) 'J'l.E 0# CERTJFlEA
~
.... 1YP'E A~ PHY$ICWf"S twIE. MAIUNG ADOAESS. ZP CODE
'III
,
,
,
tt.. .ctR'lrtlHAJ tt"",QI'lNlCJf(l(A1KOCQlMED "TTHE HOl.A 0.l1. NClPUCE $TA'Im AOIlHE ClUSESSUJB).
"""'0000.'''''0- [j]-O- 0....... D~. O~':::-
121.IUJRYOATE ~ fl2.~ C24"'"
06/15/2004 -0715
::; tZl. f'LACI,: OF ItUJRY ......__ ~............. ec.).
i!i
::
:>
...
k
...
%
o
I<
o
<>
INTERSECTION
,,,. DE$CAt8E HOW ftUIT occ:;uAAEO ~........... irljuryl
PASSENGER IN A VAN THAT ENTERED .iN INTERSECTION AND WAS STRUCK
.'
/
-t
.25. ~T1OH01lM.U1Y rsn- .......... ........__dl)o....ZII')
LAKE ELSINORE 92530
121. DATE ~ .a TYH NANL mu 0# COAONEA' DfP\nY COAONEJIl
06/17/2004 Jose R.Soto Supervising Dep. Coroner,
E FAX AUT"- . CEHSUS TRACT
CERT FlED COpy OF VITAL RECORD
I.
~
'!-E.
~.,
This is a true and exact reproduction of the document officially registered and placed on file
in !he olfice of Counly of Riverside, Department of Health.
DATE ISSUED 0 6/ 2 2/ 2004
ThIs copy not valtd ufilc:;" prc~~ on ;-ng;"v;, botdcr displaying scaJ and signature of Reg1s,RJ\OE
~ ~:::::. ::.::::_::~.;_:::_;'_;.::;_~.;:;;;.;_.......':;"L......"'...''''..._._....
GARY A. WALDRON
JOHN S. OLSON
SHERRY S. BRAGG
JANET L CALLISTER
DANE P. MILLER
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
City of Lake Elsinore
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
WALDRON & OLSON, LLP
ATTORNEYS A T LAW
26 CORPORA TE PLAZA DRIVE
SUITE 100
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660-7958
(949) 760-0204
TELECOPIER (949) 760-2507
November 15, 2004
Re: NOTICE OF CLAIM
To Whom It May Concern:
OF COUNSEL
CAROL A. FOSTER
DAVID I. LIpSKY
fD) ~~~DW~ 1m
.1n1 NOV 1 7 2004 ~
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Enclosed please find a Claim for Personal Injuries (Wrongful Death) submitted by
Cameron Hamilton, father on behalf of minor Sarah Lynn Hamilton, to the City of Lake
Elsinore.
You may contact the undersigned with any questions or comments you may have
concerning this Claim. Thank you very much.
WALDRON & OLSON, LLP
.~l~~RONHAMILTON'
father, on behalf of minor SARAH LYNN
HAMILTON
AG~NDA ITEM NO.
PAGE V
3
OF ((J
~
.....,
.....J
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
~
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
DATE: December 14,2004
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP 30493-1, a Residential Subdivision by Pardee
Homes located in the Canyon Hills Specific Plan at the northeast corner of
Canyon Hills Road and Hillside Drive.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map 30493 was approved at the regular City Council meeting on February 22, 2000
and a revision to this map was approved on November 23, 2004. Final Map 30493-1 represents a
further division of the original map and consists of 1075 acres that is divided into 26 residential sites,
one school site, one park site, three open space lots and 8 remainder lots for future residential
development. The project site is located east of Canyon Hills Road north of Hillside Drive.
FINDINGS
",-...
Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantiaIly to the tentative tract map and all
Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
I. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's acceptance as being true and correct
and accept all dedications at time of recordation.
2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation.
PREPARED BY:
CO
APPROVED BY:
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
CITY MANAGER'S
",-...
Attachment: Final Map
AQENDA ITEM NO. L{
PAGE~.OF~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
,-...
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
DATE: December 14,2004
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP 30493-2, a Residential Subdivision by Pardee
Homes located south of Railroad Canyon Road and northwest of Canyon Hills
Road.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map 30493-2 was approved at the regular City Council meeting on November 23,
2004. Final Map 30493-2 represents a further division of the original map No. 30493-1 and consists
of 22.697 gross acres that are divided into 57 residential sites and 2 landscape maintenance
easements. The project site is located in the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan area.
FINDINGS
,-...
Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantially to the tentative tract map and all
Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's acceptance as being true and correct
and accept all dedications at time of recordation.
2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation.
PREPARED BY: Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager tat$
APPROVED BY:
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
CITY MANAGER'S OFFI
,-. Attachment: Final Map
AGENDA iTEM NO. S
PAOE_ \ Of 1
-
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
~
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
DATE:
December 14,2004
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP 30846, a Residential Subdivision by KB Homes
located in the Rancho La Laguna Specific Plan at the southwest corner of
Corydon Street and Grand Avenue.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map 30493 was filed, amended and approved at the regular City Council meeting on
August 26,2003. Final Map 30846 consists of 74.203 gross acres divided into 222 residential sites,
with lots reserved for flood control purposes, wetland remediation, a passive park purposes, wetland
and open space purposes. The project site is located between Palomar Street and Corydon Street and
north of Grand Avenue.
FINDINGS
~ Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantially to the tentative tract map and all
Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's acceptance as being true and correct
and accept all dedications at time of recordation.
2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation.
PREPARED BY:
Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager ~
APPROVED BY:
~
APPROVED FOR ~ JD(1J~ {l
AGENDA LISTING: ~.. . dl
CITY M NAGER'S OFFIC
Attachment: Final Map
ACENDA ITEM NO. rp
PACE I OF I
- -
,........
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
DATE: December 14,2004
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP 31917, a Residential Subdivision by K
HovnanianlForecast located west of Grand Avenue and north of McVicker
Canyon Park Road.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map 31917 was approved at the regular City Council meeting on January 20, 2004.
Final Map 31917 represents a further division of the original parcel map No. 32335 and consists of
51.02 gross acres that are divided into 103 residential sites and 7 open space lots. The project site is'
located in the La Laguna Estates Specific Plan.
FINDINGS
,.........
Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantially to the tentative tract map and all
Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's acceptance as being true and correct
and accept all dedications at time of recordation.
2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation.
PREPARED BY:
Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager ~
,.........
APPROVED FOR it Jh I . I~ oJ
AGENDA LISTING: JJIYJJ,J.iI ~
CITY MANAGER'S OFF E fI
Attachment: Final Map
APPROVED BY:
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7
PAGE \ OF
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
I""'"
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RICHARD WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE: DECEMBER 14, 2004
SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF $3 MILLION BOAT LAUNCH FACILITY GRANT
FROM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF BOATING & WATERWAYS
BACKGROUND
I""'"
In April 2002 the City applied for a state grant to rehabilitate the boat launch facility at the
Lake Elsinore Recreation Area (LERA) & Campground. A total grant allocation of $3 million
was approved by the California Department of Boating & Waterways on November 14,2003,
in conjunction with Phase I funding in the amount of $817,000. The City delayed acceptance
of the grant until a supplemental engineering & economic feasibility report by Noble
Consultants Inc. (NCI) was near completion, in which NCI evaluated various alternatives and
detailed a cost-effective design to rehabilitate the adjacent peninsula at the same time as the
boat launch facility. City Staff received an e-mail version of this supplemental report on
December 6, 2004. In the interim, the California Department of Boating & Waterways
approved Phase II funding for the balance of the project in the amount $2,183,000 on August
12,2004.
DISCUSSION
Given the time span between the grant award and the City's consideration of acceptance of the
grant, it is imperative that the City Council accept the grant and approve the standard
agreement with the State of California post-haste or risk losing the grant funding.
Staff has not had an opportunity to fully evaluate the recently completed supplemental
engineering & economic feasibility report (see attached report). Furthermore, the City Council
may desire the Public Safety Advisory Commission to review the report prior to the Council
directing Staff to proceed with one of the four alternatives. Staff anticipates bringing forward
to the Council a recommended alternative and a plan to fund the project within the next 60
days for the combined rehabilitation of the boat launch facility and adjacent peninsula.
FISCAL IMPACT
",......
If at a later meeting, the City Council accepts the recommendation from Noble Consultants
Inc. to proceed with one of the two lower cost alternatives to rehabilitate the adjacent
peninsula in conjunction with the boat launch facility, then the City's share of the project costs
would range from $1,645,200 to $2,213,600. The City's CIP budget allocated $909,000 to the
project based on the original (April 2002) estimate from the engineering firm. The City will
need to source additional funding in the range of $736,200 to $1,304,600 to complete the
project.
~\ iTai ttJO.
PACE /
3
Of lic
The source of funding for the City's share of the project will come from a combination of
General Fund Revenues and Developer Park CIP Fees for FY '04-'05 & '05-'06.
~
ESTIMATED PROJECT BUDGET
Item Dollar Amount
Estimated Range of Total Project Costs $4,645,200 to $5,213,600
Cal-Dept of Boating & Waterways Grant ($3,000,000)
City's CIP Budgeted Amount ($909,000)
Range of additional funds required $736,200 to $1,304,600
RECOMMENDATION
Accept the $3 million grant award and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement
with the State of California's Department of Boating and Waterways.
PREPARED BY: Pat Kilroy, Director of..!--ake & Aquatic Resources
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
~(j)tI{~~1fI
Richard J. Wate paugh, City an er
~
....."
~ tT"~M f~O.
JW:ieL
~
Of l./D
,.........
LAKE ELSINORE
BOAT LAUNCHING FACILITY
$3,000,000 MULTI-YEAR
GRANT CONTRACT
,.........
,-..
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~
PACE:3 OF 40
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STANDARD AGREEMENT
STD 213 (Rev 06/03)
AGREEMENT NUMBER
03-101-314
REGISTRATION NUMBER
3680
I. This Agreement is entered into between the State Agency and the Contractor named below:
STATE A(;ENCY'S NAME
DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND W A TERW A YS (DEPARTMENT)
CONTRACTOR'S NAME
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (GRANTEE)
2. The term of this
Agreement is:
November 17, 2003 (effective date) through (20 years from Date of Acceptance of the Project)
3. The maximum amount $ 3,000,000.00
of this Agreement is: THREE MILLION DOLLARS
4, The parties agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the following exhibits, which are by this reference, made a part of the
Agreement.
LAKE ELSINORE BOAT LAUNCHING FACILITY
Exhibit A - Small Craft Launching Facility Construction Grant and Operation Agreement
Exhibit A Attachment I - Department of Boating and Waterways Maintenance Guidelines
Exhibit B - Lake Elsinore Boat Launching Facility Feasibility Report
15 pages
4 pages
7 pages
.....,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties hereto.
CONTRACTOR California Depanmenl of General
Services Use Only
CONTRACTOR'S NAME lifother than an individual, stare whetherll corporation, partnenhip. etc.)
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
BY (Authorized Sixnalllre) / DATE SIGNEDI Do nut /',pe)
.€S
PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING
DICK WATENPAUGH, City Manager
ADDRESS
130 S. MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92530 ,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AGENCY NAME
DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND W A TERW A YS
BY (Authurized Sixnature) DATE SIGNED(Do not rIpe)
p<;
PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING D Exempl per:
RA YNOR TSUNEYOSHI, Director ~ ",
ADDRESS AGENDA ITEM NO.
2000 EVERGREEN STREET, SUITE 100 PACE L/ OF 40
SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95815-3888
/'"'
~
/'"'
REVISION 01/21/04
Exhibit A
SMALL CRAFT LAUNCHING FACILITY
CONSTRUCTION GRANT AND OPERATION AGREEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE 1 - DEFINITIONS .......... .................... .............................................................1
ARTICLE 2 - GRANTEE'S WARRANTIES ...................................................................1
ARTICLE 3 - TERM OF AGREEMENT ..........................................................................2
ARTICLE 4 - PHASE FUNDING OF GRANT / BUDGET CONTINGENCY..................2
ARTICLE 5 - DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT ..................................................................2
ARTICLE 6 - CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECT .............................................................4
ARTICLE 7- OPERATION OF PROJECT ......................................................................6
ARTICLE 8 - BREACH OF AGREEMENT ..................................................................... 8
ARTICLE 9 - CONCESSION AGREEMENTS ....................................................9
ARTICLE 10- LIABILITY AND FIRE INSURANCE ........................................................ 9
ARTICLE 11 - INSTALLATION OF OTHER FACILITIES ............................................10
ARTICLE 12 - SIGN REFERRING TO DEPARTMENT FINANCING ..........................10
ARTICLE 13 - DIRECTIONAL SIGNS ..........................................................................11
ARTICLE 14 - WAIVER OF RIGHTS ....................... ....................................................11
ARTICLE 15 - NOTICES ................ .................. ....................... ..................................... 11
ARTICLE 16 - REMEDIES NOT EXCLUSiVE..............................................................12
ARTICLE 17 - OPINIONS AND DETERMINATIONS...................................................12
ARTICLE 18 - ASSiGNMENT......... ....... ..... ............ ... ... ...... ... ...... ... ..... ....... ....12
ARTICLE 19 - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OBLIGATED .....................................12
ARTICLE 20 - LIABILITY.. .... ....... .... ....... .............................. ...... ............... ...12
ARTICLE 21 - PRIOR TERMINATION ............................................................13
AOENM.liiM~O. 1
PACiE ~- OF <-fo
REVISION 01/21/04
Exhibit A
SMALL CRAFT LAUNCHING FACILITY
CONSTRUCTION GRANT AND OPERATION AGREEMENT
...."
ARTICLE 22 - APPROVAL .................................................................... ......... .............13
ARTICLE 23 - AUDIT .......... .......... ..... ......... ...... ......... ..... ................. .............................13
ARTICLE 24 - RECYCLING CERTIFICATION ............................................................13
ARTICLE 25 - CERTIFICATION CLAUSES ................................................................14
ARTICLE 26- ANTITRUST CLAIMS ............................................................................ 14
ARTICLE 27 - CHILD SUPPORT COMPLIANCE ACT ................................................15
ARTICLE 28 - UNENFORCEABLE PROVISION .........................................................15
ARTICLE'29~ UNION ORGANIZING ............................................................... .............15
,
ARTICLE 30 - GOVERNING LAW ..................................................................15
...."
...."
11
AGENDA ITEM"RU.1 0
PAGE (0 OF 40
ARTICLE 2 - GRANTEE'S WARRANTIES
A. Grantee warrants that the obligation created by this Agreement will not create an
indebtedness or liability contrary to the provisions of Section 18 of Article XVI of the
Constitution of the State of California.
Grantee warrants that it has title to, or adequate interests in, the Project Area. Adequate
interests include, but are not limited to, the following:
~
E.
F.
G.
r'
H.
I.
J.
K.
r"
Exhibit A
ARTICLE 1 - DEFINITIONS
A. "Accounf': An interest bearing account to be established by the Grantee for the deposit
of Grant funds; such account is to be designated the "Boating Grant - Lake Elsinore
Boat Launching Facility Development Fund" which shall reflect all receipts and
,
expenditures of grant funds.
B. "Budget Act": The Legislature enactment of a budget in support of on-going programs
(appropriations) in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 or Article IV of the
Constitution of the State of California.
C. "Commission": The Boating and Waterways Commission.
D. "Date of Acceptance of the Project": The date specified on the Project Completion
Certification and which denotes the beginning of the Twenty (20) year portion of the
Grant term in accordance with Article 3 (A) of this Agreement.
"Departmenf': The Department of Boating and Waterways.
"Grant": Funds provided pursuant to Harbors and Navigation Code section 72.5 to finance all
or part of the Project Costs.
"Grantee": The Entity identified in Exhibit B (Feasibility Report).
"Project": The construction, improvement, acquisition, or maintenance of small craft
launching facility described in Exhibit B.
"Project Area": The real property, and improvements thereto, identified in Exhibit B, within
which the Project will be undertaken.
"Project Completion Certification": A fully executed Notice of Completion, or equivalent,
which states the Grantee has accepted the Project as complete on a specific date.
"Project Costs": Management, design, material and construction costs that are incurred by
the Grantee for the purpose of completing the Project. Project costs incurred:
1. For indirect or overhead charges may be reimbursed up to the maximum budget
amount for Engineering Costs as identified in Exhibit B (Feasibility Report - Cost
Estimate Table), and
2. Shall not include any expenses prior to the effective date of this Agreement.
B.
REVISION 01121104
ACENMlTfiMENO._ <t
PACE 7 OF 40_
Exhibit A
C.
1. Access to the Project Area by a maintained public way,
2. A right of passage over a waterway, open to the public, between the Project Area
and navigable waters, and
3. Easements or other rights of way outside the Project Area sufficient to provide
utilities and services to the Project.
Grantee warrants that there is no encumbrance, lien, easement, license, title, cloud or other
interest that may interfere with the Project Area or use thereof by the public.
'--'
ARTICLE 3 - TERM OF AGREEMENT
A. This Agreement, subject to any provision for prior termination, shall begin on the effective
date and shall continue for Twenty (20) years from the Date of Acceptance of the Project by
the Grantee.
B. This Agreement may be extended, amended or cancelled upon the written agreement of the
parties.
ARTICLE 4 - PHASE FUNDING OF GRANT / BUDGET CONTINGENCY
A. The Legislature has appropriated and this Agreement authorizes for expenditure
$817.000 as Phase I of the Project. All subsequent phases of a multi-year Agreement
are subject to prior appropriation by the Legislature. This Agreement shall authorize
subsequent phases for expenditure upon the Department's written notice specifying the
phase number arid amount appropriated.
B. It is mutually agreed that this contract may have been written before ascertaining the
availability of appropriation of funds. If the Budget Act of any subsequent year covered
under this Agreement does not appropriate sufficient funds for the Project; this
Agreement shall be of no further force and effect. In this event, the Department shall
have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to Grantee or to furnish any other
considerations under this Agreement and Grantee shall not be obligated to perform any
provisions of this Agreement.
C. If funding for any fiscal year is reduced or deleted by the Budget Act for purposes of this
Project, the Department shall have the option to either cancel this Agreement with no
liability occurring to the Department or offer an amendment to Grantee to reflect the
reduced amount.
'--'
ARTICLE 5 - DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT
A. The Department shall provide a Grant to the Grantee in the maximum amount stated on
STD 213 line 3 of this Agreement.
'-'"
2
. ~NnA iTEM NO._ ~.
AC~mSINOREl <y OF 4 a
PACE_ --
REVISION 01121104
r"
Exhibit A
B. The Department shall have no obligation to disburse any of the Grant unless and until the
Grantee demonstrates that it has acquired all permits necessary to construct and operate
the Project.
C. The Department shall have no obligation to disburse any of the Grant unless and until the
Grahtee demonstrates that it has satisfactorily complied with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) for the Project.
D. The Grantee shall deposit all Grant funds into the Account upon receipt.
E. Grant disbursements to cover Project Costs may be made either (1) in advance of Project
work or (2) after the occurrence of work (in arrears).
1. Grant advances shall be subject to the following conditions:
(a) The Grantee may request a Grant advance from the Department to cover
those Project Costs expected to occur in the succeeding Thirty (30) day
period.
(b) Requests for Grant advances may not be made more than once every Ninety
(90) days.
r"
('
REVISION 01/21104
(c)
The Grantee must request advances in writing. Invoices or other evidence
of Project Costs must accompany requests.
The Department may withhold from Grant advances an amount equal to Ten
Percent (10%) of each disbursement until the Department has accepted the
Project as complete and has approved all Project Costs. The Grantee shall
provide the following to the Department:
(i) A Project Completion Certificate (or equivalent)
(ii) An accounting of all Grant funds
All expenditures of advanced Grant funds must have prior approval of the
Department.
The Grantee shall place in the Account any advanced Grant funds that are
not required to meet immediate contractual obligations; any interest accrued
from such investments shall be deposited into the Account and applied
towards the Project Costs.
The Grantee shall request Department approval of the final expenditure of
advanced Grant funds no later than Thirty (30) days following the
Department's acceptance of the Project as completed.
The Grantee shall return to the Department all Grant funds, including
interest, remaining in the Account after all Project Costs have been paid no
ACiENDA ITEM NO. <=6
PACiE '1 OF qo
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
03ELSINOREl
3
C.
Exhibit A
later than Sixty (60) days following Date of Acceptance of the Project by the
Grantee.
2. Grant disbursements made in arrears shall be made as follows:
(a) The Grantee may request a Grant disbursement in arrears not more than
once every Thirty (30) days; paid invoices or other evidence of Grantee's
payment of Project Costs must accompany such requests.
(b) The Department may withhold from Grant disbursements an amount equal to
Ten Percent (10%) of each disbursement until the Department has accepted.
the Project as complete and has approved all Project Costs. The Grantee
shall provide the following to the Department:
(i) A Project Completion Certification (or equivalent)
(ii) An accounting of all Grant Funds
(c) The Grantee shall request final disbursement no later than Sixty (60) days
fbllbwing the Date of Acceptance of the Project by the Grantee.
F. The Department may withhold any Grant disbursement if the Grantee fails to comply with
any of the provisions of this Agreement.
G. Grant funds will not be advanced or approved for expenditure for Project Costs which the
Grantee has financed with funds from another source.
ARTICLE 6 - CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECT
A.
B.
The Grantee shall complete the Project no later than Five (5) years following the
effective date of this Agreement.
The Grantee shall, within Sixty (60) days of approval of this Agreement, provide the
Department with a Project Schedule showing the proposed dates of the following Project
phases or milestones: Beginning and ending of Grantee selection of the Project design
consultant; Department approval of the consultant Agreement; beginning and ending of
Project design; Department approval of final plans and specifications; beginning and
'V"
ending of Grantee advertising of Project for bids; Project bid opening date; Department
approval of construction Agreement; beginning and ending of Project construction;
acceptance of Project by the Grantee; and, submission of a Project Completion
Certificate to the Department.
The Grantee shall obtain from the Department advance written approval of the following:
1 . All bid documents prior to advertisement,
2. All contracts prior to award, and
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 10
<t
OF '/0
REVISION 01/21/04
03ElSINORE1
4
'-'
l'
I'
,.
~i
Ii
t;,
[i
F
i
L
~!
,,-...
~
,,-..
Exhibit A
D.
3. All construction change orders that increase or decrease the construction contract
amount by $5,000 or more.
All architectural and engineering contracts for plans and specifications shall require that the
plans and specification:
1. / Be prepared by persons licensed by the State of California to undertake the type of
design work required by the Project (engineer's/architect's certificate number to
appear on construction contract design documents),
2. Be submitted to the Department and Grantee on CD or DVD; all drawings shall be in
one of the following electronic file extensions: .DWG or .DXF, and specifications
shall be submitted in MS Word or WordPerfect format,
3. Become the property of the Grantee,
4. Provide for all Project facilities set forth in Exhibit B, and
5. Provide for shoreside facilities for removing waste from vessel holding tanks in
accordance with the Harbors and Navigation Code section 654.1 and Title 14,
California Administrative Code, section 5200.
All construction contracts of the Project shall:
1 . Be awarded in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations,
2. Contain the following clause: "Representatives of the Department of Boating and
Waterways shall be allowed access to all parts of the construction work",
3. Contain a clause stating that the Contractor and its subcontractors shall not
unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment against any employee who is
employed in the work covered by such contracts or against any applicant for such
employment because of sex, sexual orientation, race, color, ancestry, religious
creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability,
medical condition (cancer), age, martial status, and denial of family care leave, and
that such provisions shall include, but not be limited to: employment, upgrading,
promotion or transfer, recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination,
rates of payor other forms of compensation, and selection for training including
apprenticeship,
4. Contain a clause that the construction contractor shall comply with all air pollution
and environmental control rules, regulation, ordinances and statutes which apply to
the Project and any work performed pursuant to this Agreement, and
5. Contain a clause that requires the construction contractor to ensure the structural
integrity and safety of the Project.
E.
REVISION 01/21/04
03ELSINORE1
AOENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 1/
2
OF 4~
5
Exhibit A
F.
Prior to the commencement of the construction of the Project, the Grantee shall cause the
contractor and a corporate surety acceptable to the Department to furnish in favor of the
Grantee and the Department, as their interests may appear, bonds or other security interests
as allowed pursuant to Public Contract Code sections 10263 and 22300 in the minimum
amounts indicated below:
1. Faithful performance- One Hundred Percent (100%) of the total contract bid price.
2. Labor and materials - One Hundred Percent (100%) of the total contract bid price.
The Grantee's personnel and construction of the Project shall be under the supervision of ,
qualified inspectors. Inspection reports and related inspection data shall at all reasonable
times be accessible to the Department personnel, and on request copies of such reports and
data shall be provided to the Department by the Grantee.
Time is of the essence in this Agreement.
G.
H.
ARTICLE 7- OPERA TfON OF PROJECT
A. The Grantee shall not transfer its interest in the Property Area without the written
approval of the Department.
B. The Project and all other improvements constructed or placed in the Project Area shall be
operated as a recreational boat launching facility. The Project Area shall be open to all
recreational vessels, including vessels powered by 2-stroke and 4-stroke gasoline engines,
at all times during, the term of this Agreement except as approved by the Department and
Commission. Notwithstanding Harbors and Navigation Code section 660, any non-
emergency restrictions related to time-of-day use, speed zones, special-use areas, or
pollution control measures in the Project Area which result in closure or partial closure of
waterways in the project area to any recreational vessel shall be subject to prior approval by
the Department and Commission. Failure to obtain prior approval of the Department and
Commission for such restrictions shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and may result
in penalties set forth in Article 8 (3).
C. The Grantee (or any lessee or concessionaire operating under the authority of the Grantee)
shall not charge a fee or combination of fees totaling more than $13.00 to include but not
limited to the following activities within the Project Area: vessel launch and retrieval, parking,
entry, day-use, and water-use. However, such total fee may be increased annually in
accordance with percentage changes in the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Price
Index (CPI) using the U.S. City Average (1982-84 = 100) for July 2001 (177.5) as the base
for any such adjustment. Any adjustment exceeding the annual percentage change in the
CPI shall be made only after the Grantee obtains the written approval of the Department.
REVISION 01/21104
ACENMtfJleM NO.
PACE / a
6
.......,
"
. ..., ii
........ ~ I
I
i'
It
1::
i!]
!il
i'
ii
~i
rz
OF i..{ 0
I"'"'"
D.
~
I"'"'"
E.
Exhibit 'A
The Grantee shall maintain the Project Area and all improvements funded by this Agreement
in accordance with the Department of Boating and Waterways Maintenance Guidelines
("Guidelines"), a copy of which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. The
Dep,artment and its agents may, at any and all reasonable times during the term of this
,
Agreement, enter the Project Area for purposes of inspecting the Project Area to determine if
the facility is being maintained according to the Guidelines. The Grantee shall:
1. Provide to the Department, within Sixty (60) days of approval by the Department of
General Services of this Agreement, a maintenance schedule for approval detailing
how each objective of the attached Guidelines will be addressed within the Project
Area over the term of this Agreement. Each objective of the Guidelines must be
considered; any objectives that are not applicable to a Grantee shall be included in
the schedule with notation that such objective does not apply to this Project Area.
The Department shall not unreasonably withhold its approval; however, it is the
Grantee's responsibility to ensure that such maintenance schedule adequately
addresses Grantee's responsibilities and each objective. The Department's written
approval of the maintenance schedule shall be required before any funds are
disbursed.
2. Follow its approved maintenance schedule throughout the term of this Agreement.
Failure to maintain the facility according to the maintenance schedule is a breach of
this Agreement and shall preclude the Grantee from receiving any future grants.
3. Update its maintenance schedule outlined in the Guidelines. Grantee must receive
the prior written approval of the Department for updates to its maintenance schedule.
The Department shall not be liable for any costs of maintenance, management, control or
operation of the Project Area.
The Project shall be open and accessible for the use and enjoyment by the general public on
equal and reasonable terms.
All Project Area facilities shall be maintained and operated with due regard to public safety
and in accordance with all applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations. All contracts relating
to the operation of the Project shall include a nondiscrimination and compliance clause as
referenced on Article 6 (E.3).
All concession agreements for operation of the Project shall provide the following:
1. Fees paid to the Grantee by the concessionaire for the operation and maintenance
of the Project (usually a percentage of gross receipts) may only be for "reasonable
F.
G.
H.
REVISION 01/21/04
03ElSINORE1
ACENDAITEM NO. 1
PACE /3 OF 40
7
2.
Exhibit A
administrative charges" so as not to motivate the Grantee to turn over the operation
and maintenance of the Project for purely profit considerations.
Fees paid to the concessionaire for use of the facility shall be no greater than those
allowed in this Agreement.
Tile concessionaire shall operate the Project and all other improvements placed in
the Project Area as a recreational boat launching facility.
The Project shall be open and accessible for the use and enjoyment by the general
public on equal and reasonable terms.
All Department signs shall be kept permanently in place.
3.
4.
5.
ARTICLE 8 - BREACH OFAGREEMENT
The Department through written notice may require the Grantee to remedy (to Department's
satisfaction) any breach of this Agreement within Ninety (90) days of the date of such notice. The
Department may extend"the time permitting remedy of the breach if the Grantee begins such remedy
within the said period; however, if the Grantee fails to proceed with or complete any remedial action
within the time allowed, and then the Department may take one of the following steps:
1. The Department may take any action to correct the breach. The Grantee shall be
liable for all costs, including administrative costs, incurred in the course of correcting
the breach;
2. The Department may require the Grantee to repay the Department for all Project
Costs covered by the Grant; the Grantee shall make such repayment within One
Hundred Eighty (180) days of the close of the fiscal year within which Department
demands repayment. Repayment shall be determined by the Department on a
prorated unexpired term basis.
3. ,In the event the Grantee adopts a time-of-day, speed zones, special-use area, or
pollution control measures which restrict the Project Area, or results in its closure or
partial closure to any form of recreational vessel, the Department may determine the
percentage of boaters affected and, with the concurrence of the Commission, may
require the Grantee to repay the Grant on a prorated unexpired term basis for that
percentage of all Project Costs covered by the Grant. The Grantee shall make such
repayment within One Hundred Eighty (180) days of the close of the fiscal year within
which a Department demands repayment. Repayment shall be made according to a
schedule determined by the Department after consultation with Grantee.
REVISION 01/21/04
\l~ElSINORE1
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE I Y
8
""'"
""'"
""'"
S
OF 40
Exhibit A
,,-...
ARTICLE 9- CONCESSION AGREEMENTS
All concession agreements for the operation and maintenance of the Project Area must have the
written approval of the Department prior to award. The Department will approve such concession
agreements only when the Grantee can demonstrate that private sector operation is the best
available al~ernative. Concession agreements of a short-term duration (five years or less) are
preferred, with renewal based upon performance reviews by both the local governmental agency
and the Department. Any concession agreement for operation and maintenance of greater than
five years shall require the concessionaire to make a capital investment in the Project Area.
~
ARTICLE 10 - LIABILITY AND FIRE INSURANCE
A. The Grantee shall insure the Project through one of the following alternatives:
ALTERNATIVE I
The Grantee shall maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement the
following insurance in the minimum amounts specified:
Bodily Injury or Death: $300,000 each person
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Property and Product Damage $500,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 aggregate
Fire Insurance 90% of the full insurable value of all
insurable components of the Project.
ALTERNATIVE II
1. The Grantee agrees that all contracts between it and the designer (or designers)
responsible for design and preparation of plans and specifications of the Project
shall contain a clause requiring said designer(s) to obtain Architect's Professional
Liability (errors and omissions) Insurance in the amount of $250,000.
2. The Grantee agrees that all contracts between it and the contractor (or contractors)
responsible for construction of the Project shall contain a clause which requires the
contractor(s) to obtain insurance in the minimum amounts specified in Alternative I.
3. The Grantee prior to acceptance and operation of the Project shall procure and
maintain in full force and effect during the remainder of the term of this Agreement
insurance in the amounts specified in Alternative I.
ALTERNATIVE III
1. The insurance requirements specified in the preceding Alternative I may be satisfied
~ to the extent that the Grantee can provide comparable protection for the Grantee and
the Department by virtue of the Grantee's participation in any "risk management"
REVISION 01/21/04
03ELSINORE1
i
OF LfO
,
~
9
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE J S-
E.
Exhibit A
B.
plan, self insurance program, insurance pooling arrangement, or any combination of
these, provided that the protection plan has been reviewed by the Department.
Copies of any policy or policies, including any new or renewal policy, shall be in a form
satisfactory to the Department. Copies of such policy or policies shall be submitted to the
Department at least Twenty (20) days prior to the effective date or dates thereof.
Under Alternative I above, any policy or policies shall contain the following endorsement:
The State of California, its officers, employees and agents are hereby
declared to be additional insured under the terms of this policy, as to
activities of both the Grantee and the Department in respect to the Project,
and this policy shall not be cancelled without Thirty (30) days prior written
notice to the Department.
Loss under any fire insurance policy shall be payable to the Department for deposit in an
appropriate trust fund with the State of California. The proceeds may be paid to the Grantee
upon the Grantee's application for the reconstruction of the destroyed facilities.
The Department shall not be responsible for the payment of any premiums or assessments
on Grantee's insurance policies.
....."
C.
D.
ARTICLE 11 -INSTALLATION OF OTHER FACILITIES
A. The Grantee may at its own expense place or cause to be placed within the Project Area any
structure, alterati<?n, and/or improvement in addition to those set forth and described in
Exhibit B, provided that such facilities:
1. Are constructed, maintained and operated for the use, enjoyment protection and
service of the public,
2. Do not directly or indirectly reduce the service capabilities for the boating public
called for in Exhibit B including the sanitary and parking facilities, and
3. Have the prior written approval of the Department. Approvals shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
B. The Department shall not be obligated to make or cause to be made any alteration,
improvement, or repair to any facilities within the Project Area in addition to the original
construction to the Project as provided for herein.
ARTICLE 12 - SIGN REFERRING TO DEPARTMENT FINANCING
The Grantee shall cause a permanent sign to be installed within the Project Area, which shall
include a statement that the Project was financed by the Department. The sign may contain
additional statements, which recognize the participation of other government agencies in the Project.
The sign shall be installed before the Project is made available to the public. The location and
REVISION 01/21/04 A~~'f)~lTEM NO.
10 PACE I (P
....."
'-'"
1
OF '-10
~
/'""'
l~
I
I
Exhibit A
I
make-up of the sign, including the dimensions, materials and lettering, require the prior approval of
the Department.
ARTICLE 13 - DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
The Grant~e shall at the direction of the Department cause permanent directional signs to be
installed, which shall provide adequate directions for reaching the Project Area. The signs shall be
installed on major roads in the area and in as close proximity as possible to freeway exits in
conformance with the provisions of the City's Development Code and CalTrans policy. The locations
and make-up of the signs, including the dimensions, materials, and lettering, require the prior
approval of the Department.
ARTICLE 14 - WAIVER OF RIGHTS
It is the intention of the parties to this Agreement that from time to time either party may waive, in
writing, certain rights under this Agreement. Any waiver by either party hereto of its rights with
respect to a default or any other matter arising in connection with this Agreement shall not be
deemed to be a waiver with respect to any other default or matter.
ARTICLE 15 - NOTICES
The parties agree that to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of the services performed
hereunder; the Grantee and the Department shall each designate specific staff representatives for
the purposes of communication between parties. Any notice or other written communication required
or which may be given hereunder shall be deemed given when delivered personally, or if mailed,
Three (3) days after the date of mailing; unless by express mail, facsimile (FAX) telecopy, e-mail, or
telegraph, then upon the date of confirmed receipt to the following representatives:
For the Department:
Department of Boating and Waterways
Attention: Ms. Sumer Goza, Contract Administrator
2000 Evergreen Street, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95815
Telephone Number: (916) 263-0585
FAX Number: (916) 263-0648
For the Grantee:
City of Lake Elsinore
Attention: Mr. Pat Kilroy, Director
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Telephone Number: (909) 471-7730
FAX Number: (909)
REVISION 01121/04
03ELSINORE1
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE J 7
<6
OF 40
11
f
f
[
f
Exhibit A
Either party hereto may, from time to time by notice in writing served upon the other as aforesaid,
designate a different mailing address or a different or additional person to which all such notices or
demands thereafter are to be addressed.
'-'"
ARTICLE 16 - REMEDIES NOT EXCLUSIVE
The use by either the Department or the Grantee of any remedy specified in this Agreement for the
enforcement of this Agreement is not exclusive and shall not deprive the party using such remedy
of, or limit the application of, any other remedy provided by law.
ARTICLE 17 - OPINIONS AND DETERMINATIONS
Where the terms of this Agreement provide for action to be based upon the opinion, judgment,
approval, review, or determination of either the Department or Grantee, such terms are not intended
to be and shall never be construed as permitting such opinion, judgment, approval, review, or
determination to be arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable.
ARTICLE 18- ASSIGNMENT
No assignment or transfer of this Agreement or any part hereof, rights hereunder, or interest herein
by the Grantee shall be valid unless and until it is approved by the Department in writing. The
Department's approval shall be granted at its sole discretion and may be made subject to such
reasonable terms and conditions as the Department may impose.
"-"
ARTICLE 19 - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OBLIGATED
This Agreement and all of its provisions shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the
parties hereto.
ARTICLE 20 - LIABILITY
A. The Grantee waives all claims and recourse against the Department including the right to
contribution for any loss or damage arising from, growing out of, or any way connected with
or incident to this Agreement.
B. The Grantee agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless, the Department, its officers,
agents and employees from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any and
all contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, laborers, and any other person, firm or corporation
furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the
performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting
to any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or damaged by Grantee in the
performance of this Agreement.
'-""
REVISION 01/21/04
AGENB'A1M1 NO. 1:
PAGE I t( OF <..fa
12
Exhibit A
JII""'"'
C. If the Department is named as a co-defendant pursuant to Government Code section 895, et
seq., the Grantee shall notify the Department and represent it unless the Department elects
to. represent itself. If the Department undertakes its own defense, it shall bear its own
litigation costs, expenses and attorney's fees.
ARTICLE 21 - PRIOR TERMINATION
This Agreement shall terminate on the date specified in Article 6 (A) of this Agreement if by such
date (1) the Grantee has not met all conditions precedent to disbursement under this Agreement, or
(2) the Department has disbursed no part of the Grant funds.
ARTICLE 22 - APPROVAL
This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both parties and approved by the Department
of General Services. Grantee may not commence performance until such approval has been
obtained.
ARTICLE 23 - AUDIT
Any contracts entered into by the Grantee involving an expenditure of Grant funds shall contain a
/'"" provision that the Department, the Department of General Services, the Bureau of State Audits, or
their designated representative shall have the right to review and to copy any records for possible
audit for a minimum of Three (3) years after final payment under such contract, unless a longer
period of records retention is stipulated. Grantee agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such
records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might
reasonably have information related. to such records. Further, Grantee agrees to include a similar
right of the Department to audit records and interview staff in any subcontract related to
performance of this Agreement. (Government Code section 8546.7, Public Contract Code section
10115 et seq., Title 2, California Administrative Code, section 1896)
ARTICLE 24 - RECYCLING CERTIFICATION
Upon the completion of performance under this Agreement, the Grantee shall certify in writing under
penalty of perjury, the minimum, if not exact, percentage of recycled content, both post consumer
material and secondary material as defined in the Public Contract Code sections 12161 and 12200,
in materials, goods, or supplies offered or products used in the performance of this Agreement,
regardless of whether the product meets the required recycled product percentage as defined in the
Public Contract Code sections 12161~and 12200. Grantee may certify that the product contains
~ zero recycled content. (Public Contract Code sections 10233, 10308.5,10354)
13
ACENMtfreM NO.
PACE / q
<6
OF t.j 0
REVISION 01/21/04
D.
Exhibit A
ARTICLE 25 - CERTIFICATION CLAUSES
The CONTRACTOR CERTlFICA TlON CLAUSES found at the following address:
htto://www.documents.das.ca.aov/olslccc-103.doc as of the effective date of this Agreement, are
hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 26- ANTITRUST CLAIMS
The Grantee by signing this Agreement hereby certifies that if services or goods are obtained by
means of competitive bid, the Grantee shall comply with the requirements of the following:
A.
The Government Code Chapter on Antitrust claims contains the following definitions:
1. "Public purchase" means a purchase by means of competitive bids of goods,
services, or materials by the State or any of its political subdivisions or public
agencies on whose behalf the Attorney General may bring an action pursuant to the
Business and Professions Code subdivision (c) of section 16750.
2. "Public purchasing body" means the State or the subdivision or agency making a
'\, ".
public purchase. Government Code section 4550.
In submitting a bid to a public purchasing body, the bidder offers and agrees that if the bid is
accepted, it will assign to the purchasing body all rights, title, and interest in and to all
causes of action it may have under the Clayton Act section 4 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 15) or under
the Cartwright Act (Chapter 2 (commencing with section 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the
Business and Professions Code), arising from purchases of goods, materials, or services by
the bidder for sale to the purchasing body pursuant to the bid. Such assignment shall be
made and become effective at the time the purchasing body tenders final payment to the
bidder. Government Code section 4552.
If an awarding body or public purchasing body receives, either through judgment or
settlement, a monetary recovery for a cause of action assigned under this chapter, the
assignor shall be entitled to receive reimbursement for actual legal costs incurred and may,
upon demand, recover from the public body any portion of the recovery, including treble
damages, attributable to overcharges that were paid by the assignor but were not paid by
the public body as part of the bid price, less the expenses incurred in obtaining that portion
of the recovery. Government Code section 4553.
Upon demand in writing by the assignor, the assignee shall, within one year from such
demand, reassign the cause of action assigned under this part if the assignor has been or
may have been injured by the violation of law for which the cause of action arose and (a) the
assignee has not been injured thereby, or (b) the assignee declines to file a court action for
the cause of action. See Government Code section 4554.
B.
c.
REVISION 01/21/04
14
03ELSINOREl <:{
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE au OF Lf 0
"-'
"-'
....."
Exhibit A
;--.
ARTICLE 27 - CHILD SUPPORT COMPLIANCE ACT
A. Grantee recognizes the importance of child and family support obligations and shall fully
comply with all applicable state and federal laws relating to child and family support
enforcement, including, but not limited to, disclosure of information and compliance with
ear~ings assignment orders, as provided in Chapter 8 (commencing with section 5200) of
Part 5 of Division 9 of the Family Code.
B. Grantee, to the best of its knowledge is fully complying with the earnings assignment orders
of all employees and is providing the names of all new employees to the New Hire Registry
maintained by the California Employment Development Department.
ARTICLE 28 - UNENFORCEABLE PROVISION
In the event that any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable or held to be unenforceable, then
the parties agree that all other provisions of this Agreement have force and effect and shall not be
affected thereby.
ARTICLE 29- UNION ORGANIZING
For all contracts, except fixed price contracts of $50,000 or less, the Grantee acknowledges that:
.;--.. A. Grantee will not assist, promote or deter union organizing by employees performing work
on a state service contract, including a public works contract.
B. No state funds received under this Agreement will be used to assist, promote or deter
union organizing.
C. Grantee will not, for any business conducted under this Agreement, use any state
property to hold meetings with employees or supervisors, if the purpose of such meetings
is to assist, promote or deter union organizing, unless the state property is equally
available to the general public for holding meetings.
D. If Grantee incurs costs, or makes expenditures to assist, promote or deter union
organizing, Grantee will maintain records sufficient to show that no reimbursement from
state funds has been sought for these costs, and that Grantee shall provide those
records to the Attorney General upon request.
Grantee, by signing this Agreement, acknowledges the applicability of Government Code section
16645 through section 16649 to this Agreement.
ARTICLE 30 - GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement is governed by and shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State
;--..
of California.
IS
ACENDA~NO.
PAGE ~I
1
OF 4 (]
REVISION 01/21/04
lake Elsinore
Boat launching Facility
$817,000 Phase I Grant
(Total Grant Amount of $3,000,000)
(Total Project Amount of $3,909,000)
SUMMARY
'-'"
The City of Lake Elsinore has applied to the
Department of Boating and Waterways for a
$3,000,000 grant to make improvements to
the Lake Elsinore Boat Launching Facility
(BLF) on Lake Elsinore. This report concerns
the Phase I grant of $817,000.
The Lake Elsinore BLF is located about 75
miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles,
about 22 miles south of the City of Riverside,
and about 80 miles north of the City of San '-'"
Diego.
Lake Elsinore BLF was originally constructed in 1965 . There is an existing ramp that is useable
only during lake levels between 1,232 and 1,240 feet. The area surrounding the existing ramp is
all unimproved consisting of unpaved earth and vegetation. There are no existing restrooms at
the site except for two portable toilets, no paved parking lots, no
paved road, or any other launch ramp site amentities.
The proposed project entails the following: (1) six-lane boat
launching ramp, (2) three boarding floats, (3) 288 vehicle/trailer
parking area, (4) service area with six employee and four barrier-
free access parking spaces, (5) launch ramp apron and staging
area, (6) four-unit, barrier-free access restroom building, (7) boat
wash-down area, (8) fish-cleaning station, (9) sanitation pumpout
system, (10) landscaping, (11) and picnic area & restroom
lighting.
The benefit/cost ratio must be greater than unity (1.00) before
public investment in a project is justified. This project is
considered economically feasible with a benefit/cost ratio of
4.10.
'-'
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1
PAGE a;;). OF 40
Department of Boating and IJ'merh'llp \ (H'cmber 2003
~
INTRODUCTION
Grant Applicant
The grant applicant for this project is the City of
Lake Elsinore.
Project Identification
The proposed project will involve improvements
to the Lake Elsinore Boat Launching Facility
(BLF).
/"""'"
Proposed Project
Project Location
The Lake Elsinore BLF is located about 75 miles
southeast of downtown Los Angeles, about 22
miles south of the City of Riverside and about
80 miles north of the City of San Diego.
".-.
Lake Elsinore BLF
Access to Project
The Lake Elsinore BLF can be reached from
Interstate 15 (115) from either the south or north.
Heading south on 115 from Corona, exit Central
Avenue (State Highway 74), turn right onto
Central Avenue, turn right onto Collier Avenue,
turn left onto Riverside Drive, and proceed
about 2.5 miles on Riverside Drive to the facility
on the left hand side. Heading north on 115 from
San Diego exist Main Street, turn left onto Main
Street, turn right onto Graham Avenue, (which
becomes Lakeshore Drive),
turn left onto Riverside Drive,
and proceed about 0.5 miles on
Riverside Drive to the facility on
the left hand side.
Area Description
Lake Elsinore BLF was originally constructed
in 1965. There is an existing ramp that is
useable only during lake levels between 1,232
and 1,240 feet. The area surrounding the
existing ramp is all unimproved consisting of
unpaved earth and vegetation. There are no
existing restrooms -at the site except for two
portable toilets, no paved parking lots, no paved
road, or any other launch ramp site amentities.
Lake Elsinore is located in one of the most
rapidly growing areas in Southern California.
Lake Elsinore is very popular for a wide variety
ACENDA ITEM NO.2 cj
PACE ;;)3 OF <-to
Depflrtlllem of Boatil/g al/d If 'ate/'lI'a)'s SOI'ember 2003
of water sport enthusiasts. All forms of
recreation are practiced here, including
waterskiing, personal watercrafting, wake
boarding, general pleasure boat cruising,
fishing, sailing, rowing and swimming. Roughly
95% of the use on Lake Elsinore has been
estimated to be some form of power boating.
The lake also has a designated "high speed"
area marked by bouys in the center of the lake
where there is no speed limit. Lake Elsinore is
also used for powerboat racing, water ski racing
and sailing regattas.
Previous Commission Action
The Boating and Waterways Commission has
previously consented to the following grant to
the City of Lake Elsinore, for development of
the boat launching facility at the Seaport
BLF(located on the other side of the lake):
In FY 1994/95 the Commission approved a
$800,000 grant to construct a 8-lane boat
launching ramp, boarding floats, construct a
223 vehicle/trailer parking area, construct
restroom facilities, lighting, landscaping, signs
and amenities.
Proposed Project
The proposed project entails the following: (1)
six-lane, 114' wide x 210' long boat launching
ramp, (2) three 8' wide x 100' long boarding
floats, (3) 288 vehicle/trailer parking area, (4)
service area with six employee and four
barrier-free access parking spaces, (5) launch
ramp apron and staging area, (6) four-unit,
barrier-free access restroom building, (7) boat
wash-down area, (8) fish-cleaning station, (9)
sanitation pumpout system, (10) landscaping,
(11) and picnic area & restroom lighting.
Lake Elsinore BLF
Conclusion
There are no particularly difficult or unusual
problems associated with this project and it falls
within the normal range of practice for design
and construction of projects of this type.
Therefore, the proposed project is considered
feasible from an engineering standpoint at a
total estimated cost of $3,909,000.
""""
Cost Estimate
Project Item DBW CITY
Demolition $ 11,000
Earthwork/Fill $ 1,405,000
Boat Launching Ramp 236,000
Boarding Floats 146,000
Parking Area 355,000
Ramp ApronlStaglng Area 137,000
Restroom 103,000
Walkways 2,000
Slope Protection 535,000
Storm Drainage 26,000
Utilities 60,000
Boat Washdown Area 6,000
Fish Cleaning Station ~
Landscaping 44,000
Signs Ullll
SUBTOTALS $ 2.386.000 685.000
CONSTRUC.SUBTOTAL $ 3.071.000
Contingency 279,000
Engineering 335,000
inspection 140,000
Permits- M.ll.ll.lI
TOTAL $ 3,000,000 909,000
GRAND TOTAL $ 3,909,000
*The City of Lake Elsinore will be funding aU inspection and permit fees.
"-"
ECONOMIC ANAL YSIS
Much of the data below was derived from the 2002
California Boating Facilities Needs Assessment
(BNA) - a comprehensive assessment of boats
and boating facilities statewide. Volumne V -
Boating Economic Assessments and Facilities
Demand Projections - summarizes the economic
benefits of boating to California, the values of
recreational boating in California, and the demand
projections for boating and boating facilities derived
from the 2001 California Boats and Boaters Survey
(88S).
""""
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE cXY
3<K
OF 40
Departlllellt of BOiltillg alld 1/'atenmys .\o\'e/llba 2003
r"
INTRODUCTION
The economic justification of any proposed
project rests upon a comparison of the benefits
and costs attributable to the project. A benefit/
cost analysis is performed to demonstrate
whether the total cost of a project to society is
justified by its overall benefit to society. A project
is deemed beneficial and therefore economically
feasible when total benefits equal or exceed total
costs. A glossary with data sources follows this
section.
The Benefit/Cost Process
The first step in the benefit/cost analysis is to
determine annual benefits. Annual benefits are
determined by calculating the annual base year
user days (Table 1A) and the annual percentage
growth rate (Table 1 B). These two are multiplied
to give the project user days per year. The
project user days per year are multiplied by a
user day value plus the expected annual percent
",..-..
increase in the Consumer Price Index to give
.annual benefits (Table 2).
Next, annual costs are determined by multiplying
the existing or projected annual boat launches
for the facility by the cost per boat launching and
the expected annual percent cost escalation rate
to give annual costs. If there is no charge for
2003 2023
~~~<.~6:.t~,t,lqij(;ifu low
high
A~RUM~!iIlfla\i
",..-..
boat launching at the facility, a standard cost is
substituted in the equation (Table 3).
Project benefits per year and project operating
costs per year are then discounted to yield their
net present value. Since the value of a dollar is
considered to be greater in the present year than
Lake Elsinore BLF
-.......
~. ,,' ' ..", ~
: ;,' :.' .::.:' '-",' -- '~-" ;" ~.". ..,',' - " .
~ "" "
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
in some future year, a discount rate is applied in order
to de-inflate the future dollars and to convert the
benefits and costs occuring over the 20 year grant
period to a present day value. In this manner, the
present day value may be comparable to other values
in the present.
The sum of the present benefits and the discounted
future benefits is the net present value of the project
(Table 4). The sum of the present costs, including
capital costs, and the discounted future costs is the
net present cost of the project (Table 5).
The net present value of benefits is then divided by
the net present value of costs to yield the benefit/
cost ratio. The benefit/cost ratio must be greater
than unity (1.00) before public investment in a project
is justified (Table 6). .
ANNUAL BENEFITS
Annual base year user days for this project are
113,400. (Table 1A). The annual percentage growth
rate is 2.2% (Table 1B). Annual benefits are shown
in Table 2. The net present value of benefits is shown
in Table 4.
AGENDA ITEM N~.
PAGE a~ OF
1
40
Departme/lt of Boating ana IJ 'utefl\,(/Ys ,\'Ol'ember 1003
ANNUAL COSTS
Annual costs are shown in Table 3. The net
present value of costs is shown in Table 5.
BENEFIT/COST RATIO
The benefit/cost ratio for this project is 4.1 0 (Table
6). This means that estimated benefits exceed
estimated costs. The construction of this project
is, therefore, economically justified.
GLOSSARY/DATA SOURCES
1. Annual Base Year User Days - annual boat
launches times average persons aboard a boat.
2. Annual Boat Launches - existing or projected
yearly boat launches at a facility, estimated by the
grantee, or from regional data from the BBS.
3. Average Persons Aboard a Boat - regional data
from the BBS.
4. Annual Percentage Growth Rate - the average
of the low and high boat usage (over the 20-year
Lake Elsinore BLF
life expectancy of the project) derived from boat
forecasts regional data for boats less than 26 foot
in length. ,....,
5. Boat Forecasts Regional Data - boat ownership
in California by region and boat length through
2020. Data sources include DMV Year-End Boat
Registration Report; DMV Boat Registration Data
Tapes; California Department of Finance, County
Population Estimates for January 1; California
Department of Finance, Interim County Population
Projections; US MARAD, Merchant Vessels of the
U.S.
6. User Day Value - the measure of the value of
one day of recreation to the user. For the purposes
of this analysis, it is the value of recreation provided
by publicly accessible waterways and boating
facilites within California. The user day value was
~13:i';(~
Year
Benefits
Benefits
.,....,
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
_"'lI'ftli~
t y..~ .... ~ :. ,;.; - :. : J,.;;', ,:,...,m:f1,g]'
The discount rate being used is 4.50%. This is equivalent
to the interest rate being charged by the Department of
Boating and Waterways on its public loans. Present value
is determined by dividing future benefits by (1+r)n, where
r is the discount rate and n is the number of years into the
future.
.,....,
ACENDA ITEM NO. 5 <;?
PACE Q. to OF '-/0,
Department of Boating and Waterways .\ovembel' JOO]
,-..
determined by using a technique known as the
travel cost method. The travel cost method
assumes that an individuals willingness to pay time
and travel expenses for a a recreational outing can
be estimated based on the number of trips that they
make at different travel costs. These costs can
then be used as a proxy to estimate the "price" of
recreation.
The BBS estimated a travel cost per day for
recreational boating in California, which was then
divided by the average number of persons aboard
a boat on an average boating trip. This yielded an
average travel cost per person per day of boating
of $17.89. This is the user day value used in this
benefit/cost analysis.
7. Consumer Price Index - monthly data on
changes in the prices paid by urban consumers
for a representative basket of goods and services.
.,,-....,
....i!.~~I\1ti1i i 1[.~l:\Jl~~
Year
Capita'
Costs
Discount
Factor
Cost
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~'.Jf;;\~~l'li'.tl
~
The discount rate being used is 4.50%. This is equivalent to the interest
rate being charged by the Department of Boating and Waterways on its
public loans. Present value is detennined by dividing future benefits by
(l....)n. where r is the discount rate and n is the number of years into
the future.
Lake Elsinore BLF
8. Boat launching fees - existing or projected fees
for boat launching from grantee.
9. Annual Percentage Cost Escalation Rate- the
annual percent increase in the 20-city average of
the construction cost index.
10. Standard cost - The cost to be used in the
calculation of annual costs when the boat
launching facility does not charge a fee. This cost
($5.23) is derived from a DBW Fee Survey
completed in August 2001.
11. Regional Data -In the BNA, California is divided
into ten regions: north coast, san francisco, central
coast, south coast, san diego, northern interior,
sacramento basin, central valley, eastern sierra,
and southern interior. This project is located in
the s.outhern interior region.
Financial Considerations
Project funding is derived from the gasoline taxes
paid by boaters in California, and the repayment
of loan principal and interest. After the project is
funded, the grantee must maintain the facility for
20 years at no additional cost to the Department.
The completed project will be open to all on an
equal and reasonable basis. There is a $14.00
fee to launch a boat at the Lake Elsinore BLF.
RECOMMENDA TION:
In view of the foregoing demonstration of the
project's engineering and financial feasibility,
the Department of Boating and Waterways
recommends that the Boating and Waterways
Commission consent to the phase I grant of
$817,000 to the City of Lake Elsinore for
improvements to the Lake Elsinore BLF.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE ;;11
6 i
OF 40
DejJartment of Boating ami" 'cltenmys .\ol'cmbe/' 2003
LAKE ELSINORE
BOAT LAUNCHING FACILITY
.......,
~---------~"==-~~~-__~-::~j ------l1 t-l
I ". .~--,...~ .,.-" .:::J..'__. ct. .' ..,.... I 1
,:-;:'. -,'-. , :!i.~ 0 ~ i.!
, ! . .~ Z . "~c!! I ,
" ..~",. , W.. '0 g'~i' / i:' I
/ ." /:Z:a.tr'"':~...'i ~
1 .) .",. $;z:.., .,..0<( ...XO,J;j i ~. 1
I~'. :.~'\;jl ...;5~ (QfVjtL/;:t 1
---"\.'::yt~: .t.D;~......, ....' 11 c
: , II'; " / (/ ,./_J ~ :
I ; .../'\, ' Hi! -F . ,.'tt I,',' .! 1
1 , .\ '----, ~ 1
, I \ " I
\ .
I ,!~---~"-- """. \~ I
::- '--;:~i I
I ~ I
J
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.......,
I-~
I----~
I
I i
Ill-~I-~~~. ....'."-7<,-_"
· ~!f'~,,~~,~~ "''-,
I I4JW liiii;>-. .- -~
1_ ;cl.<..-9 -,>' '"
""''-, ::(.l!(
'! ~~""~11-",,_
I i l ~~ - "
",.t.' """',a/i' /"
!-llG~"'-'-~' ,
1 'NO. "-..
L__________..2''''''-_
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
___-.=.._~___J
.......,
Lake Elsinore BLF
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 ~
PAC~OF Lfo
~
---J
,,- --. :
NOBLE
CONSULTANTS. INC.
December 3, 2004
731-12
Mr. Pat Kilroy
Director, Lake & Aquatic Resources Department
City of Lake Elsinore
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
RE: Supplement to: Engineering & Economic Feasibility Report for Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements (April 2002).
Dear Mr. Kilroy:
/""
Weare pleased to submit this supplement report that provides additional engineering and
economic analysis to evaluate lower cost alternatives for the rehabilitation of the boat launch
facility and peninsula at the Lake Elsinore Campground Boat Launching Facility. This report
supplements our April 2002 Engineering & Economic Feasibility Report, as agreed to in the
Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Lake Elsinore that we received on October
25, 2004. The purpose of this supplement analysis is to enhance the operational safety of the
Lake Elsinore shoreline in conjunction with the future boat launching ramp improvements. The
recommended supplement improvements expand the project area to the southwest side of the
boat launching facility by including earthwork shoreline modifications to the existing peninsula
breakwater and alternative improvements along the southwestern edge of the boat launching
ramp (Figure 1). They address the following two objectives:
1. Either eliminate or barricade abrupt vertical grade changes, which could be potentially
hazardous to recreational lake users. Generally, reducing the peninsula, which currently
acts as a breakwater to the launch ramp, improves the uniformity of the shoreline.
2. To the extent practicable, provide waterfront protection to the boat launch ramp without
compromising water safety for recreational users.
Four conceptual plans were compiled to satisfy these objectives in varying degrees and, to the
extent possible, within the range of the project budget. Noble Consultants Inc. (NeI) performed
cursory engineering and economic assessment evaluations for each of the four alternatives. The
two highest-ranking alternatives were then to be re-examined more thoroughly to select a
preferred alternative. However, the initial selection was complicated by subjective differences
between alternatives. Therefore, to make certain that each alternative could be fully understood
before making a selection, a full analysis of each alternative was determined to be more
beneficial. Based on cost comparisons as well as operational safety, functional and durability
/""
LJ NOV,no; ~5'J IlEL MARIN KEYS DLVD~ S\!ITE ? NOVATO. C'I. ')<i949.'S(,.n (41 'i) HIH .U'727 fAX H I 'i) 1;I&HJf_\S
; i IRVINE; 22(11 Ot'I'ONT DR.. 5\TfE t.10.IRVINEc C\ ')26J2.'SfJ9 (949) 7'>2-1 'Bn HX iO)"')} 712-83KI
LJ SAN I)Il'K;O;'>~.!''' OAK80LRNE RfLs'\Nn::E.CA92!l'7l-HH ((,\0)) 'i9(J-')'iU! FAX ii,19> 448.;w:n
h np :/lw"t\V.j\<)b!ecdlumltamS.O:Oll\
ACENDA ITEM NO._ ~
PACE_ act _OF ,-/0
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mr. Pat Kilroy
City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3,2004
Page 2 of7
'-""
criteria, NCI selected the most favorable improvement plan and provided recommendations for
its implementation. This report highlights the functional and cost characteristics identified by
NCI for each alternative.
The four alternative plans considered in this Supplement report are as follows:
1. Eliminate the Peninsula and Breakwater. This plan calls for the elimination of the
existing peninsula breakwater along the west side of the boating channel and smoothing
the contours uniformly along the shoreline west of the boat launch, in both a north to
south direction and a west to east direction (Figure 2).
2. Floating Dock System. This plan calls for reducing the peninsula until it is equal with
the existing line of the marina basin's outer breakwater (sand spit), and substituting the
west most launch ramp boarding dock with a more substantial, and longer, pile anchored
floating dock system. to serve as a breakwater barrier. Since this alternative does not
completely barricade the shoreline along the launch ramp's west side, grade contours will
be uniformly smoothed to eliminate abrupt slope changes along the shoreline (Figure 3).
3. Ascending Riprap Breakwater (Berm). This plan also calls for reducing the peninsula
as described in Plan 2, and constructing a new rubble mound breakwater, consisting of a
5-foot tall riprap berm, along the west side of the boat launching ramp. In addition, the
shoreline west of the boat launch will be graded to provide a gentle natural beach slope
extending into the lake. The riprap berm will serve as a barricade near the abrupt grade
changes along the western edge of the launch ramp when traveling from west to east
(Figure 4).
4. Elevated Bolder Breakwater (Jetty). This plan also calls for reduction to the peninsula
as described in Plan 2, and constructing a rubble mound breakwater, or jetty, consisting
of large riprap armor with a crown elevation of 1,256 feet MSL over a sand core along
the west side of the launch ramp. This jetty will also serve as a barricade near the abrupt
grade changes along the western edge of the launch ramp (Figure 5).
The engineering and economic analysis of the above alternatives is consistent with the following
conditions and conclusions:
.......,
~ The proposed boat launching facility improvements shown in the April 2002 report,
which consist of a six-lane boat launching ramp and sanitation pumpout system; a
car/boat trailer parking lot with 288 spaces; a launch ramp apron and staging area with a
boat wash down area; a service area with employee and handicap parking; and a restroom
building and fish cleaning station with landscaping, picnic area and lighting, all remain
unchanged. These improvements are described under Section 5.2 Site Facilities (pages
21 through 23) of the April 2002 report, and are illustrated in Figure 7 of that report.
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. <J
PAGE 30 OF <-fo
-~
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
;"""
Mr. Pat Kilroy
City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3, 2004
Page 3 of7
~ With the exception of Alternative Plan 2, the three boarding floats between the lanes of
the boat-launching ramp remain unchanged. In Alternative 2, the originally proposed 8 ft
x 100 ft boarding dock nearest the west edge of the ramp will be replaced by a 8 ft x 425
ft boarding dock, secured in place by piling. For maximum benefit in providing
breakwater protection to the boat-launching ramp, the dock would be placed along the
western edge of the launch ramp. However, in that configuration there will be three boat-
launching lanes between the first two boarding docks as shown in Figure 3.
~ For the purpose of determining excavation quantities, the four alternative plans can be
categorized into two groups. The first group, representing elimination of the peninsula, is
compatible with Alternative Plan 1 (Figure 2). The second group represents reduction of
the peninsula, and with some variation, is compatible with Alternative Plans 2, 3 and 4.
;"""
~ In all cases, the overall fill requirement for the project exceeds the excavated material
available from either elimination or partial elimination of the peninsula breakwater.
Either imported fill or dredging within the existing marina basin will be used to makeup
any shortfall in backfill requirements. The project's site fill requirements are based on the
115,000 cubic yards presented in the April 2002 Engineering & Economic Feasibility
Report. This material will come from the following three sources:
o Peninsula excavation (Alternative Plans 1 through 4)
o Marina basin dredging
o Imported material
The estimated quantity of material available from the peninsula breakwater area for each
of the four alternatives evaluated, as well as the remainder of fill required from either
marina basin dredging or importing is as follows:
Excavation and Backfill Quantitv (ey)
Peninsula Fill From Total
Fill Other Sources Fill
Eliminate Peninsula 70,600 44,400 115,000
(Alternative 1)
Reduce Peninsula 57,600 57,400 115,000
(Alternatives 2 & 3)
Reduce Peninsula 56,100 58,900 115,000
(Alternative 4)
;"""
~ Eliminating the peninsula (either complete or partial removal) provides between
approximately 56,000 CY and 70,600 CY of the required 115,000 CY total fill material
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 31
~
OF 40
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mr. Pat Kilroy
City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3, 2004
Page 4 of?
......,
to be used for the project. The remaining fill material, which is approximately 44,400
CY to 59,000 CY, would come from either marina basin dredging or imported from
offsite.
~ Alternative Plan 1 provides for the largest quantity of on-site fill material from removal
of the peninsula, but eliminates breakwater protection of the boat launching ramp and
future marina basin.
~ Alternative Plan 2, provides a floating dock breakwater and boat launching ramp
boarding float along the western boundary of the boat launching ramp, however floating
breakwaters are not as effective as landform breakwaters for shoreline protection, and do
not prevent the potential for silt to migrate into the boat launching ramp from a westerly
to easterly direction.
~ Alternative Plans 3 and 4 involve the construction of either a rock riprap berm or a rock
riprap breakwater/jetty along the western side of the boat launching ramp that will extend
into the lake by a distance to be in line with the existing marina basin's outer submerged
spit. This berm or breakwater will be constructed over an existing peninsula after
removing needed fill material and grading the remaining peninsula in order to retain the '...."
natural existing beach slope to the west of the boat launching ramp.
The April 2002 report was based on the import of all fill material, whereas this supplement
report is based on the dredging of lake sediments to provide all site fill material. The dredging
unit cost used in this analysis is 41 to 59 percent higher than the $11 per cubic yards used for the
import of fill and placement in the April 2002 report, however the dredging operation will insure
that the lake volume's capacity is not reduced. It is expected that cut material will consist of
granular sandy sediments, which needs to be verified with soil borings during the design process.
The dredging of sandy sediment should result in little change in the volume of fill material
compared to the volume of dredged materials during the drying and compaction of these sandy
materials, however there could be some loss of material in the handling process. Therefore, a
dredged (cut) volume overage of approximately 12 percent is recommended to account for any
handling losses during the fill operation. This has been allowed for in the range of unit dredging
costs used within this analysis. However it is still important to verify the soil characteristics of
this dredge material during the design phase.
The construction cost, shown in Table 12 of the April 2002 report, is $2,800,000 (rounded) to
construct all of the boat launching ramp facility improvements identified in that report. The
largest single cost component for the project, earth fill, is directly related to the cost of
excavating material at the peninsula and marina basin. The fill material is located both above
and below water levels, which is dependent on the changing lake elevations. Therefore, either
land based excavators and/or dredges would be utilized by the contractor to excavate at dry and
,......,
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 3,.2
~
OF Cf 0
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mr. Pat Kilroy
r" City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3,2004
Page 5 of7
wet locations, which would depend on the lake elevation during construction and on the
experience and available equipment of the successful contractor.
Dredged material may need to be conditioned before it can be placed and compacted in fill areas,
which slows productivity and increases cost as compared to material excavated in the dry,
however the dredging of sandy materials that are allowed to freely drain during the placement
operation can significantly reduce the drying and compaction time. In order to account for the
potential fluctuation in cost of the project's fill that is influenced by lake levels, contractor
experience, equipment utilized, dredged fill handling/processing requirements, and final volume
of dredged fill required to meet the site's fill requirements, a range in unit cost of $15.50 to
$17.50 per cubic yard was used to allow for dredging, placement and compaction of the site's
fill. Construction costs for improvements of each Alternative Plan are tabulated below.
~
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Range for Lake Elsinore Alternative Plans 1 Through 4
Alternative Plan! Project Rock Floating Piling Total Non- I Total
Description Fill Revetment Dock(') Construction Construction ! Project
Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Cost QuanUty Cost Subtotal Cost'" cosI!P1 ! Cost
CY $ Tons $ SF $ LF $ S S S i S
Hig'" 517.501CY low Range Low Range lowRarGe , LowRarGe
Lo.ded Unit Cost>> Low: $15.50fCY SfWTon 5601SF 5.wooEA HighRarGe High Raroe High R_ HighR'"'l!O
Mernative Plan 1 Low I
i
Eliminate the Peninsula ~ 1$1763000 . $1783000 $3318000 $1 327 200 i $4 645 200
land Breakwater. High 115.000 $2,013.000 -03- -03- -fla- -03- -na- -na- $2,013,000 $3,548,000 $1,419,200 ! $4,967,200
Range i
Alternative Plan 2 low !
Floating Dock System. I Range 1 $1783000 $160,000 $1959000 $3 494 000 $1 397 600 j $4 .891 600
High 115,000 $2,013,000 -na- -na- 3,400 4 $16,000 $2,189,000 $3,724,000 $1,489,600 I $5,213,600
Range
Alternative Plan 3 i
Low $1 429 200 I $5 002 200
Ascending Riprap ~ $ 1 783 000 $255,000 $2038 000 $3 573 000
Breakwater. High 115,000 $2,013,000 4,250 -na- -na- -na- -na- $2,268,000 $3,803,000 $1,521,200 i $5,324.200
Range I
lAlternative Plan 4 LCM' I
Elevated Bolder Jetty. ~ 115,000 $1783000 8,000 $480,000 $2263000 $3 798 000 $1 519200 I $5 317.200
High $2,013,000 -fla- -na- -na- -na- $2,493,000 $4,028,000 $1,611,200 I $5,639,200
Range !
~
1. The floating dock cost includes a credit of $44,000 for eUminaUng one 8 II x 100 II boarding doclc
2. Total construction cost includes $1,535,000 for adjusted April 2002 Report Construction Cost.
The adjusted April 2002 Report project cost is without project fill, compuled as follows:
Adlusted April 2002 Construction Cost
April 2002 Report Construction Cost: 2,800.000
Credit for April 2002 FiH Cost: (1,265,000)
Adjusled Cost >> 1,535,000
3. Similar to Ihe April 2002 Report. non-eonstruction costs are computed al40% of construction cost;
10"10 of that amount is construction contingency.
r"
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 33
~
OF '-fo
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mr. Pat Kilroy
City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3, 2004
Page 6 of7
..",
For cost purposes, the dredging equipment operation was based on using a portable barge and
either a Northwest 65D or Bacyrus Erie 88B for both the dredging and fill operations. These are
fairly common pieces of equipment, which are locally available. Based on typical production
rates for granular sandy materials, 3 months (13 weeks) would be estimated to complete the
dredge cut and fill operations based on using two machines.
Conclusions and Recommendations
In selecting the preferred Alternative Plan, consideration of both performance and cost measures
are of equal importance. Based on cost, the Alternatives Plans can be divided into two groups:
those that meet the project budget objective of $5,000,000 and those that exceed this budget
amount. Based on the above table that presents our opinion of probable construction cost,
Alternative Plan I is under the project budget of $5,000,000 and Alternative Plan 2 is considered
to just meet the project budget when taking the average of our estimated low and high range for. .
total project cost. In addition, the Alternative Plan 3 low range for total project cost also just
meets the project budget, whereas its high range, and both the low and high range of Alternative
Plan 4 exceed the project budget.
Although Alternative Plan 1 may be the least costly of the four plans, without a breakwater, it
will not begin to provide the service potential of Alternative Plan 2, which provides a functional
floating breakwater over the full range of lake levels, and includes grading improvements to
enhance operational safety of the Lake Elsinore shoreline. Alternative Plan 3 provides a bottom
barrier near the abrupt grade changes along the western edge of the launch ramp for the safety of
lake users walking in a westerly to easterly direction, and also provides a barrier to bottom
sediments moving in an easterly direction, however at the higher lake levels it will be submerged
and therefore will provide minimum breakwater protection from easterly moving waves and
currents. Alternative Plan 4 provides excellent safety and breakwater protection under all lake
levels not exceeding elevation 1254 feet, however it easily exceeds the project budget and will be
the least aesthetically pleasing plan under the lower lake levels.
'-'
Based on the potential project costs and the operational safety considerations, as being the most
important criteria, our recommendation is to proceed with Alternative Plan 2. However, since
the most significant project cost is the site's fill, the potential exists that the final project cost
could be either at or lower than the low range cost during final design and construction bidding if
the several site fill construction factors discussed in this report are favorable. Therefore our
recommendation in the implementation of designing Alternative Plan 2 would be to design an
ascending riprap berm as described in Alternative Plan 3, as an optional added bid item to
Alternative Plan 2, with a berm height of 3 feet above the bottom instead of 5 feet above the
bottom. Then depending on what the final construction bid price is, this option could either be
accepted or rejected.
'-"
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE m OF 40
~
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mr. Pat Kilroy
;--. City of Lake Elsinore
Campground Boat Launching Facility Improvements
December 3,2004
Page 7 of7
We look forward to implementing the design phase of this important City project. Please call us
if you would like to discuss any aspects of this supplement report.
Sincerely,
NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald M. Noble, P.E.
President
RMNITJF/jl
Attachments: Figures 1 through 5
,.--
;--.
AOENDA ITEM NO. ~
PAOE 3-:s- OF L{ <-'
LAKE ELSINORE
RECREATIONAL AREA
CAMPGROUND
,
J
}
j
i
;
I
I
i
I
i
i
ff
j
l
!
g
)
i
J
.-~
\
//.
//
f/
FUTURE RECREATIONAL MARINA
6 LANE LAUNCH RAMP
WITH 3 BOARDING FLOATS
8',1DO' BOARDING FLOATS
(MOUNTED @ TOP OR
CENTER OF LAUNCH RAMP)
SAND PENINSULA
BREAKWATER
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1
STUDY AREA (43 ACRES)
(2) STUDY AREA
1 SCALE: 1" = 500'
IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
REFLECT RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE APRIL 2002
ENGINEERING AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR LAKE ELSINORE.
CONSULTANTS. INC.
2201 DUPONT DRIVE, SUITE 620
IRVINE, CA. 92715
Telc.949-752-1530
Fax. 949-752-8381
DESIGNED BY
DRAWN BY
CHECKED BY
APPROV. BY
RMN
TJF
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
CAMPGROUND BOAT LAUNCHING FACILITY
FIGURE 1
SHEET ~ Dr ~
JOB NO. 731- t 2
SCALE AS SHOWN
DATE 2 DEe 2004
NOBLE
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE &JJ OF Ll 0
ff
~
,
REGRADE SHORELINE FOR
UNIFORM SLOPES INTO LAKE
-
..---..--..--
",
I
COMPLETELY REMOVED I
EXISTING PENINSULA FOR :
UNIFORM SLOPES INTO !J;I<E
-.,
-.,
EXCAVi\.T.le-tIr 'QUANTITIES:
_.,--7'0;600 CY NET CUT
.,_"- (EXCESS Fill MATERIAL)
I
I
I
(2) ~:~~I"~~ SITE PLAN
ALTERNATIVE PLAN 1 - ELIMINATE SAND
PENINSULA AND BREAKWATER
NOBLE
RMN
TJF
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
CAMPGROUND BOAT LAUNCHING FACILITY
DESICNED BY
DRAWN BY
CHECKED Il'i'
_ROV. BY
CONSULTANTS. INC.
2201 DUPONT DRIVE, SUITE 620
IRVINE,CA 92715
Tel.. 949-752.]530
Fax. 949-752.838]
FIGURE 2
AOENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 07
SHEET
JOB NO.
SCALE
~or~
731-12
AS SHOWN
2 DEe 2004
DATE
t
OF Lf 0
y
u
0
0
a::
w
V1 ~
~ '"
...
n: w Z
a::
w Q) 0-
0 '-' i=:il
5 Z 0
L:> >= w"
a:: << U):-
0 g <I)..
I lo. U)W
u o;J
Z
<< n::U
OU)
@
oi
~1
oi
...;
N~
N
[r~
OW
I>
~iil
II II
~~~
u:~
~()
a.U)
@
/ <(
/. e
(L V1
>-
'" <n
<<
a:: '"
I ~ U
0
U << ",0
Z g Z'-
=> lo. ~~ <n
:'5 '" ~
w Z ~~ 0:
z 5 y w
:'5 a:: - <<
<< onw 0
'" 0 ",a:: 5
Q) "CD '"
/
/'
~
'"
I
V
Z
::>
:5
'-~
~--
--------~,
!;<
g
---------- '. -
""---..
--.... .'
..... "
"'-, - "~------------
..
Zg
:5 "
0..:-
Ww
I-::/.
U5&l
i"~i
~a~
<(W~
Z::J
>-G:
_V
~ V>
OV>
OW
,,>V
x if!!.
,
I
'/ ----~lii--
,/
---~~'~it~
:Mi
k,
N
~
o
o
o
C)
z
~
o
...J
U-
N
Z
<(
...J
0-
W
>
~
Z
~
W
I-
...J
<(
...\ z ~
NOOO
-ON
~.!. ~ u
I'" W
",,...~~
~ i .
nd
)-
....
::;
U
<<
"-
w
a::C>
OZ
Z-
_I
U)U
...JZ
W::>
w:3
'"
:3';(
~g
)-0
....Z
-::>
UO
a::
C>
a.
'"
...
U
~H II
~ ~ ~
nh
~ i ! ,
~
~,,~-
~~...~
~~~~
OOd.&;
g~~~
8~~~
~
z
:)
0..0
e>:il
Z"
:-
Ow
<(...J
ffi~
~
("t)
w
0:::
::l
e>
lL
,...."
...."
OF 40
~
~
~
(L
'"
w <(
0- ac
g
'"
N
z
'" 0
ac 0-
W
CD <(
ac
(L (L
~ OC
(L '"
OC <.>
~ ~
~
~
in
z
Qo
1-'"
W:'
(I)~
--'
0::<(
U~
~ @
<(
ac
'-"
0'
'"
N
WVl
lY~~
}:!:5g
~OVl
",'-W
<:(~O
~,-,Vl
COz
0":"'"-
~3~
(LO.-
_Vl-
ani Z ~
0:: "'~O
-0'"
I ill lS~~~
I- .I~~~
.v ~ ,. i i
I u~
<( ,..
ill I-
0:: :::;
u
m <(
L>-
a.. '"
~ Ct:C>
oz
z-
_:1:
a.. VlU ~
--'Z
~ "'::> W
~j a:::
M <(I- ::)
--'<( <9
Z LLO
OlD u::
<( ,..0
...J I-Z
a.. -::>
00
ill Ct:
C>
> ll.
::f
i= <(
<( U
z ~1~1I1
0::
in W
N I-
,:" Z b ...J
~ <( ~ ~ ~
:5 Ii II
0... ~
ill Iii
-l
t: () !l
(J) en '"
!5~:;:
~~~
N ~j~
~~~
~~i
::l
~
I'
J' ,
~
f'
I~
~~
('l~
[<-',',:\'
f~~
/
/+
i' ?l
>->-l>:
:~~
w
Z::::\
Z>-G:
_U
)-o~
ow
..,u
x..,: x
~~
"-
'"
~
I
U
Z
=>
~~ ~
, ,~ <D
'--.. -....
z
:)
0... b
<9 0
'"
Z II
0 ~
Iii
<( --'
a::: ()
<9 en
--~~.:~~-~-
'L~
'lr~,
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE q OF
4(;)
o
'"
'"
o
;;.
~
'"
in
'"
N
'"
0..
:>
~
W
Z
,.
o
'"
u
0..
~
0..
ii:
'"
u
:i'
I-
~
~
N
z
~~
U
W"
liP
(/)~
(/)W
0--'
5~
@
l-
V>
5
I
I~
(f)
';(
0..0
::;--'
<("-
'"
'-'
IZ
u6
zoc
::><(
::sg
'1t'"
:)~
.03<
w-~I
0..
o
--'
tfJ
0..
<(
oc
0..
rr
.0
on
N
~G:i
w--'
-,W
N
/
/
"-
'"
~
I
U
Z
:::>
:5
~:~
----------------~-_.
---
no
...
~~
~S~
::~~
Z~
~~~
~g~
V>v>",
...",no
"'no'"
~Om
(;d= Cl
li~~
il-j
;:::::::>W
~<.>~
1-'"
W
Z::J
_tOO
I- V>
OV>
<0'"
.,U
7~~
\
\
\
Zo
<!~
...J II
a..~
WW
1---'
-C3
(j)(/)
an\ Z ~
N;<O
-ON
t.!. ~ u
I"' w
~ .nt--~~
W I: i ~
-,
C ~
0-
W :J "-'"
~ U
<(
"-
W
0:'-'
W OZ
-I ~I
(/)U 10
W --'z
W:::> W
~ ~:5 a:
z jl;t ::>
<( ....0 C)
-I om U-
n. ~O
o-Z
W -::>
Uo
> oc
'-'
~ 11-
,.
<(
Z u
0:: ~H II
W
I-
-I
<(
I; l; l; l;
I d I
~ i 5
N
1:
~"'~-
~~....s
~~~t\
o~ii
~~~~
!5!!':.~u..
c
"-'"
z
~
a.. 0
C)~
~."
0:-:
<(w
a:~
C)(/)
MNO.
PACE_ 40 OF_YO
~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
MA YOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
DICK W A TENP AUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
DECEMBER 14, 2004
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ANNEX PROPERTY INTO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-1 (LAW
ENFORCEMENT, FIRE AND PARAMEDIC SERVICES) AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN
ANNEXATION AREA NO.9 (SERENITY)
BACKGROUND
~ On August 12,2003 the City Council approved Resolution 2003-37 establishing
Community Facilities District No. 2003-1 (Law Enforcement, Fire, and paramedic
Services). The district levies a special tax for public safety costs above what
already exist in the district. The City is requiring undeveloped parcels within the
City that are developed with more than four residential dwelling units to be
annexed into the service district.
As a condition of approval, the City has required the Serenity development to be
annexed into the Community Facilities District No. 2003-1.
DISCUSSION
A special tax will be levied in the amount of $312.12 per single family dwelling
(SFD) unit for fiscal year 2005-06. The amount of the special tax assessment
maximum increases two percent annually.
Serenity will add 233 single family dwelling units to the exiting district boundary
and generate about $72,724 annually beginning in 2005-06.
~ The maps of the proposed boundaries are attached.
ACENDA IrEM NO. q
PAce--L-.OF \ \
Report to the City Council
CFD 2003-1 Annexation No.9
December 14,2004
Page 2 of3
'-'"
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost oflaw enforcement and fire services is approximately $750 per single
family dwelling unit. For each SFD unit, only about $100 to $150 of property tax
dollars will be generated. Property tax is not sufficient to fund the cost of public
safety services and therefore the CFD 2003-1 special tax levy of $312.12 will
assist the funding of the increased public safety service where the property tax is
deficient.
PROCESS
The annexation into the district requires a specific process as outlined in the
attached resolution. The City Council will need to hold a public hearing on the
annexation into CFD 2003-1 and the participating property owner will have the '-'"
opportunity to vote. The public hearing can be scheduled for January 25,2005.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council:
1. Adopt the Resolution of intention to Annex Property from Annexation Area
No.9 (Serenity) into the CFD 2003-1
2. Schedule the public hearing on Annexation Area No.9 for January 25,2005
PREPARED BY:
Matt N. Pressey, Director 0
APPROVED FOR Il J1\1 J ~
AGENDA LISTING: ~
DiCK W a~~paUgh' City Manager
'-'"
ACENDA ITEM NO._
PAGE Q
9
OF -.l \
,.....,
PROPOSED BOUNDARY OF
ANNEXATION NO. 9 TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-1
OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
(LAW ENFORCEMENT, FIRE, AND PARAMEDIC SERVICES)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
APN: 370-120-004
370-120-014
370- 120-050
370-120-052
370-120-056
370-412-021
370-415-006
370-415-007
370-415-008
370-415-009
370-415-010
370-415-011
370-415-012
370-415-013
370-415-014
370-415-015
~
SCAlE: 1"-200'
flEF'ERENCE THE RIIot:RSlDE COUNTY ASSESSOIl'S MAPS
fOR A DETAlLED DESCRlPnON OF PARCEL UN[S AND DIIIDISIONS
flLED IN THE DfllCE OF THE CITY ClERK OF THE CITY OF I.Al<E ElSINORE THIS _DAY OF _2004.
CITY CtLRK OF THE CITY OF I.AI<E ElSINORE
I HfJiEllY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNOARIES OF ANNEXAnON NO. 9 TO
THE CITY OF LAKE ElSINORE COlIIIUNITY fAClUlIES DISTRICT NO. 2003--1 (LAW ENfORCDlEHT, fIRE, AND PARAMEDIC SD/\fCES)
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF R1Iot:RSlDE, STA l[ OF CAUfORMA WAS APPROIot:D BY THE CITY COUNCIl OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ElSINORC: AT A REGtJLARI. Y SCHEDlJLED MEEnNG THEREOF, HElD ON THE _ DAY OF ~.
BY ITS REsownON No.
CJTY CtLRK OF THE CITY OF I.AI<E ElSINORE
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
I.f:WiQ
fllED THIS _ DAY OF ~. AT THE HOUR OF O'Cl.OCIL...M. IN B~ OF MAPS
OF ASSESSMENT AND COlIIIUNITY fAClUTlES DISTRICTS PAGE IIOS...........THROUGIL- AS INSTRlIMENT NO
IN THE OffICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER IN THE COUNTY OF RIIot:RSIDE, STATE OF CAUfDRNlA.
COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF R1Iot:RSlDE
fEE ._
DISTRICT BOUNDARY
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 2>
Cf
OF\\
_HARRIS a: ASSOCIATES
34 Euc_ _ Sullo 150
.. 1nI.., CIo 12614
(141) 155-3800 . FAX (141) 155-3115
Annexation No. 9 to
COmIllunily Facilities Di.trict No. 2003-1
of the City of Lake Elsinore
(La... Enforcement, Fire, and Paramedic Services)
COUNTY OF 1llVEIIIlIDE, CALIFOIIIIll
Sh..t I OF I
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-.!eL
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE TO ANNEX PROPERTY INTO COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-1 (LAW ENFORCEMENT, FIRE AND
PARAMEDIC SERVICES) AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A
SPECIAL TAX WITHIN ANNEXATION AREA NO.9 (SERENITY)
~
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City")
has established City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2003-1 (Law
Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services) (the "District") pursuant to the Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, commencing with Section 53311 of the
Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"); and
WHEREAS, the District will finance law enforcement, fire and paramedic services that
are in addition to those provided in the territory within the District prior to the formation of the
Oistrict and do not supplant services already available within the territory proposed to be
included in the District through the formation of the District subject to the levy of a special tax to
pay for such services, being approved at an election to be held within the boundaries of the
District; and
WHEREAS, the Council has provided for the annexation in the future of territory (the
"Future Annexation Area") to the District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Act.
.....,
WHEREAS, the City has received a Consent and Waiver from KB Home requesting
annexation of property owned by KB Home, which constitutes a portion of the Future
Annexation Area, into the District; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Council hereby determines to institute proceedings for the annexation
of Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity) into the District under the terms of the Act. The exterior
boundaries of the area to be annexed (Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity)) are hereby specified
and described to be as shown on that certain map now on file in the office of the City Clerk
entitled "Proposed Boundaries, City of Lake Elsinore, Community Facilities District No. 2003-1
(Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services), Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity)," which
map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in Annexation Area No. 9
(Serenity) and shall govern for all details as to the extent of Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity).
On the original and one copy of the map of such Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity) on file in the
City Clerk's office, the City Clerk shall endorse the certificate evidencing the date and adoption
of this Resolution. The City Clerk shall file the original of such map in her office and, within
fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Resolution, the City Clerk shall file a copy of such
map so endorsed in the records of the County Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California.
Section 2. The map showing Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity), which area is to be
subject to a special tax to be levied, is hereby approved and adopted. A certificate shall be
ACENDA ITEM NO. 9
PACE...:L- OF ) \
'-""
"".-.. endorsed on the original and on at least one copy of the map of Annexation Area No. 9
(Serenity), evidencing the date and adoption of this resolution. The City Clerk shall file the
original of such map in her office and, within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this
Resolution, the city Clerk shall file a copy of such map so endorsed in the records of the County
Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California.
Section 3. The name of the proposed annexation area shall be "City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2003-1 (Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services),
Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity)."
Section 4. Except where funds are otherwise available, it is the intention of the City
Council to levy annually in accordance with procedures contained in the Act a special tax (the
"Special Tax") sufficient to finance law enforcement, fire and paramedic services that are in
addition to those provided in the territory within Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity) prior to the
annexation of Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity) into the District and do not supplant services
already available within the territory proposed to be included in the District, the costs of
administering the levy and collection of the Special Tax and all other costs of the levy of the
Special Tax, including any foreclosure proceedings, legal, fiscal, and financial consultant fees,
election costs, and all other administrative costs of the tax levy. The Special Tax will be secured
by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the proposed
Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity). The schedule of the rate and method of apportionment and
manner of collection of the Special Tax is described in detail in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
by this reference incorporated herein. The annexation of Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity) will
not result in any change to the special tax rates levied in the District prior to such annexation.
"".-.
The Special Tax is apportioned to each parcel on the foregoing basis pursuant to Section
53325.3 of the Act and such Special Tax is not on or based upon the ownership of real property.
The maximum Special Tax applicable to a parcel to be used for private residential
purposes, as set forth in Exhibit A, is specified as a dollar amount which shall be calculated and
established not later than the date on which the parcel is first subject to tax because of its use for
private residential purposes, and such amount shall not be increased over time by an amount in
excess of 2 percent per year. Under no circumstances will the Special Tax to be levied against
any parcel used for private residential purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or
default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within the proposed Annexation Area No. 9
(Serenity) by more than 10 percent. As specified by the Act, for purposes of this paragraph, a
parcel shall be considered "used for private residential purposes" not later than the date on which
an occupancy permit for private residential use is issued.
Section 5. A public hearing (the "Hearing") on the annexation of Annexation Area
No.9 (Serenity) and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax shall be
held on January 25, 2005, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, at the
chambers of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, 183 North Main Street, Lake
Elsinore, California 92530.
"".-.
ACENDA ITEM NO.. <1
PAGE f5 . OF 1\
Section 6. At the time and place set forth above for the hearing, any interested
person, including all persons owning lands or registered to vote within the proposed Annexation "-'"
Area No.9 (Serenity), may appear and be heard.
Section 7. Each City officer who is or will be responsible for the District, if it is
established, is hereby directed to study the proposed Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity) and, at or
before the time of the above-mentioned Hearing, file a report with the City Council, and which is
to be made a part of the record of the Hearing, containing a brief description of Annexation Area
No.9 (Serenity) and his or her estimate of the cost of providing additional law enforcement, fire
and paramedic services within the boundary of Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity). The City
Manager is directed to estimate the fair and reasonable cost of all incidental expenses, including
all costs associated with the annexation of Annexation Area No.9 (Serenity), determination of
the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in
order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City with respect to the District.
Section 8. The City may accept advances of funds from any sources, including
private persons or private en~ities, and is authorized and directed to use such funds for any
authorized purpose, including any cost incurred by the City in annexing the proposed Annexation
Area No.9 (Serenity). The City may enter into an agreement to repay all of such funds as are
not expended or committed for any authorized purpose at the time of the election on the levy of
the Special Tax, if the proposal to levy such tax should fail, and to repay all of such funds
advanced if the levy of the Special Tax shall be approved by the qualified electors of Annexation
Area No.9 (Serenity).
Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a notice ("Notice") of the "-'"
Hearing pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation
published in the area of the proposed Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity). Such Notice shall
contain the text of this Resolution, state the time and place of the Hearing, a statement that the
testimony of all interested persons or taxpayers will be heard, a description of the protest rights
of the registered voters and landowners in the proposed Annexation Area No. 9 (Serenity) as
provided in Section 5339.5 of the Act and a description of the proposed voting procedure for the
election required by the Act. Such publication shall be completed at least 7 days prior to the date
of the Hearing.
Section 10. The voting procedure with respect to the establishment of the District and the
imposition of the special tax shall be by mailed ballot election.
'-'
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE l 0
q
OF H
""
""
".....
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
day of
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
, 2004.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
AOENDAlTEM NO. 9
PAGE-=::L- OF , \
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
I, , City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a
meeting thereof held on the _ day of ,2004, and that it was so adopted by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
By:
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 1r
9
OF II
......",
......",
......",
,,-..
EXHIBIT A
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
OF SPECIAL TAX
,,--.
,--
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9
PAGE-3-0F \ \
City of lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2003-1
(law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services)
"""""
Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax
Introduction
Special taxes shall be annually levied on all Developed Residential Property and Developed
Multi-Family Property (as hereinafter defined) in the City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities
District No. 2003-1 (Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services) (the "District"), in accordance
with the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes hereinafter set forth. All of the property
within the District that is not Developed Residential or Developed Multi-Family Residential Property
shall be exempt from the Maximum Annual Special Taxes of the District.
Definitions
Assessor's Parcel. A parcel of land in the District designated and assigned a discrete
identifying number on a map of the County Assessor of the County of Riverside.
City. City of Lake Elsinore, California.
Developed Multi-Family Property. Assessor's Parcels in the District for which a building
permit has been issued by the City on or prior to March 1 preceding the Fiscal Year for the
construction of a Unit that is located or shall be located within a building in which each individual
Units has or shall have at least one common wall with another Unit.
...."
Developed Residential Property. All other Assessor's Parcels in the District for which a
building permit has been issued by the City on or prior to March 1 preceding any Fiscal Year for the
construction of a Unit that is not Developed Multi-family Property.
Fiscal Year. The period beginning on July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
Maximum Annual Special Taxes. The maximum annual special taxes levied within the
District for any Fiscal Year.
Unit. Each separate residential dwelling unit, which comprises an independent facility
capable of conveyance or use separate from adjacent dwelling units.
Rate and Method of Apportionment of Maximum Annual Special Taxes
As of July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing July 1, 2003, the City shall determine which of
the Assessor's Parcels within the District constitute Developed Residential Property or Developed
Multi-Family Property. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2003-04, and all subsequent Fiscal Years, the City
shall levy the Maximum Annual Special Taxes on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Residential
Property in the amount of $300 and on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Multi-Family Property
"""""
AGENDA ITEM NO.
,fACE \ 0
9
OF 1\
'"
in the amount of $150 per Unit. The amount of Maximum Annual Special Taxes shall be increased
annually by 2%, commencing in Fiscal Year 2004-05, and each Fiscal Year thereafter.
Duration of the Maximum Annual Special Taxes
The Maximum Annual Special Taxes shall be levied in perpetuity so long as Law
Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services are being provided within the District.
The Maximum Annual Special Taxes levied in each Fiscal Year shall be collected in the
same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same
penalties and the same procedure, sale, and lien priority in case of delinquency as is provided for ad
valorem taxes. The Maximum Annual Special taxes when levied shall be secured by the lien
imposed pursuant to Section 3115.5 of the Streets and Highways Code. This lien shall be a
continuing lien and shall secure each levy of Maximum Annual Special Taxes. The lien of
Maximum Annual Special Taxes shall continue in force and effect until the Special Tax ceases to be
levied in the manner provided by Section 53330.5 of the Government Code.
r-
r-
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \ l
9
OF h
",......
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
MA YOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
DECEMBER 14,2004
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND APPROVING
THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE ANNEXATION OF
CERTAIN TERRITORY KNOWN AS TRACTS 30846 AND 19344-
3 INTO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND
STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.1, AS LLMD ANNEXATION
NO.3, DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO ORDER THE
ANNEXATION AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS,
~ DETERMINING THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE
TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
ACT OF 1972 AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT, AND
OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS
THERETO
BACKGROUND
As a condition of approval, the City has required the KB Home Serenity
development to be annexed into the Landscape and Street Lighting District No.1.
As new developments are brought forward to the City, the development will be
annexed into Landscape and Street Lighting District No.1 if a development will
not have a homeowners association or if there are more than 3 street lights.
DISCUSSION
Attached is the Engineer's report for the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street
Lighting Maintenance District Annexation No.3 prepared by Harris and
Associates. The district annexation includes the Serenity development which
~ contains approximately 630 square feet of public right-of-way landscaping and 63
street lights. The total annual cost of operations and maintenance is estimated at
~~O~
AGENDA \TEM I . . ~ ~
PAGe~Of- -
Report to the City Council
December 14,2004
Page 2 of3
......"
$12,315 or $52.86 per single family dwelling unit. The estimated cost for the first
year includes a 50% reserve of$5,708 bringing the total to $18,023 or $77.35 per
single family dwelling unit for the first year only. The 1972 Act requires that a
special fund be set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District and each
annexation or zone tracked separately. Any balance or deficit remaining on July 1
must be carried over to the next fiscal year.
The City Council may approve up to a two percent (2%) fixed rate adjustment
annually. The rate adjustment will adjust the Maximum rate but not necessarily
the assessment rate. If costs begin to exceed assessment revenue, the City Council
may increase the assessment up to the Maximum.
FISCAL IMPACT
""""
The City is not negatively impacted by the annexation or continuation of the
district. In addition to the operating costs of the district, the special tax would be
levied annually to sufficiently finance the costs of administering the levy,
collection of the special tax and all other costs of the levy of the special tax.
The City will be, however, positively impacted with the funding for public right-
of-way landscape.
PROCESS
The annexation of the Landscape and Street Lighting District Annexation No.3
requires a specific process as outlined in the attached resolution. The City Council
will need to hold a public hearing on the annexation of certain territory into LLMD
No. 1 and the participating property owner will have the opportunity to vote. The
public hearing can be scheduled for January 25,2005.
......"
ACENDA ITEM NO. /0
PACE ~ OF ~ ~
Report to the City Council
"....... December 14,2004
Page 3 of3
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council:
1. Approve the Engineer's Report for Annexation No.3 to LLMD No.1
2. Adopt the Resolution 2004 - fe:l of Intention to Annex into LLMD No.1
3. Schedule the public hearing on the District Formation for January 25, 2005.
PREPARED BY:
of Administrative Services
~
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
/JJJ/J. tV
Dick Watenp~ager
~
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 2>
10
OF aa
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-d
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND
APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY KNOWN AS THE TRACTS 30846 AND 19344-3 INTO THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.1, AS
ANNEXATION NO.3 TO THE LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1, DECLARING THE
CITY'S INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION AND TO LEVY
AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, DETERMINING THAT THESE
PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND THE
RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT, AND OFFERING A TIME
AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO
WHEREAS, the City Council ofthe City of Lake Elsinore, pursuant to the provisions ofthe
Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California (the "Act"), desires to initiate proceedings for the annexation of certain territory
(the "Annexed Area") to the Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1 (the "District"), and
declares the City's intention to order the annexation ofthe Annexed Area for the levy and collection
of annual assessment within the Annexed Area for Fiscal Year 200512006 for the purposes provided
therefor in the Act; and
~
WHEREAS, KB Home (hereinafter referred to as the "Developer") is the sole owner of that
certain real property located in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California,
more particularly described as follows:
Legal Description:
Tracts 30846 and 19344-3, in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of
California, currently known as Assessor Parcel No.' s 370-120-044, 014, 050, 052, 056, 370-
412-021 and 370-415-006 through 015.
WHEREAS, the Developer is developing the Property as a single family residential
development (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the improvements to be installed, constructed, or maintained within the
proposed Annexed Area may include installation, construction, or maintenance of any authorized
improvements under the Act, including, but not limited to, streetlight improvements and any
facilities which are appurtenant to any of the aforementioned or which are necessary or convenient
for the maintenance or servicing thereof; and
...."
ACENDA ITEM NO. 10
PACE 4 OF Ol~
Page 2
""
WHEREAS, Section 22608 ofthe Act limits the requirement for the resolutions, Engineer's
Report, notices of hearing, and right of majority protest under the Act to the territory included within
the annexation and waives these requirements with the written consent of all of the owners of
property within the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 218, the Right to Vote on Taxes Act, does hereby require that a
notice of the proposed assessment along with a ballot shall be mailed to all owners of identified
parcels within the Annexed Area and that the agency shall conduct a public hearing not less than 45
days after the mailing of said notice; and
WHEREAS, the Annexation consists of the development known as Assessor Parcel
No.'s 370-120-044, 014, 050, 052, 056, 370-412-021 and 370-415-006 through 015; and
WHEREAS, the developer has submitted a petition to the City requesting to have the
development annexed into the Landscape and Street Lighting District No.1; and
WHEREAS, the developer, as stated in the petition, may waive all statutory notices of
hearing and rights of majority protest by any interested property owners within the Annexation; and
.-- WHEREAS, the City has prepared a diagram attached as Exhibit "A," which is designated
Proposed Annexation No.3 to the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District
No. 1 and an assessment showing the proposed boundaries of the territory to be annexed into the
District, which is benefited by the construction ofthe improvements and the amount to be assessed
against each of the parcels within the proposed annexation to the District; and
WHEREAS, the City has ordered the preparation of an Engineer's Report in accordance with
Article 4 (commencing with Section 22565) of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code giving a
description of the annexation; and
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report, diagram, and assessments have been approved and filed
with the City Clerk and are open to public inspection and may be referred to for all details regarding
the improvements, the boundary of the proposed annexation, the assessments, total costs, and
description of the parcels to be assessed; and
WHEREAS, this City Council has examined and considered the Engineer's Report, diagram,
assessments, and the proceedings prior thereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct.
.--
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE IT
10
OF .Q ~
Page 3
....."
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds (1) that the public interest, convenience, and
necessity require the maintenance of a street lighting system; and (2) declares its intention to order
the formation of the Annexation and to levy and collect assessments against the assessable lots
and/or parcels ofland within such Annexation for that portion ofthe fiscal year commencing July 1,
2005 and ending June 30, 2006, to pay the costs and expenses of the maintenance of improvements
described below. Ifthe assessments proposed by this resolution are approved by the property owners
pursuant to a mailed ballot election conducted in accordance with Article xm D of the California
Constitution, the City Council in subsequent fiscal years may thereafter impose the assessment at any
rate or amount that is less than or equal to the amount authorized for Fiscal Year 200512006, without
conducting another mailed ballot election.
SECTION 3. That the City Council hereby proposes to annex to Landscape and Street
Lighting District No.1 the Annexed Area located at Tracts 30846 and 19344-3, also known as
Assessor Parcel No.'s 370-120-044, 014, 050, 052, 056,370-412-021 and 370-415-006 through 015,
and to levy annual assessments thereon to provide for the following work:
Installation, construction, or maintenance of any authorized improvements under the Act,
including, but not limited to, streetlight improvements and any facilities which are appurtenant to any
of the aforementioned or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing thereof.
The distinctive designation for the proposed Annexed Area shall be "Annexation No.3 to the .....,
Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1", when referred to
separately and upon annexation will be included in the designation of Landscape and Street Lighting
District No. 1.
SECTION 4. That the Property Owner has provided the City Council ofthe City of Lake
Elsinore a petition fully signed and notarized, waiving all statutory notices of hearing and notice
periods, granting the City the right to maintain and service the improvements and gives consent to
the establishment of an assessment for the proposed annexation ofthe property into the District in an
amount reasonably determined by the City to cover all costs and expenses incurred for the continued
maintenance, operation, and servicing ofthe improvements.
SECTION 5. A Diagram for the District (Section 22570 ofthe Streets and Highways Code)
and an assessment (Section 22572 of the Streets and Highways Code) showing the area to be
annexed, benefited, and assessed for the improvements has been prepared as Exhibit "A." The
diagram, assessment, and improvement plans have been filed with the City Clerk.
SECTION 6. The diagram, which indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory
proposed to be annexed into the District, is hereby declared to describe the proposed boundaries of
the proposed annexation to the District and shall govern for all details as to the extent and location of
said annexation.
....."
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE ( 0
/D
Of ~~
Page 4
~.
SECTION 7. That the City Council is satisfied with the correctness of the diagram and
assessment, including the proceedings and all matters relating thereto.
SECTION 8. That notice is hereby given that on the 25th day of January, 2005, at the hour
of7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, in the City Council Chambers, in the City of Lake
Elsinore, the City will hold a public hearing to receive and tabulate all ballots with reference to the
Annexed Area pursuant to the Right to Vote On Taxes Act.
SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day 14th of December, 2004.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~
VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK BARBARA LEffiOLD, CITY ATTORNEY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, the City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
was duly adopted by the City Council ofthe City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 14th day of December, 2004 by the following vote of Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
/"'"'
_ VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK
ACENDA Il"E\'vl i't'"'_ J 0
PAGE -, OF d ~
Page 5
Exhibit A
Annexation No.3 to Landscape and Street Ligthting Maintenance District No.1
"'"
,...."
,...."
AGENDAtTEM NO.~5:~"-
PACE_~ _Of_~ -
/""'"
370-412-021
370-415-006
370-415-007
370-415-008
370-415-009
370-415-010
370-415-011
370-415-012
370-415-013
370-415-014
370-415-015
\
APN: 370- 1 20-004
370-120-014
370-120-050
370-120-052
370-120-056
'"
VlONITY MAP
NO SCAlE
Wit:tII2
DISTRICT 8Ol.tiOARY
The parcel numbers above correspond to the Assessor's maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside
for Fiscal Year 2004-05.
'"
Annexation No.3 to the Landscape and
Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1
Assessment Diagram
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE <1
fD
OF ;;J ~
......,
Engineer's Report
for
Annexation No. 3
to the
Lake Elsinore
landscap~ and Street Lighting
Maintenance District No. 1
(Serenity)
'-'
City of Lake Elsinore
Riverside County, California
Prepared by:
Hams & Associates
December 8, 2004
'-'
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10
PAGE \ () OF or~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1
December 8, 2004
Page i
~
ENGINEER'S REPORr
ANNEXATION NO.3 to the LAKE ELSINORE
LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council. The
undersigned certifies that she is a Professional Engineer, registered in the State of California.
DATED: December 8, 2004
~~
B Joan E. Cox
RC.E. No. 41965
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll and
Diagram thereto a~ched, was filed with me on the _ day of . 2004.
City Clerk, City of Lake Elsinore
Riverside County, California
By
~
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll and
Diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore, California, on the _ day of , 2004.
City Clerk, City of Lake Elsinore
Riverside County, California
By
,.,.-
q:\elsinore\llmd1 lfonnalionlnew district\annex no. 311md engineer's report.doc
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \\
10
OF ~~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page ii
ENGINEER'S REPORT
ANNEXATION NO.3 to the LAKE ELSINORE
LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificates...... ........ ...................... ... ......... ........................... ............... ........ ...... i
Report................................................... ........ ...................... ......................... ..... 1
Part A - Plans and Specifications.........................................................3
Part B - Estimate of Cost .. ....................... ........................... .... ............. 4
Part C - Assessment Roll.....................................................................5
Part D - Method of Apportionment of Assessment.............................. 6
Part E - Property Owner List. .......... ................... ...... ... .............. .......... 9
Part F - Assessment District Boundary ................................................9
"""
"""
"""
q:\elsinore\lImd1\formation\new district\annex no. 3 IIrnd engineer's report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE \ ~ OF bl~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1
December 8, 2004
Page 1
,........
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ENGINEERtS REPORT
Prepared Pursuant to the Provisions of the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code
Section 22500 through 22679), Article XIIID of The California
Constitution, and The Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation
Act (California Government Code Section 53750 Et Seq.)
Pursuant to Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, Article
XIIID of the California Constitution, the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act and in
accordance with the Resolution of Initiation adopted by the Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
State of California, in connection with the proceedings for:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ANNEXATION NO.3 to the LANDSCAPE AND
STREET LIGlITING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1
hereinafter referred to as the" Assessment District" or "District", I, Joan E. Cox, P.E., the authorized
representative of Harris & Associates, the duly appointed ENGINEER OF WORK, submit herewith
the "Report" consisting of six (6) parts as follows:
,........
PART A
Plans and specifications for the improvements showing and describing the general nature, location
and extent of the improvements.
PART B
An estimate of the cost of the proposed improvements for FY 2005-06, including incidental costs and
expenses in connection therewith.
PARTC
An assessment of the estimated cost of the improvements on each benefited lot or parcel of land
within the Assessment District.
,........
q:\elsinore\lImd1\fonnation\new district\annex no. 3 IImd enginee(s report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10
PAGE \ ~ OF ;;)~ ~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 2
PART D
The method of apportionment' of assessments, indicating the proposed assessment of the total amount ......",
of the costs and expenses of the improvements upon the several lots and parcels of land within the
Assessment District, in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots and parcels,
PART E
A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property within the Assessment District, as
shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Riverside.
PART F
The Diagram of the Assessment District Boundaries showing the exterior boundaries of the
Assessment District, the boundaries of any zones within the Assessment District and the lines and
dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within the Assessment District
......",
......",
q:\elsinore\lImd1\formation\new district\annex no, 3 IImd engineer's report doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ L\
10
OF ~~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1
December 8, 2004
Page 3
/'"'"
PART A
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
The facilities will be operated, serviced and maintained as generally described as follows:
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS, FY 2005-06
The facilities to be maintained and serviced include landscaping for the specific Maintenance District
as described herein. Facilities include but are not limited to: landscaping, planting, shrubbery, trees,
turf, irrigation systems, hardscapes, fixtures, and appurtenant facilities, in public rights-of-way,
parkways, slopes and dedicated easements within the boundaries of said Maintenance District.
Zone 1 (the original District) - Encompasses the Water Ridge Development and funds landscape
and street lighting maintenance and operations.
Zone 2 (Annexation No.1) - Encompasses the Elsinore Homes Development and funds landscape
and street lighting maintenance and operations.
Zone 3 (Annexation No.2) - Encompasses the Pepper Grove Development and funds landscape and
street lighting maintenance and operations.
Zone 4 (Annexation No.3) - Encompasses the Serenity Development and funds landscape and
street lighting maintenance and operations
,r-.
The facilities in Zone 4 are specifically described as follows:
. Landscaping within the public right-of-way, approximately 630 square feet
. Street lights within the public right-of-way (63 street lights)
Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance,
operation and servicing of the landscaping and appurtenant facilities, including repair, removal or
replacement of all or part of any of the landscaping or appurtenant facilities; providing for the life,
growth, health and beauty of the landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying,
fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid
waste; and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or
cover graffiti.
Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of the landscaping and the maintenance of
any of the lighting facilities or appurtenant facilities and the furnishing of electric current or energy,
gas or other illuminating agent for the lighting facilities, or for the lighting or operation of the
landscaping or appurtenant facilities.
The plans and specifications for the improvements, showing and describing the general nature,
location, and the extent of the improvements, are on file in the office of the Director of Public Works
and are incorporated herein by reference.
,.........
q:lelsinore\llmd1\formationlnew districtlannex no. 3 IImd enginee(s report.doc
ACENDA 'TEM NO
. .
PACE \ ~
/0
OF ~ d-
Annexation No.3, City of Lake .Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 4
PART B
ESTIMATE OF COST
"-""
The estimated cost of the operation, servicing and maintenance of the street and sidewalk
improvements for Fiscal Year 2005-06, as described in Part A, are summarized herein and described
below.
ANNEXATION NO.3 to the LANDSCAPE AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1
Proposed Bud2et - Fiscal Year 2005-06
Zone 4, Fiscal Year 2005-06 Estimated Costs
Landscaping
Operations and Maintenance
Reserve (50%)
Sub-Total
$201.60
$100.80
$302.40
Street Lighting
Operations and Maintenance
Reserve (50%)
Sub-Total
$11,214.00
$5.607.00
$16,821.00
District Administration
$900.00
....,;
Total Estimated Costs
$18,023.40
The 1972 Act requires that a special fund be set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District.
Funds raised by assessment shall be used only for the purpose as stated herein. A contribution to the
District by the City may be made to reduce assessments, as the City Council deems appropriate. Any
balance or deficit remaining on July 1 must be carried over to the next fiscal year.
....,;
q:\elsinore\llmd1\formation\new district\annex no. 3 IImd engineer's report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10
PAGE \ \.0 OF ~'d-
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 5
,,-..-.
PART C
ASSESSMENT ROLL
The total proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2005-06 and the amount of the total proposed
assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel within Zone 4 of the District, as shown on the latest
assessment roll at the Riverside County Assessor's Office, are contained in the Assessment Roll
provided below.
The description of each lot or parcel is part of the Riverside County assessment roll and this roll is,
by reference, made part of this Report.
Assessor's Parcel Number
Dwelling Units
FY 2005-06 Max. Asmt
,,-..-.
370-120-004
370-120-014
370-120-050
370-120-052
370-120-056
370-412-021
370-415-006
370-415-007
370-415-008
370-415-009
370-415-010
370-415-011
370-415-012
370-415-013
370-415-014
370-415-015
233
$18,020.22*
*The maximum assessment is $3.18 less than the estimated budget due to rounding of the assessment
per dwelling unit.
,,-..-.
q:\elsinore\lImd1\formation\new district\annex no. 3 IImd engineer's report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10
PAGE--LI-OF a ~
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 6
PART D
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF ASSESSMENT
...""
GENERAL
Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972,
permits the establishment of assessment district by cities for the purpose of providing certain public
improvements which include construction, operation, maintenance and servicing of street lights,
traffic signals and landscaping.
Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the 1972 Act) requires that maintenance
assessments be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. This section
states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned
by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots
or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel
from the improvements."
The 1972 Act permits the designation of zones of benefit within any individual assessment district if
"by reason of variations in the nature, location, and extent of the improvements, the various areas will
receive different degrees of benefit from the improvements." (Sec. 22574). Thus, the 1972 Act
requires the levy of a true "assessment" based on the actual benefit rather than a "special tax."
In addition, Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" which was approved on the November
1996 Statewide ballot and added Article XIIID to the California Constitution, requires that a parcel's
assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that
parcel. Article XIIID provides that only special benefits are assessable and the City must separate the
general benefits from the special benefits. Article XllID also requires that publicly owned property
which benefit from the improvements be assessed.
....""
REASON FOR THE ASSESSMENT
The assessment is proposed to be levied to pay for the costs of the construction, servicing and
maintenance of landscaping, street lighting and appurtenant improvements within the District.
SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS
Street Landscaping, Slopes and Greenbelts. Trees, landscaping, hardscaping and appurtenant
facilities, if well maintained, provide beautification, shade and enhancement of the desirability of the
surroundings, and therefore increase property value.
In Parkways and Land Values, written by John Nolan and Henry V. Hubbard in 1937, it is stated:
"... there is no lack of opinion, based on general principals and experience and common
sense, that parkways do in fact add value to property, even though the amount cannot be
determined exactly.... Indeed, in most cases where public money has been spent for
parkways the assumption has been definitely made that the proposed parkway will show a
......,
q:lelsinore\lImd1\formation\new district\annex no. 3 Ilmd engineer's report.docS
ACENDA ITEM NO.-1 b
PACE ) ~ OF d ~
Annexation No.3. City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8. 2004
Page 7
.-..
provable financial profit to the City. It has been believed that the establishment of parkways
causes a rise in real estate values throughout the City, or in parts of the City,..."
It should be noted that the definition of "parkways" above may include the roadway as well as the
landscaping along side the roadway.
The ongoing operation and maintenance of the street landscaping, slopes and greenways within the
individual district, as identified in Part A of this Report, provide beautification to the areas that result
in a special benefit to the parcels within the tracts adjacent to the improvements. If these landscaped
areas were not properly maintained, the tract would be blighted.
The City of Lake Elsinore considers the maintenance and upkeep of parkways and adjacent slopes to
be the responsibility of the adjacent development due to the added beautification of the local
community which extends to the perimeter of the development.
Street Lighting. Proper maintenance and operation of the streetlights benefit all properties within
the District by providing security, safety and community character and vitality as outlined below.
Streetlights provide only incidental benefits to motorists traveling to, from or through the area.
BENEFITS OF STREET LIGHTING
Security and Safety
. Mitigates crime
. Alleviates the fear of crime
. Enhances safe ingress/egress to property
Community Character and Vitality
. Promotes social interaction
. Promotes business and industry
. Contributes to a positive nighttime visual image
----
Improvements that provide a special benefit to an isolated group of parcels of land located within the
District are considered to be a localized benefit, and the costs associated with these improvements are
assessed to all assessable parcels receiving the localized benefit. Localized benefits include the
construction, operation, servicing and maintenance of the improvements that only benefit the parcels
located within the localized areas.
Localized Improvements - Parcels that have localized landscaping such as entryway landscaping,
parkway landscaping, etc., and street lighting adjacent to or near their parcels directly benefit from
the improvements and are assessed for the costs of the localized improvements.
,-
q:\elsinore\lImd1\formation\new district\annex no. 3 IImd engineer's report.doc
ACENDA ITEM NO. 10
PACE~OF ;;(a
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 8
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Zone 4
The parcels of land in Zone 4 are single family residential (SFR) lots, with each of these lots
benefiting equally from the improvements being maintained. Therefore, the costs associated with the
landscaping and street lighting within and directly adjacent to the development, as shown in Part B of
this report, will be apportioned on a residential lot basis. The table below provides the assessment
apportionment for Zone 4.
.---,
SFR
Lots
233
Max. Maint. Asmt
per Lot (FY 2005-06)*
$77.34
Actual Asmt
per Lot (FY 2005-06)
$77.34
Total Max. Asmt
For District
$18,023.40
* The maximum annual maintenance assessments shall be increased each year by 2%. The actual
assessments levied in any fiscal year will be as approved by the City Council and may not exceed
the maximum assessment rate without receiving property owner approval for the increase.
"-""
---'
q:\elsinore\lImd1\formalion\new dislricl\annex no. 3 IImd engineer's report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE a (:) OF.::};:)
Annexation No.3, City of Lake Elsinore
Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1
December 8, 2004
Page 9
,-....
PART E
PROPERTY OWNER LIST
A list of names and addresses of the owners of all parcels within this District is shown on the last
equalized Property Tax Roll of the Assessor of the County of Riverside, which by reference is hereby
made a part of this report. This list is keyed to the Assessor's Parcel Numbers as shown on the
Assessment Roll, Part C of this Report.
PART F
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Diagrams showing the exterior boundaries of the District and the lines and dimensions of each lot or
parcel ofland within the District are provided on the following page.
The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions
shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside for Fiscal Year 2004-05. The
Assessor's maps and records are incorporated by reference herein and made part of this report.
~
~
q:\elsinore\lImd1\fonnation\new district\annex no. 3 IImd engineer's report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE a \
Jb
OF ~:J
~
370-412-021
370-415-006
370-415-007
370-415-008
370-415- 009
370-415-010
370-415-011
370-415-012
370-415-013
370-415-014
370-415-015
\
APN: 370-120-004
370-120-014
370-120- 050
370-120-052
370-120-056
~
\IIONITY MAP
NO SCAlE
LEW!l1
D1SlR1Cf _AllY
The parcel numbers above correspond to the Assessor's maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside
for Fiscal Year 2004-05.
Annexation No.3 to the Landscape and
Street Lighting Maintenance District No.1
Assessment Diagram
Page 1 of 1
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10
PAGE ~~OF ~~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
".-
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
DICK W A TENP AUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
DECEMBER 14,2004
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (SERENITY) AND INCUR
BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
BACKGROUND
On October 18, 2004 consultants for KB Homes submitted a financial plan and
CFD proposal to the City's Finance team. The City's Finance Team has met with
KB Homes and discussed the plan and the formation of a new Community
Facilities District in the development.
,-....
ANALYSIS
The developer plans to build 233 single family homes. Taxes will begin to be
levied for the 2005-06 tax year for homes with building permits issued as of May
1,2005. The weighted average residential special tax is estimated at $2,557.
The annual CFD tax amounts, when combined with all other property taxes
applicable to the project, are estimated to be approximately 1.900/0, which is within
the 2% City CFD guidelines.
In order to finance the facilities it is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in the
amounts not to exceed $12,000,000.
Attached is a copy ofKB Home's original financial plan submitted on October 18,
2004.
""'
AGENDA ITEM NO.--1.L-
PACE~OF 30
Report to the City Council
CFD 2005-1 (Serenity) Formation
December 14,2004
Page 2 of2
......"
FISCAL IMPACT
Repayment of the bonds are secured by the special taxes levied on all property
within the district, other than those properties that are exempt as provided in the
rate and method of apportionment.
The City will, however, be faced with a long-term obligation going forward to
maintain the streets and other City facilities constructed with proceeds of the CFD
bonds.
PROCESS
The formation of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District requires a specific
process as outlined in the attached resolution to establish a CFD. The City Council
will need to hold a public hearing on the formation of the District and for the
approval of the bond documents. At the public hearing the participating property ......"
owner will have the opportunity to vote. The public hearing can be scheduled for
January 25,2005. Bonds are scheduled to be issued and sold in mid March, 2005.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution of Intention 2004- 70 to Establish CFD 2005-1
(Serenity)
2. Adopt Resolution of Intention 2004- ~ to Incur Bonded Indebtedness
3. Schedule the public hearing on the District Formation for January 25, 2005
PREPARED BY: ~~
Matt N. Pressey, Dire r of Administrative Services
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
1JiM~
Dick Watenpaug , Ci Manager
......"
AGENDA ITEM NO.---1L-
PAGE ex OF 30
.., DPFG
27127 CALLE ARROYO; SUlTE 1910
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO. CA 92675
TEL (949) 388-9269
FAX (949) 3&8-9272
\vww.dpfg.com
D, .JPMENT PLANNING & FINANCING GROUP, INC.
October 18, 2.004
Mr. Richard Watenpaugh
City Manager
City of Lake Elsinore
13.0 S. Main
Lake Elsinore, CA 9253.0
Re: City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District Proposal-KB Home.
Dear Mr. Watenpaugh:
r- We are>sendingthis .Cotnmunity Facilities District FinancingPla,n OJ,1. behalf ofJ(B Home
{or yoW review a,ndcop.sideration, Tbe basicalJProach we ate sugge$tingisthat the City
of Lake. EIsinore.be the lead. agency in establishing. a new CFDtoissue bonds..to.fund the
City of Lake Elsinore feesandiInprovclllcnts and EVMWDwater ~gsewer fees and
imprQveroents. This approach will requiretlteCity of Lake Elsinore to enter into a Joint
Community Facilities Agreement with the BVMWP.
We appreciate your consideration of our proposal and look forward to proceeding with
thefortnatio~ of the propo.sedC.ommlUlityFacilities District. . Itlthetl),e~I1tiJne,if you
have any.questions or comments, please do not hesitatetocallme.at(949)218-6.o23.
Sincerely,
cc.
Matt .P.t'essey,. City of Lake Elsinore
Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates
Rod Guntl~ Rod Goon Associates, .In(;.
Scott Hansen, KB Home
ACENDA ITEM NO.--LI
PACE .3 OF ~
r-
'J
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District Finance. Plan
Qctober 18, 2004
~
l. Background
a) KB Home, Inc., a home builder ("Owner~'), proposes the formation of a
Community Facilitie$ District ("eFD") to encompass their residential
development consisting of 233 single. family detached dwelling units within
Tentative Tract No. 30846 and Tract No. 19344 (the "Project") that lie within
the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore ("City"), and
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ("EVMWD"). A vicinity map of
the Project is attached as Exhibit A.
b) 'fhisproposalanticipates the Clty'of Lake Elsinore' will be the lead agency. in
theCF'D fonnatipl1 and EVM\V.Dwill be a Joint Community Facilities
Agre:ementpamcipant.
c) This proposal further anticipates that the CFD shan solely encompass the
Project as set forth in the Bond. Sizing Analysis attached hereto as Exhibit B.
d) Anticipated dates of1he Project's salient development milestones are set forth
below.
......,
Descritition Date
Commencement of Mass .Gradin2 1012004
Recordation of Final Map 12/2()()4
Commence Sales to thePilbIic 1 112004
First Horne clOsirie: 0412005
II. ProposalJ Approach
a) It is anticipated that the CFDwill be fOrIIled to finance the acquisition and
construction of streets,~tre~tscape, parks, City fees, andE,VNtIWD fees and
facilities. Exhibit Cprovides ~ list of improvements and fees proposed to. be
eligible for CED funding.
b) If it is ultimately detenninedthtough the appraisal process that the 3 to 1
value-to-lien requirementasf'1<1t1ired by the City Isnot~cPievedby the bond
iSsue date, KB Jiome wOldd like to preserve the following options: (i) post. a
letter of credit toc()~er the portion of theCED bondsnotsupport~d by the
value-to-lien requirement, or (ii) escrow a portion of the CED bonds not ~
supported by the value~to4ienrequirement.
eFD Finlince Plan
F:\jimz\KB\sercnity\KB Finance PlllJl_ 4.doc
PaGe J
10/1812004
AtlENDA ITEM NO.
PACE Li
II
OF 30
,-...
City of Lake EIsmore
Community Facilities Dis.trict Finance Plan
October 18, 2004
c) The CFD would be authorized to fund fees and improvements listed on
Exhibit C. The estimated costs of the public improvements listed in Exhibit C
is larger than the anticipated bond proceeds so as to provide. authorization
cushion in the event the int~rest rates on the actual bond pricing and/or the
actual issuance costs come in lower than the interest rate and lor issuance cost
assumptions used in the CFD formation proce.edings.
d) The. CFD's funding of fees would provIde the .Ownet, or its successors, a
creditagainsttbeappnc~blefee. i\.dditiotlally,apy eligible. Jeesthatare . Paid
for by the Owner, or its suc~essors,prior to the availabilhyof CFD bond
proceeds would be reimbursed.When CFD hand proceeds become available.
e) The annual CPD tax amounts when. combined with all other property taxes
applicable to the Project have been established so as not to exceed 1.9% of the
estimated residential home prices; It is anticipated that the eFD tax rates will
increase by 2.0% per year. Exhibit B also outlines the total property tax rates
that would apply to the ultimate homeowners.
,,-
f) A draft Rate and Method of Apportionment of t4e Special Tax (based on the
City Center Townhomes CFD) is attached as Exhibit D.
g) The.Qwner anticipates thattheCFD could be fOrllledby JanlUlrY, Z005 and
bond proceeds made available by Juneof1005.
,-...
CFDFinance Plan
f;\iimz\KB~erC!ni~y~ fi~(; Plan4.doc
Pag<:2 II
ACENDA It@MZPm
PACE G OF 30
AGENDA ITEM NO.--11-
PACE (0 OF 30
<(
l-
iD
J:
@
'-'
~
'-'
".........
l!
f.
~. S! ~~I;J''''~''':::~~,~~ ~ 'f! tii
N. ~ "'l!i I
.~ ~. ~ la t-..~ ...:::~~ft I ~ l!J!
,. ~...~ g ... in tit
~- -._~_-_t'o:.~:;
~.. A':f'I
. ~
"'i
~
~~
...
~
~~
~
~'"
~
~ ~. Sl'llil t-..~ '" :::;"'~i~~~ ~_'
ri;~.... &h'. -
.,., ii
gN
ti
g ! !t:ilat-~"';:M~I~ ~...'
ci:g,' II) ... - ii'i .-c
~.-.~ ~
~
~
.... '" .0
fa fSi
o-~-
Q).
~ f
~
...
.~ 8!l! :;1". ;1;"';:"'~~. ~ ';t.
J tjN~ !
N .0
N Ii>
~
...
"
()
Ii
~
a
..
.
g ~ ~.... ~ lil ... .~.....,.::: "':~51
;; <;"~.~ l4 ~
fQ :n,N ~
Q
t.;
iJt ;:
~
~
i <;"~
~.--
ii .,,-.....
i
1>.
~::
:J,.-....
".8
if
~o
!
Sl
_, .0
" <;"~
~ ~..
.~ ~.~ 13 ....~ "';: I.'>....~.~
g Ii N
..,
...
';t. .N .Ie
~.., ~
-~ g
I i,t;~ N~O>-:: t? ~::~ ; ~ -;> i
l I~i.. .
~
~
,.
,.:
~ 1i~l:J""~"';:: ..,~.~..li; '/G.
Ii ~.~. ~ 1'0"" ~ !
ii -;":0
~ ~
i
".........
!
..f
Ii
ao:..~~
::S-'<<;}
.~'a'e
~j'l
:sll-!.
S~i f
"D.. .
1i<&8 a
:Ir ::r::
-l:! lFi "i
~!! ~
l5.nan ;n
%
1i"1iv-fi'!i".e.a"a
----_.-..~~
:I 2
)( l ~
-I ~i! ~.
~- I 1_ It _ ~
8 :; i 8~...~1" Ii?
~~ ~aJI~ct i t.>
lii';'o .s....i..~.......iii ~ ...t......
a: o::l: \L.. ....0 .
~~::: ~~'!"tl>\L i
~U)l!!5~i~ 1
I ~ i~i~~~~l,<F 1 ~ !;;
~O~:aiD:;:'l..W' ~ ~ I
::t ~ ~uir~z~& ~;:)-
o
<(
..,
..
5
N
!
8
;;
.t:,.
e
...
,..:
N
~
...
.!!'
'0
C
o
""-
.e~
;;-
la *.
I- .5
Ii
_8
~",.
~~
<~
Ii::'
o-
F
j
.>
'"
'"
~
.
>-
-1
it
~~ ..
c ~ 11
.g to- ~ 8
i,!~ .1~..#8~ID.e
gg tl",ci,
~t iil!J.s
.."! ~'I g
"'e,'li! c '0
"-5-
iii~\Li=) ~
'g~~ia!
.8t51~lii
f:-.B'~ u.8 ::l
u
!
"'SN
~,---C?
.'I""!"....
of;,:::"tJ
llt 8.:!. .
-C'?:f'IoI
..
II> ...
leg"'~
~i!>_.1Il...~
to,'('If,m
,...
3
i.i.
..
...
II> ...
..
..
I
...
-.
ii
;'l
;..
~
l:
::
.~
. :
~ ~
B ~
f ~l
Ii! l!!w
ft it~
~ ~=
e~ ;;-6 . g
!~cv -~_ii1;.J<e
i! ~"S8
i'~ ~il ~
'0 ~.Q.16 .s
,..!- ....lldlii
!:..~ '0 .! ;.s
!!.J2 J! $ .b1j
~li EI Il
it~$i Rl~
.!!"!li~ .~.
.so ...g'j~ .. '0.... ~
5 _....n .. .. 11 l!L
.~IE ~ ;i(i s.
l'lili.1....=
~i:;;!ll!i
i~~i~I.~!...
o",..CU 1:
j~Jii;~1
i!1 ~.:l~i
glfS ~iS ii
~iloll" ij.~.:g
.~$~i!:.1:i!
]"~ .. 0: .. ~ix;:
]i~J~.g 1>.1i..~
f$~l~ Ili
$Ja! .!l ~.rl i..;;
~ .'5. ..1= 'i i.~
~""!,=!iE-
-all: .; i I. ~
~ Jll: 1i:~;
I <-i<-i<<<t'
'"
..
..
v-
i
~
'l!
g
t;
~
'e
j
""
u.:
~e~'i:-~--~~g
AGENDA ITEM NO..--l(
PAGE '( OF 30
RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - 10
...."
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE TO ESTABLISH CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (SERENITY)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City")
has received a petition (the "Petition") requesting the institution of proceedings for (i) formation
of a community facilities district (the "CFD") pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities
Act of 1982, as amended (the "Act"), (ii) authorization of issuance of bonds for the CFD, and
(iii) establishment of an appropriations limit for the CFD; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the Petition complies with the requirements
of Government Code Section 53318( c) and now intends to initiate such proceedings; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Council to finance the acquisition and construction
of the Facilities (as defined below) or any combination thereof through the formation of the
CFD, subject to the authorization of bonds and the levy of a special tax to pay lease payments,
installment purchase payments or other payments, or principal and interest on bonds, being
approved at an election to be held within the boundaries of the CFD;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
.~
Section 1. The Council hereby determines to institute proceedings for the formation
of a community facilities district under the terms of the Act. The exterior boundaries of the CFD
are hereby specified and described to be as shown on that certain map attached hereto as Exhibit
A, and now on file in the office of the Clerk entitled "Proposed Boundary of City of Lake
Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Serenity)," which map indicates by a
boundary line the extent of the territory included in the proposed community facilities district
and shall govern for all details as to the extent of the CFD. On the original and one copy of the
map of such CFD on file in the City Clerk's office, the City Clerk shall endorse the certificate
evidencing the date and adoption of this resolution. The City Clerk shall file the original of such
map in her office and, within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Resolution, the City
Clerk shall file a copy of such map so endorsed in the records of the County Recorder, County of
Riverside, State of California.
Section 2. The name of the proposed CFD shall be "City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Serenity)."
Section 3. The facilities proposed to be financed by the CFD are public infrastructure
facilities and other governmental facilities with an estimated useful life of five years or longer,
which the CFD is authorized by law to construct, own or operate and that are necessary to meet
increased demands placed upon the City as a result of development or rehabilitation occurring
within the proposed CFD, including but not limited to streets, streetscape, sidewalk, curb and
gutter, traffic signal, traffic signing and striping, park, open space, landscaping improvements,
dry utility improvements, storm drain, water and sewer facilities, City fees and fees of the
......,
45542916.2
AGENDA I rbYI i~O.--1 /
PACE )5 OF 30
~
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, and related costs including designs, inspections,
professional fees, annexation fees, connection fees and acquisition costs (the "Facilities"). Such
Facilities need not be physically located within the CFD.
Section 4. Except where funds are otherwise available, it is the intention of the
Council to levy annually in accordance with procedures contained in the Act a special tax (the
"Special Tax") sufficient to pay for the costs of financing the acquisition and/or construction of
the Facilities, including the principal of and interest on the bonds proposed to be issued to
finance the Facilities and other periodic costs, the establishment and replenishment of reserve
funds, the remarketing, credit enhancement and liquidity fees, the costs of administering the levy
and collection of the Special Tax and all other costs of the levy of the Special Tax and issuance
of the bonds, including any foreclosure proceedings, architectural, engineering, inspection, legal,
fiscal, and financial consultant fees, discount fees, capitalized interest not to exceed two years,
election costs and all costs of issuance of the bonds, including, but not limited to, fees for bond
counsel, disclosure counsel, financing consultants and printing costs, and all other administrative
costs of the tax levy and bond issue. The Special Tax will be secured by recordation of a
continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the CFD. In the first year in which such a
Special Tax is levied, the levy shall include a sum sufficient to repay to the City all amounts, if
any, transferred to the CFD pursuant to Section 53314 of the Act and interest thereon. The
schedule of the rate and method of apportionment and manner of collection of the Special Tax is
described in detail in Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. The
Special Tax is based upon the cost of financing the Facilities in the CFD, the demand that each
parcel will place on the Facilities and the benefit (direct and/or indirect) received by each parcel
from the Facilities.
~
The Special Tax is apportioned to each parcel on the foregoing basis pursuant to Section
53325.3 of the Act. In the event that a portion of the property within the CFD shall become for
any reason exempt, wholly or partially, from the levy of the Special Tax, the Council shall, on
behalf of the CFD, increase the levy to the extent necessary upon the remaining property within
the CFD which is not delinquent or exempt in order to yield the required payments, subject to the
maximum tax. Under no circumstances, however, shall the Special Tax levied against any parcel
used for private residential purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by
the owner of any other parcel or parcels within the CFD by more than 10 percent. Furthermore,
the maximum special tax authorized to be levied against any parcel used for private residential
purposes shall not be increased over time in excess of 2 percent per year.
Section 5. The Council hereby finds that the proposed Facilities are necessary to
meet increased demands put upon the City as a result of the new development or rehabilitation
within the proposed CFD.
Section 6. A public hearing (the "Hearing") on the establishment of the CFD and the
proposed rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax shall be held on January 25, 2005,
at 7 :00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, at the chambers of the Council, 183 North Main
Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530.
~
45542916.2
2
ACENDA ITEM NO.---LL._
PACE q OF 3 Q._~
Section 7. At the time and place set forth above for the hearing, any interested
. person, including all persons owning lands or registered to vote within the proposed CFD, may
appear and be heard.
...,;
Section 8. Each City officer who is or will be responsible for the Facilities to be
financed by the CFD, ifit is established, is hereby directed to study the proposed CFD and, at or
before the time of the above-mentioned Hearing, file a report with the Council, and which is to
be made a part of the record of the Hearing, containing a brief description of the Facilities by
type which will in his or her opinion be required to adequately meet the needs of the CFD and
his or her estimate of the cost of providing the Facilities. The City Manager is directed to
estimate the fair and reasonable cost of all incidental expenses, including the cost of planning
and designing the Facilities to be financed pursuant to the Act, including the cost of
environmental evaluations of such facilities, all costs associated with the creation of the CFD,
issuance of bonds, determination of the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special
taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City with
respect to the CFD, and any other expenses incidental to the construction, completion and
inspection of the authorized work to be paid through the proposed financing.
Section 9. The City may accept advances of funds from any sources, including
private persons or private entities, and is authorized and directed to use such funds for any
authorized purpose, including any cost incurred by the City in creating the CFD. The City may
enter into an agreement to repay all of such funds as are not expended or committed for any
authorized purpose at the time of the election on the levy of the Special Tax, if the proposal to
levy such tax should fail, and to repay all of such funds advanced if the levy of the Special Tax
shall be approved by the qualified electors ofthe CFD. ,...",
Section I O. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a notice ("Notice") of the
Hearing pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation
published in the area of the proposed CFD. Such Notice shall contain information set forth in
Section 53322 ofthe Act. Such publication shall be completed at least 7 days prior to the date of
the Hearing.
Section 11. The Clerk may send a copy of the Notice by first-class mail, postage
prepaid, to each registered voter and to each landowner within proposed CFD as shown on the
last equalized assessment roll. Said mailing shall be completed not less than fifteen (15) days
prior to the date of the Hearing.
Section 12. Pursuant to Section 53344.1 of the Act, the Council hereby reserves to
itself, in its sole discretion, the right and authority by subsequent resolution to allow any owner
of property within the CFD, subject to the provisions of Section 53344.1 of the Act and those
conditions as it may impose, and any applicable prepayment penalties as prescribed in the bond
indenture or comparable instrument or document, to tender to the City Treasurer in full payment
or part payment of any installment of the special taxes or the interest or penalties thereon which
may be due or delinquent, but for which a bill has been received, any bond or other obligation
secured thereby, the bond or other obligation to be taken at par and credit to be given for the
accrued interest shown thereby computed to the date of tender.
.....,
45542916.2
3
AOENDAITEM NO.~ I
PAGE \ (:) OF 50
-
,-..-. Section 13. The voting procedure with respect to the establishment of the CFD and the
imposition of the special tax shall be by hand delivered ballot election.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
day of
,2004.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
By:
Title: Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,-..-.
Barbara Leibold, City Attorney
~,
45542916.2
4
ACENDA 'TEM NO.--L1 .,
PAGE II OF 30
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
'-""
COUNTY OF RNERSIDE
I, Vicki Kasad, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting
thereof held on the _ day of , 2004, and that it was so adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
By:
City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore
~
'-""
45542916.2
AGENDA ITEM NO. II
PAGE \;;J OF '30
,.........
,.........
,.........
EXHIBIT A
BOUNDARY MAP
45542916.2
!\GalOA \lEIA NO.~
PAGf~ ~
PROPOSED BOUNDARY OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT No. 2005-1
OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
(SERENITY)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
""""
APN: 370-120-004
370-120-014
370-120-050
370-120-052
370-120-056
370-412-021
370-415-006
370-415-007
370-415-008
370-415-009
370-415-010
370-415-011
370-415-012
370-415-013
370-415-014
370-415-015
""""
SCALE: 1"=200'
REFERENCE 1HE RIIoDlSIDE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAPS
FOR A DETAIlED DESCRlPnON OF PARCEL UNES AND DlMENSlONS
nLm IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CURK OF 1HE CITY OF LAKE E:LSlNORE THIS ---PAY OF _2DCJ.4.
CITY CURK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
I HEREBY CERnFY THAT THE MTHIH MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSlNORE
COAIIAUNITY FAClUnES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (SERENITY) CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE. COUNTY OF RfIlElSlDE. STATE:
OF CAlII'ORHIA WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE: AT A REGULARL Y SCHEDULED IAEEnNG
THEREOF. HfJ.D ON THE _ DAY OF 2DCJ.4. BY ITS RESDLlIllOH No.
CITY CLE:RK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE:
LEGEM2
FlLE:D THIS _ DAY OF _ 2DCJ.4. AT THE HOUR OF D'Q.ClCI<..-M. IN BODK_ OF MAPS
OF ASSESSlAENT AND COAIIAUNITY FAClUnES DISTRICTS PAGE: N~THROIJGH_ AS INSTRUMENT NO.
iN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER IN THE COUNTY OF RI\lERSIDE. STATE: OF CAUFORNIA.
COUNTY RECORDER OF 1HE COUNTY OF Rl\oERSlDE
FEE: ._
"'"
DISTRICT OOUNDARY
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
AGENDA ITEM NO.-1L--
PACE \'-\ OF .-:70
_HARRIS A: ASSOCIATES
34 r-Iho """', _ l!lO
_ Imn.. CA 9261.4
(841) 155-3900 . FAX (949) 155-3H5
Communit,. FaclJiUea Diltrict No. 2005-1
of the Cit,. of Lake E18iDore
(Seren1t,.)
COllllTY OF 1IIYIlIl8III1. CllII'OJIlII.l
_10FI
~
,--..
,--..
45542916.2
EXHIBIT B
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \ is
II
OF 30
EXHIBIT D
...,
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
(SERENITY)
The following sets forth the Rate and Method of Apportionment for
Special Taxes in the City of Lake Elsinore ("City") Community F
(Serenity) ("CFD No. 2005-1 "). An Annual Special Tax shall be Ie
2005-1 each Fiscal Year, in an amount determined through the a
Apportionment described below. All of the real property withi
by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the
herein provided.
levy and collection of
District No. 2005-1
and collected in CFD No.
fthe Rate and Method of
5-1, unless exempted
and in the manner
The terms hereinafter set forth have the foIl
own on an Assessor's Parcel
, the land area as shown on the ...,
lcable Final Map, the land area shall
ct of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5,
ode of the State of California.
" Admi
*~
behalf ofCF
the collection 0
of Bonds, the pa
to the administration
authorized purposes of
..nary and necessary expense incurred by the City on
to th etermination ofthe amount ofthe levy of Special Taxes,
ding the expenses of collecting delinquencies, the administration
d benefits of any City employee whose duties are directly related
. 2005-1 , and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the
. 2005-1 relating to CFD No. 2005-1.
"Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Y ear on any Assessor's
Parcel.
II Assessor's Parcel" means a lot or parcel ofland designated on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an
assigned Assessor's Parcel Number.
"Assessor's Parcel Map II means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
by Assessor's Parcel Number.
...,
" Assessor's Parcel Number" means that number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for
purposes of identification.
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
ACENDA ITEM No.---1L-December 3,2004
PACE \ ~ OF 3D _ Page 1
/"""
"Assigned Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax ofthat name described in Section D below.
"Backup Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax ofthat name described in Section E below.
"Bonds" means any obligation to repay a sum of money, including obligations in the form of bonds,
notes, certificates of participation, long-term leases, loans from government agencies, or loans from
banks, other financial institutions, private businesses, or individuals, or long-term contracts, or any
refunding thereof, to which Special Taxes within CFD No. 2005-1 have en pledged.
"City Council" means the City Council of
Body of CFD No. 2005-1, or its designee.
"County" means the Count
"Building Square Footage" or "BSF" means the square footage 0
exclusive of garages or other structures not used as living space
building permit application for such Assessor's Parcel.
"Calendar Year" means the period commencing Jan
December 31.
"CFD No. 2005-1" means Community Facilities District
the Act.
,..........
of Taxable Property for which a building
al Year in which the Special Tax is being
, Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes
"Final Map"
adjustment, pursu
seq.) or recordation
individual lots for whic
f property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line
ision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et
nium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 1352 that creates
g permits may be issued without further subdivision.
"Fiscal Year" means the period commencing on July 1 of any year and ending the following June
30.
"Lot" means all the Assessors Parcels for which a building permit has or may be issued for the
purposes of constructing a residential dwelling unit.
"Maximum Special Tax" means the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section
~ C, that can be levied by CFD No. 2005-1 in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel.
"Non-Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a
building permit was issued for any type of non-residential use.
City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO.~ December 3, 2004
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 PAGE \ '1 OF 3D Page 2
"Partial Prepayment Amount" means the amount required to prepay a portion of the Annual ....,
Special Tax obligation for an Assessor's Parcel, as described in Section H.
"Prepayment Amount" means the amount required to prepay the Annual Special Tax obligation in
full for an Assessor's Parcel, as described in Section G.
"Proportionately" means that the ratio ofthe Annual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned
Annual Special Tax is equal for all applicable Assessor's Parcels. In the e of Developed Property
subject to the apportionment of the Annual Special Tax unde three of Section F,
"Proportionately" in step three means that the quotient of (a) Annu cial Tax less the Assigned
Annual Special Tax divided by (b) the Backup Annual Special T Assigned Annual Special
Tax, is equal for all applicable Assessor's Parcels.
"Special Tax" means any ofthe special taxes a
to the Act.
erty that would
cannot be
e Property
"Provisional Undeveloped Property" means all Asse
otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursu
classified as Exempt Property because to do so w
below the required minimum Acreage set forth in Sectio
"Residential Property" means all Assess
permit has been issued for purposes of cons
y CFD No. 2005-1 pursuant
.......,
ired in any Fiscal Year to pay: (i) the debt
'in the Calendar Year that commences in
e costs associated with the release of funds
n to establish or replenish any reserve funds
and (v) the collection or accumulation of funds for the
.1Zed by CFD No. 2005-1 provided that the inclusion of
rease e levy of Special Tax on Undeveloped Property as set
(vi) any amounts available to pay debt service or other periodic
y applicable bond indenture, fiscal agent agreement, or trust
"Taxable Property" me all Assessor's Parcels within CFD No. 2005-1, which are not Exempt
Property.
"Undeveloped Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property which are not
Developed Property, or Provisional Undeveloped Property.
.......,
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO.~ December 3, 2004
PAGE ~ g OF ZD Page 3
,,-....
SECTION B
CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCELS
Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2005-06, each Assessor's Parcel within CFD No.
2005-1 shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each Assessor's
Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property
or Provisional Undeveloped Property. In addition, each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property
shall further be classified as Residential Property or Non-Residential Property, Lastly, each
Assessor's Parcel of Residential Property shall be assigned to its app riate Assigned Annual
Special Tax rate based on its Building Square Footage.
The Maximum Spec.
Provisional Unde
Tax.
SECTION C
MAXIMUM SPECI
1. Developed Property
2.
,,-....
fied as Undeveloped Property, or
all be the Assigned Annual Special
ND
VAL SPECIAL TAX
1.
Each Fisca
Property shall
Tax applicable to
be determined p
ssessor's Parcel of Residential Property or Non-Residential
an Assigned Annual Special Tax. The Assigned Annual Special
sessor's Parcel of Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2005-06 shall
ant to Table 1 below.
".......
ACENDA ITEM NO._ {I
PACUq __.oF~3o
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
December 3,2004
Page 4
TABLEt
......,
ASSIGNED ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATES
FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005-06
2.
Classification
Residential
Residential
Buildin S uare Foota e
Less than 1,801
1,801 - 2,050
Residential
2,051 - 2,300
Residential
Residential
Non-Residential
Property and Provisional
, al Special Tax. The Assigned
cel clas ed as Undeveloped Property and
ear 200 -06 shall be $17,760 per Acre.
......,
3.
1, 2 , the Assigned Special Tax rate for Developed
ovisional Undeveloped Property shall be increased by
effect in the prior Fiscal Year.
SECTION E
KUP ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX
At the time a Final Map is recorded, the Backup Annual Special Tax for all Lots within such Final
Map area shall be determined by dividing (a) the product of the Maximum Special Tax rate for
Undeveloped Property and the total Acreage of all Lots in such Final Map area, by (b) the total
number of Lots within such Final Map area. The resulting quotient shall be the Backup Annual
Special Tax for each Lot within such Final Map area.
The Backup Annual Special Tax for all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property classified as Non-
Residential Property shall be the Maximum Special Tax rate for Undeveloped Property multiplied by
the Acreage of such Assessor's Parcel.
......",
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
M NO -1l I2ecember 3, 2004
AGENDA \TE . 3D Page 5
PAGE_ Qo _OF -
/""" If a Final Map includes Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property which are classified or reasonably
expected to be classified as Residential Property and Non-Residential Property, then the Backup
Annual Special Tax for each Assessor's Parcel which is classified or reasonably expected to be
classified as Residential Property shall be computed exclusive of the allocable portion of total
Acreage attributable to Assessor's Parcels classified or reasonably expected to be classified as Non-
Residential Property.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if one or more Lots within a recorded Final Map are subsequently
changed or modified by recordation of a lot line adjustment or similar in ent, then the aggregate
Backup Special Tax applicable to such changed Lots shall be realloca a anner consistent with
the first paragraph of this section among such changed Lots so cumulative total of the
Backup Special Tax generated by such changed Lots equals t .:ve total of such Backup
Special Tax that would have been generated by such change. e did not take place.
Step One:
METHOD OF APPORTION
On each July I, commencing July 1,2006, the Backup
two percent (2.00%) of the amount in effect in the
/"""
. cal Y , the City Council shall levy
e following steps:
Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of
pplicable Assigned Annual Special Tax
Requirement.
Step Two:
eded to tisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
ual Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on
eveloped Property up to 100% of the Assigned Annual
ch such Assessor's Parcel as needed to satisfy the Special
Step Three:
s are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
been completed, then the Annual Special Tax on each Assessor's
Parcelof& idential Property whose Maximum Special Tax is the Backup Annual
Special Tax shall be increased Proportionately from the Assigned Annual Special
Tax up to 100% of the Backup Annual Special Tax as needed to satisfy the Special
Tax Requirement.
Step Four:
If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
three steps have been completed, the Annual Special Tax shall be levied
Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property up to
100% of the Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to each such Assessor's Parcel
as needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement.
,,-..
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
ACENDA ITEM NO.-1 t December 3, 2004
-:l. Page 6
PACE &~ OF 00 -=.
/
~
SECTION G
PREPAYMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX
The following definitions apply to this Section G:
"CFD Public Facilities" means $7,500,000 expressed in 2005 dollars, which shall increase by the
Construction Inflation Index on July 1,2006, and on each July 1 thereaft r such lower amount (i)
determined by the City Council as sufficient to provide the public under the authorized
bonding program for CFD No. 2005-1 , or (ii) determined by the uncil concurrently with a
covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds to be supporte Taxes levied under this
Rate and Method of Apportionment.
"Construction Inflation Index" means t
Record Building Cost Index for the city ofL
in the previous Fiscal Year. In the event this i
Index shall be another index as determined
Engineering News-Record Bu' Cost Index
"Construction Fund" means an account specificall
equivalent to hold funds, which are currently availa.,.
facilities eligible under CFD No. 2005-1.
ge in the Engineering News-
the calendar year which ends
e Construction Inflation
sonably comparable to the
geles.
~
"Future Facilities Cos
be funded through exis
minus public facility costs
to the date of p
'lities minus public facility costs available to
or funded by the Outstanding Bonds, and
the Construction Fund actually earned prior
"Outsta
Taxes w ic
the current Fis
prepayments of
. ued Bonds issued and secured by the levy of Special
e first interest and/or principal payment date following
ond to be redeemed at a later date with the proceeds of prior
Taxes.
Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, or an Assessor's Parcel of
Undeveloped Property fo ich a building permit has been issued or is expected to be issued, or an
Assessor's Parcel of ProvIsional Undeveloped Property maybe prepaid in full, provided that there
are no delinquent Special Taxes, penalties, or interest charges outstanding with respect to such
Assessor's Parcel at the time the Special Tax obligation would be prepaid. The Prepayment Amount
for an Assessor's Parcel eligible for prepayment shall be determined as described below.
An owner of an Assessor's Parcel intending to prepay the Annual Special Tax obligation shall
provide the City with written notice of intent to prepay, and within 5 days of receipt of such notice,
the City shall notify such owner ofthe amount ofthe non-refundable deposit determined to cover the
cost to be incurred by CFD No. 2005-1 in calculating the proper amount of a prepayment. Within ......;
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO.~cember 3, 2004
PAGE ~c;} OF 30 Page 7
,...... 15 days of receipt of such non-refundable deposit, the City shall notify such owner ofthe Prepayment
Amount of such Assessor's Parcel.
The Prepayment Amount for each applicable Assessor's Parcel shall be calculated according to the
following formula (capitalized terms defined below):
As of the date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amou
plus
plus
plus
plus
less
equals
Bond Redemption Amount
Redemption Premium
Future Facilities Amount
Defeasance Cost
Administrative Fee
Reserve Fund Credit
Prepayment Amount
1.
,......
2.
eveloped Property, Undeveloped Property or
o be prepaid, divide the Assigned Annual
o paragraph 1 for such Assessor's Parcel by
igned Annual Special Tax applicable to all
fTaxable Property at buildout, as reasonably determined
quot ent computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the Outstanding
roduct shall be the "Bond Redemption Amount".
4. the Bond Redemption Amount by the applicable redemption
pr m, if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds
of the Bond Redemption Amount. This product is the "Redemption
Premium. "
5. Compute the Future Facilities Cost.
6.
Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the amount
determined pursuant to paragraph 5. to determine the Future Facilities Cost to
be prepaid (the "Future Facilities Amount").
,......
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO. II
PAGE d5 _ OF 3D
December 3, 2004
-
Page 8
7.
Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount
to be redeemed with the proceeds ofthe Prepayment Amount until the earliest
call date for the Outstanding Bonds.
"'"
8. Estimate the amount of interest earnings to be derived from the reinvestment
of the Bond Redemption Amount plus the Redemption Premium until the
earliest call date for the Outstanding Bonds.
9.
Subtract the amount computed pursuant to par
computed pursuant to paragraph 7. This differ
h 8 from the amount
se "Defeasance Cost."
10.
Estimate the administrative fees
prepayment, induding the costs of co
the costs of redeeming Bonds,
evidence the prepayment
"Administrative Fee."
associated with the
repayment Amount,
g any notices to
mount is the
11.
""'"
ount is equal to the sum of the Bond Redemption
ion Premium, the Future Facilities Amount, the
dministrative Fee, less the Reserve Fund Credit.
payment Amount, the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs
11 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established
bond indenture and used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make debt
se e payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 6 shall be
deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to
paragraph 10 shall be retained by CFD No. 2005-1.
With respect to Special Tax obligation that is prepaid pursuant to this Section G, the City Council
shall indicate in the records of CFD No. 2005-1 that there has been a prepayment of the Special Tax
obligation and shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act within thirty
(30) days of receipt of such prepayment to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax obligation and
the release ofthe Special Tax lien on such Assessor's Parcel, and the obligation of such Assessor's
Parcel to pay such Special Taxes shall cease. ....."
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO. II
PAGE @Lt OF Z:rl)
December 3, 2004
Page 9
~ Notwithstanding the foregoing, no prepayment will be allowed unless the amount of Special Tax that
may be levied on Taxable Property, net of Administrative Expenses, shall be at least 1.1 times the
regularly scheduled annual interest and principal payments on all currently Outstanding Bonds in
each future Fiscal Year.
SECTION H
PARTIAL PREPAYMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX
The Partial Prepayment Amount shall be calculated acc
Assessor's Parcel of
ected to be issued, or and
Section H. below, may
enalties, or interest
. al Tax obligation
The Special Tax obligation of an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Pro
Undeveloped Property for which a building permit has been issue
Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property, as cal
be partially prepaid, provided that there are no delinque
charges outstanding with respect to such Assessor's Par
would be prepaid.
~
PP=
PG=
F=
A=
ses calculated according to Section G.
With respect
records of
and shat
receipt of suc
the Special Tax
and the obligation
cease.
. S partI Y prepaid, the City Council shall indicate in the
a partial prepayment of the Special Tax obligation
Q in compliance with the Act within thirty (30) days of
fthe ecial Tax obligation, to indicate the partial prepayment of
artial release ofthe Special Tax lien on such Assessor's Parcel,
r's Parcel to pay such prepaid portion of the Special Tax shall
Notwithstanding the foreg ng, no partial prepayment will be allowed unless the amount of Special
Tax that may be levied on Taxable Property after such partial prepayment, net of Administrative
Expenses, shall be at least 1.1 times the regularly scheduled annual interest and principal payments
on all currently Outstanding Bonds in each future Fiscal Year.
~
SECTION I
TERMINATION OF SPECIAL TAX
For each Fiscal Year that any Bonds are outstanding the Annual Special Tax shall be levied on all
Assessor's Parcels subject to the Annual Special Tax. If any delinquent Annual Special Taxes
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO. II December 3, 2004
--J.-J....-- Page 10
PAGE 8.D" .. OF 3D .
remain uncollected prior to or after all Bonds are retired, the Annual Special Tax may be levied to
the extent necessary to reimburse CFD No. 2005-1 for uncollected Annual Special Taxes associated ......"
with the levy of such Annual Special Taxes, but not later than the 2043-44 Fiscal Year.
SECTION J
EXEMPTIONS
The City shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor's Parcels whic
offered for dedication, encumbered by or restricted in use by the State
local governments, including school districts, (ii) Assessor's Pa
worship and are exempt from ad valorem property taxes bec
organization, (iii) Assessor's Parcels which are owned b
encumbered by or restricted in use by a homeowners' asso .
or utility easements making impractical their utilizati
easement, (v) Assessor's Parcels which are privat
solely for public uses, or (vi) other types of public use
that no such classification would reduce the sum of all Ta
owned by, irrevocably
mia, Federal or other
ich are used as places of
e owned by a religious
ered for dedication,
arcels with public
set forth in the
restricted
iI, provided
34.08 Acres.
Notwithstanding the above, the City Cou
Property if such classification would reduce t
Assessor's Parcels which cannot be classified a
reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property to Ie
Undeveloped Property, and bject to Sp
ssessor's Parcel as Exempt
to less than 34.08 Acres.
e such classification would
III be classified as Provisional
ant to step four in Section F.
......"
Any prop
file a w "
the first instal
promptly review
oralevidenceregar
decision requires that t
property owner, a cash re
shall be made to the Ann
u or application of the Special Tax is not correct may
ouncil not later than twelve months after having paid
ax th IS disputed. A representative( s) of CFD No. 2005-1 shall
necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and
ofthe Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. lfthe representative's
ax for an Assessor's Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the
hall not be made (except for the last year oflevy), but an adjustment
Special Tax on that Assessor's Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s).
SECTION L
MANNER OF COLLECTION
The Annual Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad
valorem property taxes, provided, however, that CFD Nq. 2005-1 may collect Annual Special Taxes
at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations.
......"
City of Lake Elsinore
Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
AGENDA ITEM NO. II December 3,2004
Page 11
PACE dto_OF 3b
,-....
RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -11-
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,000,000 WITHIN THE PROPOSED
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.
2005-1 (SERENITY)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City")
has heretofore adopted Resolution No. 2004-..:LL, stating the Council's intention to form the
City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Serenity) (the "CFD"),
pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, (the "Act"), to
finance the purchase, construction, expansion or rehabilitation of certain real and other tangible
property with an estimated useful life of five years or longer, including public infrastructure
facilities and other governmental facilities, which are necessary to meet increased demands
placed upon the City as a result of development or rehabilitation occurring within the proposed
CFD (the "Facilities"); and
WHEREAS, in order to finance the Facilities it is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness
in the amounts not to exceed $12,000,000, the repayment of which is to be secured by special
taxes levied in accordance with Section 53340 et seq. of the Act on all property within the CFD,
,,- other than those properties exempted from taxation as provided in the rate and method of
apportionment attached as Exhibit B to Resolution No. 2004-1L;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
The above recitals are true and correct.
Section 2. It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness within the CFD in the amount
not to exceed $12,000,000 to finance the costs ofthe Facilities.
Section 3. The indebtedness will be incurred for the purpose of financing the costs of
designing, constructing and acquiring the Facilities, the acquisition of necessary equipment and
property therefor and fulfilling contractual commitments and carrying out the powers and
purposes of the CFD, including, but not limited to, the financing of the costs associated with the
issuance of the bonds and all other costs necessary to finance the Facilities which are permitted
to be financed pursuant to the Act.
Section 4. It is the intent of the Council to authorize the sale of bonds in one or more
series, in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $12,000,000 at a maximum
interest rate not in excess of 12 percent per annum or such rate not in excess of the maximum
rate permitted by law at the time the bonds are issued. The term of the bonds shall be determined
pursuant to a resolution of the Council authorizing the issuance of the bonds, but such term shall
in no event exceed 40 years or such longer term as is then permitted by law.
~
45542927.2
ACENDA ITEM NO. II
PACE ;;;> I OF Sb
Section 5. A public hearing (the "Hearing") on the proposed debt issue shall be held
on January 25, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as practicable, at the chambers of the ....",
Council, 183 North Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530.
Section 6. At the Hearing at the time and place set forth above, any interested
persons, including all persons owning land within the proposed CFD, may appear and be heard at
the Hearing.
Section 7. The proposition to incur bonded indebtedness in the maximum aggregate
principal amount not to exceed $12,000,000 shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the
CFD. A special community facilities district election shall be conducted on January 25, 2005.
The special election shall be conducted by hand delivered ballot election. The ballots shall be
returned to the office ofthe election officer no later than 11 :00 o'clock p.m. on January 25,2005.
Section 8. The Clerk is hereby directed to publish a copy of this resolution, which
shall serve as notice ("Notice") of the Hearing and the special bond election, pursuant to Section
6061 of the Government Code in a new:spaper of general circulation in the proposed CFD.
Section 9. The Clerk may send a copy of the Notice of the Hearing by first-class
mail, postage prepaid, to each registered voter and to each landowner within the proposed CFD
as shown on the last equalized assessment roll.
.......",
.....,
45542927.2
2
ACENDA ITEM NO. II
PACE dD OF5o
~
".-....
~
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
,2004.
By:
Title: Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Leibold, City Attorney
45542927.2
3
ACENOA lTEM NOo_1.---.-.-
PAGE act OF 3b
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
)ss.
)
,..,
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
I, Vicki Kasad, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting
thereof held on the _ day of , 2004, and that it was so adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
By:
City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore
,..,
.....""
45542927.2
ACENDA iTEM NO. II
1PAOE_~_ OF '"3L:::>
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
,- REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE: DECEMBER 14, 2004
SUBJECT: 31sT YEAR CDBG SENIOR CENTER APPLICATION
BACKGROUND
Over the past nine (9) CDBG Program Years, the City of Lake Elsinore has submitted applications
to the County requesting funding support for the operation of the Senior Center due to the use of
the Center by unincorporated County residents.
DISCUSSION
The Senior Activity Center is currently funded for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 (CDBG 30th Year) with
$19,000, and $113,300 provided by the City's General Fund. The City received no funding from the
County of Riverside last year, although $47,658 was requested.
,-
During the past nine (9) years, Supervisor Buster has supported the City's Senior Center facility as
demonstrated through the County's funding of a portion of facility operations. The deadline for
submitting applications to the County for the 31 5t CDBG Year is Friday, December 10, 2004.
The attached application requests $35,721 in County support ofthe City's Senior Activity Center as
27% of the users are County residents.
Staff is asking for City Council approval to submit an application to the County of Riverside
requesting a portion oftheir 31 5t year allocation for support ofthe continued operations ofthe Lake
Elsinore Senior Activity Center.
FISCAL IMPACT
The only cost to the City will be staff time to prepare the application for. submittal.
RECOMMENDATION
/'""'
It is recommended the Mayor and the City Council approve the attached application and direct staff
to submit it to the County of Riverside requesting continued funding ofthe operations ofthe Lake
Elsinore Senior Activity Center through the County's 315t Year Public Service Community
Development Block Grant Funds in the amount of$35,721.
AGENDA ITEM NO. I J.-
PAOEJ_. OF ~
PREPARED BY: David W. Sapp, Director of Community Services
APPROVED BY: [)tl~ tv. Jw em
APPROVED FOR ~ ~~
AGENDA LISTING: _ Ii "'-
Ri ard J. Waten augh, City ana r
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAOE Q
,.....,
,.....,
....,
IJ
OF~
PROPOSAL NUMBER
Date Received
",-..-.
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
APPLlCATlONFORM
'-GENERAL INFORMATION:
Name of Primary' Activity Sponsor: City of Lake Elsinore, Community Services Department
Mailing Address: 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore
Zip Code 92530
Telephone Number: 95,1) 674-2526
Contact Person:
Ted Fazzio
Title: Rer.re::ltion /Tourism Manager
Program Manager:
Phone:
Address (If different from above):
Amount of COBG Funds Requested: $
$35,72-1
Where will the activity occur and what is the geographic scale of the proposed activity (community, city, region) be
specific? Lake Elsinore Senior Activity Center, serving Lake Elsinore City and surrounding
_____ unincorporated Riverside County area.
1at Supervisorial District does your activity occur. Dis trict 1
II. ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY: (This is applicable only if you are a non-profit organization). Please provide a
list of your (;urrent Board Df Directors (Labe! as Attachment !I). N I A
Date Organization founded: 1888/City of Lake Elsinore
Oate Organization incorporated as a non-profit organization
Number of volunteers
Number of paid staff
Federal identification number
State identification number
Attach: ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION AND BY-LAWS (Label as Attachment IIA)
III. PROJECT ACTIVITY: (check the applicable category your application represents)
_ Real Property Acquisition ~ Public Service _ Housing _ Capital Equipment (Fixed)
_ Rehabilitation/Preservation (please provide picture of structure)
__ Public Facilities Improvements (construction)
Other: explain
~
3
~CENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 2>
IJ.
OF \~
IV. PROJECT NARRATIVE:
A.
Name of Project Lake Elsinore Senior Activity Center
Specific Location of Project 420 E. Lakeshore Drive. Lake Elsinore. CA 92530
(Include street address, if applicable)
"-""
2. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project by describing preasely what will be accomplished with the
requested funds.
1. Provide a detailed Project Description in quantifiable terms: (attach additional sheets if necessary)
Operation of the Lake Bsinore Senior Activity Center; Operating Hours Man - Fri, Bam-4pm and
other hours (or special events/projeds.
1. Setvice. educationaf & recreational selViaJ canter
2. Provides infonnation & referraf, health screenings, educational programs, dasses, computer
teaming canter, daily nutritional site. exercise programs, social & setvice dubs, drop-in &
organized group activities, speciaf se1Vices (income tax. paralegal, HRA, notary, Sociaf Security.
food distribution & general assistance, counseling & other support & advocacy programs for older
adults.
3. Center serves over 185 patrons perday to indude City & County residents
)> Facility operations, staffing, utilities, supplies & equipment
)> CDBG Funding would be supplemented by City General funds and private donations.
2. What are the goals and objectIVes ot the projecP
1. Provide:
)> Safe & comfortabte environment to visit, socialize & secure needed services
)> Quality programs & setVices to meet the speciaf needs of the older adult population
2. . Expanded serviaJs & programs for the continuing education o( older adutts through cooperative
ventures with agencies & service providers & local businesses/metehants.
3. Cootdinate community resources to provide special services to meet the social, economic &
personal needs of the seniors.
4. Provide diversified programs and expand opportunities available to local seniors.
5. Provide outreach & marketing efforts to make the public aware of available programs & servK:es.
,...."
3- Discuss this project's benefit to low- and moderate- income residents to be served by this project:
The facifities, programs, selViaJs and programs are offered free or at reduced costs through
cooperative ventures; donations of funds, time, services & equipment; and grant funding. Examples
indude the new computer /eaming canter; food distlibution & panlty programs; legal assistance;
counseling, notary services, health screenings, income tax, HRA. and social security selllices; and
many more are offered regularly at no cost
IV. PROJECT NARRATIVE (Cont.):
4. If this is a public service activity: '(A) Is this a NEW service provided by your agency? Yes_ No..J{
(8) If service is not new, will the proposed activity substantially increase the existing level of service?
Explain how the service will be substantially increased. (attach additional sheets if necessary)
Although new services (such as the computeroenterand notary selllioos) are added as opportunities
arise, the.faciJity and generaf operations have been on-going. Outreach & marketing will increase
awareness & thus increase participation. Continuous exposure in promoting programs incroases use
of fad/ities and increased participation.
,...."
4
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAC'E ~
/1..-
OF \~.
,....--.
5. What methods will be used for community involvement to assure that all who might benefit from.the project
are provided an opportunity to participate?
Marketing methods indude use of Newspaper, raalO. & Cable TV public service spots;
mailings (notices, City Newsletter, Outlook publications), Center Newsletter, flyer distribution,
public presentations and any other means that beromes available. Coordinated work with
churches, organizations (Bks, Lions, etc.) and service agencies (AARP, Social Security,
Sodal Services etc.) to provide information to the public. Survey residents and coordinate
efforts.
6. What are the project's expected results? How many are expected to be served?
Increased attendance (5% annually), expanded programs, new contacts. and greater
awareness of available programs and services. Project: 185+ aver. Daily attendance
7. How will you measure and evaluate how the project mee~s its goals and objectives [measures should be
both qualitative and quantitative]?
,....--.
}> Log daily attendance (daily sign~n sheets)
}> Log daily telephone & personal contacts
}> Log numbers of persons served.
}> Survey users to obtain feedback of the participants
}> Gather infonnation and feedback following each program offered.
}> Provide "Comments" fonns for benefit infonnation to participants.
8. What evidence is there of long-term commitment to the proposal? Describe how you plan to continue the
work (project) after the grant ends?
This is a City facility and we will continue to seek funding to supplement City support through
grants and general funds as needed. We will solicit donations and continue to provide as
many services for free or at a reduced cost based on the funding available.
9. Attach maps of proposedproject(s) location and service area.
r--.
5
AGENDA lTEM NO.
PACE D
/J-
OF lY
V. PROJECT BENEFIT:
To be eligible for CDBG funding, a project must qualify within one of the three following categories. Indicate how the
activity in this application meets one of the following categories of benefits. Indicate the source of the infonnalion provided. ....."
(Provide infonnation for the one category your application applies to.)
CATEGORY 1. Benefit to low-moderate income persons (must be documented). Please identify how you have
documented the persons served are low-moderate income persons bi providing information in either A, 8, or C.
A. Area Benefit.
The project serves persons in the identified block groups in Census Tract which are 51 % or more low/moderate
income. 2000 Census Data:
Census Tract and block group numbers:
CT 420.02
BG
CT 430
BG
6.9
CT 427. 03
8G
CT 43 1
BG
CT 429
BG
CT 431.98
BG
_ I/- Total population in Census Tract(s) / block group{s)
_ # Total low-moderate population in Census Tract(s) / block group(s}
B. Limited Client.ele:
....."
The project serves clientele that have documented their income. Identify the procedure you currently have in
place to document that the clientele you serve are low-moderate income persons.
Intake forms are completed on each participant at the program site.
C. Clientele presumed to be principally low- and moderate-income persons.
The following groups are presumed by HUD to meet this criterion: Abused children, battered spouses, elderly
persons, severely disabled adults, homeless persons, illiterate adults, person's living with AIDS, and
migrant farm workers. Describe your clientele to be served by the activity.
All clients are elderly persons. Intake forms are completed annually to document
participants.
CATEGORY 2. Prevention or Elimination of Slums and Blight:
Is the project located in a Redevelopment Area? _Yes _ No. If yes, attach map of area. Additionally, provide the
Redevelopment Project Area {excerpts accepted} which documents the existence of slum/blight. Also document the
specific redevelopment objectives pertaining to the proposed project.
CATEGORY 3. Documented Health or Safety Condition of Particular Urgency:
Condition shall have been of recent (18 months) origin. Provide documentation which demonstrates the health or safety
condition has existed only within the previous 18 months.
....."
6
ACENDA ITEM NO.
pl\rr: le.
IJ
OJ: \ Y
VL FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
A. Complete the following annual budget to begin on July I, of this year. If these line items are not applicable to
,-... your activity, please attach an appropriate budget. Provide total Budqet information and distribution of CDBG funds
in the proposed budqet.
BUDGET SUMMARY
TOTAL BUDGET
(Include CDBG Funds)
III. Architectural/Engineering Design
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
CDBG FUNDS
REQUESTED
$ 7,421
$ 0
$ 0
$ 7 421
$ 0
$ 0
$ 1,500
$ 300
$ 1.000
$ 25 500
$-.-28 300
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
$ 35 , 721
I Personnel
A Salaries & Wages
B. Fringe Benefits
C. Consultants & Contract Services
SUB-TOTAL
$ 64,000
$ 40.000
$ 0
$104 000
II Non-Personnel
A. Space Costs
B. Rental, Lease or Purchase of
Equipment
C. Consumable Supplies
D. Travel
E. Telephone
F. Other Costs
SUB-TOTAL
$ 0
$ 0
$ 1,500
$ 300
$ 1 000
$ 25 500
$ 1R 100
.
IV. Acquisition of Real Property
v. Construction/Rehabilitation
,-...
TOTAL:
$132,300
B. Identify other funding sources; identify commitments or applications for funds from other sources to implement
this activity. Attach evidence of commitment. If commitments are pending, indicate amount requested and attach
documentation regarding the previous year's funding.
Fundinq Source
Amount Requested
Date Available
Type of Commitment
City of Lake Elsinore
City CDBG
$77 ,579
$19,000
July 1, 2005
July 1, 2005
General Fund Budget
CDBG
C_ Provide a summary by line item of your Agency s previous year's income and expense statement.
/""
7
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE .,
/:y
OF \4
ATTACHMENT: VII MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
......,
A. Describe the organization responsible for managing and operating the project including:
previous similar experience, list source, and commitment of funds for operation and maintenance.
Identify project manager, or person in charge of the project's day-to-day operations.
The City of Lake Elsinore, Community Services Department, will provide the
management for this project. This department is responsible for the City's Parks,
Recreation Facilities (Senior Center, Community Center, Stadium), Tourism, and
Streets. Teri Fazzio, Recreation & Tourism Manager, will oversee the operations
and make operating decisions; and Arline Gulbransen, Site Coordinator, will be
the facility based coordinator of the program operations. The Site Coordinator
has 20+ years of management experience in public Recreation and Senior
Service programs. Funding for the operation of the facility and programs is a
combination of COBG funds supplemented by City General Funds and
Donations.
B. What is the role of your organization in the community?
The City of Lake Elsinore is a Municipal government operation, with a
Council/City Manager organization, responsible for the public safety and
pravision of municipal services for the residents of the City. The Community
Services Department oversees the operation of City Recreation Facilities and is
very involved in community programs. It is the focal point of the City, supporting
private and public el1deavors for the betterment of the residents. The City
disseminates public information and promotes programs and services available.
....".
...."
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE <K
IJ-
OF \4
D.lf this project benefits citizens of more than one community or local jurisdictions and/or municipalities, have
requests been made to those other jurisdictions:
~ Yes ~No _ If yes, identify sources and indicate outcome
If no. please explain
COBC funding is being requested to provide service to unincorporated areas In
Riverside County. Population Served is estimated at 27% County residents_
Amount requested from County COBC funds is $ 35,721 (27% of Budget).
E Was this project previously funded with CDBG funds? If yes, when? Is th;s activity a continuation of a previously
funded (CDBG) project? (explain)
This project is a continuation of a previously funded prog,'am. Request for
funds is fot' continuation and expansion of programs and services.
VII. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION: (PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION 8Y ATTACHMENT)
A. Describe the 0 rganization responsible for managing and 0 perating the project including: previous s imiiar
experience, list source, and commitment of funds for operation and maintenance. Identify project manager, or
person in charge of the project's day-to-dayoperations.
SEE A TT ACHMENT
~
8. V'.'hat is the role of your organization in the commuflity?
SEE ATTACHMENT
C. Timetable for Project Implementation. Indicate primary project objectives: (You may attach a time chart. if
you wish).
OBJECTIVE
START DATE
COMPLETION DATE
Operation (fiscal)
July 1, 2005
June 30, 2006
~
8
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE C\
IJ-
,
OF~
0_ If you have never received COBG funding from Riverside County, provide the following regarding any previous
experience with other Federally funded programs.
Source Activity
Year
Funds Received
Arnt
Funds Expended
.....,
VIII. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION:
Every project proposal MUST contain evidence of citizen participation and support for the proposaL That evidence
must indqde documentation of at least one community meeting this year at \vhich the specific project was discussed
and opportunity given for citizen input Describe the methods used. to obtain citizen involvement and attacrl
9~riate documentation.
Attached is a copy of the Community Participation Calendar, which designated Wednesday, November 12th
as the Citizen Participation meeting held at the Lake Elsinore Cultur<J! Center.. The public is invited
and encouraged to voice their views on how CDBG funds are to be allocated, and can input at all
public meetings_ This application considered the input at the November IJh meeting. The Lake
Elsinore Senior Center is well supported. providing valuable services for the older adults of the
communi~ It sef\les on average over 185 persons a week, and coordinates many activities with .....,
service providers, merr:hants and organizations in the community. Relationships are established with
Social SecUlity, AARP. VITA, Ramona Visiting Nurses Association, HICAP, Inland Counties LfJ<]al
Services, CARE. local police & fire services, ~ Harvest. Food Bank. RTA (Dial-A-Ride ADA
Certification Center). Sodexal, HOPE, U S. Posfal Service, Riverside County Office on Aging and
many others to provide on-going services at the Center.
IX. PLANNING:
Identify the most applicable adopted plans or strategies which the proposed project will help implement:
The City of Lake Elsinore is committed to provide continuous, on--going programs and services for the
older adults in Lake Elsinore and surrounding unincorporated areas of Riverside County- Through the
Senior Center, and the many programs, services and activities provided, the City can continue to
provide services locally that are needed to maintain a comfortable quality of life for the older
population in the area. Provision is made for the continuing education, socialization and recreation
needs (or all economic levels, with particular sensitivity to the low-income population. The Center will
continue to coordinate service provision, distribute food, provide activities and programs that meet the
needs of the seniors and keep abreast of legislation and resourr:es that will benefit the older
population.
.....,
9
AOI:NDA 'TEM NO.
PACE \ D
IJ.
Of \~
APPLICATION
CERTIFICATION
,,-.
Undersigned hereby certifies that:
1. The information contained in the project application is complete and accurate.
2. The applicant shall comply with all Federal and County policies and requirements affecting the
CDBG program.
3. The federal assistance made available through the CDBG program funding is not being
utilized to substantially reduce the prior levels of local financial support for community
development activities.
4. The applicant shall maintain and operate the facility for its approved use throughout its
economic life.
5. Sufficient funds are available to complete the project as described, if CDBG funds are
approved.
6. 1 have obtained authorization to submit this application for CDBG funding.
(DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED).
Type\print name and title
of Authorized Representative
Signature of Authorized Representative
TERI FAZZ 10, Recreation ITourism Manaqer
fiIilu~ "t/f
,
DATE Decemher 8 2004
,,-..,
The following are attached to this application:
Yes NO
[X] [ ] I) Map of area served
[xJ [ ] II) Management information
[ ] [ ] III) Organizational history (Non-Profits only)
[ ] [ ] A) Articles of Incorporation
[ ] [ ] B) Current Board of Directors
[ ] [ ] IV) Income and Expense Statement
S:\COBGlCTZNPRTNI2OO5\Applic.ation doc
,,-.
10
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PAOf: \ \
I:J
OF \y
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
2005-2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION CALENDAR
'-"'"
. Monday, November 8,2004 6:00 P.M.
Citizen Participation Meeting at LE. Cultural Center
183 N. Main Street
. Thursday, December 9, 2004 5:00 P.M.
Application deadline to City of Lake Elsinore
. Friday, December 10,2004 5:00 P.M.
Application deadline to County of Riverside
. Thursday, January 6,2005 5:00 P.M. (Tentative)
City Council Study Session
. Tuesday, January 11,2005 7:00 P.M.
City Council Final Approval of 31 51 Year Program
. Friday, January 14,2005 5:00 P.M.
Application Deadline of Cooperating Cities 2005-2006 CDBG Programs
~
. Tuesday, March 22, 2005 1 :30 P.M.
County Board of Supervisors Public Hearing for Projected Use of CDBG Funds
. Tuesday, May 3, 2005
County Board of 'Supervisors approval of One-Year Action Plan for 2005-2006
program year
. Friday, May 13,2005
Board-approved One-Year Action Plan (summary) published County-wide. Copies
of Plan are made available at all City Halls
. Monday, May 16, 2005
One- Year Action Plan submitted to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for 45-day review
. Friday, July 1,2005
2005-2006 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year begins
'-"'"
ACENDA ITEM NO. I;}.
PAOf \ 6t OF ) '-\
,,-..,
,-...
l"ij ...'J>. ""J>.io: I 0' W!'W~iW WIWIS:~' OJ "':"'1"'1'''' '" '" '" "''''I'''''''I''''.'''''.''':'''i'''I'''INI'''I''''''''.'''IOj :.' 0' ~I~ ~I~ ~ ~'~I-I~I-I~I~I"'I' 1
! z: ~ ~ z ~I~I g~ ~!~ ~ ~ }!ol' I ZIZ Z Z Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l~I~I2:I~i::~l~ ~1~16~1:6!b[b 011 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ %I~ Yl~ ~ Z;r:~I~I];,,1 (I)
I 0 0 <.:> 0 o'......I=i ,3: a wlo ililC>10 rr: C?l <01'001-" m U1 .b. (..) N ......IO!COIOlj""!O'>j<.hIW ..... O!.b. W!N;......I~I ,~I 0',...... <.:> <:) ()") 01 00 to 010 Olcnl!ll g. ~
--11 ~ <::}> 0 "':~n ~ -l,in'lo <::,<- ~'I ~: :;OI".....ll,<IG) m.... -l, "I:;o''UI'':<::lm,- }>I'o,G)'(I);oi~~H i:il 0'(1) (I) < <:::;0 mm o!o'-:!I:;O ~I[-t- u =
c}l ~}> C -n ~ ~Io ~I ol"'-nI?::I'~ ~ ;ill r:!'1~ ~:;; }> f;; ;O:;O!!! ;:61", clol?:: oiiii,'c C!;O:"iOlol~U' oj m C: b <5 mlm m <:: }>It< n:!~I~1 I .... t;;
G:' I r 0 ---4 ~ :v r C 1- o!m ~lz -I i >: 3:;m m -t (j) ~)> \,I" 0 Z OJ UJlz clc -tl-i~>lm!~:< C zl"'T1:,_:,-:::u 0 ::! :j \J ::u m ~1C> r ~ (.oJ
-=ti ~I' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~'~' ~I ~,~ e'E!~I~'IH 21 ~i~ ~I~I~I~ ~,~; ~ ~ E'~,~ ~1~'I~i~I~lgl~i~(f)~ :: i ~i r - ~!~ ~ ~!~ o~ ~ fl~!~HI I ~
I ;U ~ C ~ (j) -; 0 c """'P>;"U 1)>1 (n.-i z 1< I)>. m _l_l..-u Pja ml}> (l)lm,-I- mil (I)! 0 (/)lm rn ml m 0,111< m
" '; -< < :;0 m ""j' enlo m "'::;"1"11" mi~ ml 0 "",<:: 00 ~ 0 OJ''C'' ~ z,m,. CI(f)o <.:;!:Z:U 1 mj 0 I 01 Z Zi~ ~ ?; m 01 Z
-< po m z Z c! ,-u 'lJ )>I(tll'!: ,en~: Cfll m 1m m me Z )> -i' -f m; 'IG) < l;u, 0 -f -fIZ}> ....,<:: -
,j Imm::j....~ I"i I?';,<-Icmllmim'''m Illo~oo'O(I)~ri>oOIQOQ:'S;~ 01 <10 '1<::' .' (l)Z ...."::: 0
" u m i i ~I.' 1~llil~l.en:,i I.~! ~!II~!. ! ,I U~lil~ illii,i;ll~i~I~II!II!II~111 ':::1' I ~II i II! l~i~!.1 ~!I ;I~!' I ~
Z -4 'm II ' Ic -/}>I ' ,I 1 . I ,I m <;u ;u .G) ; I <" <;Z, I. - 01 I 1 I ,,: m
1'1 6 ~ ~ (I) II 'ilF':'S:;;1 I ',!: I i I lil~II~1 ,~i I~t ; Ii I~I~~! ' II! 1 gj 'I'z I: I' I Q! i AI
I ~ I fhll', 1'<1 j i . i, i i. i ,I I ml,- i~l 1,'Oj I~I ! I llffi,,: i.l I ,I II I, i III! i i
I ! I I, I i I i I : I! I ! I I I '!~l' I i 'I Ii' . '! i, I I II 'I I I I
! I '11 'II' I I,! I l ~ j , ! II i l' ! I 1 ~ j : I I II' I :
11 Ii! I i I. I : i III i i I I! I I!! i i I ! 1 ; ! ! ! i! i I! I i II ,III i III III
I I I' i 'I I I! II i I i I tl!. j . ! iI' II L i Ii: i ! ; 'i: _! 1 j I III I! I II}> -< '"
;:; I I I I II i',l I, i! I;): i ! I ! U : i U I I I ",I I ! I 'Ii: I wi I ~ ~ ~
:, """1' .i,lllt:i,i~::I.I. ::~l'!':-::I'~I!"'~I, "'i. k.:l. iwj,i-;,i=:::I'. ,I j-;;;i,i. "'1'<OI''''I~It:I';;;' "'~~I' ~~g
~ : : j 1 I ~:. \;.:;::! ! ! ~l ; l:j,~ ~ ~I ~I 1~ !~I :~J~i ! i !~! I ~ ~j~ :t: ~ :;; ~ g g, (I) 0,"->
jlll /,'1' I! ill' i i 'Ill! Ii i Iii II ',I II i II!! ',.li' i i! 1'1' I' I' 11~~g
o I I; I' I' ,I I I , I! "'I .! I -I I I ! I I ,,,,, I I I wI ,c;;o ~
-"" II I I!-'I I'~I'~II ,.I_J>.: ":-"I~l!" -- p, ) I-"'I-~I I' I p'i Ii -- !-'_"'!" -<O''''ll)>m~
;j II 01' . . I- . I !:j,' 1;j15: . I' j l~!' '.g g ~ -.::!.~ ~ . 1~1. I~I' ~ ~l' . . . ,. ' I ~1 . ~. ~I~ ~ ~ ~I~ ,', ~ ~ r Z 0
...... I I I I I j lO! IV!,r:.. I ! I CD; 1-...1 VI.en <.n <.n co, !Oll fro; ,~tvl ill t w!! t.n '" U'I 0'1 {.JID -"I'" (J)IO W
~1 Ii ! I 1llllllll! I ill'; i:!! 'I' 111'1' il'!! 1 i Ii! i! 'I ii 1 Jill II ! "'~~
~I 0 .1, 'I. ,11.111 ilt:i 'i~t;:li.~';jl. . !II. J' II~i.!. . I.. :....;~i-~'I"'.~ J:I.. .1,:': "<>-Ul, io~'~II' i,', ti., it; .1,1.. :. ". ~i 'I! El.1 ,. ...1-;;;111:00;Lj'::, {:~II:~. . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~'m i /lOll Q'~ <) l 100 (:) 00'0 .r::> 01 0 0 .,', . I -I U> NO f\) .,.. 'D 0. \,oJ -i mo ~
~I _", I,ojl u a -l-H--L;<:> ~1":'t1=1~I- i:':j_ ''':' a a _: tH-.l-~-- 0\, ..... Q) -" ,Jlo. 0 -...I, ~o 0
9ii I! J I ill'.,1 U II : ill~! : i U u! 1~11111.1 fl 'Ii ::: I !?II :,' 1_~J"II, i ~!~l '~il
"'.... .1, 1""10"""" ool..,;"'I"'II....I.II....:"'.~I.I'J>.I"'.I,I.. .,.", I'W!'I,"'oo",o>wl'~' . wi... r-o
U) I.f:>,. rn CD 1 1,1'" , IN N 0) m (() 0 .$:>. ())I()'I J ,. l ,10, (..) CDI""" 0 A l\.) 0 -" <n ~ ~
... ~.oo W ! 0> I .000'" a '" a <D, 0> '" ; , : 'i ~ - '" '" <D W(" ~r ~ ~ '"
~,' I'll l!-'! !-'!'-III Ilt:::l! i 11_~t""i !Ir>/ I -",11,15"1,-1 II' ill?', I :-' I~_<o? !"~ I~i
~I . "," '1- II;:;j' oj8' 'I,' 8 'j' 8j81l::8' ~I. ;:;1'l::,'!8.G;!' '1' "';'.'1 .;~ '" ~:Sl~.t~g" 8::; mO
VI I . 0 0 <:> 0; 0 0 0 0 01 0 10! {o 01 I Ii' I I i <.A! I -..I CJ),-,.tl- 0 ...., 0 0 UJ
il'l I I 'II! I I I i I! '.' III /111'1111 ! !;~1.1 ill I ~~g
~I i I I I I I J ' II ! ~ :\.,. I I! I ! I I' ;: : "'! i I I I ~ ... 8 ~ s
"'I I' I "'II "'I~ ~I . -I"" "" "'I 1/'" "'1 II I " I"'" "'I W '" '" 0> '" m -i a
g, I ' I' . I' .!. ,~' ~ ~' 'i ~i T ~,~Ig ~ g g . ~I' g , ~I~!' .' . ',' 'I ! i gj . !. g'~ g ~ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ -l ~ ~
1111/lil'll 1'1' 1111!1111 II'! I! III i~illllll ~~g
~I I I I I' ,; I I I ., t 1 '~I j "~ I 00",
;,:: I 1 II~I 1--""1 _t. I -...1 _~_~I I I~: I [:"" ....;;.~ ~;;. ~~~
'" 101'10. '1' I'" ,1"'1"'1" 11"",.,..~al"''''la w'la\., 0 "'01. ", '1' '.OJ''',''''-I<O.o<>-,,,. -<0 ~oO>
0,' 0 01 ()l 0, : 101000 0 0, '001 I 10, I 0 C> 0 <:> 010 00
o I , f : I I . 0 ,00 I OJ: jO 010 OJ 0, 0, I ,00 I ,1 10( 1 000000 00
,,-..
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ '6
"l1
n~
o t-v
9Q)(J
9<;:;)1-<
~>-l
t:: . >-<'
:;:3 t-v .
... <;:;).0
-< ~ >Tj
(f).1:I:. ~
~ ::, >
<c..~
(;' t-v tT1
o. <;:;) ~
en <;:;) l..LJ
.~ I-<
tj~~
0<;:;)1-<
"0 <;:;) Z
~C\o
rlbJ:;O
9 t:: tr1
g~
rl f'b
~
/'),-
OF \ l.\
'-'"
.. "'-
~.~""'-
~.
UI~
~.
IOUn
~
c.-'
OllJWcu
COUNTY
...........oa... ~ ClII
WESTERN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
;~ 0 -..
~-c.- Q~
0."" u _
t -J' t
'=!~.::.-~~:
"'-'"
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAOt: \ "-\
/J--
OF \ L\
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
~ REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE: CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 14, 2004
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE
CHANGE NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09.
APPLICANT
Dave Mello
Centex Homes-Inland Empire
2280 Wardlow Circle
Suite 150, Corona CA 92880.
REQUEST
",--
. Annexation 71. The applicant is proposing an annexation of 15.75 net acres into the City of
Lake Elsinore. The annexation, which has been initiated by the current property owners,
will consist of the removal of the site from the County of Riverside jurisdiction to the city
limits of Lake Elsinore. The Annexation is pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001) and the
standards and policies established by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCO).
. General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09. The General Plan Amendment will remove the
subject property, subject to the completion of Annexation 71, from the City of Lake
Elsinore's Sphere oflnfluence and into the city limits of Lake Elsinore. Further, the General
Plan Amendment will change the current County Land Use category from "Future Specific
Plan" (FSP) and Low Density to the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan Designation of
Low-Medium Density, allowing a maximum of six (6) dwelling units per acre. The General
Plan Amendment is pursuant Section I.D.3. (General Plan Amendment Procedure) of the
City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
. Zone Change No. 2004-04. The applicant is requesting a Zone Change (Pre-zoning),
subject to the completion of Annexation 71 to designate the property proposed for
annexation as R-l (Single Family Residential). The Zone Change is pursuant to Chapter
17.84 (Amendments) and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC).
",--
. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503. The applicant is requesting approval for a
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, subject to the completion of Annexation 71, creating sixty
(60) single-family lots, three (3) open space lots and a remainder lot consistent with the R-l
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC StaffReport.doc
ACENDA ITEM r~o.
PACE I
dl
OF q,
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14,2004
PAGE 2
SUBJECT: MERRITT/LUSTER ANNEXATION NO. 71.
,....",
Zoning District. Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.23 (R-1 Single-Family Residential
District) and Chapter 16.25 (Vesting Tentative Maps) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code (LEMC) and Section(s) 66452, 66454, 66474.2 and 66498 of the California
Subdivision Map Act (CSMA).
· Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09. The City of Lake Elsinore intends to adopt
a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the Guidelines established by the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
BACKGROUND
At their regular meeting of December 07,2004, the Planning Commission adopted the following:
1. Resolution No. 2004-157 recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated Negative
Declaration No 2004-09.
2. Resolution No. 2004-158 recommending to the City Council approval to commence with
annexation proceedings for the properties described in Annexation 71;
3. Resolution No. 2004-159 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan
Amendment 2004-09 subject to the completion of Annexation 71;
4. Resolution No. 2004-160 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change
(Pre-Zone) No. 2004-04 subject to the completion of Annexation 71;
5. Resolution No. 2004-161 recommending to the City Council approval of V esting Tentative
Tract Map 32503 subject to the completion of Annexation 71.
Additionally, the Planning Commission accepted into the record and recommended that the City
Council approve the document entitled Supplemental to Merritt/Luster Planning Commission Staff
Report, whose findings are referenced in the attached City Council Resolution.
,....",
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ANNEXATION 71
The proposed annexation consists of the removal of 15.75 net acres from the County of Riverside's
jurisdiction and placement of the same into the city limits of Lake Elsinore. The annexation is being
initiated by the project applicant, Centex Homes-Inland Empire, which is the authorized agent for the
property owners (See attached letters of authorization) and as such is considered an uncontested
annexation pursuant to the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) regulations.
,....",
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC StaffReport.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ I
PACE a OF 3..L-
"..-
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14,2004
PAGE 3
SUBJECT: MERRITT/LUSTER ANNEXATION NO. 71.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
The applicant requests pre-annexation approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map, subject to
the completion of Annexation 71 with the ultimate intention of removing the subject site out of the
city's Sphere of Influence and into the incorporated city limits of Lake Elsinore. The applicant further
requests that upon completion of the annexation procedures that the subject site be designated a land use
of Low Medium Density (LMD) Residential pursuant to the General Plan, which allows up to six (6)
dwelling units per acre. Ultimately, the applicant intends on developing sixty (60) single-family
residential units on 15.75 net acres or an empirical value of3.80 dwelling units per acre, less than that
which is allowed.
ZONE CHANGE 2004-04
Correspondingly and consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment (referenced above), the
applicant is also requesting that the project site referenced herein, subject to the completion of
Annexation 71, be "Pre-Zoned", as required by Local Agency Commission of Riverside County to R-l
(Single-Family Residential). The Zone Change would ultimately allow for the ultimate development
,,-., of60 dwelling units pursuant to the applicable chapters of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503
The proposed vesting tentative tract map, subject to the completion of Annexation 71, will subdivide the
15.75 net acre site into sixty (60) single-family lots. Generally, vesting tentative maps are filed and
processed in the same manner as a tentative map and are defined as "subdivisions" pursuant to Section
66424 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Consequently, this project requires both,
Planning Commission and City Council "pre-annexation" consideration pursuant to the requirements of
Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The approval of the map will
be conditioned upon the annexation of the property into the City.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an
Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information necessary in determining
whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative
Declaration would be the appropriate necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the
subject project contained herein. According to section 15070(b) of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) a Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that
although the proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the subject
Vesting Tentative Map of the 15.75 acres could result in significant effects, mitigation measures
were available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
,.......
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC StaffReport.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 2>
J,I
OF~
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14,2004
PAGE 4
SUBJECT: MERRITT/LUSTER ANNEXATION NO. 71.
Following, the Initial Study, Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Notice ofIntent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was circulated to the State Clearinghouse for the required thirty (30) day
public and agency review period. The thirty- (30) day review period ended on December 9,2004.
As required, the City (Defined as the Lead Agency) will consider any comments received prior to
City Council approval.
'-'"
DISCUSSION
Items of discussion generally concentrated around two (2) items of significance. First, the Commission
expressed concerns regarding the life of the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map and the
corresponding issue of the applicability of the vested rights. Pursuant to the California Subdivision Map
Act staff assured the Commission that the approval date of the map would commence upon completion
ofthe annexation of the subject property and that the vested rights would apply only to the time of the
actual approval date.
The second item of discussion identified the necessity and clarified the purpose of the supplemental
staff report which was read into the record ofthe public hearing. The document entitled Supplemental
to Merritt/Luster Planning Commission StafIReport (See Attachment) established findings of
consistency with the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), since the parcel
acknowledged on the vesting map as a remainder parcel ( .2 acres), was recognized by the Riverside
County Integrated Plan as being in a criteria cell pursuant to the MSHCP Plan. '-'"
ENVIRONMENTAL
The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6
(Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated
Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on staff's
evaluation, the proposed project will not result in any significant effect on the environment.
Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or
Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
intended Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on November 5,
2004 for the required 30 day review period.
FISCAL IMPACTS
Residential development of this nature generates a negative fiscal impact to the City. However, the
development has been conditioned to annex into Community Facilities District (CFD) 2003-01 and
Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts on
public safety operations and maintenance including city-wide improvements and facilities relating to
fire and police protection, and to offset the negative fiscal impacts on City maintained lighting and
landscaping.
....,;
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC StaffReport.doc
ACENDA IteM NO.
PACE l\
al
OF~
",-....
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14, 2004
PAGE 5
SUBJECT: MERRITT/LUSTER ANNEXATION NO. 71.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following actions;
1. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2004-]i, approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
2004-09, subject to the completion of Annexation 71.
2. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2004-7.l, which consents to the commencement of
proceeding to annex the 15.75 acres enumerated in Annexation 71
3. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2004-lZ approving General Plan Amendment 2004-09
subject to the completion of Annexation 71;
4. Adopt City Council Ordinance No.1-D1L-, approving Zone Change 2004-04 (Pre-Zoning)
subject to the completion of Annexation 71;
5. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2004-li", approving Consistency Findings for the Multi-
Species Conservation Habitat Plan (MSHCP).
6. Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 subdividing the 15.75 net acre site into
sixty (60) single-family lots.
"...,
Based on the Attachments and the adopted Planning Commission Findings and the attached Conditions
of Approval.
PREP ARED BY:
Rolfe Preisendanz, Senior Planner
REVIEWED BY:
Code Enforcement Manager
REVIEWED BY:
A. Brady, Communit evelopment Department
APPROVED FOR ~ifiJ J
AGENDA LISTING: ..
City Manager's Office ~
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution No. 2004-1.2, approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-
09, subject to the completion of Annexation 71; and
2. City Council Resolution No. 2004-]1, which consents to the commencement of proceeding
to annex the 15.75 acres enumerated in Annexation 71; and
/""
3. City Council Resolution No. 2004-2t: approving General Plan Amendment 2004-09
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC StaffReport.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. /2 t
PAGE 5 OF91--
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 14, 2004
PAGE 6
SUBJECT: MERRITT/LUSTER ANNEXATION NO. 71.
'will'
subject to the completion of Annexation 71; and
4. City Council Ordinance No.---1l2tf.-, approving Zone Change 2004-04 (Pre-Zoning) subject
to the completion of Annexation 71; and
5. City Council Resolution No. 20041), approving Consistency Findings for the Multi-
Species Conservation Habitat Plan.
6. December 7, 2004 Planning Commission Staff Report, Resolutions and Conditions of
Approval
7. Exhibits
8. Supplement to Merritt/Luster Planning Commission Staff Report
9. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 (SCH No. 2004111061)
"'"
'will'
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Staff Report. doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE (0
SZI
OF 3L-
"......
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-]J.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09
FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS ANNEXATION NO.
71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE
CHANGE NO. 2004-04 AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 32503 LOCATED AT APN(s) 349-400-005,
349-430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire has submitted
application(s) for Annexation No. 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change No.
2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503, located southerly of State Highway 74
(SR-74), on the north and south sides of Riverside Street, bordered on the east by the City Limits
and the Ramsgate Specific Plan, Assessor Parcel Number(s) (APN) 349-400-005, 349-430-011
& 012 and a portion of 349-430-006; and
",--,
WHEREAS, Annexation No. 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change
No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 together comprise the "project" as
defined by Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California
Public Resources Code S 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may cause either a
direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change
in the environment and which includes the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the subject project has been prepared
to evaluate environmental impacts resulting with the project; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said project has been given, and the City Council has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 14, 2004.
SECTION 1. The City CouncIl has conSIdered the proposed Annexation No. 71,
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 32503. The City Council finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
2004-09 for the project known as the Merritt/Luster Annexation (Annexation 71) is adequate and
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) which analyzes the environmental effects of the "project", herein defined, based upon
the following finding and determinations:
"......
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review
would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC RESO MND.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. ;J I
PAGE l OF~
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-""}a,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09
PAGE TWO
....."
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions,
which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no
significant effects would occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that
the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, that the City of Lake Elsinore Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2004-09 hereof be adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December 2004, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
....."
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
(SEAL)
"-wIll'
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACE ~
;71
OF en
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-li
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, CONSENTING TO
THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX
THE TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS ANNEXATION NO.71
(APN(S) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION
OF 349-430-006) INTO THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES
OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire annexing certain
properties described as APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006
(Approximately 15.75 net acres) into the corporate boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore; and
WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001); and
WHEREAS, Dave Mello, Centex Homes-Inland Empire has submitted additional
~ applications for General Plan No. 2004-09, Zone Change No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 32503 consisting ofthe ultimate development of 15.75 acres into 60 single-family
lots and associated improvements, subject to annexation, located adjacent the Ramsgate Specific
Plan within the City's Sphere of Influence and unincorporated boundaries of County of
Riverside; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at their regular
meeting held on December 7, 2004 "made its report upon desirability and made its
recommendations in favor of said annexation by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No.
2004-158 recommending to the City Council approval of Annexation No. 71; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given and the City Council has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties at a public hearing with respect to this item on December 14,2004; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to give its consent to the commencement
of annexation proceedings and concurrent sphere of influence amendment.
~
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed Annexation (Annexation
No. 71), prior to approving commencement proceedings to annex the subject territory. The City
Council finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is adequate and
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) which analyzed the environmental effects of Annexation No. 71, based upon the
following findings and determinations:
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso Annexation.doc
AGEr~DA ITEM NO.
PAGE c;
r/v(
OF ...9..L-
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-13
ANNEXATION NO. 71
PAGE NO.2
""""
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review
would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions,
which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no
significant effects would occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that
the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001) and the City of Lake
Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Annexation No. 71 have been made as
follows: "-'"
1. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore and will not
create pockets or islands.
The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the Ramsgate Specific Plan area on the
easterly boundary of the project and will be a reasonable extension of the city boundary
areas in that the annexation of the proposed parcels will not create any pockets or
islands.
2. The proposed annexation will not result in any adverse significant impacts on the
environment.
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information
necessary in determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be the appropriate necessary
environmental documentation and clearance for the subject project contained herein.
According to section 15070(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that although the
proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the subject
Vesting Tentative Map of the ] 5.75 acres could result in significant effects, mitigation
measures were available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
.....,
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso Annexation.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 1 0
JJ
OF -91-
r-
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-~
ANNEXATION NO. 71
PAGE NO. 3
3. The proposed annexation will eliminate an existing undesired pocket of the county area.
The proposed annexation consists of the removal of 15.75 acres from the County of
Riverside's jurisdiction and placement of the same into the city limits of Lake Elsinore.
The annexation is being initiated by the project applicant, Centex Homes-Inland Empire,
which is the authorized agent for the property owners (See attached letters of
authorization) and as such is considered an uncontested annexation pursuant to the
Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) regulations.
PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, that the commencement of proceedings for Annexation
No. 71 be approved.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December 2004, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
,-..-
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
(SEAL)
r-
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso Annexation.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \ \
;Zl
OF C\ \
RESOLUTION NO. 2004--=Z+:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, MAKING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE THIRD CYCLE OF THE
CALENDAR YEAR 2004 AMENDING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY
DESCRIBED AS APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012
AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006 FROM THE COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE "FUTURE SPECIFIC PLAN" (FSP) AND LOW
DENSITY TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE'S
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNA TION OF LOW-MEDIUM
DENSITY SUBJECT TO THE COMPLETION OF
ANNEXATION NO. 71.
......."
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners) and filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire initiating proceedings
for General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09 amending the General Plan Land Use Map for certain
properties described as APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006
(Approximately 15.75 net acres); and
WHEREAS, Section 65361(a) of the Government Code provides that no mandatory
element of a General Plan shall be amended more frequently than four times during any calendar
year;
"-'
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting
held on December 7, 2004 made its report upon the desirability of the proposed project and made
its recommendations in favor of said General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09 by adopting
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-159 recommending to the City Council approval of
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the City Council has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 14, 2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed General Plan Amendment
No. 2004-09, prior to making a decision to approve the proposed amendment to the General Plan
Land Use Map. The City Council finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
2004-09 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of General Plan
Amendment No. 2004-09, based upon the following findings and determinations:
"-"'"
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso GP A.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACEJ d
JI/
OF Q \
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-Ji
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
PAGE NO.2
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review
would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions,
which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no
significant effects would occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that
the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable
.Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Pwgram.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of
Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09
have been made as follows:
~
~
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of
the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or
improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to
be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or
working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue
identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded,
based on the Traffic Analysis, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study
Area will not be degraded as a result of this project upon the completion of annexation.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area
consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent
properties.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will allow the applicant to develop the site, upon
annexation, with the proposed density of 3.80 Dwelling Units/net acre and will in turn
bring about a site more compatible with the area known as the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage
more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints.
The proposed General Plan Amendment, upon annexation, would establish a density
more in conformance with the recently Ramsgate Specific Plan to the south and east of
the subject site.
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso GP A.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ '3
cZl
OF C\ I
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-lL.{
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
PAGE NO.3
....,
Additionally, the proposed project site would be in close proximity of any necessary
services needed by persons residing in the proposed subdivision as indicated in the "Plan
of Services" report.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
The proposed General Plan Amendment was included within the description of the
project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that the project, upon
annexation, will not have a significant effect on the environment.
PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, that the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Land Use
Map hereof be amended for the third cycle in calendar year 2004 to reflect General Plan
Amendment No. 2004-09
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14 day of December 2004 by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
~
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN :
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
(SEAL)
"""""
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC Reso GP A.doc
ACENDA ITEM NO.~_-
PACE \L\ OF C1\
~
ORDINANCE NO. ~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE
CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2004-04 CHANGING THE
ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS
SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-
430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006 TO R-1
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE
ZONING ORDINANCE SUBJECT TO COMPLETION OF
ANNEXATION NO. 71.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners) and filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire initiating proceedings
to change the zoning (pre-zoning) designation of the subject parcels known as APN(s) 349-400-
005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006 to R-1 Single Family Residential District
under the Zoning Ordinance subject to the completion of Annexation No. 71; and
~
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting
held on December 7,2004 made its report upon the desirability of the proposed project and made
its recommendations in favor of said Zone Change No. 2004-04 by adopting Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2004-160 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone
Change No. 2004-04; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the City Council has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 14, 2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed Zone Change (Pre-Zone)
No. 2004-04, prior to making a decision to approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use
Designation and establish a Zoning Designation. The City Council finds and determines that
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes
environmental effects of the proposed project, based upon the following findings and
determinations:
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review
would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
~
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE \ S
;Z,
OF ~__
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. mi-
ZONE CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2004-04
PAGE 2
The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions,
which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no
significant effects would occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that
the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of
Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2004-04
have been made as follows:
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or
general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the
proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements
in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be
detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working
within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by
staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the
Traffic Analysis, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not
be degraded as a result of this project upon completion of the annexation.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the
General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC).
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General
Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of
the subject project, upon completion of the annexation is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the
General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing
opportunities and a satisfYing living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore".
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE \ \.v
r9(
OF C\~\
'-II'
'-II'
'-'"
~
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.11.7d.
ZONE CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2004-04
PAGE 3
SECTION 3 (ZONING RECLASSIFICATION). This Zoning Map of the City of
Lake Elsinore, California, is hereby amended by changing, reclassifying and rezoning the
following described property, to wit:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 349-400-005, 349-430-011 &
012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006: TO R-l SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING
ORDINANCE UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE
Approval is based on the following:
I. The proposed Zoning is consistent with the Goals, Policies, and Objectives in the General Plan.
2. The proposed Zoning is consistent with the General Plan and the various land uses authorized
by the Ordinance are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs
specified in the Plan. (Government Code Section 65860).
~
3. Reasons why the City has considered the effect of Zoning Ordinances on the regional housing
needs in which the City is located and how the City has balanced these needs against the public
service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. (Government
Code Section 65863.6).
SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its final
passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause this Ordinance
to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 14TH day of
December, 2004, upon the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
.,-..
AGENDA ITEM NO. cJ./
PACE \ 1 OF C\ \
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. II ~'-I
ZONE CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2004-04
PAGE 4
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this 14th day
of January, 2005, upon the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
(SEAL)
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PACe _\ <?J
......,
......,
......,
rJ.1
OF_~
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-]5
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE MUL TI-
SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS ANNEXATION NO.
71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE
CHANGE NO. 2004-04 AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 32503 LOCATED AT APN(s) 349-400-005,
349-430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire has submitted
application(s) for Annexation No. 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change No.
2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503, located southerly of State Highway 74
(SR-74), on the north and south sides of Riverside Street, bordered on the east by the City Limits
and the Ramsgate Specific Plan, Assessor Parcel Number(s) (APN) 349-400-005, 349-430-011
& 012 and a portion of 349-430-006.
~
WHEREAS, Annexation No. 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change
No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 together comprise the "project" as
defined by Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California
Public Resources Code ~ 21000 et seq., which is defined as an activity which may cause either a
direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change
in the environment and which includes the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies.
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the subject project has been prepared
to evaluate environmental impacts resulting with the project
WHEREAS, public notice of said project has been given, and the City Council has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 14, 2004.
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed Annexation No. 71,
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, Zone Change No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 32503. The City Council finds and determines that the project known as the
Merritt/Luster Annexation (Annexation 71) is consistent with all of the required procedures,
policies, guidelines and provisions of the MSHCP based on the following findings:
MSHCP CONSISTENCY FINDINGS
1. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution that must make an
MSHCP Consistency finding before approval.
..-.-
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\CC RESO MSHCP.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ( _
PAGE~~
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-)s.
MSHCP CONSISTENCY
PAGE TWO
Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, because the proposed project requires a
number of discretionary approvals from the City and is subject to CEQA review, it must
be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, which entails for the proposed project determining
whether it is subject to the City's LEAP process, consistent with the Protection of Species
Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.2),
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, 9 6.1.3), Additional
Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, 9 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines
(MSHCP, S 6.3.2), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, 9 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels
Management Guidelines (MSHCP, 9 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, S 4).
2. The proposed project is not subject to the Joint Project Review process.
The footprint of the project site has been modified to avoid the MSHCP Criteria Area,
and therefore, does not now fall within the Criteria Area. This has been made a
condition of approval. As a result, the proposed project would not be subject to the Joint
Project Review process.
3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
Guidelines.
No riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat and other aquatic resources were
identified on the proposed project site. As a result, no further MSHCP analysis or
conservation measures are required. The proposed project is therefore consistent with
the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Guidelines.
The project site does not fall within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas.
Therefore, habitat assessments and/or focused surveys are not required for Narrow
Endemic Plant Species. The proposed project is therefore consistent with the Protection
~f Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The project site falls within the Burrowing Owl Survey Area. However, it was
determined that the species is not expected to occur on-site due to the lack of suitable
habitat. To assure burrowing owls will not be impacted by project development, as a
condition of project approval, a pre-construction survey will be required before grading
to confirm the absence of burrowing owls, as required by the MSHCP. The project is
therefore consistent with the Additional Survey Needs Requirements.
6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
P:\Merrin Luster Annexation \CC RESO MSHCP.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. ;7.-./ .__
PACE ~ OF q I
'wtI1'
'wtI1'
....",
~
~
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-/5
MSHCP CONSISTENCY
PAGE THREE
Measures have been incorporated into the proposed project so that there will be no
project-related drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasives, barriers, and grading/land
development impacts to the Conservation Area. The proposed project is therefore
consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The vegetation of the entire project site has been mapped. This mapping is sufficient
under the MSHCP and is consistent with the MSHCP.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The proposed project has been designed to include landscape buffers near the proposed
MSHCP Conservation Area that will in essence act as Fuel Modification Zones. Within
these areas there will be fire-resistant, non-invasive plants. Accordingly, with these
measures, the proposed project is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management
Guidelines.
9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development
Mitigation Fee.
As a condition of approval, the project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits. The current fee
for residential development with a density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is
$1,651 per dwelling unit.
10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP.
The proposed project complies and is consistent with all of the required procedures,
policies, and guidelines of the City's MSHCP Resolution and the MSHCP. The applicant
has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions, which would avoid
the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no significant effects
would occur.
1. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that
the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable
Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, that the City of Lake Elsinore Multi-Species Habitat
Conservation Plan Findings of Consistency hereof be adopted.
",..-
P:\Menin Luster Annexation \CC RESO MSHCP.doc
AGENDA iTEM NO.~__
PACE oH OF q I
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-.15
MSHCP CONSISTENCY
PAGE FOUR
~
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of December 2004, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN :
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST:
.....,
Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
(SEAL)
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \CC RESO MSHCP.doc
'will'
AGENDA ITEM NO. ;J-!
PAGE ~ ~ Of q \
VICINITY MAP
ANNEXATION NO. 71
yON ROAD
RAILROAD CAN
VICINITY MAP
N. T. S.
NDA ITEM NO.
PACE ~3
I
OF q \
....J
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold hannless the
City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the
City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of
the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Tentative
Condominium Map, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California
Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167.
The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City
and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any
such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify,
or hold harmless the City.
ANNEXATION NO. 71
2. The annexation of said property shall comply with the requirements contained in the Cortese-Knox-
Herzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001)J
and the standards and policies established by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCO).
3. All entitlements contained herein are subject to the completion and approval of the annexation of
the subject property.
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503
4. Pursuant to Section 66454 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 32503 shall not become effective until such time that Annexation No. 71 is approved by
the City Council and has received final approval by Riverside County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO), and recorded as territory under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Elsinore.
5. The conditional approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 shall confer a vested right to
proceed with development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies and standards as
of the date the Local Agency Formation Commission files and records a Certificate of Completion
with the County Recorder.
6. The vested rights shall expire if a final map is not approved prior to the expiration of the vesting
tentatlve map.
7. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32503 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by ....J
approved Conditions of Approval.
ACENDA ITEM NO.~
PACE ~L.\ . OF . q \ . ...... ...~
~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
8. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures established within the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 contained herein.
9. Prior to final certificate of occupancy of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503, the improvements
specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed,
or agreements for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City
Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. All uncompleted improvements
must be bonded for as part of the agreements.
10. The applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" and shall return the
executed original to the Community Development Department, Planning Division.
11. The parcel identified as a "remainder parcel" as shown on the V esting Tentative Tract Map shall
remain undeveloped until such time that the conservation area as identified by the Multi-Species
Habitat Plan (MSHCP) for related criteria cell is identified.
~
PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP
12. Prior to Final Tract Map approval by the City Council, all lots within this subdivision shall conform
to the standards of the Section 17.23 (Single-Family Residential District) of the LEMC.
13. The Final Map shall be in compliance with the approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 as
stamped approved by the Planning Division.
14. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per LEMC.
15. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Planning Division.
16. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
(EVMWD).
17. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the subdivision. No
service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be delineated on engineering sewer plans
and profiles for submittal to the EVMWD.
18. The applicant shall meet all requirements of Southern California Edison Company. In addition, the
developer shall submit plans to Southern California Edison for a layout of the street lighting system.
The cost of street lighting 1lfl6 induding installation shall be the responsibility of the Lighting
Landscaping and Maintenance District (LLMD No.1). Said plans shall be approved by the City and
~ shall be installed in accordance with the City Standards. Lighting on streets that are directly adjacent
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE ~S
(k{
OF C{\
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACf MAP NO. 32503 AND ~
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR lHE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
to the City of Canyon Lake shall be properly shielded to protect direct light and glare contrary to the
lifestyle currently desired by the Canyon Lake residents. Amended per the Planning Commission
December 7, 2004.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT
19. The applicant shall be required to submit a Construction Management Plan subject to the approval
of the City Engineer and the Community Development Director or designee.
20. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all on site preparation activity. Construction shall
not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall completely cease at 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Construction activity shall not take place on Saturday and Sunday, or any legal holidays.
21. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site preparation activity will require
the appropriate City permits from the Engineering Division. A Geologic Soils Report with
associated recommendations will be required for all grading permit approval, and all grading must
meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Interim and
permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond 100% for material and
labor for one year for erosion control landscaping at the time the site is rough graded.
~
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
22. The applicant shall submit a Photometric Study which provides analysis of the lighting generated by
exterior street lighting. The photometric study shall insure that street lights do not substantially
impact the neighboring properties.
23. The applicant shall be required to form a Home Owner's Association (HOA) or join an existing
Home Owner's Association for adequate maintenance of common open space and related
landscaping.
24. Arrangements shall be made between the City and the applicant for fiscal impacts by the project
prior to issuance of the first building permit. The applicant shall participate in a Cost Recovery
Program or make other arrangements with the City to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of
the project on public safety and maintenance issues in the City, including city-wide improvements
and facilities relating to fire and police protection and maintenance of roadways, etc. The applicant
may fulfill this requirement by annexing into the Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2003-01
as detailed in Condition of Approval No. 87.
25. All development associated with this subdivision requires separate Design Review consideration and
approval by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 17.82 of the LEMC prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc "'-"
AGENDA ITEM NO. () {
PAGE Q~ OF ~ \
r""-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PlAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEClARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT /LUSTER ANNEXATION
26. House plotting, architectural drawings, floor plans and landscaped buffer areas shall be in substantial
conformance with the plans contained herein. All standards of development in effect at the date the
applications were deemed complete (August 2, 2004) shall apply for this project.
27. All tract fencing shall be approved subject to Section 17.14.130.D of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code. A Fencing Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval at the
discretion of the Community Development Director.
28. All trailers and/or mobile homes used during construction, mailboxes and signage shall be subject to
Planning Division review and approval prior to installation. All trailers and! or mobile homes used
during construction shall require a cash bond to guarantee proper removal.
PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
29. Slopes on individual lots in excess of three-feet in height shall be installed, landscaped and irrigated
by the developer. These slopes shall be maintained by individual home owners;
r-.
30. All common slopes shall be installed, landscaped, and irrigated by the developer. All common
slopes shall be maintained by the established Home Owner's Association.
31. The applicant shall meet all the requirements of the serving gas utility.
32. The applicant shall meet all the requirements of the serving telephone utility.
33. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and record CC&R's against the
subdivision. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Director or Designee and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include methods of maintaining the
landscape common areas, detention basin(s) and access drive way located between lot(s) 10 and 11.
In addition, CC&R's shall established methods to address design improvements.
34. No dwelling unit in the subdivision shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's
group or similar entity has been formed with the right to financially assess all properties individually
owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and
common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses
of such entity, and with authority to control, and duty to maintain, all said mutually available features
of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include
compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to
meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit
enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall
r""- submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
ACENDA iTEM NO.
PACE ;).,
!f(
OF ~ \
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND '-'
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR TIlE
MERRITT /LUSTER ANNEXATION
making any such sale. TIlls condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public
pmposes.
35. Membership in the Home Owner's Association shall be mandatoty for each buyer and any
successive buyer.
36. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an
"Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning
Division for inclusion in the case records.
37. Prior to the commencement of grading operations, the applicant shall provide a map of all proposed
haul routes to be used for movement of dirt material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer. A bond may be required to pay for damages to the public right-of -
way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
38. lbree (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/Irrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and
approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director
or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be
charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent (40%) City
fee.
'-'
a. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and
grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods.
b. Applicant shall plant street trees, selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of
forty feet (40) apart and at least twenty-four-inch (24") box in size.
c. Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than thirty-six
inches (36").
d. Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape
plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan.
e. The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all
requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of
Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used
. .
to prevent exceSSIve watenng.
f. All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two years from
installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
""""
AGENDA ITEM NO. tJ{ (
PACE ;).~ OF 91
-
,..........
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACf MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
applicant at the end of the required two years with approval/acceptance by the Landscape
Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee.
i)
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at the
time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building. All planting areas shall include
plantings in the Xeriscape concept, drought tolerant grasses and plants.
Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan.
j)
k)
Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BU~DING PERMIT
39. Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Proof
shall be presented to the Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits and final
approval.
~
40. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the
Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid.
41. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the
Riverside County Fire Department have been met.
42. Priory~ issuance of building permits, applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fee in effect at time of building
penrut Issuance.
ENGINEERING
43. The applicant shall dedicate full width right-of-way for the project frontage of Riverside Street.
Right of way width dedication shall be 88-feet with an additional 12-foot easement dedication for
roadway purposes.
44. The applicant shall construct full width street improvements along the project frontage for Riverside
Street. Roadway section shall measure seventy-four (74) feet from curb face to curb face. Street
improvements shall include sidewalk and landscaping as required for the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
The existing curb improvements shall be cut and a new drive approach shall be constructed for the
three existing lots to remain.
45. The applicant shall provide a 30-foot wide paved access from A-street to the property located
westerly of lots 7 through 16. Construct a City standard commercial driveway adjacent to A -street
~ as the entrance to the access road.
P: \Merrin Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.~_
PACE ;;l C1 OF -.9.L_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND ......,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
46. The applicant shall construct a toe drain along the westerly property line and provide an outlet into
the internal storm drain system as a means of conveying the storm water.
47. The applicant shall provide documentation confirming Riverside County's acceptance of the
proposed eighty-eight foot (88') road way width.
48. If this tract develops before Tract 25476, Riverside Drive shall be constructed from State Route 74
to the intersection of 'B' Street and Riverside Drive. Construction shall be completed prior to
issuance of the 151 cenificate of occupancy.
49. If this tract develops before Tract 25476, the traffic signal at the intersection of SR 74 and Riverside
Drive shall be constructed before the 55th cenificate of occupancy.
50. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section
16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City's agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District.
51. The applicant shall pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85-
26).
.....,
52. The applicant shall submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable
water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit
this letter prior to issuance of building permit.
53. The applicant shall construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC
12.04). Plans must be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building
pernut.
54. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer.
Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Depanment Standards,
latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34).
55. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of public works
improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to issuance of Building Permit.
56. The applicant shall pay all fees and meet requirements of encroachment permit issued by the
Engineering Division for construction of public works improvements (LEMC 12.08 and Resolution
83-78).
57. All compaction repons, grade cenifications, monument cenifications (with tie notes delineated on 8
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation\PC Conditions of Approval.doc .....,
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 30
;2(
OF ~ \
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
,... ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACf MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR lHE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
~" x 11" Mylar) shall be submiued to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public
works improvements will be scheduled and approved.
58. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent
property owners prior to final map approval.
59. The applicant shall make arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles,
vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent.
60. The applicant shall provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street
improvement plans as required by the City Engineer.
61. The applicant shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations
within the improvement area.
62. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving
utility unless othetwise approved by the City Engineer.
/'""
63. The applicant shall apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building
permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall be
required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as
determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not
required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern
inspection can be conducted before grading begins.
64. The applicant shall provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations.
65. An Alquis-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults
and/ or liquefaction zones present on-site or provide documentation from a Professional Geologist
or Geotechnical Engineer that this is not required.
66. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall cenify all
slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. All manufactured slopes greater
than 30 ft. in height shall be contoured.
67. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City with a map of all
proposed haul routes to be used for movement of import or export material in excess of 2,000 cubic
yards. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
~
P:\Merriu Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
ACENDA ITEM NO.~ /
PACE .3 \ OF 9 i
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND ...."
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEClARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
68. The applicant shall provide a photographic baseline record of the condition of all proposed public
City haul roads to the City. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of
restoring public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of
damages to the public right-of-way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
69. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way should be contained within drainage
easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating: "Drainage
easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions".
70. All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and
conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer.
71. The applicant shall meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations.
72. The applicant shall meet all requirements of LEMC 15.68 regarding floodplain management.
73. The applicant shall submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City
Engineer prior to approval of the rough grade plans. Applicant shall mitigate any flooding andf or
erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. '-'
74. Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegally dumping in the drain
system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the City Engineer.
75. Roof drains shall not be allowed to connect directly through cuts in the street curb. Roof drains
should drain to a landscaped area when ever feasible.
76. 10 year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm runoff should be
contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage facilities
should be installed.
77. The applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any
urban pollutants from entering the watershed.
78. The applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of Intent with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program with a storm water pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading
permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will
be implemented for the development including maintenance responsibilities.
79. The applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their
storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
......"
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 3:;)
J(
or: q \
r"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACf MAP NO. 32503 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction
which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance
responsibilities.
80. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of the
development in the use of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness
education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water
quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage
Area Management Plan.
81. The applicant shall provide first flush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce
storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveway aisles.
82. Intersection site distance shall meet the design criteria of the CAL TRANS Design Manual (particular
attention should be taken for intersections on the inside of curves). If site distance can be
obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of landscaping
and wall placement.
,-....
83. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant
shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris,
vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other
phases of construction.
DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES
84. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into Community Facilities
District 2003-01 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety
operations and maintenance issues in the City.
85. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into the City-Wide
Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District (LLMD) No.1, to offset the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project on public-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City and for street
lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to
Southern California Edison.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
86. The applicant shall pay park fees of $1,600 per unit.
87. The Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall maintain all lettered lots including Lot "c."
,--
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO.--el.{
PAGE "3 ~ OF ct \
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71, GENERAL PlAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09, ZONE CHANGE
NO. 2004-04, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503 AND .~
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEClARATION NO. 2004-09 FOR THE
MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
88. The HOA shall maintain all natural and manufactured slopes.
89. The HOA shall maintain all perimeter landscaping.
90. The HOA shall maintain all flood control devices and structures including retention basins.
91. The applicant shall contract with CR&R for all construction debris removal as per City Ordinance.
92. The applicant shall provide the City with a digital inventory of all street signs, street markings, street
trees and square footage of all streets in format approved by City.
RNERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
93. The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval (See Attached) of the Riverside County
Fire Department. Fire protection measures shall be provided in accordance with Riverside County
ordinances and! or recognized fire protection standards.
MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
94. The applimnt shall cvmry, UJXn appruml of the Riw-side 01nse1wti0n Authority (RCA), a canserwtion easmmt
or fee title for the portion of Vesting Tentatiu! Traa Map 32503 (2 acres) identified as the "Remainder Parcel" to
the Riw-side 01nse1wti0n Authority (RCA) prior to the issuana! of the grading permit. Added per the
Planning Commission December 7, 2004.
'-'"
95. A pre-aJnStruaion suruy will be requiml prior to the issuana! of a Grading Permit to confirm the ahserue of
burrowing mds as requiml by the Multi-Species Habitat 01nse1wti0n Plan. Added per the Planning
Commission December 7, 2004.
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Conditions of Approval.doc
"-'
AOErJDA ITEM NO.
PAGE 3<.;
c2(
OF C\ \
19/27/04
14:12
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
p~O PERMIT Permit No: FIRECONDS
Parcel:
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
10.FIRE. 2
MAP-#50-BLUE DOT REFLECTORS
Blue retroreflective pavement markers shall be mounted on
private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate
location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement
of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire
Department.
10.FIRE. 3
MAP*-#16-HYDRANT/SPACING
Schedule A fire protection approved standard fire
hydrants,(6"X4"x2 1/2"} located one at each street
intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet apart in
any direction, with no portion of any-Iot-frontage more
than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be
1000 GPM for 2 hour duration at 20 PSI. Shall include
perimeter streets at each intersection and spaced 660 feet
apart.
/""
10.FIRE. 4
CASE - CITY CASE STATEMENT
LE TR32503
LAKE ELS INORE
With respect to the conditions of approval for the
referenced project, the Fire Department recommends the
following fire protection measures be provided in
accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
FIRE DEPARTMENT
50.FIRE. 1
MAP-#7-ECS-HAZ FIRE AREA
Ecs map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The land division is located in
the "Hazardous Fire Area" of Riverside County as shown on a
map on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Any
building constructed on lots created by this land division
shall comply with the special construction provisions
contained in Riverside County Ordinance 787.
/""
ACiENDA ITEM NO.
PACiE 30"
Page: 1
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
~I
OF ql
LO/27/04
L4 : 12
Riverside County LMS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Page: 2
?ATIO PERMIT Permit No: FIRECONDS
Parcel:
....."
50. PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION
50.FIRE. 2
MAP*-#43-ECS-ROOFING MATERIAL
DRAFT
Ecs map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: All buildings shall be
constructed with class "A" material as per the California
Building Code.
50. FIRE. 3
MAP-#53-ECS-WTR PRIOR/COMBUS
DRAFT
Ecs map must be stamped by the Riverside County Surveyor
with the following note: The required water system,
including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by
the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building material placed on an individual lot.
50.FIRE. 4
MAP-#47-SECONDARY ACCESS
DRAFT
In the interest of Public Safety, the project shall provide
an Alternate or Secondary Access(s) as stated in the
Transportation Deparment Conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the Transportation Department and the Riverside County
Fire Department.
"""
80. PRIOR TO BLDG PRMT ISSUANCE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
80.FIRE. 1
MAP-#50C-TRACT WATER VERI FICA
DRAFT
The required water system, including all fire hydrant(s),
shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water
agency and the Riverside County Fire Department prior to
any combustible building material placed on an individual
lot. Contact the Riverside County Fire Department to
inspect the required fire flow, street signs, all weather
surface, and all access and/or secondary. Approved water
plans must be a the job site.
80.FIRE. 2
MAP - SECONDARY/ALTER ACCESS
DRAFT
In the interest of Public Safety, the project shall provide
An Alternate or Secondary Access(s) as stated in the
Transportation Department conditions. Said Alternate or
Secondary Access(s) shall have concurrence and approval of
both the Transportation Department and the Riverside County
Fire Department. Alternate and/or Secondary Access(s)
shall be completed and inspected per the approved plans.
"""
AGENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE~ OF q, ---
~
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
City of Lake Elsinore
Planning Divis ion
130 S. Man Street
Lake Eisnor<; CA 92530
(909) 674- 3124
(909) 471-1419fax
DATE:
Tuesday, December 7,2004
TO:
Chainnan and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:
Robert A. Brady, Community Development Director
PREPARED BY:
Rolfe Preisendanz, Senior Planner
PROJECT TITLE:
APPLICANT:
Merritt/Luster Annexation
Dave Mello, Centex Homes-Inland Empire, 2280 Wardlow Circle,
Suite 150, Corona CA 92880.
,..--
PROJECT REQUESTS
,......
. Annexation 71. The applicant is proposing an annexation of 15.75 net acres into the
City of Lake Elsinore. The annexation, which has been initiated by the current property
owners, will consist of the removal of the site from the County of Riverside jurisdiction
to the city limits of Lake Elsinore. The Annexation is pursuant to the Cartese-Knox-
Hertzlxrg Local Gawnrrmt Reorganization Act of2000 (Government Code Section 56000-
56001) and the standards and policies established by the Riverside Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO).
. General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09. The General Plan Amendment will remove
the subject property, subject to the completion of Annexation 71, from the City of Lake
Elsinore's Spherr of InjIueruE and into the city limits of Lake Elsinore. Further, the
General Plan Amendment will change the current County Land Use category from
"Future Specific Plan" (FSP) and Low Density to the City of Lake Elsinore's General
Plan Designation of Low-Medium Density, allowing a maximum of six (6) dwelling units
per acre. The General Plan Amendment is pursuant Section I.D.3. (General Plan
Amendment Procedure) of the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan.
. Zone Change No. 2004-04. The applicant is requesting a Zone Change (Pre-zoning),
subject to the completion of Annexation 71 to designate the property proposed for
annexation as R-l (Single Family Residential). The Zone Change is pursuant to
Chapter 17.84 (Amendments) and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC).
fACiE. ."2:>(
Jr. ---
Or C1 \
P:\Merrin Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AGENDA In...,; .. '"
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 2 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
""
· Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503. The applicant is requesting approval for a
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, subject to the completion of Annexation 71, creating sixty
(60) single-family lots, three (3) open space lots and a remainder lot consistent with the
R-1 Zoning District. Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.23 (R-1 Single-Family
Residential District) and Chapter 16.25 (Vesting Tentative Maps) of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Section(s) 66452, 66454, 66474.2 and 66498 of
the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA).
· Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09. The City of Lake Elsinore intends to
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the Guidelines established
by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
BACKGROUND
Although, the subject project did not command the need for a "Scoping Meeting" as required by
Section 15083 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), City staff did schedule two (2)
"Pre-Annexation" conferences with the project's proponent (Centex Homes-Inland Empire) on
March 15, 2004 and April 1, 2004. Both meetings were held in order to resolve any potential
concerns related to both state and local agencies. As a result of those meetings and in response to a
letter from David Taussig & Associates dated May 17, 2004 (See Attachments contained herein),
City staff did provide input as to the issues and inquiries related to the necessary content of the
"Plan of Services" (See Attachment). Other items of interest related to the discussion of traffic ""
circulation, subdivision design, landscape buffering and annexation procedures pursuant to the
Cortise-Knox-Herzlxrg Local Gau?mment Re-organization Act of 2000 and the standards and policies
established by the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
Ensuing, on June 14, 2004 the applicant (Centex Homes-Inland Empire), submitted the subject
applications referenced herein. On August 2, 2004, the applications were deemed complete, to
which staff determined, based on results of the Environmental Assessment, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration would be the appropriate environmental documentation pivotal to Section 15070
(Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California
Environmental Quality Act. Further, since the proposed project was located in the immediate
vicinity of the State Highway 74 (SR-74) and that possible impacts related to air quality were
impending, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (See Attachments) was submitted to the State
Clearing House for the required thirty (30) day review period, which ended on December 5, 2004.
Likewise, in association with the obligatory thirty (30) day review period as required by Section
15073 (Public Review of Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California
Environmental Quality Act, a Notice of Public Hearing was initiated for the December 7, 2004
Planning Commission Meeting. As of the date of this report, no responses have been received.
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
....."
AGENDA ITEM NO._--Jl--
PAGE 3~ OF C\\
"
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 3 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located southerly of State Highway 74 (SR-74), on the north and south sides
of Riverside Street, bordered on the east by the City Limits and the Rarnsgate Specific Plan, Assessor
Parcel Number(s) (APN) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Project
Site
Single-Family
Residential
County of Riverside
R -A 20000
County of Riverside
Very Low Density
Residential
County of Riverside
Very Low Density
Residential
City of Lake Elsinore
Rams ate S eci lC Plan
City of Lake Elsinore
Ramsgate S ecific Plan
County of Riverside
Very Low Density
Residential
North
Vacant
County of Riverside
R-A 20000
South
Vacant
City of Lake Elsinore
Rams ate S eci lC Plan
City of Lake Elsinore
Ramsgate S ecific Plan
County of Riverside
R -A 20000
East
Vacant
~
West
Single-Family
Residential
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (S)
ANNEXATION 71
The proposed annexation consists of the removal of 15.75 net acres from the County of Riverside's
jurisdiction and placement of the same into the city limits of Lake Elsinore. The annexation is being
initiated by the project applicant, Centex Homes-Inland Empire, which is the authorized agent for
the property owners (See attached letters of authorization) and as such is considered an uncontested
annexation pursuant to the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) regulations.
The annexation consists of a block of three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 17.25 gross
acres or 15.75 net acres. The parcels are currently located on the border of the city limits of Lake
Elsinore, within the boundaries of the unincorporated area of Riverside County. The site is
bounded on the south and east by the Ramsgate Specific Plan (City of Lake Elsinore) and on the
west by two single-family homes (County of Riverside). Currently, two (2) of the three- (3) parcels
identified within the scope of this annexation contain single-family dwellings. The applicant and
intended future owner means to remove any and all structures for the ultimate development of the
sixty- (60) single family homes and associated improvements.
",.-...
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
):tGENDA ITEr"., NO.
PAGE lP,
~(
OF C1 ,
PlANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 4 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
~
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
The applicant requests pre-annexation approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map, subject
to the completion of Annexation 71 with the ultimate intention of removing the subject site out of
the city's Sphere of Inj/uena? and into the incorporated city limits of Lake Elsinore. The applicant
further requests that upon completion of the annexation procedures that the subject site be
designated a land use of Low Medium Density (LMD) Residential pursuant to the General Plan,
which allows up to six (6) dwelling units per acre. Ultimately, the applicant intends on developing
sixty (60) single-family residential units on 15.75 net acres or an empirical value of 3.80 dwelling
units per acre less than that which is allowed
ZONE CHANGE 2004-04
Correspondingly and consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment (referenced above),
the applicant is also requesting that the project site referenced herein, subject to the completion of
Annexation 71 be "Pre-Zoned", as required by Local Agency Commission of Riverside County to
R-1 (Single-Family Residential). The Zone Change would ultimately allow for the ultimate
development of 60 dwelling units pursuant to the applicable chapters of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code (LEMC).
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503
~
The proposed vesting tentative tract map, subject to the completion of Annexation 71 will subdivide
the 15.75 net acre site into sixty (60) single-family lots. Generally, vesting tentative maps are filed
and processed in the same manner as a tentative map and are defined as "subdivisions" pursuant to
Section 66424 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Consequently, this project requires
both, Planning Commission and City Council "pre-annexation" consideration pursuant to the
requirements of Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The
approval of the map will be conditioned upon the annexation of the property into the City.
Vested Rights
As referenced above, vesting tentative maps are filed and processed in the same manner as tentative
maps. However, Subsection 66454 (Pre-annexation filing of tentative maps) of the CSMA also
states that such approval shall be conditioned upon annexation of the property or as specified in the
conditions of approval contained herein and shall not be effective until annexation of the subject
property has been completed. Moreover, although Government Code Subsection 66474.2 of the
CSMA states that, the approval or conditional approval of a vesting tentative map shall confer a
vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies
and standards in effect at the date lAFCO files and records a Cenificate of Completion with the
County Recorder, the rights referred to within Chapter 16 of the LEMC shall expire if a final map is
not approved prior to the expiration of the vesting tentative map. ~
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
AGENDA ITEM No._~l
PAOE~OF C\\
"'"
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 5 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT /LUSTER ANNEXATION
Lot Configuration
The sixty- (60) single-family lots will range in size from 6,060 square feet to 12,113 square feet and
will include the necessary infrastructure for safe and efficient circulation and peninent utilities. The
average net lot size of the proposed subdivision is approximately 7,299 square feet. Lots "A", "B"
and "C", designated open space lots, will range in size from 17,550 square feet to 41,650 square feet.
Lots "A" and "B" will be developed as landscaped "buffer zones" to the surrounding properties.
Lot "C" will be developed as a retention basin. A Home Owner's Association (HOA), established
by the project's proponent, will maintain all three (3) lots. Additionally, a thirty foot (30') driveway
easement will be provided between lots 10 and 11, providing access to the home owner to the west
of the site, also to be maintained by the HOA... The width, length and slope percentage of the
private driveway has been reviewed and approved by the Riverside County Fire Depanment.
/""""
Riverside Street, which runs in an east/westerly direction, will bisect the subdivision into two (2)
areas. Thirty-nine (39) of the sixty- (60) lots will be developed on the south side of Riverside Street
with the remaining twenty-one (21) lots contained on the nOM side of Riverside Street. Funher, in
order to comply with the Multi-Species Habitat Plan (MSHCP) a .2 acre "remainder parcel" at the
southerly ponion of the development, will remain undeveloped and outside the development area of
the subdivision. Pursuant to Section 66424.6 of the CSMA, the remainder parcel shall not be
counted as a parcel for the purpose of determining whether a parcel or final map is required
Additionally, the fulfillment of construction requirements for improvements, including payment of
fees associated with any deferred improvements shall not be required until a permit is granted for
said parcel.
Trajjic and Circulation
Access to the proposed subdivision will primarily be made available by way Riverside Street, which
generally runs in an east/westerly direction, transecting the Ramsgate Specific Plan and bordering
the County of Riverside, ultimately funneling to Highway 74 (SR-74). Considering the potential
impacts of the proposed project related to local and regional traffic, the applicant's consultant,
Urban Crossroads, prepared a traffic study on June 4, 2004 and then revised again on November 1,
2004. The traffic study, which supplemented the previously completed traffic analysis for the
Ramsgate Specific Plan, confirmed that in order to operate at acceptable levels, the intersections at
both Riverside Street/Highway 74(SR-74) and Wasson Canyon, Steel Valley Road (NS)/SR-74
(East/West) required signalization. Concurrent with these findings the City has already conditioned
Tentative Tract Map 25476 for those improvements.
In addition, the primary access to the twenty-one (21) lots located to the nonh of Riverside Street
will gain access from Crumpton Street panially located in the County of Riverside and panially
located in the City of Lake Elsinore. The applicant has been conditioned to improve fifteen feet
(15') beyond the centerline of Crumpton Street, shown on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
,-.. Crumpton Street will then provide access to "B" and "C" Street(s), both of which are proposed as
cul-de-sacs. Funher, the thirty-nine (39) lots to the south of Riverside Street located on "A" Street
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
AGENDA iTEM NO.
PAGE L\ \
d-{
OF <=\ \
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 6 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT /LUSTER ANNEXATION
~
as shown on the vesting map will gain access from Street(s) "D" and "E", ultimately providing
connection to Riverside Street via Tentative Tract Map 25476.
Conclusively, although that ponion of Riverside Street bisecting the development is shown on the
City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence General Plan Circulation Element as a Major (4-
lane/l00' R.O.W.), the Ramsgate Specific Plan had already approved an eighty-eight foot (88') right-
of-way contiguous to the proposed vesting tentative tract map contained herein. Likewise, the
County of Riverside agreed in a meeting held on October 4, 2004 that since the "curb-to-curb"
section is the same as that which is allowed by the County, the proposed eighty-eight foot (88')
R.O.W. would be acceptable.
Landscap2 Buffer
As required by Section 17.23.060 (Lot Area) of the LEMC, the applicant has provided landscape
buffers between the proposed development and the lower density zoning districts to the west, nonh
and east of the project. Specifically, the applicant is proposing Lot "A" along the westerly edge of
the project and Lot "B" along the nOnh and east boundaries of the project. The Home Owner's
Association as shown on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map contained herein will maintain both open
space lots. The slope areas created by the development will generally encompass the perimeter of
the site and will create sufficient buffering to the lower density developments adjacent to the site as
well as providing sufficient streetscape along Riverside Street. Funher, as required by Section
16.25.060 (Filing and processing/Vesting Tentative Maps) of the LEMC the applicant has
submitted conceptual landscape plans for the subject "buffer areas" (See Attachments contained
herein) .
....."
Site Plan
Correspondingly, as required by Section 16.25.060 (Filing and processing/Vesting Tentative
Maps) of the LEMC, the applicant has submitted a detailed site plan, which has identified and
confirmed the appropriate development standards as would be required by the requested zoning
district R-1 (Single-Family Residential District) of the LEMC upon the completion of
annexation. Funher, although the site plan contained herein insures that the site will be developed
pursuant to the LEMC, the applicant will be required to submit a Residential Design Review and an
applicable Precise Grading Plan prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits.
A rchitfftUrf!
Likewise, as mentioned above, Section 16.25.060 (Filing and processing/Vesting Tentative
Maps) of the LEMC also required that the applicant submit the intended architectural elevations
and floor plans in order to insure the vested rights sought by the applicant. Considering this, the
applicant will be proposing four distinct models, which will range in size from 2,180 square feet to
2,750 square feet. Essentially, the products intended for the proposed subdivision are in substantial
conformance with the architecture of the homes approved for the Ramsgate Specific Plan area.
Essentially, the architectural designs of the homes can be classified as Tuscan, Crajisnwz, Traditimal .~
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
ACENDA Hi;.", '"~'_.... (1 t __.__
PAGE~Of C\ \
,.....
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 7 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
and Spanish.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARA nON NO. 2004-09
As defmed by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an
Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information necessary in determining
whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative
Declaration would be the appropriate necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the
subject project contained herein. According to section 15070(b) of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) a Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that
although the proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the subject
Vesting Tentative Map of the 15.75 acres could result in significant effects, mitigation measures were
available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
Following, the Initial "Study, Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was circulated to the State Clearinghouse for the required thirty (30) day public
and agency review period. The thirty- (30) day review period ends on December 5, 2004. As
required, the City (Defined as the Lead Agency) will consider any comments received prior to City
Council approval.
"....
ANALYSIS
ANNEXA nON 71
The State of California Government Code Section 56653 requires that applicants for the annexation
of parcels into the City of Lake Elsinore prepare a "Plan of Services" report as a critical element of
the annexation process. Section 56653 further requires that the "Plan of Services" include the
following elements:
· An enumeration and description of the services to be extended to the effected area;
. The level and range of those services;
· An indication of when those services can feasibly be extended to the effected territory;
· An indication of any improvements, upgrading the structures, roads, sewer, or water
facilities, or other conditions the local agency would impose or require within the effected
territory if the change of organization or reorganization is completed;
· Information with respect to how those services will be financed.
As required, the Plan of Services Report (See Auachments), prepared by the applicant, provided a
comprehensive evaluation of existing municipal services to the "project", as well as an evaluation of
future services upon annexation. The report enumerated and described the services to be provided,
level and range of those services, feasibility of extending such services, any upgrades or additional
facilities required by the City of Lake Elsinore and a description of when the services will
,-.., commence.
P: \Merriu Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AGENDf~ m~r,," NO.~
PACE l\3 Of q I
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7, 2004
Page 8 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
""'"
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09 and ZONE CHANGE 2004-04
In reviewing the requested pre-annexation land use map amendment and pre-zone change, staff
analyzed potential implications of the proposed amendments as it related to critical elements of the
General Plan. Specifically, staff identified local housing needs and the potential of resulting traffic
issues related to an increase in the housing stock. In conjunction with the mandates of the General
Plan, staff was concerned with any potential impacts that would be detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the
proposed amendment or within the City.
In deliberation of this request, staff considered and reasoned that considering the proximity of this
project to the Ramsgate Specific Plan, this pre-annexation General Plan Amendment offers excellent
opportunities to establish additionally needed housing in the area. Further, although the requested
pre-zone to R-l (Single-Family Residential District) would have allowed the applicant to develop
approximately 94 single-family lots, the applicant has chosen to only propose 60 single-family lots.
Based on this analysis; staff concluded that the requested pre-annexation amendment to the General
Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of the subject
subdivision subject to the completion of Annexation 71, is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the
General Plan Housing Element. Unequivocally, the Housing Element obligates the City to provide
"decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore"
and that the traffic impacts related to these requests be negligible. In response, the City's Traffic
Engineer concluded that the number of dwelling units and circulation proposed would not be
significant and should not decrease the level acceptable level of service.
'-'"
Finally, pursuant to the Merritt & Luster Projx;rty Supplmmtd Traffic Analysis (Revised), prepared by
Urban Crossroads on November 1, 2004, the proposed annexation and associated subdivision will
require no further improvements than the impacts and improvements previously identified in the
Ramsgate Tenmtiu: Tracts Focused lmp:ta Analysis prepared in January 2003. Considering this, staff
concluded that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will not be detrimental to
health, safety and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the
proposed amendment or within the City.
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32503
The primary issue related to the approval andf or conditional approval of vesting maps pivot around
the conference of vesting rights to proceed with development in substantial compliance with the
ordinances, policies and standards in effect on the date the Local Agency Formation Commission
files and records a Certificate of Compliance with the County Recorder. Nevertheless, Government
Code Section 66498.1 of the CSMA cautions that the rights conferred by Section 66474.2 of the
CSMA shall expire if a final map is not approved prior to the expiration of the vesting tentative map.
In the case hereto, although the application of the vesting map was filed in compliance with Chapter
16.25.060 (Filing and processing) and that the applicant has submitted the required exhibits and """"
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AOENDAITEM NO. )/
PAGE~OF y\
,.....
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 9 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT /LUSTER ANNEXATION
documents necessary to establish consistency with the adopted General Plan and applicable chapters
of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Section 66454 also forewarns that the time period for the
tentative maps does not begin until the completion of the annexation of the property. Considering
this, staff has not established an approval date for the tentative map at this juncture in the
annexatIon process.
Lot Configuration
The lot configuration proposed by Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32503 contained herein is
consistent with the pervasive development standards contained in Section 17.23.060 (Lot Area) of
the LEMC of Chapter 17.23 R-1 (Single-Family Residential District), in that the minimum lot
size for the proposed subdivision exceeds; the required minimum lot size, the average lot size and
the required comer lot size.
Tr~ and Cirr:ukztian
~
The analysis of the traffic impacts related to the subject project were based on the updated traffic
study entitled Merritt & Luster ProJx:rty SuppUmmtd Tr~ Analysis (Revised) prepared by Urban
Crossroads on November 1, 2004. The traffic analysis supplemented the completed analysis for the
Ramsgate Specific Plan entitled, &onsgate TentatiU? Tracts Focused Traffic ~ Analysis, also prepared
by Urban Crossroads, Ine. in January, 2003. The analysis referenced herein analyzed future
conditions with the proposed additional development to ensure that the previous study findings
were still accurate at the two (2) key intersections namely:
· Riverside Street (NS) at State Route (SR-74)(EW); and
. Wasson Canyon Road-Steele Valley Road (NS) at SR-74 (EW).
Ultimately, the traffic analysis for the proposed Merritt/Luster property will have no additional
impact and would require no funher improvements than the impacts and improvements previously
identified in the Ramsgate Tentative Tracts Focused Traffic Impact Analysis.
Additionally, as stated earlier in the repon, although that ponion of Riverside Street bisecting the
development is shown on the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence General Plan Circulation
Element as a Major (4-lane/100' R.O.W.), prior to 1985 the County of Riverside's General Plan
designated that roadway section for Riverside Street as an eighty-eight foot (88') right-of -way. In
tandem, the Ramsgate Specific Plan was conditioned to dedicate a right-oF-way consistent with the
General Plan in effect at the time the Specific Plan was originally approved. Likewise, the County of
Riverside recently agreed in a meeting held on October 4,2004 that since the "curb-to-curb" section
is the same as that which is allowed by the County, the proposed eighty-eight foot (88') R.O.W.
would be acceptable. In order to assure compliance with the General Plan Circulation Element and
to provide a practical consistency with the County of Riverside and the Ramsgate Specific plan staff
has added the following condition of approval:
,,-.
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
ACENDA m::M NO.
P,i.\CE l\S
J--I
OF ~ \
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7, 2004
Page 10 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
The applimnt shall dedicate full width right-of-way far the projrt frontage ofRiu?rside Street. Right ofwaywidth
daiicat:im shall be 88feet with an additiona/12foot easement dedication for roat:kmy ~es.
"'"
L~ Buffer
The proposed conceptual landscape plan for the buffer areas meets the requirements of Section
17.23.060 (Lot Area) of the LEMC in that the applicant has incOlporated two (2) open space lots
(Lots "A" and "B") totaling 74,424 square feet, adjacent to the lower density zoning districts to the
south, west and nonh of the proposed subdivision. The landscape buffer zones will minimize the
disparity between different densities of development. Effectively, the open space lots will border
the perimeter of the tract and will be maintained by the Home Owner's Association. The adequacy
of this transition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission and City
Council on a case-by-case basis.
A rchiteaure
The architectural design of the proposed buildings meets the requirements set fonh within Chapter
17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC in that the architecture of the buildings
has been designed to enhance their immediate surroundings. Additionally the applicant has
provided a variety of building design and form such as staggering planes along the exterior walls,
which will create light and shadow. .......,
Siting
The proposed site plan meets or exceeds the requirements of Chapter 17.14 (Residential
Development Standards), Chapter 17.23 (R-l, Single-Family Residential District) and Chapter
17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Pursuant to and in
compliance with Chapter 17.23 (R-l, Single-Family Residential District) of the LEMC, that the
applicant is only proposing 60 single-family lots instead of the allowed 94 dwelling units.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09
The Mitigated Negative Declaration contained herein identified six (6) issues which were "Less than
significant with mitigations incorporated". Those areas, identified in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 identifies and describes the areas of
environmental issue and their corresponding mitigations. No issues were identified as a Potentially
Significant Impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6
(Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or
Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the CalifOrnia Errvironrrmtal Quality Act (CEQA). Based on
staff's evaluation, the proposed project will not result in any significant effect on the environment. ""-'"
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
ACENDA ITEM NO.~'
PACE Ytp OF q ,-
"........
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 11 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or
Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the CalijOm:ia Errviranrrmtal Quality Act (CEQA), the intended
Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearing/Jouse on November 5, 2004 for the
required 30 day review period
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2004-_ recommending
to the City Council approval to commence with proceedings for the properties described in
Annexation 71; Resolution No. 2004-_ recommending to the City Council approval of General
Plan Amendment 2004-09; Resolution No. 2004-_ recommending to the City Council approval of
Zone Change (pre-Zone) No. 2004-04; Resolution No. 2004-_ recommending to the City
Council approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32503 and Resolution No. 2004- _
recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2004-09 based the
following Findings, Attachments and the proposed Conditions of Approval. . .
FINDINGS-ANNEXATION
~
1. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore and will not create
pockets or islands.
7be projXJsed annexation area is contiguous to the Ramsgate Specifr Plan area on the easterly luundary of
the project and will Ix: a reasonahle extension of the city loundary areas in that the annexation of the
prvfXJsed parcels will not create any pockets or islands.
2. The proposed annexation will not result in any adverse significant impacts on the
enVIronment.
As defturl by Section 15063 of the CalifOrnia Errviranrrmtal Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial
Study'lmS prepared in order to provide the Citywith infonnation rurrssary in determininguhether an
Errviranrrmtal Impaa Report (EIR), Negatiw Declaration or Mitigatni Negatiw Declaratim WJUid Ix: the
appropriate rurrssary mvirmrrmtal docunmtation and clearance fUr the subject project containIxl hemn.
According to section 15070(b) of the CalifOrnia Errviranrrmtal Quality Act (CEQA) a Mitigatni
Negatiw Declaration 'lmS appropriate since it dronal that although the proJX>Sal for the Annexation,
General Plan Ammdrmu, Zme Change and the subject Vesting T entatiw Map of the 15.75 acres could
result in signijimnt effects, mitigation rnMSureS W?re avai.&He reduang these signijimnt effects to insignijimnt
lewls.
3. The proposed annexation will eliminate an existing undesired pocket of the county area.
The profXJsed annexation consists of the ro11(JU1] of 15. 75 acres firm the County of Ril:ersides jurisdictim
and plaament of the same into the city limits of Lake Elsinore. The annexation is king initiatni by the
project applicant, Cen.tex Hom::s-Inland Empire, whim is the authorized agent for the prop:rty awners (See
attalhed letters of authorization) and as sum is considered an uncmJestni annexation pursuant to the
Ril:erside Local Agemy Fonnation Grrmission (LA FCO) regulations.
~
P:\Merrin Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ (
PAGE_ l{l OF _ q \
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 12 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
.....,
FINDINGS -GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of
the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or
improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The profXJsed General P&n A rrmdmmt has ken analyzed relatiu: to its jXJtmtiality to k detrimmtal to the
health, safety, amJUrt and wlfare of the persons residing or 7Wrking within the neighl::urlxxxl of the profXJ5ffi
amenth7ent. The primary issue identijiai by staff relates to the traffic imparts of the profXJsed density. staff,
cmdudtd, based on the Traffic AruUysis, that the Leul of Service for the intersections in the study A rea will
not k dtgrad<<i as a result of this project UjXJn the crmrJetinn of annexation.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment will pennit reasonable development of the area
consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacen~
propertles.
The profXJsed General P&n Amendment will allow the applicant to deudop the site, uJXYn annexation, with
the profXJsed density of 3.80 IAreUing Units/net acre and will in turn bring alvut a site mare crmJU1ih1e
Yi1h the area knmm as the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
6. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage more
in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. ~
The profXJsed General P&n Amendmmt, uJXYn annexation, 7WUld esuWlish a density rmre in cun[annance
Yi1h the mmtly Ramsgate Spaific P&n to the south and east of the subject site. Additionally, the profXJsed
project site 7WUld k in close proximity of any run:ssary servia?s nm:Iai by persons residing in the profXJsed
sulxlivisian as indimted in the ccp&n of Servia!s>> reJX>>1.
7. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the
enVIronment.
The profXJ5ffi General P&n Amendment was indud<<l within the description of the proftrts Initial Study.
Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated Ncgatiu: Declaration, uhh condudtd with
mitigations that the project, uJXn annexation, will not haLe a signijimnt effect on the envirmmnt
FINDINGS - ZONE CHANGE
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or
general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed
amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the
neighborhood or within the City.
The profXJsed Zone OJangz has ken analyzed relatiu: to its potentiality to /:x; detrimmtal to the health,
saftty, amjOrt and ux/fare of the persons residing or'lWrking within the neighl::urlxxxl of the profXJsed
amenth7ent. The primary issue identijiai by staff relates to the traffic imparts of the profXJ5ffi density. Staff,
cmdudtd, based on the Traffic AruUysis, that the Leul ofServicejUr the intersections in the Study Area will
not k dtgrad<<i as a result of this project UjXJn crmrJetinn of the annexation.
'-'"
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AGENDA 11Eiv1 NO.---:1..!-
PAGE 4'b OF ql
~
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7,2004
Page 13 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the
General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code (LEMC).
Based an its analysis, sta/f has condudRd that the requested arrmdmmt to the General PUm Land Use Map
and the rorresponding Zone ClJarw, al/awing the deuIopnent of the subject projoct, UJXn crmPetim of tlx
annexation is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General PUm Housing E!m7ent, obligating tlx City to
provide "decent housing oppmunities and a satisfying living envi:rmrrmt fUr residents of Lake Elsinore'~
FINDINGS - VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
The project as desigrurl assists in adJieuing the deudopnmt of a mil-bakmad and furu:tianal mix of
residmtial, amm:rcial, industrUd, 0Jm space, recrm.tional and institutional Umd uses (GOAL 1.0, Land
Use Element) as u:eIl provide dm:nt housing opportunities and a satisfying living envi:rmrrmt for residents
of Lake Elsinore (GOAL J.O, Housing Element).
~ 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public
service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources
have been considered and balanced.
Pursuant the Cortese-Krwx-HertzWg Load Gau:mmmt Reorganization Ad of 2000 (Government
Code Section 56000-56001) and the standards and policies esuWlished by the Riu:rside Load Agmry
Formation Gmmission (LAFCO) the applimnt has prepared a PUm of Servii:e Report 'lRhh found a
balance in the avai&hle fiscal and erwirarvrmtal resourm avai&hle upon annexation.
3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to
result in any significant environmental impact.
The project has /x;en adequately conditiarud by all appliaWle departments and agencies and will not therefOre
result in any signijimnt envi:runrrmtal impacts.
FINDINGS-MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would
avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur; and
The applimnt has made revisions to the project or has agrm/ to speciJk canditims, whidJ 'lWUid awid the
ejfocts or mitigate the ejfocts of the projrt to a point where no signijimnt effects 'lWUid occur.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the
,-... project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
P: \Merritt Luster Annexation \PC Staff Report.doc
AGENDA ITEM lW.~
PAGE l1 C\ OF q \
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DECEMBER 7, 2004
Page 14 of 14
PROJECT TITLE: MERRITT fLUSTER ANNEXATION
Purswnt to the evidma: rrn?iud in the light of the Wxie m:ord presented to sta/f the project will not baa: a
sigpijicant effoct on the errvirmrrmt considering the applicable Conditims of Approwl and MitigaJim
Monitoring Program.
......,
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER
APPROVED BY:
ATTACHMENTS
PLANNING COMMISSION ItESOLUTIONS
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-09 AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM INCLUDING PLAN OF SERVICE REPORT
ANNEXATION OF MERRITT fLUSTER
LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION AND SUPPORT FOR ANNEXATION
LETTER FROM DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
EXHIBITS
· REDUCTIONS (8 '/2 x 11)
Exhibit A Proposed Annexation Boundary Map
Exhibit B General Plan Amendment Map
Exhibit C Zone Change Map
Exhibit D Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503
Exhibit E Plot Plan to accompany Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503
Exhibit F Legal Description
Exhibit G Elevations
Exhibit H Conceptual Landscape Plans
7. FULL SIZE EXHIBITS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
......,
6.
......,
P: \Merrin Luster Annexation \PC Staff Repon.doc
AGENDA ITEM NO. h{ 1
PAGE 50 OF ~I
",......
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-157
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2004-09
FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS ANNEXATION
NO. 71, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.
2004-09, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-04 AND
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32503.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire to request
approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 for the purpose of developing an
residential subdivision; and
WHEREAS, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 has been prepared to evaluate
environmental impacts resulting with the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated
with the responsibility of making recommendation to the City Council adopting Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2004-09; and
",......
WHEREAS, public notice of said applications has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department
and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 7,
2004; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt (NOI) has been filed with the County Clerk of
said applications, and the Planning Division has requested a public review period commencing
on November 5, 2004 and extending to December 5, 2004;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE as follows:
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 has been prepared, submitted and reviewed
in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the
City's CEQA requirements. The report is complete and adequate in it's evaluation of all
environmental effects of the project known as Merritt/Luster Annexation No. 71 and
associated discretionary approvals and is not expected to result in any significant
environmental affects with mitigation measures, based on the following findings;
",......
AGENDA IT::M NO.~j__._.
PACE 5 \ OF q)
RESOLUTION NO 2004-
MND NO. 2004-09
PAGE 2 OF3
""""
FINDINGS MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would
avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur; and
7he appliamt has made revisims to tk projrt or has agreed to specific conditions, which 'lWtdd amid tk
eJfocts ormitigate tk e/fects of tk project to a point7Rkre rw si&zificant eJfocts 'lWtdd cxmr.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the
project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.
Purswnt to tk evidenre rmiud in tk light of tk uIxie nmrd presented to stdff tk project will rwt haw a
sifJ'lificant eJfect on tk emirrnment cunsidering tk applimh!e Conditions of AfJJ7YUWl and Mitigatim
M onitaring PrrYgn:on.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that it finds that
Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is complete and adequate and provides appropriate
environmental documentation for the project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA,
the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental clearance procedures.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore certify Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09.
....,
Ron LaPere, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a
meeting thereof conducted on December 7,2004 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission
"""
AGENDA ITEM NO.AI
PAGE 3:J. OF.31___
~
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-158
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE
COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX THE
TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS ANNEXATION 71 (APN(S)
349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-
430-006) INTO THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Meno, Centex Home-Inland Empire annexing certain
properties described as APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006
(Approximately 15.75 net acres) into the corporate boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore; and
WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Section 56000-56001); and
/"""'
WHEREAS, Dave Meno, Centex Homes-Inland Empire has submitted additional
applications for General Plan No. 2004-09, Zone Change No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 32503 consisting of the ultimate development of 15.75 acres into 60 single-family
lots and associated improvements, subject to annexation, located adjacent the Ramsgate Specific
Plan within the City's Sphere of Influence and unincorporated boundaries of County of
Riverside; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated
with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for annexations; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department
and other interested parties at a public hearing with respect to this item on December 7, 2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the request for the annexation
(Annexation No. 71), prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council commence
proceedings to annex the subject territory. The Planning Commission finds that Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is complete and adequate and provides appropriate
environmental documentation for the project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA,
the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental clearance procedures.
/"""'
P:\Menin Luster Annexation \PC RESO Annnexation.doc
AGENDii. ITEM NO. :iA
PACE <5 ~ OF C\ I
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71
Page 2 of 3
'-"
SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Cortese-Knox Local Government
Reorganization Act of 1 985, Government Code Section 57082 and the City of Lake Elsinore the
following findings for the approval of Annexation No. 71 have been made as follows:
1. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore and will not
create pockets or islands.
The proposed annexation area is contiguous to the Ramsgate Specific Plan area on the
easterly boundary of the project and will be a reasonable extension of the city boundary
areas in that the annexation of the proposed parcels will not create any pockets or
islands.
2. The proposed annexation will not result in any adverse significant impacts on the
environment.
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared in order to provide the City with information
necessary in determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be the appropriate necessary
environmental documentation and clearance for the subject project contained herein.
According to section 15070(b} of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was appropriate since it deemed that although the
proposal for the Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the subject
Vesting Tentative Map of the 15.75 acres could result in significant effects, mitigation
measures were available reducing these significant effects to insignificant levels.
3. The proposed annexation will eliminate an existing undesired pocket of the county area.
The proposed annexation consists of the removal of 15.75 acres from the County of
Riverside's jurisdiction and placement of the same into the city limits of Lake Elsinore.
The annexation is being initiated by the project applicant, Centex Homes-Inland Empire,
which is the authorized agent for the property owners (See attached letters of
authorization) and as such is considered an uncontested annexation pursuant to the
Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) regulations.
~
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore commence proceedings for Annexation No. 71.
Ron LaPere, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
P: \Menin Luster Annexation \PC RESO Annnexation.doc
'-"
AGENDA ITEl'/i NO.
PAGE 6'-1
;;(1
or- en
,......
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR
ANNEXATION NO. 71
Page 3 of 3
I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a
meeting thereof conducted on December 7, 2004 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
".....
Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the
Planning Commission
,-..
P:\Merritt Luster Annexation \PC RESO Annnexation.doc
AGEI'JDj~ ITEM NO.
PAGE 55
;f
or- q l
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-159
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09 AMENDING THE LAND
USE DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY
DESCRIBED AS APN(s) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012
AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006 FROM THE COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE "FUTURE SPECIFIC PLAN" (FSP) AND LOW
DENSITY TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE'S
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF LOW-MEDIUM
DENSITY SUBJECT TO THE COMPLETION OF
ANNEXA TION NO. 71.
.....,
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and .Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire initiating
proceedings to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by requesting a General Plan Amendment
changing the designation of the parcels known as Assessor Parcel Number(s) 349-400-005, 349-
430-011 &012 and a portion of 349-430-006 from the County of Riverside's Land Use
Designation of "Future Specific Plan" (FSP) and Low Density to the City of Lake Elsinore's
General Plan designation of Low-Medium Density subject to completion of Annexation 71; and
WHEREAS, Dave Meno, Centex Homes-Inland Empire has submitted additional
applications for Annexation 71, Zone Change No. 2004-04 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
32503 consisting of the ultimate development of 15.75 acres into 60 single-family lots and
associated improvements subject to the completion of Annexation 71, located adjacent the
Ramsgate Specific Plan within the City's Sphere of Influence and unincorporated boundaries of
County of Riverside; and
,...,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated
with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the
approved General Plan Land Use Map; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department
and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 7,
2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed pre-annexation
General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City
Council approve the proposed amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map. The Planning
,...,
AGENDA nEi'/; I.;:G. :J (
PACE 5~Of~
,.....
PlANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR
GENERAL PlAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
Page 2 of 3
Commission finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is adequate
and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of ends City Council certification, based upon the
fo]]owing findings and determinations:
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of
Lake Elsinore the fo]]owing findings for the approval of pre-annexation General Plan
Amendment No. 2004-09 have been made as fo]]ows:
,...........
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment wi]] not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of
the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or
improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed General Plan 'Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to
be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or
working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue
identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded,
based on the Traffic Analysis, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study
Area will not be degraded as a result of this project upon the completion of annexation.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area
consistent with its constraints and wi]] make the area more compatible with adjacent
properties.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will allow the applicant to develop the site, upon
annexation, with the proposed density of 3.80 Dwelling Units/net acre and will in turn
bring about a site more compatible with the area known as the Ramsgate Specific Plan.
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage
more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints.
The proposed General Plan Amendment, upon annexation, would establish a density
more in conformance with the recently Ramsgate Specific Plan to the south and east of
the subject site. Additionally, the proposed project site would be in close proximity of
any necessary services needed by persons residing in the proposed subdivision as
indicated in the "Plan of Services" report.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
The proposed General Plan Amendment was included within the description of the
project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that the project, upon
annexation, will not have a significant effect on the environment.
,...........
Are"'''''' ,.~..~.... ,.~ "/f
v~j\Jf~r~ f b t~r\fi ~~!J;. . e7\
---
PAGE_ 'J7 or_.~
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004-09
Page 3of3
"'"
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore approve General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09.
Ron LaPere, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
I hereby certifY that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a
meeting thereof conducted on December 7, 2004 by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners:
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
'-'
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the
Planning Commission
"-'
PACE 0'3
$1
OF 91
AGE'.'JDP! rlEiVl ~~o._
,-...
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-160
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONE
CHANGE (PRE-ZONE) NO. 2004-09 TO CHANGE THE
ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS
SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS (APN(S) 349-400-005, 349-
430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006) TO R-l
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE
ZONING ORDINANCE SUBJECT TO COMPLETION OF
THE ANNEXATION NO. 71.
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire to change the
Zoning Designation of the parcels described as APN(s) 349-400-005,349-430-011 & 012 and a
portion of 349-430-006 to R-l Single Family Residential District .subject to the completion of
Annexation No. 71; and
,-...
WHEREAS, Dave Mello, Centex Homes-Inland Empire has submitted additional
applications for Annexation 71, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-09 and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 32503 consisting of the ultimate development of 15.75 acres into 60 single-family
lots and associated improvements, located adjacent the Ramsgate Specific Plan within the City's
Sphere of Influence and unincorporated boundaries of County of Riverside subject to the
completion of Annexation No. 71; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated
with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the
approved Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department
and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 7,
2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Pre-Zone Change
No. 2004-04, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the
proposed amendment to the Zoning Map. The Planning Commission finds that Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is complete and adequate and provides appropriate
environmental documentation for the project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA,
the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental clearance procedures.
",.......
."f"\:f,i7".:I !T';':~"~ ".hi rJ J
M"V6..M~t:.J'r~ f 'l\o.>o~'~~ '1Ii'''''-~__~___
Pl\CE3CJ OF _ q I __
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR
ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-09
Page 2 of3
SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of
Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change No. 2004-04 have been
made as follows:
1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or
general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the
proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements
in the neighborhood or within the City.
The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be
detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working
within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by
staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the
Traffic Analysis, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not
be degraded as a result of this project upon completion of the annexation.
2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the
General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC). .
Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General
Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of
the subject project, upon completion of the annexation is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the
General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing
opportunities and a satisfYing living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore ".
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore approve Pre-Zone Change No.2004-09 subject to the completion of Annexation No. 71.
Ron LaPere, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a
meeting thereof conducted on December 7, 2004 by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners:
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
AGEiIJDI. 11E~V! NO.
PAGE (JJO
'-'
'-'
'-'
~t
OF~
""' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR
ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-09
Page 3 of3
ATTEST:
Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the
Planning Commission
,.........
,.........
AGEi'Wf"\ ~ rEM NO.~
PAGE Co\ OF Q I
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-161
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROV AL OF
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32503 SUBJECT TO
THE COMPLETION OF THE ANNEXATION OF THE
PARCELS KNOWN AS APN(S) 349-400-005, 349-430-011 &
012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006 INTO THE
CORPORA TE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE.
......"
WHEREAS, an application, authorized by Jack and Betty Luster and Everada Merritt
(Property owners), has been filed by Dave Mello, Centex Home-Inland Empire to request the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32503 upon completion of the annexation of the parcels
known as 349-400-005, 349-430-011 & 012 and a portion of 349-430-006 for the establishment
of a sixty (60) lot subdivision; and
WHEREAS, Dave Mello, Centex Homes-Inland Empire has submitted additional
applications for Annexation 71 and Zone Change No. 2004-04 consisting of the ultimate
development of 15.75 acres into 60 single-family lots and associated improvements, located
adjacent the Ramsgate Specific Plan within the City's Sphere of Influence and unincorporated
boundaries of County of Riverside; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated
with the responsibility of recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Maps for
residential projects; and
....,
WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning
Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department
and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on December 7,
2004;
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed request for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission
finds and determines that this project is consistent with Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Section(s) 66424, 66454 and 66427 of the California
Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) and that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-09 is complete
and adequate and provides appropriate environmental documentation for the project and fully
complies with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's
environmental clearance procedures.
....,
_ n 'T~-.' -~'f /) A
~_GEriDt~ ~ j t:tV~ ~\~';J.__ oVL
Pt\GE to Q OF .-9...L-
_.~-
,,-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32503
PAGE 2 OF3
SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Section(s) 66424, 66454 and 66427 of the
California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) and Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC), the following findings for the approval of the vesting tentative map
has been made as follows:
".-...
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
The project as designed assists in achieving the development of a well-balanced and
functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and
institutional land uses (GOAL 1.0, Land Use Element) as well provide decent housing
opportunities and a satisfYing living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore (GOAL
1.0, Housing Element).
2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public
service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources
have been considered and balanced.
Pursuant the Cortise-Knox-Herzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
(Government Code Section 56000-56001) and the standards and policies established by
the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) the applicant has prepared
a Plan of Service Report which found a balance in the available fiscal and environmental
resources available upon annexation.
3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to
result in any significant environmental impact.
The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies
and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above Findings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of a
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32503 subject to the completion of Annexation No. 71.
Ron LaPere, Chairman
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
~
AGENDA rn2"j NO.
PACE (p '6
~I
OF q l
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32503
PAGE 3 OF3
"-"
I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a
meeting thereof conducted on December 7, 2004 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission
~
"-"
AGENDA if!;!!;'! 1KJ..-2A__
PACE 'lP'i OF q \
,-..
April 21, 2004
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
Planning Department
130 S. Main Street
lake Elsinore, CA 92530
RE: LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
To Whom It May Concern:
~
We hereby certify that we are the owners of approximately 10 acres of land (APN 349-
430-011 & 349-430-012), located on Riverside Drive in the County of Riverside, to be
annexed into the City of lake Elsinore.
By this letter, Centex Homes, as the Applicant, and HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES
IRVINE, INC., as the Engineer, are hereby authorized to submit and process a Tentative
Tract Map and Development Plan covering the aforementioned property, on behalf of
Jack and Bettie luster.
Sincerely,
A~/ c7Z~4
0~~/~
Name
~- 623_ 0 7"
Date
ij- ;l 3- () Y
Date
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.., r
PAGE l.PD OF q\
.
""'"
April 21, 2004
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
Planning Department
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
RE: lETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby certify that I am the owner of approximately 6.21 acres of land (APN 349-400-
005), located on Riverside Drive in the County of Riverside, to be annexed into.the City
of Lake Elsinore.
"'-'
By this letter, CENTEX HOMES, as the Applicant, and HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES
IRVINE, INC., as the Engineer, are hereby authorized to submit a~d process a Tentative
Tract Map and Development Plan covering the aforementioned property, on behalf of
Everada Merritt.
Sincerely,
~~~~
~ame
D~/k#
.....
""'"
AGENDA ITEM NO.~\
PACE_W O.~
~
Ken Seumalo
City Engineer
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Subject: Permission to Grade On Property Adjacent to the Luster property Assessor Parcel
Number 349-430-012.
I, Dennis Lunsford; the undersigned, hereby state that I am the legal owner ofthe property
located in the City of Lake Elsinore and known as Assessor Parcel No 347-110-015.
I further state that I have seen and received a copy of the Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32503,
which proposes construction on said property consisting of:
1. Grading to create a new 12.8% driveway.
2. Route property access to an improved street.
~
I hereby give my consent and permission for right of entry onto the above identified property to
perform the above stated construction. This permission shall continue in force only until the
above-described work has been completed and a Notice of Completion is issued on this project.
It is expressly understoo,d that upon completion of the work. This Right of Entry is terminated
and said property will be left in, a neat and orderly condition.
.. , ~
~ ...'
. I ~,., .
Dennis Lunsford . ~
(Notary Acknowledgement Attached)
r--
H:\Merritl & lusteM0507Pennission to Grade lelterlundsford.doc
AGE[~CP~ rrE~Va ~~40~
PAGE (PI
/)(
OF q\
...""
Date: April 23, 2004
Name: Dennis Adams
20075 Riverside Drive
Lake Elsinore, CA 92531
Reference:
APN: 349-430-003
To whom it may concern:
Centex Homes has approached me to describe their proposed development plans for the
neighboring Merritt and Luster properties. I have reviewed the proposed development of
approximately 59 single family detached residential lots on APN's 349-430-011-7, 349-
430-012-8 and 349-400-005-9 adjacent to my property, APN's 349-430-003, and have
found the proposed buffer and development to be acceptable. I lend my full support and
approval to Centex Homes for the development of the Merritt & Luster project.
'---'
Sincerely, .. ... .. ?2
Denm;t1 /I
/ / '
.' / ~~ %----'
/
~-~?- ay
Signature
Date
'---'
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ l.
PAGE <t>L OF C\ \
~.
Date: April 16, 2004
Name: Lyle Scotton
Address: P.O. Box 82
Lake Elsinore, CA 92531
Reference:
APN: 349-400-009 & 349-400-030
To whom it may concern:
Centex Homes has approached me to describe their proposed development plans for the
~ neighboring Merritt and Luster properties. I have reviewed the proposed development of
approximately 59 single family detached residential lots on APN's 349-430-011-7,349-
430-012-8 and 349-400-005-9 adjacent to my property, APN's 349-400-009 & 349-400-
030, and have found the proposed buffer and development to be acceptable. I lend my
full support and approval to Centex Homes for the development of the Merritt & Luster
project.
Sincerely,
Lyle Scotton
oz;-e ~,~ ~gnature
.s - / / -6~ Date
,...
t\CEN;j;~ ~'w.~_
PAGE .v>8 OF q ,
Date: April 16, 2004
Name: Daniel Gouvion
Address: P.O. Box 2089
Lake Elsinore, CA 92531
Reference: APN: 349-400-032 & 349-400-033
To whom it may concern:
Centex Homes has approached me to describe their proposed development plans for the
neighboring Merritt and Luster properties. I have reviewed the proposed development of
approximately 59 single family detached residential lots on APN's 349-430-011-7, 349-
430-012-8 and 349-400-005-9 adjacent to my property, APN~s 349-400-032 & 349-400-
033, and have found the proposed buffer and development to be acceptable. I lend my
full support and approval to Centex Homes for the development of the Merritt & Luster
project.
Sincerely,
Daniel Gouvion
- \..~ I ()... ~1).... ~ignature
<--::::--- ~ ~
IP/f1L Date
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE -ZO
......."
......."
......."
~l
OF -g-l
-
,.......
Date: April 20, 2004
Name: David McGloklin
California Pac Ann Conf United Methodist Church
Lake Elsinore, CA 92531
Reference:
APN: 349-400-004
David:
It was a pleasure to meet with you this afternoon. I am glad to hear that the Church
,....... desires to move forward with their own site development as Centex Homes brings
utilities closer with the construction of Rosetta Canyon. While I know that it may take
some time to obtain an official endorsement from the congregation it is my understanding
from our discussion that the Church will be supportive of the Merritt property
development and have no reason to object to our plans. The proposed perimeter
landscape will provide an adequate buffer between the two properties. I hope we will
continue to share information and lend support to one another as we move through the
development process. If I have misunderstood our conversation "in any way please
contact me within the next ten days that I may correct my understanding.
Sincerely,
e~(~/'
Assistant Project Manager
Centex Homes Inland Empire
2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150
Corona, CA 92880
,.......
(909) 479-9396 Office
(909) 273-2100 Fax
,AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE J I
:;Z{
OF C1\
~
Date: May 5, 2004
Name: Toribio Mendez
19979 Riverside Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92570
Reference:
IlPN:347-110-G14
Mr. Mendez:
It was a pleasure to meet with you and your daughter Friday, April 23, 2004. I am glad to
hear that you have no objections to the development of the Merritt or Luster properties.
After reviewing the buffer plan and discussing the consent letter for the project Chris
Holmquist and I understood that even though you had no objection to the development of
the project as presented, you have no desire to sign any docwnents stating such. We
appreciate your support and look forward to maintaining an open line of communication
as neighbors. If I have misunderstood our conversation in any way please contact me
within the next ten days that I may correct my understanding.
....,
Sincerely,
/:A /Itfl /--
David J. ~eilo, Jr.
Assistant Project Manager
. Centex Homes Inland Empire
2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150
Corona, CA 92880
(909) 479-9396 Office
(909) 273-2100 Fax
~
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~I
J C11
PAGE -, ex OF _
,.....
Date: April 23, 2004
Name: Dennis Lunsford
Address: 1235 Hinnen Ave
Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
Reference:
APN: 347-110-015
To whom it may concern:
/"""
Centex Homes has approached me to describe their proposed development plans for the
neighboring Merritt and Luster properties. I have reviewed the proposed development of
approximately 59 single family detached residential lots on APN's 349-430-011-7, 349-
430-012-8 and 349-400-005-9 adjacent to my property, APN's 347-110-015, and have
found the propose4 buffer and development to be acceptable. I lend my full support and
approval to Centex' Homes for the development of the Merritt & Luster project.
Sincerely,
Dennis Lunsford
C>~ ~gn
\ ~.' . . ature
Date
,.....
AGENDA m:fi. NO. ;J (
PAGE 15 -. OF --9..L._
'wIJII
April 13, 2004
Adel Abusamra
32655 Rachel Circle
Dana Point, CA 92629
Reference: APN: 347-110-016
To whom it may concern:
Centex Homes has approached me to describe their proposed development plans for the
neighboring Merritt and Luster properties. I have reviewed the proposed development of
approximately 59 single family detached residentiallots on APN's 349-430-011-7, 349-
430-012-8 and 349-400-005-9 adjacent to my property, APN's 347-110-016, and have
found the proposed buffer and development to be acceptable. I lend my full support and
approval to Centex Homes for the development of the Merritt & Luster project.
~
Sincerely,
Adel Abusamra
Add ~.L~~^~Signature
4,/1:3 /~~ Date
'-'
AGENDA ITEM NO. JJ. .
PACe-.J..j _OF q \
30 I ,-,ove Street, Suite 600
1ewport Beach, CA 92660
Tel (949)955-1500
Fax (949) 955-1590
CITY OF LAKE ElSrNORE
RECEIVED
HAY 1 8 200~
PLANNING DEPl:
AYID TACSSIG & ASSOCIATES, l~c.
'ubJ;-l'ifUlnce and Urban Economics
May 17,2004
Administrative Office - (City Hall)
Community Development Department
130 S. Main St.
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Subject: Rosetta Canyon Annexation - Plan of Services
To Whom It May Concern:
David Taussig & Associates, Inc. (DT A) has been hired by Centex Homes to prepare a Plan of Services Report to
evaluate the proposed annexation of three parcels in the Rosetta Canyon Territory of Riverside County into the City of
Lake Elsinore. The Plan of Services Report is to be submitted to Riverside County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo) for approvaL The purpose of this letter is to request the assistance of various County and City
departments in providing the information required for the Plan of Services Report as mandated by State Law.
~ ,e primary task of the Plan of Services Report is to evaluate the current level of services/facilities available to an area
_..rough the current service provider; and a subsequent evaluation of the future level of services/facilities to that same area
upon organization or reorganization of the affected area. The report is also to provide a comprehensive analysis of
whether new facilities will need to be constructed or upgraded, as well as a discussion of the expected costs and if any
special taxes or assessments will be necessary.
Please find attached Figure 1 and Exhibit A.
Figure 1: is a map of the proposed annexation area.
Exhibit A: outlines the specific data that we are requesting to aid us in the preparation of our Report.
Thank you for your assistance in this effort. DT A will be calling within the next week to follow-up and to provide
assistance, if needed. We would appreciate a response to our data request within two weeks of receivine: this letter.
Please feel free to contact DT A with any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Koung Sun
Analyst
Aavid Taussig & Associates, Inc.
Newport Beach. Riverside. San Rarrwn
AGENDA nEM NO.
PAGE ! ts
~1
OF C\\
,....c
(1)
~
=
eJl
--
~
~ ~
(II
~ U)~~
3 I <(OC
I 0... U b..
1 4:0
U>>-
~
u ::l
o
U
~ -l~W
~~~~I
l~m8:
3: <( 0:::J: >-
I .l-
o li....... . >< ~
...J Xw
>- W 0
15 u
>
I -lw
O~Q
o (II
01:;15
>-Ow>
lC\1g~
1 U) 0
.."..W>-
3: l' 0::: ~
SG::X::)
>- WO
fi U
>
301SH3A/lJ .:/0 ,,(lNno:J
3l:1ON1S13 3>1.h'.:/O AlI:J
ti
J
i
;t
IZ::
~
~
~I
~
I
--
("JDaJ JJJIU& __
lo~~
O~(II
o ffi
>-0 >
I C\1g~
1 U) b..
hlo
3: <( n:: >-
o I ~
-l U::Xa
>- hlu
5
>
j w
o 9
~g~i
~ C\1 U b..
~ 1 4:0
3: ~>~
9a: 5
>- u
~
}-- ~
a:Z~~
1 4:>- ell
n:: U J:: GI
~u3
;t 0 ~
~~~ g~~
...J 04:OC
>- C\1 U b..
15>- I <(0
>~ <(>>-
l..t. !z:
L. ::l
o
U
10~w
O}--~
~ OZeJ
9 O~~
>- C\1 U) b..
15>- ~wo
>~ 1 n:~
~ G::Xa
Wu
Q
.au)
1'-- W }-- ~
~ }--:z: ~~
t\I <( 4: >- ell
:2 ~ UJ:: GI
}-- U)~u~
}--~ j
<(
.n::
m
~
~
....
J.-
J.-
i
iii
'will
F1l
CD~
I i
'-"
~
>II
a
I
""-"
r;.'-.'~c'~
YMt;;I\'iU}c!\. 'Tn' '" '1
~ b~i~ ItlQQ ....a
PACE --r { ... --.' l"l... .--
_ , \V OF ,}
Exhibit A
~
:RVICE(S): LAND USE REGULATION, BUILDING INSPECTION,
Please provide a respond for each service indicated above.
1) If you are the current provider of one or more of these services to the impacted parcels, which specific services
do you provide? What is the current level of service, the location(s) from which the service is being provided
and the costs that residents/property owners are currently charged for this service?
2) If you are the current provider of one or more of these services to the impacted parcels, do you anticipate
continuing providing service to the parcels after the annexation? If so, will your level of service change and what
do you expect your costs for rendering such services will be?
3) If you are not the current provider of service to the impacted parcels, do you anticipate that you will begin
providing service to the area upon annexation? Which services and what level of service will you provide, from
what location(s) will these services be provided, and what do you expect your costs to be?
~. 4) If you are not the current provider of service to the impacted parcels, but will be after the annexation, will any
upgrades in facilities or additional personnel be required to extend services to the annexation area?
5) On what date will service be available to the impacted parcels after annexation?
Questions? Please contact Koung Sun, Analyst, David Taussig & Associates at (949) 955-1500 or by email at
koung@taussig.com with any questions you may have. Please return your response within 2 weeks of receipt of this
letter to David Taussig & Associates. either by fax (949) 955-1590 or via mail at J 301 Dove Street, Suite 600. Newport
Beach, CA 92660.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE!
K:\Clients2\Centex\Rosetta Canyon\Rosetta Canyon POS\POS Request - land use regulation and building inspection.doc
~
AGENDA iTEM NCl.~___
PAGE "1;r OF q \
---1-----
In'"
oW
o~
IU
g<
.\0
I.
0\.
.\0
M_
z<
o.W
<~
GREENWALD
I'
I I
l:~
11 -~-
I I
I I
I
I
I
....
....w
o~
lu
I I ~<
I 'L 1M
I- 0\"'.:
LLJ . <').
LLJ z.<i:
0:: o.W
I- <~
(I) . ... --
LLJ
o
in
0::
~
~
3NON1S73 3>N7 ~ A.l.D
301SN31/H ~ NfIOO
z
00
WI-
(J)<(
oX
o....W<(
OZW
0:::: Z 0::::
0....<(<(
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE '1B.
Vi
I-.:
<:
Q...
~
>..
I-
~
(j
~
N'"
....w
o~
IU
~<
"'\0
ICD
0\.
..
M_
z<
Q..w
<~
J 1-
OF <1,
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
>..
Q::
'<:(
~
::::l
e:>
Q:)
>..
I-
<:3
z
o
1=....
<c'"
X ..
LaJO
ZZ
Z>-
<C~
c<C
LaJC
(J)Z
0::)
0.0
Om
~
a.
8--. ~
~
l-
e:>
<:
<..:>
~
~
~
C)
Yl
I~
1<.5
1'<:(
IlQ
Illi
1-
ICS
10:::
I'"
I~
Ie:>
I~
0i7=1 :~'\f,), Ifn.... OOOOP:HI WdOC:71 i7007 'oe- ^Ol\l :f1~110'''''
W09t :Ot tOOl 'or MN :a3I.:JIOO~ JJZOlOOO :OdZOlOOO :S.HMX
DIAO .dOW-uolloxauw70 100'\('1\ sdow\ OUlUUOI....\ 70 I 00\ :I-I:n -11\11 ~I-I
'"
@V -1>- -I
~I- ~'"
@ Q:Z Q:>-
w::l w~
I!@ ZD Zu
WU W'-"
@9 ~'-' ~o
@V ~Q: o~
ZO w-l
.....-1 (1)_
1->
~ ..... DZ
(1)- a...~
Il= .....Z 0-1
X~ Q:a...
Il= W-l a...
a...
.
.
.
. t
. I
.
.
.
t-
. Z
. .....
. 2
"I .
.., C
'"
. zO)
.
. ""'0
. 21 ~
. <~
. ZO
.
. 5~
.
. Q. ..
. ~O
)...
Q:: <Z
~ a=::
~
::::> .....
C) Z
Cl::l
)... .....
'- C)
<:3
3lJON1S73 3>1Y7 .:JO J.J.J:)
301SH3A1lI .:JO NfIOO
~!!
'"
-1>-
~I-
Q:Z
w::l
ZD
WU
~'-'
~Q:
ZO
......-1
1->
.....
(1)-
.....z
X~
W-l
a...
-I
~'"
Q:>-
w~
Zu
w'-"
~o
o~
w-I
(I)
DZ:
a...~
0-1
Q:a...
a...
@@~&@ ~!!
'"
.:...1>- -I
~I- ~'"
Q:Z Q:>-
w::l w~
zD Zu
WU w'-"
C)'"" l.:)&;:I
~Q: o~
ZO w-l
.....-1 (I)
~> DZ:
(I) - a...~
AGE~ riM NO.
PACiE '-1 q
8~
~
'-
C)
:<:
<..:>
~
~
~
C)
d 1-
OF q\
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
----
.
t I
I I
~L~~~&~
LaJ
Q
fi)
0::
~
a:
W09Z:U tOOl 'or AON :03l.:l100... OdZlOlOO :~K)ZOZOOO :OdZOlOOO :S..:l3~X
(li7=1 :~''o'''IC:: In,...I OO:>O"':H~ Wd/C:71 i7nn7 'ne' AOI>J :(1~ll(n..l 6M07nlnn'o'...I<\\sdow\6uIUUOI..l\7nlnn\ :1-l:().II>J1 nl.l
"
@V -r 6
L:JI-
@ Zz Z
.....::> .....
Zo z"
l!@ Ou Dr
~ N", NI-
>-<
@V L:Jo QU
ZO w'"
.....0 (I) .....
I- ' 0'
~ .....0
(l)N a..~
..... I 0
I}= X<:[ ~
WI a..
I}= ~
:1
. ,
t :j'
-.
.
.
.
..
. i
.
.
.
3NON1S73 3>IY1 .::JO AJ./:J
301SH3AIH .::JO NfKXJ
"l
0.:
:0:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
)....
Q;:
~
~
:::>
a
Cl:::l
)....
f..-
<:3
v
o
I
~'-'
o
N
J
..
o
z
C)
z
-
z
o
N
.....
o
LaJ
C)
Z
<
:I:
(.)
8~
IlUICN V)
f2
f..-
a
<:
(:)
~
~
~
Cl
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..'i-[:
wdrS:l ~ tOOl 'or ^ON :03I.:1100Vi OdZlO WO :~~ZOlOOO :OdZOlOOO :S.:l3~X
n...=1 :T1",)~ ""n.., OOOOf':lR WdC'C:71 ...007 'nC' ^ON :n-:jll{n~ 6M0701nn71-1')\sdow\6uIUUOI~\7nlOO\ :I-I:O./NI :nl./
I I
I I
~L~~~~&
~.JJ,jL
@@~~~ ~JUL
laJ
0
U; ,....
a::: -r 6
~ L:JI-
Zz ~
.....::>
0:: Zo z"
Ou Dr
N", Nt;
L:Jo Q8
Zo W
.....0 (I) .....
I- ' 01
.....0
(l)N a..~
..... I 0
X<:[ ~
w, a..
~
,....
6~ 6
~5 ~
Zo a~
ONU N I-
'" .....
L:Jo Q8
zo W
~o (I'}.......
I- ' 0 I
t?~ a.. ~
A~~TEM NO.
apACe .. ex:>
;).1
OF ql
r"
~ ~. ~ h ~ I I I ~m:- "
~ ia ~!~b 1 a ~!~b 1 II ~ ~ ! It ;
~ ~ ~! !I!~ ~ ! !I!~ ~ i~~ i i i! S ~ '~~.~./
~ ~ I'" ~d' .. '" ~5r .. 1;1 Ift~ Ift~ ~ ~l ~
i b!.; I!~; n; b~i i ;i~ i ~ ~~II ~ ~~n ~ ilij ~;I
; ~~il ~ ~ ib ~~i! 5 Sb ~~i! i E"! ~ ~ ~ I~~ ~ I~~! ~ ~,,~:: 6 d1 I~
. ~ ~ I ~ ~II ,~"a ~ ~II l~"a ~ lia nl~ . .... ~:~
;~~~ i ~ ~ii! *n~ b ~~i! *;li b ~,,! ~ ~ I 0 lli
.DD'~; ~ ~b; ~;~I ~~; ~;~I ~ ~b ; ~ I ii ~ ~ ~~i ;
! ~~ ~~ ..... I~~ ~~f~i . I~~ ~~l~i . ~b~ ~ '-' i~~ i r..... u~ -
~ 1;~IIIIR!~i~ · ~ ~:~ ii~~! I ~:~ m~! I i!l! ! E <> ~s:~ 3!!~ ~ i!~ ~ ~~I I~
2 ~!~m~ml!~! g ill Idu ; III 1;:1; i :~;I i 5 ~ hI~ ~ i:(~ ~ I~i~ ~ ~I~ l~
u.
'" ~ '" ~
hOH
a n n~ i
~unu
~-o.~ .
~
~ i
~ !Iv
~ ii'~
~ filIi
~
rll
Q.:!~~
~I.I
~~~~~
~hi~
~
~
f:i 5! ~"I~~ HI
~ i~!! ~ :t ii~!
o I~~i ilb hli
~
/:;'3:;;s~f;C":" : .
-'ie"~
/ ,.,"Y
'1..-.
"
~
r"
.' ';:-J
.~"'l
....,.~..
::.. ).'.
''''~f
:~'4'" .
if/J'
_U<ooW:Q_"_:oa.N ~\~._:AI
lUCW)
; ~ j1L'l ~ ~
i:; :~ ~
!il I~ ~~
~ i"~ ~
i ~;to
VI ~~
Q.I .....
E ~ C>
1 cil 0 l8 ~o
IQ:I: f &Ii
'~!il ~ 0 i:::~
I%~ 1: Jag g)1:
; i a ~i ~ ~
. .
~ '1 'w
I
~
II t:t:
11 ,1111 i~~
ilCD !! B~dh
.... ~~..
-'
~ ~ I ~
~; ~
.,
~ l~.
!.t J
s-
-' ~U ~
.
.s
i ~
..
~
1:<
.,,~
]~
....~
~
~
;. .. I t>
~ "
AG~N~~~ ~~~c.~_
-p j; =.J
z
o
~
'"
!tl
~
'"
~
I
).
Iti ~
~t, :<
~ ~~
2: ~~
e a"
. -~
.... ~~
~
es I
..
~
1>
Iti
~
...
Q
j
Q2
_nxill\il_;g~"=.JZ'::~~~
~~~
.~ ~!lO
~~'~i4 ~13~
a 1:11I a:~ .
l, '~;r. .... ).. i
~ ,N ()~
~.
a:
o
3~
~i::
e~
~
/ i
/ I
/ L_.__~
/ I .
~ :' / I
\ ~ ,n /~,~.ii I
- .. , 7 A'l '>I .
liP '!~r,.i1.]1.,!~ '1'1)1'.. !
Ii' 'll~\ j !m~m.'f'.Jhfu! ____
".. .1 ~ 'Ii J".,"~.r '''c> J ,~~ ~ i I
" ~ - ~ ~ .,,,.""b1.I ......-' ;
JI~ = ~":- " ' h.- ;', I
;1' ~ ~~~ ~D-~ll[i-l i'~~~ ~; ~~ ~ I
:.;'~ I1[J J rk:}; ltL ~.~ ~I ~. "".f) I ! I
: I I. ~ v~,' -I - - . - J~
:' .i -{ '-I _ _ "1----_
J ~ 1r '- ~_IL L- :,..i-::::.=,: 3fJ 1J31;;~~~
----. n '_u _. A ~V
JUll"'__ - ~ -_ ~. J:--
'. ::::. '_. "~"
---. "-t<-t'~, n' ~''o "- ;;~"'\" \' I "'
? "'''''.1 (.j' \. I I
l~ :'/P'!;';r r .........: " +~
'h:I"'I'-I.~ I ~ \\....__~ ~~
J'. ';'IIU. '....": c', '"_"~ ~\ /~.~
-',,- 1 '1"fr.r-,l_'I'~ af.e- 1 I .Jl \ '-\~~.--1
· ll: l_' I . I \/.?li';oIl'>~_ \ "
..~~. ' 1.::n'~~1_' ..J_~~. --l-.:d.:':: ~~.<~,. .\ ~I
~ = .~" " '~I
-:~~, t ~~II"i'~'-;"l~\\J~~..)~
1 ~c-T.'~~lrL '(ItJ.-.,t'.j., 3. 'tAJi;;:~Ti!<_", ~!Ih:
" ....L.l, "','VI'- ,( ,:;' l
'--- ~ ~ I I OCY I \ I If _'. .. I" ' I:.
' -',-..- -", \ \ \ I II '---/./2 I :/'
': Io't' , ,~, : , I I( -..~.....Ji ~d Il'
"~r~-J\ ~'-'ll"1 'rt[ '! /!J~) .~. ~= ~.~~"", ~~ Ii""
IAJ- .1l.1\" 'f , _ ~~=---:;"":_'"'__ . ,'"""-.
Ili:l~' i\~~'j>lht. '::=--=7~- --T -f---- 7,1<-~:' i /i __,
" ~ .. -,.." I \ /. ,; 1/,
i -;, ~ ,..~i'i'''' CCOi ' \, 1 ~ {It'"
I ~ t":~"I', "'\ -/ ,'ij(7 ___....~ !
"pI '""" 11 ""~\'~ i ~,'- I, Ii l
~~r I ~-=;n""rir:- t"1<:~1,.J \. \ .. J.. ~-""1
: ' , . li_d~L: _' _ =1:"- - I-- 1 /, ' I
,~ . ,.,," .. ~~ I ~
. [-.'--'1 "I': -1,':"'_ _' "-'-'
I 'I'" ,,~ ," _~ __ I ,
'- --""" -~='-. I "
"~J't'"rli', . -..- I I I il
:1<<, I"'-~ ~ _ __ .
' ~ ~ .,. "'---- " I,,, .. _ ,~ , :
., . ~ , "I, , II '
~1~1i!='r/ o'-=Ir \-;J: "2f---- I ~/<<~ Vilir- t---JJ ~I/!/ __
,.- \ "( ~'fi-- ,l/ H,
H., - il' ,;)." ,1' 1,- \\""L;',~" 7 ~ !' 'Jr....
d!.l ~;jp-. '=~~ ,- ,I,
h 11i"J.. K~' ! :>i< ,~ -F _ !_~, , , / ,
\,~~~ '>, L/ / ~ '~,
<\ ~_'_~'J~~.l I\:i, i....,,~~,~ _ ~-r
~ - -- -- _ _ m --". ""., _,,,,-,,,,, "-',.Ii
....,~ " .. I.' 'l\;,-_>~ ,N, Ji
;:::.:::'.:. ';,"':::, .. il !J ... //7"'7''' f:'~ ''f.
.Jil ~ / / ! Ii r", AGENDA ITEM 1,0,
~- PAGE e:!l
O/~gl
~ ~ I~~I
i~ub
~; 1"JJ~!
CD lillll
i!!!! I
8 ~~~~
E:
~
l
;JI
OF C{1
.~
;1'''''
Lw Lw <: Cl
U) ~~ <: ~~ <:~
"C ~ "C
"'!-C) L.....'-..':> Q C) L.....'-..':> lrJ Q ClQ,
O)lrJ C)<: L..... ~ U) C)<: L..... "C lr)Cl:::
O)--.J >::: Cl --.J >::<:Cl ~ s"C
_"C <: <: "C ~-.J"ClrJ ~<:C)
C)--.J"CU) 8 8 Q,B:}~
1'<-):::; f:::::<:U)Q, "C f:::::<:U)Q, ~Q:)~
-<: Cl::: C) h..' Cl::: ~ ~ Cl::: C) h..' Cl::: ~ lrJ Q,
:>.-Cl::: C)lr) Cl Cl::: C)lr) Cl <:<:
--./2 Q'St3<...:> ~ ~ Qst3<...:> L..... ,U) ~ "C
~:ELw ~~Lw Cl
~:::J "CQ, Cl::: "CQ, Cl::: Q, U)
--.J <:h..'L.....
t::::l23 ctJ 0) G ctJ CJ)
Q, :::::J "'!- 0)' Q, :::J "'!- 0)' ~U)C)
L..J <:U)lt..J- h.. <:U)Lw- h.. ;::~U)
Q, :>.-' "C '-..':>'0 C) :>.-' "C ~~ Cl
Cl:::h.. Lw<: --.J U)h.. Lw<: --.J ~ Q,
C)<: ~~"Ct5 ~ "l::<: ~~"l::t3 ~ 2"'!-Cl:::
~:::::J "l::-.jCl:::"C ",!-:::J "l::-.JCl:::"C . Lw 8
Cl:::C) =t \C ;1::' Q lc.. O)C) ::r: \C ,Q L..... ::r:'-..':>Lw
<...:> 0)<"':> I ;:r: ::s::<:Cl:::
Lw <: K "'J' -.J Lw<:J-::::1'<-) --.J
~ "'J'Lw <:<::::J_ =ii -Lw <:<:~- ~ "C
O)Q, Cl::UC) "'J'8 C)~C) <:Cl:::O-;-
~lr) U)U)~ I .~_ Vi U)U)~ I (3;:r::~
"'JQ: h.. Cl ~ :>.-e5 h.. C) ~
~~ U)~lf)C) U)lc..lf)Cl lcJJ-::::lcJ
C) --J :s: ~C)QQ:) Q:):::::J'-..':>
"l:: ~ ~ QQ:) ~Q: lcJC)"l::
-.JCl::: :>.- :>.-
i: -.J O)'::t::Q Lw 0)' ::t:: Q QU)Q
h..~ lcJh..v)"C -.J L..... h..Vi"C --J 3l.cJ ,
~C)~~ es E3C) ~C)~~ es
(5U) J-:::: ~U) J-:::: \CQ~
9= lc..--JC)<: t3 lc..-.JC)<: t3
~Q, L.....K~ C)~ c)lc..K~ ~~~
U) gs -. C)C) t::::l ~ :E
....... ~<...:>~ l.... CD'LU Lw ~C)Yi L.....C)cQE3 Lw ~~C)
3 --JL.....C',jQ, Cl:::c...J::s:: -.JL.....C',jQ, lrJ Q:)
~::t!Cl "C--.J Cl::: ~ LwCl "C-.J Cl::: ~ L.....2
"l:: --.J ::r:=ii<:C) "'J'Cl::: --J ::r:~<:C) Cl Q
Lw~c5 t C)<...:> ~ O)--J--.J I C)c...J L..... cQ~
LwIf:::::Lw 'O"C2 lwlf:::::Lw C)
~(:)L..... <:~c...JCl::: "'J(:) <:Lw<...:>Cl::: CDC',j
m --.Ji::l::lrJ ClC)Lw<: L.... i::l::V) C)<:lw<: L..... h.. <:
h.. Vi"C --.J ~L,::"l:: h..C)Vi"C --.J Cl<--
h..L,::"l:: ~ "C --JC)t::::l
C)Clh.. V)h..l....~ 3C)h.. V)h..l....-- ::r: f:::::L.,j
--JL.....:<: ~tJCl~ . I ---J L.....:<: ~t3C)~ I ~<"':>Q,
<:C)L.,j :El....L.,j"l:: ~ <:C)L.,j ~L....L.,j . lw ~Cl:::
Q C)'O~ Lw --J~~ (~~ ~ Lwlw~~~ ~ h.. C)
C) ~L.....~
"I-:::::J ~~~Q,Cl::: ~~g ~;:r:::r:Q,Cl:::
~~g J-::::1<:2 :>.- J-::::t<:C) :>.- L,::C)Cl:::
C)R:Q, ~L.....lw"C:::J --.J Cl;(:Q, ~l....Lw"C~ --J C',jL.....<:~
.... ~C',jLw C)~lw"l:: B:} ~C',jLw C)<: --.J B:} "'J--.J"C~
V)c::5~ <L..... Vi<"':> ~ .~ <: C)~G ~ "'!-~~~
C) :>'-"l:: gs V)C) C)L.....:>'-"C :::::J :>'-;:r:Cl::2
~ "l::<::<: f::::: ~ --.J Q:) i::' "l::<:<: f:::::~--.JctJi:: Cl --.JKL.,j__
::: t---..;: gs::r:B:}C)<: <: ::: 1--- gs=tB:}C)<: U) t5Cl:::~--J
,"l:: C5 t::::l Q~2::~:::::J ,ctJ C5 t::::l ;:r:C) "l::
lw QLw~~i5 Lw J-::::<:Q,<"':>
, L.,j "l::~gs~8 ~ ' L..J ~
--.J~ctJ ~ctJ "C~gs~<...:> :::::J <: :>.-'
LU L..J Q: Gj~Q: C)Lw"Ch..
<...:>2::<...:> :<:h..<:~Cl ~ c...J2::c...J <:h..<:~C) ~ V)~lw<:
Cl:::V)V) 8V)LwB:}~ <..j ceV)V) (3V) Cl:::'-..':> Lw V)~
.... ~2i: ~ ~ ~ "C<:l.t.J Lw"l::~l.t.J~ Lw ~~~8
ctJL:5~Q:)CS Q--Q, ctJL.,jKQ:)t:::} Q:)
\\
1'......
AGENDA ITEli! NO.
PACE 8 5
JI
OF C\ \
WDgl ; U vOOl 'or AON :031.:1100rt OdZlO lOO :~~ZOlOOO :OdZOlOOO ;S..:l3~X
ov=1 :~''J,)C: 10'...1 00:>01':11=1 WOC7;11 V007 '0(' AOIII :0":1110'..1 6Mo":>san-lo6.n70100Y~\sdow\6uIUUDI..I\70Ino\ :1-1:0.111I1 ~I-l
Supplement to MerrittlLuster Planning Commission Staff Report
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503
'will'
MSHCP Consistency Determination
On January 13,2003, the Lake Elsinore City Council conditionally adopted a Resolution
(MSHCP Resolution), which established the City's procedures and requirements for the
implementation of the MSHCP. The City Council at this time also authorized the Mayor to
execute the MSHCP Implementing Agreement (IA)I. Accordingly, with the u.s. Fish &
Wildlife Service's (the Service) and the California Department ofFish & Game's (CDFG)
issuance of the Incidental Take Permits on June 22, 2004, the MSHCP is in full effect in the
City. On July 27,2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1124 (MSHCP Fee Ordinance),
which established the City's development impact fee for the MSHCP.
The City's MSHCP Resolution provides that no project requiring a discretionary, or certain
ministerial-permits or approvals that could have adverse impacts to the species covered under the
MSHCP, shall be approved by the City, and no City-initiated public project shall be undertaken,
unless the project is consistent with the MSHCP. (MSHCP Resolution, ~ III(B), at p. 2.)
Accordingly, pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, because the project requires a number
of discretionary approvals from the City and is subject to CEQA review, it must be reviewed for
MSHCP consistency. (MSHCP Resolution, ~IV(E), p. 3.)
'will'
The City's MSHCP Resolution outlines what is entailed in an MSHCP consistency determination
for a Project within the City's jurisdiction. The MSHCP Resolution provides the following
steps:
· The City shall implement the requirements for private and public project contributions to
the MSHCP Conservation Area as set forth in MSHCP, by electing to comply with one of
the following:
o The City shall implement the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and
Acquisition Negotiation Process ("HANS") or a functionally similar Lake
Elsinore Acquisition Process ("LEAP"); or
I In order for the City to receive coverage under the MSHCP, it must be a signatory to the MSHCP IA. (MSHCP, at
p. 6-1.). Additionally, the City must also have adopted the appropriate Implementation Mechanisms, which include:
· Approval of an ordinance imposing the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP, p. 6-1; lA, *
I 1.1.1 (A), p. 23);
· Approval of an ordinance or resolution that adopts the MSHCP and establishes procedures and
requirements for the implementation of its terms and conditions (MSHCP, pp. 6-] - 2: lA, * ] 1.1.](A), pp.
23 - 24); or
· Taking such other action that will ensure effective MSHCP implementation (MSHCP, p. 6-2; ]A, * I].], p.
24).
'will'
Supplemental MSHCP
ACENDA ITEM NO.~
PAGE~OF q\ _
"'"
o Upon receipt of a completed application for a project that is subject to this
Resolution, or prior to the City's initiation of a project, the City shall determine
whether all or a portion of the real property for the project is located within the
boundaries of the Criteria Area. Ifthe City determines that all or a portion of the
real property for the project is located within the Criteria Area, then the City shall
perform the following:
· Determine the design criteria applicable to the project based on the
particular USGS section, quadrant, and/or cell grouping in which the
project property is located, as set forth in Section 3.2 ofthe MSHCP; and
· Impose as a condition to the City's approval of the project such conditions
as are necessary to ensure the project complies with and implements the
design criteria applicable to the project.
. The City shall implement the requirements for the Protection of Riparian/Riverine Areas
and Vernal Pools set forth in Section 6.1.2 ofthe MSHCP.
. The City shall implement the requirements for the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant
Species set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP.
"'"
. The City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of a project such conditions as
are necessary to ensure the project complies with and implements the Urban/Wildlands
Interface Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP.
. The City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of a project such conditions as
are necessary to ensure surveys are prepared for the project as required by Section 6.3.2
of the MSHCP.
(MSHCP Resolution, S V(A) - (E), at p. 3 - 5; see also MSHCP2)
The project's consistency with these MSHCP Resolution requirements, as well as the MSHCP
policies and guidelines are briefly discussed below.
"'"
2 Proposed activities outside the Criteria Area sbaH be reviewed for consistency witb tbe Protection of Species
Associated witb Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, 9 6.1.2), tbe Protection of Narrow
Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, 9 6.1.3), and the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, 9
6.3.2), of the MSHCP. (MSHCP, p. 6-48; see also Service's Biological Opinion for the MSHCP (FWS-WRlV-
870.1926, June 22, 2004) (Service BO), p. 26.) In addition to tbis, proposed development activities are required to
be reviewed for consistency witb tbe Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines, if they are in close proximity (MSHCP,
96.3.2), may be required to undertake Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, 9 6.3.1), comply with tbe Fuels Management
Guidelines (MSHCP, ~ 6.4), and pay the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance,S 4).
Findings demonstrating consistency oftbe proposed activity witb tbese guidelines shaH be incorporated in the permit
issued for tbe proposed activity. (MSHCP, p. 6-48.)
Supplemental MSHCP
l\rEt\i/'V ....,. , f'J I
MYbe\tuf%. ~kC:;t-; ~-~:~.-dLL~__c___
PAOE ~.:s- OF C\ I
Conservation Criteria Evaluation
.,,-,
The first and arguably the most critical step in meeting these requirements is the determination of
whether all or a portion of the Merritt/Luster property is located within the boundaries of the
MSHCP Criteria Area. If so, the City, through its LEAP process, must then determine the
potential amount of conservation land that could be set aside for the project, as set forth in
Section 3.2 ofthe MSHCP.
According to the MSHCP, the project site is located within the Elsinore Area Plan. This Area
Plan, the County's RCIP Website (see http://www.rcip.org/maps.htm). and the MSHCP
Conservation Summary Report Generator Sheets Summary Report Generator Sheets for Parcel
Numbers 349-400-005, 349-430-011, and 349-430-012 (see
http://rcip.org/PDFlib/rcip/apn search.asp) show that only a small fraction of southern most
parcel was partially located within the Criteria Area. However, the footprint of the project site
has been modified to avoid the Criteria Area, and therefore, does not now fall within the Criteria
Area. This has been made a condition of approval. As a result, the project would not be subject
to the City's LEAP process.
Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines
According to the Service BO, the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas
and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, ~ 6.1.2) will be implemented throughout the MSHCP Plan
Area to provide for protection of riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools (including fairy shrimp
habitat). (Service BO, p. 26.) The Service BO indicates that the Guidelines requires that '--'
riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat, and other aquatic resources are mapped and
the potential significant effects of a project's impacts on these areas assessed3 using available
information augmented by project-specific mapping on a project by project basis and an
avoidance alternative implemented, iffeasible. (Id.)
According to the Service BO, if riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat and other
aquatic resources are mapped and assessed for a project site, an avoidance alternative should be
implemented, if feasible. (Service BO, p. 6-27.) If an avoidance alternative is not feasible, the
Service BO indicates that a practicable alternative that minimizes effects to riparian/riverine
areas, vernal pools/fairy shrimp habitat, and associated functions should be selected and
unavoidable impacts will be mitigated. (ld.)
Thomas Leslie Corporation (TLC) conducted a Biological Constraints Analysis and Burrowing
Owl Habitat Suitability Assessment (BCA/HSA, April 24, 2004) for the project site. TLC
determined that there were no riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat and other
aquatic resources on the project site. As a result, no further MSHCP analysis or conservation
3 This includes a description of the functions and values of the mapped areas with respect to the planning species
associated with riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools (see MSHCP, pp. 6-20 ~ 6-21), specifically, hydrologic
regime, flood storage and flood flow modification, nutrient retention and transformation, sediment trapping and
transport, toxicant trapping, public use, wildlife Habitat, and aquatic Habitat). Also consideration of species
composition, topography/hydrology, and soil analysis, where appropriate.
"-'
Supplemental MSHCP
ACEND~ Iii...., .._dl_
PAGE ~ /.0- OF ell
/"'"" measures are required. The project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and
V ernal Pools Guidelines.
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines
Within identified Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas, site-specific focused surveys for
Narrow Endemic Plant Species are required for all public and private projects where appropriate
habitat is present. (MSHCP, p. 6-29; see also Service BO, p. 28.) Site-specific focused surveys
for Narrow Endemic Plant Species are required within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Survey Areas where appropriate soils and habitat are present. (Id.) Surveys are to be conducted
in the appropriate season, in accordance with established protocols (for species for which
protocols have been established). (Id.)
Survey results are required to be documented in mapped and text form. (Id.) Where survey
results are positive (i.e., a Narrow Endemic Plant Species is present), any proposals with the
potential to affect Narrow Endemic Plant Species will be subject to avoidance, minimization and
mitigation strategies. (Id.)
The MSHCP (MSHCP, Figure 6-1), the MSHCP's Conservation Generator Summary Report
(see http://rcip.org/PDFlib/rcip/arn search.asp), and TLC's BCA/HSA, indicate that the
project site does not fall within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas. Therefore,
habitat assessments and/or focused surveys are not required for Narrow Endemic Plant Species.
~ The project is therefore consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Guidelines.
Additional Survey Needs Requirements
Additional surveys are required for certain species in conjunction with MSHCP implementation
in order to achieve coverage for these species. (MSHCP, p. 6-63.) First, habitat assessments are
undertaken and if potential habit for these species is determined to be located on the property,
focused surveys may be required during the appropriate season. If a survey is required, it will be
conducted within suitable habitat according to accepted protocols. (MSHCP, p. 6-63.) For
locations with positive survey results, 90% of those portions of the property that provide for
long-term Conservation value for the identified species will be avoided until it is demonstrated
that Conservation goals for the particular species are met. (MSHCP, p. 6-65.)
According to the MSHCP (MSHCP, Figures 6-2 and 6-3), the MSHCP Conservation Summary
Report Generator (see http://rcip.oq~/PDFlib/rcip/apn search.asp), and TLC's BCA/HSA, the
project site does not fall within the Plant Species or Amphibian Species (MSHCP, Figure 6-3)
Survey Areas. The MSHCP (MSHCP, Figure 6-4), the MSHCP's Conservation Summary
Report Generator (http://rcip.org/PDFliblrcip/apn search.asp), and TLC's BCAlHSA indicate
that the project site does fall within the Burrowing Owl Survey Area.
~
As noted above, TLC conducted a BCAlHSA for the western burrowing owl. TLC determined
that this species is not expected to occur on-site due to the lack of suitable habitat. However, to
assure burrowing owls will not be impacted by project development, a condition of project
approval has been added, requiring a pre-construction survey prior to the issuance of a grading
Supplemental MSHCP
AGENDA ITE~\li f'iU.---J.J-._ __
DAr.J: \S I OF q I
permit confirming the absence of burrowing owls, as required by the MSHCP. The project is
therefore consistent with the Additional Survey Needs Requirements. '-'
Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines
According to the MSHCP, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines are intended to address
indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation
Area. (MSHCP, p 6-42.) The Guidelines shall be implemented in conjunction with review of
individual public and private development projects in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation
Area and address the following:
. Drainage;
. Toxics;
. Lighting;
. Noise;
. Invasives;
. Barriers; and
. Grading/Land Development. '-'
(MSHCP, pp 6-42 - 6-46.)
According to the County's ArcIMS Viewer (http://www.rcip.org/maps.htm). the project site is in
close proximity to the MSHCP Conservation/Criteria Area. Therefore, the project would be
subject to the UrbanlWildlands Interface Guidelines.
As shown in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32503 and Site Plan, measures have been
incorporated into the project so that there will be no project-related drainage, toxics, lighting,
noise, invasives, barriers (i.e., landscaping), and gradinglland development impacts to the
Conservation Area. The project is therefore consistent with the UrbanlWildlands Interface
Guidelines.
Vegetation Mapping
Individual project-level vegetation mapping may be required under the following circumstances:
· For public and private projects within the Plan Area determined to be subject to the
Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pools policies.
. For public and private projects within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species survey area and
subject to the Narrow Endemics Plant Species policies.
......"
Supplemental MSHCP
AOENDA ~ ''''"'', ""-
PACiE ~~.
al.
Of ~ \--
~--------
I"""" . The Permittee as part of the local CEQA review process for individual public and private
projects may impose vegetation-mapping requirements.
(MSHCP, p. 6-62.)
TLC's BCAlHSA has mapped the vegetation of the entire project site. This mapping is
sufficient under the MSHCP and is consistent with the MSHCP.
Fuels Management Guidelines
Fuels management focuses on hazard reduction for humans and their property. (MSHCP, p.
6-72.) According to the Fuels Management Guidelines, new development that is planned
adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area or other undeveloped areas, brush management
shall incorporate brush management in the development boundaries and shall not encroach into
the MSHCP Conservation Area. (ld.)
As noted above, the project has been designed to include landscaping that will in essence act as
buffers and Fuel Modification Zones near the proposed MSHCP Conservation/Criteria Area.
Within these areas there will be fire-resistant, non-invasive plants. Accordingly, with these
measures, the project is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee
~
As a condition of approval, the project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits. The current fee for
residential development with a density ofless than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is $1,651 per
dwelling unit.
Conclusion
As demonstrated above, the project complies and is consistent with all of the required
procedures, policies, and guidelines of the City's MSHCP Resolution and the MSHCP,
including:
. The MSHCP Conservation Requirements;
. The Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vemal Pools Guidelines;
. Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines;
. Additional Survey Needs and Procedures;
. The Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines;
,-...
. Vegetation Mapping;
. Fuels Management Guidelines; and
Supplemental MSHCP
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PAGE )(C)
at
OF~_
· Payment ofthe MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.
,""""""
For all these reasons, therefore, the project is consistent with all ofthe provisions ofthe MSHCP.
MSHCP Consistency Findine.s
I. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution that must make an
MSHCP Consistency finding before approval.
Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, because the proposed project requires a
number of discretionary approvals from the City and is subject to CEQA review, it must
be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, which entails for the proposed project determining
whether it is subject to the City's LEAP process, consistent with the Protection of Species
Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.2),
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.1.3), Additional
Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, S 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines
(MSHCP, S 6.3.2), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, S 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels
Management Guidelines (MSHCP, S 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, S 4).
2. The proposed project is not subject to the Joint Project Review process.
The footprint of the project site has been modified to avoid the MSHCP Criteria Area,
and therefore, does not now fall within the Criteria Area. This has been made a
condition of approval. As a result, the proposed project would not be subject to the Joint
Project Review process.
'-'
3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
Guidelines.
No riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat and other aquatic resources were
identified on the proposed project site. As a result, no further MSHCP analysis or
conservation measures are required. The proposed project is therefore consistent with
the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Guidelines.
The project site does not fall within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas.
Therefore, habitat assessments and/or focused surveys are not required for Narrow
Endemic Plant Species. The proposed project is therefore consistent with the Protection
of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
"-tIll
Supplemental MSHCP
AGENDA ITEM E\lV, a 1___.__,_
PACE ~o ~OF C\ \
~ 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The project site falls within the Burrowing Owl Survey Area. However, it was
determined that the species is not expected to occur on-site due to the lack of suitable
habitat. To assure burrowing owls will not be impacted by project development, as a
condition of project approval, a pre-construction survey will be required before grading
to confirm the absence of burrowing owls, as required by the MSHCP. The project is
therefore consistent with the Additional Survey Needs Requirements.
6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
Measures have been incorporated into the proposed project so that there will be no
project-related drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasives, barriers, and grading/land
development impacts to the Conservation Area. The proposed project is therefore
consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
The vegetation of the entire project site has been mapped. This mapping is sufficient
under the MSHCP and is consistent with the MSHCP.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fu.els Management Guidelines.
~
The proposed project has been designed to include landscape buffers near the proposed
MSHCP Conservation Area that will in essence act as Fuel Modification Zones. Within
these areas there will be fire-resistant, non-invasive plants. Accordingly, with these
measures, the proposed project is therefore consistent with the Fuels Management
Guidelines.
9. The proposed project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development
Mitigation Fee.
As a condition of approval, the project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits. The current fee
for residential development with a density of less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre is
$1,651 per dwelling unit.
10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP.
The proposed project complies and is consistent with all of the required procedures,
policies, and guidelines of the City's MSHCP Resolution and the MSHCP.
,.......
Supplemental MSHCP
ACHJDA !TEM rw. c9 f
P,Df;i:': ()I {",' q,
I.-~U 6_..,._~::l__________I'",-.!~r_...___L--
".-
ORDINANCE NO. 1133
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION
2.08.025 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHANGING THE DATE OF THE CITY'S GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND ADDING SECTION 2.08.026
PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF TERMS
WHEREAS, General Municipal Elections in the City of Lake Elsinore are held on the
first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of odd-numbered years;
WHEREAS, California Election Code Sections 1301 and 10403.5 authorize the City to
change the date of general municipal elections to coincide with the election dates of the
statewide direct primary, statewide general election or the day of school district elections; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that its goals of encouraging maximum voter turn-out
will be promoted by changing the City's General Municipal Election date from the first Tuesday
after the first Monday of November in each odd-numbered year to coincide with the statewide
general election on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in each even-numbered year and that
the City's request to consolidate the City's General Municipal Elections with the statewide
general election conducted on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of even-
numbered years is in the best interests of the voters of the City of Lake Elsinore.
~,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Change in General Municipal Election Date. That Section 2.08.025 of the
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
"Section 2.08.025 City Council Elections. Commencing November 2006, general
municipal elections shall be held in the City of Lake Elsinore on the first Tuesday after
the first Monday in November of each even-numbered year. All other municipal
elections, which may be held by authority of the constitution and laws of the State of
California, shall be known as special municipal elections."
SECTION 2. Extension of Terms of Office. That Section 2.08.026 is added to the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code as follows:
"Section 2.08.026
Extension of Terms.
,,-...
A. The term of those Council members of the City of Lake Elsinore whose
office would have, prior to the adoption of Ordinance 1133, expired following the
November 2005 general municipal election shall be extended for twelve months until the
November 2006 general municipal election pursuant to Elections Code Section 10403.5.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3'
PAGE...L.OF ~
PAGE TWO - ORDINANCE NO. 1133
.....",
B. The term of those Councilmembers of the City of Lake Elsinore and the
elected City Treasurer whose office would have, prior to the adoption of Ordinance 1133,
expired following the November 2007 general municipal election shall be extended for
twelve months until the November 2008 general municipal election pursuant to Elections
Code Section 10403.5."
SECTION 4. Severability. If any prOVISIOn, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance and are hereby declared to be
severable.
SECTION 5. Transmittal to County. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a
copy of this Ordinance to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside,
together with the request that said Board approve the change of the City of Lake Elsinore
General Municipal Elections to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in each even-numbered
year to allow consolidation with the statewide general election and provide the City with notice
of such approval.
SECTION 6. Effective Date and Operational Dates. This Ordinance shall take effect
thirty (30) days after its final passage and shall become operative upon approval by the Riverside
County Board of Supervisors. Within 30 days of the operative date, the City Clerk shall cause a
notice to be mailed to all registered voters of the City of Lake Elsinore informing them of the
change in the general municipal election date.
"""""
SECTION 7. Posting and Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by
law.
PASSED, UPON FIRST READING this 23rd day of November, 2004, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN, MAGEE, BUCKLEY
KELLEY, SCHIFFNER
NONE
NONE
PASSED, UPON SECOND READING this 14th of December, 2004, by the following
vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
-...;
City COlDlcil Ordinance Amending Section 2.08.025
2
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3l
11/17/04 f\ 3
PAGE q.... OF
,.... PAGE THREE - ORDINANCE NO. 1133
/"'"
,....
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Leibold, City Attorney
City Council Ordinance Amending Section 2.08.025
3
AQENDA lTEMtNO. 3 I
PAGEl OF ~
~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
TO:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
DECEMBER 14, 2004
SUBJECT:
ORDINANCE NO. "35
BACKGROUND
As part of the Parity Study adopted by the City Council in June 2003 was the recommendation that
the City's Weed Abatement Program be relocated from the Code Enforcement Division to
Community Services, Public Works Division.
One recommendation made during the mid-year budget review process for fiscal year 2003 - 2004
was the creation of the Parks and Open Space Division to be spearheaded by the Parks and Open
Space Manager.
~
One of the main responsibilities of the new division would be to oversee operations of the Weed
Abatement Program. The Community Services Department assumed full responsibility of weed
abatement with the approval of the 2004-2005 fiscal budget.
DISCUSSION
With the completion of the Community Services' first weed abatement effort, it has become
apparent that changes to the City Municipal Code are required to assist in the clarification and
expansion of Chapter 8.32.
In discussions with the City Attorney, the Director of Community Services and the Parks and Open
Space Manager refined Chapter 8.32, "Weed and Rubbish Abatement" to reflect the conditions and
needs for a more flexible document.
The proposed ordinance defines more clearly what rubbish is and what constitutes rubbish as
outlined in Subsection B of Section 8.32.010.
Chapter 8.32.010 was amended to include specific language for the abatement in and around above
ground flammable liquid tanks and include tree removal/trimming as part ofthe Weed Abatement
Program as proposed in the re-designation of Subsection C of Section 8.32.010.
r--
Section 2's addition to the Municipal Code provides for Weed Abatement Guidelines to be
established and made available to all property owners at no cost. The Guidelines provide a mission
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE l
3~
OF7
-
statement for the program; establishes requirements for the removal of weeds and rubbish; defines
discing guidelines for the City as well as AQMD's Rule 403; provides for and establishes fire break ....."
requirements on parcels of I O-acres in size or more and establishes guidelines for parcels on 45
degree slopes or greater. The Guidelines are a common sense approach to weed abatement that
clarifies the property owner's responsibility in abatement and maintenance ofhis/her property on an
annual basis.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost to reprint the revised ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
It is staffs recommendation that the Mayor and City Council adopt Ordinance No. /...13S- amending
Chapter 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding Weed and Rubbish abatement.
PREPARED BY:
David W. Sapp, Director of Community Services
APPROVED BY:
M
David W. Sapp, Director of Co
"-'"
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
Richard J. Watenpaugh, City M
!J
"""""'"
ACENDA ITEM NO. 3~
PACE. ~ -.0' 7
~
~
City of Lake Elsinore
Weed Abatement Guidelines
Our Mission
The mission of the City of Lake Elsinore's weed abatement program is for the annual
removal of combustible fuel such as weeds, brush, dead trees and rubbish from
unimproved property within the city limits, including abatement of nuisances such as fill
dirt and debris from illegal dumping, through the cooperation of affected property owners
according to standards in the Municipal Code.
The following are the City of Lake Elsinore's weed abatement guidelines. These
guidelines shall apply to all vacant and unimproved lots throu2.hout the year.
including those lots with vacant structures.
All Properties
Includes any alley, sidewalk, parkway strip, or unimproved public easement abutting the
property.
,-..
. Remove all rubbish, trash, trimmings, litter, tires, and combustible waste
material.
. Disc or mow all weeds, grass, brush, or other combustible vegetation according
to our guidelines below.
. Remove all grass and other cuttings after mowing, hoeing, or weed-eating.
. Remove all sagebrush, chaparral, tumbleweeds, and any other brush or weeds
which attain such large growth as to become, when dry, a fire menace to
adjacent improved property.
. Tumbleweeds shall be removed from the property on a year- round basis.
. All weeds shall be cut to 3 inches in height on all parcels.
Discin!! Guidelines
All disc work shall be completed so that all weeds, grass, crops or other vegetation or
organic material which could be expected to bum shall be substantially turned over so
there is insufficient fuel to sustain or allow the spread of fire. Handwork, including
mowing, weed-eating or hoeing, may be utilized for the removal of weeds along fence
lines where discing my not be possible, so that these areas are free and clear of growth
and dead vegetation. As per AQMD Rule 403, all areas to be disced must be watered
prior to the start of work for the control of fugitive dust.
~
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE -3
3~
OF 7
Parcels Over Ten (0) Acres
· In lieu of discing the entire parcel, firebreaks may be used in such a manner that
no single area shall exceed ten (10) acres. Firebreaks shall be a continuous
strip of land which is clear of all combustible weeds, grass, stubble, rubbish,
or other material which would allow the travel of fire. Firebreaks may
include fire-resistive vegetation, such as irrigated crops, ice plant, and any other
live plants recognized by the City of Lake Elsinore as being fire-resistive.
· Provide 50 foot wide firebreaks around all combustible structures.
· Provide 50 foot wide firebreaks along each side of all roadways.
· Provide a 50 foot firebreak along each side of all fences, property lines, ditches
and creeks.
· Remove any and all trash and illegal dumping.
· Remove any dead or overgrown branches within six (6) feet from the ground.
Remove dead palm fronds.
Parcels On A 45 De2ree Slope
· Any parcels that are on a slope 45 degrees or greater will need to remove weeds
thirty (30) feet from all roadways, and fifty (50) feet away from any structures.
. Remove all trash and illegal dumping.
· Remove any dead or overgrown branches within six (6) feet from the ground.
Please note that, should a fire occur due to lack of weed and debris removal,
the Fire Department may charge you for the Firefighting costs it incurs.
Common Problems
. Weeds along curbs and gutters
. Weeds along fences
· Weeds and dirt left on sidewalks
. Mounds of dirt left on parcels
· Litter must be removed prior to discing
· Lots under 10 acres must be disced or mowed completely
. Trim and clean around trees
. Remove all tumbleweeds
Please be sure to monitor your property(s) regularly and keep them clean not only
throughout the spring and summer fire season, but year-around.
THANK YOU FOR KEEPING THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SAFE AND
CLEAN.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
PACE 4
""'"
~
""'"
3d
OF 7
--<
,......
ORDINANCE NO. Il35
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.32 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL
CODE REGARDING WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.32 of the La~e Elsinore Municipal Code establishes the
procedures for weed and rubbish abatement for the City of Lake Elsinore; and
WHEREAS, it is the purpose and intent ofthe City Council ofthe City of Lake Elsinore
to amend and restate Chapter 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code in order to enhance fire
prevention practices and eliminate public nuisances in the City of Lake Elsinore; and
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1:
~
That Subsection B. of Section 8.32.010 of Chapter 8.32 ofthe Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code is hereby redesignated as Subsection C. of Section 8.32.010.
That Subsection B. of Section 8.32.010 of Chapter 8.32 ofthe Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code is hereby added as follows:
B. "Rubbish, refuse and dirt" includes unused or discarded matter having no
substantial market value, which is exposed to the elements and is not enclosed by any structure
or otherwise consist of such matter as trash, rubble, asphalt, and accumulated dirt from other
sites or for which there is no City approved grading permit.
That Subsection D. of Section 8.32.010 of Chapter 8.32 ofthe Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code is hereby added as follows:
D.
designee.
"Superintendent of Public Works" means the Director of Community Services or
That Subsection C. of Section 8.32.010 of Chapter 8.32 ofthe Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code is hereby redesignated as Subsection E. of Section 8.32.010, and is hereby amended to add
as follows:
6. Any accumulation of dry grasses or other flammable vegetation within fifty (50)
feet of any above ground flammable liquid.
7. Trees, if determined to increase the fire hazard, due to mortality, insect
infestation, disease, or lack of maintenance.
,~
1
AGENOA ~llfilll~. ~
PAC' Ie:, , OF j
"!""~--'''':""' t''"''" ',"l" "~'. "./, , r ,Ii'~ I ;~,
~fIf,{'J" ~ Nt ,:'..~\<..~
t', 1 .
SECTION 2: That Section 8.32.035 is hereby added to Chapter 8.32 of the Lake "-II'
Elsinore Municipal Code as follows:
8.32.035
Weed Abatement Guidelines
The Superintendent of Public Works shall prepare weed abatement guidelines to assist
property owners in meeting the requirements ofthis chapter. Such guidelines shall be available
to the public at no charge.
SECTION 3: That Section 8.32.040, within the second sentence, the words
"same calendar year" are hereby deleted and such deleted words are replaced as follows:
"within the one year period following adoption of the resolution as provided in this
chapter"
SECTION 4: That Section 8.32.055 is hereby added to Chapter 8.32 of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code as follows:
8.32.055
Recurrent Rubbish - Abatement Notice
At the time it adopts the resolution as provided in this chapter, the City Council may also
find and declare that rubbish, refuse and dirt on specified parcels of prop"erty are recurrent
nUIsances.
Such recurrent nuisances shall be abated in accordance with the provisions of this
chapter, provided that upon the second and any subsequent occurrence of such nuisance on the
same parcel or parcels within the same one year period, no further hearings need be held and it
shall be sufficient to mail a postcard notice to the owner of the property as they and their
addresses appear upon the current assessment roll.
The notice shall refer to and describe the property and shall state that rubbish, refuse and
dirt of a recurrent nature are present on the property and that same constitute a public nuisance
which must be abated by removal of such rubbish, refuse and dirt, and that otherwise they will
be removed and the nuisance will be abated by City authorities, in which case the cost of such
removal shall be assessed upon the parcel and lands from which or in front of which such
rubbish, refuse and dirt are removed and that, upon confirmation, such cost will constitute a fine
upon such parcel or lands until paid.
"-II'
SECTION 4:
SEVERABILITY
If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the
other provisions of this Ordinance and are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 5:
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption ofthe Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to
be published and posted in the manner required by law.
.....,
2
ACENDA ITEM NO. 32
PACE. ~ OF 7
".-.-
SECTION 6:
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage. The City
Clerk shall certify as to adoption ofthe Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published and
posted in the manner required by law.
PASSED, UPON FIRST READlNG this _ day of
following roll call vote:
, 2004, by the
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAlN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
following roll call vote:
, 2005, by the
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
,--.
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAlN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Leibold, City Attorney
".-.-
3
ACENDA ITEM NO.
PAOE . 7
31
OF7
,.....
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
DATE:
December 14, 2004
SUBJECT:
Selection of Consultant to Update the General Plan
BACKGROUND
The last comprehensive update of the City's General Plan occurred in 1990. The City
Council directed staff to prepare and circulate a request for proposals (RFP) to update the
City's General Plan. Staff sent an RFP to 23 consultants to update the General Plan and
prepare the necessary environmental impact studies. There were six proposals submitted
to the City in response to the RFP.
DISCUSSION
r""'
Staff reviewed the six proposals and selected four to participate in the interview process.
The four consulting firms were:
RBF Consulting
The Planning Center
URS Corporation
Mooney-Jones & Stokes
Interviews were held on Wednesday December 8,2004 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
in the Cultural Center. Each consultant was provided one hour to make their
presentation and answer questions from the interview panel. The interview panel
consisted of Councilman Schiffuer, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Planning
Manager, Engineering Manager and the Director of Community Development. Staffs
recommendation for the selection of the consultant is based on the qualifications and
experience of the consultant who would best meet the needs of the City. Since this is an
agreement for professional services, the cost proposal for the selected consultant was not
a factor in the recommendation to City Council. The cost proposal for the selected
consultant was opened at the end of the interview process once a consensus had been
reached on which consultant to recommend to the City Council.
~
Although all four ofthe consultants would be capable of performing the work identified
in the RFP, the interview panel concluded that the team of Mooney-Jones & Stokes
would be the best consultant to update the City's General Plan.
_ ACf;NOA trEM ,NO. ~~
P"Of I --..01 2
-
City Council Meeting December 14, 2004
General Plan Consultant
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT
The City Council has budgeted $500,000 in Fiscal Year 2004-2005 and $500,000 in
Fiscal Year 2005-2006 to complete the General Plan update. The Mooney-Jones &
Stokes cost estimate for updating the General Plan, including a Lake Element, Economic
Development Element and a Master Drainage Plan, and preparing the environmental
impact report is $777,456. The update is projected to take 18 months to complete. Since
the proposed cost ofthe project is less than the budgeted amount, the City Council may
want to allocate between five and 10 percent as a contingency for additional work the
City may want to include as part of the update process.
RECOMENDATION
The following is recommended to the City Council:
1.
Select Mooney-Jones & Stokes as the consultant team to update the City's
General Plan;
Authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Mooney-Jones &
Stokes to update the General Plan; and
Authorize an amount not to exceed $825,000, which would provide a
contingency of$47,544 or 6.1 percent, to fund the project.
2.
3.
PREPARED BY: Robert A. Brady, Director of Community Development
APPROVED FOR C.-/l~ ~
AGENDA LISTING: / /1 itlL~ /' /-
City Manager's Office
ACEIiOA ~TEM NO.
PAO. /J
......"
......"
'-'"
33
OF)
,
""'"'
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager
INITIATED BY:
Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG)
DATE:
December 14,2004
SUBJECT:
Annual Adjustment of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
(TUMF)
BACKGROUND
""'"'
At their regular meeting of April 23, 2003, the City Council adopted Ordinance No.1 096
establishing the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), which is levied and
collected from new residential and non-residential development. The purpose of the
TUMF is to finance the construction of regional road improvements and transportation
programs. Once collected, TUMF fees are transmitted to the TUMF Program
Administrator (the Western Riverside Council of Governments, or WRCOG) for
allocation and expenditure.
DISCUSSION
The TUMF Program Ordinance and the Administration Plan allow for Periodic
adjustments to the fee based on construction costs or other variables that could affect the
dollar value to construct the facilities identified in the Program. Construction costs are
directly attributable to delivering the projects identified in the TUMF Program. These
adjustments serve to maintain pace with inflation. Developer credits and reimbursements
provided for qualified road improvements are also adjusted proportionately. The
adjustment simply maintains the "buying power" of the dollar during the life of the
Program. As the Program enters the second year of implementation, staff is undertaking
the requisite annual effort to identify construction cost indices for purposes of
implementing this administrative adjustment to the Program fee.
""'"'
The national construction cost index (CCI) is used as the basis for adjusting TUMF
Program costs. Discussions between the sub-region's Public Works Directors concluded
that the national average is best suited for use as the industry standard because of its
stability: it is not as susceptible to regional fluctuations as more localized indices might
be. Additionally, the national standard benefits from its broad source data (the twenty
largest metropolitan areas in the United States) and has been prepared since 1908. In
N:'E~(;i'\ ~r~M I\..J. _ 3 4
'V. _
P.Ac:~--LOF I S'
sum, it is a recognized, consistent and trusted data source to use as the basis for adjusting
TUMF program costs. ~.
In April 2004 WRCOG Executive Committee approved a 1.5% correction to the network
but did not seek to increase the fee at that time, deciding to include the correction
concurrently with the future annual index adjustment. In September 2004 the Public
Works Directors recommended a 7.38% CCI based on 13 months (utilizing the national
source data discussed above) and the 1.5% network correction for a total fee adjustment
of 8.88%. The incremental implementation amounts for Industrial, Retail and Service
fees will also increase accordingly as reflected in the Ordinance Amendment. These
increases shall be effective Julyl, 2005 through June 1, 2006.
TUMF fees would increase from the current fee structure by the following amounts:
Fee Category Current Fee 8.8% Increase New Fee
Residential
Single Family $6,650/unit $598/unit $7,248/unit
Residential
Multi-Family $4,607/unit $414/unit $5,0211unit
Industrial $0.48/ sq .ft. $0.04/sq. ft. $0.52/sq. ft.
Retail Commercial $2.60/sq. ft. $0.23/ sq. ft. $2.83/sq. ft. ~
Service Commercial $1.611sq. ft. $0. I 4/sq. ft. $1.75/sq. ft.
As a member agency and participant in TUMF, the City of Lake Elsinore needs to
incorporate the revised fee structure into the existing Program ordinance in order to begin
collecting the revised fees in by March 1,2005. As the revised fees would normally go
into effect 60 days after action by the City Council, this would require the City of Lake
Elsinore to schedule these changes for action prior to the end of this calendar year.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review and discuss this item and adopt
Ordinance No. J \ ~ ' amending the schedule of fees in the TUMF Ordinance for the
City of Lake Elsinore.
PREPARED BY: Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager
APPROVED BY:
Robert Brady, Director of Community Development
~i!i!iit~
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
"""'"
AGENDA ~TEM NO.
PACE a.
3f:
or: '5
,....
,........
r"-
Attachments:
Ordinance No.f 13~
Ordinance No. 1096
AGENDA ~TEM NO.--3i.-
PACE 1 or- _ Is'
ORDINANCE NO. l\~~
~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 1096 OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO AUTHORIZE AN
AJDUSTMENT TO WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE
The City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore ordains as follows:
Section 1: Title
This Ordinance shall be known as the "Fee Adjustment to the Western Riverside County
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance".
Section 2:
Findings
A. As Stipulated in Ordinance 1 096, Section 4-C, the fees may be periodically
reviewed and increased or decreased to reflect changes upon periodic review by WRCOG. This
amendment affects Section 4-A, Establishment of Fees and Section 6-B, ii, Payment of Fees. All
other sections of Ordinance 1096 shall not be affected by this amendment.
Section 3:
Revisions
A.
The following are the sections to Ordinance 1096 and the revision amounts.
....."
Section 4:
Establishment of the Revised Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
A. Adoption. Subject to the exemptions set forth in Section 4F and the
phase-in periods set forth in Section 6.b. hereof, there is hereby adopted the following
schedule of fees:
$7248 per Single Family Residential Unit
$5021 per Multi Family Residential Unit
$1.58 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$8.51 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$5.28 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
Section 6:
Procedures for the Levy, Collection and Disposition of Fees
A. Authority of the Community Development Department. The Director
of Community Development, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to levy and collect
the TUMF and make all determinations required by this Ordinance.
B. Payment of the revised fees shall be as follows:
11. For non-residential projects the fees shall be phased in as follows:
From the effective date of this Ordinance to July 1, 2004, non-
residential projects shall be exempt from fees hereunder pursuant
to Section 4.F
......,,;
From July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005, the fee schedule shall be:
AGENDA ~TEM NO.
PAOE . ~
34
Of (S
,....
Section 4:
Severability
$0.52 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$2.83 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$1.75 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
From July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006, the fee schedule shall be:
$1.05 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$5.67 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$3.52 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
After July l, 2006, the fee schedule shall be as set forth in Section
4.A. hereof, or such fee schedule as may be in effect due to
amendment of Section 4.A. in accordance with Section 4.C. hereof.
If anyone or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Ordinance shall to any
extent be judged invalid, unenfo!ceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of
competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this
Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable.
Section 5:
Effective Date
,.-..
This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of adoption.
PASSED UPON FIRST READING this _ day of
following vote:
, 2004, upon the
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN :
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
, 2004, upon
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
,....
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Thomas Buckley, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
.AGENDA ITEM NO._ .51
PACi c:; _OF /5
'"""
ATTEST:
Vicki Kasad, City Clerk
City of Lake Elsinore
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney
.....,
"-'
AGENDA ITEM NO. '3 q
PACi ~ . OF / 5
, .
ORDINANCE NO. 1096
~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AUTHORlZING
PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM AND
ADDING CHAPTER 16.83 TO THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Lake Elsi~ore ordains as follows:
Section 1: Title
This Ordinance shall be known as the "Western Riverside County Transportation
Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance" and shall be added as Chapter 16.83 of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code.
Section 2:
Findings
A. The City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that future
development within Western Riverside County and the cities therein will result in traffic
volumes exceeding the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials (the
"Regional System") as it presently exists. A map depicting the boundaries of Western Riverside
County and the system is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
B. The City Council has been further informed and advised, and hereby finds, that if
/"'" the capacity of the Regional System is not enlarged, the result will be substantial traffic
congestion in all parts of Western Riverside County, with unacceptable levels of service
throughout Western Riverside County by 2025.
C. The City Council has been further informed and advised, and hereby finds, that
funds will be inadequate to construct the Regional System needed to avoid the unacceptable
levels of traffic congestion and related adverse impacts. Absent a Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF), existing and known future funding sources will be inadequate to
provide the necessary improvements to the Regional System, resulting in an unacceptably high
level of traffic congestion within and around Western Riverside County.
D. The City is a Member Agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments
(WRCOG), a joint powers agency consisting of the County of Riverside, and the fourteen other
cities situated in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, the Member Agencies of
WRCOG developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to expand the capacity of the
Regional System could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee on future
residential and non-residential development. As a Member Agency of WRCOG, the City
participated in the preparation of that certain "Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee Nexus Study", dated October ] 8, 2002, prepared pursuant to California
Government Code, Section 66000 et seq., the Mitigation Fee Act (the "Nexus Study").
E. The City Council has reviewed the Nexus Study, and hereby finds that future
development within the County and Cities will substantially adversely affect the Regional
System, and that unless such development contributes to the cost of improving the Regional
System, the System will operate at unacceptable levels of service.
,......
Ai~tftit}l% ~l"EM NO. 1 '-I
P.ACi_ ,1 - OF lS.
~. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the failure to mitigate growing
!raffi? Impac~s. on the R~gional Syst~m withi? Western Riverside County will substantially
~mpaIr the abIhty ~f pubhc safety.servIces (pohce and fire) to respond. The failure to mitigate
Impacts on the RegIOnal System wIll adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare.
G. The City Council further finds and determines that there is a reasonable and
rational relationship between the use of the TUMF and the type of development projects on
~hich the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the transportation
Improvements that are necessary for the safety, health and welfare of the residential and non-
residential users of the development projects on which the TUMF will be levied.
H. The City Council further finds and determines that there is a reasonable and
rational relationship between the need for the improvements to the Regional System and the type
of development projects on which the TUMF is imposed because it will be necessary for the
residential and non-residential users of such projects to have access to the Regional System.
Such development will benefit from the Regional System improvements and the burden of such
development will be mitigated in part by the payment of the TIJMF.
I. The City Council further finds and determines that the cost estimates set forth in
the Nexus Study are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Regional System
improvements, and that the amount of the TUMF expected to be generated by new development
will not exceed the total fair share cost to such development.
J. The fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall be used to help pay for the
construction and acquisition of the Regional System improvements identified in the Nexus
Study. The need for the improvements is related to new development because such development
results in additional traffic thus creating the demand for the improvements.
.....,
K. By notice duly given and published, the City Council set the time and place for a .....,
public hearing on the Nexus Study and the fee proposed hereunder, and at least ten days prior to
the hearing, the County and the City made the Nexus Study available to the public.
L. At the time and place set for the hearing, the City Council duly considered that
data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the services for which the fees
are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion
of the hearing.
M. The City Council finds that the Nexus Study proposes a fair and equitable method
for distributing a portion of the unfunded costs of improvements to the Regional System.
N. The City Council hereby adopts the Nexus Study and incorporates it herein as
though set forth in full.
Section 3:
Definitions
For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the
following meanings:
A. "Development Project" or "Project" means any project undertaken for the
purpose of development including the issuance of a permit for construction.
B.
"Gross Acre" means the total property area as shown on a land division map of
record, or described through a recorded legal description of the property. This
area shall be bounded by road rights of way and property lines.
C. "Industrial Project" means any development project, which proposes any
AGENDA J.TEM NO.
PAOi <6
......"
~f
OF Ie;
industrial or manufacturing use allowed in the following zoning classifications:
CM, M-I and M-2 or an industrial manufacturing use listed in a specific plan.
~
D. "Low Income Residential Housing" means residential units in publicly
subsidized projects constructed as housing for low-income households as such
households are defined pursuant to section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety
Code. "Publicly subsidized projects," as the term is used herein, shall not
include any project or project applicant receiving a tax credit provided by the
State of California Franchise Tax Board.
E. "Multi Family Residential Unit" means a development project that has a
density of greater than eight (8) residential dwelling units per gross acre.
F. "Non-Residential Project" means a retail commercial, service commercial and
industrial development which is designed primarily for non-dwelling use, but
shall include hotels and motels.
G. "Residential Dwelling Unit" means a building or portion thereof used by one
(1) family and containing but one (1) kitchen, which is designed primarily for
residential occupancy including single-family and multi-family dwellings.
"Residential Dwelling Unit" shall not include hotels or motels.
H. "Retail Commercial Project" means any development project, which proposes
any commercial use not defined as a service commercial project, allowed in the
following zoning classifications: C-P, C-l, C-2, CM, R or a commercial or
recreational use listed in a specific plan.
------
I.
"Service Commercial Project" means any development project that is
predominately dedicated to business activities associated with professional or
administrative services, and typically consists of corporate offices, financial
institutions, legal and medical offices.
J.
"Single Family Residential Unit" means each residential dwelling unit in a
development that has a density of 8 units to the gross acre or less.
Section 4:
Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
A. Adoption. Subject to the exemptions set forth in Section 4F and the phase-in
periods set forth in Section 6.b. hereof, there is hereby adopted the following schedule of fees:
$6650 per Single Family Residential Unit
$4607 per Multi Family Residential Unit
$1.45 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$7.81 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$4.84 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
B. Fee Calculation.
1. For non-residential projects, the fee rate utilized shall be based upon the
predominate use of the building or structure identified in the building
permit as further specified in the TUMF Administration Plan.
II.
For non-residential projects, the fee shall be calculated on the total square
footage of the building or structure identified in the building permit and as
further specified in the TUMF Administration Plan.
~
AGENDA ITEIA NO. ? ~ C;
PAOi-5--OF ..
C. Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts
adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. By amendment to this Ordinance, the fees may be
increased or decreased to reflect changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System
including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of ""'"
the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, in estimated revenues
received pursuant to this Ordinance, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with
which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMP program within two (2)
years of the effective date of this Ordinance and no less than every five (5) years thereafter.
D. Purpose. The pmpose of the TUMF is to fund those certain improvements to the
Regional System as depicted on Exhibit A and identified in the Nexus Study.
E. Applicability. The TUMF shall apply to all new development within the City
unless otherwise exempt hereunder.
F. Exemptions. The following new development shall be exempt from the TUMF:
). Low income residential housing.
ll. Government/public buildings, public schools and public facilities.
llI. The rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any legal, residential structure
and/or the replacement of a previously existing dwelling unit.
IV. The rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any non-residential structure
where there is no net increase in square footage. Any increase in square
footage shall pay the current applicable rate.
Development Projects which are the subject of a Development Agreement
entered into pursuant to Government Code, Section 65864 et seq. prior to
the effective date of this ordinance, if new fees are expressly prohibited,
provided, however that, if the term of such a Development Agreement is
extended after the effective date of this Ordinance, the TUMF shall be
imposed.
VI. The sanctuary building of a church or other house of worship, eligible for
a property tax exemption.
v.
""'"
Vll. Residential projects that have been issued a building permit prior to June
1,2003.
Vll). Non-Residential projects that have been issued a building permit prior to
June 30, 2004.
G. Credits.
Regional System improvements may be credited toward the TUMF in accordance
with the TUMF Administration Plan and the following:
...,
AGENDA m:M NO.---.3.L
~AOi,)O _Of is I.'
Regional Tier
~
1.
Arterial Credits: If a developer constructs arterial improvements
identified on the Regional System, the developer shall receive credit f~r
the all costs associated with the arterial component based on approved umt
cost assumptions for the Regional System.
II. Other Credits: In special circumstances, when a developer constructs off-
site improvements such as an interchange, bridge, or railroad grade
separation, credits shall be determined by WRCOG and the local
jurisdiction in consultation with the developer.
lll. The amount of the development fee credit shall not exceed the maximum
amount determined by the most current unit cost assumptions for the
Regional System or actual costs, whichever is less.
Local Tier
1. The local jurisdictions shall compare facilities in local fee programs
against the Regional System and eliminate any overlap in its local fee
program except where there is a recognized benefit district established.
II. If there is a recognized benefit district established, the local agency may
credit that portion of the facility identified in both programs against the
TUMF.
Section 5:
Reimbursements
,...-.
Should the developer construct network improvements in excess of the TUMF fee
obligation the developer may be reimbursed based on actual costs or the approved unit cost
assumptions, whichever is less at the time of the agreement. Reimbursements shall be enacted
through a three party agreement including the developer, WRCOG and the local jurisdiction,
contingent on funds being available. In all cases, however, reimbursements under such special
agreements must coincide with construction of the transportation improvements as scheduled in
the five-year Capital Improvement Program adopted annually by WRCOG.
Section 6:
Procedures for the Levy, Collection and Disposition of Fees
A. Authority of the Community Development Department. The Director of
Community Development, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to levy and collect the
TUMF and make all determinations required by this Ordinance.
B. Payment of the fees shall be as follows:
1.
The fees shall be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the
Development Project or upon fmal inspection, whichever occurs first.
However, this section should not be construed to prevent payment of the
Fees prior to issuance of an occupancy permit or fmal inspection. Fees may
be paid at the time application is made for a building permit.
Il.
For non-residential projects the fees shall be phased in as follows:
,...-.
From the effective date of this Ordinance to July 1,2004, non-residential
projects shall be exempt from fees hereunder pursuant to Section 4.F
AOEftllA lIE.. NO. 3 t 5
PAce-1l-OF
From July I, 2004 to June 30, 2005, the fee schedule shall be:
$0.48 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$2.60 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$ I .61 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
'-'"
From July I, 2005 to June 30, 2006, the fee schedule shall be:
$0.96 per square foot of an Industrial Project
$5.20 per square foot of a Retail Commercial Project
$3.23 per square foot of a Service Commercial Project
After July 1,2006, the fee schedule shall be as set forth in Section 4.A.
hereof, or such fee schedule as may be in effect due to amendment of
Section 4.A. in accordance with Section 4.C. hereof.
lll. The fees required to be paid shall be the fee amounts in effect at the time of
payment.
IV. If all or part of any development project is sold prior to payment of the fee,
the property shall continue to be subject to the requirement for payment of
the fee, accordingly, the fees shall run with the land.
v. Fees shall not be waived.
C. Disposition of Fees. All fees collected hereunder, that are required to be
transferred, shall be transmitted to the Executive Director of WRCOG within thirty days for
deposit, investment, accounting and expenditure in accordance with the provisions of this '-'
Ordinance and the Mitigation Fee Act.
D. Appeals. Appeals shall be filed with WRCOG in accordance with the provisions
of the TUMF Administration Plan. Appealable issues shall be application of the fee, application
of credits, application of reimbursement, application of the legal action stay and application of
exemptions.
E. Reports to WReOG. The Director of Community Development, or his/her
designee, shall prepare and deliver to the Executive Director ofWRCOG, periodic reports as will be
established under Section 8 of this ordinance.
Section 7:
Effect of Legal Actions on Non-Residential Projects.
If a legal action, or referendum is filed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance or
during the phase in period of the fee program, and the legal action seeks to set aside, void or
annul the City's approval of a non-residential project, the phasing schedule set forth in Section 6
shall be stayed. The stay shall only remain in effect for a period of 18 months from the time the
legal action was filed, or until a final, non-appealable order is issued by the court or a settlement
agreement is executed, whichever occurs first. Once the stay is no longer in effect, the period
remaining in the phasing schedule shall again commence to run.
Section 8:
Appointment of TUMF Fund Administrator
WRCOG is hereby appointed as the Administrator of the Transportation Uniform
.....,
AOaeDA nEM NO. 3lf
'AtE lJ- OF~
""'"'
Mitigation Fee Program. WRCOG is hereby authorized to receive all fees generated from the
TUMF within the County, and to invest, account for and expend such fees in accordance with the
provisions of this Ordinance and the Mitigation Fee Act. Detailed administrative procedures
concerning the implementation of this ordinance shall be set forth in a resolution adopted by
WRCOG.
WRCOG shall expend only that amount of the funds generated from the TUMF for staff
support, audit, administrative expenses, and contract services that are necessary and reasonable
to carry out its responsibilities and in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits
exceed one percent (I %) of the annual net amount of revenue raised by the TUMF.
Section 9:
Severability
If anyone or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Ordinance shall to any
extent be judged invalid, unenforceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of
competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this
Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable.
Section 10: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of adoption.
PASSED UPON FIRST READING this 8th day of April , 2003, upon the
following vote:
\
Y"""
AYES: Councilmembers: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER,
BRINLEY
NOES: Councilmembers: NONE
ABSENT: Councilmembers: NONE
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: NONE
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of April
the following vote:
, 2003, upon
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN :
Councilmembers:
BUCKLEY, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, BRINLEY
Councilmembers:
NONE
HICKMAN
...--
AGENDA ITEM NO.----.3L
PAOi-13-OF:l5:.:.
Vicki Kasad, City erk
City of Lake Elsinore
AGENDA tTEM NO.
PAGE J ~
,..,
....,
....,
~lf
OF ]<;
"'"
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE)
I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and read by title only for adoption on the
8th day of April, 2003; and approved upon second reading by title only on the 22nd day of
April, 2003, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
BUCKLEY, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER,
BRINLEY
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HICKMAN
1- 0~INUOUNCILMEMBERS:
VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
NONE
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE)
I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy
of Ordinance No. 1096 of said Council, and that the same has not been amended or repealed.
;z)~J2:J
VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK
,,-... CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
ACENOA ~TEIwi IW. 31f
'AGE 1 ~OF J~ _
.
,.....
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DECEMBER 14, 2004
PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION STATUS REPORT
BACKGROUND
The City Council in March, 2004, authorized and appointed the City of Lake Elsinore's Public Safety
Advisory Commission.
DISCUSSION
City Ordinance #1116 authorized the appointment of the Public Safety Advisory Commission and
outlined the Commission's duties and responsibilities. One of the Commission's duties was to
periodically report to the City Council their status related to their specified duties.
,.....
Attached is their first status report "Update Report to City Council/December 2004."
In addition to the attached report, approved by the Commission, the following additional information
was provided to the,Commission at their regular meeting on December 8, 2004.
Item # 1
Item #2
Item #3
Item #4
Public Safety Website - a copy ofthe current PSAC Webpage, plus the draft of phase
2 (attached).
Public Safety Brochure - the current status draft brochure (attached). Yet to be
completed is the directory portion of the brochure.
LERA Boat Launch/Safety Design and Costs - staff reported that Council tonight
would be considering acceptance of the $3 million Boating & Waterways Grant with
the additional development recommendations from Noble Consultants for additional
safety work to complete the entire project. Subject to Council action, the additional
work (optional) would be returned to the Commission for review and
recommendations back to Council within 60 days.
Lake Safety Assessment - staff has located a consultant that appears to meet the
Commission's concerns regarding Lake Safety experience. Staff should have a report-
to the Commission at their January meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
,..... None at this time.
ACENDA ~TEM NO. 35
UQi--L-Of . J 2
Public Safety Advisory Commission Status Report
December 14, 2004
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the Mayor and Council receive and file this status report.
PREPARED BY:
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA BY:
DICK W ATENP AUGH, CITY MANAGER
/h~
CITY MANAGER'S 0 CE
~
~
'---'
ACEH.DAITEM NO. 35
'ACi d- Of I '}..
.
Public Safety Advisory Commission
~
!Jpdate Report to Citv Council
December 2004
Backeround
In early 2004 the City Council discussed the possibility of forming a Public Safety
Advisory Commission (PSAC). After several meetings it was agreed to create the PSAC
and each Council Member appointed a resident to the Advisory Commission, which,
officially, became effective 01 July 2004.
The PSAC has held six meetings and one study session and, available, minutes have been
distributed to Council Members.
The PSAC Ordinance calls for update reports to the City Council, this document is the
first such report.
~
Status of Topics reviewed bv PSAC
1. Establishment of a Public Safety Website.
This was discussed at the first meeting on May 12 2004 and it was agreed a Staff
Report would be presented at the June meeting. An outline ofthe proposed Web
page was presented and discussed at the June meeting and it was agreed to move
forward on the project with a target completion date of 90 days.
At the date of writing this report (01 December 2004) the PSAC are unaware of
the currently anticipated completion date.
2. Creation of a Public Safety Brochure
Again, this topic was discussed at the May and June meetings and a
recommendation was made to Council that a brochure be prepared at an
approximate cost of$5,000 to $7,000. Council approved the recommendation.
At the date of writing this report (01 December 2004) the PSAC are unaware of
the currently anticipated completion date.
~
Af'~'M)'A n'~c.:1 riO.
City of Lake Elsinore
...1
J;'CE ;2
1
35
;f~
C;i=J
Public Safety Advisory Commission
.....,
3. LERA Boat Launch - Safety Design and Costs
At the PSAC meeting of 14 July 2004 the Commission received a presentation
from the Lake Department regarding improving the safety in the Boat Launch
area. After considerable discussion the Commission recommended to the City
Council that the Consultant be asked to submit a follow up report that considered
a lower cost and a phased solution.
Council accepted the recommendation and the requested Consultant fees were
approved.
At the date of writing this report (01 Decemb~r 2004) the PSAC are unaware of
the status regarding the revised proposal.
4. Lake Safety Assessment
At the PSAC meeting of 14 July 2004 the Commission also received a
presentation regarding an overall review of Lake Safety. The Commission
reviewed the CV of one individual referred to Staff and concluded that the
individual did not appear to have the skills required for the task.
.....,
The Commission suggested that Staff seek alternative candidates (taking account
of JPIA requirements) to complete the review and to update the Commission of
the outcome of the search in 30 days. If a qualified candidate was not available
then consideration may be given to forming a local committee (made up of
representatives from Lake staff; Lake Police; LEMSAR and the Coastguard.)
At the date of writing this report (01 December 2004) the PSAC are unaware of
the current situation regarding the agreed actions.
~""'~"'''''',,,, 1':"-"" PO q <;
.-t~i~"!_,,4st , I ~t:i ~~i.'. l . _
PnC~3-CF~
"-'
City of Lake Elsinore
2
Public Safety Advisory Commission
5. Citizen's Action Patrol
~
Evaluation of the formation of a Patrol was included in the PSAC Ordinance and
the City Manager introduced it as an Agenda item at the 8 September 2004
meeting together with examples of two cities' patrols. It was agreed that
additional information on existing patrols would be gathered.
At the PSAC meeting of 13 October 2004 we briefly reviewed several other
programs.
During the November PSAC meeting we received a very informative presentation
from the founder and leader of an established patrol in Harvest Valley. It was
agreed we would hold a special, or study session type, meeting on 30 November
to discuss general thoughts and approaches relative to the possible formation of a
Citizen's Patrol in Lake Elsinore. This meeting was held and a framework for
further discussion was created - a copy of the outline document is attached. This
topic will be discussed further at the December 2004 PSAC meeting.
6. Presentations
During the past four or five months the Commission has received presentations
from the following units within the City:
,--..
a) Neighborhood Safety Programs which included: Problem Oriented
Policing; Neighborhood Enhancement Team (NET); Crime Free Multi
Housing; Neighborhood Watch;
b) Lake Elsinore Police Department Gang Team
c) Lake Elsinore Fire Department
d) Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division
All of the presentations have been professional and informative and will greatly
assist the Commission in formulating recommendations in the coming months.
7. Summary
The early months since formation of the Commission have been very helpful in
building up the knowledge of the Members relative to the Public Safety resources
available in the City. It is now time for the Commission to move forward in a
more proactive manner and to introduce action items listed in the Ordinance
City of Lake Elsinore
~.;;nA rme;j f~O.
JVrfue };
3
3~
c::~
"""
1 December 2004
Lake Elsinore City
Public Safety Advisory Commission
......"
Discussion Topic: Citizen Public Safety Patrols
I. Should the City initiate Citizen Safety Patrol Program (First and last question)?
2. Soope: What aspects to include (Potice/Fire/Code Enforcement)?
3. Issues to consider: Structure (organizationt Legal Issues; Assets and Resources;
Expected Outcomes; Projected time frame to complete study; Report to City Council
I. Structure:
1. Mission statement
2. Goals/objectives of the program
3. Program design/Organizational structure
4. Volunteers vs. paid staff (both)
5. Background checks
6. Qualifications (requirements) of participants (background checks, etc.)
7. Role of participants
8. Scope of tasks/duties of participants/staff
9. Appointment/removal of participants
10. Training & education of participants/staff .
II. RuleslRegulations of conduct of participants/staff
12. Supervision/control of participants
13. Program evaluation (periodic)
14. Public relations
15.
16.
'-'
II. Legal Issues
I. Personal liability
2. Workman's Compensation
3. Non-profit status
4.
III. Assets & Resources
1. Budget
2. Equipment
IV. Expected Outcomes
I. Impact on City residents
2. Impact on City Departments/staff
V. Projected time frame to complete study
VI. Report/recommendations to City Council
~~li~ ITE!& P~O.
IW'~ . <f
c35
c;;-1c} _
'-'
,.......
~
,.......
PROS CONS
.,. - - - - ,
~~~'A m~i rro.
PAC~.'
"'3r
.:. ::;J
c;;~
Lake Elsinore Page 1 of 2
~
---
~ ~ ,J
~
Quick links
Contac.LUs
S1te5e.aB:b
BudgelillOlm....ary:
CfD JnfurmatioD
Cit}LClerls
CitllrLun,-U
CjlllolmcH
Agenda
Minutes Archive
City Profile
Commissions
12ep-LJ2i rectory:
ECQJh__D_eveIQpment
Human Resources
JQb._ORenings
fublic Notkes
SJ:ate__OLIbeJ:ity
""*:;' 1# r
~1~1,;~ r * f
,-" \\ , .' - - :"" :
~, I', - ,i
· tIJ ',--,
December 9, 2004
Previous Page
City Boards, Commissions and Committees
Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
Planning_Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Minutes Archive
Members
Roland (Ron) LaPere, Chairman
Daniel L. Uhlry
Tylisha Larimer
Harvey R. Ryan
Michael O'Neal, Vice Chairman
Term Expiration Date
6/2002-6/2006
6/2002-6/2006
612004-612008
6/2004-6/2008
6/2004-612008
Beginning September 2002, the Planning Commission meets on the 1 st and
3rd Tuesday of the month at 6:00 P.M. at the Cultural Center. The
Commission is appointed by the City Council to review, approve or deny all
development proposals. The Commission may advise the City Council in the
application or development of policies on Land Use and Physical Development
within the City. The Commission also reviews and recommends proposed
amendments to the General Plan or Zoning Regulations and Standards.
'--'
Public Safety Advisory Commission
Reauthorized by City Council in April 2004. Commission members are
appointed by the City Council for a term of two years. The Commission serves
as a conduit of information from the residents and business people of Lake
Elsinore to their Public Safety, Code Enforcement and Emergency Services
professionals.
Members
Daniel L. Uhlry, Chairman (appointed by Mayor Buckley;
first time chair presides until 12/31 /04)
Michael Lewis (appointed by Mayor pro tem Kelley)
Term Expiration
Date
7/1/2004-
7/1/2006
7/1/2004-
7/1/2006
7/1/2004-
7/1/2006
7/1/2004-
7/1/2006
7/1/2004-
7/1/2006
'~
-of~9/2004
Ron Hewison (appointed by Councilman Hickman)
BHl Arnold (succeeds Raymond Moon, Magee appointee,
effective 9/28/04)
Ray Knight (appointed by Councilman Schiffner)
'"-""
http://www .lake-elsinore.org/commissions.asp
At~~f'l.oA m:M NO.
'AOi c;
Lake Elsinore
~
--
-- ..."
~
Quick Links
Contact Us
Site~aLch
Agendas
Reques_t_form
~
~
(proposed)
Page 1 of2
IfII/#IW Quidt.rmd topics, job oppottunities, project updllle$,
IfII/#IW improvet'l1ent prejects, lAke condiliOns ~tings iInd
IfII/#IW Spt'dlll notIces, dv!c events, iInd what'~~.
December 9, 2004
Public Safety Advisory Commission
Meetings
The PSAC meets every second Wednesday of the month, 6:00 p.m., at the
Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street. Meetings are open to
the public
Cl id~_hef~J_or A
Cl ick here to a
laint to the PSAC
Related Un
.fia_c_kg[QuridJi~QYeIning_AulhoLilY
. C~JIlmjssjon_MeInbeIS~dTe[m_s
. Duties of the PSAC
· StaJtCQDJacts
Background
The Lake Elsinore Public Safety Advisory Commission was re-established on
March 9, 2004 under City Ordinance No. 1116. The Commission is tasked
with making advisory policy recommendations to the City Council on Public
Safety issues, serving as a conduit for community input and discussion on
public safety issues, and to consider those public safety policy matters over
which the City Council has control. The PSAC is not a hearing board for
allegations or charges against law enforcement officers, nor is it responsible
for investigations into alleged misconduct.
Governing Authority
The PSAC conducts its business in accordance with Chapter 2.46 (Public
Safety Advisory Commission) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, City
Council Policy Number 200-5A (Commission Appointments), and applicable
sections of the California Open Meeting Law.
PSAC Commissioners & Terms
Commissioners serve appointed terms of two years.
Daniel L. Uhlry, Chairman
7/1 /04 - 7/ 1 /06
Michael Lewis
7/1 /04 - 7/1 /06
Ron Hewison
7/1 /04 - 7/1 /06
Bill Arnold
7/ 1 104 - 7 1 1 106
ACEIIDAlTEIoI NO._ ~
'AGE q Of.
12/9/2004
http://www .lake-elsinore.org/commissions/PSAC _ main. asp
Lake Elsinore
(proposed)
Page 2 of2
Ray Knight
7/1 /04 - 7/1 /06
Duties
The PSAC serves to:
'-'"
A. Establish a conduit of information from residents and businesses to
their Public Safety, Code Enforcement and Emergency Service
Professionals using public meetings, the City's web site, print
information and community outreach;
B. Act as independent "eyes and ears" to augment City and LEPD staff's
efforts t9,ptotect and serve the public;
C. Create"ar,d maintain an Internet page on the City's web site for online
citjf:,n input, complaint tracking and providing community feedback;
D. See'k out additional input and maintain a dialogue with various City
ocganizations including the Lake Elsinore Marine Search and Rescue,
Neighborhood Watch Groups, Homeowners' Associations, Lake Elsinore
Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Merchants Association, and
others;
E. Report to the City Council on a regular basis and forward all PSAC
recommendations to the City Council for consideration;
F. Assist the City Council, City Manager and local public safety
professionals with Disaster Preparedness and Crisis Management;
G. Consider and evaluate the cost and benefits of creating a Citizen's
Action Patrol.
Staff Contact for the Commission
'wIf
City Manager's Office
Dick Watenpaugh, City Manager
PH 951.674.3124 x 204
Lake Elsinore Police Department
CbieLL.QJ.tis.E ethe[Qlf
PH 951.245.3300.
The City of Lake Elsinore California (951) 674-3124
130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 webmaster
Copyright<O 2000-2001, All Rights Reserved, Site By: SiteCreators
'J \.:."wtII.
PtCENOA niM NO. }~'
PAce-IP Of J ')
http://www .lake-elsinore.org/commissions/PSAC _ main. asp
12/912004
'i{~
:(:' ~
"\oj;
z
o
-
>- en
~".J' "." en_
~ 0 &
~ !! &
$Ju
en
~
-
c
=
--
en
~..
.i (.)
ca ::i
.... ca
~ ::>>
5'D.
() ~
"0 U) ...... ~ .....
..0 0 <r
C U) a
Q) '- ~ ~ ~
0 Q) ::J "
>- ~ U)
'- () C +- Q. Q) 0
0 Q) ::J C +- +- U) (f)
U) U) .c. Q) Q) Q) (/) :J ,9 0..
"5 0 @ .c. 0.. C .......
>- +- "0 +- "E .0 e>
"0 '- c '-
~ Q) +- 0 .Q
<( 0 0 U) :J E q
E t; '- +- C>> Q.
>- Q) 0 E :J C C ~ ..... !
+- Q. C CD +- 0 0 Q) C Q) .Q
~ ~ Q) CD .. :J += 0
.c. 0. CD ~ .s:: Q. U) Q) C +-
Q) Q) .c 0 U) c:
0 +- .c ~ 0 ..0 Q) c Q) -fii
Q) .!a ~ a
(/) - ~ a ~ @ .c. ~ E 0 :J li
E 0 t U)
.~ .{j 0 0 0> c 0- J
..0 c >- Q) c c lio,..: C .0 Q) J
0 0 .c. Z += :J 0 .1.;.;,;;
:J "(;) "0 +- '(;) (") Q) 0 += :!:: C
0.. .sa U) 0 w co Q) o. E -
Q) +- !
Q) E c Q) r- E '(;) E ..0
.c. E "0 .:::t: :> ...... :J
.- ~ 0 0 .Q U)
0 ---1 <(
C 0
0 (/) - +-
0..
,...... ^
c U)
0 '- +-
C Q) C
"0 -0 "~ ..0 Q) Q)
Q) U) 'E E E
U) "'" 3
+- Q) 0 .r:.
c '" E ::J +- +-
"0 C 0. Z c '+- 0
"(;) ...... 0 T5 '0 0 ---1
Q)
0. :J +- 0 >- Q. en 0>
Q. .0 0. c ,~ Q. c c
0 ~~ 0 >- :J /r. <( 0 +=
'- ~ Q)
Q) .... 'O- .c. 0 c +=
> .. ~ 0 U) (J) 0 (J)
'- en 0 () "5 '- "0 0 Q) 2
Q) '- .c .c \J 0 :~ U)
U) 0 .... :J +- C
Q) = "0 ~ <( C ::J E Q) c
U) 1n 0 ..0 Q)
'- >- C c i
Q) 0 Q) iIi 0 E 0.
c 0 0 0
0 ~ 0.0 () () Q) .c 0 0
.~ C ~ c 0 ~ 0 Q. 0
-... 0 0 0
- c (/) '-'
en "E 0 "0 ---1 Q. c
.. (/) '- .~ ill <( 0 '-
E E U) 0> 0.. 0 ..0 Q) l!) g
E > () .c "0 I "0
.. Q) +- a
t! 0 '- & () ::J 0 a C 0
Q) .c 0.. -
0 +- .- 0 '-" 0 o AdENDA<frEM NO.
PAGE ,I
c
0
E
...
'0
.s:::;
(j -0 -0 -0 -0
> 0 w 0 Q a
-= - "~ - c ~ -
.J::. r- r- 0 r--\, r-
- (1) - -'\- --
=> r--.. ..... r--.. .!! r--.. ~:.J::. r--..
..J I (i) I ~ 0 I OJ I
(i) ~ 0 ~ c "q' C "'"
:I: ... ~
'2 .s:::; <( 0 0
-- ,~ - c -- >- -
0 r- - r- r-
- -- 0 - - - 0 --
0 r--.. :E r--.. Q: r--.. in r--.. Q: r--..
o CD
.c C
e+-o
000+=
() P +- 2
e .... en CD
::> 0 e
o~2~
000 e
-'-pO
~pe()
(] e CD ....
oES
92 (/) E --
->-1i) ()
+- 0 0 "
.8.o~5
+- .... .... 0
0000
0. ::> 4: ~
CD ~ (/) .-
~....D..O
.
W
~ 1i5
J!2 0
o ()
(/)
~ 0 .... ~ 0
(].o2(/) +-0)
,::>en'~ 2e
.0-0.0.... 0+=0
~ .~ 0 0 ....
5 0.0 p ::> ~ "5
8 g i .5 ., ~ ~ ~
~ p~ ~ c -g ~ =2
(] ?~~\.~ 0 ti= ~
E~' \~~~(/)
+- 0 G! .~.o 55
.~e C\e"ON
~ 0 0\ 0 e +=
4: 2 \0 0 (]
\ .
a&: ,.,c,
(])
:S
......
5 t CD
-Q~o~~. C3
vco:r<i5N
cOenOo)X
.QO....o.o~
~(])CDecN
~og>20~
~(])e02~
.@Q05~'"
S02TIO~
~~~'- lO
0</:),-0 0-
ECl:.O
~
.2
+-
e
CD
E
+-
'- -.-
0-
0.2
CD (]) .
o~8
(])~~
-Q (/) l.{j
O::>~
0.. ON
(])-'-
'-'!-~
o (]) V'
e --
._ .c
~O
j
o
-'
e .Q ~ CD 4- (/) P
0 0 0 > (]) ::> (])
+= +- .0 e P Q.. .... e .... 0 c
0 en >- ::> ::> e w CD i.- S +- p .;:: .c 0 .c
<l5 en CD C 4- () (])
E CD () 0. E 0 -' (]) "0 c 0 .c
p +- 0) +-
~ e +- "0 c 0 > ~ ~ .c
.... '~ E en e +- 0. -~ +-
Q (]) CD 0) CD c 0 'en 0+- .c CD <l5
c CD 2> e .0 0 0 e E ::> p 0 '-
c >- .0 0+- a en
'en p 'en (]) () CD +- 0 0. '3 :::> CD p 2
CD ::> ~ 0 (]) 0 0) .si e $ ....
-.- ::> a E 3 p :: C 3 () e e 0 (/) 0 en 'en (]) CD
0 .0 (]) () CD '- e
.. 0 E2 0+- (] :0 .~ CD 0 CD UJ .c
0 UJ 0 (/) e c +- 0 +1' 0 0 :::> E 0 0+-
:!::: P 2 en e .c e 0
..... ::> ~ c ~ 0 (]) +- 0+- :::> .~ .0 e 0> en .;:: .... <1> E .c
c p c ~ e a 3
4f) p 0 (] c p c 0. 0. "0 0 0 0 .:::L 2 p
0 (]) c e CD 0 (] 0 .0 a .9 a
(U e -.- 0 '~ 0 0 c 0. (]) += 0 2 0 CD e
f: 0 en 0 en CD += (]) E +- E J!2 =0 =0 += .c (]) 2 0
+- (/) 0+- J!2 0 0. (]) c "0 0 (]) 0) E v>
0 c e .c 0> .fQ "0 -
4) E (]) p .c CD e ~ N .... '$ e 0 e-
CD 0 (]) 0 0+- :::> .... .~ 0 0 'c 0 0 c
fI) 0 p .... v> . , 'P 0 ~ c +- N () Z 0 .... ~ 0
.0 E 0.. .... .c 0 += e 0 e I (])
.c -en 0> Q c ..0 c '0 +- -~ += +=
(,,) ::> CD CD () .- 0 CD 0 0) ::> ::> 2> 'en <l5 v> 0 .0 0
ct E2 CD 0.. ~ C e 0 en +- ::> (]) e E 0 .E w 0. E +- '0
.0 .... 0 += 0+- (]) 0 ::> 0 e
~ 0 (/) 0. (]) :sz
U') 'S; Q) ~ it:: 0 e E .:::t. e (]) 0 ::> 3
E '- Q +- en 0) 0 0 0
Q. 0 '$ .... (]) e 0+- +- '- (]) (]) 0 (]) '0 ~ .:::t. en 2 en (/)
1i5 0 c (]) .;:: ::> 0 0 0 .... 0 e 0 0 (]) .9 CD en .c 0 ~
w .... .c UJ (/) E 0. a 4: (]) +- .c 0 0. 0 .... 0 (/) E 0 ~ <.D 4: 0 0
G> -.- +- en +- +-
.c . . . .
t- IC( m (.) Q
'-
(])
-0
C
:J
~,':;:t
J!2(])O
o .... 0
(/)enN
o
o 3 0:
.0 .c
:J 5 ~
0.. .~ 0
Q) .~ 2
o E c
cEo
~8a5
~ C-t5
00=
-1en.o
Q) 'S; 0
.c"01i5
~4:Q)
\j>~ ~~ () ~
t.>" ';i;. ,- -.- r.. +-
C \.'>/) ',C 0 ..1...l .c
(]) :~ ' ...<}"u) i'E .~ 5. ~
f= E>-' E.o ~ 3
.' 0 0':::>0 ....
.r. E =, (]) . o',o..c (])
'-J 0 o..c '-.~ +- > 0
O o.+-Q) 0 ,.... 0 ....
\I::.'!-' (]) +-
- f1> >- 0 0 +-, ":'t:' 7"l en C
\V \- +- .,-.- v.... 0
o .c 0 cn"-<n,'~':J a -en (])
Z +- .~ e -' u "0 ,- c t:: 0
en > 0 = c ~ 0 0 en
~~-g1j.g8~gEE
e +- O)P D.. 0 -0 +- 6'0
g~cffi5enp-o=e
p .:::t.E_occo:::>
0.2 ~ E'g g>~ ~~8
>- ~ .c 0 ::> '5 ::> Q)(]) >-
:!:::~:!:::~OQ5o.~o:!:::
003....0 en c_~ (/)0
.2 3
-oo:!:::
....
o +- (/)
o _~ a(])
.oop
0)0>1-
e 0 a ~
'C en C -.-
o (]) v> g
(]) 0)...."0
.c I- (]) c
o E 0 0
+-o~()
o 0 ,~
c <5 c E
-~ en (]) (])
OeE+-
<(2(])8>
~02~
(]) ~ Q (])
.c=c>
~ 0 (]) c
AGENDA ~TEM NO. 5
PAoE-1L..o. 1 J..
~
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
REPORT TO CITY COUNCILIREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TO:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
CHAIRMAN & BOARDMEMBERS
FROM:
DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER
DA TE:
DECEMBER 14,2004
SUBJECT: MEETING OF DECEMBER 28, 2004
BACKGROUND
On November 9, 2004, the City council was asked to consider their options
regarding two City Council/Redevelopment Agency meetings, being
November 23rd and December 28th. At that time the Council decided to hold
the meeting of November 23rd, but consider the meeting of December 28th at
a later date.
~
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDA TION
It is recommended that the Mayor & City Council provide staff direction
regarding the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting of December
28th.
PREPARED BY:
:JLW
VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK!
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA LISTING:
"
AQENOA ITEM NO. ~~
, PAGELoF-L-