Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Agenda Packet 08-14-1990 L a k e E I s i n o r e City C o u n ci Agenda 545 CHANEY STR�;JSDAYI%GII�JII4RE19JOOOL7DOSTRIMT BOARD ROOM POLICY OF THE CITY COUNCIL: "Only those items filed with the City Clerk' s Office by Noon, luesday, prior—Tb--tTe following Tuesday meeting, not requiring departmental investigation will be considered by the City Council at said meeting". CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENTS Note: Any person wishing to address City Council on any matter not on the Agenda, must complete a request form available at the speakers podium and submit it to the City Clerk prior to commencement of the meeting. (Comments limited to 3 minutes) . PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS A. Oath of Office - Planning Commissioners. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes a. City Council Meeting - July 10, 1990. Approve. b. City Council Meeting - July 24 , 1990. Approve. C. Planning Commission Meeting - July 18, 1990. Rec. & File. 2 . Building Activity Report - July, 1990. Rec. & File. 3 . Code Enforcement Activity Report - July, 199o• Rec. & File. 4. Structure Abatement Activity Report - July, 199o. Rec. & File. 5. Warrant List - July 31, 1990. Ratify. 5. Proclamation - Energy Awareness Month - October, Approve. 1990. 7 . New Council Policy - Reconsideration of Agenda Approve Items. Policy. 8 . Designation of Congestion Management Plan Agency - Adopt Res. Resolution No. 90-72 . No. 90-72 . 9. Traffic Signal Agreement with County of Riverside - Approve Lakeshore Drive/Machado Street. Agmt. 10. Traffic Control Resolution - Establishing Loading Adopt Res. Zone - Resolution 90-73 . No. 90-73 . PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 24, 1990 11. Resolution No. 90-74 - Relating to Placement of Adopt Res. Assessments in Connection with Assessment District No. 90-74 . No. 87--2 - Shoppers Square. 12. Resolution No. 90-75 - Relating to Placement of Adopt Res. Assessments in Connection with Assessment District No. 90-75. No. 89-1 - Summerhill Bridge Improvements. 13 . Legislative Advocate Agreement - Joe A. Gonsalves Approve & Son. Agmt. 14. Cooperative Agreement for Tract 19358. Approve Agmt. 15. Right of Entry Permit - Railroad Canyon Road. Accept Permit. 16. Railroad Canyon Road Deeds. Accept Deeds. 17. Resolution No. 90-76 postponing the Special Adopt Res. Election on Community Facilities District No. No. 90-76. 88-3. Z8 Resolution No. 90-77 making Application for Adopt Res. Initiation of Annexation Proceedings. No. 90-77. 19. Set public hearing date of August 28, 1990 for the following: a. Tentative Tract Mats 26142 - South Lake Estates Approve Joint Venture. Hearing Date. A request for approval of a 113 lot single- family subdivision on a 29.5 acre parcel. The subject property is located on the east side of Stoneman and the south side of the existing City Limits. b. Tentative Parcel Map 25717 - Brookstone Approve Development, Inc. Hearing A request for Tentative Parcel Map approval Date. to allow for the subdivision of 15.29 acres of land into eleven (11) lots ranging in size from 20, 080 net square feet to 2 .40 net acres. The subject property is located at the north- east corner of Silver and Flint Streets in the M-1 (Limited Manufacturing) Zoning District. c. Annexation No. 55 and Zone Change 90-7 - Approve Coastal Valle y Development. Hearing Date. A request to annex into the City of Lake Elsinore approximately 10.68 acres of land presently located within the County of Riverside and pre-zone subject property from County Rural Residential to C-2 (General Commercial) District. The subject property is located between Dexter Avenue to the northeast and Interstate 15 on the southwest. d. Zone Chancre 90-10 = George Alonai (Dexter Approve Armstrong. Hearing Date. A request for a zone change of three parcels (A.P. #374-071-001, 002 , 003) from R-2 .eAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 14, 1990 residential to R-3 residential to establish consistency with the current General Plan which designates the area as High Density Residential. These parcels are located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pottery and Langstaff Streets. PUBLIC HEARINGS 31. Conditional Use Permit 90-5 = Lake Elsinore Concur with Christian Fellowship. Planning An appeal of Planning Commission denial of a Commission. request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a church in an existing light industrial zoned building. 32 . Tentative Tract Map 25831, Zone Chancre 90-11 Approve and Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 - The Staff Recomm. Clurman Company. including Adoption of A request to approve Tentative Tract Map 25831 Ord. No. 900. for 195 lots, amend the Ramsgate Specific Plan to include this tract and a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan. 33 . Annexation No. 51 and Zone Chancre 89-13 = North Adopt Neg. Gate Downs JR. Bruce Kemper) . Dec. 90-38 ; Approve Annex. A request to annex 160 gross acres into the City #51 & Zone of Lake Elsinore and to pre-zone the site R-1 Change 89-13 ; (HPD) (Single-Family Residential-Hillside Adopt Res. Planned Development Overlay District) . The site No. 90-78 & is north of Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area and Adopt Ord. Greenwald Avenue, northwest of Canyon Lake and No. 901. southerly of Dorchester Lane. 34 . Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 - Lang Approve Beach Equities. Staff A request to create four (4) parcels, where Recomm. currently nine (9) exist. BUSINESS DISCUSSION ITEMS 51. City Allocation of Take of Occupied Stephen's Approve Kangaroo Rat Habitat Under the Interim Habitat Staff Conservation Plan. Resolution 90-79. Recomm. 52 . Business License Application. Consider A request for license to operate an ice cream Request. truck. BUSINESS ITEMS 53 . Second Reading - Ordinance No. 899 . Adopt Ord. Relating to the West Lake Elsinore Development No. 899. Agreement. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKy ELSINORE 545 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1990 CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Washburn at 7: 00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Winkler. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also prefsent were: City Manager Molendyk, Assistant City Manager Rogers, City Attorney Harper, Administrative Services Director Wood, Community Development Director Gunderman, Community Services Director Watenpaugh, Public Services Director Kirchner and City Clerk Kasad. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Washburn advised that those parties interested in Item #34 would be permitted to speak at that time, as it is a public hearing. Leon Strigotte, 216 Chaney Street, expressed concern with the Council 's support of the County-wide Park Assessment District issue. He commented on the assessments and fees already imposed on City residents and on upcoming increases. He suggested a better use of residents monies would be applied to assessments for increased and improved police and fire services. PRESENTATIONSLCEREMONIALS None. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 2, 3, 8, 12 MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. 1. The following Minutes were approved: a. June 26, 1990 - Regular City Council Meeting. b. July 2 , 1990 - Adjourned City Council Meeting. The following Minutes were received and ordered filed: C. June 20, 1990 - Lake Elsinore Planning Commission. AGENDA ITEM NG. . PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 4 . Ratified Warrant List for June 29 , 1990. 5. Rejected and referred to Claims Administrator the Claim submitted by Julie & Greg Wlodarczyk (CL #90-19) . 6. Approved Agreement with Riverside County Road Department for Repair of Lakeshore Drive - Wise Street to Dryden Street, and authorized the Mayor to sign. 7. Accepted Right-of-Way Dedication for Ulla Lane, as offered in Parcel Maps 14777 and 7362 and authorized the City Clerk to have same recorded. 9 . Accepted Grant Deeds for the Purpose of Street Right-of-Way Dedications as follow: Single Family Residence at 408 Lewis Street for a 2.5 foot alley dedication. Single Family Residence at 742 Mill Street for a 5 foot street dedication. Single Family Residence at 911 Pottery Street for a 2 . 5 foot alley dedication. Single Family Residence at 911 Pottery Street for a corner cutback dedication. Single Family Residence at 1305 Sumner Avenue for a 2 . 5 foot alley dedication. and authorized to City Clerk to record said documents. 10 . Approved Grant of Easement from City to EVMWD for Sewer Construction within Lot B of Tract 20705 , and authorized the City Clerk to have recorded. 11. Accepted Grant Deeds for the Purpose of Slope Easement Dedications as follow: 16601 Holborow Avenue for a 10 ' slope easement dedication. 16777 Holborow Avenue for a 10 ' slope easement dedication. 29590 Nichols Street for a 10 ' slope easement dedication. and authorized City Clerk to have same recorded. 13 . Accepted Quitclaim Deeds for Water Rights on Single Family Residences as follows: 321 Acacia Street from Robert Hall Cook 4109 Crestview Drive from John & Phyllis Schulz 211 Davis Street from Advent Builders, Inc. 313 Davis Street from James L. & Deborah Anne Cantrell 16801 Holborow Avenue from Claude Bob & Sharon Delao 16777 Holborow Avenue from Roger & Karen Ritzdorf 408 Lewis Street from Calvin Calister 742 Mill Street from Joseph Cornicelli & Kari Cooper 29590 Nichols Street from Glen & Betty Anne Burchfield 911 Pottery Street from Calvin Callister 312 Scrivener Street from Christopher Meece 1305 Sumner Avenue from Scot and Kristine Howard AGENDA ITEM NO.A PAGE OF PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 and authorized the City Clerk to have same recorded. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 2 . Code Enforcement Activity Re art - June. JL90. Mayor Washburn commented on the increasing amount of trash re-appearing around town. He suggested adoption of an "Soot, number for residents to report the location of any trash which has been dumped. Councilman Winkler commented on last year's Trashbusters Program and its success. Mayor Washburn also commented on the need to clean-up some commercial parking lots on Main Street. MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR JUNE, 1990. 3 . Structure Abatement Activity Report June, 1990 . Mayor Washburn commented on the necessity and success of this Program and suggested the use of the "800" number for reporting of structure abatement related concerns . MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE STRUCTURE ABATEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR JUNE, 1990 . 8 . Acceptance of Right-of-Way Deed for Grand Avenue. Councilman Buck questioned the time line for the Robb Road/Lakeshore Drive intersection. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the plan for that intersection had been approved and efforts to acquire the necessary right-of-way are underway. He further advised that stuctural design work should begin in a couple of weeks. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY STARKEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ACCEPT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEEDS FOR GRAND AVENUE FROM THE LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. 12 . An royal and Acceptance of Right-of-Wavy Dedication and Slope and Drainage Easement for Railroad Canyon Road. City Manager Molendyk suggested that video prepared by King Videocable relating to the Railroad Canyon Road Project be shown to update those councilmembers not present at the last meeting. The tape on Railroad Canyon Road was shown. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the videotape is for the most part still the most up to date information, however, the K-Rat permit has not yet been received. He suggested it might be received within the next two weeks. He further advised that in spite of this delay work on utilities, etc. are progressing. City Manager inquired whether there was someone the City could work with to expedite the permit. Staff explained that they have contacted all of the appropriate sources to no avail. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ACCEPT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD CANYON ROAD. AGENDA ITEM NO. CL. PAGE OF PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PUBLIC HEARINGS MAYOR WASHBURN SUGGESTED THAT COUNCIL BEGIN WITH PUBLIC HEARING #32 AND HOLD HEARING #31 LAST. COUNCIL CONCURRED. 32 . West Lake Elsinore Develo mentctre� ment. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE THE WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO JULY 24 , 1990. 33 . Conditional Use Fermit 90-5 - Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowshi . MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 TO AUGUST 14, 1990. 34 . Application for Additional Franchise - Jones Intercable of San Diego. City Attorney Harper detailed the purpose of the public hearing and the criteria to be considered in granting of an additional franchise. He detailed the materials presented to the City Council previously and at the Council table this evening. He also advised that three letters in support of King Videocable had been received. The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests other than those detailed by the City Attorney. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7 :23 p.m. asking those in favor of this item to speak. The following people spoke: Donnie Clarke, representing Jones Intercable, commented on the materials presented to Council this evening and presented a petition to the City Clerk for inclusion in the record. He addressed each of the Criteria detailed by the City Attorney as follows: Criteria #1 - Whether there will be significant positive or necrative impacts on the community being served. Mr. Clarke quoted the Federal Communications Commission Chairman saying, "Competition between two cable operators not old style regulation will create cable t.v. responsiveness and innovation, fiber optic networks hold the promise of providing business and government with a better electronic highway. It can deliver more communication services and choices" . He further commented on the need for competition to cause improved. service. Criteria ) 2 - Whether there will be an unreasonable adverse economic or aesthetic impact upon public or rip gate property within the area. Mr. Clarke commented that there would be no adverse economic impact due to the construction because of the required bonds for this work. He also commented that the aesthetic impact would be very minimal because the majority would be aerial construction, and they would be willing to provide appropriate shrubbery to camoflauge the pedestals. Criteria #_3 - Whether there will be unreasonable disruption or inconvenience to existing users_, or any adverse effect on future uses or utility poles, public easements, and the public AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 rights-of-way contrary to the intent of Section 767.5 of the Public Utilities Code. — Mr. Clarke advised that Jones Intercable had commissioned an independent study of the local plant; which found that in terms of available space for an additional cable television operator, less than 1% of the existing Edison and General Telephone poles would have any space problems, and further that in those problem areas the construction could easily be directed underground. Mr. Clarke further advised that with regard to disruption to existing users the engineering study shows that with proper care no disruption would be necessary during the construction of their system at all. As to disruption of traffic flow, again according to the study the majority of the underground areas are residential in nature and are away from the main throughways. Any disruption to automobile or pedestrian traffic flow in the busy commercial districts would be very minimal and he added that they would do construction at times when the traffic flow was the minimum. Even at night within the safety limitations. Criteria `4 - Whether the franchise Applicant has the technical and financial ability to perform. Mr. Clarke advised that Jones Intercable is the 9th largest cable operator in the Country,operating in 20 states and doing business since 1968 . He also advised that they currently service 1 .4 million subscribers and serve communities such as Oxnard, Walnut Valley, Lakewood, Palmdale, Lancaster, Industry City and San Diego, He stressed that their business is Cable Television and they are in no other side business, and detailed corporate statistics and new communities being pursued for franchises. the system unless someone would like some elaboration on it but He commented that he thinks it is clear that Jones has the qualifications both technical and financial to deliver and perform according to what is required. Criteria ±_:51 - Whether there is any impact on the franchising authority's interest in having universal cable service. Mr. Clarke advised that they had originally applied for a limited franchise for the new development areas, however the City had advised that under the existing ordinance, service to all residents would be required, and they are now willing to construct their plant to serve the entire City. He also commented on their ability to serve areas which have not previously been served. Criteria _6 - Whether other societal interests generally considered by franchising authorities will be met. Mr. Clarke commented that they are proud of their corporate citizenship in the communities they serve and are more than wiping for the Council to check their references in other communities . He detailed their involvement in public education and the Mind Extension University. He also detailed Galactic Radio. He also commented on their support of non-profit organizations, particularly the Special Olympics for which they have raised over one million dollars nationwide. Criteria A7 - Whether the operation of an additional cable AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF� PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10 , 1990 television system in the community is economically feasible. Mr. Clarke advised that according to their financial analysis, their operation in Lake Elsinore would be very feasible. He further advised that they would be spreading their management in Riverside County to cover all markets. He commented that due to the tremendous growth in this area, direct competition is very viable. Criteria #8 - Such other additional matters,_ both procedural and substantive, as the franchising authority may determine to be relevant. Mr. Clarke commented that they realize the City Council, has a difficult decision, however he assured Council that had the people of Lake Elsinore not been interested in an additional cable operator they probably would not be requesting the franchise. He reminded Council of the independent surveys taken in the Community and the telemarketing efforts undertaken. He summarized that they feel they can be a major asset to the Community and look forward to working with the City Council to build the City. Mayor Washburn requested other persons in favor of this franchise to speak, the following persons requested the option to answer questions on behalf of Jones Intercable later in the hearing: Mr. Ben Blackman Charles Gill Gary McDonald Albert McArthur, 226 E. Peck Street, advised that he had obtained 110 signature in favor of a second cable company, and detailed his discussions with the people he contacted. He suggested that second company might provide more sports channels, and supported the application for a second franchise. Mayor Washburn advised that requests to speak had been received supporting King Videocable. City Attorney Harper clarified that the issue is not whether people are in favor of King Videocable or not; the issue is whether or not there should be an additional franchise. Mayor Washburn requested those who wished to comment on the franchise application to speak. The following people spoke: Bill Moran, 939 Barbara Way, advised that he has been a King subscriber for seven years and while he has always been opposed to monopolies and unfair business advantages, he feels that is not the case here. He commented that they have served the area for fifteen years, installed the cable, dug the ditches and offered public broadcasting. He commented on their willingness to broadcast the parades, assist the Chamber of Commerce and the City. He expressed concern with having his front lawn dug up and a pedestal put in, as his is currently underground. George Alongi, 649 Mill Street, commented on the early competition in the City between markets and the current selection. He commented that the issue is not whether King Video provides good service or not, but the issue of providing a selection to the community. He expressed concern with refusing a company the right to serve the community. Vick Knight, 132 West Graham Avenue, advised that he and his AGENDA ITEM NO.__IjJL L_ PAGE SQ"_OF- a'r PAGE SEVEN - CITY -COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 family have been fans of King Video for nine years and that he is very impressed with the community programming that they have provided. He detailed the civic events, parades, educational activities, community forums, telethon and meetings which King Video covers. He advised that this is only the second community in the State where the local cable'-system has put on a United Way Telethon, and that he is pleased with the recognition the Community has given King Video with the Pac Man Award. He summarized by objecting to the request for an additional franchise. Pete Vanderhagen, resident of Canyon Lake, advised that he represents a former Board of Director and member of the Canyon Lake P.O.A. , as such he commented on the credibility problem which existed in Canyon Lake a few years ago and King Video's efforts to increase communication, improve service and get the problems resolved. Mr. Vanderhagen also advised that he is an educator and has been involved in instructional television for 20 years working with PBS Stations, cable companies and broadcasters around the country; he also detailed the educational programming which has been offered by King Video in the past. He concluded by commenting on the commitment of King Video to the Community and their willingness to experiment and try new channels of information and be a good corporate citizen. Sonja Wilson, 21330 Waite Street at present and 30402 Jernigan Street previously, commented that she has subscribed to King Videocable since it first came to the valley having been a resident for twenty-four years. She commented on the variety of channels, good service, and good quality. She detailed a recent problem which required re-wiring of her connection to the system. She commented on the public forums, telethon and other community services; and on the unprejudicial hiring and service practices of King Video. She concluded that King Videocable has done a good job and provides service to the entire community. Sara Coleman, 21009 Grand Avenue, Wildomar, advised that she was speaking as a private citizen and a non-subscriber to cable television. She advised that while she believes in private enterprise and equal opportunities she also believes that necessitates equal responsibility. She also advised that she undertook a survey of her own with very different results from those portrayed and commented that a survey is only as effective as the questions asked. Her questions found that most people are very satisfied with the existing level of service. She commented that she is proud of the existing company and its service and dedication to community and suggested that only one franchise be maintained. Alan Baldwin, 16496 Lash, commented that he has been in Lake Elsinore since 1966 and in his experience King Video has never said no to anything. He further commented that they have pushed the Community to increase their use of the cable system for public programs, including anything that could create community involvement and community access. He commented that only bad could come from a new franchise opportunity for a new operator in that it would be very difficult to keep the present system economical . Steve Brown, Brookstone Development, commented that in their 15 years of experience in this Community building homes and shopping centers, King Video has been a part of their growth supplying cable services to most of their units . He further commented it would be nuisance to have two pedestals coming up in front of all of the homes because they are always working AGENDA ITEM NO. • PAGE OF PAGE EIGHT - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10 , 1990 to cover up utilities for aesthetic reasons. He expressed concern: that another franchise couldn't help but cut into King Video ' s profit structure and the City would come up on the short end of the stick. Norm Nichols, 32385 Macy Street, advised that he has been-in Lake Elsinore for sixteen years and his level of service has not been as -good as the comments preceding his, and commented that in thirteen years of cable service he has had "watchable" cable 50% of the time. He expressed concern that King Video has been the only cable service available during that time. He commented that he must not be the only one with problems considering the number of repair trucks around town. He ... finally commented that he would like to see another cable company whether it is Jones or someone else. Karen Snyder, 150 N. Pennsylvania St, Lake Elsinore, commented that she has been a customer of King Videocable for eight years and is a very satisfied customer. She further commented on being contacted by Jones Intercable and the manner in which they asked questions relating to double the channels for the same rate. She expressed her support of King Video for their willingness-.to-grow and. work _with the Community and employ many of the local residents. She also expressed her confusion with Jones Intercable's original request to provide cable in the new development areas and their new proposal to provide it to the entire City. Tom Thomas, Vice President and General Manager of King Videocable, 556 Birch Street, Lake Elsinore, commented on his pride in this Community and its residents, and with being the second General Manager of King in the sixteen years they have been in. the City. He stressed King Videocable concern with continuity in its service and its employees, and detailed the years of service of many of them. He detailed the programs they have covered and provided for the past sixteen years and showed a. videotape further detailing the projects in which they have become involved. Ed Houston, President, King Videocable, 333 Dexter Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, advised Council that they are a solely owned subsidiary of King Broadcasting Company. He detailed the annual gross revenues of King Video and Jones Intercable and compared assets and holdings and contributions of the two companies. Barry Johnson, 17380 Lakeshore Drive, commented on his difficulty in being connected to the King Videocable system when he moved here. He detailed his attempts over approximately one and one half months time. He also commented that they are under staffed and not able to hire additional personnel. He finally commented that he definitely felt another franchise should be granted. Ben Blackman, General Manager for Jones Intercable Operations in Southern California, commented that while he is impressed with Mr. Thomas, he felt the issue was to grant a franchise to Jones Intercable. He requested that the discussion get back on track. He further commented that good service is not the question, but Jones Intercable is interested in a franchise in the community of Lake Elsinore. Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 8 : 37 p.m. and requested comments from staff. City Attorney Harper reminded Council that in addition to the public testimony there were formal written presentations from AGENDA ITBM 0. PAGE OF PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 Jones Intercable and King Videocable. Councilman Winkler requested that City Attorney Harper clarify criteria number seven with regard to economic feasibility. He inquired whether this meant whether or not we could support two cable systems or whether or not it is f�easible-for Uones. City Attorney Harper advised that he would interpret the language to mean whether or not it was economically feasible for the Community, as opposed to the other cable provider. Councilman Winkler addressed criteria number one and six. He commented that one of the last comments was .that this Aid not address whether King Video was a good business and community service, but whether a new franchise would have a possible adverse economic impact on King; if it does adversely affect King, some of the community services provided could be ;_ reduced. He felt this might have an effect on number one and six. City Attorney Harper commented that in the sense.-It was stated, it would be less an evaluation of King Video and more whether or not the type of service the community is presently receiving would continue with the impact of an addition franchise. _ Councilman Winkler commented from that standpoint he has concerns with criteria one and six. He also commented on the services provided by King Videocable that are beyond the requirements of their franchise and their involvements in the community. He expressed concern with the construction required for the additional system and its impact on the community and its residents. He commented that with the current rate of growth the residents are subject to construction constantly and any increase would impact the community. Councilman Dominguez advised that he was here when King Video first came to the valley and they have consistently provided good services to the community and worked to get the local residents involved. He expressed concern with the potential of shortened profits and shortened services . Councilman Starkey inquired of Mr. Clarke why his company had just recently become interested in the City of Lake Elsinore. Mr. Clarke advised that they are just now getting interested in Lake Elsinore and Western Riverside County because of the current growth in the area. He also advised that they have an ongoing search throughout the Country for new business opportunities. Councilman Starkey also inquired how Jones Intercable could offer between 70 and 80 channels here when they do not provide that many channels in any of the other cities they serve. Mr. Clarke questioned which cities were meant by this questions. Councilman Starkey suggested San Diego or Lancaster as an example. Mr. Clarke advised that in San Diego they provide the same type of service they would supply to Riverside County, which is a five hundred and fifty megahertz system and with eighty channel capacity. Mr. Clarke further advised that they would initially program fifty-four here with potential for seventy seven channels. Councilman Starkey detailed the type of community service provided by King Video and questioned an example of the type of community service Jones provides to the City of San Jacinto. Amy Vaninstill , representing Jones Intercable, advised that they support the San Jacinto Potato Festival . AGENDA ITEMS NO. • PAGE.,,„_O� PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 '" She explained that in San Jacinto they have just begun _ buidling the system and currently service approximately 300 subscribers. She further explained that they support the Potato Festival financially, and the San Jacinto Business Association annual Christmas party for disadvantaged youth. She commented on the limitations in their-mtSi:11nky-,tc -=%'- contribute to charities when their subscription level- Is just beginning to build up. She commented on the .Special Olympics efforts Jones Intercable is involved in, Mr. Clarke commented on the disadvantage of not having been able to show the City it's work. He also commented on -p community involvement award received by Jones:-lntercabl,e. w- Mayor Washburn questioned a copy of the Jones Intercable 1989 annual report that shows a loss of twenty-four million' dollars, and that the company only owns 43%..-:of the company assets. Mr. Clarke had no information on this document. Councilman Buck questioned the proposed service level and the costs presented, specifically how they could provide the same level of service afforded San Diego at a cost $17.95, when the quote here is $14.50 per month. Mr. Clarke explained that this figure is based on the market for the --area; and further clarified that this area is a very competitive market for cable services. Councilman Buck inquired, as professionals in the cable field, how many companies they feel Lake Elsinore can support. Mr. Clarke indicated he did not know. Councilman Buck further questioned the company's willingness to provide the level of community services offered by King Videocable. Mr. Clarke advised that they are not only willing to offer that, but considerably more channels and services. Councilman Buck expressed concern with the possibility of a "Price war" causing the level of service to drop because the companies cannot provide what we currently have. Mr. Clarke suggested that the community would welcome a price war. Mayor Washburn questioned Jones Intercable' s license to install cable. Mr. Clarke confirmed that they are licensed. Mayor Washburn further questioned some of the statistics relating to the ability to support another system. Mr. Clarke also reiterated his information based on locally conducted services. Councilman Starkey asked if the franchise were to be granted, where would Jones begin installation. Mr. Clarke suggested that it would be parallel in the existing areas and the new areas. Councilman Starkey further questioned their - willingness to provide service in the downtown area. Mr. Clarke confirmed that they would cover this area. MOVED BY WINKLER TO DENY THE APPLICATION. City Attorney Harper requested that Council 's motion include specific findings to support the motion. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DENY THE APPLICATION BASED ON CRITERIA ONE, TWO, SIX, SEVEN AND EIGHT. 35 . Surface Mining and Reclamation Ordinance. Ordinance No. 897 . Community Development Director Gunderman detailed the purpose AGENDA ITEM N0. PAGE 4F PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1'��90 of this Ordinance and the necessary review process.;_;,,, The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at -9:07 p.m. asking those in favor of this ordinance to speak:; -Wv*•�Onel-ispbke. Mayor Washburn asked those in opposition to speak. :Hearing no one the public hearing was closed at 9:07 MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY STARKEY TO ADOPT 0RDINANCE 'NO. 497: ORDINANCE NO. 897 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE IMPLEMENTING-THE SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1975.'- -' UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE _. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 9: 15 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:20 P.M. 31. Northwest Sewer Project Assessment District 86-1. Resolution Nos. 90-32 thru 90-39. City Attorney Harper explained the prior consideration of this item and the continuance of the public hearing to allow for redesign and bid of the project. He advised that changes in design were made and new bids have been received. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the bids were approximately $1 million less than the first bids. He explained that the sewer line work low bidder was MSC Constructors and the pump station low bidder was Colich & Sons. He also detailed recommended deletions or 0 assessments. The City Clerk reported that two written comments were received requesting deletion of Zone 2 from the district from Lawrence Cartier and Dennis Spar (Dura Construction) . Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 9:26 p.m. asking those in favor of Assessment District 86-1 to speak. The following people spoke: Fred Crowe, Butterfield Engineering, the Keith Companies, 565 Chaney Street, advised that he is in favor of the proposed district and stressed the necessity of its improvements. He advised that he had received a letter from Len Vierra of Rancon and detailed the concerns of that letter, but commented the existing report would appear to be acceptable. City Attorney Harper clarified the current proposed benefit spread. Dennis Spar, Dura Construction, concurred with staff's recommendation for removal of Zone 2 from the District, and AGENDA f"i Clvi �.�. 1 ,a�• PAGE O PAGE TWELVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, IM 0 = questioned the pay back for that area. City-41Attorney ,Harper explained the reimbursement requirements arid` ressed-tliat the final costs would not be locked in by this approach. Mr. Spar further commented on his understanding of the reimbursement with the water district. Neil Cleveland, 28465 Front Street, Temecu1*a-,1-explained the promise for reimbursement of .costs he and another developer had incurred in the placement of the existira_sewer 1 ,es. He expressed concern that those property owners were now : requesting to be deleted from the district 'arid •-essentially not paying for the improvements they originally-­at_rreed participate in. Steve Brown, Brookstone- Development, further-Voiced the concerns expressed by Mr. Cleveland. He also commended staff for their work in obtaining the re-bid. .•:­4_;1,&z-. •.:a Jonathan Friedman, Long Beach Equities, requ .ted�,�� clarification of the sewer main refund figure, which had not changed with the rebid process. Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at- 9:44 p.m.- .-- Steve Hassett, NBS Lowrey, Project Engineers- explained that the cost questioned by Mr. Friedman had not yet been re-adjusted, but would be a reduced figure..- -­Councilman Dominguez questioned the parcel owned by E.Z. Products and what the recommendation would be. City Attorney Harper advised that the -engineer's report had included assessment on this property in that it will receive benefit, even though they have a septic system. Council discussion relating to original conditions of approval of E.Z. Products and the benefit from this district. Mayor Washburn expressed concern with Zone 2 being dropped from the District. Councilman Buck advised that due to the information provided by Mr. Cleveland, he no longer would support the deletion of Zone 2 . After Council discussion, it was decided that Zone 2 should be left in and City Attorney Harper recommended adoption of the proposed resolutions with adoption of Resolution No. 90-36 subject to respreading of assessments pursuant to modified engineer's report. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NOS . 90-32 THRU 90-39; WITH RESOLUTION^ NO. 90-36 ADOPTED SUBJECT TO RESPREADING OF ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE MODIFIED ENGINEER'S REPORT: RESOLUTION NO. 90-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING CERTAIN CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE ENGINEER'S "REPORT" IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, OVERRULING AND DENYING PROTESTS AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. AGENDA ITEM NO. • PAGE OF PAGE THIRTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 RESOLUTION .NO. --90-34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA), APPROVING AND PROVIDING FOR CONTRIBUTION TO PAY CERTAIN COSTS AND EXPENSES IN AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-35 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE-.ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AGREEMENTS. RESOLUTION NO. 90-35 i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT, ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT. RESOLUTION NO... 90-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS BY CITY FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 90-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. . 90-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBING A CERTAIN PROJECT; MAKING A STATEMENT OF THE PUBLIC USE FOR WHICH CERTAIN PROPERTIES TO BE TAKEN AND REFERENCE TO STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN; DESCRIBING THE GENERAL LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID PROPERTY TO BE TAKEN; DECLARING FINDINGS AN DETERMINATIONS ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR SAID PROPERTY; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO BE COMMENCED IN SUPERIOR COURT TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY INCLUDING APPLICATION FOR POSSESSION OF SAID PROPERTY PRIOR TO JUDGMENT; AND MAKING OTHER DETERMINATIONS. BUSINESS/DISCUSSION ITEMS 51. Revised Central Business District Ordinance. Ordinance No. 898 . City Manager Molendyk advised that this ordinance was the result of a request from the City Council to be able to have the final selection of the Design Review Committee members. George Alongi expressed concern with this ordinance in that it will cause the priorities of the committee members to be similar to those of the Council priorities. He stressed the need to maintain this as a separate organization. MOVED BY DOMINGUEZ, SECONDED BY BUCK TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 898: ORDINANCE NO. 898 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, AMENDING CHAPTER 17. 11. 050 REGARDING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS OVERLAY DISTRICT. AGENDA ITEM PAGE, ,OF PAGE FOURTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: "COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: -COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE BUSINESS ITEMS 52. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 890. Relating to the Alberhill Ranch Associates Development Agreement. _. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 890: ORDINANCE NO. 890 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH ALBERHILL RANCH ASSOCIATES. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 53 . Second Reading - Ordinance No. 896. Relating .to the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Specific Plan - McArthur/Glen Group. Continued from June 26, 1990. MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY BUCK TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 896: ORDINANCE NO. 896 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING THE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO (MCARTHUR/GLEN GROUP) . UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: WASHBURN CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Molendyk requested a joint executive session of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency to discuss matters of potential litigation. AGENDA ITEM NO. A • PAGE.,OF PAGE FIFTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Buck commended staff on the July 4th program. Councilman Dominguez thanked the Chamber of Commerce for the July 4th Fireworks. Councilman Starkey reminded the Community of the requirement to obtain a permit for a yard sale. He expressed concern with the increased traffic on Joy Street between Riverside Drive and Machado Street and advised that staff is currently addressing the problem. He further advised that he has received may complaints about the need to clean up the downtown area, including the Day Worker situation, as soon as possible. Mayor Washburn commented on the Sheriff's Department successful effort to stop businesses in the valley from selling alcohol to minors and listed the businesses that have been cited. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 10: 12 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 10:14 P.M. CLOSED SESSION THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION AT 10: 14 P.M. TO DISCUSS EVMWD AND LAKE MANAGEMENT LITIGATION. THE CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 10:34 P.M. NO ACTION TAKEN. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10: 35 P.M. GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO. ..� PAGE JaZ OF � MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 545 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1990 CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Washburn at 7: 00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Buck. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Molendyk, Assistant City Manager Rogers, City Attorney Harper, Administrative Services Director Wood, Community Development Director Gunderman, Community Services Director Watenpaugh, Public Services Director Kirchner and City Clerk Kasad. PUBLIC COMMENTS I. John Empson, 32825 Macy Street, read the following letter: My name is John Empson, I reside at 32825 Macy Street, Lake Elsinore, California. I 'm here tonight to register my complaint regarding the City Council ' s method of letting people speak at public hearings. Open discussion can be a valuable avenue for the members of the City Council. My problem is that on many discussions, people from Riverside County voice their pro's and con's and I Feel they should not be permitted to speak on City matters. If you permit everyone to speak, they should clearly identify themselves if they are residents of the City of Lake Elsinore or the County of Riverside. I have in my possession, copies of the petition and letters AGAINST General Plan Amendment 90-1 and Zone Change 90-2 . The results I came up with on the petition are: 31% city residential 58% Riverside County residential 1 letter residential My own letter (not included in the copies provided to me) Letter in favor - 5 from real estate firms and/or developers. The same problem occurred at your public hearing on a Cable TV application. I am determined to follow up this matter with the Grand Jury Chairman in Riverside, CA in the near future. Thank you, John J. Empson (He submitted the letter to the City Clerk. ) AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE...,...OF PAGE TWO -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24 , 1990 2 . Kim Quon, Vice President of the Downtown Business Association, 117 S . Main Street commented on Item #53 of this Agenda relating to Ordinance No. 898 . He expressed concern with the City Council choosing representatives for the Downtown Design Review Committee for the Association. He also expressed concern that the D.B.A. was not contacted prior to consideration of this Ordinance to work out a viable alternative with the City Council. He encouraged denial of this ordinance. 3 . George Alongi, 649 Mill Street, Secretary of the D.B.A. , also _ expressed concern with the adoption of the proposed Ordinance No. 898 . He commented that it would not build a good relationship between the City and the D.B.A. in that it does not allow them to make decisions affecting them. PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS None. CONSENT CALENDAR The following item was pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item No. 12 MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. 1. The following Minutes were received and ordered filed: a. Planning Commission Meeting - July 5, 1990 . 2 . Received and ordered filed the Animal Control Activity Report for June, 1990. 3 . Received and ordered filed the Building Activity Report for June, 1990 . 4 . Received and ordered filed the Investment Report for June 30, 1990 . 5 . Ratified the Warrant List for July 16 , 1990. 6 . Approved the C.D.B.G. Urban County/City Agreement and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the necessary documents. 7 . Approved the Memorandum of Understanding on a Waste Generation Study with the County of Riverside and the Cities of Riverside County and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the M.O.U. S. Approved Memorandum of Understanding with the Public Employees Association of Riverside County, Inc. for fiscal year 1990-91 and adapted a new appendix "C" to the personnel rules and regulations to reflect the cost of living adjustments applicable to all City employees. 9 . Adopted Resolution No. 90-66 -- Making Preliminary Findings, Directions and Designating Persons to Perform Duties related to Assessment District 90-2 (Tuscany Hills - Phase I) . RESOLUTION NO. 90-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, MAKING PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND DIRECTIONS AND DESIGNATING PERSONS TO PERFORM AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE,.. OF PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 DUTIES RELATED TO ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 90-2 (TUSCANY HILLS - PHASE I. 10. Adopted Resolution No. 90-67 - Requesting the Tax Collector to Place Assessments on the Bills of Properties in -Assessment District No. 89-1 . Summerhill Bridge Improvements. RESOLUTION N0. 90-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA TO PLACE ASSESSMENTS ON THE BILLS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES. . 11. Adopted Resolution No. 90-68 - Requesting the Tax Collector to Place Assessments on the Bills of Properties in Assessment District-No. 87-2 ,-. Shoppers Square. RESOLUTION NO. 90-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA REQUESTING THE TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA TO PLACE ASSESSMENTS ON THE BILLS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES. 13 . Accepted Notice of Completion for the 1990 Asphalt Resurfacing Project. 14 . Accepted Release of Deferral Agreement for 507 Pottery Street (APN#374-051-012) . 15. Approved public hearing date of August 14, 1990 for the following: a. Zone Change 89-13 and Annexation #51 _ John Crehan. A request for annexation and pre-zoning that will permit low density residential (0-6 dwelling units per acre) to be planned on a 161. 88 acre site. The project is located in the Southwest quarter of Section 27, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, off Greenwald at Northgate of Canyon Lake. b. Tentative Financial Parcel NAR 25638 - Long Beach E uities. A request to approve Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25636 which subdivides 251 acres into four parcels, for financial purposes. The project is located on all four quadrants of the interchange of I-15 and Nichols Road. c. A Rublic, hearing to a_ doAt the Stebhens ' Kan aroo Rat Mitigation Fee Ordinance in accordance with the Short-term Habitat Date. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 12 . New Council _Policy = Relating to Reconsideration of Agenda Items. Mayor Washburn explained the intent of the proposed policy. Councilman Buck expressed concern that this policy would require a majority Council vote to allow for reconsideration. He questioned the ability to reschedule an item because new information has been uncovered. Councilman Dominguez concurred with Councilman Buck and suggested that the current process is working and shouldn't be changed. AGENDA ITEM NO.__LoJL_ PAGE.-3—OF PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 City Manager Molendyk commented that the current process is strictly an informal policy which allows any Councilmember to agendize an item. Mayor Washburn inquired whether the time frame in the policy was too prohibitive. Councilman Buck suggested that any time limit could be too restrictive depending on the circumstances. Councilman Winkler commented on the intent of this policy to remove .staff from the loop and give them a specific direction With regard to reconsideration. He suggested that the 7 day limitation be changed to a timely basis. City Attorney Harper commented that would normally be 10 days and clarified that a Councilmember could bring back any item. Councilman Winkler suggested a 30 day limitation. Councilman Buck expressed concern with setting a time limit at all. City Attorney Harper recommended that a time limit be set to clarify timely for staff. Council discussion ensued. MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND REQUEST THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REVIEW AND REWRITE . PUBLIC HEARINGS 31. General Plan Amendment 90-1 and Zone Change 90-2 - Pentagon Develor=ent,Hunsaker. Continued from June 26, 1990 . Community Development Director Gunderman detailed the prior meetings and considerations of this project and detailed the Council 's alternatives . City Attorney Harper further commented on the options available to Council with regard to density and zoning. Community Development Director Gunderman further explained that the zoning is not as critical at this point as the General Plan Designation. The City Clerk reported no additional written comments to those previously submitted and detailed. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7 :31 p.m. asking those in favor of this item to speak. The following people spoke: Bill Allen, applicant, representing Pentagon Development, 16377 Lakeshore Drive, advised that they are looking forward to resolving the problems with this project, and briefly summarized the previous considerations. Bob McClellan, 31000 Airway Avenue, Suite 123, Costa Mesa, advised that he as been one of the property owners of this site since 1984. He explained that they originally held 107 acres at this location, and the projects that have already been approved or constructed. He also explained the difficulty in developing the remaining portion of the property and detailed its limitations. Melanie Fitch, 31000 Airway Avenue, commented on her review of the citizens concerns relating to this project, and detailed the correspondence received and questionnaires completed. AGENDA ITEM NO.-�.L PAGE OF—M— PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 Ed Fitch, 4600 Birch, Suite 2900, Newport Beach, detailed prior considerations and work with the City for the other developments on the property and explained the original thinking with regard to the commercial potential of this property. He explained the access and circulation limitations of the property. Paul Salata, Costa Mesa, advised that he is also a general partner in the ownership of this property and that he has discussed this property and its best use extensively with the City. He detailed the storm drain and road improvements which they have worked with the City to provide. He reminded the Council that the original Staff recommendation for this issue was approval, but the Planning Commission recommended denial. Mayor Washburn asked those in opposition to speak. The following people spoke: Steve Fischer, 15701 Shadow Mountain, advised that the residents of this area have met several times with Mr. Allen to work out a compatible project. He further advised that there are serious concerns with traffic circulation and the density of the proposed project. He commented that the residents could accept condominiums more readily than apartments at a limited density. Lou Prijatel, explained the opposition to this project that has been expressed by the neighborhood. He also explained that the residents were willing to discuss R-1 or R-2 , but are completely opposed to R-3 . He advised that the residents are concerned with obtaining parks, traffic signals and a site for the hang gliders. Other residents speaking in opposition on the basis of traffic concerns, density,vacancy rate of nearby apartments and the need for parks were: Jeanne Fischer, 15701 Shadow Mountain John Empson, 32825 Macy Street Barbara Nation, Laguna Street Robert Neeson, 33665 Macy Street Judy Lipold, 33063 Macy Street Bob Lincoln, 33182 Lime Street Joe Sanchez , 15631 Laguna Larry Exert, 15660 Lake Terrace Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 8 : 25 p.m. Mayor Washburn commented that the commercial aspect might not be productive due to the related traffic problems, etc. and concurred that the condo approach might be better. Councilman Buck questioned the ability of Council to restrict the density within R-3 Zoning. Community Development Director Gunderman explained the the density should be handled under the General Plan. City Attorney Harper elaborated on this point explaining that the density could be restricted, but the type of ownership could not be set by Council. Councilman Buck further questioned the ability to zone the property R-2 and allow for increases if appropriate. City Attorney Harper advised that this could not be done because the density limit of R-2 is 12 units per acre. Councilman Winkler questioned the comment that commercial development is inappropriate for this property, and inquired if growth in the area would make it appropriate at a later date. Mr. McClellan explained the limitations of the market AGENDA ITEM -16t- PAGEE OF-U— PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24 , 1990 area for this site. Councilman Starkey inquired if this piece of land was an oversight. Mr. McClellan explained that it occurred in he process of making the other projects marketable. Councilman Winkler commented that in his opinion the increased growth in five years might make the commercial use of this property feasible. He also inquired whether Commercial_vould generate more traffic than an R-3 use. Community Development Director Gunderman advised that Commercial would generate considerably more traffic than R-3. Councilman Winkler further commented on -the private property ownership potential and the constraints of traffic circulation around the lake. He also questioned the progress in securing parks in this area. Mr. Fischer advised that the residents have been meeting with staff and have identified some potential locations. Councilman Winkler suggested that this item be held for the revised General Plan. He questioned the traffic signal at Grand Avenue and Ortega--Highway. Staff advised that the design has been budgeted for the signal and there is an informal agreement with Caltrans for 2/3rds of the signal cost. Councilman Dominguez advised that he has reviewed this project since the original commercial designation, but has reservations with regard to the traffic impact on the area. He also commented that it if people are looking for a small town atmosphere this is not it. Further discussion with regard to ownership options and density ensued. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 1 WITH WASHBURN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO DENY THIS REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT WITH CONSIDERATION OF THE AREA TO RETURN WITH THE ENTIRE GENERAL PLAN. 32 . City-Wide Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District. Resolution No. 90-69 - Confirming Assessments. Public Services Director Kirchner detailed the process for annual confirmation of the assessments -in this District. The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 9: 17 p.m. asking those in favor of this item to speak. No one spoke. Mayor Washburn asked those in opposition to speak. Hearing no one the public hearing was closed at 9 : 18 p.m. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 90-69 : RESOLUTION NO. 90-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LEVY AFTER FORMATION OF A DISTRICT. 33 . West Lake Elsinore Development Agreement. AGENDA ITEM NO.— s n PAGE.-( --OF AL- PAGE SEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24 , 1990 Ordinance No. 899. Community Development Director Gunderman detailed this agreement and its deal points. He advised that this agreement pertains to approximately _1, 600 homes. He recommended that if the Council decides to approve the agreement, it should be approval in concept pending consideration of the Funding and Acquisition Agreement. The City Clerk reported no .written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 9 : 24 p.m. asking those interested in this agreement to speak. The following person spoke: Jeff Robinson, attorney for the developers, offered to answer any questions from Council . Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 9 :24 p.m. Councilman Buck questioned the Funding and Acquisition Agreement, the park property, the $75, 000 per acre figure and the fire station. ,.cCommunity Development Director Gunderman clarified the issues raised by Councilman Buck. Councilman Winkler commented on what was originally a 30 acre park and has now become a 15 acre park. He suggested that more improvements should be available through the Development Agreement process. - He expressed concern that this is not an adequate amount of park space for the number of homes. He also questioned the school site. Community Development Director Gunderman advised that it would be designated at the final map stage. Councilman Dominguez expressed concern with the current park size and the fire station requirements and with the apparent reduction in the deal points of the agreement. Councilman Starkey further commented on the reduction- in the original 30 acre park. Mayor Washburn highlighted his concerns including Page 36 of 140 regarding the intent in the acquisition and the relation of the land dedication. He also questioned page 38 of 140 regarding the Mello-Roos District and fulfillment of the entire obligation to assist if provisions of financing the park & recreation, fire protection, storm drains, street improvements and traffic control. He also questioned the ability to condition Mr. Dale' s project in the future for additional open space of recreation facilities. On page 39 of 140, line 3 , he questioned the requirement to "explore and agree" on alternate funding sources. City Attorney Harper clarified that the agreement would require that the City explore the options in good faith, but not necessarily agree. Mayor Washburn suggested that page 51 of 140 be modified with regard to the time frames. He recommended the following: Tentative Map or Tentative Parcel Map - 120 days Final Subdivision Map - 60 days Amendment to this Agreement - 60 days Design Review - 60 days Use Permit - 60 days Building Permit - 60 days On page 55 of 140 he questioned the annual review and the burden of responsibility for this process . City Attorney Harper advised that in reality this was a shared AGENDA ITEM NO, j.�. PAGE OF ,,,,,, PAGE EIGHT - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24 , 1990 responsibility, and any costs incurred would be minimal. On page 57 of 140 he requested that the City be notified of any assignment or transfer of the project. City Attorney Harper advised that this was inherent in the processes that would be required to release -the current developers and allow assumption of the project. Mayor Washburn requested clarification of the parks issues. Community Development Director Watenpaugh clarified the McVicker Canyon Park Site, showed conceptual plan of 26 acres with 15 usable acres. Also showed plan of another site in the Centex development consisting of 3 . 92 acres. negotiated adjacent to Terra Cotta School. Tract Map 24624 requires that it be a turn-key park and that is not specifically in the development agreement. He also detailed the proposed funding program for the parks. Councilman Buck questioned the 26 acre park site,and whether the City would be paying for the 26 acre total site or only the 15 acre usable portion. Community Services Director Watenpaugh explained the Quimby Act provisions allowing for acceptance of dedication -of land-or payment of fee with credit based on appraisal or agreed upon price. Councilman Winkler commented on the additional leverage available through the development agreement process. He questioned the timing of the McVicker Park and a desirable completion date. He suggested limitation on the Certificates of occupancy if it is not- completed by the deadline. Further Council discussion ensued on the acquisition, timing and development of the proposed Parks and the benefit of a development agreement. Mike Allar, representing Centex Homes, 3190 Chicago, Riverside, explained the currently proposed parks and the limitation of the park sites. He further explained that the current plan is the same approved with the Centex Tract Map. Mayor Washburn commented that the work with the developers has been favorable and concurred that some credit should be given in that regard. John Mandrell, Keith Companies, further commented on the work of the developers and on the need for credit based on the off-site improvements to be provided. He also commented on the need to spread the costs as fairly as possible based on the total costs. Mayor Washburn stressed his belief that the fire station and parks should not be part of the costs assessed on the individual property owners. Councilman Winkler questioned the current standard for parks per 1, 000 residents. Community Services Director Watenpaugh advised that the current standard is 5 acres per 1, 000, which the City has currently satisfied. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT IN CONCEPT AND MODIFY PAGE 36, PAGE 51 AND PAGE 55 AS DISCUSSED AND ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 899 : ORDINANCE NO. 899 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPERS (CENTEX REAL ESTATE, LA LAGUNA ESTATES, MARINITA AGENDA ITEM NO.. a�• PAGE. OF . PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, PREMIER HOMES, MEEKER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, TOMICH/JONES, TORN RANCH, AND GOLDEN STATE DEVELOPMENT) . UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS : BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: - NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: - NONE _ City Attorney Harper advised that in connection with this agreement, he has been notified that the election will now need to be postponed to August 15, 1990. He requested that the resolution be added to the agenda. MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADD RESOLUTION 90-71 TO THE AGENDA. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 90-71. RESOLUTION NO. 90-71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE POSTPONING A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-3 TO SUBMIT TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT THE COMBINED PROPOSITION OF LEVYING A SPECIAL TAX, ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT, AND INCURRING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. 34 . Recovery of Expenditures for the Abatement of Weeds , Rubbish Refuse and Dirt. Community Development Director Gunderman explained this program and the process for the recovery of expenditures. The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 10: 20 p.m. asking those in favor of this item to speak. No one spoke, Mayor Washburn asked those in opposition to this item to speak. Hearing no one, the public hearing was closed at 10:20 p.m. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONFIRM THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT AND AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR TO PLACE AN ASSESSMENT WITH THE COUNTY TAX ASSESSORS OFFICER TO RECOVER ALL PERTINENT COSTS AND INTEREST ACCRUED THEREON. BUSINESS DISCUSSION ITEMS 51. Time Extension Request for Tentative Parcel Map 23381 - Camelot Properties . Community Development Director Gunderman addressed a letter received from Camelot Properties and detailed the current progress with the necessary improvements. He also suggested modification of the timeline for completion of all work. Leonard O ' Byrne, Camelot Properties, -advised that he would have no problem with the 30 day review period. He also A09NDA IT9M NO.16 Ad QF PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 advised that the landscaping work would begin on July 25, but he is concerned with the timing for removal of the tanks in that he is unsure of the County's processing of the permits. Mayor Washburn advised that he would have no problem with a 90 day extension. City Manager Molendyk inquired how long the County would take to process the permit. Building Manager Shear estimated 30 to 45 days for final approval. Councilman Buck questioned the delays for the widening of Malaga. Mr. O'Byrne advised that he is ready to proceed, but he would like to discuss with the new owners of the Casino prior to beginning work. MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO AUGUST 28, 1990. BUSINESS ITEMS 52 . Second Reading - Ordinance No. 897 . Relating to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 897: ORDINANCE NO. 897 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE IMPLEMENTING THE SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1975. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES : COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS : NONE 53 . Second Reading - Ordinance No. 898 . Relating to the Central Business Overlay District. MOVED BY DOMINGUEZ, SECONDED BY BUCK TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 898: ORDINANCE NO. 898 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, AMENDING CHAPTER 17. 11. 050 REGARDING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS OVERLAY DISTRICT. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES : COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WASHBURN NOES : COUNCILMEMBERS: WINKLER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: DONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 54 . Planning Commission Appointments. Mayor Washburn advised that he and Mayor Pro Teti Starkey had interviewed the five applicants for the two Planning Commission seats. He thanked all applicants for their AGENDA ITEM NO. • PAGE OF PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 interest and recommended Jeff Brown and Tony Gilenson be reappointed for terms continuing to June, 1994 . MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE RE-APPOINTMENT OF JEFF BROWN AND TONY GILENSON TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR TERMS CONTINUING TO JUNE, 1994. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS None. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Dominguez advised the public that the Downtown project is continuing with anticipated completion in October, 1990. Councilman Winkler commented on Quimby Act fees and requested that staff provide a report reflecting what our Park fees should be. Mayor Washburn reported on his contact with various officials regarding the K-Rat and that receipt of the permit is eminent in the near future, possibly this week. Mayor Washburn also commented on a meeting with LEAF and the local veterinarians to resolve conflicts. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10: 31 P.M. GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM No. PAGE OF MINUTES OF LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON THE ISTH DAY OF JULY 1990 THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7 : 02 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Brinley. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners: Gilenson, Brinley, Saathoff, Wilsey and Brown ABSENT: Commissioners: None Also present were Community Development Director Gunderman, Associate Planner Restivo, Assistant Planners DeGange and Fairbanks, and Senior Civil Engineer O'Donnell. MINUTE ACTION Motion by Commissioner Brinley to approve minutes of July 5, 1990, as submitted, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved: 5-0 PUBLIC COMMENTS There being no requests to speak, Chairman Brown closed the PUBLIC COMMENTS section. PUBLIC HEARINGS I. West Lake Elsinore Development Agreement (Continued from July 5, 1990) - Commissioner Wilsey asked to be excused due to possible conflict of interest. Community Development Director Gunderman presented a request to approve a Development Agreement for the West Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District. The area consists of approximately 1, 075 acres and will include approximately 1, 600 single-family dwellings. The property is bounded generally by Lakeshore Drive and Mountain Avenue on the north, Machado Street on the east, Alvarado Street and its extension on the south, and the Santa Ana Mountains on the east. The tract maps reflecting the development of this area have been approved with the exception of La Laguna Estates which has submitted a map for preliminary approval. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:I2 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Jeff Robinson, Attorney representing the 7 developers, stated that he would answer any project specific questions, and commented briefly on staff's request for inclusion of insurance provision. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7 : 14 p.m. Commissioner Gilenson commented on the following: - Insurance provision, recommended verbiage be taken from the Brighton Agreement, Sections 29. 0, 29 . 1 and 29 .2 substituting these sections in this Agreement as Section 8 . 11. AGENDA ITEM NO. • PAGE %Off- Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 2 WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONTINUED - Development Agreement which references a Funding/Acqui- sition Agreement, throughout. We received a copy of the Funding/Acquisition Agreement, but have no input to it. There are a lot of openings in the agreement, where I feel we can not approve this Agreement prior to the Funding/Acquisition Agreement being approved by City Council. I Understand the Mark-Roos/Mello Roos theory. My concern with the Acquisition Agreement is what will be financed--infrastructure outside the project site, infrastructure that would normally be required of a developer. Would this be part of the reimbursement or is it just extra ordinary infrastructure that normally he would not have to deal with? This is not addressed in the Development Agreement, and I feel should be addressed in the Funding/Acquisition Agreement. Commissioner Brinley commented on La Laguna's request for an adjustment in their DAG fees; approving the Development Agreement without City Council approval of the Funding Acquisition Agreement. Commissioner Saathoff asked if the Commission reviews the Funding/Acquisition Agreement. Community Development Director Gunderman responded in the negative. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the escalation of La Laguna Estate fees; CDF overruns--concern that overruns might happen as a result of the City using Mark-Roos instead of Mello-Roos. Feels that the overruns should be borne by the City, from the DAG Fees. Mr. Mandrell, Keith Companies, stated that the formation of the district has a project report, approved by City Council in March. I believe this states clearly what improvements were intended to be covered under the Community Facilities District or the Mello-Roos that was being formed. It was also the understanding, when this process started with the Development Agreements, as I understood it, that we really needed to resolve these issues with the Development Agreement in order to finish the Funding/Acquisition Agreement. Chairman Brown commented on the Mark-Roos financing program. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution 90-13, entitled as follows: RESOLUTION 90-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPERS (CENTEX REAL ESTATE, LA LAGUNA ESTATES, MARINITA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, PREMIER HOMES, MEE= DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, TOMICH/JONES, TORN RANCH, AND GOLDEN STATE DEVELOPMENT) and recommend to City Council approval of the West Lake Elsinore Development Agreement as submitted by staff with the addition of the insurance agreement that is found in the Brighton Homes Agreement, second by Chairman Brown. Approved 4-0 (Commissioner Wilsey Abstaining) Commissioner Wilsey returned to the table at 7: 34 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 0 OF_ / Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 3 2. Zone Change 89-13 and Annexation #51 - John Crehan - Associate Planner Restivo presented a request to annex 160 gross acres into the City of Lake Elsinore and to pre-zone the site R-1 HPD (Single-Family Residential District-Hillside Planned Development overlay District) . The site is located at the southeast corner of Section 27, Township 5 South Range 4 West and is contiguous to the City Limit boundary. Generally, the site is north of Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area and Greenwald Avenue, northwest of the gated Canyon Lake Community and southerly of Dorchester Lane. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7: 35 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Michael Klipa, civil engineer for the project, stated that he concurs with staff's report, and will answer any questions. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7: 37 p.m. Commissioner Brinley commented on the site being located in a Study Area for the Steven's Kangaroo Rat, and inquired about the Steven's Kangaroo Rat fee. There being no further discussion, Chairman Brown called for a motion. Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to recommend to City Council approval of Annexation #51 and Zone Change 89-13 based on the Findings listed in the Staff Report, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 3 . Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 - Long Beach Equities - Consulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subdivide 251 acres into four parcels ranging in size from 3.4 acres to 191. 6 acres, for financial purposes only. The site is located on all four quadrants of the interchange of Interstate 15 and Nichols Road. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. John Friedman, of Long Beach Equities, stated that there are 5 existing lots not 9 as indicated in the Staff Report. He then requested that condition number 5 be amended, as follows: With respect to Parcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of-way for the easterly 1,150 feet of Nichols Road. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Mr. Ken Peacock, Mission Development, 34184 Coast Highway, Suite 318, Dana Point, stated that they own property adjoining this map. Mr. Peacock stated that a letter was sent to Ray O'Donnel and Ron Smothers requesting an easement for ingress/egress for our property (AP $390-270-005) , as a condition to the parcel map filing. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7 : 48 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE '2 DE—=�-- Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 4 TENTATIVE FINANCIAL PARCE MAP 25638 CONTINUED Commissioner Gilenson suggested adding verbiage "so as not to landlock said property" to condition number 8. Commissioner Wilsey commented on the applicant's request to amend condition number 5. That extra verbiage would tie Nichols Road to the existing length as illustrated on the map, is this correct? Senior Civil Engineer O'Donnell stated that there is 60 foot of right-of-way already dedicated on this map, whether this condition is included or not. Chairman Brown commented on the dedication of sufficient right-of-way across Nichols Road, and how this fits into the Circulation Element; whether or not the conditions of approval should be recorded on the map for design and development of Parcel 1 and 2, reference condition number S. Motion by Commissioner Brinley to recommend to City Council approval of Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 based on the Findings and subject to the 8 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report with the following amendments: Condition No. 5 : "With respect to Parcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of-way for the easterly 1, 150 feet of Nichols Road. Condition No. 8 : "The design for development of Parcels 1 and 2 shall take into account the access needs of the property northerly of them (Assessor's Parcel Number 390-270-005) , so as not to landlock said property. " Second by Commissioner Wilsey. Approved 5-0 Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to recommend adoption of Negative Declaration 90-10, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 4 . Tentative Tract Map 25831 - The Clurman Company, Inc. - Consulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subdivide 50 acres into 195 lots. Two of these lots will be combined with lots in the adjacent Tentative Tract Map 25478, so the total number of buildable lots is 193 . One lettered lot will be created for a private park site. The average lot size is 8, 590 square feet and the minimum lot size is 5, 500 square feet. This project has been conceived with the idea of being an extension of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. The site is located such that it is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, on the northerly side of Ramsgate. The western boundary of this tract is along the southerly extension of Trellis Lane, south of Highway 74 . Mr. Smothers requested that condition number 16 be deleted, as it is a duplicate condition, covered in condition number 21. Mr. Smothers stated that today we received a letter from L.D. Johnson Companies owner of the Ramsgate project, essentially stating that they were in agreement with this proposal and asked that it be entered into the record. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF1� Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 5 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25631 CONTINUED July 18, 1990 Mr. David Gunderman City of Lake Elsinore RE: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Dear Dave: LD Johnson Companies is in agreement with the development by the Clurman Company of Tentative Tract Map 25831. This map has been designed in conjunction with our Ramsgate project. Should you have any questions please call me. Sincerely, LD Johnson Companies William H. Frey Vice President Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 8 : 10 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Don Clurman, The Clurman Company, gave a brief history on the proposal. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 8 : 10 p.m. Commissioner Wilsey commented on adding this property to the Ramsgate Specific Plan, and the lot size count being approximately 26% below our R-1 minimum standards. Mr. Clurman asked that Mr. Weber of Hunsaker & Associates address the issue on lot sizes. Mr. Weber stated that there are 50 lots between the 5,500-6, 000 square foot range. 5, 500 is the minimum lot size on this tract. The lot average for the entire tract is 8 , 590 square feet. Commissioner Wilsey recommended that all lot sizes be brought up to the R-1 standards. Commissioner Brinley stated she is in agreement with Commissioner Wilsey on the lot sizes being brought up to R-1 standards, and then commented on the Southern California Edison easements and landscaping, condition number 33. Commissioner Gilenson stated he agrees with Commissioners Brinley and Wilsey on the lot sizes. Asked for clarification on condition number 22, pertaining to 12 kv equipment, and condition number 32, pertaining to reimbursement for off-site improvements. Commissioner Gilenson was informed that Southern California Edison will not allow 12 kv to be placed underground, condition number 22 . Surrounding developments would provide reimbursement for off-site improvements, condition number 32 . AGENDA ITEM NO. ` • P A1E '60,Q Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 6 TENTATIVE TRACT 14AP 25831 CONTINUED Commissioner Saathoff commented on lot sizes not being compatible with adjoining tentative tract maps. Chairman Brown commented on maintenance easements of green spaces with the Homeowners Association (HOA) ; topography constraints and access to slopes; purpose of easement between Lots 178 and 179; Slope area between Lot 114 and 115 be widen for access from one end to the other, if maintained by HOA, and the same issue on Lot 69 and 70, Lots 180 and 181, and; if the HOA is going to be responsible for maintenance of the Southern California Edison easement running through the tract. Chairman Brown then commented on density--does not mind the high density provided we have the trade-offs. But sees most of the trade-offs as open space area because of topography constraints that has nothing to do with amenities for the community. Mr. Weber commented on the density for the approved Ramsgate Specific Plan, 3 . 5 and 5. 1 dwelling units per acre, and the Clurman tract coming in at a density of 3.9 dwelling units per acre. We feel that the City is getting a better integrated Specific Plan in the Community for all of Ramsgate. It is a transitional use/development between a higher density to the northwest and the property to the south. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny without prejudice Tentative Tract Map 25831. I think the applicant is aware of the concerns on the small lot sizes; maintenance of the green space areas; the need for clarity in the language in reference to what area the homeowner and the Homeowners Association is going to maintain, second by Chairman Brown for discussion purposes. Discussion ensued on whether this would go forward to City Council if denied without prejudice, and continuing the proposal to the meeting of August 1, 1990. Commissioner Saathoff stated the reason he made the motion in that manner rather than a continuation was to make the applicant aware, of the fact, that the way it was presented, at this time, feels that it would be denied and wanted that noted. Chairman Brown withdrew his second, and Commissioner Saathoff withdrew his motion. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Tentative Tract Map 25831 to the meeting of August 1, 1990, second by Chairman Brown. Approved 5-0 At this time, 8:37 p.m. . the Planning Commission recessed. At this time, 8: 51 p.m. , the Planning Commission reconvened. 5. Tentative Tract Map 26142 - South Lake Estates Joint Venture - Chairman Brown stated that staff has requested this item be continued to August 1, 1990, and called for a motion. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Tentative Tract Map 26142 to the meeting of August 1, 1990, second by Commissioner Wilsey. Approved: 5-0 AGENDA ITEM NO. • • phr,F nr -.L=� Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 7 BUSINESS ITEMS 6. Single-Family Residence - 783 Lake Street - Amaro Construction - Assistant Planner Fairbanks presented a request to construct a 1,347 square foot, two-story dwelling. The lot is located 95 feet west of the northwest corner of Avenue 1 and Lake Street. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked for discussion at the table. Commissioner Gilenson commented on the use of a swamp cooler and screening for said cooler. Commissioner Wilsey commented on visibility from Lakeshore Drive. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the roof line and suggestions proposed to the applicant by staff. Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to deny without prejudice Single-Family Residence at 783 Lake Street, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Commissioner Saathoff stated that the applicant has met all requirements and has provided some enhancements requested by staff. If you deny without prejudice, the applicant deserves some very specific reasons why--other than the fact it is not appealing, and I do not feel we can deny on that basis. Discussion ensued on the premise of Design Review, and compatibility of structure with the surrounding neighborhood. There being no further discussion, Chairman Brown called for the question. Approved 4-1 (Commissioner Saathoff voting no) 7. Accessory Structure - 29322 Swan Avenue - Jose Mares - Chairman Brown stated the applicant has requested this item it be withdrawn from the agenda. Motion by Commissioner Brinley to withdraw from the agenda the Accessory Structure at 29322 Swan Avenue, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 8. Street Abandonment 90-2 - John D. Frank - Assistant Planner Fairbanks presented a request for abandonment of Flint Street right-of-way between Lewis Street and Lowell Street. An approximate 660 foot segment of the 60 foot wide Flint Street right-of-way from Lewis Street to Lowell Street, 1.38 acres. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked for discussion at the table. Commissioner Gilenson commented on future impacts on traffic circulation; if Flint Street would ever be developed on the other side of the abandonment; future abandonment being to the east and not to the west--not going through all they way to Poe, as opposed to closing it off at Silver. Chairman Brown commented on the reasoning behind the street abandonment; future concerns on continued abandonments as far as right-of-ways necessary for utilities to serve adjacent properties. AGENDA ITEM NO. • • PAGE OF� Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 8 TREET ABANDONMENT 90-2 CONTINUED Motion by Commissioner Brinley to recommend to City Council approval of Street Abandonment 90-2 based on the Findings and subject to the 1 Condition of Approval listed in the Staff Report, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 9. Residential Project 89-8 - Extension of Time - Bruce Ayres - Assistant Planner Fairbanks presented a request for a one year extension of time. The only changes to the approved project are: Vacation of a portion of Avenue 11; elimination of two triangular lots, which the applicant does not own; a lot line adjustment will move Line "A" to Line "B" , and; a merger of Lot "B" and Lot "C". Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked for discussion at the table. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the need to re-affirm Negative Declaration 89-19 . Community Development Director Gunderman stated that because there have been some minor changes to the design, from what was originally approved, we need a re-affirmation on the Negative Declaration. Motion by Commissioner Brinley to re-affirm Negative Declaration 89-19 and approve a one year extension of time for Residential Project 89-8, extending the Minor Design Review to July 25, 1991, based on the Findings and subject to the 81 Conditions of Approval listed in the Memorandum dated July 18 , 1990, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 10. Residential Project 89-22 - Pardee Construction Company - Assistant Planner DeGange presented an application for Minor Design Review of 106 duplex type homes and one recreational building. The project is located in the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan Area, at the northeast intersection of Lost Road and Cottonwood Hills Road, approximately 2 .5 miles east of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road. Assistant Planner DeGange requested the following amendments to the Conditions of Approval; Condition No. 35: Delete first paragraph and replace with condition number 57. Condition No. 55: Residential Project 89-22 shall be subject to all Conditions of Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 25274. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Mr. Mike McGee, Project Manager for Pardee Construction, gave a brief overview on the proposal, and requested conditions #8, #21, #35d, #35f. ,and #36 be deleted in their entirety. Mr. McGee requested clarification on condition number 18, then commented on the Conditions of Approval as follows: Condition No. 51: Requirement for automatic garage door and roll-up doors on the units. It has been our intent all along to provide automatic garage doors on all units. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE.OF /Q Planning Commission Minutes July 1$, 1990 Page 9 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 69-22 CONTINUED Condition No. 19: Amend to read: All signage shall be by separate City Permit, consistent with the Sign Program in the Specific Plan. Condition No. 25: Amend to read: The design and construction of the project shall meet all County Fire Department standards. Discussion ensued on condition number 25, with Mr. McGee suggesting the following language: "if the special letter is necessary" added at the end of the condition. Chairman Brown recommendation that condition number 25 be amended to address the structures that would be required as opposed to the units themselves. Condition number 35a: Change the word "planting" to "planted" . Condition No. 35c: Add the words "except street trees" . Condition 39: Assumes that this means something other than cinder block, it can mean slumpstone, is this correct? Condition 40: Amend to read: Garage shall be constructed to provide a minimum of nine-feet-six-inches by twenty-feet (916" x 201 ) of interior clear space for each car for a total interior clear space of 19x20 feet for two cars. Condition 49 : Raises an issue about the color scheme. The condition, as worded, would be somewhat limiting in color schemes and have us move away from accent colors and only to stucco and trim colors. It would also have us paint window frames which comes to us in baked white enamel and we would prefer not to have to re-paint window frames. This also creates a maintenance problem which would have to be included in the Homeowners Association program. Also, we have brought with us a new color board which adds additional color schemes, a second roof color, brighter accent colors, and hopefully addresses the color issue in greater detail. Requested the following language be added "subject to the approval of the Community Development Director" Condition 53 : If this is desired by the Commission I am happy to comply. However, I would like to point out that typically we do not put windows into garage areas, because in the past they have created a problem in maintaining an attractive streetscape. Condition 56 : The landscaping for the site itself and for the individual units has been designed by the landscape architect to comply with the Landscape Guidelines of the City, as approved, and in accordance with the Specific Plan. All of the requirements stated here are in excess of the City's current Landscape Guidelines. Condition 56a: We are already providing the number of street trees required by the Landscape Guidelines. The Landscape Guidelines allow for uniform placement of street trees or a clustering of street trees. Condition 56b: Foundation shrubs planted every 3 feet on center. It is getting regimented 3 feet on center and does not allow us much design flexibility with our landscape architect. AGENDA ITEM NO. ' • PACE OF Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89-22 CONTINUED Condition 56c: Slope Trees, the City Guidelines currently state that 75 percent of the slope trees can be 5 gallon and the balance 15 gallon. Condition 56d: Slope shrubs, the current guidelines call for 70 percent at 1 gallon, 30 percent at 5 gallon, and density shall be 25 per 1,000 square feet. Condition 56e: Slope ground cover, 6 inches is excessive in terms of the overall requirement. It is hard to plant cuttings that close together. We typically see 12-18 inches on center, and the City Guidelines provide that those areas can be hydroseeded. The Commission discussed deleting conditions #8, #21, #35.d, #35f. , #36, and #37. A lengthy discussion ensued on conditions #25, #35, #35a. , #35b, #35c. , #37, #40, #49, #51, #53, #56a. , #56.b, #56c. , #56.e and 57 . Commissioner Brinley commented on setbacks from the sidewalk to the garage. Commissioner Gilenson commented on condition number 50, recommended that the recreation facility be completed at half build-out, or prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the 53rd unit. Mr. McGee stated that they planned to have this completed at the opening of the model complex. Commissioner Gilenson suggested that condition number 50 be completed at opening of model homes. Mr. McGee suggested that condition number 50 be completed at release of first Certificate of Occupancy. Chairman Brown commented on parking, asked if it is permitted everywhere, and its enforcement. Mr. McGee responded that this is permitted only in the guest spaces , and is enforced by the Homeowners Association. Chairman Brown asked if a place was being provided on site for people to wash their cars. Mr. McGee responded in the negative. Chairman Brown suggested this be given consideration. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Residential Project 89-22 based on the Findings and subject to the 57 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report with the following amendments: Condition No. 8 : Delete Condition No. 18: Delete Condition No. 19: All signage shall be by separate City Permit, consistent with the Sign Program in the Specific Plan. Condition No. 21: Delete AGENDA ITEM NO. • ' PAGE OF Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 11 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 9-22 CONTINUED Condition No. 25: The design and construction of the project shall meet all County Fire Department standards for fire protection and shall include emergency vehicle turning radius, and fire resistance requirements for all buildings including sprinklers where required, and any additional requirements requested by the Fire Marshal. A fire detector check assembly shall be required for any interior fire lanes and hydrants. A letter shall be submitted verifying compliance prior to issuance of building permits, for structures where required. Condition No. 35: Delete original paragraph and replace with: Prior to issuance of building permits, landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect, fee to be determined at time of application. Condition No. 35a: Change the word "planting" to "planted" . Condition No. 35b: Delete Condition No. 35c: Add "except street trees" . Condition No. 35d: Delete Condition No. 35f. Delete Condition No. 36: Delete Condition No. 37: Delete Condition No. 40 : Add "clear space for each car for a total interior clear space of 19x20 feet for two cars" . Condition No. 49 : Delete Condition No. 50 : The recreation facility shall be completed at release of first Certificate of Occupancy. Condition No. 51: All units shall be provided automatic garage doors. Condition No. 53 : Delete Condition No. 55: Residential Project 89-22 shall be subject to all Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tract Map 25274 (attached) . Condition No. 56: Because of the nature and density of the project the applicant shall exceed the standards set forth in the Landscaping Guidelines. Condition No. 56a: Additional street trees shall be added to the plan. Condition No. 56b: Additional foundation and accent shrubs shall be added to the plan. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �� OF� Lam_. Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 12 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 69-22 ZONTINUED Condition No. 56e: Slope ground cover shall be planted per the recommendation of the City's Landscape Architect. Condition No. 57: Incorporated into condition 35. Second by Commissioner Brinley. Commissioner Wilsey asked for further discussion on condition number 49, retaining the condition and adding verbiage "color mix shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director." Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion to include Commissioner Wilsey's comment on condition number 49 , amending said condition to read: Condition No. 49: Add "Color mix shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. " Commissioner Wilsey asked for further discussion on condition number 53 . Commissioner Saathoff stated that his motion included the deletion of this condition. Commissioner Gilenson inquired about condition number 51, and whether or not the second sentence was to be retained. Commissioner Saathoff responded that the second sentence was to remain. Commissioner Brinley amended her second to include the amendment to the motion. Approved 5-0 At this time, 10: 15 p.m. . the Planning Commission recessed. At this time, 10: 25 p.m. , the Planning Commission reconvened. 11. Residential Project 90-10 - George Alongi - Assistant Planner DeGange presented for Design Review a single-story duplex of 2 , 993 square feet in size and two 3, 577 square foot two-story triplexes. Each structure is placed on a 9, o00 square foot lot. The project location is at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pottery and Langstaff Streets. Assistant Planner DeGange requested that condition number 44 be added, which would read: Condition No. 44: All landscape improvements shall be bonded 120% Faithful Performance Bond, and released at completion of instal- lation of landscape requirements approval/'acceptance, and bond 100% for material and labor for one year. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Mr. George Alongi commented on Page 2 of the Staff Report, pertaining to the comments made by the City's Landscape Architect, roofing material, and then commented on the following Conditions of Approval: Condition No. 10: This should be changed to 916" x 1916" inside measurement. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE O�—�=- Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 13 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 90-10 CONTINUED Condition No. 13: If the City wanted me to put the trees 30-foot apart, they would have 3 trees there, is that what the City wants? Condition No. 14 : I would like to see the Planning Commission talk to the City Council and to the Building Department. Drainage across the sidewalk. What they want us to do on these projects is to drain under the sidewalk. Condition No. 17: Park in-lieu fee, where did this come from? Condition No. 23: Landscaping plan coming back before the Commission. I agree with this for larger projects, but when you get down to small projects it is really an overkill. Condition No. 25: I would like the Commission to tell me how we can stop people from outdoor storage. Are we talking before or after? It is something that you can't enforce. Condition No. 26: Trash enclosures are required for eight units and up. I do not have to put trash enclosures in, however, I am going to, but I do not want to be stuck to the City standards on building them. Condition No. 28 : I want to go on the record--I extremely resist signing any documents giving away my water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District does not require any water rights in any other area, and they do not require it in Lake Elsinore, neither does the Elsinore Water District. The City of Lake Elsinore said they collect them and turn them over to different water companies, but they have not yet turned one over. Condition No. 42 : There is no Resolution to that. There is an Ordinance 16-32-020, which only addresses itself to the type of sign that City Council approve. Minutes of April 23, 1985, page 2 item 9, addresses itself to approval of the type of sign and discussion of a fee for the sign. I believe that the signs will benefit the total community, not just a selected few, and if they are going to benefit the total community then I think the total community should pay for the signs . It should come out of the General Fund or the Redevelopment Fund. Condition No. 43 : Questioned the posting of Performance Bond. We are doing street improvement plans, pulling encroachment permits, and submitting liability insurance. Requested this condition be removed. Discussion was held on the above referenced conditions. Commissioner Wilsey commented on condition number 12 , suggested adding the following verbiage to the end "if applicable, screening shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. " Commissioner Brinley commented on proposed condition number 44 and this being included as condition number 23.a. ; condition number 36, pertaining to location of power poles. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the landscaping plan, and comments from the City's Landscape Consultant. AGENDA ITEM NO. i • • PAGE i 4F._-=-- Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 14 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 90-10 CONTINUED Chairman Brown commented on condition number 43, posting Performance Bonds. If the City has not been requiring Performance/Completion Bonds, for people who work in the public right-of-way, then we should be. Chairman Brown commented on the triplex--second floor unit landing being inadequate; continuation of plant-on mansard roof treatment; extension of eaves; first floor having no protection from the elements; width of window on first floor, and turning the staircase leading to the second floor. Chairman Brown asked for further discussion at the table. Commissioner Brinley stated that the overhang over the door would be an added amenity--providing protection from the elements. Commissioner Wilsey inquired about the difference in elevation--is there a step down onto the roof-top? Suggested incorporating some of the landing area on to the deck area. Mr. Alongi responded that there is a three-inch step down from the living area on to the deck. This could be extended, but the reason why we don't is for security. Chairman Brown commented on the previous design approval; understands concern about L-shaping out the staircase--in lieu of that would much rather see the overhang over the bottom unit; impracticability of increasing the landing, and continuing the roof treatment across the three garages. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Residential Project 90-10 based on the Findings and subject to the 43 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report with the following amendments: Condition No. 8 : Add "Roof treatment to be continued over the three garage doors. Condition No. 10 : Garage shall be constructed to provide a minimum of 916" x 19 , 6" of interior clear space. Condition No. 12 : Add to end of last sentence "if applicable, screening shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director." Condition No. 23a: All landscape improvements shall be bonded 120% Faithful Performance Bond, and released at completion of installation of landscape requirements approval/acceptance, and bond 100% for material and labor for one year. Condition No. 26a: Treatment over the front exterior door, to the downstair units, for protection from the elements shall be provided and subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. Second by Commissioner Wilsey. Approved 5-0 AGENDA ITEM NO.J • PAGE OF--/- -- Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 15 12 . Commercial Project 90-8 - Greg Pitcher - Assistant Planner Fairbanks presented a request for Minor Design Review of the exterior refurbishment of the Mission Trail Plaza (Stater Brothers Center) . This project is a 6.43 acre parcel located 1,200 feet east of the northeast corner of Mission Trail and Railroad Canyon Road. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Mr. Greg Pitcher, representing the applicant, questioned condition number 20, pertaining to screening of roof mounted equipment; condition number 11, pertaining to brick pavers at driveway approaches. Mr. Iry Chase, property owner, stated that he objects to doing the brick pavers. First of all, it is a rehab not a new center. He then gave a brief overview on the center, highlighting the rehabilitation, and economical situation. Considerable discussion ensued on the above referenced conditions, and the center being brought up to the standards of the surrounding shopping centers. Chairman Brown suggested phasing the improvements, with City Council concurrence, and commented on the parking lot landscaping; whether or not the equipment can be screened effectively from Casino Drive, practically. Commissioner Gilenson suggested that Del Taco be included in the rehabilitation. Commissioner Brinley commented on the brick pavers being provided at the end of the phasing. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the front elevation of the buildings and the roof materials; landscaping of the parking lot; screening of equipment from Casino Drive--rather than require screening would rather see this money applied elsewhere. Commissioner Wilsey commented on providing planter landscape treatments in front of the buildings, referred to rendering posted. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 90-8 based on the Findings and subject to the 26 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report with the following amendments: Condition No. 11: Delete Condition No. 13 : Delete fee and replace with verbiage: "fee to be determined at time of application. " Condition No. 20: Add "The roof mounted equipment shall be decorated to match the roof or painted, so that it will blend in with the roof. On Del Taco, screening of the roof material in the rear shall be provided to match existing roof. Commissioner Wilsey inquired about condition number 22 , construction activity being limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and suggested this condition be deleted. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF—Y—_ Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 16 COMMERCIAL PROJECT 90-8 CONTINUED Commissioner Saathoff recommended that condition number 22, be modified to: Monday through Saturday or as modified by the Community Development Director. Commissioner Brinley inquired about security lighting for the parking lot, and requested that this be added as condition number 27. Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion to include the amendment to condition number 22, and the addition of condition number 27, which will read as follows: Condition No. 22: Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday, or as modified by the Community Development Director, and the applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance in order to protect adjacent occupants from unreasonable noise and glare associated with construction. Condition No. 27 : Security lighting for the parking lot shall be provided from dust to dawn. Second by Commissioner Wilsey. Approved 3-2 (Commissioners Brinley and Gilenson voting no) 13 . Sign Program - Greg Pitcher - Assistant Planner Fairbanks presented a request for Minor Design Review of a Sign Program and Center Identification Sign for the Mission Trail Shopping Center. The commercial center is, a 6.43 acre site, located 1,200 feet east of the northeast corner of Mission Trail and Railroad Canyon Road. Chairman Brown asked if there was anyone present representing the applicant, and if there were any concerns. Mr. Greg Pitcher, representing the applicant, commented on the height of the sign. Mr. Iry Chase, property owner, commented on the need for street signage to identify the tenants. Commissioner Saathoff commented on the location of the center identification sign and the distance from the sidewalk. Commissioner Wilsey commented on the sign being too busy and the need for a better architectural statement. Chairman Brown commented on the number of tenants listed on the sign, 3 majors at the top and 6 additional on the bottom; eliminating 1 major user; height of sign and height limitations---asked if the height of the sign is higher than the center because of topography and the center is 20 feet, can you put up a 20 foot sign? Assistant Planner Fairbanks responded that by Code you would, but in this case it would not matter because the sign grade is at the same grade as the rest of the center, within a foot. Community Development Director Gunderman responded that you probably could, in your scenario. You could put a sign in the air 20 foot above the grade of the road. AGENDA ITEM No. • . PAGE„ OF �� Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 17 SIGN gROGRAM FOR MISSION T__ IL CENTER CONTINUED Discussion at the table ensued elevation of the center, and continuing the Sign Program for architectural re-design, if allowed an additional 1-2 foot. Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to continue the Sign Program for the Mission Trail Shopping center to the meeting of August 1, 1990, for re-design, second by Commissioner Saathoff. Approved 5-0 INFOMTIONAL I. Lake Land Use Plan - Community Development Director Gunderman stated that City Council will look at the Lake Land Use Plan Tuesday, July 24, 1990. This will come back before the Planning Commission in a few months, as a Specific Plan. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S Co NTs Community Development Director Gunderman presented the Planning Commission with a schedule of the proposed General Plan Town Hall Meeting dates and Planning Commission Hearing dates, requesting input on these dates within the next week or so. RLANNING COMMISSIONER'S CCOMMENTs Commissioner Wilsey Commented on the situation at Highway 74 and the freeway off-ramp northbound, no stop sign. Requested that Cal Trans be notified and step taken to correct this situation. Commissioner Gilenson Nothing to report. Commissioner Saathoff Nothing to report. Commissioner Brinley Nothing to report. Chairman Brown Commented on the traffic being diverted from Riverside Drive to to Gunnerson and Lake Street and no control. Do we have anything to do with the approval of the diversion of traffic on that State Highway? Senior Civil Engineer O'Donnell responded that Cal Trans diverted the traffic without the approval from the City. This was a combined project between Cal Trans and Lake Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Would like to have City Council look at the storing of shopping carts outside, on the sidewalk, in front of the supermarkets. Would like to see something done about this. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1, _. PACE.LL—Or_-LK Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 18 There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Planning Commission adjourned at 12:22 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Gilenson, second by Commissioner Brinley. Approved 5-0 Approved, I Jeff Brown, Chairman I Respectfully submitted, Linda Grindstaff Planning Commission Secretary AGENDA ITEM NO. • p+ PAGE_0 4F �O REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL DATE: August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Building Activity Report, Month of July 1990 PREPARED BY APPROVED BY:4.onyM.1 Community Developm Director Dave Gund an DISCUSSION: Attached is the Building Activity Report which also includes information for year-to-date and last twelve (12) months for comparison. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. AGENDA ITEM N0. PACE / 0E C I T Y O F L A K E E L S I N 0 R E DIVISION OF BUILDING AND SAFETY ACTIVITY REPORT - July 1990 VIEW 6 - Single Family Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 709, 000 0 - Duplexes - Bldgs - 0 Units - 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 - Multiple Family - Bldgs - 0 Units - 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 2 - Commercial. . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641,945 0 - Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 - Mobile Home Installations $ 0 ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS 35 - Residential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80, 300 7 - Commercial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,500 1 - Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000 3 - Mobile Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000 21 - Swimming Pool/Signs/Blockwall/Misc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 ,720 1 - GRADING . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,000 ANNUAL COMPARISON CURRENT YE PRECEDING YEAR No. Permits Valuation No. Permits Valuation Month of: July 76 $ 1,604,465 103 $10,286,463 Calendar Year: 621 $20, 038,709 652 $28,462, 043 Last 12 Months: 1058 $41,937,788 1137 $50,550,459 Plumbing Permits: 23 38 Electrical Permits: 42 50 Mechanical Permits: 14 11 Description Owner Valuation NEW SINGLE FAMILY 742 Mill Road Cornice $ 105, 000 32976 Kevin Place Kevin Jeffries $ 104,000 33146,33150,33154, 33158 Shoreline MaCleod $ 500, 000 (Models) NEW COMMERCIAL 31706 Casino Drive Manny's Resturant $ 404 , 000 18451 Dexter Chevon Station $ 237,945 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .r, OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 7 , 1990 SUBJECT: CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT MONTH OF JULY, 1990 PREPARED BY: PROVED4Mo Dave Gun an kCommuni Development r Director DISCUSSION Attached is the Code Enforcement Activity Report for the month of July, which also includes information on the previous month and year-to-date. RECOMMENDATION Receive and file AGE"TA!!T v1 NO. 'Y,�E�,OF -1J CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DIVISION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT - JULY, 1990 CURRENT PREVIOUS YEAR-TO MONTH MONTH DATE COMPLAINTS: Resident Complaints 16 11 _142_ Staff Initiated Complaints 61 06 _354^ Total Complaints Received 77 17 _496^ Total Violations Corrected 52 86 _534� REFERRALS TO OTHER AGENCIES/DIVISIONS Animal Control 03 01 _08 Building & Safety 06 11 —89 Business Licensing 01 00 _32 Health Department 0 0 0 Public Works 06 04 ^89 Sheriff's Department 22 11 _133 Water Department 0 0 —0 — COURT CASES: Court Hearings (Disputed Citations) 0 0 1-- Violations Corrected 0 4 0_ NUSIANCE ABATEMENT: Cases Set for Nuisance Abatement Hearing 05 00 24! Total Abatement Completed 03 00 07_ TOTAL CASES CLOSED: 93 113 _892_ AIMY11 A ITEM. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL DATE: August 7s _1990 SUBJECT: Structure Abatement Activity_ Report - July 1990 PREPARED BY APPROVED BY: Community Develo ent Director City M pager Dave G erman Ron Mo endyk DISCUSSION: Attached is the Structure Abatement Activity Report which contains information on monthly activity and the number of properties involved in the abatement program and their status. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Tsfs a CEO. FkO-';r,— / _OF .5 C I T Y O F L A K E E L S I N O R E DIVISION OF BUILDING AND SAFETY ACTIVITY REPORT ON STRUCTURE ABATEMENT - JULY 1990 Current Previous Month Month New structures in abatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Properties currently being demolished. . . . . . . . 3 2 Total structures being rehabilitated . . . . . . . . 6 5 Structures at Intent Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4 Structures at First Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6 Structures at Second Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 (For addresses of properties see attached sheet) STATUS OF STRUCTURE ABATEMENT PROGRAM TO-DATE Total structures that have been demolished by owner. . . . . . . . . 57 Total structures that have been rehabilitated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Structures demolished by the City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Total structures in the abatement program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 A0�6drA 1 i E�' N0. PkCE_,,b_OF ACTIVITY REPORT ON STRUCTURE ABATEMENT - JULY 1990 EW STRUCTURES IN ABATEMENT 30181 Riverside Dr - Triplex abandon Marion Street X Lakeshore Avenue - Structures hazardous 31715 Mission Trail - Illegal structure PROPERTIES BEING DEMOLISHED 405 Flint - SFR substandard 500 W. Minthorn - SFR substandard structure 1000 Lakeshore - SFR hazardous STRUCTURES BEING REHABILITATED 18135 West Lakeshore Drive - SFR 233 Southshore Drive - SFR evicted (sold) 16550 Arnold Avenue - SFR Hazardous 214 North Kellogg - Illegal Unit 309 Lowell Street - SFR hazardous 1116 Cleveland Court - SFR substandard STRUCTURES AT INTENT NOTICE Camino Del Norte X Main Street - Abandon Structures 1403 Lakeshore Drive - SFR hazardous due to fire 824 1/2 Lakeshore Drive - SFR hazardous 103 Mohr - Duplex abandon structure STRUCTURES AT FIRST NOTICE 506 Minthorn - Commercial 29492 Nichols - SFR 29351 Riverside Drive - SFR hazardous STRUCTURES AT SECOND NOTICE 303 West Pottery - Multi-Family substandard 30490 Wilson Way - SFR poorly maintained 18010 Heald Avenue - SFR hazardous 31071 Wisconsin - SFR evicted All";RZ`ITEM NO. OF LAKE ELSINORE PAGE NO. 1 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91-013 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE :FIER WARRANT CHECK DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT N0. AMOUNT A .T . & T . 20092 10 . 01 * ALPHA BUSINESS LOANS, INC. 200914 260 . 00 * AMERICAN RED CROSS 2009E 905 . 75 * BOB BOONE 20096 294 . 00 * MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES 20091 5384 . 04 * B .S. I . CONSULTANTS, INC . 2009E 27543 . 41 * B .S . I . CONSULTANTS, INC . 2009S 1542 . 43 * ELSINORE OFFICE PRODUCTS 2010C 88 . 50 * EXECUTIVE MICRO 20101 590 . 99 * GREINER , INC . 2010E 288 . 00 * LAKE ELSINORE MATERIALS 20107 337 . 18 * MAYHALL PRINT SHOP 20104 9 . 61 N.B. S ./ LOWRY 2010E 58651 . 28 PACTEL CELLULAR - LA 20106 345 . 36 * PACTEL CELLULAR - LA 20107 236 . 55 * THE PLANNING ASSOCIATES 20108 18844 . 02 * PRESTIGE LANDSCAPING 2010S 2500 . 00 * PRICE SECURITY SYSTEMS 2011C 1712 .50 * RJM DESIGN 20111 4629 .85 * RIGHTWAY 20112 981 . 60 * CHRIS ROSENBERG 20113 27 . 75 * SAFETY-KLEEN CORP . 20114 171 . 41 AGENDA I M NO. L5 PAGE I OF o LAKE ELS INORE PAGE NO. 2 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 —013 DATE 07/31/90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK :HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN a. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV,NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT SEERS LUMBER 20115 235 . 66 * SIMS PEST & DISEASE 20116 230 . 00 * GREGORY K _ SMITH 2O117 34479 . 00 * SUN TRIBUNE 20118 442 . 78 * SOIL TECH, INC . 20119 777 .S0 * SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 20120 16 . 97 * SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO . 20121 9 . 86 * RUSSELL TOURVILLE CONSTRUCTI 201212 9005 . 00 * U. S . AUTO CLASS, INC . 2012 178 . 27 * WAKEFIELD COMPANY 20124 101 . 80 * CREATIVE CULINARY CONCEPTS 20125 300 . 00 * DEBBIE DESIMONE 20126 121 . 00 * RUG DOCTOR RENTS 2012 19 . 20 * 1 1 f { I AGEN A ITEM 0.�, GE 2- OF IE) LAKE ELSINORE PAGE NO. 3 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -013 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE :HER WARRANT CHECK DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV,NO. AMOUNT N0. AMOUNT WRITTEN 171471 . 28 PREPAID . 00 ACCRUED . 00 TOTAL 171471 . 28 RECAP BY FUND PRE--PAID WRITTEN GENERAL FUND 100 . 00 90776 . 35 LIGHTING/LANDSCAPE DISTR 130 . 00 673 . 20 BRIDGE CAPITAL PROJECTS F202 . 00 S384 . 04 PARK CAPITAL PROJECTS FU 221 . 00 15183 . 19 L .E . T . S _ FUND 450 . 00 197 . 47 OTHER FUNDS 999 . 00 592S7 . 03 I AGEN DA ITEM NO AGES F LAKE EL S I NORE PAGE NO. 1 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91-01 4 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK :R DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT A - 7 BUS SALES 20131 28S .56 * ACE LOCK d KEY 20132 100 . 00 * ALLANS POWER & EQUIPMENT REt 2013 32 . 30 * ALPHA BUSINESS LOANS, INC . 201314 96 . 00 * AMBER AIR: CONDITIONING 2013S 66 . 42 * AMERICAN EXPRESS CO . 20136 48 . 82 * ARBOR PRO TREE SERVICE 20137 70sO . OQ * AWARD CO. OF AMERICA 20136 311 . 20 * BIG AL OIL CO . 2013S ISS2 . 63 * CYNTHIA BLOOD-WILSON 20140 237 . 60 * PAM BRINLEY 20141 150 . 00 * JEFF BROWN 2014 150 . 00 * r B .S . I . CONSULTANTS, INC . 20143 10324 . 16 * WILLIAM S. BUCK L>0144 300 . 00 * C .M .S . BUSINESS FORMS 2014S 315 .SS * CALTIP TREASURER 19947 2399 . 00 * CALIF . EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPME 19933 2743 . 80 * CAPELLO JANITORIAL SUPPLY , I 20146 328 . 23 * TERESA CHERVENY 20147 150 . 00 * CONTINENTAL PACIFIC BATTERY 2014 49 . 05 * COOL RADIATOR 20149 35 . 00 * DANIEL' $ TIRE SERVICE 20150 783 . 36 AGENDA ITEN I N0. RGE CF lc:) LAKE ELSINORE PAGE N0, 2 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 _41 4 DATE 07/31/90 PAYEE HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED wARWRITTENECK 10. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT FRED DOMINGUEZ 201>f 300 . 00 * F.V.M.W .D' c^0152 1680 . 71 * EKCC 20153 1044 . 25 * ELSINORE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY, l 20154 1105 .53 # ELSINORE PIONEER LUMBER CO . 20iss 3868 . 36 ELSINORE READY MIX CO . , INC . 20156 43 .58 ELSINORE VALLEY RENTALS 20IS7 253 . 00 * FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP . 20158 198 . 75 * FIRST TRUST BANK 19926 102 . 96 * FIRST TRUST BANK 19928 22208 . 45 * FIRST TRUST SANK 20033 22907 . 33 s FONTANA PAVING, INC . t0159 29S . 21 FONTANA PAVING, INC. 19935 13364 . 01 * FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO . 20160 1666 . 75 * FRED'S ELECTRIC 20161 1890 . 00 * G.T.E.L . 19949 22276 . 19 * GEARHARTS SERVICE STATION 20162 873 . 13 * GENERAL TELEPHONF CO . 2016 45 . 51 * GENERAL TELEPHONE CO . 19944 42 . 76 * GENERAL TELEPHONE CO . 19945 ^c600 . 14 * TONY GIL£NSON 20164 150 . 00 * GOLDEN OFFICE TRAILERS, INC . 2016 240 . 19 AOE DA!TE N0. PAGE S OF VCD LAKE ELSINORE PAGE NO. 3 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 _014 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK ;PIER Q. DETAIL Of DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D 1NV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT DAVID A. GUNDERMAN 20166 490 . 00 HERRERA INTERIORSCAFFS 2016 154 . 00 : HORIZON WATERS 201se 162 . 10 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 2015 1379 . 42 I£MA RETIREMENT TRUST 1992i 1379 . 42 � J & R LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 201 7.0 3536 .S0 ; MICHELE JECTER 20171 71 . 39 � STEVE KARVELOT 20172 376 . 00 VICKI LYNN KASAD 2017 200 . 00 x KLEEN LINE CORPORATION 20174 251 . 93 KOCH MATERIALS COMPANY 20175 661 . Si KURAGAM I WHOLESALE NURSER IE. 20176 233 . 7S >k LAKE ELSINORE ANIMAL. FRIENDE 20177 5181 . 66 � CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 199P.7 55568 . 74 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE= 19952 59437 . 91 # CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 20034 100 . 00 LAKE ELSINORE FLORIST & GIFI 2017E 80 . 60 LAKE ELSINORE LOCK 3 KEY 2017 34 . 61 LAKE ELSINORE TIRE & AUTO 20180 15 . 96 � LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 20181 10 . 68 M . J . M . ELECTRINICS 20182 21 . 19 DELORES MCDANIELS 19932 510 . 00 AGENDA ITEM P GE OF VQ LAKE ELS I NORE PAGE NO. 4 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91-014 DATE 07/31/90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK :HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN 0. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO, AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT MC LEAN 6 SCHULTZ 20183 14125 . 00 * MAYHALL PRINT SHOP 20184 2636 . ^c0 * MOORE RECREATION 6 PARK EQUI 20185 394 . 36 * MOTOROLA, INC . 20186 523 .50 N.B . S ./ LOWRY 20187 42559 . 48 * COUNTY OF ORANGE 20188 115 . 00 * ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING, INC . 20189 1024 . 88 * P . E . R . C . 20190 e20 . 00 * PMW ASSOCIATES 20191 120 . 00 * PACIFIC CLAY PRODUCTS, INC . 20192 306 .59 * PACIFIC ELECTRIC CO . 19934 19128. 60 * PACIFIC IRRIGATION SUPPLY, 1 20193 323 . 88 * PACTEL CELLULAR - LA (E 20194 27 . 91 * BILL PAYNE 2019S 51 . 25 THE PHOTO PLACE 20196 42 .22 * THE PLANNING ASSOCIATES 20197 17343 . 14 * THE PRESS ENTERPRISE 20198 90 . 00 * PRICE SECURITY SYSTEMS 20199 831 .2S * PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 20200 183 . 84 * PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19946 291 .50 * RANCHO CALIFORNIA GYMNASTICS 20201 720 . 00 * RIVERSIDE. COUNTY FEDERAL 20202 2766 . 56 s AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF LAKE ELSINORE PAGE NO. 5 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91-014 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE: WARRANT CHECK HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCAIPTION ACCOUNTCHO'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT RIVERSIDI: COUNTY FEDERAL 19930 3266 . 56 * COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - OFFICE 20203 2550 .31 * RIVERSIDE CO . PARKS DEPT . 20204 3 . 00 * COIS BYRD, SHERIFF 19931 95 . 75 * COIS BYRD, SHERIFF 19942 103 . 73 * COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - SHERIF 2020S 1797 . 60 * RODRIGUEZ DISPOSAL CO . 20206 2609 . 00 * BILL SAATHOFF 20207 150 . 00 * SEARS CATALOG 20208 8 . 53 * KEVIN SHEAR 202109 780 . S0 * THERESE SMITH 20210 63 . 84 * RUDY SOLIS 20211 1620 . 00 * SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 20?12 2884 . 00 * SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 19938 304 . 83 * SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 19939 70 . 84 * STANDARD INSURANCE 20213 38 .40 * SILL STARKEY 2021 300 . 00 * TEMECULA VALLEY PERSONNEL 20215 960 . 00 * TEXACO REFINING-MARKETING It 202NI6 122 . 31 * THOMAS TEMPS 20217 1174 . 40 * RUSSELL TOURVILLE CONSTRUCT 20218 4220 . 00 * U . P . S. 2021 26 . 48 5 A ENDA ITEM NO. PAG OF lO LAKE EL.S I NORE PAGE NO. 6 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -014 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK +ER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT U.S . GAMES 20220 175 . 71 * UNIVERSAL COACH PARTS INC . 20221 17 . 06 * GARY WASHBURN Eozap 300 . 00 * RICHARD WATENPAUGH 2OZE3 400 . 00 * WEST PUBLISHING CO . 20224 69 . 30 * WESTLAKE MEDICAL GROUP 202215 55 . 00 * AL WILSEY 20226 100 . 00 * JIM WINKLER 2OeP- 300 . 00 * RAY WOOD ASSOCIATES 19942 3675 . 00 * ZUMAR INDUSTRIES 202e8 124 . 05 * SMART & FINAL 20229 238 . 74 * CLERK OF THE COURT 19951 70 . 00 * URBAN 6 REGIONAL INFO . SYSTE 20230 32 . 50 * CAYTON ELECTRIC 19937 3455 . 00 * MP CONCRETE PUMPING SERVICE 20231 90 . 00 * RAIDER OIL & CHEMICAL CO . 19941 1r0 . 00 GUS L.AVORICH 19940 6795 . 00 * NELSON' $ SANDBLASTING 19936 S00 . 00 * BRYSKAR BUSINESS SERVICES 19948 120 . 00 * DIANE HCALARY 20232 85 . 00 * NANCY TORN 20233 63 . 7S * AGENDA ITEM No -_--A�� PA E OF--L0---- FAKE ELS INORE PAGE NO. 7 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 9 1 -014 DATE 07/31 /9 0 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK ;HER 0. DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT WRITTEN 154948 . 69 PREPAID 223667 .S2 ACCRUED . 00 T01 AL 378616 . 21 RECAP SY FUND PRE-PAID WRITTEN GENERAL FUND 100 184144 . 61 60859 . 46 TRANSPORTATION FUND 112 13364 . 01 . 00 LIGHTING/LANDSCAPE DISTR 130 559 . 18 20905. 81 BRIDGE CAPITAL PROJECTS F202 . 00 14125 . 00 PARK CAPITAL PROJECTS FU 221 23083 . 60 11093. 95 L .E . T .S . FUND 450 2516 . 12 2854 . 68 OTHER FUNDS 999 . 00 4S109 . 79 GENDA ITEM NQ. PA GECF j STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Govemor CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION : CHARLES R. IMBRECHT Chairman July 16, 1990 Dear Mayor: October is California's Energy Awareness Month. The energy industry is the largest single sector in the state, contributing $75 billion to the economy in 1989. To inform all state residents of the meaning of this special month and to gain recognition at both city and county levels, we are enclosing a copy of Governor George Deukmejian's official proclamation. We encourage your participation in .events related to Energy Awareness Month, and hope that you will issue a local proclamation or resolution to that effect. If we receive a copy of your document by August 15, 1990, we will include it in press kits targeted to local media outlets. Your original document will be on display at the California Energy Commission during Energy Awareness Month. Any questions regarding related activities should be directed to: Bob Aldrich Public Information Officer California Energy Commission 1516 - 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 Thank you for your interest and assistance in this cooperative effort. Sincere�x, / r i tr CHARLES R. IMBRECHT ' Chairman Enclosure 1516Ninth Street,Sacramento,California 95814 (gib)324-3326 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE�.—.OF r • WHEREAS, California is a world economic force and is the fifth largest consumer of energy and being among the largest economic sectors in the state. California ranks third in gasoline consumption attributed to vehicles, behind only the entire United States and the Soviet Union and the energy industry contributed $75 billion to the overall state economy in 1989 alone; and WHEREAS, energy as a consumer commodity in its varied forms -- electricity, natural gas, fossil and petroleum-based fuels, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and cogeneration -- affects consumers throughout our state; and WHEREAS, California leads the nation in developing and implementing conservation programs, alternative transportation fuels demonstrations, energy security contingency planning methods and research pertaining to renewable and alternative energy resources and technologies; and WHEREAS, the California Energy Commission, as the state ' s designated principal energy planning agency, is responsible for ensuring a reliable supply of energy consistent with protecting the environment and enhancing our economy. ITOW, THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE on this 14th day of August, 1990, does hereby proclaim October 1990 as Energy Awareness Month using the theme "USING ENERGY WISELY - THERE 'S NEVER ENOUGH TO WASTE" and urging all its citizens to increase their awareness and knowledge of wise and efficient ways to use the varied forms of energy available to them. GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR P AGENDA ITEM NO, PAGE OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL DATE: August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: New Council Policy Prepared by: Approved for Agenda: Vicki Kasad Ron Moleepdyk City Clerk City MaMger BACKGROUND At a recent City Council Meeting staff was directed to develop a policy relating to reconsideration requests for items already considered by the City Council. After much discussion at the last Council Meeting, this item was tabled and the City Attorney was directed to re-write the policy. Attached is the new proposed policy. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed policy. AGENDA ITEM NO. f "N PAGE OFF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Agenda Policy No. 100-5A Items (Not requiring Public Effective Date Hearing) Page 1 of 1 BACKGROUND On occasion an applicant requests reconsideration of conditions, terms, etc. of a previously considered agenda item. The process for dealing with this type of request is not clearly defined by the Municipal Code or established Council Policy. PURPOSE To provide a process for handling requests for reconsideration. POLICY It is the policy of the Lake Elsinore City Council that requests for reconsideration must be received within ten (10) days of the initial City Council Action. Upon receipt, such request shall be placed on the agenda as a Business Item; such request shall require a majority vote to allow the reconsideration. If majority approval is granted for the reconsideration, the matter will be scheduled for the next City Council Meeting to allow for staff preparation of the report. Matters originally requiring a noticed public hearing shall not be reconsidered except by following the original public hearing procedures. The purpose of reconsideration is not the consideration of evidence not previously presented. It is not be be construed as an appeal of an unfavorable decision, nor a rearguing of the evidence already presented. The burden of showing justification for reconsideration shall be on the proponent for the reconsideration. Adopted: AGENDA ITEM NO. f PAGE OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN AGENCY PREPARED BY:C APPROVED: Ron Kirchner Ron Molendyk Director of Public City Ma ger Services BACKGROUND With the passage of Proposition 111 last June, the Congestion Management Plan provision of AB 471 became effective. This legislation states that, "A congestion management program shall be developed, adopted, and annually updated for every County. The program shall be developed. . . . , either by the county transportation commission, or by another public agency, as designated by resolutions adopted by the county board of supervisors and the city councils of a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area of the county. " SUMMARY At its regular meeting on July 11th, Riverside County Transportation Commission voted to seek designation as the agency responsible for development of the Congestion Management Plan/Program in Riverside County. As a result, the Commission requests the council to formally consider the matter and adopt a resolution designating the Commission as the agency responsible for development of the CMP. FISCAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Resolution. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE,_/ OF _.?/ RESOLUTION 90--J�, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DESIGNATING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO PREPARE THE COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the State legislature has adopted AB 471 (Chapter 106, Stats. 1989) requiring the adoption of countywide congestion management programs to coordinate streets and highways transportation planning; and WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65089 (a) adopted as part of AB 471 requires that the County of Riverside and a majority of cities within the County representing a majority of the incorporated population adopt resolutions designating the Riverside County Transportation Commission to coordinate the development, adoption and annual updating of a congestion management program within the County; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby resolves as follows: The City hereby approves the Riverside County Transportation Commission as the agency responsible for the development, adoption and annual Updating of the County congestion management program developed pursuant to Section 65088 et. sea. of the California Government Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 1990. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST VICKI LYNNE KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE y OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT LAKESHORE DRIVE/MACHADO STREET PREPARED BY: APPROVED: Ron Kirchner Ron Mol ndyk Director of Public City Manager Services BACKGROUND The County Transportation Department agreed informally several months ago to cooperate in the design and construction of a traffic signal at Lakeshore Drive and Machado Street. It was agreed that the City would be the lead agency. SUMMARY A cooperative agreement has been prepared by the City staff and has been approved by the Board of Supervisors. (Exhibit A) . It requires the City to design and construct the improvement with 75% of the costs paid by the County. The work is budgeted for the current year and the final plans will be completed in September. Estimated total cost is $150,000. FISCAL IMPACT Cost to the City is estimated to be $37,500. RECOMMENDATION Approve the Cooperative Agreement for this project. AGENDA ITEM NO.�_� PAGE.. OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS, LIGHTING AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAKESHORE DRIVE AND MACHADO STREET This Agreement entered into this day of JUL 3 1990 , 1990, is between the City of Lake Elsinore, referred to herein as "CITY", and the County of Riverside, referred to herein as "COUNTY". RECITALS (1) CITY and COUNTY desire to install traffic control signals and safety lighting and performing roadway improvements at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Machado Street in the area of the City of Lake Elsinore, referred to herein as "PROJECT", and desire to specify the terms and conditions under which PROJECT is to be engineered, constructed, financed, operated and maintained. (2) PROJECT intersection is jointly owned by CITY and COUNTY. (3) It has been determined that the State of California promulgated traffic signal warrants have been met for the PROJECT intersection. Section I COUNTY AGREES: (1) To pay an amount equal to seventy five percent (75%) of PROJECT construction and engineering costs. (2) To provide CITY with necessary policies, practices, procedures, specifications, and other standards required for the AGENDA ITEM NO. JUL 3 1990 PAGE O) preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimates, referred to herein as PS&E, for PROJECT. (3) To provide prompt reviews and approvals as appropriate of submittals by CITY and to cooperate in timely processing of PS&E. (4) To issue free to charge, upon application by CITY, the necessary Encroachment Permits for required work within COUNTY street rights of way. (5) To enter into a maintenance agreement with the CITY whereby the CITY will agree to operate and maintain the facilities and the COUNTY will pay seventy five percent (75%) and CITY will pay twenty five percent (25%) of the maintenance and energy costs for PROJECT. (5) To fund 100% of the costs to acquire necessary rights of way, if any, that is located within the incorporated boundaries of COUNTY, for PROJECT, as described in Section II, Article (3) . Section II CITY AGREES: (1) To pay an amount equal to twenty five percent (25%) of PROJECT construction and engineering costs. (2) - To prepare PS&E for PROJECT with CITY or consultant forces. PS&E are to be prepared in accordance with the Standard Plans and Specifications of the State of California Department of Transportation, the standards and practices of the County of Riverside, and all applicable laws and regulations. Said PS&E are subject to review and final approval by COUNTY. (3) To acquire and furnish_ in fee, in accordance with the funding requirements set forth herein, the necessary rights of way, if any, require for PROJECT. Rights of way acquired for PROJECT in favor AGENDA ITEM NO. i PAGE O� of COUNTY shall be funded in full by COUNTY in accordance with Section I, Article (6) . Rights of way acquired in favor of CITY shall be funded in full by CITY in accordance with Section II, Article (4) . (4) To fund 100% of the costs to acquire necessary rights of way, if any, that is located within the incorporated boundaries of CITY, for PROJECT, as described in Section II, Article (3) . (5) To have the final design documents and drawings for PROJECT prepared by or under the direction of civil engineers registered and licensed in the State of California. Any reports, the specifications, and each sheet of plans shall bear the professional seal, certificate, and signature of the professional engineer responsible for their preparation. (6) To identify and locate all high and low risk underground facilities, .including above and below ground utilities and construction obstacles, and to protect, remove, relocate or otherwise provide for such facilities. Costs of locating, identifying, protecting or otherwise providing for such high and low risk facilities shall be distributed and borne in the same manner as described in Section I, Article (1) and Section II, Article (1) . (7) To apply for necessary encroachment permits for work within COUNTY street rights of way, in accordance with COUNTY standard permit procedures. (8) To advertise, award and administer a public works contract for the construction of PROJECT improvements. (9) To retain or cause to be retained for audit for COUNTY or p CENDA ITEM NO. PAIGGE_G..--OF� other governmental auditors for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment, all records and accounts relating to construction of PROJECT. (10) Upon completion of PROJECT, to furnish COUNTY a complete set of full-sized reproducible "Drawing of Record" plans. (11) To enter into a maintenance agreement with COUNTY, whereby COUNTY will pay seventy five percent (75%) and CITY will pay twenty five percent (25%) of the maintenance and energy costs for PROJECT. Section III IT IS MUTUALLY_AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (1) The total cost of PROTECT is estimated to be One Hundred Forty Thousand Dollars ($140, 000. 00) . (2) Construction by CITY of improvements referred to herein which lie within COUNTY rights of way or affect COUNTY facilities, shall not be commenced until CITY'S original contract plans involving such work have been reviewed and approved by signature of CITY'S Engineer, or his delegated agent, and by COUNTY'S Road Commissioner, or his delegated agent, and until an Encroachment Permit authorizing such work has been issued by COUNTY to CITY therefor. Receipt by CITY of CITY'S contract plans signed by COUNTY shall constitute COUNTY acceptance of the official approval of said plans. (3) In construction of said work, CITY will furnish a representative to perform the functions of Resident Engineer, and COUNTY may furnish a representative. The COUNTY'S representative may consult with CITY'S representative, however, the decisions of the CITY'S representative shall be considered final. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF (4) Execution of this Agreement by COUNTY grants CITY the right to enter upon COUNTY right of way to construct the PROJECT referred to herein. (5) No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the parties hereto. (5) Upon completion of all work under this Agreement, ownership and title to all materials, equipment, and appurtenances installed will be jointly shared in the ratio of seventy five percent (75%) COUNTY and twenty five percent (25%) CITY. (7) Neither COUNTY nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is further agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4 , CITY shall fully indemnify and hold COUNTY harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810. 8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. (8) Neither CITY nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by COUNTY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to COUNTY under this Agreement. It is also agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, COUNTY shall fully indemnify and A(3ENDA ITEM NO. 31-- PAGE OF—L-- hold CITY harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by COUNTY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to COUNTY under this Agreement. AGENDA ITEM NO. _!!= PAGE OF notices: Any notices required to be sent pursuant to this Agreement shall be sent by regular mail, addressed as follows: .City of Lake Elsinore County of Riverside Ron Kirchner, City Engineer Ivan F. Tennant, Acting 130 S. Main Street Road Commissioner Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 P.O. Box 1090 Riverside, CA 92502 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Dated Dated -JUL 31990 F By: BY: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor Cha an �y per Board o Sup isors Co de Attest: Attest: Gerald Maloney Clerk of the- and of Superviso s By: By: Vicki L. Kasad, City Clerk putt' lerk of Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: William C4 Katzenstein, Zan'-fy l John Harper, City Attorney Couirsel AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE. OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: TRAFFIC CONTROL RESOLUTION - PREPARED BY: APPROVED: Ron Kirchner Ron Mole yk Director of Public City Manger Services BACKGROUND Staff has prepared the attached Resolutions to address certain traffic control problems as follows: LOADING ZONES The property owner has requested this zone in front of the California Inn Hotel. FISCAL IMPACT Minimal RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Resolution. AGENDA ITEM NO.�. PAGE J OF RESOLUTION 90-1j A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DESIGNATING LOCATIONS OF LOADING ZONES OF CERTAIN STREETS WHEREAS, Section 10.40. 060 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides for the designation of "Loading Zones" by resolution of the City Council; and, WHEREAS, it has been determined that the designation of such zones on certain streets or portions thereof, is necessary to provide for the convenient loading and unloading of passengers or material. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, hereby establishes certain :Loading Zones" on those streets or portions thereof set forth as follows: NAME OF STREET SIDE OF STREET LOCATION OF LOADING ZONE/LENGTH Main Street Easterly Approx. 25 feet Southerly of Prospect Street/24 feet BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Director of Public Services is hereby directed to place and maintain painted markings, as required by the Vehicle Code, at said locations giving notice of said designations. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this day of , upon the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST VICKI LYNNE KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ITEM NO.JQ- PAGE_ 0E— -'~ RESOLUTION NO. 90-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION #90-68, REQUESTING THE TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA TO PLACE ASSESSMENTS ON THE BILLS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California (the "City") , has heretofore instituted and conducted proceedings under the terms and provisions of the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (the "Act") being Division 12 (commencing with Section 10000) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the acquisition and construction of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment district designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87-2 (SHOPPERS SQUARE) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District") ; and WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 88-46 adopted on August 9, 1988 (the "Resolution of Intention") , it was determined and declared that bonds should be issued under the provisions of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, being Division 10 (commencing with Section 8500) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, all assessments in this district were levied without regard to property valuation; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore does hereby resolve as follows: 1 . That the portion of the Principal , Interest and other costs totaling $156, 164.04 related to Assessment District No. 87-2 due or coming due through June 30, 1991, be placed on the County Tax Rolls and be collected by the Riverside County Tax Collector. 2. That the properties to be so assessed and the related amounts are submitted on magnetic tape as requested by Riverside County Tax Collector. AGENDA IT8M NO. -- PAG� OF.- PAGE TWO - RESOLUTION NO. 90- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED the day of 1990, upon the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI LYNNE KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO. VAGE-2—OF RESOLUTION NO. 90- '715 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION #90-67, REQUESTING THE TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA TO PLACE ASSESSMENTS ON THE BILLS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California (the "City") , has heretofore instituted and conducted proceedings under the terms and provisions of the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (the "Act"), being Division 12 (commencing with Section 10000) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the acquisition and construction of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment district designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 89-1 (SUMMERHILL BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District") ; and WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 89-29 adopted on July 25, 1989 (the "Resolution of Intention") , it was determined and declared that bonds should be issued under the provisions of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, being Division 10 (commencing with Section 8500) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, all assessments in this district were levied without regard to property valuation; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore does hereby resolve as follows: 1 . That the portion of the Principal , Interest and other costs totaling $165,805.98 related to Assessment District No. 89-1 due or coming due through June 30, 1991, be placed on the County Tax Rolls and be collected by the Riverside County Tax Collector. 2. That the properties to be so assessed and the related amounts are submitted on magnetic tape as requested by Riverside County Tax Collector. AGENDA ITEM NO. --' PAGE OF_ PAGE TWO - RESOLUTION NO. 90- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED the day of 1990, upon the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI LYNNE KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL DATE: AUGUST 14 , 1990 SUBJECT: LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE PREPARED BY: �.e/ APPROVED BY: ?t) I. C. Ray Wood, Administr Ron Mondyk,ve _ Services Director City Manager BACKGROUND: The City and related agencies are facing growing problems of general and specific needs related to State Legislative actions affecting our City. While the League of California Cities ably represents the broader Cities ' needs, there have been, and will increasingly continue to be needs related specifically to Lake Elsinore and/or a small number of cities in which the League does not have resources to become involved. A recent example is the legislation adversely affecting the Marks-Roos Bond Pooling Act which we are using. Many cities throughout the State have found it highly desirable, even necessary, to acquire the services of a Legislative Advocate for direct representation. Staff has carefully reviewed and made inquiries about such advocates and has received a proposal for such services. The proposal has been submitted for your review. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to secure the services of a Legislative Advocate to represent the various agencies of Lake Elsinore is $24, 000 per year. The potential return is not measurable. However, if we had successful advocacy in the recent situation referenced to above, the potential return would have been far greater than the cost. RECOA1,1ENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a contract and related required forms for the services of Joe A. Gonsalves and Son for services as Legislative Advocates in Sacramento. A(X%L;A ITEM PLO._- J3- PAGF_L_0F_J_�_- - _ r A G R E E M E N BETWEEN JOE A. GONSALVES & SON AND THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE The City of Lake Elsinore wishes to engage the services of JOE A. GONSALVES & SON, 925 L Street, Suite 205, Sacramento, California, to provide services in legislative advocacy and governmental affairs in matters affecting cities in California. The purpose of this Agreement is to state the terms and conditions under which JOE A. GONSALVES & SON will provide services to the client, the City of Lake Elsinore. The terms and conditions of this agreement are as follows: 1. JOE A. GONSALVES & SON shall review all bills introduced in the California Legislature and inform the City of all such legislation affecting the City's interest and forward weekly a copy of all such bills to the City. 2. The City shall review and analyze all such bills and inform JOE A. GONSALVES & SON, in writing, of City's position. AGMCA ITEM i40. 13 PAGE 2 of 3. JOE A. GONSALVES & SON shall be designated and authorized by the City to act as an official representative with the California State Legislature and various governmental agencies, commissions, and persons involved in governmental affairs affecting the City. 4. JOE A. GONSALVES & SON shall at all times perform duties customarily performed by legislative advocates and governmental affairs representatives on behalf of the City to the best of their abilities, experience, and talents. 5. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the 1st day of J_u1v, 1990, and shall continue in full force and effect until terminated by a thirty day (30) written notice from either party to the other. 6. The City shall pay to JOE A. GONSALVES & SON the monthly sum of 2 , 000, payable in advance on the first day of each month with automatic annual adjustments based on the increases in the consumer price index for the previous year. 7 . The City shall reimburse JOE A. GONSALVES & SON for any travel and other expenses directly related to a request by the City for JOE A. GONSALVES & SON to participate in any meetings or activities outside of Sacramento. -2- PAGE 3 OF r 8. If any action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, costs, and necessary disbursements in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled. 9. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. It constitutes the entire Agreement between parties regarding its subject matter. If any provision in this Agreement is held by any court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as follows: JOE A. GONSAL S & SON DATED: G BY THE CITY OF DATED: BY -3- AGEtti :k I i ct�: i1 PAGE OF,�- LOBBYING FIRM ACTIVITY AUTHORIZATION (Government Code Section 86104) 1989-1990 Session (insert Years) FORM 602 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ;ggp TYPE OR PRINTIN INK - A For information required to be provided to you pursuant to the Information Practices Act of B 1977,see Information Manual on Lobb in Disclosure Provisions of the Political Reform Act. NAME OF LOBBYIST EMPLOYER: TELEPHONE NUMBER: CITY OF LAKE ELSI14ORE (714 ) 674-3124 BUSINESS ADDRESS. (Number and Street) (city) (State) (Tip Code) EFFECTIVE DATE. 130 S. 'fain Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 July 1, 1990 I hereby authorize JOE A. GONSALVES & SON (Name of Lobbying Firm) 925 L Street, Suite 205 , Sacr=ento, California 95814 (Business Address) to engage in the activities of a lobbying firm (as defined in California Government Code Section 82038.5 and 2 Cal. Adm. Code Section 18238.5) on behalf of the above-named employer. VERIFICATION I have used all reasonable diligence in preparing this Statement. I have reviewed the Statement and to the best of my knowledge the information contained herein is true and complete. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on(Date) At(City and State) By(Signature of Responsible Officer) July 1, 1990 Lake Elsinore, CA Name of Responsible Officer(Type or Print) l.tie PAGE OFjj-� NAME OF FILER: CITY OF LAKE ELSINOFL NATURE AND INTERESTS OF LOBBYIST EMPLOYER (See instructions on reverse.) Check ONE box ONLY: ❑ INDIVIDUAL(Complete ❑ BUSINESS ENTITY ❑ INDUSTRY,TRADE OR OTHER(Complete only only Parts A and E) (Complete only Parts PROFESSIONAL ASSN. Parts D and £) B and E) (Complete only Parts C and F) A. INDIVIDUAL E. INDUSTRY GROUP CLASSIFICATION l_ NAME AND ADDRESS OF EMPLOYER (Check one box which most accurately describes (or principal place of business if self-employed) the industry group which you represent. See instructions on reverse.) ❑ AGRICULTURE 2. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN WHICH YOU OR YOUR EMPLOYER ARE ENGAGED ❑ EDUCATION ® GOVERNMENT B. BUSINESS ENTITY ❑ HEALTH DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN WHICH ENGAGED ❑ LABOR UNIONS ❑ LEGAL ❑ MISCELLANEOUS C. INDUSTRY,TRADE OR PROFESSIONAL ASSN. [].PUBLIC EMPLOYEES I_ DESCRIPTION OF INDUSTRY,TRADE,OR PROFESSION REPRESENTED ❑ POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS ❑ UTILITIES 2. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF ANY PORTION OR FACTION OF THE INDUSTRY,TRADE,OR PROFESSION WHICH THE ASSOCIATION EXCLUSIVELY OR PRIMARILY REPRESENTS BUSINESS: ❑ ENTERTAINMENT/RECREATION ❑ FINANCE/INSURANCE ❑3. NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN ASSOCIATION(Check appropriate box) LODGING/RESTAURANTS ❑ MISCELLANEOUS ❑ SO OR LESS(Provide names of all members on an attachment) ❑ MANUFACTURIN WlNDUSTRlAL ❑ MORE THAN SO ❑ MERCHANDISEIRETAIL D. OTHER ❑ OIL AND GAS l_ STATEMENT OF NATURE AND PURPOSES ❑ PROFESSIONAL/TRADE Municipal Government serving the best ❑ REAL ESTATE interests of the citizens of the City ❑ TRANSPORTATION of Lake Elsinore. 2. DESCRIPTION OF ANY TRADE,PROFESSION,OR OTHER GROUP WITH A COMMON ECONOMIC INTEREST WHICH IS PRINCIPALLY REPRESENTED OR FROM WHICH MEMBERSHIP OR FINANCIAL SUPPORT IS PRINCIPALLY DERIVED AGENDA(T>:M NO. Government - City of Lake Elsinore PAGE! OF r AMENDMENT TO REGISTRATION STATEMENT (Government Code Section 86107) • — © LOBBYING FIRM REGISTRATION - - - - - ❑ LOBBYSST_EMPLOYER REGISTRATION ❑ LOBBYING COALITION REGISTRATION 1989 - 1990 Session FORM 605 (Insert Years) 1990 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY TYPE OR PRINT IN INK A For information required to be provided to you pursuant to the Information Practices Act of B 7977,see Information Manual on Lobbying Disclosure Provisions of the Political Reform Act. NAME OF FILER. JOE A. GONSALVES & SON ADDRESS (Number and Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code) TELEPHONE NUMBER: 925 L. Street, Suite 205, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 441-0597 PART I-DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES (See instructions on the back of this page) E] ADD ❑ DELETE ❑CHANGE ❑ ADD ❑ DELETE ❑CHANGE Effective date: 7/1/90 Effective date: Description: Description: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA -92330 (714) 674--3124 PART II-UST OF ATTACHMENTS (See instructions on cover sheet and the back of this page.) Check appropriate box(es): ® Form 601 (Lobbying Firm Registration Statement) ®Form 602(Lobbying Firm Activity Authorization) ❑ Form 604(Lobbyist Certification Statement) ❑ Form 606(Statement of Termination) VERIFICATION I have used all reasonable diligence in preparing this Amendment. I have reviewed the Amendment and to the best of my knowledge the information contained herein is true and complete. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. C Executed on(Date) At(City and State) B (Si of Y nature 9 Responsible Officer) ° 7/l/90 Sacramento, CA E Name of Responsible Officer(Type or Print) Title F JOE A. GONSALVES AGENDA ITE NO. PRESIDENT _ F­ I c�,� LOBBYING FIRM REG;STRATION STATEMENT PAGE 1 OF 2 (Government Code Section 86104) 1989-1990 Session} (Insert Years) FORM 601 1990 TYPE_ OR PRINT IN INK FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY A For information required to be provided to you pursuant to the Information Practices Act of 1977,see information Manual on Lobbying Disclosure Provisions of the Political Reform Act. NAME OF LOBBYING FIRM: TELEPHONE NUMBER: JOE A.- GONSALVES & SON (916 ) 441-0597 BUSINESS ADDRESS: (Number and Street) . (City) (State) . (Zip Code) If this is an Initial Registration,enter th 925 L. Street, Suite 205, Sacramento, CA 95314 DATE QUALIFIED as a Lobbying Firm: MAILING ADDRESS: (11 different than above) Same PART I-INDIVIDUAL LOBBYISTS(List the full name of each partner, owner,officer,or employee of the lobbying firm who is a lobbyist. Do not lost any individual who is separately registered as a lobbying firm or who is employed by a lobbying firm with which you subcontract.) JOE A. GONSALVES ANTHONY D. GONSALVES For each lobbyist fisted above, attach a Form 604 (Lobbyist Certification)completed by the lobbyist and a$25 registration fee. ❑ If more space is needed,check box and attach continuation sheets- PART II-LOBBYIST EMPLOYERS(List each person with whom the firm contracts to provide lobbying services. If the firm is hired by any other lobbying firm,list the subcontracting firm first,then list the client(s)for whom you will lobby.) Employer's Name.Address,and Telephone Number Effective Date Period of Contract CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 South Main Street 7/l/90 Indeterminate Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 (714) 674-3124 ...... ........ ...... .................................................................................------ ........................................ ...•--—........................... Agencies to be Lobbied Description of Employer's Lobbying Interests Legislation relating to Local Government issues. Employer's Name.Address,and Telephone Number Effective Date Period of Contract .................................................................................................................... ....................................... ..................._................ Agencies to be Lobbied Description of Employer's Lobbying Interests Employer's Name,Andress,and Telephone Number Effective Date Period of Contract ....................................... ................................... Agencies to be Lobbied Description of Employer's Lobbying interests For each lobbyist employer listed above, attach a Form 602 (Lobbying Firm Activity Authorization)signed by the employer. ❑ If more space is needed,check box and attach continuation sheets. AGENDA ITEM NO. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE VERIFICATION ON PAGE 2 PACE OF r PAGE 2 OF 2 PART III-STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICER t am a partner,owner,or officer of the lobbying firm of JOB A. GONSALVES & SO'N 1 am the person responsible for filing"statements and reports and keeping records required by Chapter 6 of the Political Reform Act (Government Code Sections 81000-91015). 1 have read and understand the prohibitions contained in Sections 86203 and 86205. 86203. It shall be unlawful for a lobbyist or a lobbying firm,to make gifts to one person aggregating more than ten dollars($10) in a calendar month, or to act as an agent or intermediary in the making of any gift, or to arrange for the making of any gift by any other person_ "Gift' as used in Section 86203 means a gift made directly or indirectly to any state candidate, elected state officer, or legislative official, or to an agency official of any agency required to be listed on the registration statement of the lobbying firm or the lobbyist employer of the lobbyist. 86205. No lobbyist or lobbying firm shall: (a) Do anything with the purpose of placing any elected state officer, legislative official, agency official, or state candidate under personal obligation to the lobbyist,the lobbying firm,or the lobbyist's or the firm's employer. (b) Deceive or attempt to deceive any elected state officer, legislative.official, agency official,.or state candidate with regard to any material fact pertinent to any pending or proposed legislative or administrative action. (c) Cause or influence the introduction of any bill or amendment thereto for the purpose of thereafter being employed to secure its passage or defeat- (d) Attempt to create a fictitious appearance of public favor or disfavor of any proposed legislative or administrative action or to cause any communication to be sent to any elected state officer, legislative official, agency official, or state candidate in the name of any fictitious person or in the name of any real person, except with the consent of such real person. (e) Represent falsely, either directly or indirectly, that the lobbyist or the lobbying firm can control the official action of any elected state officer,legislative official,or agency official. (f) Accept or agree to accept any payment in any way contingent upon the defeat, enactment, or outcome of any proposed legislative or administrative action. VERIFICATION 1 have used all reasonable diligence in preparing this Statement. I have reviewed the Statement and to the best of my knowledge the information contained herein is true and complete. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. ................ .................................. Executed on(Date) At(City and State) .................. ..g..Sign. lle. ........ .... ..... ... .. y(Signature of Responsible Officer) D July 1, 1990 Sacramento, CA E Name of Responsible Officer(Type or Print) Title F JOE A. GONSALVES P " IDENT 11 PAGE �! OF Joe A. Gonsalves & Son '! PROFESSIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATION j PARK EXECUTIVE BLDG. SUITE 205 925 L ST. SACRAMENTO,CA 95814-3787.016 441-0597 ANTHONY SCHOOLS CORPORATION THE LUSK COMPANY William A. McAlwee, President and 17550 Gillette Avenue Chief Executive Officer Irvine, California 92713 Corporate Headquarters John D. Lusk, President 15942 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 100 (714) 757-6101 San Leandro, . California 94578 William Lusk, Vice President and (415) 481-7667 Chairman of the Board (714) 757-6102 CALIFORNIA FINANCIAL SERVICE Don Steffensen, Senior Vice President ASSOCIATION (714) 757-6104 1010 11th Street, Suite 210 Hugh Dynes, Liaison Sacramento, California 95814 Switchboard (714) 757-6100 George Angell (916) 446-1207 OAK TREE RACING ASSOCIATION (619) 566-7360 285 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91007-3439 CALIFORNIA PRODUCER-HANDLER Clement Hirsch, President ASSOCIATION (714) 645-5111 ` 502 Mace Boulevard, Suite 12 Ray Rogers, Executive Vice President Davis, California 95616 (818) 574-6345 Amos DeGroot, President (916) 753-1127 ROCKVIEW DAIRIES, INC. 7011 East Stewart and Gray Road CHINO CORONA FARMS Post Office Box 668 31726 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 118 Downey, California 90241 San Juan Capistrano, California 92675 Amos DeGroot, President Larry Vaughan, President (213) 927-5511 (714) 240-0595 STUEVE'S NATURAL INC. DEL MAR THOROUGHBRED CLUB 8300 Pine Avenue Post Office Box 700 Chino, California 91710 Del Mar, California 92014 Harold J. J. Stueve, President Joe Harper, Executive Vice President (714) 393-0960 and General Manager Tom Hamilton, Chairman of the Board WILLDAN ASSOCIATES (619) 755-1141 222 South Harbor Boulevard Suite 600 EXECUTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Anaheim, California 92805-3711 11444 West Olympic Boulevard John Maulding, Senior Vice President Los Angeles, California 90064 (714) 758-8186 William J. Adams, Senior Vice Jim Easton, Sacramento Office President and General Counsel (916) 442-2817 (213) 312-2104 INDUSTRIAL CATERERS ASSOCIATION 7300 Artesia Boulevard AGENDA ITEM NO. Buena Park, California 90621 pgGE_ 1 OF Kelly Ramirez, Manager (714) 521-6000 r� CITY OF BELL GARDENS CITY OF LA MIRADA AND LA MIRADA 7100 South Garfield Avenue REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Bell Gardens, California 90201 13700 La Mirada Boulevard Claude Booker, Manager La Mirada, California 90638 (213) 806-4501 Gary Sloan, Administrator (213) 943-0131 CITY OF BELLFLOWER 16600 Civic Center Drive CITY OF LAKEWOOD Bellflower, California 90706-5494 5050 Clark Avenue Jack Simpson, Administrator Lakewood, California 90714 (213) 804-1424 Howard Chambers, Administrator (213) 866-9771 CITY OF COMMERCE 2535 Commerce Way CITY OF NORWALK Commerce, California 90040 12700 Norwalk Boulevard Louis Shepard, Administrator Norwalk, California 90651-1030 (213) 722-4805 Richard R. Powers, Manager (213) 929-2677 CITY OF CUDAHY 5220 Santa Ana Street CITY OF PALM DESERT Cudahy, California 90201 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Jack Joseph, Manager Palm Desert, California 92260 (213) 773-5143 Bruce Altman, Manager Carlos Ortega, Assistant Manager CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (619) 346-0611 21660 East Copley Drive Suite 100 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 3200 East Tahquitz-McCallum Way Robert Van Nort, Manager Palm Springs, California 92263 (714) 860-2489 Norm King, Administrator (619) 323-8201 CITY OF DOWNEY Dallas Flicek, Assistant Administrator 11111 Brookshire Avenue (619) 323-8214 Downey, California 90241-8016 Jerry Caton, Manager CITY OF PALMDALE (213) 869-7331 708 East Palmdale Boulevard Palmdale, California 93550 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS AND Robert W. Toone, Jr. , Administrator HAWAIIAN GARDENS REDEVELOPMENT (805) 273-3162 AGENCY 21815 Pioneer Boulevard CITY OF PARAMOUNT Hawaiian Gardens, California 90716 16400 Colorado Avenue Ron Downing, Administrator Paramount, California 90723 (213) 420-2641 William Holt, Manager (213) 220-2000 CITY OF INDUSTRY Post Office Box 3366 CITY OF PITTSBURG 15651 East Stafford Street 2020 Railroad Avenue Industry, California 91744 Pittsburg, California 94565 Chris Rope, Manager S. Anthony Donato, Manager (818) 333-2211 (415) 439-4850 INDUSTRY URBAN-DEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF PLEASANT HILL Post Office Box 7089 3300 North Main Street 15651 East Stafford Street Pleasant Hill , California 94523 Industry, California 91744-3366 Joe Tanner, Manager (818) 961-6341 (415) 944-3267 2 Dave Larsen, Attorney ACUZAITEh1` NO. 13 (415) 944-3239 PAG= 4I OF� G CITY OF RANCHO Ci"',1MONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Jack Lam, Manager (714) 989-1851 CITY OF ROSEMEAD 8838 East Valley Boulevard Rosemead, California 91770 Frank Tripepi, Manager (818) 288-2400 CITY OF SIMI VALLEY 2929 Tapo Canyon Road Simi Valley, California 93063 Lin Koester, Manager (805) 583-6701 CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS 2150 W. Hillcrest Drive Thousand Oaks, California 91320 Grant R. Brimhall, Manager (805) 497-8611 CITY OF VICTORVILLE 14343 Civic Drive Victorville, California 92392-2399 James L. Cox, Manager (619) 245-3411 CITY OF YORBA LINDA 4845 Casa Loma Avenue Yorba Linda, California 92686 Art Simonian, Manager Bruce Channing, Assistant Manager (714) 961-7100 AGENDA}TEN. NO._� PAGE_ _L 0� a REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 19358 r PREPARED BY: APPROVED: ay O'Donnell Ron Kirchner Senior Civil Engineer Director of Public Services APPROVED: Ron Molelodyk City Manager BACKGROUND The tentative map for Tract Map 19358 was approved by the City Council on April 8 , 1985, and was given final approval on March 28 , 1989 . This tract was conditioned to construct an offsite storm drain channel for Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) . SUMMARY The plans for the storm drain channel and an agreement for construction has been approved by RCFCD. The City needs to be a third party to the agreement to accept the storm drain easement for construction and then dedicate the channel after its construction to RCFCD for maintenance and not allow any certificate of occupancy until the channel has been completely constructed. FISCAL IMPACT None RECONLMENDATI ON Authorize Mayor to sign cooperative agreement and transmit to Riverside County. AGENDA ITEM NO. 14 PAGE OF1� . GRAAJO ,4 vE AGENDA ITEM NO.�••- PAGE_a OF.^.1t� 1 # AGREEMENT i 2 (Tract No. 19358) The RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER 3 CONSERVATION DISTRICT, hereinafter called "DISTRICT", the CITY OF 4 . LAKE ELSINORE, hereinafter called "CITY", the COUNTY OF 5 RIVERSIDE, hereinafter called "COUNTY", and MACLEOD DEVELOPMENT fi COMPANY, a California corporation, hereinafter called "DEVELOPER", hereby agree as follows: 8 � RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has submitted for approval Tract No. 19358 10 ' I1in the City of Lake Elsinore, and as a condition for approval 11 I DEVELOPER must construct certain flood control facilities in 12 ' order to provide flood protection for DEVELOPER'S planned 13 development; and 14 i B. The required facilities include approximately 700 15 jlineal feet of underground concrete pipe and approximately 1000 16 ; lineal feet of concrete-lined open channel, hereinafter together 17 called "PROJECT" , as shown in red on Exhibit "A" attached hereto 18 and made a part hereof; and 19 C. DEVELOPER desires DISTRICT to assume ownership and 20 responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT. 21 Therefore, DISTRICT must review and approve the plans and 22 �, specifications and subsequently inspect the construction of 23 PROJECT; and r 24 D. DISTRICT is willing to review and approve the plans i 25 land specifications prepared by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, and is I 26 Twilling to inspect the construction of. PROJECT; and 27 28 i i -- 1 E. DISTRICT is willing to assume ownership and 2 responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT, , provided, (i) DEVELOPER complies with this agreement, (ii) 3i 4 DEVELOPER deposits with DISTRICT the amount specified herein to 5 cover DISTRICT'S construction inspection costs for PROJECT, (iii) PROJECT is constructed in accordance with plans and 6t 7jspecifications approved by DISTRICT, and (iv) DEVELOPER obtains I� ; and conveys to DISTRICT the necessary rights of way for the 8 , operation and maintenance of PROJECT as set forth herein; and F. CITY is willing to accept and hold faithful 10 performance and payment bonds submitted by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, 11 , !land to consent to the recording of Irrevocable Offers of 12 13 ' Dedication furnished by DEVELOPER as set forth herein, provided ' ( PROJECT is constructed in accordance with plans and 14 ; specifications approved by DISTRICT and CITY; and 15 G. COUNTY is willing to consent to the recording of -161 Irrevocable Offers of Dedication furnished by DEVELOPER as set 17 forth herein. 18 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as 19 follows: 20 SECTION I 21 li DEVELOPER shall: 22 Fi 1. Prepare plans and specifications for PROJECT in 23 I laccordance with DISTRICT standards and submit the plans and 24 specifications to DISTRICT for its review and approval. 25 1 1 2. Deposit with DISTRICT the sum of $14,500.00, the 26 estimated cost of providing construction inspection for PROJECT, 27 r 28 ` AGENDA ITEM NO. - 2 - PAGE ,OF I at the time of providing written notification to DISTRICT of the 1 2 start of construction as set forth in Section I.7. herein. 3 . Secure all necessary licenses, agreements, permits 3 and rights of entry as may be needed for the construction, 4 , inspection, operation and maintenance of PROJECT, including, but 5 not limited to, an encroachment permit from DISTRICT and such 6 permits and rights of entry as may be required from the 7 jCalifornia State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) . 8 DEVELOPER shall furnish DISTRICT, at the time of providing 9 � 11written notification to DISTRICT of the start of construction as 10 set forth in Section I.7. herein, with sufficient evidence of 11 DEVELOPER having secured such necessary licenses, agreements, 12 , permits and rights of entry, as determined and approved by 13 DISTRICT. 14 4 . Provide CITY, at the time of providing written 15 , notification to DISTRICT of the start of construction as set 16 forth in Section I.7. herein, with faithful performance and 17 ' payment bonds, each in the amount of 100% of the estimated cost 18 for construction of PROJECT as determined by DISTRICT. The 19 � ! surety, amount and form of the bonds shall be subject to the 20 ' approval of DISTRICT and CITY. The bonds shall remain in full 21 force and effect until PROJECT is accepted by DISTRICT as i 22 , complete; at which time the bond amount may be reduced to 10% for 23 '� I I period of one year to guarantee against any defective work, 24 labor or materials. 25 1 I 1 5. obtain and provide DISTRICT, at the time of 26S: providing written notification to DISTRICT of the start of 27 construction of PROJECT as set forth in Section 1.7. herein, with 28 s AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF E� r, I duly executed Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication to the public for flood control purposes, including ingress and egress, for the 2 rights of way deemed necessary by DISTRICT for the construction, 3 4 inspection, operation and maintenance of PROJECT, as shown in concept in blue and in concept cross-hatched in red on Exhibit 5 : 6 "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof. The Irrevocable 7 Offer(s) of Dedication shall be in a form approved by DISTRICT 8 land shall be executed by all legal and equitable owners of the property described in the offer. 9 10 6. Furnish DISTRICT when submitting the Irrevocable 11 Offer(s) of Dedication, with Preliminary Reports on Title, dated I not more than thirty (30) days prior to date of ,submission for 12 hall the property described in the Irrevocable Offer(s) of 13 1 rDedication. 14 15 7. Notify DISTRICT in writing (Attention - Michael D. Rawson) at least twenty (20) days prior to the start of 16 ; construction of any element of PROJECT. 17 S. Construct, or cause to be constructed, PROJECT at 1E 19 DEVELOPER'S sole cost and expense in accordance with plans and specifications approved by DISTRICT. 20 9. Convey, or cause to be conveyed to DISTRICT, upon 211, ; completion of construction of PROJECT but prior to DISTRICT 22 acceptance of PROJECT for operation and maintenance: 23 a) flood control easement(s) , including ingress 24 and egress, in a form approved by DISTRICT, for 25 the rights of way shown in concept 26 cross-hatched in red on Exhibit "B"; 27 28 AGENrA ITEM NO. 4 - PAGE OF i 1 b) fee simple title to the rights of way shown in concept in blue on Exhibit "B". 2 10. At the time of recordation of the conveyancing 3 document(s) set forth in Section I.9. , furnish DISTRICT with 4 policies of title insurance, each in the amount of not less than 5 fifty thousand dollars ($50, 000. 00) for each parcel to be 5 conveyed to DISTRICT, guaranteeing DISTRICT'S interest in said 7 property as being free and clear- of all liens, encumbrances, 8 � ! assessments, easements, taxes and leases (recorded and 9 'I (! unrecorded) , and except those which, in the sole discretion of 10s DISTRICT, are acceptable. 11 11. Pay, if suit is brought upon this contract or any 12 1 ' bond guaranteeing completion of PROJECT, all costs and reasonable 13 1 expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and 14 { acknowledge that, upon entry of judgment, all such costs, 15 expenses and fees shall be taxed as costs and included in any 16 { judgment rendered. 17 i 12. Furnish DISTRICT with final mylar plans for PROJECT 18 and assign their ownership to DISTRICT. 19 SECTION II 20 ' DISTRICT shall: 21 1. Review and approve plans and specifications prepared 22 1 E by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, prior to the start of construction. 23 l 2. Provide CITY an opportunity to review PROJECT design 24 1plans prior to DISTRICT final approval. 25 3 . Record, or cause to be recorded, the Irrevocable 26 Offer(s) of Dedication provided by DEVELOPER pursuant to Section 27 s: 28 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 - PACE � OF � 1 4. Inspect the construction of PROTECT. 2 5. Upon DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being 3 complete, and upon recordation of all conveyancing documents 4 described in Section I.9. , accept ownership and responsibility 5 for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT. 5. Keep an accurate accounting of all DISTRICT 7 construction inspection costs, and within thirty (30) days after DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being complete, submit a cost statement to DEVELOPER. If inspection costs should at any time exceed the deposit as set forth herein, DEVELOPER shall pay the 10 j 11 additional amount as may be deemed necessary by DISTRICT to cover 12 its inspection costs, upon demand by DISTRICT. If the deposit 13 exceeds said inspection costs, DISTRICT shall reimburse DEVELOPER 1 14 the excess amount within forty-five (45) days after DISTRICT iacceptance of PROJECT as being complete. 15 it 161 i. Provide CITY with "as-built" mylar plans for any 17 PROJECT facilities constructed within CITY rights of way, upon DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being complete. 18 1 SECTION III 19 CITY shall: 20 1. Review and approve plans and specifications prepared 21 22 by DEVELOPER for those portions of PROJECT within CITY rights of i way, prior to the start of construction of PROJECT. 23 ` 2. Accept the DISTRICT and CITY approved faithful 24 performance and payment bonds submitted by DEVELOPER as set forth 25 in Section I.4. , and hold said bonds as provided herein. i 26 3. Consent to the recording of any Irrevocable offer of 27 } ( Dedication furnished by DEVELOPER pursuant to this agreement. 28 ; AGENDA ITEM NO. 144 6 - PAGE,OF i I 4. If requested by DISTRICT, accept the Irrevocable I Offers) of Dedication as set forth herein, and any other 2 outstanding offers of dedication necessary for the construction, 3 inspection, operation and maintenance of PROJECT, and convey 4 sufficient rights of way to DISTRICT to allow DISTRICT to 5 5 jconstruct, operate and maintain PROJECT. .i 5. Not grant any occupancy permits for any unit within � Tract No. 19358, or any phase thereof, until construction of 8 € PROJECT is complete, unless otherwise approved in writing by 9 " DISTRICT. 10 �; SECTION IV 11 COUNTY shall: 12 1. consent to the recording of any Irrevocable Offer of 13 ! Dedication furnished by DEVELOPER pursuant to this agreement. 14 2. If requested by DISTRICT, accept the Irrevocable 15 ! Offer(s) of Dedication as set forth herein, and any other 16 , outstanding offers of dedication necessary for the construction, 17 inspection, operation and maintenance of PROJECT, and convey 18 ' sufficient rights of way to DISTRICT to allow DISTRICT to 1 19 , k construct, operate and maintain PROJECT. 20 i SECTION V 21 It is further mutually agreed: i c21; 1. All work involved with PROJECT shall be inspected by 23 ; DISTRICT and shall not be deemed complete until approved and 24 jaccepted in writing as complete by DISTRICT. 25 ' � 2 . CITY, COUNTY and DEVELOPER personnel may observe and 26 11 inspect all work being done on PROJECT but shall provide any 27 comments to DISTRICT personnel who shall be responsible for all 28 ., AGENDA ITEM N4.�.�....� �j PAGE. OFL= I' i quality control communications with the contractor during the 1 construction of PROJECT. 2 # 3 3. Construction of PROJECT shall be completed by 4 DEVELOPER within twelve (12) consecutive months after execution 51 of this agreement and within sixty (60) consecutive calendar days 'jafter commencing work on PROJECT. It is expressly understood 6 7 that since time is of the essence in this agreement, failure of � DEVELOPER to perform the work within the agreed upon time shall 8 , ; constitute authority for DISTRICT to perform the remaining work 9r 10 Jand require DEVELOPER'S suretyto a to CITY the pay penal sum of 11 any and all bonds. In this event, CITY shall subsequently reimburse DISTRICT for DISTRICT costs incurred. 12 , i 4 . DEVELOPER shall, during the construction period for 13 PROJECT, provide Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount 14 . required by law. A certificate of said insurance policy shall be 15 , provided to DISTRICT and CITY prior to such construction period. 16 1 5. DEVELOPER shall, commencing on the date notice is 17 given pursuant to Section I.7. , and continuing until DISTRICT 18 accepts PROJECT for operation and maintenance: 19 � (a) Provide and maintain comprehensive liability 20 i insurance coverage which shall protect 21 DEVELOPER from claim from damages for personal ' 22 23 ' injury, including accidental and wrongful j death, as well as from claims for property 24 damage which may arise from DEVELOPER'S j 2511 construction of PROJECT or the performance of 26 ( its obligations hereunder, whether such I 27 I construction or performance be by DEVELOPER, by 28 AGENDA ITEM NO.,..� 8 PAGF,/d OF, 1 any contractor, subcontractor, or by anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. 2 ` 3 Such insurance shall name DISTRICT, CITY and 4 COUNTY as additional insureds with respect to 5 this agreement and the obligations of DEVELOPER hereunder. Such insurance shall provide for 6 limits of not less than two million dollars 7 $ € ($2, 000, 000.00) per occurrence. (b) Cause its insurance carriers to furnish 9 DISTRICT and CITY, at the time of providing 10 , written notification to DISTRICT of the start 11 , of construction as set forth in Section I.7. , 12 with certificate(s) of insurance showing that 13 such insurance is in full force and effect and 14 that DISTRICT, CITY and COUNTY are named as 15 � additional insureds with respect to this 16 � agreement and the obligations of DEVELOPER 17 hereunder. Further, said certificate(s) shall 18 provide that the issuing company shall give 19 DISTRICT and CITY sixty (60) days written 20 notice in the event of any cancellation, 21 termination, non-renewal or reduction in 22 1` coverage of the policies evidenced by the ` 23 " certificate(s) . In the event of any such f 24 E cancellation, termination, non-renewal or 25 reduction in coverage, DEVELOPER shall, 251 forthwith, secure replacement insurance meeting 27 �I the provision of this paragraph. 28 14 9 - AGENDA ITEM NO.-f PAGE�/ .OF t Failure to maintain the insurance required by this 1 paragraph shall be deemed a material breach of this agreement and 2 ! shall authorize and constitute authority for DISTRICT, at its 3 4 sole discretion, to proceed with performing the remaining work on PROJECT pursuant to Section V.3. 5 6. In the event that any claim or legal action is 6 brought against DISTRICT, CITY or COUNTY in connection with this 7 agreement because of the actual or alleged acts or omissions by 8 s 9 �IDEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold DISTRICT, CITY and COUNTY harmless therefrom, without cost to DISTRICT, 10 CITY or COUNTY. Upon DEVELOPER'S failure to do so, DISTRICT, 11 CITY and COUNTY shall be entitled to recover from DEVELOPER all 12 of their cost and expenses, including, but not limited to, 13 reasonable attorneys' fees. 14 7. DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold DISTRICT, 15 CITY and COUNTY, their respective officers, agents, employees and 16 iindependent contractors free and harmless from any claim 17 whatsoever, based or asserted, pursuant to article I, Section 19 18 of the California Constitution, the Fifth Amendment of the United 19 { States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance which seeks to 20 impose any other liability or damage whatsoever, for the design, 21 construction or failure of PROJECT or from the diversion of the 22 h f iwaters from the natural drainage patterns, save and except claims 23 'I hand litigation arising through the sole negligence or sole 1 24 willful misconduct of DISTRICT, CITY or COUNTY. DEVELOPER shall 1 25 defend DISTRICT, CITY and COUNTY without cost to DISTRICT, CITY 26 � or COUNTY, and upon DEVELOPER'S failure to do so, DISTRICT, CITY 27 land COUNTY shall be entitled to recover from DEVELOPER all of 28 i AGENDA ITEM NO. I - 10 - PAGE OF.Zwf�l E t I their cost and expenditures, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees. 2 3 S. DEVELOPER for itself, its successors and assigns 4 hereby releases DISTRICT, CITY and COUNTY, their respective 511 officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, demands, 6 ; actions, or suits of any kind arising out of any liability, known or unknown, present or future, including, but not limited to, any 7 1claim or liability, based or asserted, pursuant to Article I, 8 ,: Section 19 of the California Constitution and the Fifth Amendment 9 ' ' of the United States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance 10 ; which seeks to impose any other liability or damage, whatsoever, 121 for the design, construction or failure of PROJECT, or the discharge of drainage within or from PROJECT. Nothing contained 13 } herein shall constitute a release by DEVELOPER of DISTRICT, CITY 1411 Inor COUNTY, their officers, agents and employees from any and all 15 f! !! claims, demands, actions or suits of any kind arising out of any 15 " ;' liability, known or unknown, present or future, for the negligent 17 18 flmaintenance of PROJECT, after the acceptance of PROJECT by DISTRICT. 19 9. Any waiver by DISTRICT, CITY or COUNTY of any breach 20 ! of any one or more of the terms of this agreement shall not be 2i construed to be a waiver of any subsequent or other breach of the 22 same or of any other term hereof. Failure on the part of 23 DISTRICT, CITY or COUNTY to require exact, full and complete 24 compliance with any terms of this agreement shall not be 25 I construed as in any manner changing the terms hereof, or 26 estopping DISTRICT, CITY or COUNTY from enforcement hereof. 27 28 ' p,, EN0A PAGE G` j 3 1 10. If any provision in this agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or 2 unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless 3 continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in 4 any way. 5 11. This agreement is to be construed in accordance with 6 the laws of the State of California. 7 , 12 . Any and all notices sent or required to be sent to 8 9 ,, the parties of this agreement will be mailed by first class mail, jpostage prepaid, to the following addresses: 10 1 111 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 130 S. Main Street 121 Post Office Box 1033 Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 j Riverside, CA 92502-1033 13 MACLEOD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 14 2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 670 Transportation Department IPasadena, CA 91107 County Administrative Center I5 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 16 17 13. Any action at law or in equity brought by any of the 18 parties hereto for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights 19 provided for by the agreement shall be tried in a court of 20 competent jurisdiction in the County of Riverside, State of I 21 California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law 22 providing for change of venue in such proceedings to any other 23 county. 24 14. This agreement is the result of the negotiations 25 ! between the parties hereto, and the advice and assistance of 261their respective counsel. The fact that this agreement was i 27iprepared as a matter of convenience by DISTRICT shall have no 28 j P, "c-40A ITEM NO. 12 - PAGE/�.OF �i import or significance. Any uncertainty or ambiguity in this 1 2 agreement shall not be construed against DISTRICT because DISTRICT prepared this agreement in its final form. 3 15. The rights and obligations of DEVELOPER shall inure 4 Ito and be binding upon all heirs, successors and assignees. 5 ' I' 16. DEVELOPER shall not assign or otherwise transfer any 6 ' of their rights, duties or obligations hereunder to any person or 7 k, entity without the written consent of the other parties hereto 8 being first obtained. In the event of any such transfer or assignment, DEVELOPER expressly understands and agrees that they 10 ; shall remain liable with respect to any and all of the 11 obligations and duties contained in this agreement. 12 � i 17 . This agreement is intended by the parties hereto as 14 1a final expression of their understanding with respect to the ( subject matter hereof and as a complete and exclusive statement 15 ! of the terms and conditions thereof and supersedes any and all 16 ' prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or 17 ` written in connection therewith. This agreement may be changed 18 or modified only upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 19 20 21 22 23 24 ' 25 j 26 27 i 28 �I I i F 13 - AGFNDA ITEM NO. P�,GE OF fi i I f I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this 2 agreement on (To be filled in by Clerk of the Board) • 3 3IRECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5 KENNETH L. EDWARDS By 5 Chief Engineer Chairman, Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: 7 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN GERALD A. MALONEY 8 Ecounty Counsel Clerk of the Board 9 By��e_ S .��� BY Deputy Deputy 101 Dated: [tQ GU (SEAL) 11 ( RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 12 BY 13 FRANKLIN E. SHERKOW Chairman, Board of Supervisors Transportation Director- 14 #' ATTEST EI 15i GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board 16 By 17 Deputy 18 (SEAL) ' p RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE By- - Mayor ATTEST: sgATE Qv . � OF �*_ ` Clerk � OP S ON GE S 1 ss• �'ERs0NS, D s�qv cEz�O% �� A�TERZ F�'�8E0��' �� %O,v A OP C0 T � IS F C 1°N RATrI11r r IN °H T��ws rsFA OFF �D >>\ &�nQde cIAL AND R� pUhe S. GeEAL cbn„� c�� tF°R90 AGENDA ITEM NO. A �� QQ 1ft3 PAGED OFL1l— 1 MACr jr.%foRY G I Z " -tr`tACT -Tim LOGanaN --- DCAT1�n1 rr„c? ' �,Mlrs� LAKE ELS/NORE GlFa.vo .e✓E. .L PRJJ�CT �" � 74 At4-'IFNDA ITEM NO. ',moo PAGE OF UI.CIIJI T Y lydP EXHIBIT A X. t • L' i fJ r � AGENDA ITEM NO. PAW EXHIBIT B REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: RIGHT OF ENTRY PERMIT RAILROAD CANYON ROAD PREPARED BY APPROVED: Ron Kirchner Ron Mo endyk Director of Public City Manager Services BACKGROUND This project is currently under construction and all required right-of-way within the city limits has been secured. The new roadway will connect to the existing county road in Canyon Lake, and requires a slope easement in the County, to affect this transition widening. That easement will be acquired by the County from the property owner, Hilltop Properties. SUMMARY As the City cannot accept right-of-way for the County, we have arranged for a Right of Entry permit from the owner to the City, which allows the contractor to build the improvement. The permit also provides that the Grantor will convey a permanent easement to the County upon request. The County has been advised of this. FISCAL IMPACT All costs associated with the project, including acquisition expense, are funded by the Benefit Assessment District. There is no direct cost to the City. RECOMMENDATION Accept the attached Right of Entry Permit and instruct the Clerk to record same. AGENDA ITEM N0..�.�---- PAGE OF WHEN RECORDED, PLEASE MAIL [ THIS INSTRUMENT TO: [ [ CITY CLERK [ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 South Main Street [ Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 [ RECORDED AT REQUEST OF [ CITY ENGINEER [ SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY RIGHT OF ENTRY PERMIT Project: RAILROAD CANYON ROAD Improvement Project CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Portion Lying Within The Unicorporated Area Of The COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Re: Right-of-Way Acquisition Offsite Requirements Affecting A Portion of APN 354-030-013 Vesting: HILLTOP PROPERTIES, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Subject: Street Dedication (RAILROAD CANYON ROAD) , Slope Easement and Drainage Easement The undersigned hereby grant(s) to the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, in the County of Riverside, State of California, its agents and contractors the right to enter upon the hereinafter described property and con- struct street improvements, support slopes and drainage structures in connection with the improvement of RAILROAD CANYON ROAD. This permit is granted with the acknowledgment that the undersigned will convey by grant deed the easements described hereinafter to the the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE upon request to do same by said County. This permit shall be recorded upon acceptance by the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE and remain in force and be' binding upon the unersigned, its successors or assigns in interest until such time as the the easements hereinafter described have been conveyed to the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, accepted by said County and recorded. The proposed street dedication, slope easement and drainage easement referred to above are more particularly described in EXHIBIT 'A' and as shown on EXHIBIT 'B' and are attached hereto and made a part hereof. (MacFARLANE & ASSOCIATES ) 1 of 2 ( 133 :t)DA ITEM NO. PAGE -" OF,��. RIGHT OF ENTRY PERMIT - continued: This RIGHT OF ENTRY PERMIT is granted this �b��_ day of 1990. HILLTOP PROPERTIES, INC. BY: - BY: (ATTACH NOTARY JURAT) ' 9 S S ' 9 • C limited interest in real property granted A Municipal Corporation, by the fore- t. •'•. rated by a duly authorized resolution and ^ordation thereof by its duly 3is - - --- �F` • a J `JJ • aP 1 •. Q i •. ••• AFf N0, J f '•. • p s r /. ••. J�d?,�P�hP 01ro ��f� fyo �D •••• \ !J c ° G •. 11 .AP 0c w �' 6i[ •. •'• �� �p �r0 �jJ fro 'A •%. .'•.••'lror S�,yd'Q.7r�J� 1�P6r �f10' .•. a a . '•. •••'��d da��ca PcG�r ••'•. .• f °fc�,�a` 0`� fc` � \d ••. cgs •. d r flI• / s 4 �` co r AREPRCR) (MacFARLANE & A. P°df��'�,P ITEM NO. Pp �.3 : /` File: 582.40 L/582-40.DED July 5, 1989 Revised 03/07/90 Page 1 of I CW AW/GD EXHIBIT 'A' STREET DEDICATION FOR RAILROAD CANYON ROAD (HILLTOP) PARCEL A ALL THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 1. NORTH 89°16'26" WEST 1364.54 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF RAILROAD CANYON ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AS DEDICATED PER DOCUMENT RECORDED MAY 17, 1949 AS FILE/PAGE 167 IN BOOK 1077 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 2. NORTH 89'16'26" WEST 17.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1945.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 58046'46" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE 3. NORTHEASTERLY 13.70 FEE-9- ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0'24'13"; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE 4. NORTH 30'49'01" EAST 449. 56 FEET; THENCE 5. SOUTH 59'10'59" EAST 15.00 FEET 'Pa A POINT ON SAID WESTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT- OF-WAY 6. SOUTH 30°49'01" WEST 454.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 0.158 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE GF„ ._ File: 582.40 L/582-40SE.LEG March 5, 1990 Page 1 of 1 AW/GD EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SLOPE EASEMENT (HILLTOP) PARCEL B BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 1. NORTH 89'16'26" WEST 1,381.93 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THAT CERTAIN 110.00 FOOT WIDE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 2. NORTH 89'16'26" WEST 47.28 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE 3. NORTH 32*50140" EAST 220.00 FEET; THENCE 4. NORTH 43'25'00" EAST 106.24 FEET; THENCE 5. NORTH 26'56'14" EAST 186.08 FEET; THENCE 6.- SOUTH 16°26'19" EAST 30.76 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY 7. SOUTH 30*49101" WEST 450.91 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1,945.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE 9. SOUTHWESTERLY 13.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00'24'13" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONITAINS 0.291 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 5- OF.17--, File: 582.40 L/582-4SDN.LEG November 16, 1989 Revised 03/05/90 Page 1 of 1 AW/GD FMIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT (HILLTOP) PARCEL C BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 1. NORTH 89016'26" WEST 1,381.93 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1,945.00- FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 58046146" WEST, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THAT CERTAIN 110.00 FOOT WIDE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD RIGHT- OF-WAY; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF- WAY 2. NORTHEASTERLY 13.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00'24'13"; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE 3. NORTH 30*49101" EAST 400.68 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE - LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY 4. NORTH 23'22'36" WEST 30.86 FEET; THENCE 5. NORTH 30'49'01" EAST 54.25 FEET; THENCE 6. SOUTH 33'03'35" EAST 2.71 FEET; THENCE 7. SOUTH 16'26'19" EAST "30.76 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID WESTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF- WAY S. SOUTH 30049'01" WEST 50.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 0.030 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I OF^ , �zi0 _40bd ON V4311 bON3Jd o g5kr Z6-OE-9 921YIM NOIIYI IG199N M 6rfo.pfz xvi i«94fZ-619 �1 d4 9E11 '3'�N d3133X '7 H112Y rorz6 v� oPara uas'oos atfns'anu,nv auWas otor 8um"Uu Zug pua Sujuuvtd SjZCY?4YlS1,�0,�Z1�25'aaalQ4d Z W/1,Us,"Ym 3s ,9, 73,Ydd *►9.;d 7204Ydd'90d ,b: 7�oddd '9'Od1 .LED ZVON157.7 _?Y 7 dO A11J iN.,°�.9I•b8N �� ww 3015d3Alb' .�0 AJNnoo + _ ;r` I M,.Sk. c'l / 9A.89 7Y 1005Pb1 CY fro {u I9� i add a� i X,ke.co=v 0.71Y.71630 UY NOANO •�`J �° e titi OVOY71dd d0 NOLLYOd -o 'l91 d1d �° � ' CO ` 9v L101 Y009 Nlloo VY No(NO od d71VY 921.183dOdd d01771H -s.9 (, d, 7.90,Y Vd) �d 91'o sNldllyoo ,9Q of 0.3d+1?00V 39 CU ,a 73od d'B Od' S', �' .a� rN.,9&.Z�EZN M/�I S31 d0/ONI R' �d LZ d SNIt/1NOo N .00' I M.,bS.oi:bs7► (.9 7��+b'd)(79,0Ib0b39' 04 x .9c of M�bl.9Z.9rn ,5z�S :l,ws�3do7s S�lan� ► C C I I i 00'0 9)VIYlmo.? (.0. 790Nbd) 03w11 and 38' Ol /V •, :L W53 �04Nl ddQ 531 d,710N1 GAG- G^ 7�C� REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: RAILROAD CANYON ROAD DEEDS PREPARED BY: APPROVED: U Ron Kirchner Ron Mol ndyk Director of Public City Manager services BACKGROUND The construction of Railroad Canyon Road requires additional right of way and slope and drainage easements. A portion of the roadway transverses property owned by Pardee. FINDINGS A Grant Deed for street right of way and an additional Grant Deed for slope and drainage purposes have been presented by Pardee for acceptance by the City. (See Exhibits A and B) . FISCAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION Accept the attached deeds and instruct the Clerk to have same recorded. AGENDA ITEM NO.__]_fi,.. PAGE OF NECORDING REQUESTED BY e - AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO Ntnie PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS street Iddress 1010 SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 500 Me E SpN DIEGO, CA 92101 L— SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE — MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX$NONE-EASEMENT__ONLY tame COMPUTED ON FULL VALVE OF PROPERTY CONVEYED, treet dddnZu N/A OR COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE LESS LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES REMAINING ATTIME OF SALE. 'tp Signature of Declerent or Agent determining tax. Firm Name TRANSFER TAX f EASEMENT GRANT DEED {mow No--------------------- FOR SLOPE AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES By this instrument dated----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------for a valuable consideration, PARDEE—GROSSMAN/COTTONWOOD CANYON, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP hereby GRANTS to THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION the following described Real Property in the State of California,County of----------------------RIVERSIDE-- ------------------------- City of.-------LAKE_-E L S INORE---------------------------------- SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF BY: PARDEE-GROSSMAN/COTTONWOOD CANYON, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP BY: PARDEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AS GENERAL PARTNER BY: - -- - 9U- L ------------------------------------ THEOD RE 3. C PRESIDENT 11� If BY: - - - -------------------------------------- Pa�iCiB {;tIhEA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY r- ASTATE RI�TTA On......._------__ .—..,19-�.— before m�thedersigned,a Notary Pu or said SS. County and State,Personally appeared.._.._.......__ .....--•----------.......---........... COLIN I i OF---.-........._..»..»......._ - _...... --.._ _.... »» _--•----- ..._.._-_-----•...._..known to me to be the V person.......whose name.... ---- subscribed to the It.and acknowledged to me thaL...--he._.......executed the same. 0 .P otatq's Signature....._..---...---.._..._.....................»....... ....»».._.....»»_...._...-....__----........ AGENDA PAGE ° OF w MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE PARTNERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGMENT 2W r�% State of California On this the 6ttbay of July 90 19�,before me, 55. County of Los Angeles MARY JO VALLERY the undersigned Notary Public,personally appeared Theodore J. Cullen and Patricia Cohen OFFICIAL SEA: ® personally known to me MAS~" 4olary .10 VALLERY G roved tome on the basis of satisfactory evidence Notary AubIIC—Cs�ifornia p LOS ANGELES COUNTY to be the person(s)who executed the within instrument on behalf of the MyCgmm.ErC 1'�r.27.IM partnership,and acknowledged to me that the partnership executed it. :WITN S my hand a official seal. n otary's Sign re r3D 122 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION•23012 Ventura Bw.•P.O.sox 4aa•wo0cmm hdw,CA Df364 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAS. ? - OF L/582-4EXH, 7/6/90 (CH) , DC/GD, PAGE 1 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL 'LL'_ ALL THAT PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0°16'40" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A DISTANCE OF 110.71 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 83'03'46" EAST, 23.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 79°11'52" EAST, 92.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 80°16'09" EAST, 122.40 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°27'26" EAST, 55.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 70'23'37" EAST, 129.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH. 83'29'20" EAST, 240.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44*46139" EAST, 75.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87*23139" EAST, 114.09 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45'06'57" EAST, 66.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25'48'39" EAST, 100.39 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79*24144" EAST, 87.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55°47'09" EAST, 86.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47*59,06" EAST, 131.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 81°14'01" EAST, 332.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°00'17" EAST, 100.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24°43'13" EAST, 85.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 84°03'00" WEST, 1399.28 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1939.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7'03109", A DISTANCE OF 238.67 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A-RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 1°06'09" EAST; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 0'16'40" EAST, 46.21 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE OF,5-,.�-, - FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 1/28/90 PARCEL 'MM' PAGE 1 OF 3 DC/GD PARCEL 'MM' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'16'40" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 278.94 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 2061.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 1'03'13" EAST; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE AND EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1*29*47", A DISTANCE OF 53.83 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 0'26'34" WEST, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 73'37'31" EAST, 236.02 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 83*48,18" EAST, 48.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60'26'30" EAST, 126.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81'21'54" EAST, 120.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 58'11'34" EAST, 69.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85'00'04" EAST, 135.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89*59156" EAST, 290.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 83'00'04" EAST, 166.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50'51138" EAST, 34.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85.00104" EAST, 473.53 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24.43113" WEST, 49.70 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 4'43'20" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10'13'40", A DISTANCE OF 24.41 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 84.03100" WEST, 1416.43 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 2061.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5'30'26" , A DISTANCE OF 198.10 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. AGENDA ITEM NO.... ..,... PAGE OF&OL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES VITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. ITEM. NO. f i PAGE 0�4 3 FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 i REV. 1/25/90 1 PARCEL 'MM1' PAGE 1 OF 2 DC/GD PARCEL 'MMI' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'16'40" WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 376.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 83'48118" EAST, 73.95 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY , SOUTH 73'37'31" WEST, 55.95 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 2960.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE'OF 0'23'49", A DISTANCE OF 20.51 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 15*58140" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 0'16'40" WEST, 29.47 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN _ PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COMM. SEE EXHIBIT. 'B' ATTACHED HERETO"AND MADE A PART THEREOF. AGE"rA ITEM NO. PAGE OFF FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 1/28/90 j PARCEL 'NNI' PAGE 1 OF 2 DC/GD PARCEL 'NN1' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: CO.KMENCING AT THE SOT.7HWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'16'4C" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 278.94 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 0'16'40" WEST, 67.83 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 2960.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 15'58'40" WEST; SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0*23149", A DISTANCE OF 20.51 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 73'37'31" FAST, 55.95 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 83'48'18" EAST, 208.44 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF- WAY SOUTH 73'37131" WEST, 236.02 FEET TO A POINT ON. THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 2061.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 0'26134" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1'2947", A DISTANCE OF 53.83 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL I3ES ERTIRELY WITHIN THE EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. AGENDA ITEM NO. ,.. PAGE OF FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 7/5/90 PARCEL 'NN2' PAGE 1 OF 3 GD/DC PARCEL 'NN2' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS' FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'00'54" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 527.71 FEET-TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 48'39'06" WEST, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18948'46", A DISTANCE OF 373.98 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 1140.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 29°50'21" WEST FROM SAID 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT FROM SAID 1140.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEARS NORTH 19'17'51" WEST, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE: OF 17'25'25" A DISTANCEE OF 346.67 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 1052'26" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF- -WAY NORTH 75'51'19" EAST, 145.04 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67*00104" EAST, 242.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22*59#56" WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67000'04" EAST, 35.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 22'59'56" EAST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'00'04" EAST, 29.66 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33901138" EAST, 51.70 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1060.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 27'26'06" WEST, SAID BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF- SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1044'53", A DISTANCE OF 32.34 FEET TO A POINT ON A COMPOUND 760.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE AGENDA ITEM NO. PAOE OF`��..- CM"CAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 29-10'59" WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38.03'00" , A DISTANCE OF 504.71 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 22046'01" EAST, 700.07 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 28046'16" EAST, 71.14 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50*59,12" EAST, 69.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28005'37" EAST, 445.34 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 2040.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 50-57'55" EAST, SAID BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'46'56" , A DISTANCE OF 134.66 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 42'49'01" EAST, 75. 89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON- TANGENT 1861.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGIINTNING BEARS SOUTH 55'09'04" EAST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6'56'59", A DISTANCE OF 225.73 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 27'53'57" WEST, 1328,64 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'26'560 , A DISTANCE OF 267.35 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL LIES ENTIRELY WITHIN THE EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. 1 1 ' ACF"1n4 M-M No. JL_ FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 M. 1/23/90 PARCEL 'SS' PAGE 1 OF 3 DC/GD PARCEL 'SS' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0*00154" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 280.21 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH .45033'59" WEST, 92.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20*03100" EAST, 137.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72'58'47" WEST, 124.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 70024'25" WEST, 285.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78*07115" WEST, 364.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24043'13" EAST, 80.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1261.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 5.451181 WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 56020'45", A DISTANCE OF 1240.09 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 27'53'57" EAST, 1021.33 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34°14'20" EAST, 90.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 27053'57" EAST, 150.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62006'03" WEST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 27'53'57" EAST, 67.31 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1739.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9'40'48" , A DISTANCE OF 293.80 FEET TO A POINT OF NON- TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 52-25115" EAST; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 36026100" EAST, 300.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 37*341451, EAST, 18.82 FEET. TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 2055.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6°45'44" , A DISTANCE OF 242.54 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 30.49'OI" EAST, 50.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID CITY-COUNTY LINE, SOUTH 89'16'26" EAST, 54.93 FEET; THENCE-LEAVING SAID CITY-COUNTY BOUNMARY LINE, SOUTH AGENDA ITEM NO...,,..� PAGE OFF_ 34*08,151 WEST, -541.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41.00'15" WEST, 230.50 FEET; THENCE ss SOUTH 29.13140" WEST, 161.19 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 19.37'13" WEST, '218.24 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24'18'33" WEST, 42.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 65'41'27" EAST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24'18'33" WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 65*411270 WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24.18'33" WEST, 18.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34"12144" WEST, 386.94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14.31'31" WEST, 206.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28*06,17" WEST, 252.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13*10151" WEST, 81.18 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 29017,40" WEST, 147.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42.27'14" WEST, 221.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45'33'59" WEST, 248.42 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED EASEMENT LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED AS FILE N0. ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. I AC=�rA ITEM NC. PAGE,-ZpZ GF` � FILE: 592.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 1/25/90 PARCEL 'TT' FACE 1 OF 2 DC/GD PARCEL 'TT' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'00'54" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 527.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 48'39'06" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL. ANGLE OF 18'48'46", A DISTANCE OF 373.98 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 29'50'21" WEST, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND CONTINUING ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20'24'02", A DISTANCE OF 405.55 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 9'26'19" WEST; THENCE NON- TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 24'43'13" EAST, 77.14 FEET; THENCE NORTH 75'51'19" EAST, 8.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1140.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 1052126" WEST, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17025'25", A DISTANCE OF 346.67 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED .TUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. AGENrA ITEM NO. PAGE OF 3�, FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 7/5/90 PARCEL 'TT1' PAGE 1 OF 2 CD/DC PARCEL 'TT1' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION .11; THENCE NORTH 00°00'54" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 550.82 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 760.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 43'02155" WEST, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY -LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF- WAY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13051'56" , A DISTANCE OF 183.92 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND 1060.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 29*10159" WEST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1'44'53", A DISTANCE OF 32.34 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 27'26'06" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT- OF-WAY AND NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 33'01'38" EAST, 754.35 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 28.46116" FAST, 453.86 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 22*46101" WEST, 700.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 760.00 F007 RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A'CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24'll'04", A DISTANCE OF 320.79 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED .TUNE 27, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTI' RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 7/5/90 PARCEL 'TT2' PAGE 1 OF 3 CD/DC PARCEL 'TT2' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST-QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUT WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 00'00'54" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A DISTANCE OF 699.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 33.01'38" EAST, 430.11 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28'46'16" EAST, 525.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'59'12" EAST, 69.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28'0537" EAST, 445,34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT- OF-WAY NORTH 12'29'58" EAST, 139.38 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78'22'38". EAST, 55.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 32'22'38" EAST, 255.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39'50141" EAST, 382.96 FEET TO A POINT ON THE BOUNDARY LINE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF .LAKE ELSINORE; THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 89'16126" EAST, 47.28 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1945.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 58'46'45" WEST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6'21'30", A DISTANCE OF 215.84 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 37'34145" NEST, 18.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38'43'29" WEST, 300.06 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1861.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 52'25'15" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE'ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2'43'49", A DISTANCE OF 88.68 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 55'09'04" EAST, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 42'49'01" WEST, 75.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 2040.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID AGENDA ITEM NO. 19 PAGE OF _, CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'46'560, A DISTANCE OF 134.66 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES VITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY .RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. } f i AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGED Of-!�� FILE: 582.45 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 1/25/90 PARCEL 'YY' PAGE 1 OF 2 AW/GD PARCEL 'YY' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:, COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 89°16'26" WEST (RECORD NORTH 89-16'26" WEST PER R. OF S. 52/16) , ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A DISTANCE OF 1199.82 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 34'08'15" WEST, 541.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41°00'15" WEST, 184.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 78°59'45" EAST, 143.45 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 11.00'15" WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78°59'45" WEST, 155.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41'00'15" EAST, 23.09 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED EASEMENT LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. J AGENDA ITEM NO....�.�.....", PAGE OF-.ZL� i. � f '�.:6K::'- Lam, •d \ y y y I TVS at lf 000 �\\ t,l \` , sy r jk vi z �\�.��``�� till ' .I• � � - )J 32 IL rL fic AGENDA-ITEM NO. 9 JAMS 3?5 PAGE F 1Lj - tip: `:. •M. VIA ;w a _ ^` •a w j !) �� e�i t1 l � j�• r CA 1E" '„ ' K Ll NEn a Q n 'e x Q \\ V' OCL cr cc " roc� \ \ 1. \\\'i i 4 fir;•, e � M '-t .-, r�i.: C) S .\ \\ \21 i AGENDA ITEM NO. OJ �33NS 335 o s _ era•{ `. a c id.. "' _ Z Ct to Cc Lil v 1 I; � ill. ' •ate�:.1;?:w ►\ r .■ Ir tl 4 r r x 'Z-T zz EC Pf f i�,: k i .�,, ••j r. �//•a.� i hGt 4 W t ` tE �l�apQ$•1,u �1i4,�}t(�I <t+ '�,e �, �' -:'Y � ` / •'x '(��rj" M.r �° /`r i• / �j� NO. JY47 WN07 335 o ra� ff N [u L 10 IL .ia8 i f �` �+ ji ♦ - .'fie - c -q :3 ?.LLtd •isw$iin' h ekv '� 7. u • eaf�i., 51Iry ri t i f \� $ ` '\4 � '` t - v �• s. �° .t ._ ( _ _ � � Iy.tT 6Y. � � ly'i W.C�'r�'�-� 1.1.„I.1 !�- �`�• 1 �� � � ae- r. ' F :C��,S•' I.I _ +r. .illrf 1 Solil IR Zi \:� .\\ I Jt v .i?::j��fll- __ A !.�. f/jf it Y f �•�Yj'�- ! ,44ie• " ,."i., + i .7'-i;';`,j :�I ��_, '4• _r�' �` R• is '+�7L �,t� Kr I `;�` a� �� � A a ,. i i -� �•'7 ...,:.: ! � � R - } i J 1 �,,yf � � t• r .� ate;. +S t � � 1 +-yt 3 w•. 1 ? °c ;••• •� ' �� _ it ;; I '� ' NDA ITEM . 1 _ i_ PAGE 2�OF2 �6 133x5 3a5 1HOJb ��dd� 335 01760RDING REQUESTED BY �AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO Same 1( PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS street 1010 SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 500 M f SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 ZIPL MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE — tterrN DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX$ NONE—EASEMENT ONL stn.t COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE OF PROPERTY CONVEYED, Address OR COMPUTED ON FULL VALUE LESS LIENS AND Cft to N/A ENCUMBRANCES REMAINING ATTIME OF SALE. 24 L Signature of Declarant or Agent determining tax. Firm Name TRANSFER TAX S EASEMENT GRANT DEED (Escrow No..-- _----.__, FOR STREET RIGHT—OF—WAY PURPOSES By this instrament dated---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,for a valuable consideration, PARDEE—GROSSMAN/COTTONWOOD CANYON, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP hereby GRANTS to THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION the following described Real Property in the State of California, County of--------------RIVERS.=------_-.-----_-------------------- City of-------L1 _FLSMORE-------------------------- SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF BY: PARDEE-GROSSMAN/COTTONWOOD CANYON, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP BY: PARDEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AS GENERAL PARTNER THEODORE J. CULLEN�TS�ECRETARY VICE PRESIDENT BY: -� Cohen, SSI r aSTATE O NIA On. -----------__»---_----- .,19....-.—,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public i or said SS. County and State,personally appeared—.. » __ ..-.... ........-.___......_................... x u COUNTY OF_.____ .._._........_.Jmown to me to be the a person_whose name._ _ »» .subscribed to the within r ac owledged to the that..._._._.he---- --ezecuted the same. o vNotary's z N ACE No. PAGE OF MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE No.203 PARTNERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGMENT on this the�thday of Jul 19�,before me, State of Californ r_ SS. Y :JQ V LERY County of the undersigned Notary Los An eles public,personally appeared ! Theodore J. Cullen and Patricia Cohen 7i personally known to me OFFICIAL Sly- O proved tome on the basis of satisfactory evidence MARY Jo vALLERY to be the person(s)who executed the within instrument p behalf of the Nc:a plic�aNiaml� -� Los r,vGELES G>�Y partnership,and acknowledged to me that the partnershi ' p executed�t. , v,comm.E.V. V.t9G2 WITNE my hand and official se 1. otary's Sign t re NATIONAL NOTARY ASSoGUTYON•23012 V uri SNd-•P.O.Box 45n•Woody"MWs.CA Z364 7130 122 ,.,Ur� 11 •�+AROVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF- WAY LIES VITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN RECORDED DUNE 281976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN EX PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED 'COUNTY• SEE HIBIT 'B' ATTACHED THE OFFICE OF THE CONY RECORDER OF SAID METO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. ` AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF L/582-4EXH, 7/6/90 (CH) , DC/GD, PAGE 2 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL '00' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: C0Y-1-TENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION_ 11; THENCE NORTH 0*16,40". WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 156.92 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 0'16'40" WEST, 106.83 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 3040.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 15'33116" WEST, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0'49'13" , A DISTANCE OF 43.52 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 73'37'31" FAST, 12.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 2061.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 0'26'34" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5'30'26", A . DISTANCE OF 198.10 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 84003100" EAST, 1416.43 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1013'40", A DISTANCE OF 24.41 FEET; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 24'43'13" WEST, 129.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 84'03'00" WEST, 1399.28 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1939.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7'03'090, A DISTANCE OF 238.67 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. AGENDA ITEM NO.�- E PAG p FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED 8/8/89 REV. 7/5/90 PARCEL 'UU' PAGE 1 OF 3 GA/DC PARCEL 'UU' ALL THAT PORTION of THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11. TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 0'00'54" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 353.31 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ON THE ARC OF A 1261.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 42'41'27" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36'56'09" , A DISTANCE OF 812.91 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 5.45'18" WEST; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 24'43'13" EAST, 144.29 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ARC OF A 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 9.26'19" WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20024102m, A DISTANCE OF 405.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1140.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING AND SAID 1139.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEARS NORTH 29'S0'21".WEST, A RADIAL FROM SAID 1140.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEARS NORTH 19'17'51" WEST, SAID BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE SOUniERI.Y RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ERISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL, ANGLE OF 9'S3'08-, A DISTANCE OF 196.69 FEET TO THE .BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND 840.00 .FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 29010'59- WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38003'00-, A DISTANCE OF 557.84 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 22*46,01" EAST, 704.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF-A TANGENT 1960.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20'03'00" , A DISTANCE OF 695,�g�^ AG ENOA ITEM NO. PAGE OF FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 42049'O1" EAST, 256.45 FEET TO THE FEGZNNZNG OF A TANGEIrIT 2040.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12000'00" , A DISTANCE OF 427.26 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 30'49'01" EAST, 90.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 89'16'26" EAST, 17.34 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 30'49'O1" WEST, 50.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 2055.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6.45'44", A DISTANCE OF 242.54 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 37'34'45" WEST, 18.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 36'26100" WEST, 300.06 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1739.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 52'25'15" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9'40'48", A DISTANCE OF 293.80 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 27'53'57" NEST, 67.31 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 62'06'03" EAST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27'53157" WEST, 150.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34'14'20" WEST, 90.55 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27053157" ' WEST, 1021.33 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1261.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19'24136", A DISTANCE OF 427.19 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 28, 1976 AS FILE NO. 92734 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SEE EXHIBIT 'B' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. _ I M NO. ITE .�.-- AGENUA ��r7 PAGE '%,�0 � FILE: 582.40 582-4PCL.M-Z ADDED .8/8/89 REV. 7/5/90 PARCEL 'W' PAGE 1 OF 3 GD/DC PARCEL 'VV' ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; THENCE NORTH 00'00'54" FAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A DISTANCE OF 699.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 33'01'38" EAST, 430.11 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28*461160 EAST, 453.86 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EXISTING RAILROAD CANYON ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 22'46'01" EAST, 4.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING _OF A TANGENT 2040.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE -_-_ NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20.03*00", A DISTANCE OF 713.87 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 42.49'01" EAST, 75.89 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ON THE ARC OF A 1861.00 FORT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL FROM SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 55'09104" EAST; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2043'490, A DISTANCE OF 88.68 FEET TO A POINT OF NON-TANGENCY, A RADIAL FROM SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 52'25'15" EAST; DICE NORTH 38.431291 EAST, 300.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 37-34'45" EAST, 18.82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1945.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6.21'30', A DISTANCE OF 215.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDg-AND CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 89-16'26" EAST, 17.39 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE' SOUTH 30.49'01" WEST, 44.09 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1960.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHVEESTERI.Y; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12'00'000 , A DISTANCE OF 410.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42'49'Ol" WEST, . 180.56 FEET TO Tin TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. � r AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF T-;C - 49 - .\ �5 �tt _.•�h}.:� ,[ _�-��♦:��,,rys . ate .'e Y V• cc 0 Jz- LL tt Er o --elm AGENDAITEM NO. 9 t��Hs 3as PAGE O — • _ - .. '• r ��; b�ii•• ;. C:�;4 � ,E� ,ti•'- � .� .< �� [t�ii �x•.Z tinn 1 •' w z • dc lin it td \�` \- _ •_'. _ ?fir �:1 ij% v E tf r \\ All" ;AIN la cc Ck MW — -7—� Nll AGENDA ITEM NO. 7f PAGENj�-O O t� Flo Ai 310.Q dc L a4 y w � _f i nC1LE .r :1 � )};t��'lt� y' ''�•�1 `_a 8 - '� ��+�Jt rL v t�lil�tl� '£V �`,lliy ,,//f } lli�aa iill�t,tr�§`��,✓:^ J / `y Q� \ \\1' �� �; I�l���l}�}'in4tl 14 h�L1 : QP'. .✓!J` .rr j r.,�,i'i AGE!WA ITEM NO. PAGE 3 L O� - S - _ -• •�, of it 1d;7 iGNV7 P9 _t O AL c ,4ui r � � i,� •3f. r Ct t7 ld IN goo ONO 04 Lj An � ll o ,�Row• O - - a ♦.t ,I - Z Q. 1, �a • kJJfJ_�5'tie �i:t � 't� � i�' ,� ' � t \'t i "`.9 ' .,•eri,�a„ � LQ Ct� � pf�sfN�/ /�/� t �• o ��'- � ; _ -,(..:� f It: �' • .r>�._. �' __� � � � � �- � 1 � 1,�\tea; � �. 'i`:r f �t r�'.•^ �:;�0°~ j \ i.�•L � "� b .1 ter- ,' (rI � �a Nam• �• \�-_ t � ! '�-,.- �.. '�� �1 yam. �� .al = � '��.f� _ `, f ! •,� 2 {��•" 5^ oaf.?z. ;. u: af1 • .� ` r c1 •F 'r .e ` .•r 'fit t ¢-r? LJ. Ir -4 it�•7; �. pp __ •r� 1 (a Lt1? l�� '•`\ tl � I , ' �( F -'-�� ,' '•all �' Y�= - ' i - -6 13?ff5 336 1N9/8f a ddn ass AG ITEM N0. 01 �.�... RESOLUTION NO. 9 0 --L 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AMENDING THE BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-3 , AND SCHEDULING A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-3 TO SUBMIT TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF SUCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT THE COMBINED PROPOSITION OF LEVYING A SPECIAL TAX, ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT, AND INCURRING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS WHEREAS, the City Council (the "City Council" ) of the City of Lake Elsinore ("the City" ) has heretofore on November 14, 1989 , duly adopted Resolution No . 89-64 declaring its intention to establish a community facilities district and to levy a special tax to pay for certain public facilities in and for such community facilities district under and pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982" (the "Act") , being Chapter 2 . 5, Part 1, Division 2 , Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, which such community facilities district was designated . as "City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities ' District No. 88-3 (West Lake Elsinore) " (the "Community Facilities District" ) ; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore can November 14 , 1989 , duly adopted Resolution No . 89-61) declaring its intention to incur a bonded indebtedness in the amount of thirty million dollars ($30,000, 000) to finance certain public infrastructure facilities, including streets, drainage, sewer and water improvements , fire protection and park facilities , together with necessary appurtenances thereto and site and right-of-way acquisition (the "Facilities") within the Community Facilities District, such bonded indebtedness to be secured by the levy of a special tax within the CommUnity Facilities District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No . 89--64 , a public hearing was held by the City Council on December 26 , 1989 , at which hearing all persons interested, including all taxpayers , property owners and registered voters within the Community Facilities District were given an opportunity to appear and be h�yzd , and the testimony of all interested persons or AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF c taxpayers for or against the establishment of the Community Facilities District and the levy of the special tax therein, or the extent of the Community Facilities District, or the furnishing of the Facilities, or the establishment of an appropriations limit therefor, or any other matters set forth in said Resolution No. 89-64 , was heard and considered; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said Resolution No. 89-65, during the public hearing held by the City Council on December 26 , 1989 , any persons interested, including all taxpayers, property owners and registered voters within the Community Facilities District, also were given an opportunity to appear and be heard on the proposed debt issue or any other matters set forth in said Resolution No. 89-65, and they were permitted to present any matters relating to the necessity for incurring such bonded indebtedness to pay for all or a portion of the Facilities and to be secured by a special tax to be levied within the Community Facilities District; and WHEREAS, at the end of said public hearing the City Council duly adopted a Resolution of the City establishing the Community Facilities District and calling an election in the Community Facilities District for Wednesday, June 13 , 1990, to submit to the qualified electors within the Community Facilities District the combined ballot proposition of levying a special tax, of establishing an appropriations limit and of incurring a bonded indebtedness, such combined ballot proposition to read substantially as set forth in Exhibit A thereto; and WHEREAS, at the end of said public hearing the City Council also adopted a Resolution of the City declaring the necessity to incur a bonded indebtedness to finance all or a portion of the Facilities for the Community Facilities District and called an election in the Community Facilities District for Wednesday, June 13 , 1990 , to submit to the qualified electors within the Community Facilities District the aforementioned combined ballot proposition of levying a special tax, of establishing an appropriations limit and of 2 AGENDA ITEM NO.. PAGE 0F incurring a bonded indebtedness, such combined ballot proposition to read substantially as set forth in Exhibit A thereto; and WHEREAS, on June 12, 1990 , the City Council duly adopted Resolution No . 90-57 postponing the election to July 31, 1990; and WHEREAS, on July 24 , 1990 , the City Council duly adopted Resolution No. 90-71 postponing the election to August 15, 1990; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 89-76 establishing the Community Facilities District referred to the Map of the Community Facilities recorded in Book 28, pages 57-63 in the Book of Maps of Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts in the County Recorder ' s Office of the County of Riverside as the boundary map of the Community Facilities District; and WHEREAS, the boundaries of the Community Facilities District must now be modified to include less territory than that described in said map and only such land as is within the jurisdiction of the City, and such modification must occur prior to the election to be held within the Community Facilities District; and WHEREAS, an amended map has been prepared and filed with the City Clerk showing the true boundaries of the Community Facilities District ; and WHEREAS, the City Council is fully advised in the premises ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 . All of the above recitals are true and correct . Section 2 . The City Council hereby declares and deems that the public convenience and necessity require that the election scheduled for August 15 , 1990 in the Community Facilities District be postponed . 3 2 5 2 8 c 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Section 3 . The election shall be and is hereby called and ordered to be held in the Community Facilities District on Wednesday, September 12, 1990, at which election there shall be submitted to the qualified electors within the Community Facilities District the combined ballot proposition of levying a special tax, of establishing an appropriations limit and of incurring such bonded indebtedness , such combined ballot proposition to read substantially as set forth in Exhibit A hereto, with such changes therein as shall be requested by the City Clerk as the designated election official of the Community Facilities District. Section 4 . If the combined proposition for the levying of such special tax, the establishing of such appropriations limit and the incurring of such bonded indebtedness receives the approval of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast on the proposition, the bonds may be issued and sold for the purpose for which authorized, and the bonds (except where funds are otherwise available) shall be paid exclusively from the annual levy of such special tax and are not and shall not be secured by any other taxing power or funds of the City or other public agency or the Community Facilities District . Section 5 . The City Council does hereby submit to the qualified electors within the Community Facilities District at said special election the combined ballot proposition described in Section 3 of this resolution, and designates and refers to said proposition in the form of ballot hereinafter prescribed for use at said election . (a) Said special election shall be held and conducted, and the votes thereat canvassed and the returns thereof made, and the results thereof ascertained and determined, as herein provided; and in all particulars not prescribed by this resolution said special election shall be held and conducted and the votes received and canvassed in the manner provided by the laws regulating elections of the City and consistent with the Act . 1` >b AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE OF�..,� (b) The requirements of Section 53326 of the Act have been waived by each landowner; the ballots for the special election shall be distributed by personal or mailed delivery to each of the landowners within the Community Facilities District . Each landowner shall have one vote for each acre or portion thereof that he, she or it owns within the Community Facilities District, as provided in Section 53326 of the Act . (c) All qualified electors qualified to vote at elections in the Community Facilities District upon the date of the special election herein provided for shall be qualified to vote upon the measure submitted at said special election. (d) On the ballots to be used at said special election, in addition to all other matters required by law to be printed thereon, shall appear the measure described in Section 3 hereof . Each voter to vote for said measure and for levying said special tax, establishing such appropriations limit and incurring said bonded indebtedness shall mark the ballot card in the space opposite the word "YES" or to vote against said measure and against levying said special tax, establishing such appropriations limit and incurring said bonded indebtedness shall mark the ballot card in the space opposite the word "NO. " (e) The ballots to be used at said special election must be received in the office of the City Clerk by 5 : 00 o 'clock p.m. the date of the election; if all qualified electors have voted by such time, the election shall be closed. (f) The City Clerk shall commence the canvass of the returns of the special election at 9 :00 A.M. on the day following the date of the special election and at the conclusion thereof shall determine the results of the special election and shall certify said results to the City Council . (g) The City Council shall declare the results of said special election at the next regular meeting following receipt of the certificate from the City Clerk, and shall 5 2528c5 AGENDA ITEM O. PAGE OF cause to be spread upon its minutes a statement of the results of said special election as ascertained by said canvass . Section 6 . The City Council hereby approves and ratifies said Resolution No. 89-76 establishing the Community Facilities District, except for the reference in Section 10 thereof to Book 28, pages 57-63 in the Book of Maps of Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts in the County Recorder ' s Office of the County of Riverside as the boundary map of the District , and all other references in Resolution No. 89-76 to the boundary map of the Community Facilities District are hereby deemed to refer to the amended map of the Community Facilities District . Section 7 . Pursuant to Section 53325 . 5 of the Act and Section 3113 of the Streets and Highways Code (the "Code") , the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to endorse the Certificate on the amended map evidencing the date and adoption of this resolution and is further authorized and directed to file said map in accordance with the provisions of Section 3113 of the Code within 10 days after the approval of the amended map which shall be within 10 days of the adoption hereof . Section 8 . The election within the Community Facilities District, as modified, on the combined ballot proposition of levying a special tax, establishing an appropriations limit and incurring a bonded indebtedness called for September 12 , 1990, shall be conducted as scheduled. Section 9 . The City Clerk is hereby directed upon the passage and adoption of this resolution to publish a copy of the same once in the Sun Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the Community Facilities District , in accordance with Section 53352 of the Act . This publication shall constitute notice of said special election at which the combined proposition of levying a special tax, establishing an appropriations limit and incurring a bonded indebtedness is submitted to the qualified electors within the Community Facilities District , and no other notice of said special election need be given. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of August , 1990 . AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR ATTEST: VICKI LYNNE KASAD, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY 7 C5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE,, ,_OF. � EXHIBIT A PROPOSITION XXX: Shall City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No . 88-3 (West Lake Elsinore) be authorized to finance all or a portion of the acquisition and construction of public infrastructure facilities, including streets, drainage, sewer and water improvements, fire protection and park facilities , together with necessary appurtenances thereto and site and right-of-way acquisition, by incurring a bonded indebtedness in the principal amount of $30, 000,000 and shall an appropriations limit in the amount of $3 ,000,000 per fiscal year in connection therewith be established for the Community Facilities District, and shall a special tax with a maximum rate and method of apportionment as provided in Exhibit C to Resolution No. 89-64 adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on November 14, 1989, which is incorporated by reference herein, be levied to pay for such public facilities, including the payment of current and future principal of and interest on such bonds and the annual administration expenses of the City and the Community Facilities District in determining, apportioning, levying and collecting the special tax, and including the repayment of funds advanced to or on behalf of the Community Facilities District? 8 2 5 2 8 c 5 AGEWA ITEM N0. PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE August 14, 1990 TO: Council Members in Session FROM: Fred Christensen,Consultant Special Projects-Annexation SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF.APPLICATION This item is beir}g submitted to your Council to expedite processing by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission staff of the proposed Marinita-Ortega-Meeker annexation. 'Ilat annexations, as your Council is aware, is critical to the approval of the West Labe Elsinore Assessment District and its accompanying Community Facilities District. The attached resolution makes the City of Lake Elsinore the applicant in this procedure and rill allow the LAFCO staff to proceed with a re%iew of the proposal. All other documents required by the Commission have been completed and fil except for a request that the 'commission waive the req,airement for prexoning of Parcel 2, That request will be submitted to your Council for approval at the August 28, 1990 regular meeting. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTENSEN&WALLACE., INC. Consultant to the City of Lake Elsinore for Annexation Projects : $y Marcus F. Christensen President and Principal Consultant AGENDA ITEM No. i PAGE OF .� RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REQUESTING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore desires to initiate proceedings for a change of organization pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for the annexation of certain territory; and WHEREAS, the proposed change of organization involves the annexation of certain inhabited territory to the City of Lake Elsinore, whose boundaries are set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the City desires that the proposal be made subject to the following term and condition: The transfer of that portion of the property taxes generated within the subject area in accordance with the Master Agreement adopted by the County of Riverside and its cities. WHEREAS , the reason for this change of organization is to permit the establishment of a Community Facilities District that will substantially benefit the property owners and residents of the area, and to permit extension of City services in a logical and orderly fashion to this territory which is immediately adjacent to existing City boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City has completed the required pre-zoning for Parcel 1 of this proposed annexation and submitted the appropriate documents to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission and has completed the environmental review for both Parcels 1 and 2 and submitted those to the Local Agency Formation Commission; and WHEREAS, the City is requesting the Local Agency Formation Commission to waive the pre-zoning requirement for Parcel 2 ; and WHEREAS, the proposal is consistent with the sphere of influence of the City of Lake Elsinore and all other affected agencies. AGENDA ITEM NO, PAGE�40F�` NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Resolution of Application is hereby adopted and approved by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County is hereby requested to take proceedings for the annexation to the City of the territory described in Exhibit "A" in the manner provided by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Organization Act of 1985. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 1990, upon the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI L. KASAD, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: JOHN HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY A0Fr'X.A ITEM PACE 0 F fake E15 CITY HALL 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92330 Telephone (714) 674-3125 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the 28th day of August, 1990, in the District Board Room, 545 Chaney Street, Lake Elsinore, California, at 7 : 00 p.m. , relative to the following: PROJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 26142 - SOUTH LAKE ESTATES JOINT VENTURE A request for approval of a 113 lot single-family subdivision on a 29 . 5 acre parcel . LOCATION: The subject property is located on the east side of Stoneman and the south side of the existing City Limits. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that at said time and place, all - interested persons are invited to attend and be heard in favor of or Opposition to said matter, either orally or by written communication to the City Council. For further particulars, all interested persons are invited to call at the office of the City Clerk where information regarding this matter is on file and available for public inspection. date: August 2 , 1990 SIGNED2 VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON: August 15, 1990 AGENDA ITEM N0._1J . .. PACE _�_OF 1 fake G16incta CITY HALL � -•H=:-- - 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSI NORE, CALIFORNIA 92330 Telephone (714) 674-3125 s , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the 28th day of August, 1990, in the District Board Room, 545 Chaney Street, Lake Elsinore, California, at 7 : 00 p.m. , relative to the following: PROJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 25717 - BROOKSTONE DEVELOPMENT, INC. A request for Tentative Parcel Map approval to allow for the subdivision of 15. 29 acres of land into eleven (11) lots ranging in size from 20, 080 net square feet to 2 . 40 net acres. LOCATION: The subject property is located at the northeast corner of silver and Flint Streets in the M-1 (Limited Manufacturing) zoning District. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that at said time and places all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard in favor of or Opposition to said matter, either orally or by written communication to the City Council. For further particulars, all interested persons are invited to call at the office of the City Clerk where information regarding this matter is on file and available for public inspection. date: August 2 , 1990 SIGNED �`� VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON: August 15, 1990 A6&jbA I[EtY: PACE ,OF___L Cdy fake Elsinote CITY HALL 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE,CALI FORNI A 92330 Telephone (714) 674-3125 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the 28th day of August, 1990, in the District Board Room, 545 Chaney Street, Lake Elsinore, California, at 7 : 00 p.m. , relative to the following: PROJECT: ANNEXATION NO. 55 AND ZONE CHANGE 90-7 M COSTAL VALLEY DEVELOPMENT A request to annex into the City of Lake Elsinore approximately 10. 68 acres of land presently located within the County of Riverside and pre-zone subject property from County Rural Residential to C-2 (General Commercial) District. LOCATION: The subject property is located between Dexter Avenue to the northeast and Interstate 15 on the southwest. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that at said time and place, all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard in favor of or opposition to said matter, either orally or by written communication to the City Council. For further particulars, all interested persons are invited to call at the office of the City Clerk where information regarding this matter is on file and available fo public inspection. date: August 2 , 1990 SIGNED VICKI KASADI C ITY CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON: August 15, 1990 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAC,E__I_OF__/ e fade E16cKGte .� ✓ CITY HALL 130SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSI NOR E. CALIFORNIA 92330 Telephone (714) 674-3125 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on the 28th day of August, 1990, in the District Board Room, 545 Chaney Street, Lake Elsinore, California, at 7 : 00 p.m. , relative to the following: PROJECT: ZONE CHANGE 80-10 - GEORGE ALONGI (DEXTER ARMSTRONG) A request for a Zone Change of three parcels (A. P. #374-071-001, 002 , 003) from R-2 residential to R-3 residential to established consistency with the current General Plan which designates the area as High Density Residential . LOCATION: These parcels are located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pottery and Langstaff Streets. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that at said time and place, all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard in favor of 'or opposition to said matter, either orally or by written communication to the City Council. For further particulars, all interested persons are invited to call at the office of the City Clerk where information regarding this matter is on file and available for public inspection. date: August 2 , 1990 SIGNED_2� VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON: August 15, 1990 AGENDA ITEM N0. ___A_A PACE��Ofi�� REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14 1990 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 90-5 : Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship; an appeal of Planning Commission denial of a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a church in an existing light industrial zoned building. PREPARED BY: Mark Rhoades APPROVED BYLAi2e,_ Mark Rhoades Dave G derman Planning Consult a Comm. ev. Dir. APPROVED BY: Ron M endyk City Manager BACKGROUND At its meeting of August 1, 1990, the Planning Commission denied this request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a church facility in a light industrial zoned district. (staff report attached) . Planning Commission discussed the intent of the limited manufacturing district and indicated that they did not find a church compatible with the limited industrial zoning designation. DISCUSSION The intent of the "M-1" district is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan for certain categories of light industrial uses that are free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics and to protect these areas from intrusion by residential , commercial, and other inharmonious uses. PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERNS After review of the application and the public hearing, the Planning Commission cited the following concerns: 1. Necessity to protect and segregate industrial uses which Possess objectional characteristics including dust, odor, noise, and hours of operations from less intensive uses including office, retail , residential, and public meeting facilities. 2 . Avoid a precedent of allowing non-industrial land uses in industrial zoned districts. This type of land use could prevent future industries from locating in areas where non-industrial uses are located. 3 . The characteristics of industrial land uses are incompatible with residential and commercial uses. These less intense uses must be protected from the objectional qualities of an industrial use. AGENDA ITEM NO. _3N Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: CUP 90-5 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council concur with the Planning Commission and that City Council deny this appeal for Conditional Use Permit 90-5 to allow a church in the M-1 Light Industrial zoned area. It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency concur with City Council action. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of is setting, is not in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. 2 . That the proposed use may be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. 3 . That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features required by this Title. 4 . That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. AGENDA ITEM NO. � MINUTES OF LAKE ELSINO MINI IMMCORPY HELD ON THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 1990 � �W.Vf � ./i: THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7 : 01 P I: [Ii-S .-USoi L PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Gilenson. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners: Gilenson, Saathoff, Wilsey and Brown ABSENT: Commissioners: Brinley, Also present were Community Development Director Gunderman, Associate Planners Restivo and Naaseh, Assistant Planners Fairbanks and DeGange, Consulting Planner Smothers, and Senior Civil Engineer O' Donnell. MINUTE ACTION Motion by Commissioner Gilenson to approve minutes of July 18, 1990, as submitted, second by Commissioner Saathoff. Approved 4-0 PUBLIC COMMENTS There being no requests to speak, Chairman Brown closed the PUBLIC COMMENTS section. PUBLIC HEARINGS Zone Change 90-3 and Conditional Use Permit 90-1 - antic ichfield (AM/PM Mini Mart) - Continued from June , 1990 - irman Brown stated that staff has requested t this item be tinned to September 5, 1990. Chairman own opened the public heari at 7: 04 p.m. , and asked for a tion to continue. Motion by Commiss ' ner Saathoff continue Zone Change 90-3 and Conditional Use rmit 90- o the meeting of September 5, 1990, second by Commis ' one ilsey. Approved 4-0 2 . General Plan Amendm 90-4 - roy Grunder (Continued from June 20, 1990) Chairman Bro stated that staff has requested that is item be continue indefinitely. Chairman B wn opened the public hearing 7: 05 p.m. , and asked fo a motion to continue. Moti by commissioner Wilsey to continue Gen al Plan Am dment 90-4 indefinitely, second by Commissioner Sa off. proved 4-0 3 . Conditional Use Permit 90-5 - Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship (Continued from July 5, 1990) - Community Development Director Gunderman presented a request to allow a church facility to operate in an existing structure zoned M-1 (Light Manufacturing) . Proposed project site is at 571-D Crane Street. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 90-5. Pastor Hilbrant, 29308 Gunder Street, asked that the Commission be open to letting them use the facility. I believe that we have fulfilled every requirement: safety, parking, hours of operation, letter from the developer as far as not letting anyone next to us if the Conditional Use Permit AGENDA is r:l < _ . . ..■�,,.,,,,.. PAGE.. .e OE.. - I C N, Minutes of Planning Commission August 1, 1990 Page 2 5 ILY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 CONTINUED is granted. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Mr. Dave Cunningham, President of the Corporation that is the parent corporation of the Lake Elsinore Fellowship Corporation, commented on the Zoning Code and a church being allowed if a Conditional Use Permit is issued. Mr. Cunningham then inquired about the following: - How many Commissioners are aware of how far away this M-1 property is from a C-M location? - How often are the drawings (maps) updated? - How many of you have reviewed the zoning drawings and read Title 17? Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7: 09 p.m. Commissioner Gilenson stated that he stands by his previous comments--not compatible with the area. Commissioner Wilsey stated that he stands by his previous comments. He then stated that he has read Title 17 and reviews it frequently, and can not comment on the other paperwork, as I do not know what it is. Commissioner Saathoff stated that there would be a concern if this was considered with regard to the letter from the developer--in that he indicates there would be no other uses allowed in the vicinity. I do not know how this could be controlled. He then stated that he has with him Title 17 and has reviewed it. Commissioner Saathoff then commented on Mr. Cunningham's comment that the church has no nuisance or hazardous characteristics. We appreciate that, but we are saying that there are characteristics of other uses allowed in the M-1 that would be a nuisance to: a public gathering, such as a church. Also, you indicated in your comments reference to Commercial-Manufacturing not M-1 and you make reference to whether it would make sense to allow a business which requires a public assembly in a location that has intense truck traffic. Businesses permitted under Section 17.54 could operate seven days a week, 24 hours a day, and this holds true in a manufacturing zone. This is why we have a Conditional Use Permit, because there are certain circumstances where we might not allow it in a commercial-manufacturing zone. Commissioner Saathoff stated that he stands with the other Commissioners, and by his previous statements--does not feel this is compatible in the M-1 District. Chairman Brown asked Mr. Cunningham which documents he was referring to. Mr. Cunningham responded Title 17. There were some question as to whether some of my excerpts were actually from those documents. I also reviewed the General Plan as well as your AGENDA ITEM NO.- PAGE OF Minutes of Planning Commission August 1, 1990 Page 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 CONTINUED 61 zoning drawings, of which this particular project, as I stated a moment ago, is how many are aware that there is a C-M Zone that is right on the other side of the wall from this M-1, and Commissioner Saathof f answered that in part. There could be, even though you have left yourself the opportunity for approval, that possibly if we' came back with a C-M location we would be faced with the same: consideration. There are also other comments through out , the documents which the City Attorney replied to, or stated that all of this could be null and void if in fact the community Development Director has determined that with a Conditional Use Permit a church could meet in M-1. it is also the comment to which the City Attorney included all of these considerations given that the Conditional Use Permit could be granted if in fact it is compatible, as the statement continues to be made. The compatibility, however, doesn't seem to be based on the condition at hand, but what future conditions there might be. Chairman Brown commented on the letter from the owner of the property indicating he would be willing to remove all the inventory of M-1 within the project so that the church could utilize the facility. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny Conditional Use Permit 90-5 based on the Findings listed in the Staff Report, second by commissioner Wilsey. Approved 4-0 Tentative ena t t .Iv Tract Map 26142 - South Lake Estates Joint Venture Continued from July 18, 1990) - Associate Planner Naaseh 3 F�ssented a request for approval of a 113 lot single-fami U - vision on a 29 . 5 acre parcel , located on the east sid of Stone n and the south side of the existing City Limit - Associate fanner Naaseh request the following ame ents to the Conditi ns of Approval : Condition No. Delete Condition No. 41 "Final Map shall into orate Lots 110 and 3 as one lot or pplicant may grant -a ' Lot 113 to 'acent property owner at licant ' s scretion prior to final map ap oval . ' Condition No. 73 : I'Develope shall contribute $7, 000 towards he esign and construction of a traff' sign at the intersection of Cor on Road d Grand Avenue. This d elopment will i crease traffic at the .ntersection at le t six percent (6%) and should contribu.t six percent (6%) ($7 , 000) towards const ction. 11 Condition No 87 : "Stoneman shall be improve to a twenty- four foot roadbed (half- 'dth) from centerline and a sloped AC pa way five- foot (51 ) from property 1 ine s .ect to the approval of the City Engine and permitting continued use as a storm ain channel. " Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7 :28 p.m. , asking if there was anyone present wishing to speak in favor. PAG:_7 OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM:. DAVE GUNDERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: AUGUST 1, 1990 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 Regarding the 'Comments from David Cunningham" circulated at the July 10, 1990 public hearing, the City Attorney has determined that there are no items contained in that document which raise any legal issues. The City Attorney further states that churches are not retail businesses and in fact are currently treated preferentially to other "businesses. ,} The City Attorney has concluded that a church is not a permitted use in the M-1 Zone without a Conditional Use Permit. /cm AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �,OF MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Gunderman Community Development Director DATE: July 10, 1990 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 90-5: Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship Planning Commission at their meeting on July 5, 1990, continued Conditional Use Permit 90-5 to the meeting of August 1, 1990. Therefore, staff is requesting that City Council continue this application to the meeting of August 14 , 1990. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF MINUTES OF LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 1990 THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7 :08 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Gilenson. .ROLL CAL PRESENT: Commissioners: Gilenson, Brinley, Saathoff, Wilsey and Brown ABSENT: Commissioners: None Also present were Community Development Director Gunderman, Assistant Planner DeGange, and Senior Civil Engineer O'Donnell. MINUTE ACTION Motion by Commissioner Gilenson to approve minutes of June 20, 1990, as submitted, second by Commissioner Brinley. Approved: 4-0 (Commissioner Wilsey abstaining) UBLIC COMMENTS There being no requests to speak, Chairman Brown closed the PUBLIC COMMENTS section. PUBLIC HEARINGS I. st Lake Elsinore Development Agreement (Contin om June 20, 990) - Community Development D or Gunderman reques that this item be continue I wuly 18, 1990. A brief discuss was he n the legality of opening public hearings. Motion by issioner B e to continue the West Lake Elsinore velopment Agreement t e meeting of July 18, 1990 econd by Commissioner Gilenson. oved: 4-0 (Commissioner Wilsey abstain 2 . Conditional Use Permit 90-5 - Lake Elsinore Christian Fellow- ship - Assistant Planner DeGange presented a proposal for Conditional Use Permit 90-5 to allow a Church facility to operate in an existing structure zoned M-1 (Light Industrial) . Proposed project site is at 571-D Crane Street. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Pastor Jim Hilbrant stated that the building they are trying to get into will be completed in two weeks. We feel that a church should be able to operate in this facility for several reasons: 1) The building is by itself and not connected to any other building; 2) The building has a sprinkler system in it; 3) Letter to the City Council/Planning Commission from the developer (Charles Morris) stating they would not allow, during the time of the Conditional Use Permit, if so granted, any company to get in there with any hazardous materials that would be hazardous to a church or public assembly. Pastor Hilbrant informed the Commission of another location they checked into and identified the following problems with said location: parking, the building being too small and the restroon facility being located in the back of the building. AGENDA ET::i. PACE' 0 O ��E Minutes of Planning Commission July 5, 1990 Page 2 COND TIO_ NAL USE PERMI 90-5 roNTIXUED Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak on the matter. Thomas Comwell, 18193 Brightman, Lake Elsinore, spoke in favor of the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak on the matter. Mr. Dave Cunningham, President of the Corporation that is the Parent Corporation of the Lake Elsinore Christian Fellow- ship Corporation, inquired about the following: - Article in the paper regarding this hearing, listed the property in discussion as C-M, is this correct? If not, was a retraction printed? Community Development Director Gunderman responded that it was incorrect, the property is zoned M-l. There was no need to print a retraction, because it is a Conditional Use Permit for a location not a zone. when the application was taken in the second time, there was some confusion--this particular industrial park has split zoning, part C-M and part M-1. There was some confusion as to which part this building fell into. This building is in fact M-1. - Is this Conditional Use Permit 90-4 or 90-5. Community Development Director Gunderman responded Condition- al Use Permit 90-5 . Mr. Cunningham stated that churches do not have established areas they must apply for a Conditional Use Permit no matter what city they consider; the church is a business and gave definition. He then commented on the following sections of the Zoning Code: - Section 17. 56. 010, "uses that are relatively free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics. " The church has no nuisance or hazardous characteristics. - Section 17 . 56 . 010, "to protect these areas from intrusion by residential, commercial and other inharmonious uses. " - Section 17 . 56. 020 , "permitted uses" many of the businesses listed are commercial, but Section 17.56.010 says they are protecting these areas from intrusion of "commercial" uses. - With the regard to a C-M location, is everyone aware of the requirements set forth in Section 17.54. I have extracted a portion of the second sentence from 17.54. 010 hereafter quoted: 11. . . in order to accommodate the intensity of use and increased truck traffic. " - Paragraph U of Section 17 .54 . 030 allows a church to be in a C-M location. However, we might want to take a closer look to see if the author(s) of the M-1 and C-M requirements actually got the church permit in the wrong zone. Going back to the above quote from Section 17.54 .010, would it make sense to allow a business that requires public assembly in a location that has intense truck traffic? Or, for that matter several of the businesses permitted under section 17. 54 . 020 could operate 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. That possibly could create a safety hazard. PAGE OF Minutes of Planning Commission July 5, 1990 Page 3 CONDSTIONAL USE p£RMIT 2k__� CONTTN�7 D - Paragraph U subsection 1 and 2 of Section 17.54.030 is unconstitutional. None of the other businesses in the C-M requirements have these restrictions. I would suggest that paragraph U be re-written and sub paragraph U.1 and U.2 be deleted. Also paragraph U.4 is unconstitutional. This requirement is not placed on any other business. Mr. Cunningham commented on the location of the C-M/M-1 Districts, and asked if the Commissioners were aware of and reviewed these locations--many have cited a desire to help us, but unfortunately as I have looked at the entire lake that you have afforded use from your Building Department, and this leaves some definite areas in question. Mr. Cunningham then commented on issues and comments brought up at the previous meeting. Mr. Cunningham stated that he would like to reserve a couple of comments for later on, not necessarily this meeting, but in the event we will be going to City Council. Documenting some of the other things that I have discovered in the Civil Rights Act and also the First Amendment Rights that strongly suggest that, in fact reviewing your own documents, we have more than complied with the requirements set forth in the CUP application. Plus, we have also reviewed your M-1 and C-M requirements . It appears to me that there are a number of inconsistencies in both the M-1 and C-M documents and it doesn't appear to me, in any of these areas, that we would be any more inharmonious to the use of the facility as would the cabinet shop be to the catering service. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7 :40 p.m. Commissioner Wilsey stated that it is just as difficult to deal with this tonight as it was on June 6th. The issues are basically the same, and they have been previously stated. My concerns are the same and I don't think anything in that respect has changed. I would still like to find a location in the community that we can better deal with, but at this time I could not approve this. My feeling is that we recommend denial and go through the appeal process and let Council decide this ultimately. Commissioner Brinley stated that her concerns are the same as staff, and agrees with staff findings. At this point, we are limited in our M-1 (Manufacturing) Zones and it is set up for limited manufacturing and businesses, eventually job opportunities for our local residents. If we allow the church we would be setting a precedent. At this time, I would like to see some places set aside especially for churches . Can not agree with churches in the M-1 Zoning, and at this time would have to vote against it. Commissioner Gilenson stated that he concurs with what has been said. It has been brought before us before and I do not see where anything has changed. I would recommend denial. Commissioner Saathoff stated that on the basis of everything that has been presented would recommend denial. However, the applicant has brought forth several issues--certain AGEri^n , 3 PAGE-; Minutes of Planning Commission July 5, 1990 Page 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 CONTINUED issues where there is not clarity and certain issues on civil rights that he is concerned with. I would recommend denial without prejudice, and suggest that the applicant submit his statements in writing to the Commission. The Commission would present the various facts that might be required, or we feel necessary, to send forward to the City Attorney for his comments. It would also give us an opportunity--as the sections and paragraphs quoted from Title 17 this evening were not in total, to read the entire paragraph to see what its intent is. Suggested continuation for 30 days to allow the City Attorney ample time for review. Motion by Chairman Brown to continue Conditional Use Permit 90-5 to the meeting of August 1, 1990, second by Commissioner Gilenson with discussion. Commissioner Gilenson asked Mr. Cunningham if he could submit a copy of his comments in writing. Mr. Cunningham submitted a copy of his comments to the Commission, and stated that they are prepared to go to City Council Tuesday, July 10th, unless there is some reason--do you set that determination? Community Development Director Gunderman stated this matter cannot go to City Council until there is an action taken by the Planning Commission. There being no further discussion, Chairman Brown called for the question. Approved 5-0 LSINESS ITEMS 3 . ndustrial Project 89-11 - Jess Rodriguez (Continued from May 1 1990) - Chairman Brown stated that staff has request thi ' tem be removed from the agenda. Motion Commissioner Brinley to remove Industrial roject 89-11 from he agenda, second by Commissioner Gilen n. Approved 5-0 4 . Residential Pro ct 90-8 - Pardee Construc on - Assistant Planner DeGange pr ented an application r Minor Design Review of 176 sing -family homes inclu ng an 8 unit model home complex, 50.25 gro acres, 34.11 res, a portion of Tract 23848 in the Cot nwood Hill Specific Plan, located southeasterly of the inters tion o Cottonwood Hills Road and Railroad Canyon Road. Chairman Brown asked if re anyone representing the applicant and if there were ny conce S. Mr. Mike McGee, Proj Manager for dee Construction, commented on the col palette and stated th the Specific Plan document, as proved, addresses this mat Mr. McGee comet ed on the Conditions of Approval a follows: Conditio 20 : Conflicts with the Staff Report, ge 2 under th eading of Landscaping. The Specific Plan is the provis ' which overrides this, and we discussed this w h staff nd it was felt that condition 20 was not necessary i lig of the Specific Plan. ss:.stant Planner DeGange responded in the affirmative. PAGE OF COMMENTS FROM DAVID CUNININGHAH REGARDING PUBLIC HEARING ON APPEAL FOR C.U.P. 90-4 0{,, 6 ? What are the issues concerning a church being located in an M-1 District? M-1 is designated as a "limited manufacturing district." The intent of the "M-I" District is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan for certain categories of light industrial uses that are relatively free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics and to protect these areas from intrusion by residential, commercial and other inharmonious uses. First: We must all recognize that churches do not have established areas within cities that they can "just" move into. No matter what city they consider the church must apply for a Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P. ). Second: The church is a business. According to Webster "business" is defined as: 1. One's work; occupation; profession 2. One' s rightful concern. In terms of the structure of the church there is both an employer and employees. The church will in fact be recognized as a business with normal hours. The church is recognized by both the State and Federal Government as a "Corporation." The Corporation has Officers and a Board of Directors. In the course of its "business" there is a need for public assembly. The building we are meeting in at this very moment is is a business facility being used for public assembly. To rule against the church using such a facility for public assembly is to discriminate or to choose one business over another. Third: Section 17.56.010 says, "uses that are relatively free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics." The church has no nuisance or hazardous characteristics. The hours of public assembly, if that would be considered a nuisance, are being erranged at a time that would not conflict with the surrounding "businesses" normal hours . -1- AGENDA ITEM NO. 31 PAGE OF Fourth: Section 17.56.010 says, "to protect these areas from intrusion by residential, commercial and other inharmonious uses." There are two issues in this statement that need to be considered. First, Webster defines commercial as, 1. Of or connected with commerce 2. Made or done for sale or profit Notice under Section 17.56.020 "permitted uses" that many of the businesses listed are commercial, but Section 17.56.010 says they are protecting these areas from intrusion of 'commercial" uses. Secondly, the word "inharmonious" is used. Would someone please tell me what is harmonious about a catering service (dealing with food) and a commercial kennel (dealing with animals with possible insects, flies and diseases). The church is in fact not commercial. The church has nothing to sell. Fifth: The suggestion was made at the last meeting to consider a c-M location. The newspaper's "Notice of Public Hearing" identifies the proposed site as a "C-M". is that correct? Has a retraction been printed? With regard to a C-M location,is everyone aware of the requirements set forth in Section 17.54? 1 have extracted a portion of the second sentence from 17.54.010 hereafter quoted:". . .in order to accomodate the intensity of use and increased truck traffic. " Paragraph U of section 17.54.030 allows a church to be in a C-M location. However, we might want to take a closer look to see if the author(s) of the M-1 and C-M requirements actually got the church permit in the wrong stone. Going back to the above quote from Section 17.54.010, would it sake sense to allow a business that requires public assembly in a location that has intense truck traffic? Or, for that matter several of the businesses permitted under Section 17. 54.020 could operate 7 days a week,24 hours a day. Wouldn't that create a possible safety hazard? -2- PACPEPE 11 0 Sixth: Paragraph U sub paragraph 1 and 2 of C-M Section 17.54.030 is unconstitutional. None of the other businesses mentioned in the C-M requirements have these restrictions. I would suggest that paragraph U be re-written and sub paragraph U-1 and U.2 be deleted. Also paragraph U.4 is unconstitutional. This requirement is not placed on any other business. -3- n AT-r,S R'O.3� PAGE F — PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Public Hearing CUP 90-5 July 5, 1990 PREPARED BY: PROVED BY: _ a oade ave G erman Co sulting Planner Comm.r Dir. OWNER APPLICANT Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship 29308 Gunder Street Lake Elsinore, California 92330 REQUESTED USE Conditional Use Permit to operate a Church in an existing light industrially zoned building. SIZE AND LOCATION One of two units in a 6, 893 square foot industrial building on 571-D Crane Street. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site - Industrial Park M-1 Light Industrial North - Industrial Park M-1 Light Industrial East - Vacant/Agricultural M-1 Floodway Fringe South - Vacant/Agricultural M-1 Floodway Fringe West - Industrial Park M-1 Light Industrial BACRGR0UND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The application for this request was filed May 11, 1990 with the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department. The proposed location is an approved industrial park site. The industrial park contains 20 buildings and a total of 24 units. Currently the site is not fully developed. As of the publishing of this report there are no existing tenants. The proposed location is one unit of a two unit building containing a total of 6, 893 square feet. The Church facility as proposed will consist of a current congregation of approximately 75 individuals. The maximum number of individuals that will attend any one function is 100, as identified by the applicant for a Friday night meeting. The applicant has identified the following times and occupancy rates for the proposed use: Sunday 10: 00 a.m. -12 : 00 p.m. @ 85 persons Wednesday 7: 30 p.m. - 9 : 30 p.m. @ 30 persons Friday (one per month) 7 : 30 p.m. - 9 : 30 p.m. @100 persons Saturday (set up only) 7 : 30 p.m. - 9 : 30 p.m @ 3 persons AuENDAn fTCir5 FV' 2 PACE Gr Public Hearing CUP 90-5 July 5, 1990 Page 2 The proposed use would generate the need for approximately 77 parking spaces. The applicant would be required to supply staff with reciprocal evidence which will provide the needed parking spaces. These spaces will be available because the Church use is reciprocal to the business operating hours of the surrounding uses. Currently no parking spaces exist. The subject site is not yet complete. ONING The existing zoning for the proposed use is M-1. Church facilities are not permitted under Section 17.56.020 (Permitted Uses) or Section 17.56.030 (Uses subject to a Conditional Use Permit) . Section 17.56. 010 is specific in its use interpretation, especially concerning uses not appropriate. "The intent of the "M-1" district is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan for certain categories of light industrial uses that are relatively free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics and to protect these areas from intrusion by residential, commercial, and other inharmonious uses. " Churches are allowed by Conditional Use Permit to function in the R-A, R-H, R-1, R-2 , R-3 , C-0, C-1, C-2 , and C-M zones. There is no provision for a church to operate in the M-1 zone. However, per provisions of Section 17. 56. 020, the Community Development Director has determined that churches may be approved in M-1 districts if a CUP is approved. GENERAL PLAN The General Plan designation for the proposed site is Limited Industrial. The General Plan states, "This designation provides for manufacturing and industrial uses. " The proposed use is neither manufacturing in nature, nor is it an identified type of industrial use. Allowing a use which is not compatible with identified uses could set a precedent which may be injurious to future and existing industrial development. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The first finding which must be made to grant a Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.76. 070.A) is that the proposed use must be in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the zoning district. In this instance the proposed use is not in accord with either the General Plan or the zoning district. The remaining five (5) findings can be made in the positive. However, all of the findings must be made in the positive prior to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The environmental analysis identifies several potential impacts, all of which can be mitigated to issue a Negative Declaration. Item S.a. pertains to the alteration of the planned land use. The designated land use is M-1, therefore, the desirable mitigation for this proposal would be either a Zone Change or a Zone Code Amendment. However, approval of the requested CUP will satisfy this concern. Public Hearing CUP 90-5 July 5, 1990 Page 3 RECOMN:ENDAT I ON It is staff recommendation Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit 90-5 based on the evidence in the Staff Report and attached Findings. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of is setting, is not in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use may be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. 3 . That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features required by this Title. 4. That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. 5 . That in the event Commission approves the subject use at the specific location, there adverse effects on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. 6. That in the event of approval , adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.74 . 50 have been compiled by staff for the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. A L f4VA I 1 Mow*,m It., i "Out S-Ld30N0.72NICT line Fn fit I 4; tit X0,0 lb w! 400 =lr 0 C:� 21 16 -A ;a 'ell *I m 3 IP IH I . OU AGENDA T E NO. PA,-,,E 1-,b j a Y; i+ 14 r w a Y w Z L • L 4 • a V t �T 7 •i LOT A �S S t ; ! Ito' ~ r,� e �l Q O ® r ra. n►.. .a...r T LA th i- LOT ' a ..I o�',avv r rr rb O y n i kr lb rr Irk — 1'>'---.a — �' ; ►r.tr ,..w raw Ile .', .' ! I + let Ile ,N.r t.a A. • '' T AV.IIQ t '• fA CNANEY- + --ST. - AGENDA ITEM N;Cj, PAGE�OE t - OFFICE USE ONLY Negative Declaration No. 90-I8 Project: CJJ D 90_4 CITY OF JAKE ELSINORE MAY I 1 Ig9D ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM pl_nhn$ •� �At. 1. Developer or Project: Contact Pers ' rj Q}J Address: City: r = Zip: Cl 30 Telephone Number: ( ) "7L4 2. Environmental Information Prepared by: Address:— City: ..._,. Zip: 9l` � Telephone Number: (%Vl4 ) 3 . Proposed Project Title: 01CMWti%3 Location: 571--D Cram Street ShOMSDE Total site acreage: Gross: �jj& Net-.— For Residential Project: Number of units: JJ 1!:}- Dwelling units per acre: Unit sizes (square feet) : ` Attach brief description of proposed project, including intended use, and phasing of project, or if present Project is a phase or portion of a larger project. 4 . List and describe any other related permits and other Public approvals required for this project, including those required by local, regional, state, and federal agencies, not including approvals from the City, fire department, sheriff's department, and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 5. Environmental Setting: Attach a description of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding pro- perties, including information on topography, geo- logy, soil stability, plants, animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. GENERAL EXISTING LAND USE , ZONING PLAN Project site Surrounding North Surrounding East Surrounding South Surrounding West AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE—, OF a . rM.r C a w>. . k a 00 N I a OTto0 C - . paP / r acid i 4 M JA Pn yr w • C0 w • ary a -0C O aV .� • U -yw Cy +� a .1 O 9.4-, a wt7 / r lr+1 Y S. T H .rr s. �a1 q a +tie tk I y O acy 0.apah D O ywM0,ae w 6• o yu Y A O-Ci•' 6 •i ■ iri C.ri • A i s v..Ci lLi a a o r �+'�f. ..ri A a s aLJ 0p p. O l- d w �-at. 0 L.1 a a • X P w a V F r a w • x a r a t .1 o y F a ow ar FOR r JC• 10n • owr =tta cya • Coe •,F D 444 •.+ a10 • • >aawy CCy • 4 L > •.1 w/CP a• GaMr R a .4• •10 .+ L MAy0,a • •Y a %4 HO y -4 uak vM�4 k > O • aR> r+ �Ri �+ a C a L k 0 w 0 0 u k to a F D L a w O k o 014 w x O r a y s r • Al as .+ ,+a oay su .. =.+.,L ++ • ayaa -4 a o 0et ar c woo .+ •c.+pj 4 w r y u 14 • F F 60 0 R F A F 14 h R t7 • yOw L.Ui ao'n .A�.•i • 'r►ai � Gw�wY Q+a+b +Qirla y+t ��o O••i oo iyCo t OLy F3 a yrws� C9 G OR F tt• y-4GF as rid O 4 Ott -4 -1• M - ■ e OtrR aywaM OM M M ■•P Oakh U10M ah w ry • r • C CV .� 0 a• -4Ma a1a+1r 4a 4 • aaC •Aa +1 Ia =a .4a Ow 4 e 1 14 +D4t UA OSri1 ih •• • -� yF CaACr yid w.. • ••aM y yTPwl 9-1yy.4 -40 .1.. YF P-1Mra O =t7 O«4 oM aU -1C P-4M M U UCFa OC.4aa M xC • • ew yM N r yq �•+ FUDa a • wa.a-4U 0, ►3.A CUUtiyA0 = idea $4aOM■ •L .1 H ■ Ov aLh F.4• •-1 • b ,i a• o •v SyTk y R• tow aavCRra to p.i y ■ bM yyy a UM 11 QUQyT aaw • AaC t 4 N■•ua 94 W MOMwa as Yy va a•4MYM AKO •a MG as G44 o3 ►1F iaa daa 4A•p q �14 Wy.4 a• +1 • -1 ■ Q+OP Cm 1!ri I A U t7 M a A a C i M I A U .M.i G. • It! b h m �d xl x xl XI �! x Al x Im N N x1 • y k c O y G 1 4.'O Y 7 r arJ G 0 o k 0 c k JL.1 k t .c 4.) .4 m • C C M e 41 aM Ai o O 1 Mro w Po a s O y a F-{ 0 a -a O 3114 a v id e h y a 1 y c 0 a a w C a y k t1, w qw� w1�i ;44 } M of Or 0ia4F YO T o3DiM3m M'13 ats-F+ C ♦► w rid U > 7 v T .1 O C = O o u Y kA a v k $4 y -i,C Q'C C S m r Oyy.-1 a k Dka ay y >. tl.1a RP MP -, Hyya0 oaa 04r.1G -11 .4 aa ■u 1. O -R+ M k • U D a 0-0 �� a O kAy O.kv • ae 0 a a0 a O V OL yw as as k0P -V yV 4 a-414 C` yg> .+ vC D aMC 0. c"iy ov y aC.-4 0 0 00C O 4,C R w 0 w a a UM w w U • a o - mw AL w O O -4 O v D Q. k IN k ■ r C QQ O a0 • 001 O aw aW ay w4JC v 7kFa Ay a - 0I4 41Ca.1y >h ON 4 X 1. O CCx4! 16 C O .4-4 ayw i1 a {w0 4>. Qw Lkv aCv 4.) a Oh aHw a yu -4 14Ct0y yrka0 0 a .� ++ v • a0l Ma COON y r -s FRtlO Fw a Ha-+ r r-4 Cw y-410-•464 a Oa = a • Ir aJCU L M Jd M-4 yM 0 M0 Mka M C 00 Ca IO ■ yets 00 Fat3ky0 Mw •h a t apMv y Caa 0� ysviOT N ■ OcA ■ a+eE yid Ma 1� wTa.0D y • .0 so c0Ao 3•iyaa A y 11 . 0. .4 tly k0 107E-4 -1 0" r- • tla a0 aU arpy-4 14 ayh •'O ti•y UY ay aM a .0.0 • x Pa Il w Pt k k.4 tAah t k +1.4 a k a k A�F aM k y y C-4-4 m TkM >1 � 0.^ -f IAV ar am a a FH •w C+1 • • •w C44 00C.1 •4J aka c0Oa so Na+40. Oyay 1 C Oo i A k a-4 yM TU 10a > 1010yy y aHt7 ay0tlyk y y 00 W y O a0. L14 Q o 2 W+4 A A rid 0 C O F O O w L k a a .r w r 7 0 M a M O = k .1 H 10 L k L w C T � E > a Ji 0 a k rl d i1 r� tAOa Ea 1Ca a.1 $4 uaA0 Ut7wa CO uaA Ctsy Fy0 .CDs UPy OMA fA aa • WG.R0 1r A -W1 r 44 14 yid tm 00 -c4 0 -C �. 0a c `-sai0 r4a.a I ! I I I a M w�+•-1 r M P C.1 r r+-1.4 M • O R 0 > ay • aaA 0y.4-1.4 .-1 %.4c Caw .4yTk-1• > .4 y +4asr Ok WFaRa Cy O CC r R a0C •a: O •F • 4a 44 •P Ctl - }t UM OCyk aM 4,, 0 = 0 ■ 4 > a • as MPDO O•■ +40Ly CCC > a 1� 1 A r+• rM.-7 jam' w 0 C a w 0 -Pa 0 D • C y t70 -'1r y 401) 0 M Ty-1Uk k tl ■ > 41 0 C -1 C >s c CN+4M Roy 0 y 0v tTraroY > >14 00 ak-c10 wd> s •rtr �a6a ova w i ro w0.D0 ag 0 M-4; r. DyP -1-1C y w • h S414 > a -1 $4UMC 4100 .4 01 '{ 1 T> • r • y w 0 a-1 0 • v 0. •-1to rM • a I e t U = e P 10 [� k 0 a-4A w 1 1 4 11 44 a r>-M 0 a a a 43 C P a • O R fi 1443 0 a -1 ■ o v M tyk 7 y • Cr .i 14 C -1 ►4 a Y a aJ • .4 oO a O •kL 64 O -VA awyp, a 7w a r p to • O Ay 0-0 Ra 043 w Cy +1 0 a • 0 14 TT Ora a U O 0 a.1 o e M ay a>,Cy aa.-1U 0F'Dr y • C.1F9 .4 uM v > w > c,F .1 Cto Mw -4 kN kL •>. ar0.Oi 0Pa0 MRUayLMa.-pI M 4C Ipli 40 au 'a+•1 OaR C Or -4a0i Do.Fi a�rPla V LA Ms.=i O•.C•17 L ■CCCyyaa»+IIaM+ ?1 rD0.-4 R 00 60 4O�a U00 a ry .4 4JC0A - -0UJ7t 4 y tl4 0.0 Ctw Ryi+Caw 41 O.O.M qaw $4041 > r M C V a O • 00-Ui -6 0 p.n.y4 04JA OOb- _4 'O HUt a • • rr ■C7J++ N OwC as-1 OJC Q.�4.9.gM as -u1r -10 • cw • y Mym LMr 0-1 w "aa • +1 -0h 0a yy • Ok -CA aw0kT Oya .1y y>yL Jti++ r L .4a R T C A L a N a -4 yw aa-4 ■Ma a OC w • wtlw G JC9 � TO ■ L.r y rM ■ CCM w .^1 UD 10a cwC • a Na. -01 aW aaa r O -3D Q U a.4.4d0C v0ato a v 000 Fah i1MrP. a0C -10-1L.Ca as 1'. ■'� as O, W 0O-4Ar0.y kM U C.1 14 rtTH -4- 11 M ■a 0%4 PN ww0 aye ►, 00 y a >+100u T• C 76 Fy-4 > a UaW Wa0 ? 14 -4C p yy O aM a Ua a ' m s0 wya a O r L B.L. G C L --4 ►4 a e-4 M a a ... a log M A a y 0.U v •t3 H a t7 0 k F w a o a a>.w 7 a a M LL a 41. au A raJ Pa a tOw C rTa �w.aa wrs, 7' aea y1 a v ra u C01 aOv a C n C a09 OA + U - ■ e a +rr . do � a do u > Jra Oa.0 yo, a CCy MOw Wr LHC6 CA" G ►,LM OLu O. W O u M N cu O UPw 1. 0 au t o v 0 0 U 'A a 00Yu a a4 W 0.r oil"H> O G L .-1 L O a N r e v u U U C+a0. ..0 vy 4vM1C U a L tl a+ 0 -+ 1n O Sr Q� uJ� L /1•» a0 D O-..+ cciu-+aJ as -a W+� I A U 9 • w P J�0. didap oyM4J K wnu 0 a u aM NM w M Ma0.rPaya aolau W• '� �->i �as; G4a 6 ai0 toia .i Ri lJ W f4Q-4La�' c6M 0. u10n � AGENDA f i�?�� PAGE ..OF .. 1 / C 40 C 1 O pQ, • u Y ra� coo 70a� ~J►44 .4434 •aO S1 M •h Id a iw/n ,ar °aa° N. ioar3i oY ww a L40aY7s• -,SOS itUa 'Orauw itlCG C■h frq' �■i 6Owpy°a0•LYUs • yaOM.m.Q•+�AtlFj.Yu g • ? •VCM O aM -/■ a • U 9641S° U ° o Rwa. .aos. UU . _ii .4 _ _ ., u a �t•+Yaw •wwOP •■ Cyr ,,C•CtT9r 1; aee i10 $40 Y> 6a+4Y �YLY> yM *- ••OaWPM W W4.0 41 .•� a41 CM • N • uAr rl.41 w4 .04 Z r 04 so W . •.4T ••pYp rIM M W.4 UY •it4�Yy A a444YJCa a.f SLAO OanaY i • ■a I~ . Y 0.4 0.4 C '4 .. •A L x i r<Y aY / A n d 4; to .t n xl Xl xl �d xl xl C O C o a aW .� 1 ■ a w • 1 M s '4 a G y� . Y.� h a o •af '4 1 ., O +4 Gw ski O.one. OpO C O F O a D tr a !>f w a • a ■a h ■ a h O a Y 9 0 4 O G G M 7 MYw^�+ 0 -.4c O a W fic O % w • x • O >y0>.O. a F as w•.4 P r Y C M . a /r4MM1 a a+. a .4 W 0 0 a 0 N UM1 O '4 a 'fh a.4 O aC a F P a ■ a .1 L p a 0�- AL 41w'~ 0 .4 0 c7 r O / >, •y >.'rw .4.4 >, Y C -0 Y L•~ x .� a0>'~L .Y +~ww cY M o Ypii a.� y N .~LA wab+a0 f MYs •r a .4 swOa c .4 ++ 0 c 4 Yw U+Iw > LOFO / 0 r O .1 >.c�'4 0V N �iw7y.0ia • • .w O y wY F• C • C • c x 0 0 a Yo4 a,$ w ■ +, w c .4 Fa a t.+ y0 GL• a c 0 •4 0 0.4 0-9 • ec .40 C10• y'4 0 C Y S ■ .4 .y•0 • a .•1w w.4aa Ccw y • C'4 L Yt • U WKlaO 41 O a x•• 0 w A t 1•4aa0 LO .■ A >, U y y.4 t Y ,aq .t pCp • w 14 aAw ■ .4 f w • C waa wt .IOu Yy P• a04 a•+ M ° 4 C � >�• W 70 +/i0.04410 'jC2• C O a Y r � ° wqb °'•r � o.ai000st+ +j>t> CP O a h ww f.4 O ■ W a YP a ,C 11 a w . a Cy COLy • o L>++ • ■.4 LL O.0-0 ct.- a • 'e4 °'4 4+yih PV � » w� 413 21 w Or ° C h ° 4114' 0 •°493 7y 0YUA M G 0 a Y a a U O an Y W a w r C O a Y G D.�• . G O M ti M w ■ b no Y w y . r C 0 1 A ■ • tpr4'~ Mra • .+ p xG F+t'ti A >�j ri w raw3G •+t -Y • ! • t !r +, to .a.. t -r•.Ica.+ > a7asa w '4 C w0 MU6 L34 • ADa +4 + ? / Y Y O .+ Sw •N. O Oay y a rww :.4 +4 O U /.� a ■ a Y • >>..Y aw 9a0 •w YY . . O O R • y p w4 r k0 aa0atlp ■ .4 O 1., a. IA p y x w w 0 a 0�-4 a 0 1A 9 a w 0 .4'4 i C-. p• CI i (A IA W C'4 U 44.4 Iv 0. L..r.0 O c M1 .40.wa a 't0410a as 41 :1 YaCas AO w a • ■ -.Y,a ■.Ms �q � o . ow • w14aC C • a >. � y+4 40 • pC.O Dwww.4 a0.00r+k ■ A Y 9 A w 64w / ii pwr .Y ■ A n O • w 7Ca r tMaYaYa> +� to m W r1 41, do t • . wW O rA ai.tCyl pay,0y/ C /> XC p a°at+ Y °M co w0 O'ptTawMC 8N2.w0 M °Y OW c� 0.0 a•4 C-°4 • 1 wN • a .+ • 7 O44 • 0E .4wC - 00 wy 0 •+4 +~Y ■M O Om 80.4 w Cy 13a0 '4 y0 -Ir C w r /.4.4w U 3:60 C AP4 YW yr pi ■ a4 • u0 ■ ao - .4 a . 41 Y ■ ON4.400 .4 0 CFO rS 0r1 w a.a ■ a. 2 w• • aN W■ RO Co aQ0.4 w.4/ W■ ••40 0 M7r Iy0•.w4 i4aq G-4 •+ w '~A W G a aC'4 a • • C w41 aw O • Y h ■ pp p0 a 7 / w M • ruCV • a'4 W •~C %1 0 rta . 41 P/ aw Dw r� •.•411C A11 0-44w gDa Las q.Cj L•4 aAawCO■ aa a '+ • 00 N 41 • a Ya 9 ■ $ vw a+4YU a .~Dwa CCw .~W Mt x •.1 +~a YUOh s°+O Ya0 w s i a o C p= .4 V Y U/ a > •.~X w ■ 11 0 ./AwC Uy Ga .+ • > ■ / • 9 /LN .+y 0 PO \a Yw .~w wwy r.l F ? 004+ w'/ .~y ■ C W CITh s . • aY0 xr -a 'ICC FO CW C+~r eY COF� C.4 .~o ■ Y .Mw 77 a .4 •h y0 CM wa •yL U >. 14•/. Oa Ow 0'•1a -4 O a0 Oa y0 Otl • F ywa a > +414 09U.~ Uc40 pyF .~41 .40 M -'4 YPh .4 . ■ P .4wh a r ura 0 . p ■ c C 0 as • Ma •-Ica -~ C 14-0a j0 Yw Ya aUI CC ■ 0 a * y 0 ■ ..4 • w /�. a 0w a.4 Ol 4 xt-WO-4 ah F . Mb ra a.4 y•• 4•40 ■ w> w ■ -•1 a'0.4 r1OUtl a OC Yc1 a M. awy'+ ..-.ba paC4 % �1 wYh 0wC yy • do 1. ; a40 �+•4-Ic •/ wr r O 4 w0 a +4 r • -42 +4L •X. • • ■h f/ • a.4y • w .y •yN\ a C44 laa>. C M'4a r4a U Aa.r 4 OOV N01,"Z 000 W 0• O� OC C'DG MPw th OaO.. ar Cw 9Ga O + yMa C O.~M UM a • cyac C4 i� •130 wF0 x >. '4aMC .+ Ow Ca.l Uca4 w0 ■40 IAaw O QCAa •C.1acUY4y '~w Ch 14u41 r ilrw W.4w 'A • a 40.0 / /CA0 f4FA 70. Xa aaI roar F'4 4� 0 W0 aa+ 0 p 7wa7 R'4 w 9 M w O w w 0 wM A Y 0. + A z Q. r it `. 4y s% O a 7C a U 4 E4 x ■ II u V • M .• AGENDA I-TENI NO. PAGE��0� FOR OFFICE USE ONLY YES MME 30 I. MANDATORY FINDINGS QF SIGNIFICANCE: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? V b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? i C. Does the project have impacts J which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? All of the above must be answered "no" for a negative declaration to be issued. II. DETERMINATION: r---The proposed project should not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. Although the proposed p project could have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, it will not in this case because of the attached mitigation measures. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. An EIR is required. III- REVIEWED BY:--i t!'`r , DATE:- (Q _7(_J PLANNING DIRECTOR: DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. I-2 3-86 PAGE OF .. Negative Declaration 90-18 Conditional Use Permit 90-4 Environmental Assessment Form Continued s. Energy Conservation. a. The proposed use may result in the exposure of E people to severe noise levels. However, church hours will be conducted at times while the surrounding industrial uses are closed; therefore noise impacts will be eliminated. 7.8 . Land Use. a. The proposal may result in substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area. However, the Commission may make the determination that the use is in conformance. A Conditional Use Permit would be issued and substantial alteration to land use would not occur. b. The proposal may result in conflict with designations, objectives, or policies of the City's General Plan. However, Commission may issue a Conditional Use Permit and make the determination that the use is in conformance with the General Plan. 7 . 13 . Transportation/Circulation. a. The proposed use will result in the generation of substantial additional vehicular movement, however, church hours will be conducted during times at which the surrounding industrial users will be closed. Therefore, vehicular movement will be less than that generated by the industrial complex during normal operating hours. b. The proposed use will effect existing parking facilities, and create demand for additional facilities. The proposed use will be conducted at times reciprocal to the surrounding industrial uses. A signed reciprocal parking document will be presented to staff, which generates the additional parking necessary. 7 . 17 . Human Health. b. The proposed use may result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards. However, the operating hours of the church use will not be concurrent with surrounding light industrial uses, and exposure to health hazards will be insignificant. AGEi MA 1-1 Etti' tkO.. r1i. PAGE,OF Cake E(sinor�6ws Chris�jan � 29308 GsasdtrA+wws Pastor- Lake Ffsiw*,Ca 6rA fn30 James Wit -of May 90 Director Of Community Development 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 Members of City Council: Please accept the following information to support justification in obtaining the conditional use permit for the Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship at 57f p CRA► E S'T, Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship is a well—established, growing church which is recognized and supported by churches in the area. Our services. are directed toward the teaching of the bible for the purpose of instruction in scriptural precepts. Providing help and direction for the people in the Elsinore Valley. Sincerely yours, awes Hilbrant Pastor Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship AGENDA ITEM NC)_ PACE 0F PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Submitted by: Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship Project Title: C.U.P. Requirements 611 -0 CRANE- 5T Date of Submission: _tvµt Zp 90 I. INTRODUCTION: A. ProjectDescription: Proposed project is a existing concrete (tilt-up constructed) panel warehouse. &3q3 6•of area, seperated by existing partition office space at front of building. B. Existing Site Description: The 5-71 -D_ C9A,0F_ 5T.site located in the Industrial Park area off the I-15 and State Highway 74, South of Central, West of Collier, and East of Pasadena St. _ II. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED ACTION TO LAND USE PLANS, POLICIES, The proposed site is zoned as M-1 District. Action is in conformance with the city' s general plan, and is consistent with optimum functional efficiency and economic feasibility. Planed use is subject to a Conditional Use Permit . III . THE PROBABLE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ON THE ENVIRONMEN : No construction will have adverse effects, such as noise, dust , etc . There will be no damage to the natural environment, human health or safety, or other aspects of life as a result of this project. Proposed project is in an existing development, therefore information related to flora or fauna, geological and historical landmarks are insignificant. No industrial processing or other new activity with adverse impact on the environment . No equipment used resulting in emissions or pollutants will be conducted in this area. No oils, grease or floating solids are generated. Properties across from proposed project are undeveloped. Small animals and birds in the area have adapted to the presense of man resulting in no significant impact. IV. ANY PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED : No permanent adverse environmental effects are forseen. AGENDA I TIE ��a—31 PAGE OF ? V. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE KINTENANCE AND ENHINCEMENT -TERM Local long term affects of proposed project, as related "The Quality Of Life" are seen as positive. Impact on services, dining, recreation, etc. , should increase if proposed project relocates within the community. The short term use of this site, may have impacts to demographic and related social institution -and economics _ may be altered. Determinations of social and economic related assessments, however, are negligible. VI. ANY IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES: There are no additional requirements for water, power, sewage capacity, natural gas, supply of petroleum products, or gas fired equipment used for space heating which will emit additional oxides of nitrogen to the atmosphere. VII. CONSIDERATIONS THAT AFFECT THE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS : There are no long-term adverse environmental effects: VIII.SUMMARY: The project as designed should have no significant environmental effects and should not be controversial. Preparation of a more detailed Environmental Assessment is not deemed necessary. AGENDA ITEP.l NO, PAGE 2� OF�GL_ PART 2 DESCRIPTION OF USE: The location at 5'1 t-p CRAWE- 577will be used for the gathering-together of persons for the purposes of worship. The existing rear warehouse portion is intended for adult services. Office spaces are to be used for children's service and nursery care during church meetings. Seating accomodations will be provided by the use of fold out chairs. Seat spacing will conform to U.B.C. Sec 3316 (A) & (B) or appropriate local building and safety ordinances. Expected occupancy is 35 to 50 people for Sunday services. 2.1 HOURS OF OPERATION: Scheduled hours of operation are Sunday morning service from 10:00AM to 12 Noon and Wednesday evening service from 7:30PM to 9:OOPM. 2.1(A) HOURS OF ADDITIONAL USE: One Friday of each month is scheduled for a crusade meeting held in the evening hours from 7:30PM to 9:3OPM. This type of function will ordinarily draw an anticipated amount of people from around the surrounding area. However, the absence of regular membership (school age children) keep occupancy at between 35 to 75 persons. Consideration of a 1/2 hour prior and after services is required to allow adequate arrival, socializing and departure. 2.1(AA)ADDITIONAL HOURS CONTINUED: . Saturday morning of each week from the hours of 7:30AM to 9:OOAM is reserved for cleaning of the building. Setting up of chairs, etc. Occupancy is generally restricted to a crew, consisting of the Pastor and 2 or 3 volunteers. 2.2 EMPLOYEES: The Pastor is the only "employee". there are no church employees, nor is there any anticipated future need. Necessary services for operation are provided by volunteers as described.. in Section 2, Item 2.1A "Additional Use, Hours of Operation". Administrative and clerical responsibilities are conducted offsite. As described in Section 2, Item 2.3 Processes/Materials by the Pastor and other volunteers, permitting no modification to the intended use of the building. Data related specifically to growth indicates that current membership has increased by 15 adult persons since established 4 years ago. Deletion in members is reasonably compatible with additions. The growth in membership appears not to be directly connected with Community development. Therefore, Generating no additional space requirements, additional church services or impact a need for employees. AGENDA 1TEIN4 NO. PAGE (�OF 3 2.1 TYPES AND VOLUME OF TRAFFIC TO BE GENERATED: Church hours of operation differ from area and associated facilities:. - Special attention was taken to avoid - scheduling activities around peak hours of commuter traffic. Building is located in an area of minimal traffic during the hours of the proposed use. Site design of the development is cognizant of the hierarchy of the existing road system. Accessibility to the I-15 Freeway and local streets is permitted in all directions. Collier Avenue serves as a principal arterial for freeway access in East or West directions toward Main Street. Passadena Street serves as a minor arterial to Chaney Street providing inter-community connection of both Lake Shore and Collier in either direction. Passadena will serve as a future arterial to the central (Elliott) collector providing direct access to the freeway of 4 cornors. 2.1.2_ CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE TRAFFIC: 1. Rural surrounding of development location. 2. Absence of commercial (C-1) Activity. 3. Non availability of public transportation Determine minor measureable impact on the immediately adjacent roadways. Assessment of peak direction of traffic is unnecessary. Dissimilar operating hours, limited usage of Sunday and Wednesdays minimize any probable disruption. The flow of traffic is expected from each direction East of the development and all areas surrounding the Lake. Without impediments or friction to traffic flow. Figures of estimated traffic generation are also restricted to membership, and conformity to the requirement set forth in chapter 17.66. 2.1 ASSESSMENT OF PARKING AVAILIBILITY: In accordance with chapter 17.66 of the City of Lake Elsinore "Parking Requirements", the intent of the parking ordinance is preserved... Compliance with sections .010 (Purpose) , .020 (General Provisions) and .030 A.2 (Space Required) are met as follows: 1. Spaces required: (Refer to Part 2.1(B) ) Parking availability Attachment. There are 42 available spaces in the immediate area. Following space requirements provisions of Section 17.66.030 A.2 "Places Of Assembly With Fixed Seating" . Estimating a maximum occupancy of 75 people available parking spaces required are 25. AGENT A i i E110 NO. PAGE J OF 3A- 2.1 ASSESSMENT OF PARKING AVAILIBILITY: Street parking in front of site provides 180' of unmarked curb to the left of driveway and ,a�D` on the right . Allowing 20LF per car. An additional 14 spaces are provided. Rear fenced area of building when striped will accomodate an additional 8 vehicles. 2.1.1 2.1.2 The use of offsite parking is not required. No sidewalk exists on grass area between locations, therefore use of offsite parking could pose conditions materially injurious to properties. Design consideration allows efficiency for pedestrians with onsite parking. Pedestrian access from offsite locations are within reasonable walking distances. However, Safety and Welfare in respect to pedestrian flow patterns does represent caution. In addition to the above, a ridesharing program is available to reduce parking requirement and is a common practice among members. 2.1.3 In the event of a negative declaration pursuant to parking requirement. A plan for contingency parking been established, and will include implementing parking attendants to direct motorist to offsite parking. 2.1.4 In compliance with provision in Section 17.66. 070 A thru E is as follows: A. No impact provided to peak parking demands as described in Section 5 . Types And Volume of Traffic Generated. B. Attached for review are the name and hours of operation of surrounding activities. Attachment As specific in Section 17.66. 070, a parking agreement will be established with the affected properties whereby the affected properties agree to allow the continued use of ' subject AGENDA ITE,01 NO.3 PAGE OFIL-- parking facilities effective following occupancy by applicant to outline 1. The agreement shall run with the property and be recorded with the County of Riverside. 2. An acceptable procedure established. whereby the City shall be a part to any proceeding involving the revocation of parking. 3 . Establish an appropriate minimum time frame for any notice of revocation. With appropriate time for Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship to rescind parking with other offsite parking acceptable to the City. AGENDA ETEi; F ^. PAGE..OF I � u O 1 C) >N L n u S4 Ti E r- w' c o c o c o- 4 X -� Cl) 0. 0 o = •+1 r-t � v a Aj I r < < O U) r-q cc1 0 r-� cJ y U 4-4 dC > 44 Sa H ca 4-; t.;� �+ :14 11 C O C C. Go H c] r-i N ! Iw co is Qi -H U I C cc I .] G 4#� ►�-� < cc O � U I s- I �j C rI�L 0 c. •r. O. �{ Lil �4 ^C ry ac •rr •rl Cl. .0 r 4j U O y 4i v t E C 'O o ca -14 a) C'J w d y ca c3 > aJ < 4-4 O U) ffi .� aJ w m 'ri d y +7] O U1 i, 4W a w a) v Lt U 7 c0 c a3 W to a) a O4 0 0 0 0 o u• H o +, O ch (1) c) ?+ a) O c7 C •*a U S-i Z R CQ C c0 'd m ca C >% " a) a) O C h F u. p,0 �, as T y •n U a3 •v >,•� •c7 d Q) o H a n eo C 1-4 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3-1- PAGE 32 OF PART 4 SUMMARY 4 . 1 It is the declared and acknowledged intention of Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship with respect to Community interest to provide a worship facility. The establishment of assembly areas satisfactory to the occupancy demands of church congregations are limited . Efforts to . accommodate appropriate- sites , alternative to ownership are minimized . Recognition of parameters set by real estate cost require churches consider leasing properties . Past development of the City occurred in a manner that existing structures in the surrounding vicinity do not meet requirements for capacity or parking , and cannot service the need for child attending or space for Sunday school . 4 . 1 .2 The adoption of a general plan , and implementing policies for zone restriction has resulted to the extent that the area off I- 15 and State Highway 74 , is the only area with buildings for lease that provide space and parking for occupancies of 50 to 100 citizens . Conditional use should be permitted or alternative found measures must be contemplated by City Planning , and council members . 4 . 1 . 3 Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship recognizes the constraint of existing topography , and range of effects that limit appropriate industrial sites in city ' s comprehensive plan . Understanding of the citys desire to welcome light industry , and are thankful in relation to its affects to the quality of life . 4 . 1 . 4 Spiritual need of the community should not be a minimum standard to be exercised in planning for healthy growth . If a building can not be leased , forcing churches to leave the community , impacts to demographic an related social institution and economics will be altered . Subject to obtaining a _conditional use permit Section 17 . 54 . 030 U. permits churchz in the CM District , no probable impact exist that can not be avoided with approval of the conditional use permit . AGENDA :TE:.1 t,"O._.�J..-... PAGE OF D � 61'o• I 'G• '-a• y=G• i t { r r.'-G• � �2Q� ju 1T30Vd mn I rm r--_l Xj -� Q � '•'fr ���°apt aa� Imo:f •4•=G• �h•i ' � � . t 2 -1 - i 1 f �JJ Z=0 )=;f' • ,1ids• '�• Z' a LjL�a Z�O )��L: M -its- .�.._._____ -r—•--•-----• -r REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14 , 1990 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Ma 25831 Zone Change 90-11 and Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 : The Clurman Company; a request to approve Tentative Tract Map 25831 for 195 lots, amend the Ramsgate Specific Plan to include this tract and a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan. PREPARED BY: Ron Smothers APPROVED By:44e'e., Ron Smothers Dave G derman Planning Consultan Comm. v. Dir. APPROVED BY: Ik ,— Ron Mo endyk City Manager BACKGROUND This fifty (50) acre site is located south of Highway 74 along Trellis Lane. Is is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan area. The purpose of these applications is to approve the Tentative Tract Map and add the area to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. This will subject this tract to the development guidelines and standards of the Specific Plan. This Tract has been integrated with the Ramsgate tracts with respect to circulation, open spaces and grading. In fact two lots in this tract will be used to create an improved lot pattern in the adjacent Ramsgate Tentative Tract Map 25478 . During the review period this project was revised to increase the minimum lot size and add open space and landscape amenities. At the July 18 , 1990 Planning Commission hearing the developer was asked to modify the plans to bring the minimum lot size up to 6, 000 square feet. In addition the Planning Commission asked for improvement in the access to homeowner association maintained open space areas. At the August 1, 1990 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed a plan, modified as requested, and recommended approval of these applications subject to the Conditions of Approval. DISCUSSION Development of this Tentative Tract Map under the guidelines of the Ramsgate Specific Plan is an opportunity to improve the manner in which this project becomes part of this neighborhood. This project is located such that it is very dependent upon the development of the surrounding Ramsgate tracts. Access will otherwise be a very costly improvement, so it is unlikely this site will develop before the Ramsgate projects. The City Council in reviewing these applications is also being asked to acknowledge the completion of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by its adoption. Because this proje t F,GEMJA ITEM, 1`40. Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 Zone Change 90-11 required on-site studies and State 30 day review, the Planning Commission actions occurred prior to the completion of that review period. The only comments received regarding this project were from Cal Trans, asking that the City begin making these types of development 'responsible for future freeway and circulation system improvements. The Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval for this tract address this issue. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration 90-6 and approve Tentative Tract Map 25831, Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 and adopt Ordinance No. and approve Zone Change 90-11 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS - Tentative Tract Map 25831 1. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to address the development of this project and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to address environmental considerations to the same degree as the Ramsgate Specific Plan tracts. 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified impacts and conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. 3 . This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 4 . The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. FINDINGS - Ramsgate Specific Plan 89-1, Amendment No. 2 1. This request and its environmental impacts associated with the development of the site as allowed under the General Plan, were addressed with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. This process makes the proposed project (Tentative Tract Map 25831) subject to the Ramsgate Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, where applicable in eliminating or substantially lessening the effects of impacts. 2 . The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified meets the Specific Plan criteria for content and systematic implementation of the General Plan established by Section 65450 of the California Government Code and Section 17 . 99 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3 . Granting of the requested Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will permit reasonable development of the property consistent with its constraints and compatible with adjacent properties and proposed development. 4 . The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the project area, nor AGENDA ITEM NO. J�L_ PAGE 2__ OF , �! Page 3 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 Zone Change 90-11 will it be injurious to the property or improvements in that area or the city as a whole, based upon the provisions of the Plan, mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval . FINDINGS - Zone Change 90-11 1. This project is consistent with the Goals, Policies and Objectives of the General Plan. 2 . This request is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance governing Specific Plans. 3 . This request and its associated project will not have a significant impact on the environment. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 -� ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REZONING 50 ACRES LOCATED SUCH THAT IT IS SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE WESTERN BOUNDARY IS ALONG THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF TRELLIS LANE, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 74 FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO SPECIFIC PLAN. (THE CLUBMAN COMPANY) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION ONE: ZONING RECLASSIFICATION The 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 Number 347-110-022 , 347-110-024, 025, 026 from Rural Residential (R-R) to Specific Plan on approximately 50 acres, as illustrated in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and the said real property shall hereafter be subject to the provisions and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance relating to property located within such SPD Zoning District. Approval is based on the following: 1. This project is consistent with the Goals, Policies and Objectives of the General Plan. 2 . This request is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance governing Specific Plans. 3 . This request and its associated project will not have a significant impact on the environment. SECTION TWO: This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law. INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 14th day of August, 1990, upon the following roll call vote: AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Or_ Page 2 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this 28th day of August, 1990, upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGATITY: John Harper, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. 32 PAGE OF TO PERMS AND RIVERSIDE /T.T9AGT 7L FROM OORONA AND ORANGE COUNTY THAN HILLS 9sr PRIMARY TO RIVERSIDE ACCESS ROAD LA►CESHORE DA1yE ROAD � CANI'O►'I LAKE v'cn ELSINORE 9 7 TO SAN DIEGO PROJECT VICINITY F*URr=3 EXHIBIT A AGENDA ITEM No. � PAGE OE, ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE RAMSGATE DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City") has previously certified an Environmental Impact Report No. SCH 83071309 (the "EIR") with respect to the Ramsgate Development (the "Project") ; and WHEREAS, the City has caused a Supplemental EIR (SCH 88090525) and an Addendum to the EIR to be prepared which addresses the chages to the Project; and WHEREAS, the City has caused a Negative Declaration 90-6 with Mitigation Measures, to be prepared which reduces significant adverse impacts to levels of insignificance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has previously reviewed the EIR, the Supplemental EIR, the Addendum and the Negative Declaration and has recommended that the City Council (1) certify that the Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's CEQA Guidelines; (2) approved the amended Specific Plan for the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Environmental documents prepared in accordance with the California Quality Act, and has considered the information contained therein and in the other documents referred to therein; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously certified the Supplemental EIR and the Addendum to the EIR and has made the findings required by Section 1509 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, and has reviewed the Negative Declaration with its Mitigation Measures, attached hereto as Attachment A. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES ORDAIN THAT: Section 1: Upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission and based upon the findings adopted hereby with regard to the approval of the Project, the City Council hereby (i) finds that the Second Amendment to the Specific Plan for the Project area attached hereto as Attachment B is consistent with the General Plan of the City, (ii) finds that the adoption of the Specific Plan is in the public interest, (iii) approves and adopts the Second Amendment to the Specific Plan, and (iv) approves and adopts the Negative Declaration 90--2 Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto as Attachment A. Section 2 : This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its 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. AGENDA ITEM NO- PAGE_07 ;lEx - Page 2 Ordinance No. PASSED UPON FIRST READING this 14th day of August, 1990, by the following called vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of August, 1990, by the following called vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEAGITY: John R. Harper, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO—i�:� RAGE OF—qV— CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 Plannincx Delpa2ltment I. This Tentative Tract Map shall be subject to the approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, adding this tract to the Ramsgate Specific Plan; and establishing the Specific Plan Zoning. 2 . Tentative Tract Map 25831 shall expire two (2) years from date of approval unless extended pursuant to State and Local Law or recordation of final map occurs. 3 . Applicant shall comply with the approved Ramsgate Specific Plan, as deemed by the Community Development Director. 4 . Administrative Design Review shall be re residential development gaited of all P prior to the issuance of building permits. Design Review will be required of all non-residential development. 5. Applicant shall record CC & R's for the tract prohibiting on-street storage of boats, motor homes, trailers, and trucks over one-ton capacity, roof mounted or front yard microwave satellite antennas. The CC & R's shall be' approved by the Community Development Director prior to recordation of final map. 6 . The dimensions of all residential lots shown on the Final Tract Map shall comply with the minimum standards established in the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 7. Street names for all streets within the Tentative Map shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Engine,erina Deipartment S . Prior to the issuance of any grading permit or building Permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 9 . Fence locations and walls indicated on a grading or landscape plan and consistent with the Ramsgate Specific Plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the release of the Certificate of Occupancy. 10 . Grading and construction plans shall incorporate erosion control measures as required by the Chief Building Official. 11 . Improvement plans, including sewer, water and drainage shall be approved prior to the Final Map approval. 12 . Grading plans for this subdivision shall comply with the grading objectives and guidelines established in the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 13 . All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code at the time a building permit is issued. 14 . Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 15, Chapter 16. 34 ; Resolution No. 85-26) . 15. Submit a letter of verification "will-serve" letter to the City Engineering Department, from the applicable water district, stating water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project prior to Final Map approval. 16 . Construct all required public works improvements per approved plans (Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 12) ; plans must be approved. and signed by the City Engineer prior to final map AGEtiDA ITEMQNa. ! a; j R%G _ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 CONTINUED 17. Intersecting streets on the inside radius of a curve will only be permitted when adequate sight distance is verified by a registered engineer. 18 . Pay all fees and meet requirements of encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Department for construction of public works off-site improvements (Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 12, Chapter 12. 08 and Resolution No. 83-78) . 19. Provide street lighting and indicate on street improvement plans as required by the City Engineer. 20. All 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. 21. Prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, all public improvements shall be designed and constructed or bonded for in accordance with plans and specifications meeting the approval of the City Engineer and the Chief Building Official as amended by the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 22 . All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by serving utility. 23 . All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie-notes delineated on 8-1/2" X 11" mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Department before final inspection of off-site improvements will be scheduled and approved. 24 . The developer shall pay for "No parking" and Street sweeping signs. 25. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (Lake Elsinore Municipal Code 12 . 04 and 16. 34) as amended by the Specific Plan. 26'. All local streets as determined by the Community Development Director shall have sixty (60) feet right-of-way and forty (40) feet curb-to-curb. Restricted local double loaded streets (cul-de-sacs and looped streets 1, 000 feet or less) shall have fifty (50) feet of right-of-way and thirty-six (36) feet curb-to-curb with a three (3) foot utility easement on each side of the street. 27 . Desirable grade for local streets is nine percent (9%) . A maximum grade of fifteen percent (15%) should only be used in design constraint considerations. 28 . Developer shall contribute to the City' s Master Entry Way Sign Program at a rate of $100. 00 per forty (40) dwellings. 29 . Developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to approval of Final Map. 30. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District standards. 31. Provide Soils, Geology and seismic reports including street design recommendations prior to recordation of Final Map. Provide final Soils Report showing compliance with preliminary and finish grade certification. 32 . The developer shall be generally eligible for reimbursement agreements from surrounding developments for the cost of off-site improvements required of this project. AGENDA iTrM NO � _ PAGE-__--G� CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 CONTINUED 33 . The fifty (50) foot Southern California Edison (SCE) easement running through the tract shall be landscaped with the approval of the Community Development Director and SCE. SCE generally limits landscaping to that, which on maturity, won't grow higher than fifteen (15) feet in height and no trees or shrubs within twenty (20) feet of the power pole or structure. 34. "L" Street in Tract 25479 shall be evaluated and approved by the Community Development Director to determine if it is appropriate for extension into this tract prior to the approval of a Final Map for this tract. Building/Safety Building/Safety Department 35. Applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 36. Applicant shall meet all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department for fire protection. 37 . Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid or otherwise agreed upon. 38 . All structures shall be designed to incorporate all state and local water conservation regulations, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official . 39 . All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing materials as described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. 40 . Submit a schedule of public works improvements based upon the timing of occupancy of the tract prior to final map approval. 41. All lots will be served with mail delivery units subject to the approval of the Lake Elsinore Postmaster, Community Development Director and Public Works Director. 42 . The applicant shall agree to be a participant in the preparation of a specific plan on the property north of this tract. This obligation would be for the purpose of modifying the edges of this tract as may be required to properly develop the neighboring property. If the Specific Plan is not initiated prior to the Certificate of Occupancy on the final unit, this obligation will be waived. 43 . Trellis Lane shall be improved between this tract and Highway 74 with a minimum of 2 paved lanes or as required of Tentative Tract Map 25479 should its recordation occur first, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 44 . Dedicate underground water rights to the City (Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 16. 52 . 030) . Document can be obtained from the Engineering Department. 45 . Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City engineer prior to approval of final map. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 46. Prior to the Final Map recordation, a public works construction agreement shall be entered into with the developer (s) , owner (s) , and the City. AGENDA ITEM CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 CONTINUED 47. Application shall post required bonds for public works improvements as established for the project by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. 48. With the development of this site, all storm facilities shall provide tract and downstream property owners with 100 year storm flood protection. 49 . Applicant shall obtain off-site drainage acceptance letters from affected adjacent property owners to be recorded prior to or with final map. 50. All tracts and engineering shall be digitized by developer per City standard, tapes to be provided prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. If at the time of Certificate of Occupancy no system has been established by the City, this condition shall be waived, and the Developer will pay a fee of $1, 000. 00 per street for future final tract digitizing. 51. If this tract develops before the Ramsgate tracts this applicant will be responsible for providing two (2) paved access roads to his tract as approved by the City Engineer. 52 . Applicant shall contribute five percent (5%) towards the cost of design and construction of the traffic signals per the circulation recommendation by the traffic study by Kunzman Associates. 53 . A portion of Tract 25831 lies within an area which is part of the hydrology study for the Ramsgate Project. The applicant shall coordinate with said study and construct facilities required to safely collect and convey off-site tributary flows through the site by a method approved by the City Engineer. AGENDA ITEM NO. 31 Minutes of Planning Commission August 1, 1990 Page 5 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 26142 CONTINUED the 90 Conditions of Approval listed in the StafZ h t e following amendments: ondition No. 14 : Delete Con 'tion No. 41: "Final Map shall inc s 110 and 113 as one 1 or applicant may grant said Lo 113 to adjacent property owner at applicant's discretion p or to final map approval. " Condition No. 73. "Develo r shall contribute $7, 000 towar the design and construction f a traffic signal at the I rsection of Corydon Road and ra' d Avenue. This development will incr se traffic at the intersection at lea six percent (6%) and should contribu six percent (6%) ($7,000) towards co truction. " Condition o. 87 : "Stoneman sha be improved to a twenty-four foo roadbed (half- width) from center 'ne and a sloped AC parkway five-fo (51 ) from property line subje to the approval of the City En 'neer and permitting continued use a a storm drain channel . " Se nd by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 4-0 5. Tentative Tract Map 25831 (Continued from July 18, 1990) ; Zone Change 90-11 and Ramsgate Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 - The Clurman Company, Inc. - Consulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subdivide 50 acres into 195 lots, an amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan' (adjusting the boundaries to include this tract) , a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan. The site is located such that it is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, on the northerly side of Ramsgate. The western boundary of this tract is along the southerly extension of Trellis Lane, south of Highway 74 . Consulting Planner Smothers 'gave an overview on the changes made at the Commission' s request, and the Environmental Impact Report with regard to the 'letter from Cal Trans stating concern on freeway impacts and the cumulative impact. He also stated that this map is being presented by the applicant as a Vesting Tentative Map. Staff is of the opinion that this does not present a problem here, because the project is subjective to Specific Plan regulations and requirements for infra- structure. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. a a , 1-1 7--j Minutes of Planning Commission August 1, 1990 - r Page 6 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 • ZONE CHANGE 90-11 AND AMENDMENT NO. 2 CONTINUED Commissioner Wilsey commented on maintenance of slopes, and Homeowner Association maintenance area, and fencing of parcels. Commissioner Gilenson commented on lot sizes and the Staff Report and Exhibit indicating` 51 lots still under 6,000 square feet; condition number 32, pertaining to reimbursement agree- ments and who they are from; condition number 46, pertaining to public works construction agreement. i Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to recommend to City Council adoption of Negative Declaration 90-6 and approval of Tentative Tract Map 25831, Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 and Zone Change 90-11 based on the Findings and subject to the 53 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report, second by Commissioner Gilenson with discussion. Commissioner Gilenson asked if the motion included the additional verbiage to condition number 32 . Commissioner Wilsey amended his motion to include the amendment to condition number 32, as follows: Condition No. 32 : "The developer shall be eligible for reimbursement agreements from surrounding developments for the cost of off-site improvements required of this project. " Commissioner Gilenson amended his second to include the amendment to the motion. Approved 4-0 Tentative Parcel Map 25717 and Industrial Project 89-12 - Brookstone Development, Inc. Community Development Direc underman presented a request to allow for the subdivisi of a 5.29 acre site into eleven (11) lots and for cons ction (on he subject property) of eleven (11) concret tilt-up builds s totaling approximately 60,985 square f , located on the n rtheast corner of Silver and Flint Str ets. Community velopment Director Gundermar),=' requested that condition nu m r 5 of Industrial Project 12 be deleted and condition numbe 6 for Tentative Parcel app-25717 be deleted, and gave the asoning behind the deletion of these conditions. X Chairman Brown opened t publi4r1�earing at 7:58 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to spea 'n favor. Mr. Vince Daly,f representiryc B okstone Development, commented on staf s concerns liste4 on Pa e 3 of the Staff Report, items 1-6, and requested tha,V'the Commis on approve this project as amended by staff. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wish to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown ask if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no respons Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed a public hearing at 7: 59 p.m. ,Commissioner Gilenson commented on condition number 21, or i AGENDA ITEM r fLNO. .�.r (�f r1r PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Public Hearing TTM 25831 ZC 90-11 SP 89-1; Amendment No. 2 August 1, 1990 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: ��� R Smother Dave G erman Consulting Planner Comm. Dir. OWNERjAPPLICANT The Clurman Company, Inc. 455 Linden Street Laguna Beach, California 92651 REQUESTED USE A request to approve Tentative Tract Map 25831 for 195 lots, an amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan (adjusting the boundaries to include this tract) , a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. SIZE AND LOCATION Tentative Tract Map 25831 is a fifty (50) acre site. It is located such that is is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, on the northerly side of Ramsgate (see Exhibit a) . The western boundary of this tract is along the southerly extension of Trellis Lane, south of Highway 74 . The legal description of the site is: The southwest quarter of the southeast quarter; and the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29 , in Township 5 South, Range 4 West of the San Bernardino Meridian, in Riverside County, California. ENV;RONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING �A USE ZONING GENERAL ELAN Project Site - Vacant RR Low Density Residential North - Vacant RR Low Density Residential East - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area South - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area West - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area * Ramsgate Specific Plan PROJECT SETTING This project has been conceived with the idea of being an extension of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. By amending the Ramsgate boundary to include this tract it will be developed to the standards of this Specific Plan. Exhibit B shows how AGENDA ITEM NO. U52 PAGE OFy.� Public Hearing TTM 25831 ZC 90-11 SP 89-1; Amendment No. 2 August 1, 1990 Page 2 Tentative Tract Map 25831 relates to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. This tract is to be developed as the Ramsgate tracts are constructed, and in fact is dependent upon the Ramsgate tracts for complete access and services. ROJECT DESCRIPTION Tentative Tract Map 25831 proposes to subdivide a fifty (50) acre site into 195 lots. Two of these lots will be combined with lots in the adjacent Tentative Tract Map 25478, so the total number of buildable lots is 193. One lettered lot will be created for a private park site. The average lot size is 8,590 square feet and the minimum lot size is 5,500 square feet. Exhibit C shows the lot sizes for this tract along with the Ramsgate tracts. It can be seen that this tract is most comparable to the adjacent tracts 25478 and 25479. Open Space features in this tract are in several forms. Most significant is the private park site located at the projects main entry. This park is 45,552 square feet in area and will serve as a passive park, to be maintained by the homeowners association. An S.C.E. easement crosses the site, but it has been treated such that it will be a linear park, linking with open space areas in the Ramsgate project. This tract has also been designed so that there is sufficient area for a landscaped entry feature, where Trellis Lane enters the tract. Other open space areas are in the form of landscaped slope areas, between lot terraces; and, in the most northerly corner, a hilltop has been preserved, to become a larger open space feature when the adjacent land is developed. Trellis Lane is the principal access route for this tract, but it is also connected to streets outside the tract boundaries, to the west and south. The connection to the west, with Tentative Tract 25479, provides for convenient access to the shopping center site proposed as part of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. NVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed project. An Environmental Impact Report was not required as the applicant agreed to incorporate relevant mitigated measures from the Ramsgate project. A Mitigation Monitoring program for this project is included. Additionally, biological and cultural resource analysis were conducted specifically for the Clurman property. Because the endangered Stephen's Kangaroo Rat occupies a portion of the site, the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been sent to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day review period, which is currently underway. Any issues raised during this review period will be addressed before the City Council take s final action on the project. However, because the Mitigation Monitoring program and additional studies were completed, staff is of the opinion that no new significant issues will be raised during this review period. RECOVXENDATION It is recommended that Planning Commission recommend to City Council adoption of Negative Declation 90-6 and approval of Tentative Tract Map 25831, Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 and Zone Change 90-11 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval . AGr NDA ITEIM NO. pAv� �� Public Hearing TTM 25831 ZC 90-11 SP 89-1; Amendment No. 2 August 1, 1990 Page 3 FINDINGS - Tentative Tract M[gp 25831 1. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to address the development of this project and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to address environmental considerations to the same degree as the Ramsgate Specific Plan tracts. 2. Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified impacts and conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. 3. This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 4. The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. FINDINGS = Ramsgate Specific Plan 89-1: Amendment Fg-. Z 1. This request and its environmental impacts associated with the development of the site as allowed under the General Plan, were addressed with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. This process makes the proposed project (Tentative Tract Map 25831) subject to the Ramsgate Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, where applicable in eliminating or substantially lessening the effects of impacts. 2 . The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified meets the Specific Plan criteria for content and systematic implementation of the General Plan established by Section 55450 of the California Government Code and Section 17 .99 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3 . Granting of the requested Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will permit reasonable development of the property consistent with its constraints and compatible with adjacent properties and proposed development. 4. The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the jproject area, nor will it be inurious to the property or improvements in that area or the city as a whole, based upon the provisions of the Plan, mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS - Zone Chance 90-11 1. This project is consistent with the Goals, Policies and Objectives of the General Plan. 2 . This request is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance governing Specific Plans. 3 . This request and its associated project will not have a significant impact on the environment. ACL.1:16'ur: #TEM NO. PAGE. OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 89-1 AMENDMENT NO. 2 Planning Division 1. The project (Tentative Tract Map 25831) represents an amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan boundaries only and shall be subject to the provisions of the approved Ramsgate Specific Plan. 2. The maps of the Ramsgate Specific Plan shall be modified to reflect the new boundaries. These maps shall be incorporated into the Ramsgate Specific Plan subject to the approval of the Community Development Director within 90 days of approval. 3 . The project and its development shall comply with all mitigation measures as identified in the mitigation monitoring program. NDA ITEM NO. AGUE � •� x �,t���• ! ��� � PAGE �[ OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DAVE GUNDERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORZ DATE: AUGUST 1, 1990 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 - THE CLURMAN COMPANY Attached is the revised Tentative Tract Map 25831. Item Number 5 on your agenda. The developer, The Clurman Company, has used an overlay to show the adjustments to lot lines necessary to achieve a minimum lot size of 61000 square feet. As you can see in making this adjustment the project now has 190 lots, five less than the previous plan. While the applicant has adjusted the homeowners association maintenance areas per the Planning Commission instructions, we will have an exhibit available at the meeting to clearly portray these area. /cm AG-ENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 4 ,,TENTATIVE FINANCIALMCE KLp 2563g -C-O.NTINUED issioner Gilenson suggested adding verbiage "so not to Ian ock said property" to condition number S . Commiss ner Wilsey commented on the applican s Aquest to amend con tion number 5. That extra verb ge would tie Nichols Ro to the existing length as ustrated on the map, is this rrect? Senior Civil Eng ear O'Donnell stated at there is 60 foot of right-of-way al ady dedicated on s map, whether this condition is include or not. Chairman Brown comment d on th dedication of sufficient right-of-way across Nich s Road and how this fits into the Circulation Element; whet r r not the conditions of approval should be records on the map for design and development of Parcel I and 2 eference condition number 8 . Motion by Commissioner B nley o recommend to City Council approval of Tentative Fin cial Pa el Map 25638 based on the Findings and subject the 8 Con tions of Approval listed in the Staff Report wi the followin amendments: Condition No. 5: With respect to arcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of- y for the easterly 1, 150 feet of Nichols ad. Condition No. 8: "The design for developm nt of Parcels 1 and 2 shall take into acco t the access needs of the property no erly of them (Assessor's Parcel Number 0-270-005) , so as not to landlock said pro arty. " Second Commissioner Wilsey. Approv d 5-0 Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to recommend adopts n of N -ative Declaration 90-lo, second by Commissioner Gilens pproved 5-0 4 . Tentative Tract Map 25831 - The Clurman Company, Inc. Consulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subdivide 50 acres into 195 lots. Two of these lots will be combined with lots in the adjacent Tentative Tract Map 25478, so the total number of buildable lots is 193. One lettered lot will be created for a private park site. The average lot size is 8, 590 square feet and the minimum lot size is 5,500 square feet. This project has been conceived with the idea of being an extension of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. The site is located such that it is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, on the northerly side of Ramsgate. The western boundary of this tract is along the southerly extension of Trellis Lane, south of Highway 74 . Mr. Smothers requested that condition number 16 be deleted, as it is a duplicate condition, covered in condition number 21. Mr. Smothers stated that today we received a letter from L.D. Johnson Companies owner of the Ramsgate project, essentially stating that they were in agreement with this proposal and asked that it be entered into the record. AGEENDA ITEM NO. PAGE v L- d� Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 5 E1441TATIVE TRACT MAP 25831 CONTINUED July 18 , 1990 Mr. David Gunderman it City of Lake Elsinore RE: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Dear Dave: LD Johnson Companies is in agreement with the development by the Clurman Company of Tentative Tract Map 25831. This map has been designed in conjunction with our Ramsgate project. Should you have any questions please call me. sincerely, 2D Johnson Companies William H. Frey Vice President Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 8 : 10 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Don Clurman, The Clurman Company, gave a brief history on the proposal. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 8 : 10 p.m. Commissioner Wilsey commented on adding this property to the Ramsgate Specific Plan, and the lot size count being approximately 26% below our R-1 minimum standards. Mr. Clurman asked that Mr. Weber of Hunsaker & Associates address the issue on lot sizes. Mr. Weber stated that there are 50 lots between the 5, 500-6, 000 square foot range. 5, 500 is the minimum lot size on this tract. The lot average for the entire tract is 8,590 square feet. Commissioner Wilsey recommended that all lot sizes be brought up to the R-1 standards. Commissioner Brinley stated she is in agreement with Commissioner Wilsey on the lot sizes being brought up to R-1 standards, and then commented on the Southern California Edison easements and landscaping, condition number 33 . Commissioner Gilenson stated he agrees with Commissioners Brinley and Wilsey on the lot sizes. Asked for clarification on condition number 22 , pertaining to 12 kv equipment, and condition number 32, pertaining to reimbursement for off-site improvements. Commissioner Gilenson was informed that Southern California Edison will not allow 12 kv to be placed underground, condition number 22 . Surrounding developments would provide reimbursement for off-site improvements, condition number 32 . AGENDA ITEM NO.- 01-7 Planning Commission July 18 , 1990 Page 6 TENTATIVE TRACT SAP 25831 CONTINUED Commissioner Saathoff commented on lot sixes not being compatible with adjoining tentative tract maps. Chairman Brown commented on maintenance easements of green spaces with the Homeowners Association (HOA) ; topography constraints and access to slopes; purpose of easement between Lots 178 and 179; Slope area between Lot 114 and 115 be widen for access from one end to the other, if maintained by HOA, and the same issue on Lot 69 and 70, Lots 180 and 181, and; if the HOA is going to be responsible for maintenance of the Southern California Edison easement running through the tract. Chairman Brown then commented on density--does not mind the high density provided we have the trade-offs. But sees most of the trade-offs as open space area because of topography constraints that has nothing to do with amenities for the community. Mr. Weber commented on the density for the approved Ramsgate Specific Plan, 3.5 and 5.1 dwelling units per acre, and the Clurman tract coming in at a density of 3.9 dwelling units per acre. We feel that the City is getting a better integrated Specific Plan in the Community for all of Ramsgate. It is a transitional use/development between a higher density to the northwest and the property to the south. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny without prejudice Tentative Tract Map 25831. I think the applicant is aware of the concerns on the small lot sizes; maintenance of the green space areas; the need for clarity in the language in reference to what area the homeowner and the Homeowners Association is going to maintain, second by Chairman Brown for discussion purposes. Discussion ensued on whether this would go forward to City Council if denied without prejudice, and continuing the proposal to the meeting of August 1, 1990. Commissioner Saathoff stated the reason he made the motion in that manner rather than a continuation was to make the applicant aware, of the fact, that the way it was presented, at this time, feels that it would be denied and wanted that noted. Chairman Brown withdrew his second, and Commissioner Saathoff withdrew his motion. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Tentative Tract Map 25831 to the meeting of August 1, 1990, second by Chairman Brown. Approved 5-0 At this time, 8: 37 p.m. . the Planning Commission recessed. At this time, 8:51 p.m. , the Planning Commission reconvened. 5. ntative Tract Map 26142 - South Lake Estates Joint Chm-i - n Brown stated that staff has re is item be continued o 1, 1990, and or a motion. Motion by Commi er Saat continue Tentative Tract Map 26142 a meeting of Augus 90, second by Commis ' er Wilsey. ved: 5-0 AGENDA ITEM No.it PAGE 4-7 0 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: RON SMOTHERS, CONSULTING PLANNER DATE: DULY 18, 1990 SUBJECT: CLUBMAN PROPERTIES APPLICATION - T.T.M. 25831 The review of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 25831 and its associated Ramsgate Specific Plan Amendment and Zone Change have become more complex than we would ordinarily prefer, but in order to keep further delay in control, we would ask the Planning Commission to accommodate the applicant's interests. The circumstances are as follows: 1. The Tentative Tract Map and the Mitigated Negative Declaration were advertised without mention of the Specific Plan Amendment and Zone Change, so these two items would have to wait until the August 1, 1990 Planning Commission meeting for final action. 2 . Revisions to the tract map, asked for by staff, and completion of the special biological surveys resulted in a delay in submitting the mitigated negative declaration to the State Clearinghouse. As a result we are asking the Planning Commission to approve these applications prior to the completion of the 30 day State review period. Due to the extra precautions taken in preparing the mitigated negative declaration and this projects association with the Ramsgate Mitigation Monitoring Program, we do not expect any new issues to arise. However, if new issues did come forth, they could be addressed prior to the City Council action on these applications, scheduled for August 14 , 1990. Again, we apologize for the unusual complexity involved with these applications. /cm AGENDA ITEMM jNO.J' PAGE 4F PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Public Hearing TTM 25831 July 18, 1990 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: LLY' on Smot ers Dave derman Consulting Planner Comm. ev. Dir. OWNER/APPLICANT The Clurman Company, Inc. 455 Linden Street Laguna Beach, California 92651 REQUESTED USE A request to approve Tentative Tract Map 25831 for 195 lots, an amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan (adjusting the boundaries to include this tract) , a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. SIZE AND LOCATION Tentative Tract Map 25831 is a fifty (50) acre site. It is located such that is is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, on the northerly side of Ramsgate (see Exhibit a) . The western boundary of this tract is along the southerly extension of Trellis Lane, south of Highway 74 . The legal description of the site is: The southwest quarter of the southeast quarter; and the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29, in Township 5 South, Range 4 West of the San Bernardino Meridian, in Riverside County, California. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING LAND USE ONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site - Vacant RR Low Density Residential North - Vacant RR Low Density Residential East - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area South - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area West - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area * Ramsgate Specific Plan PROJECT SETTING This project has been conceived with the idea of being an extension of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. By amending the Ramsgate boundary to include this tract it will be developed to the standards of this Specific Plan. Exhibit B shows how AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OFg_(L Public Hearing TTM 25831 July 18, 1990 Page 2 Tentative Tract Map 25831 relates to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. This tract is to be developed as the Ramsgate tracts are constructed, and in fact is dependent upon the Ramsgate tracts for complete access and services. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Tentative Tract Map 25831 proposes to subdivide a fifty (50) acre site into 195 lots. Two of these lots will be combined with lots in the adjacent Tentative Tract Map 25478, so the total number of buildable lots is 193. One lettered lot will be created for a private park site. The average lot size is 8,590 square feet and the minimum lot size is 5, 500 square feet. Exhibit C shows the lot sizes for this tract along with the Ramsgate tracts. It can be seen that this tract is most comparable to the adjacent tracts 25478 and 25479. Open Space features in this tract are in several forms. Most significant is the private park site located at the projects main entry. This park is 45,552 square feet in area and will serve as a passive park, to be maintained by the homeowners association. An S.C.E. easement crosses the site, but it has been treated such that it will be a linear park, linking with open space areas in the Ramsgate project. This tract has also been designed so that there is sufficient area for a landscaped entry feature, where Trellis Lane enters the tract. other open space areas are in the form of landscaped slope areas, between lot terraces; and, in the most northerly corner, a hilltop has been preserved, to become a larger open space feature when the adjacent land is developed. Trellis Lane is the principal access route for this tract, but it is also connected to streets outside the tract boundaries, to the west and south. The connection to the west, with Tentative Tract 25479 , provides for convenient access to the shopping center site proposed as part of the Ramsgate Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed project. An Environmental Impact Report was not required as the applicant agreed to incorporate relevant mitigated measures from the Ramsgate project. A Mitigation Monitoring program for this project is included. Additionally, biological and cultural resource analysis were conducted specifically for the Clurman property. Because the endangered Stephen' s Kangaroo Rat occupies a portion of the site, the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been sent to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day review period, which is currently underway. Any issues raised during this review period will be addressed before the City Council take s final action on the project. However, because the Mitigation Monitoring program and additional studies were completed, staff is of the opinion that no new significant issues will be raised during this review period. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Planning Commission recommend to City Council adoption of Negative Declation 90-6 and approval of Tentative Tract Map 25831 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval . AGENDA ITEM NO. Pnn._ OF _� Public Hearing TTM 25831 July 18, 1990 Page 3 FINDINGS 1. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to address the development of this project and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to address environmental considerations to the same degree as the Ramsgate Specific Plan tracts. 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified impacts and conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. 3. This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Ramsgate Specific Plan. 4 . The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF OFFICE USE ONLY Negative Declaration No. 90-6 Project: T.T.M. 25831 CITY OF J&U ELSINORE MIRONMBNTAL ASSESSMENT EO i 1. Developer or Project: Contact Person: Don Clurman Address: 435 Linden Street City: Laguna e c Zip:_22b51 Telephone Number: ( } 497-3707 2. Environmental Information Prepared by:.Hunsaker b Associates Address: City: Iryine CA Zip: Telephone Number: ( ) 583-10IQ 3 . Proposed Pro ect Title: entative Tract Map Location: pp 347-11-24,25,E Total site acreage: Gross: 50.0 Net: For Residential Project: Number of units: 201 Dwelling units per acre: 4 dulgross acre Unit sizes (square feet) : Attach brief description of proposed project, including intended use, and phasing of project, or if present project is a phase or portion of a larger project. 4 _ List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by local, regional, state, and federal agencies, not including approvals from the City, fire department, sheriff's department, and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 5. Environmental Setting: Attach a description of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding pro- perties, including information on topography, geo- logy, soil stability, plants, animals, and any cultural , historical, or scenic aspects. GENERAL EXISTING LAND USE , ZONING PLAN Project site Vacant 2 Surrounding North Vacant 2 Surrounding East Vacant Surrounding South Vacant # �� Surrounding West Vacant j AGENDA ITEM NO. 3!;� Rr14`_�,OF ' iN W311 VCIN30V � I �i `� l '�I I I I •I I - ! •1 -I 1 has 6 >.v0 a G Ph a l y ■ G a u r Ah u � a•0 .+ r U o aN +yi r ■ >.•.-1 a 4 V • •• 444+� M A 16 .1 k 1 O M A C k tl pQ a1 GI c L 6.s O N O O M L+�O'• Y • 0 1�N a W m Y ■ cis p .rwc rA a . r 4 -+On tr or a "ot r-/ .+ P O CC O as k r 0-I M r 4 -+ • Q a `�+�r M O ■ C N n • G a+!•. O�• a1 O• Q ++C h 2. k --a�- 4.+ s r• P Y■ q C • i s. • X r + '" 's -c+w .,wi $4 i i i C Ah ••ka99 {ice CY� • Cr2l •� Q r ,•�i r10 �+ Q k.�Y AA .>+ rYPC ••�.1 a� M fri � .>iA i-�JGIMO • fray MOfki¢ aD+� a4+ vet O i mrl 33 . Omm Y v -r/ r o O O N 0 a Q .+ v -'1-+ � -++ O 10 If -1 4 • L.� 7 • C t '1 Y C ka N ♦i 14 .Ac D • q LO G.+ h Q 'O • Y A0■ . C A 4 C.-1 w .9 K a w-� w a-1 4 010 a A ■ . w • +1 YM D O . O-+• -9r = YY .yM Oq 0 40 -4.4 4 4-+ = a00,a� Lr0 rya k C 600 ! G C C y.•■a+Ca i7 • 9 O O 00 d a -tl+s0 MC aw-•ir p7� O~�Yr-1 UO •~iC •w.ri■a� UCC� OC.�iO-yyf HO 2C � i of UU 4 V�F- L FAO .,-1 Guu+qq s MQ■.+u s-+ 04-1 Cu` +04 Y.0 r• ? ■■ 14 .� -+ ka O . tic C110 .-4 a �U Z ��MC vA• LMGrS vY A0.A: •.4C 9%*a C'. c y-+ •Y a0 Xa U-~+ • raa gM • a U0400 �aP P40. A■ �; Naa.•�M44.4 C[O •• M04/• �N +y ML Wa .77i C�A .0 1• •0 r1 -+a 010iM c+I W L ■ O 0 O M r aD Y e i lrr r n a . 0.0 .i Y 1 G r �c,+ -. • • c c .� s arli-A+ a•+ ci . i 1 � o oa y • i o a+ 7 a-► O • r • ik • a ■ AP. of A 1 �+ C 0 mew cru k a +� • r O M # • M k k.Gw k a w ■ 4 it A U 7 C 0-+ti -+1 • S A 7 C r -+ y • k 0 . Y • 7 1+G so >. o $+ z o Y 'O •+ C J+ Y rr u > aAA r1 a L 7 or Di+ 1'33Y • k4 1J -•+.^. CG c is m'Q o tl r r all o.4 r - M akr U1 . I.. q.10 6a1 •A -4 4.440 oa0 1) Cw .4 ./M T RrA.r • ra • 4O ■ ca w4al -! >� 'a ♦1 m«y .1 -�C•� tl M • AO ■ a0.Glar raQA kC0 M wAk!.u�-0+ 0M 1f4�YOU+A•ha 3O1 4C�N+ . iq a ■ • O�� X N ■ • 00. 4 M ik _ + O O 4� 0tlQ0a OW C4 A 0 > 0W tp A+1 A •v v ali . •� • 'akQ O mP. w O • O ++-� O • P 0. k• 4 a • C 00 O U ? O1 O Qioa U ma • ka • q U!•• 4 ■i► >w+IG • aYCa Alvah aa++ a4 VcaA 41 >h M.� atl 0� X L♦+k Qa a GX44 Q rh a 0 -'IY • U-�-3M ■YO'r W c0 G-•Iwu ./ >. Ow Ckmtica 00 a1C> O • G .14>� Oh k p ■ qRM • •1 of -� kc'000 YaksO .+s++ w•Ur +1 • . a0Y -la LO• Y C 7 COrAO CM ■ 4a-10 •w Gw N-i qwk A Os37 • !r a+ CU 4 -n-rw ilk O CO -•ik� +i C -O•l0 �7 •POa a+ a4 oa CO'O kYO -AMmti r +C O♦► C m 7M -+ ++1 -+ -+ i -0 n 4J O + r • 7 iq C • r r +1kra. +� a Ca aO• a1i • k %4 NAVA La CCma C A • k401r ■ M • M aD .+ 6Y k� ■ sue.-1 -y . . • • .�■ 40 • u tlrDa+-+ k ■alti .'vo%aoUi1 rar-. a Vb • N .M i1 r �P 0 k'00'. x a• ! 4 T k M.0 a A h G k -.4,4 -a k A k Ul C a�.�+ k a u c.r.4 m>.k-1 A p..e.vn x � M+4i Gnun ��CD GOOY CM%; .�iM L�� -a+O+o+aOtik ..r .4 G 4Gk 61 CN � [>014 7 %mO4 O Ur•� W O ■ F+ 4 4 �■. Uu10 UV Mi 40 U a Asa1Ha 40s UasV, 0-•1R raa•r W96 0 i .4 KC G 4•� ■ A V i w ■ A tl b • �+ P r .i 1'1 rl Is a gala i.4 tp �i-m I I I 1 +I0m a 0.C44QR C v0 w rb1 Ca Q uCw A.i as �a U r O C a1 MQ �,�,,,•p Y� O M ''+> ■ I t{ to C9 -a+r IOj o 7•.Yioi.P.vYI • > • O av>sCC •ww Q.M O N Ov • -r •Ca1 • rM> >.-1 C4 .-1-� 7 • r �C-+A G-+wsw o� a0-0 a.3■r�> -ri.ls GO++P w.�1oC Y M f. a NM 0r-r• • .d .+1b a+iAa� iCi1 3 O a01 • l� k0 ■+>1��•••Y f V pCq F. Q #�M r •Y• a >T . M a u C O. U • DQ#kya aAlm • fair rr aPrAYoo�br�.+1 wCM 4 °0 SO a, O Y>.>r. Or! OavtCJtl00 Qi.r+oi M r 7 r-Clp y�yy .IQn%Qrfwi� .4i�C••� y .yip U O> >.0 >a 16 v-+ • o CG�LOv C Or Sa pp + y1 4 Iy P+1 a r A v 0 ■t� a.. O c O C ++r D i •w ,C 1t M i4 Y 43-1 QC.ri• it C9 Y -�! •L AA0 O c.l .�4 O..-1 uwk .� rY waOGrC - .•iOYs.■i U „ y,,. 0..10 Ac •al al Iuall iiiiii oo Q• r • oa � • Uv r.yu kvaa •-sOkUCN+�• 0 • • kM ww al.aOc•� A-�A•-� Y • • QO GC Q7Gr -. r ■-/+�1#Y +'+a� 4 P -a p CCu COw 0 U0 -+C64 OOAb! ++ N . 0- -0 ..1 w M al ar Q Q Oil 4 O > Q C 'O O • o o r ++ o LL tl.1 r •i1 a .O O-+w t kU U v ku 1 • a • a . Rv .-a Oka �! C 4 U -�••+ ppppeee G a ' aUU • • -+ • • rAk • +•I,i • k-�r 0 MQ•1 • ^'�h aa+-1 �M UA.� 00ow vCt�UOC M.k94 c 00 'c-. 0 • y QA Adgo r TO ak.� • r ■ CC-1 k au0 Aa CwG . ■ acop O r1M tl • . a "� 4 0 a.-1.-1a •{K • OAv a • coo G71�• k-a ati aOa +� 0-/4CR .! W 7Q >.dOr >�� ■ CP.' 1' ,aCY�A > %UAGI MMO7 .mwC7 Lya wa : 040a °�aat UY0 bcaayd0 Ir./D+r • O • CO.kG Ck .-� M U 4.4-+ • A �y1+•. O -d QAaI QU • mbk mtsmk G k m0 ■ C>.4 a •rk .-1y Qa OUrG tlAU AC gr- a 'CO •• n�•rf�/ 9mrs+Qm DAC Ar•k�M••-.MMar ■MO 4o COa■DMrrr OA rrO Rry+l+Vr -■i/ Q+4a�r �.�i +l ■ A u kr• a �] a w 1V.0 Co. PO N•a.0 y1.•2 r aa tU A Aj k0.0 OG •- u qO � m k O Fftis O> +40 a • a Aua �+ is Cy. • Owar Ow Qr•■Mc 1. O + OU 0yy � a X CO LaOU t itk O UOC#Aa ~ w.4 .0y .l > Q.# 0 # .ri O M O. A 1 o.AA A. y wl r C N • a n II f fC�l 7npS OAP 'If C • � TJ !r • Ko rK OK ►�O .0f, '0 • ' Rr• bL• r a F • M c O rt ro O # M'3 Pp • T PA0A C bPr e•7r RO•Y POT* M K m ■ on ##A r&Rr •.1>• KM APRn0PrtY ■'DDi O y• fA OM OR roroe n 4-0 KO ►• .� ryDN KXC 07n A dA Rro Aft • aAA O00 a&van A00 Ph PK D" "n Pam• Prrta OMO PRn 0. rtR Tr-ff K.O �+ � d7 SO KYO■O•RO■M••v7 n~0Vr0w \ AA rt • r<Aa • '1 '130 rr Ora•Ar 'as�P • O S r •K nAR!7 r C OGKN 7Of wR �/a�<Rf• rhG 9•C -1.T o A S R R X 5 0 T am # vnR w M� R 0 rP • P.M 00 P 16 ■ rD 7 A 3w ►� .✓�rn.A•t rPP O A ID7 •� TNR . rN0 rzO nWr R tr O p0 r7 f CO 1 rt SLR 0 CmO P = n• f PP nR Sti T*a r• ' • J0 aO: RM rt #\ �b V • •OAw w P rc R - - - �Nfa«n M<+rn� rMPA •Oov7•rt 7►`7nK7 Oh■i�KrKa GifOtNrnf �wDFM �hOrMrRaRra �cN�pPK.Ob T�r G�Opp�A*h•rrtrvrDp w w or ftfRw 06 0hOMfrn•wt � OR O v0nR nw sr�. "hA3paa,n R O rgr0 7 K a"a w D.P O It � r CR r w 0 , n • rtrsP�al`m�7a r , 10 hD ?Il rro 6-0rO �• 0 IGt Ww R Vh '.!: • 1 y f 1 • s • ewawphY Ir • ros » • a n u s nrehc tr r �� N • a e >? • rwoots � Nr�s07 • DF rnKwrt � •+� RR � S 1%00 4M• II' ■ COAL ✓ C�Mq <P Rror •O��iwf N� oX �Am v� O O w O O � Marlrt rail D 4q rail A'< ^a^ ebi h!P rs rA 8 r Mtri KOAie a rA/ w A Aro .QaNfD RS F' 0 s A f np r• O Kd N• r• is 6f0+7 � 8 r"' / It a < r'0 7 r r A O r p D O A V e • v r�{{ •f F r 0 Cf 77 w ti rt K A T P d ■ R h G h a D T • r n 7 rt G O J r K w►'A 'O r d r P< 7KC0 T RK A 1dr- F r N .'7 D [K • 60 •M ! �Ir• r r ■ •r A• r.1 0 O v rt L ! O r O n R/ • w 7 r r b R P O * h A 0 7 < r r f#r<or p n R 7 0 D rt S p a K n K 7 # F rt w r w 0 r f N h �/ a O q•enrm M aN •S T rt p • #7x On0YSr O r y< • 3 f K � e a • � f#r• « I O rro O r R • w A 7 Ffr GSrn00 h • ■ O na O Ari q0r or Oro re 7 p K A V / MO'• M hf 7r # f► h ' • vy K KKJ7T QS O! C►' O 7•SO •• � ro D rt ra+�dr ias • r 7 Y • r0 r•f n r D3A �Sfrh Pr Pro • artP r P d rt J G ..■ • s fRa 0rpt we D 1p0 r R r # h wamx • 7 f Jn AK n O 7n ft9- 7O rtA rtK ~ d r n w � C RK • 0 09Q P K W ►R• h K I(n�.� •h O 71 MO a�I' a9.r•~• V D or PA titHF+? w T �Q 3 A p IQra+• R •roK7w NM r O y„ y • NRrtr h •N P [OtaItLOH ro • fs O 1i �bQ• 7 O�Q 7•. / P O oil OO 3C7AoKf•0 ro s or -j [ 0 A G rt r i •hN # M WM r i i Illlil I I I I i� - III - I I I • ! � .I It I^ I . I•• • i' . I� !�. I i�, I�, I` - � u r b IO d O tT • A q• R# 'A L G K 7 so � WN• rM t!fl f ! R f n t7 O lYGt7h 7 f r y r • !l A r! n R.Q K P pKr CNn •r►nr er rr • ! r a hMrn I..�r■ # r bN • r • •7p Prt S A e■ir riff O 9 w �6w�¢r IA O 67r1► ~ Nb rN0 • ham Gr• tf +•• f� O�n� pC #• h • n h f n f h ■ K O f h h f„ f r moo -aren °Ri40 *or w, 1, o�lr`r ralaoa • �'00 : e�rnri ft a■�eoor� irn� 7 rG r /pf ■r rP n r 0 hvt rr/ • /3 # D [• w f h R A h h r0 or 1RgrR V OR O'GA•D •A a 4 G/ / 0 0 • O /n• b K f frK0 r < oh a • w DGD •.1• « �aC • K �phr «tiwv R„ile O r or A H >� 1 7 1 R r• 1 I I I I AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY YES MAYgE NO I. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? All of the above must be answered "no" for a negative declaration to be issued. II. DETERMINATION: The proposed project should not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. Although the proposed project could have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, it will not in this case because of the attached mitigation measures. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. An EIR is required. REVIEWED BY. DATE: .? PLANNING DIRECTOR ATE: Z AGENDA ITEM NO. 1-2 3-86 Z� - C 3 � U pa. Ix w 16, Q F z � cc < C rr, R i= If W v � � � - . � Asa an t u � .s W - � � E � w o >1 42 IL �. w � c � � r.. t: M -16 oa AGENCA ITEM No. PAGE O C/ ON WEIl! VCtN30Y p S " O ct OQ rn L. C� a. a AL � . rx e1.4 Pr Pq 7 o 30 c 'Q O ea 0 z y n � 3 � o � c .. m •o U E-� z T. eotz � c Q Q 0 z U u Ca c as Z, '$ . � � a w o 'a C to � �t U � � . ' � Ls :E be � t� _ a V b $ O v bQ > cr a o Q m w AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE ^,F i '3O —fTS Z-]Cdd CIE 'ON W31! VCN30V 41It 1.A A L3 N tYf n CPO s ; z ... ., � OQOQ [ I og n n 9 Lq 31 W � a � 19, 5. A n a ro � sR. PIF A z n � ms O C. 'IC o � U Aw E-� Z N O O o 3 yODj Q O v 9c � S Qea F Z � U C U UUla K .� Qr73 Im v a � u � Lj �P o d I A Go�z VA 6 a g E N z N AGENDA ITEM NO. Of -�--- 2 PAGE1c. .� `+ L ON W31! VCN-Jb 3 14 rn � � . s cn s "MIN �. to CD t to At < n ° m � SIX. Z Cam!! %It7l0° o 0 a 00 e 3 om n O O 0 0 N.. °z Rk os � m o � G C E 76. P. CL E� z 0 U O r G E a � � s � s E we � •� � � s �— � F � E, E- p � ua � v w � c� u'3 � occ� w � 3U w � 3v tz •� M Z Rt1 Fit E K ,AGENDA ITEM NO. PA.3` 1 . w _._� J^ `J �J V 00 es LJ N C r A CA � O"� �• A O � w O z TO PERMS AND RIVERSIDE �diik T.MZAC"r 7L �2Sl31 TPIOM CORONA AND ORAWE COUNTY TUWAN LOLLS TF 9sr �r PRIMARY --� TO WERSIDE ACCESS ROAD LIKE F DRIVE r Wy ROAD t LAKE , ELSINORE b TO SAN MOO t PROJECT VICINITY SGURE 3 EXHIBIT A AGENDA ITP,, i, O. i os 1 : RIVERSIDE MLD . . . . . . . . Os. : . . . . ' \. nti• •• r}�• }� t ::a:�� 1a�\gut• '-Cti• .T. T :::;;•. :�.. T 4 �� �v :t ` �:`: !ltT tl It `YT •Y ttltJtrtltt St• . . . . tlt JSlSlaJt+SJ t lttlt/ttl t'lt�tl t. . . • . . • t;ttt tttltt;ttltt{. . • • . • SlyJtr: ftrtlSJ%t• jtrtltf tlt+trtf t ri it rt O +:rl!J rr• f`1ti1iJ�t+%+tr;I 'S'tJtttr lS:SrSJSJ% .O,h tjtl S•t It�tttlZl t7t . . ftt%ttt rtt;t;ttrt. - ! �;:•r'JI t�rJ J!r..t S•S�S�S S t5�tt +ti?i?:+t+ti+•ti+ti+ti+ti r %S?f•J It+t.Srt rtrtrtr-% . . . . . . . . . . .tt ittt+tl5l t+t+S+t. ':i:r:;,r r%:t:trtr}r:r••• :•;?;?t.•Sr{rtrtJtr;rt.trtrtiriJt. :: ;.;.;t;S;S;SrtrtJ;t;:tt%f=Jt:•. .,..S t,?Srttt Jttt rtty••,�Srt ft+ttt JS+S�-� • 1SJ.;t;t J:lt�.:t;Srtrtr:rtltJLJ yrar,, ••t�ttJSJtltltltJ:.:+SJSlylttt+tltlylaNsala+t �tlti:;t;trtrtrl Jtl:r%:SttltltrtJal ylylatalyly! •:J:Jtrtr;rsrt:t:;r;r;Jtrtrtrtrylylylaiyrattr LEGEND .:t:::::.:t:::.:•:::t::J:JS:tJar+lalara:t. : . STRADA RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL VLD A c;°c•On LEN COMMERCIAL LOW oEC.0 JA OONN<NNNUNarr LD 1.1-ss O.u�Ac. P #,mac HOWE DI UM LOW O ENNs TY � OPEN SPACE tS•LO Q.UJAC. AND CONDO 11ONN "EDPJM DEMSM sF., m m MD V•u auJANw sm AD ttt D.u1Aa.ON OPMATEA • BOUNDARY r:NN rtlT LAND USE PLAN BY PLANNING AREA F1GURE 1 EJIBIT B AGENDA ITEM NO. LU n— c*) o o c*) o co a n Q � N anon aD LO a r � h r CD c� J r cl C r r- to C\j Cn C C•) r r r r r r CV5 cr M cot O r LO m v < � 0 J C7) c Q c N n Co O CD O O < Z Q O r tl) CY) Nt c7 [*? N N r W w 0 Q CV cc Q z F ..7 ►Q N + C\l Ch Lf? O �y++ S T (r) r tY) T W C� r LLJ Y� r Nr CO") N � ram- CO N C S CD N CV CY Q Q ►� CV) c) N N m N m 1� V) g N D N U) Q O O to c*) cn tt U N N cN�t cn to .j 6 N `W cC Q o �/� c c* cn o to co cn p m V/ O c*) CD Ch N r u N o LO Q cc O O _ Cf) to to N LO cr) co v O r O C5 U? Ln U) 0 O CD Ln 'i7 r r O p C) 0 U-i W Z Z ~ LO LON C j � N cq C\l N5 oN 0 cm U AGENDA ! F i;= N %3 p,kGE_* 4F { �.11 1 h 1 1 V 1- 11 sr%v 1 a.vv• ,'ROSS SO. FT. PER LOT LOT# SO. FT. LOT # SO. FT. LOT# SO. FT. LOT# SO. FT. 1 8,755 51 7,000 101 6,100 151 16,895 2 6,630 52 7,332 102 5,610 152 7,425 3 8,835 53 7,526 103 5,600 153 6,600 4 7,200 54 21,838 104 5,500 154 5,700 5 6,760 55 26,298 105 5,500 155 5,600 6 5,555 56 7,405 106 5,500 156 5,600 7 5,555 57 5,800 107 5,500 157 5,600 8 5,555 58 6,300 108 5,610 158 5,600 9 5,555 59 6,000 109 5,832 159 5,800 10 5,555 60 5,700 110 7,080 160 6,000 11 5,555 61 5,500 111 7,526 161 5,838 12 5,555 62 5,800 112 8,692 162 7,510 13 5,858 63 5,500 113 8,424 163 39,360 14 7,440 64 5,500 114 8,400 164 5,779 15 6,665 65 5,500 115 5,933 165 7,015 16 10,700 66 5,500 116 5,450 166 7,644 17 15,035 67 5,500 117 5,550 167 7,300 18 29,379 68 5,500 118 6,166 168 7,250 19 9,555 69 7,216 119 6,016 169 7,200 20 9,458 70 8,254 120 5,550 170 10,504 21 9,880 71 6,700 121 6,420 171 16,873 22 16,536 72 6,750 122 6,947 172 7,770 23 16,829 73 14,544 123 6,637 173 8,891 24 7,891 74 22,630 124 6,977 174 8,342 25 5,750 75 6,975 125 6,475 175 8,522 26 6,000 76 6,355 126 6,650 176 10,359 27 6,000 77 6,200 127 6,550 177 13,550 28 6,000 78 6,200 128 6,325 178 14,897 29 6,000 79 6,000 129 6,325 179 13,741 30 6,000 80 5,500 130 6,450 180 13,712 31 6,000 81 5,500 131 6,575 181 15,217 32 6,000 82 7,512 132 6,725 182 17,103 33 6,000 83 6,725 133 6,875 183 26,132 34 6,960 84 6,195 134 7,572 184 25,593 35 6,660 85 5,900 135 8,040 185 8,892 36 7,592 86 5,900 136 9,305 186 8,944 37 8,242 87 6,366 137 9,610 187 8,944 38 7,020 88 6,792 138 13,421 188 10,121 39 5,773 89 6,962 139 17,620 189 9,931 40 6,402 90 5,824 140 8,370 190 12,283 41 8,222 91 5,720 141 7,440 191 11,208 42 6,750 92 5,720 142 12,090 192 11,740 43 6,800 93 5,668 143 11,160 193 16,686 44 6,850 94 5,668 144 6,820 194 10,676 45 6,a50 95 5,668 145 6,350 195 5,070 46 6,900 96 16,895 146 6,120 A 45.552 47 6,900 97 29,450 147 6,000 48 6,950 98 11,160 148 6,000 49 6,950 99 11,000 149 7,130 50 6.950 100 7.595 150 15„510 TOTAL 394,812 417,043 370,328 536,969 RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE R 1,657,854 S.F. RAMSGATE LOTS - 15,746 S.F. LOT A=45,552 S.F. GROSS TOTAL- 1,719,152 S.F. AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE=8,590 S.F. 6l1/90 EXHIBIT Cv'1, W.O. 784-4 AGENDA IT ,t t�G._W2 PAGE OF �L REPORT To THE CITY COUNC DATE; IL August I4, 1990 SUBJECT: Annexation No. s1 North Gate Downs and done Chan a 89-I3: re est R' Bruce Czt to annex l60 rocs Kem era ; A site of Lake Elsinore and to acres into the R-1 re-zone the Residen HPD tial'Hillside sin le-Famil la Pla d Over District nne Develo went Tuscan xil The site is north of is S Dec Pla n Area Avenue northwest o and and of sOutherl f Can Do rc °n Lake hester Lane PREPARED By: brie Associate p ann�° APPROVED BY: Dave G APPROVED BY: Comm, dermanRon '4 ev• Dir. BACKGROUND city Mana 01 deer the At g r mee vote owed Zone 1�hange 89 ulY Is, 199 DeclaratMinutes Sta and 0, the plan issues iOn 90-381 Staff Annexation N zng commission for this proposal prepared Report attar er 5Z by a 5 00 DISCUSSION ddressing Negative environmental The request site, is Si for The curre to Provide Amendment. os �10 lots Thdsdensity lismlte subdivisi p willThe This will . 3 dWellin °n Of the Impact Re Port heard at Plan Amendme t quire a g units per riparian oor=. is being a separate het and Tenta General Plan drainage issues. 1'dorthe Stephen ,Prepared ka addre5S IngAnimpact, Environmet Tract RECo MENDAT ngaroo rat an in to a IDN g and It is Decatiorec hange $9`n 90-38; ap approve City base3' adopt Resove Annexay Council ado FINS d °n the following Find . N o sat and Zone zngs: p Ordinance No. Annexat . ton NO �1 I• The Project Influence as is locate Commission designated d within the Annexation and is cont guou by the Loc City's Sphere extension of theeCatY Li°uld to theaCityg lm� Formationency mzt boundarybe an ndary. Inappropriate Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Annexation No. 51 and Zone Change 89-13 2. The proposal will not result in significant environmental impacts. 3 . It is anticipated that future development of the site will be conditioned to provide the necessary public services and facilities to service the site. Zone Change 89-13 1. The proposed zoning is the most appropriate zone for standard single-family residential development. 2. The proposed zoning is consistent with residential zoning in surrounding City developments. 3. The pre-zoning proposal is not inconsistent with the General Plan. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE RESOLUTION NO. (a A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, CONSENTING TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND DESIGNATED "ANNEXATION NO. 51 - NORTH GATE DOWNS (R. BRUCE KEMPER) WHEREAS, on August 14, 1990, the proponent of the Annexation, known as " Annexation No. 51 - North Gate Downs (R Bruce Kemper) " has requested that the City Council consent to the commencement of proceedings to annex said area, which is contiguous to the City of Lake Elsinore; and WHEREAS, the said annexation area is entirely within the City Sphere of Influence; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, at a regular meeting held on July 18, 1990, made its report upon the desirability and made its recommendations in favor of said annexation; and WHEREAS , it is the desire of the City Council to give its consent to the commencement of annexation proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA: 1. That consent be and hereby is granted for the commencement of annexation proceedings in accord with California Government Code Section 56000 et seq. for the uninhabited territory designated hereby as "Annexation No. 51 - North Gate Downs (R. Bruce Kemper) " which consists of 160 acres located north of Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area and Greenwald Avenue, northwest of the Community of Canyon Lake and southerly of Dorchester Lane, which is shown on the map designated as Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2 . The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. AGENDA ITEM NO.._...._.-.� 7-21 PAGE OF_..._..� PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August 1990, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: John R. Harper, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore ACENDA ITEM NO. 33 PAGE OF� r7 ''S� �KT61'�• � � �l.i`���%} ,'C �`'� r �( , _ 1 ��� �Ji.7 '• �•C��•• �} 't. .;-✓�''- l • • •••� ate ✓ ,�ti� _�-ram 1� `� �� ' j• t.._ ��1•.<.� �� ������f!,.r - '�,i/���t�l MOO- Fir fir. ti �,l�!�� �,��,f�' . � _ r'c�- , •�J ,,� � �) .� �, PROJECT LOCAT INN ` ,• , J�t c',y�'� �� .� �f � �-• .ram .. .�\ � _L.-•� AKE P�-c LAKE ELSINORE CITY LIMITSVA LL' �. s,`-'r ^ UV .� r\L/`f,�' �--� D O 0 , 'qCb.��/of• .) •, •i i. rx TV :yj �� �L./ V��'r���1J�. y r. f�� �}_ ./.� � r ``, c/ �i -• /�7 -_-r J l 5 .1._ � �' •_,�,!^�.,..%.. .� L' � •�.1�r, e—, � ��;, „'t: ... mil, •'� ►,• �� L t�} ..- '7 Cam•� (/ r � r• �sss t.. MQF4Y �rr '���•,( w e e• , •• ���1!. 06��• J] �eSf i'� /.l; r;, ,y,•- � titer J.,�*�,�5 a t ,�_ ��. � '1� •� � "�- v :�� •: ., r,•-r,.�:, Tab Zd EXHIBIT A PMTECT ID=ON AGENDA ITEM ti0. PAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. qL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REZONING 160 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF TUSCANY HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AND GREENWALD AVENUE NORTHWEST OF CANYON LAKE, AND SOUTHERLY OF DORCHESTER LANE TO R-1 (HPD) [SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT-HILLSIDE PLANNED DISTRICT] (NORTH GATE DOWNS - R. BRUCE KEMPER) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION ONE: ZONING RECLASSIFICATION The 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 Number 349-250-013, 014, 015, 016 from Rural Residential (2 .5 acres minimum lot size) to R-1 (HPD) (Single-Family Residential District-Hillside Planned Development Overlay District) on 160 acres, as illustrated in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and the said real property shall hereafter be subject to the provisions and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance relating to property located within such R-1 (HPD) Zoning District. Approval is based on the following: 1. The project zoning is the most appropriate zone for standard single-family residential development. 2 . The proposed zoning is consistent with the residential zoning in surrounding City developments. 3 . The pre-zoning proposal is not inconsistent with the General Plan. SECTION TWO: This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE.,,OF INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 14th day of August, 1990, upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this 28th day of August, 1990, upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: John Harper, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 0F �'K - hrc-s� " (J 'z•Lf +-�- a -.c \ r ;;: •;.,, f �S R 1 ,. ���.: w . �'' 1• ••_{ ..r��1f'��.J� • � : � ' 1' . •— . �. • �.. •(elf / 'of127 r gab uIvy - V,- \ k, �% �L�,rt 01 0 'r ).!f. - , -r-- PROJECT LOCATION `�� � rr v"f �='•lam = LAKE ELSINORE CITY LIMITSIf ' �.. % � J:L \ rn �J s •o ICY.:�'�y':...�'�� � ,. f )'" ty Z-7-54 yxs� 25 00 ol op ����.��//` 1 �\. � ,� r •=:ice '�.�--f! -r r� _ .,• �� [� �/\ � „ice E MBITA PFC7ECT LOCATION A G E W D A iTE ) PhC-E Gi' =•� Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 3 2. Zone Change 89-13 and Annexation $51 - John Crehan - Associate Planner Restivo presented a request to annex 160 gross acres into the City of Lake Elsinore and to pre-zone the site R-1 HPD (Single-Family Residential District-Hillside Planned Development Overlay District) . The site is located at the southeast corner of Section 27, Township 5 South Range 4 West and is contiguous to the City Limit boundary. Generally, the site is north of Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area and Greenwald Avenue, northwest of the gated Canyon Lake Community and southerly of Dorchester Lane. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7 :35 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Michael Klipa, civil engineer for the project, stated that he concurs with staff's report, and will answer any questions. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished `to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7 :37 p.m. Commissioner Brinley commented on the site being located in a Study Area for the Steven's Kangaroo Rat, and inquired about the Steven's Kangaroo Rat fee. There being no further discussion, Chairman Brown called for a motion. Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to recommend to City Council approval of Annexation #51 and Zone Change 89-13 based on the Findings listed in the Staff Report, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 3 . entatie Financial Parcel Map 25638 - Long Beach Equities Co ulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subd' ide 251 cres into four parcels ranging in size from 3 .4 a es to 191. 6 cres, for financial purposes only. The ite is located on all four quadrants of the int change of Interstat 15 and Nichols Road. Chairman Brown pened the public hearing at : 40 p.m. , asking if anyone wishe o speak in favor of the oposal. Mr. John Friedman, Long Beach Equi es, stated that there are 5 existing lots n 9 as indic ed in the Staff Report. He then requested that co ition er 5 be amended, as follows: With respect to rc 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of-way for the easterly 50 feet of Nichols Road. Chairman Brown asked if any a else ished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Ch rman Brown ked if anyone wished to speak in oppositi Receiving response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone ished to speak on th matter. Mr. Ken Peacock, ission Development, 34184 oast Highway, Suite 318, Da Point, stated that they o property adjoining th' map. Mr. Peacock stated that a etter was sent to Ray 'Donnel and Ron Smothers requesting an easement for ingr s/egress for our property (AP #390-270-00 as a conditi to the parcel map filing. Cha ' an Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak on t ma er. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the blic hearing at 7 : 48 p.m. AGENIDA f�L:E;i i:ii. PAGE OF�� PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Public Hearing Annexation #51 & ZC 89-13 PREPARED BY i APPROVED BY: abrielle Restivo Da Gunderman Associate Planner CO . Dev. Dir. OWNER/APPLICANT John Crehan P.O. Box 1000 Carlsbad, California 92008 UQUESTED USE The request is to annex 160 gross acres into the City of Lake Elsinore and to pre-zone the site R-1 [HPD] (Single-Family Residential District-Hillside Planned Development Overlay District) . SIZE AND LOCATION The 160 acre site is located at the southeast corner of Section 27, Township 5 South Range 4 West and is contiguous to the City Limit boundary. Generally, the site is north of Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area and Greenwald Avenue, northwest of the gated Canyon Lake Community and southerly of Dorchester Lane. A.P. # 349-250-013 , 014 , 015, 016. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING LAND USE ZONING §ZNERAL PLAN Project Site - Vacant R-R 2-1/2 Category III County Rural North - Vacant R-R Category III County Rural East - Vacant R-R Category III BLM Land County Rural South - Vacant with C-1/R-1 Specific Plan Single-family (PUD) City Area under construction West - Mostly Vacant R-R Category III with scattered County Rural single-family development BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting to annex 160 gross acres contiguous to the City Limit boundary north of the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Area (see attached Exhibit I) , and to pre-zone the site R-1 (HPD) . The request is to provide for ultimate subdivision of the site. Currently, the General Plan Land Use Map has the Sphere of Influence area designated for Very Low Density Residential, 1 dwelling unit per 2 acres. The applicant will be proposing a General Plan Amendment and subdivision at a future hearing. Preliminary Tentative Tract Map 23084 for this site proposes a gross site density of 1 . 3 dwelling units/acre or 210 lots. AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 PAGE OF_-= Public Hearing Annexation #51 & ZC 89-13 Page 2 Site I)escription Running through the center of the site is a blue line water course with a moderate amount of riparian vegetation. The canyon floor around the riparian habitat has areas of mixed grass/herbal communities, with both steep and rolling hills to the east and west covered by inland sage scrub. Stephen's kangaroo rat (SKR) was identified in 1988 on less than one acre in the southeastern portion of the site. The site is located in a Study Area for the Stephen's kangaroo rat and future development of the site would be contingent on its deletion from the Study Area and compliance with the terms of the Section 10a Permit from Fish and Wildlife, based on approval of the habitat conservation plan. The existing County General Plan designation and Zoning for the site provides for a minimum lot size subdivision of 2 .5 acres. A tentative map was approved on March 18, 1986, which provided for 61 lots. Surrounding County R-R Zoning provides for a minimum 2 acre lot size. Within the City Limits, contiguous to the site is Neighborhood Commercial Zoning and Tuscany Hills single-family development providing for a minimum lot size of 5, 500 square feet. ISCUSSION Zoning the site R-1 [HPD] provides for single-family development standards and uses, for example, an average lot size of 7,260, setbacks etc. . . Gross site density will be determined by the ultimate General Plan designation. The proposed Hillside Planned District Overlay is to indicate that geologic, soil, hydrology and fire concerns/constraints common of hillside development are to be addressed at the time of site development, and to encourage minimal slope disturbance an appropriate re-vegetation of slopes. No development restrictions are imposed by the HPD overlay District, with the exception of landscaping to minimize fire hazards. The pre-zoning proposal is consistent with existing hillside subdivisions which are clustering "R-1" lots while retaining steep topographical features in open space. ENVIRONMENTAL Negative Declaration 90-38 was prepared for this proposal based on the finding that no significant impacts would result from annexing the property into the City of Lake Elsinore or zoning the site for single-family development. Residential density and site subdivision design will be subject to further environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of Annexation #51 and Zone Change 89-13 based on the following Findings. FINDINGS Annexation #51 I. The project is located within the City's Sphere of Influence as designated by the Local Agency Formation Commission and is contiguous to the City Limit boundary. Annexation of the site would not be an inappropriate extension of the City Limit boundary. 2 . The proposal will not result in significant environmental impacts . A�7_NDA ITEM"r No.33 3 PAGE•r-OF Public Hearing Annexation $51 & ZC 89-13 Page 3 3. It is anticipated that future development of the site will be conditioned to provide the necessary public services and facilities to service the site. one Change 89-13 1. The proposed zoning is the most appropriate zone for standard single-family residential development. 2. The proposed zoning is consistent with residential zoning in surrounding City developments. 3. The pre-zoning proposal is not inconsistent with the General Plan. AGENDA 4TE ; t�G. PAGE 0E.._`= OFFICE USE ONLY Negative Declaration No. 90-38 Pv'ITIAL STUDY Project• ZC 89-13 & Annexatio: QJ LAKE ELSINORE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM I. Developer or Project: Contact Person: John Creehan Address: P.O.Bnx 1000 City: Zip: 00 Telephone Number: (6 ) 9 -8864 2 . Environmental Information Prepared by: Comuziity Dev. Dept. Address: 130 South Main Street City: Lake Elsinore, CA Zip: 92330 Telephone Number: ( 714 ) 674-3124 3. Proposed Project Title: North ate Duns Protect Location: southeast corner of Section 27, Tb_wnship 5 south, Range 4 west. Total site acreage: Gross: 160 Net: For Residential Project: Nu:.^,ber of units: 210 Dwelling units per acre: 1.3 du/ac _ Unit sizes (square feet) : N/A Attach brief description of proposed project, including intended use, and phasing of project, or if present project is a phase or portion of a larger project. 4 . List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by local, regional , state, and federal agencies, not including approvals from the City, fire department, sheriff 's department, and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 5. Environmental Setting: Attach a description of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding pro- pertes, including information on topography, geo- logy, soil stability, plants, animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. GENERAL EXISTING LAND USE . ZONING PLAN Project site Vacant county Category III RR - 2� Rural Surrounding Vacant County Category III North RR Rural Surrounding Single-Fwmily County Category III East Residential RR Rural Surrounding Vacant with/Single- City C-1 Specific Family Residential R-1 (PUD) Plan Area Surrounding Vacant with/scattered County Category III West rural Single- Family RR Rural Residential AGENDA ITEM NO, ✓'� PAGE l ;Zd OF ��— f I I k-, 1 I I r I xi xi I I xl xi xl I xl x1 xI xI xl I I x1 xi I ! I I I I ! I r >.0 01.► �49t u°M+r. « pSp 00 orMp.�-�r Is r. �•�0 .C•�e j' 4 p0 +yiMG iC ■ iCa ° i� LQ o.. so S*4610 i•~, •, g �°+w �■ ita + «•CN O-4. • M w • 0 �+a.4 O 4 C w A • r a 1, fffiiMrr •L�w� 7L'DA � •l•.o M� r � M+vJ'FJ� L� . L'o• wA + M •- �« rl� M yfi y >• . kY FCY as f+1 • pp • Wa• r10 .� a. �.4k y a CPf r40 « acc y►IldOi 4 •Ca0 • kiwi MOM yM it Oe Ct,+ � i • MO•■ a -.4 44s 0 O 0 4 a u .4 "4 w A al •C.4a0. ire Y Y 4.4 •cc aU i� °CA c 4 •a V ai ° � %oo n4 jt, « • c c00 CW �+ •sIN M}}■ w•o -O� • -.4l 44 «i «« u W MY« .d4 l i4 U O .-4 O w• • w a k .4 M O P` Lp O i+ ++ • U +y��i ++ M O«• w ro ti+ 40 it • O+t 00 .°:e ocra gY1k4M1 ��'+ .°-°4:i4� $ate.• �pt'r'.°,oa ands .� $ CC� � s awt'.• • ■ p ww• 'A wW i ba . ceas +4 as ■ ww Ou .4 ad.4 ie . •• -4 Yc $� ow Ua0 «c Cu Vro.•++�t.' 3iQ+ R �1C.4aa ii �� M+• wo srn QQ" C Naga «C Uuoa Tar i+QaW U 7id aw «(' �. C«•+1a w y xx FW• ' amaa 'c ico C4kFV6 is �� f31Qii.a�w:.c4 .io•• rtouo■ AV _ � 3as way a� 3, V9 •caa ►i0--4 a ota aW r f p i•4 a A u ti v lot ja4 a A 1i iwi A 0 xI xl I xl xl I I I xi � y k i Y c t 41 0 W 0 A aa+ i a k O A id � k , AY '+ w . c C -4 . Y a.4 Y u . a 1 wro % as • ° O Y 7 r.-4 O . .a . s k 4* a .M1 Y • 1 t c ° •a w C f Y u p� .4 . a 0.0 -4 a d i4 k a C A w k . «a k Y a U a C O w M1 -4 M 0 Q C OM / yN ai. Oi . • akC • O ►. Oi+ a ss > y+r C D . >+ W O C 0 . U4UkP . • Mk 41 wAgC C3+ M .'O O -t a k o k a u Y 44 '�+ a rq a Lx a +1 a +�i+Y Y r O 0 0 u °Y 0 -.4 .4 a C . w O ,C a C C M r i� f>t, ro Y a.4 -4 a 0 iCi >•. 144a cc a 00 O $4W.44C G C-°4 vpao a/ %C �C> a•+ O C ° r+y4o ° aa y°C 4a+~ b� .7• 0 r -� O.-4 O O •.Y-4 M1 3+ c yQ Cx✓ Q. Id war- C oa-4k a 8� -4Y +Y 0%4 0 4 A . Cw 4a °M >- O� kaac • A00 �YL > Ur• k •✓ WY c U kC • Q p YW 0$4 YCa.4Y >P- %4 Ce UW x kY k . • 00c .4k >, OM1 k L ro a aaw + YY w kFro OY al• ki O 04 sa «aUa .i w . . aD-W .+ a CO . k y C x C0.4o c.+ a Maw• w-+ C« y.40-4k • oias . i. Ycu A -4-+-4 irk p 0,0 wi4a w cc DO Cs Sao itw�p 0 ° CM9k-P0 •4%4 •t•• w CO U+t� 44 Fin 0 41a0a 4) Y � 4 >, .W4 M °Le fb"Ci4 aw.t wa f+ -4k>,OpA N • w>Ar0e C °A & Y4°Iee N o .Q rd id . b' UD k✓ U.4 i •D�a ■ 104 Ui�Gak k aeM1 Ak °vg04 ? Yak a�4Fa+y'4Myp YCr 441 a-4W \>.Y•4.t y M a9 . a . a Ck ..4 C•4 . a .4N « >. u . cW iY •k . Ca0 > a U a+4Q QQY aY 8 1 COP .Y P 1. .•-d Y-4 >.0 a7 > aa4J 4.) Y ak •.0 a 14 Y Y aak Y Da0. FiaN O O.r-4 C O V l o iad i 4 0 G i G i0+O 4[O 3 04Y O+C4 A i0 O s IV Q.A O IWi. N U a- a)0 a (- a d a a.q i krr YM1 r dC +s a u s-44 r a u c i w a x a xl C ! 11 ro C Y 1 1 1 M 4 C f . k-4 Ck w R ua.4c 04014.4 4x l xl x I x i x ! w M My M-ai O a C -• -.4 14 F c ' r W •T-4 M 44 • W « Ck0 Fmk a-449D% •> a do W as -40k Dk 1►Cai1.i C+i yOC O CF a 0. U . c •it O•C • ka « •b4 C a - c M A `CR •M Y • tl-4 • as +°4-4 CIO a) �aa « Ok4a ~r41 Y T f . .4L k D C a M 0 a 0 a C 40 CIO w a w • v 0 w f►at+4 u M I a o aY . .0 •C -4 a>a Aeaw.4 °.•Y �v17, -e 1C .saasd > >.4 Y «u k C M W-4 a • row C Cw a 00 Q k-4 0 4w > >» P41 W O Y . 64 • T 09 O ■■ 0 wrgR COY .4-4C Y M a + O sr .4 kk to .43wU-4C Ye0 M O a Yk Oa- 1 • . 0. a.4ro ■-4aaa au a A :D4 a �. i4 ) 400 .4 34 1 Q Ar i�w .L MY • a >T �• Ca �+ c C .ut Y i4oakv0 �+f� Ye4 aY Cx • COW +•i a C+4 k•Y a O F AY oc a oa�rb -c41 +40 ■• Rkl O M>,T coo C°+�li as 4.60 a e4' ai•cio k °441Aj r1 uoAa«ii•4 -=-rwCo i -wp% iaio �.i •tCRa �p.Wi • D CAomvc Os pA C Ufa 40 ro-4 ama . W YCa4 T•4 ew >. • O ru t.4 o C0A •4+os •+4 Ar k a y q� 0.C.4 r a e� Y •4 aO .Y C O .-4 .k 0..+ U%414 tit sY M+.4 WA . a -a a ua a-. Ud s°dC 4Ooa r.CaOYUa a .0. O r i> aM °O �4ww ~A aocai. �.uewY•Wi 4p a. 126 paces ■`-4a aw aid .4yw ■ i4 O� ..40 Cu Ca'w su0.4C6r p � p Y ++ -4 MMM ..4MN Y /dY 0.0. OI k °> Y Q yA 'O • y0+4 •rt O ti.r.nwaYA0�-4w v M✓ ✓ >✓ m Avr . t (t .4 . • Qw:71C+4 �°rb•Pw S :'rM M°W YM (, a.0i + .Or-to QPw • u Oc «0L4 C 0 0 C-• U a a4 0.A 1.) JCro >.O M k.4 Y •M w c C-4 L u 0 ■ e C« c a a O b•a O • k a s v O -a rt u .Wa4e .0: • Da•0 p . 000 cat- E.40C• • OF -40.4kL6 •• • 6 >+a0a >.aac = Aa°4.W-4A> f uaw Me07 W .ajCa Yya w+ o 0.4�a Ua ° +Ce°Ya0 MYa O . CIIkc Ck --4 M u fr-4.N0 a -- 7Y-40 -+ PaY AUa arok a 614 C k - A 1. ago Cec+4-4ea . OY.c4 a Aa . DM✓ . a-- a - CaDA b+.+4U1+ T. • k • a aoa • -des l.Y 4d a0aY .Y 4U'0 L . dp P .✓ > {+ ??Y fr• . M a 0 a 0�+ a c C Y w O e4 a •4 C k F-d O k u . k . a.r V u"' k > oc kfi.4w 14 0a aC0 a4v +Y+ Rw� AJ �-4• CiUO tlOn�4 F07w em30, . Lt . uaa ° 0.4 W QeM .t' U"• O.U U r.-4 0. xx .4 C - .Y a .-4 Q u A•4 M •• 4G, 0... a0U Z .40a a0 .L x �GoUi. w oD D O-4✓ r. CF4+.4✓ . . -a W+4 a A u • « P aaIIO QY�+✓ x 0 410 aU ••tea-+ s 40 U Y K L... 6 .-4-4 c a . F u w fia-. ,» aYw4.4 auaa PAGE �' OF xi � x � xi xl D� �O b� �O■M O �0.~� ~k Vl.O LDr+U4 �«0°JL • r.■7p+u4 �° k Nk O✓ w k ■ ■ k •i yy F pp C ■ •O.Wa 0.yimrJ,FY i7ii4 %OLV �iGG r-4Flh r U Up ■ y• +4YU 44 M • s++L Y L+. 0 14 +4s�s �4 oukr • yr Y�'G• • r •+ cos`. 6� °« °'� UL «•p�ems ak:« .4 u ■ •■Yod • k-40a • ■CA■ • vs �.Vi+Y4 kh R YLS O�p. YCr+Mip tY/ C UU 410 ■Fr ■ 04 rr.i « r40 r. Y«wk .4.4 uV ■•7�� k .4 C.0 0 -4COkaA p ■w7 +4 -to-4 Mxapp • 'jwYL■ a:-4■ 0.AO 0.y•Y aT • ■ 0. •■Lxa s■Y•Y �i : si si 40 , •� o .4 n i l l I i t I I x1x 1 x1 1 ! i xIx I x I x1 X1 I I I i ! I a ✓ h « k+phi � � M w e � .y.4 c a C „r" h ■ o p s « • p,V W « O -.4 F N pp «✓ M h r k X 1 p k 0.o Ga. A �aG O r ub� ■ ■ kr01 6 ■ a h i ■ h 4i 0. Yi sa 40, CC Lk 7 �. o .4G M ■ • aOic a ■ • .K • `O. 1+ 0a10U 4 YwW w W-+ O ■ C 6r k •« a d V C a r • ■««h o 0.-4 • W «0000! 4v U, Aro « 0. «h ■.,. O A.C ■ C a O ■ ■ +i L • ■ U.. •A V-4.4•.4O «■ur+JL G om as .1 D i >, •✓ Ww -4-4 ?. ✓ M a Y Ay %y aC FpUp >�mL.41■jY ..4�+ am h 0 k ■ 6W ✓ k -.94 kr �• D • k✓ ? « ■ « >t.Ct« O✓ Y k ks �tG a: ro O C ++ ++ U c 6 Yk U++ w > F�OCO ■ U s ry E�+ O +� wy wC • F • Gx • • r w •W k ■ +4 k .+ C • 4 •�+ YO GV • o CO -4 U •-+ 0-+ ` • rG -.4• Crom+ V« A G Y S ■ 't ■ � o .«iArO LD •CCw ++ o LW L F is • u .4ro■ 0 Y O 0. n •• • d u >+ U ++ �+-4 • 3a m+ M W C • k .4 •A w ■ .4 • k • C w d w.9 -4 O✓ Y✓ c•irsco ao+ ►° ° c eoiQi >rh « � o ..s4 °R04 0 G e ■ v .a ° kO4«0 0.4 � r-rilia�.r+ .+> c 0 6 h k.. •-4 O r .a ■ Y 0 ■ G k U k s ■ LY cOCY • ■ C >w r s.. �■+. c ►. r 0 C 4.) a 4) -+ _ « G ■ • ■k Y O « O a a Y.+ O c k-< ✓ .-4 • ■ c ro-4� 6 c .� •-+n u i •• • rarka - o G h « a -4roP • a✓ a u A k c • .+ o 0a V CU-- r rC O k k k s ■ VkV i F UG+4? ■ • b«W w ma ■ �+ O XC C-+ro ■ � +4 w Mdk7C •+4 �Y • -•4 • O s ■.ti f1 �-4GO.W > sav om w .4 L k 0 .IU d L • pi90 +4 r .00 a p « {Ck • rsa ✓ Y • ■w-4 yrm✓ UL -4 O U ■+� in ✓ • +� Mw 7Oo %4 YY106 O • Y O t�r46 • C O •YU • ■ OM 44 0.V a:►+ k O M .-� p 0 ■f 9 r k 0 -4« ■ C .• L i 4T1 m i0 G.+ N t L++ 1d R F•+■L D C I. « 6 L q > a « O✓ O ram AwLw � G • • • • F4Y Y• >.✓-•4 • • � O • • ;Noa4-) 0 60Ow-+ r A U do w ►ik ■ A akrd✓ r A U ti • w T. R s A .iks.00.✓ + l'- 4D ! x I x i xl xi ! I I xl xI x1 • - ✓1 f 1 . ., 1 h 1 • 7c 4+W osAr+4a1 aVd G ■> xC • G awro A w • o a r `ro ■-4 A ■ .4kD C +4o k■ cC o L;o da 'I -4kw rO+4 C-4 Yi ** ■ 0 „y• 1 .4k ■ °aLi V D M C ? k0 �9a kw k O ■ Y O G fit• r .R « • 7 O a+ • O ro -4 k c - 0 0 V A -4 -4 V s k 4D Y •Y W k C Y 9r O « V O -4m A pp..k •M« k U l0.My{�yj�C aro V« V d ■ •■ 6 r U• r s+>oi, s Mmm V G Y Co �tLU °.■t> t•0 Y4Co aAk � 1ri se : oo C-. L w « V W ■ucv -c jc- VL = w4i •wG0 C W r00 L +4MC r owu ow k✓ Coo M-4 4" roa a: •• bw 0-4Yu 7 ■40ka LM ..4« w• x •-4 �.IF Yy04- YO Yi0 Y� o o w 3 ■ c 0 G �+ o «++06 -.4�..rC Ua+ C3 WO > ■ ■ • VMAW -6V 0 ro \r ° > •YM .4M rwY�p r« G a 00Y w.+ +.ar o C « Lan- M • • L✓ 0 i ■ 6 «CC € 6 O +«0 OW a M✓ D ° r0 04 "'✓y 77 b .+ Yn• Y O C ■ w o •YL pp>, .�1-40 Y -m.. ON • G J? w41 • > --4w o • U-4Ua0 OV G +4✓ i .4as .4G -4 ✓ h Aria +4wh • umro me m cc � rc • • ■ .+ Ci ++ c «-. a fir • vk Yo rua C r Ya4 ✓ u rr.4 V w a �. a 0w O.-4 ar-4 X • m•.� •h G r ■ .4ro ■R ■-+ V ■ 4Y r+ti • k > w 40 -4 ■row •+ DUN p4 40r NC3 .7 ■ V w a M 0 0-V 0 0 • Ca x k✓ti 014 Y✓ • k• 00 k •04 •kU c .. w43 N a .+ kUd +4 r • c.+ G +7Lo G rrh �. ■ •-+� • rr✓ •✓ ice rc.+ k■ >. t+4-+ 4: 'I*, r a 01 k •A VVOU 0 ✓✓C b� a OC GroC wII�w 1-4 ■ m+✓ O Yw ■ yNU ao o.. a4o C•+ a c o Or a+ w 4s F00-•++4 u++ o Y Ca� t� G O.y •�o u wC0 xA wo wC .+ 0 ►. Crs LG0.0. w0 .40 Mc w O 44RA 44J69UV 0V «w At- .4UV-4 ■ li ■ i f4w►+ W• r u( ROO .tAY .4LA a 0. X 0. S r C Y I., r O ■ IC C H VD ra 6✓ a V 0M • O ■W 4:L a�.0►. w D�+ w 0 k-4 A za G, o A i4: A ■ A 0. ■ o4o 7COUi E�2 d A U � Arc. . �. . . . PAGE. OF FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Y. MAYBE I. XMDATORY LINDINGS Qg SIGNIFICANCE: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the - habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? z b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? X All of the above must be answered "no" for a negative declaration to be issued. II. DETERMINATION: x The proposed project should not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. Although the proposed project could have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, it will not in this case because of the attached mitigation measures. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. EIR is required. �7 III. REVIEWED BY. zDay. : April 3, 1990 Gabrie Res , sociate P ML PLANNING DIRECTO : Wil 3, 1990 1-23-86 PduE OF Environmental Assessment Form Continued Project Location The project is located in Riverside County, within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence. The site is located at the southeast corner of Section 27, of Township 5 south Range 4 west, and is contiguous to the City limit boundary. Generally, the site is northerly and westerly of Greenwald Avenue and southerly of Dorchester Lane. Southerly of the site, within the City of Lake Elsinore, is an approved 2,000 dwelling unit Specific Plan, Tuscany Hills, and to the southeast is the Riverside County Community of Canyon Lake, which also consists of approximately 2 ,000 dwelling units. Easterly of the site is approximately 640 acres of BLM land, and northerly and westerly of the site is vacant land with scattered large lot single-family residential development. Project Description The proposal is to annex 160 acres of land into the City of Lake Elsinore and to prezone the site R-1 (HPD) [Single Family Residential- Hillside Planned District Overlay] . The current general plan designation of the site for the city's sphere of influence area is very low density residential ( 5 DU/2AC) . A preliminary subdivision proposal is for a gross site density of 1.3 dwelling units per acre. A general plan amendment will be required for ultimate subdivision of the site unless the city's proposed Comprehensive General Plan Revision is adopted for the site which proposes a compatible density. Site Description The center of the site is a blue line water course with a moderate amount of riparian habitat dominated by Arroyo Willows. The canyon floor around the riparian habitat has areas of mixed grass/herbal communities with slopes to the east and west covered by inland sage scrub. The hills rise sharply to the west 1,700 feet above mean sea level and to the east less sharply and rolling to approximately 1,600-1, 650 feet above mean sea level . The site generally drops 50 feet running north to south along the blue line water course. Stephen' s Kangaroo Rat (SKR) , a federally protected and endangered species, was identified in 1988 on less than one acre in the southeastern portion of the site. The site is located in a Study Area for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and future development of the site would be contingent on its deletion from the study area and compliance with the terms of the section 10a permit from fish and wildlife, based on approval of the interim habitat conservation plan. The majority of the site, which is composed of hills , consists of soils of the lodo series. On the southeastern corner of the site, Altamont Clay occurs with a small area of Vallecitos series soils. Floodway soils consists of Cortina cobbly sandy loam. This negative declaration is being prepared for the annexation and prezoning proposal . The subdivision proposal will require a separate environmental review in accordance with the CEQA guidelines 7 . Environmental Impacts 7 . 1 . b. c. d. e. L.- g- and Earth Impacts Ultimate development of the site will require on-site grading. The extent of grading impact is directly related to the density and design of the residential subdivision. The most significant impacts will be to the endangered SKR species, the blue line watercourse, and the significant slopes in the eastern and western portions of the site. Pre-zoning the site does not define the density or design rather it indicates the city' s intent to zone the site for single family AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 PAGE OF �� page 2 residential development with minimum lot size criteria/ development standards established. The ultimate density of the site is dependent on the general plan land use density, city general plan policies governing site development, responsible agencies, and compliance with the respective agencies having jurisdiction over on-site natural resources. The current proposal will not result in significant impacts, nor development proposed as a result of the prezoning proposal. 7 . 3. b c €, and Wat2r Additional Storm drainage that would result from any site development may be directed through the blue line water course, pending trustee and responsible agency approval, or alternate facilities directed to Greenwald Avenue. There currently exists or is proposed storm drainage facilities through Canyon Lake, Wasson Canyon and Tuscany Hills Specific Plan area to direct drainage to existing city facilities. Flood hazards factors for the blue line water course and increased storm drainage flows will have to be identified. A Preliminary hydrology report will be required for subdivision review, and final reports required for map approval. All storm drainage facilities to support the project would be required for development . Site hydrology is not considered a significant environmental issue and should not be affected by the current prezoning proposal. 7. 4 . a. b. c. = Plant Life The predominant plant community of the site is inland sage scrub with a small amount of mainly disturbed grass/herbland vegetation on the canyon floor. Grasses are mainly non-native species. The drainage area supports a minor riparian community dominated by Arroyo Willows. The proposed pre-zoning will not allow disturbance of the natural resources on site. The water course/riparian area is under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and its disturbance will require section 1600 permits and 400 permits, respectively. It is anticipated that this resource will fully evaluated and any impacts mitigated upon subdivision proposal of the site. 7.5. a. b. c. and d. _ Animal life A survey conducted by Michael Srandman Associates in December of 1988 identified Stephen's Kangaroo Rat on less than one acre in the southern portion of the project site (see attached Exhibit) . In addition the site is located in a special study area for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and development of the site will ultimately depend on its status within the study area and compliance with section 10a permit requirements as issued by the Federal Fish and Wildlife. Due to Kangaroo Rat breeding, compliance with federally *ndangered species requirements will require updated Kangaroo rat surveys prior to grading plan approval for any development proposal. Prezoning the site for single family development will not allow the taking of any species. Subdivision of the site and/or any development would require additional environmental review, and any grading permit request would require a review of its status within the study area and Stephen's Kangaroo Rat on site. The current proposal will not &nvironmental impact SKR, nor should any development resulting from the pre-zoning proposal. 33 AGEN^,L, 17EM "NO._____—� RA r.�.s—OF 12=- � t page 3 7. 8• and _ and se Prezoning the site for single family residential development does not define the proposed site density. The proposed "1990" General Plan revision (not yet adopted) for the subject site proposes this area be designated very low density residential, 2 dwelling units per acre maximum. This density is sufficiently low enough to mitigate and/or retain environmentally sensitive areas in open space such as the riparian, SKR, and steeper sloped areas. In addition, a general plan designation does not provide for the impact of natural resources governed by responsible or trustee agencies. No significant land use conflict are anticipated to result from prezoning of this site. 7.11. -. population The proposal is contiguous to existing and proposed single family residential development and would be considered a natural extension of city residential areas. Rural or large lot residential land uses to the north and west are separated from this site topographically and no transitionary density needs are anticipated. The project itself is not growth inducing. 7. 13 . a. and c. _ Transportation/circulatio The current proposal will not affect future traffic impacts. Greenwald Avenue is anticipated to carry ultimate project generated traffic to highway 74. Greenwald Avenue currently serves or will serve traffic from Canyon Lake, Tuscany Hills, and scattered rural residential land uses. Tuscany Hills proposes to add 2,960 vehicles per day to an existing count (cited in the Tuscany Hill E.I.R. ) of 4, 400 ADT's for a total of 7, 360 ADT ' s. The proposed project will add an estimated 2080 ADT' s to this total for 9440 ADT's (estimated) . Roadway capacity for Greenwald is approximately 12, 000 ADT's (Appendices C, Traffic Study, Tuscany Hills EIR) . Greenwald is not proposed to be improved beyond the subject site. The extent of traffic impact and any necessary traffic mitigation would be considered when the site density and subdivision design is determined. No significant traffic impacts are anticipated at this time. 7. 14 . a. b. c. LL e. and _ public Seryices Public service impacts are anticipated and a fiscal impact report is required. General property taxes are proposed to minimize fire and police impacts. Local schools are impacted, school fees will be assessed. Open space is proposed with park fees proposed to be levied under the City's capital improvement fund fee program. No significant impacts are anticipated. 7. 16- a. b -ql-. A-D-dc _ Ut J 11 t i e s Ultimate development of the site will require the extension of all utilities. The project will require approximately 114,400 gallons of water per day (550 gallons per unit) . Water lines are anticipated to be extended from the existing Canyon Lake or Tuscany Hills project. An on-site reservoir may be required absent Tuscany Hills development. Sewer lines are anticipated to be extended from the Tuscany Hills development. No significant impacts are anticipated to result. All utility provisions would be required for site development. 7 . 19 . _ Recreation The projected size of the proposed development is not AGENDA ITEM NO._ a3 PAGE rA—OF 12=- page 4 anticipated to impact existing recreational facilities. If parks are not provided within the boundaries of the proposal city park in-lieu fees would be required. 7.20. ah. 2j- An.4 11, = Cultural Resources Previous cultural resources survey showed no on-site resources; however, ten sites were recorded within one mile to the north. A certified cultural resources study will be required as part of the technical data for the E.I.R. References 1. Tuscany Hills EIR, Technical Appendices, Certified April 1980 - SCH No. 79082906. 2. Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Assessment, Northgate Downs Project - Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. , December 1988. 3. Initial Study information submitted by applicant. 4. On-site survey. AGENDA ;TES! PA �o 2 r ! t < C) Z ui z i L , � z r c Lf -. i � i > r �- L.� Z L n C " � •� O Q L. O LL WOW= :=.i -N, '•'ss�•.'►� o ,., 1: - i � •n °� ��� .Jam` � rti\ ���j f�•�"-'"/+ •.: ;�-�'_� rl f`� c . . , .�/ � ►� cam.^ � .� :r S{ • A �(t r'Jr .. � � � w '•;-- ,'G-s..�` (` � Z9: 'jz,, 0 1, ► ��'. �-, �•. _ .uyJ`� :=._,:�'tl�- - yam- .+�. >> _-...;�, ',ti`- ry el PROJECT LOCATION Es BL C MIL � ; AK LAKE ELSINORE CITY LIMITS �- �'r.._., - -� c l,. c-• c�� � � Via_ �•r=� � • `� `• �� ••'C ��*(•�����`✓�nr�, .'�i f`�^+�(/jam � O O� '�e� �'..�, ' � �'� \ C c �.•'___ � Vim. �~° ��C-�' `� =�s� S•—� �� ���J(� n r �r+fir ���� ' � �` ��1� -��{ f . _✓� � I Qo ' 1 SI•'+rti'- 1p1 ��,`^r't � , 1 1 � J \ . \ ( , '�r.•�w:• s r� ; T' ! .✓ Cam'!! � �f�' ' �)�`'' Jam\ � ✓0 --�_- "'1J � ll [ r � '��, w,�L � ,` )V� ' -��l! l ���( r �'lj � r�•N rj 1,a•�>:.• ✓ �r �(., ��� :.;. � �1'�'�-�� � rti� �� ,, �.�,y 1. rr vA LAL �-+'• / :�� .+� � •9 r�r � • •`rt:r.rtr°r: `I! JJ[/ '`;� 1 ;r,i' - // ''✓ ` c° •ACRES _.r,'S'•'mot; ��'i f�Y" 4 � •��i�//. / � � �`�.1 • - •' -, �; tel:!/!IfYli!': EXHIBIT 1 P=CT IDCATION AGENDA ETE I.'r ^i01. PAGE OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 ; Long Beach Equities: a request to create four (4) parcels, where currently nine 9 exist. PREPARED BY: Ron Smothers APPROVED BY: Ron Smothers Dave Gu rman Planning Consult t Comm. . Dir. APPROVED BY: Ron M Mlendyvkl== City Manager BACKGROUND This site is part of the area within the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan and has recently been annexed to the City of Lake Elsinore. The land uses planned for this site are Commercial/Specific Plan (west of Interstate 15) , open space, highway commercial and multi-family residential . This parcel map implements the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan by consolidating the existing property and parceling the site for conveyance, the only purpose for this parcel map. On July 18 , 1990, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 . Their action recommended approval with conditions, two of which the Commission added language to clarify dedication requirements and the purpose of Condition No. 8 having to do with access to an adjacent property. DISCUSSION Financial Parcel Maps are limited in their use, that of accommodating conveyance of land as opposed to prescribing development and improvement features. As such, this kind of parcel map is typically not subject to conditions of approval. The applicant, while not opposed to the conditions, has expressed concern for conditions that establish requirements prior to preparation of plans for the individual sites. The Planning Commission and staff believe the conditions give the developer flexibility in planning the use of these parcels. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt Negative Declaration 90-10 and approve Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25.638 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval . FINDINGS 1. A Negative Declaration has been prepared to acknowledge that environmental impacts have been addressed in the EIR for the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan (SCN 88090517) . 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 3 . This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. 4. The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE. Z OF ` CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE FINANCIAL PARCEL MAP 25638 I. The approval of this Tentative Parcel Map 25638 is for financing and sale purposes only. No building permit or grading permits or any other building or construction activity is authorized pursuant to this Tentative Parcel Map 25638. Property within Tentative Tract Map shall apply for approval pursuant to the normal City of Lake Elsinore procedures prior to any building or grading activity on the subject site. 2 . Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore (Municipal Code 16.52. 030) . 3. All parcels shall have access to public right-of-way or be provided a minimum forty (40) foot ingress-egress easement for public right-of-way purposes to be recorded with the map or by separate instrument. 4 . Execute an agreement to annex to the City's Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District. 5 . With respect to Parcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right- of-way for the easterly 1, 150 feet of Nichols Road. 6. Dedicate sufficient right-of-way on Nichols Road between Parcel 2 and Parcel 3 for a 130 foot street right-of-way. 7 . Cooperate with the City and its Engineer, Webb Engineering, in the dedication of sufficient right-of-way on Collier Avenue and its intersection with Nichols Road. S. The design for development of Parcels 1 and 2 shall take into account the access needs of the property northerly of them (Assessor' s Parcel Number 390-270-005) , so as not to landlock said property. AGENDA ITEM NO. ' PAGE OF Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 3 2 . &Rne Change 89-13 and Annexation #51 - John Crehan - As ciate Planner Restivo presented a request to annex 60 gros acres into the City of Lake Elsinore and to pr zone the s e R-1 HPD (Single-Family Residential District- llside Planned Development overlay District) . The site i located at the so east corner of Section 27, Township 5 uth Range 4 West an is contiguous to the City Lim' boundary. Generally, th site is north of Tuscany Hills ecific Plan Area and Green ld Avenue, northwest of the q ed Canyon Lake Community and so erly of Dorchester Lane. Chairman Brown open the public hearin t 7:35 p.m. , asking if anyone: wished to eak in favor of a proposal. Mr. Michael Klipa, ci 1 engine for the project, stated that he concurs with staf 's rep , and will answer any questions. Chairman Brown asked if any else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Ch rman Brown asked if anyone wished rto speak in oppositi Rec 'wing no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyo a wished o speak on the matter. Receiving no respo e, Chairman rown closed the public hearing at 7 :37 p. . Commissioner Br' ley commented on the s e being located in a Study Area for he Steven's Kangaroo Rat, and inquired about the Steven's angaroo Rat fee. There be ' g no further discussion, Chairman own called for a motion Motion by Commissioner Wilsey to recommend to C Council appro al of Annexation #51 and Zone Change 89-13 base on the Fin ngs listed in the Staff Report, second by Commi ioner Gi nson. A proved 5-0 3 . Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 - Long Beach Equities - Consulting Planner Smothers presented a request to subdivide 251 acres into four parcels ranging in size from 3.4 acres to 191. 6 acres, for financial purposes only. The site is located on all four quadrants of the interchange of Interstate 15 and Nichols Road. Chairman Brown opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. , asking if anyone wished to speak in favor of the proposal . Mr. John Friedman, of Long Beach Equities, stated that there are 5 existing lots not 9 as indicated in the Staff Report. He then requested that condition number 5 be amended, as follows: With respect to Parcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of-way for the easterly 1, 150 feet of Nichols Road. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown asked if anyone wished to speak on the matter. Mr. Ken Peacock, Mission Development, 34184 Coast Highway, Suite 318, Dana Point, stated that they own property adjoining this map. Mr. Peacock stated that a letter was sent to Ray O'Donnel and Ron Smothers requesting an easement for ingress/egress for our property (AP #390-270-005) , as a condition to the parcel map filing. Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, Chairman Brown closed the public hearing at 7 : 48 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO,✓.mil_ Planning Commission July 18, 1990 Page 4 TENTATIVE FINANCIAL PARCEL MAP 25638 CONTINUED Commissioner Gilenson suggested adding verbiage "so as not to landlock said property" to condition number 8. Commissioner Wilsey commented on the applicant's request to amend condition number 5. That extra verbiage would tie Nichols Road to the existing length as illustrated on the map, is this correct? Senior Civil Engineer O'Donnell stated that there is 60 foot of right-of-way already dedicated on this map, whether this condition is included or not. Chairman Brown commented on the dedication of sufficient right-of-way across Nichols Road, and how this fits into the Circulation Element; whether or not the conditions of approval should be recorded on the map for design and rdevelopment of Parcel 1 and 21 reference condition number 8 . Motion by Commissioner Brinley to recommend to City Council approval of Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 based on the Findings and subject to the 8 Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report with the following amendments: Condition No. 5: "With respect to Parcel 4 dedicate 130 foot street right-of-way for the easterly 1, 150 feet of Nichols Road. Condition No. 8 : "The design for development of Parcels I and 2 shall take into account the access needs of the property northerly of them (Assessor's Parcel Number 390-270-005) , so as not to landlock said property. " Second by Commissioner Wilsey. Approved 5-0 Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to recommend adoption of Negative Declaration 90-10, second by Commissioner Gilenson. Approved 5-0 4 . ntaItgive Tract Map 25831 - The Clurman Company, I - 0, in Planner Smothers presented a request to s ivide 50 a s into 195 Tots. Two of these lots will combined with lots the adjacent Tentative Tract Ma 478, so the total number buildable lots is 193. �Onettered lot will be created for a rivate park site. Thrage lot size is 8 ,590 square feet and the minimum t size is 5, 500 square feet. This project ha been cone ' ed with the idea of being an extension of the sgat Specific Plan. The site is located such that it is sur ded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan, n northerly side of Ramsgate. The western boundary of is trac is along the southerly extension of Trellis ne, south of ' hway 74 . Mr. Smothers r ested that condition n r 16 be deleted, as it is a d icate condition, covered in c ition number 21. Mr. Sm ers stated that today we received a letter f L.D. John n Companies owner of the Ramsgate project, essent ' lly st ing that they were in agreement with this proposal a sked that it be entered into the record. 3-AGENDA iTEV, NO. OF PAGE PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Public Hearing Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 July 18, 1990 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: Ron mothers Dave erman Consulting Planner Comm. v. Dir. OWNER/APPLICANT Long Beach Equities, Inc. 2038 Armacost Avenue West Los Angeles, California 90025 REQUESTED USE A request to approve a Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 . This map creates four (4) parcels, where currently nine exist. SIZE AND LOCATION The site consists of 251+ acres located at Nichols Road interchange with Interstate 15. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area/ Floodway and Floodway Fringe North - Vacant Riverside Very Low Density County Residential MRA & RR East - Vacant Riverside Very Low Density County Residential RR & R-1 South - Vacant Riverside Floodway & Floodway County Fringe/VCDR & Comm. MRA/City Manufacturing CM West - Vacant SP* Specific Plan Area * Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan PROJECT BACKGROUND This site is part of the area within the Alberhill Ranch Specifc Plan and has recently been annexed to the City Lake Elsinore. The land uses planned for this site are Commercial /Specific Plan (west Interstate 15) , Open Space, Highway Commercial and Multi-Family Residential. This Parcel Map implements the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan by consolidating the existing property and parceling the site for conveyance, the only purpose for this parcel map. AGENDA STEM NO. PAGE� OF Public Hearing Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 July 18, 1990 Page 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This parcel map subdivides 251 acres into four parcels as follows: Area Specific Plan Land Use Parcel 1 31.9 acres Multi-Family Residential Parcel 2 23 .9 acres Highway Commercial Parcel 3 3 .4 acres Highway Commercial Parcel 4 191.6 acres Commercial/Specific Plan and Open Space These parcels coincide with the land use pattern established by the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The EIR certified for the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan (SCN 88090517) evaluated the impacts of that plan and the land divisions it proposed. In this regard a Negative Declaration has been prepared to acknowledge that environmental review has been completed for this project. ISSUES Financial Parcel Maps are not intended for any purpose other than conveyance of land and so typically are not subject to conditions of approval. However, because of the City's current efforts to establish the improvements that provide access to the recently approved Outlet Center, some conditons asking for street right-of-way on Nichols and Collier are necessary. Another issue has to do with providing for access to a property north of Parcel 1 of this Parcel Map (Assessor's Parcel Number 390-270-005) . RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS 1. A Negative Declaration has been prepared to acknowledge that environmental impacts have been addressed in the EIR for the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan (SCN 88090517) . 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. 3 . This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. 4 . The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. AGENDA ITEM NO. • OFFICE USE ONLY Negative Declaration No. 90-10 -•`221 Project: Tentative Financial-7ar� Via[) 663a CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM I. Developer or Project:Long Beach Equities, Inc. Contact Person: Jonathan Friedman Address: 2038 Armacost Avenue City: W. Los Angeles, CA Zip: 90025 Telephone Number: ( ) 2. Environmental Information Prepared by: NBS Lowry Address: 1545 W. Florida Avenilp City: ---- -Hemet„ rA _. Zip: 92343 Telephone Number: ( 714) -' 3 . Proposed Project Title: Fin i Parcel Ma 25638 Location:--Interstate 15 at Nichols_Road being in W. ; gxcepting therefrom A. P.N. #389-200-015 Total site acreage: Gross: 251f/_ Net: N/A For Residential Project: Number of units: N/A Dwelling units per acre:_ N/A Unit sizes (square feet) : N/A Attach brief description of proposed project, including intended use, and phasing of project, or if present project is a phase or portion of a larger project. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED 4 . List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by local, regional, state, and federal agencies, not including approvals from the City, fire department, sheriff ' s department, and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED. 5. Environmental Setting: Attach a description of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding pro- perties, including information on topography, geo- logy, soil stability, plants, animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. GENERAL EXISTING LAND USE . ZONING PLAN Project site Vacant Please see attached Surrounding North Vacant Please s e attached Surrounding East Vacant Please see attached Surrounding South Vacant Please see attached Surrounding West Vacant Please s e attached AGENDA ITEM No. V71 PA Gr v O -I-q— R87-015-002 Page 1 2 Cr SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM '•µ� L Fanning Deu;. 3 . Tentative Financial Parcel Map No. 25638 encompasses approximately 251+/- acres of the 822 acre Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. Eight acres of the project site are currently within the City of Lake Elsinore; the balance of the property is within unincorporated Riverside County and Lake Elsinore ' s sphere of influence. However, a request for annexation of this property into the City of Lake Elsinore is currently being processed through the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) . This tentative map would subdivide 251+/- acres into four parcels , for financing purposes . Subsequent applications will provide for the ultimate land uses; including open spaces, commercial/specific plan, highway commercial and multi-family residential. 4. Associated projects include the following: Project Jurisdiction Annexation No. Riverside County LAFCO General Plan Amendment No. City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change No. City of Lake Elsinore Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan City of Lake Elsinore 5 . ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site Riverside County: M-R-A (Mineral Re- Areas Not Designated sources & Related as Open Space and Manufacturing) Mineral Resources and Category I-II City of Lake Elsinore: C-M (Commercial Specific Plan Area Manufacturing) Surrounding NORTH Riverside County: M-R-A and R-R (Rural Areas Not Designated Residential) as Open Space and Mineral Resources and Category I-II City of Lake Elsinore: VLDR (Very Low Density Residential) Surrounding EAST Riverside County: R-R and R-1 (Single Areas Not Designated Family Residential) as Open Space City of Lake Elsinore: VLDR AGENDA ITN! NO. PAG= R87-015-002 Page 2 Surrounding SOUTH Riverside County: M-R-A Areas Not Designated as Open Space City of Lake Elsinore: R-1 VLDR and C/M (Commercial Manufacturing) Surrounding WEST Riverside County: M-R-A Areas Not Designated as Open Space, Mineral Resources and Category I-II City of Lake Elsinore: VLDR AGENDA ITEM NO. r PAC Or xl �a x, X1 xa xE x! XI xf f I f l I I f l I I I I I a - .� « •cIw 01 rkw Is U >, k i00 a Is ohroo C -Ia0O. • Oci I o +. L M Yus « c}k ran c Ec at ■ u ✓« u -+ • .i o >.ar1O kro a • .. « h k wa k a O -1b Ck Ca !4 kar, ; a ■ kC.■4 r Q. °�+F.d.4 0 s4Ya •.aiA O r Yl�• Pq C� fi +OiCM •kvia C. sari wM • IgLr�daG Aaria iC{a,� >� 0A p0 Y 0 q,4 .t« .tiM1 i°i sea d�Gk■ Ak0 « COO uk C OiRc 9 FEU «a1�L iQ7 sei k x b � i✓ s Y a yR6 +i aC • •« a « k0 ✓ -7 aua a ..1 Ya D0✓ a .•1 a++-1x y 0✓ a■er. r. so �++ 0. r �0 '1 0o C yF1 i0 ■ .4 ykR•Qjo a . 4 0.t.am -Cis i yka .'+� a , COMaO -0.� • -4.4 «i «« U ,� .�Yr. •pp V .+ .•1 11 0140 z •.1 ro 0 a u�1 • O++ O o k a .y ■ C O a .Oia a 0. t✓lN$...4 O 54 4) +Fi .°-p.aoM 07kM Ud•CIOM fa+s .•� ii • C Cn V i �Oe VC P•••iw■ O?ro Is 3.■iA �+•i DV .«iF 9a_4iaaAO UCFd $aF.y-i41w0 f�i0 � A � Y MMk �D.Fa RM G 'i c0u• ti o kaar•. 0 a.r .a.+ cDDo." tiiaq f.aaka I., . a eLM rro i.n a v d i• rrro ahk ✓ Ro 4H ji,aac0.aaaO�+tu1a (glyh Qak a ■ G Ca €ill■✓■ C■ d• ►nO..kr aCa �7 G7a•r-Ik«-1 IKO •i 1-IDk�e G« 0� 1•�tF a «_ % 4, Da 40yw i r .. DO 4 Ok i A 4 Ok a p uk b ra u a00 r•7k e 1L1 .0 [• m I f 1 1 f I I I I I I I ! I 14 c 4-; -kt Y. us v p m G F U \ • ✓ c r v 0 v a L v G a o k 0 A k y k 1 LY w r • c c »+ a y b+. ✓ u a a 1 It IV « aus us a 0 2 v c-+ o us -p p s k 0 p b a M Y a 1 Y C a a Z r. F a v k tr� -.• 6p k k q kLw k • .. a k Yq .C!coti Xraus 4•ao ..s++.>�. IIY0 k• k .M O•.. YCk k 09 ■ Nak0• •u a0 +3..0.1a RR k�F Y k r u > } p1 >, 11 0 a Op UYkAra kl. hO. Ck &mZ km O a r 0VV-4 b k O kmuY AJh awa 0, -4 0, -.kYY00 00u Oy tO +4 Ga 40 0 C « eYR v ✓ •-. 4 ..L.. a 0 y 41 44 wr•0 4■. Pr « y -1 •ww a D.p+ aRC O Y 0 0 o a0a . so-41a R kQ k kuus a Oka) o Dust cro y • 0 us P R kus k rust oQ a aus ✓ a +0 4 k 0. O aM • a rkam a aM1 k all+ a.YGp akC 0 Ay DM ✓W pk YGa-4V -m 00Ur•4 x kYk 0.• 0 r Fxv R aM c 0 •. k us 0-1-+y avow « � p MVOat iRa-0� -'�� ma C� Eryp am b Ck •r. F+aakp . F•.« .a >a ko Y M y�Fk ra•a�kc A• Y aGD.•a0a MwoR Okra yi>ka.Ltu}akN+�>bt roa p >, OM k -0 a "01, ak30 •air. « C C } • a.. +. e+ak a• • a01j - Y 10 ✓ C VA .4 -i Yk PO -4 i • Oa Yr'0 D0 F■ kYO .t« 0M� 4.; b� pL w ° C � a � MiroFY ° 4 yl. O� � aC a Cmo � aerotO•FOOl .i>•ee i 6 rCFEm" Wby a0 ■ U a a0y-1 k a •tOYO44 4Ya.. 0 Y p .a J, m u k y u k Mr Ir.,404L ■ . O ■ CI y ya41 at k Yk Y4, aON +J Oak l 14 a kc O 0 � s W GOD k La aa.a � Si 0urokiC0u■A �.1 '. asY FYa .toi �ia4j0-9 rA a wac0 w f4 kM1 YM 4,4 a c n Q Q Z oc 1 a -4 7J xl xl I xi xi I b+ •O >a> p C ✓ i 1 i ka _ -4 4 t ak+o I+ O o C s•o T E O P.C 6 0yr> our se�CaM+M7k.W R I I I I I f I N Y -1034 Ok arG� aR0O F 0Gy 1 rC r. •P G r-4 Oy✓ It oMOGa1k fF -0-4 > rFa I I ! I I I f .c r,• a.. .c k0C ik0 ba0 Ouse 0 Y 0ro01 r .a ar. ai • rr. > >r•+ Y r.0 k Ck w•-1 i • p ■tac C-a } M oo ak- 0 « op > • >.Pr 9: 0 v 0 k a Yk kk > a ..ek 0aa Yao 01 a a k0a+.Fk 1 i t oa-�■ • pR r4A. : > • • 6 e0 , a ■ r. b1 0 a ORAkoo aattk C LR p }►. rL kyoa >r, Cs a at yC 01 •A+. av Cx • C0,4 Iirw r ca c•+ -1• iv a oc+ • • uk • kwO o b k 0 rk k +C. i k -Ya o 'p6La�.Y kR3%1o7 .p. • ks raP o •o Av •t R0 ••0 «cal .+o r■ a o khh call r u Do o.. ob • ✓ 7 >,cY • b1.. 0 OLtp y • C.. Cv .a as­4 • > « s•sCL pw Ct .a r. w kN kL k a>+ roptw DPa • w0.0 a✓L►a D�-•1 Magp >, a t rU x.. D ■ a FOA +°.a OS ° •+� 00 C •A • k3 6C.r ■ • ■t .0 .a pvv00 op C-. 'ak R.a ur4k -1 a Ya-. ..JO r- • .■ u a ✓ar-. a•..7 - A a 1 43 Y LUO-a 0. OD R• ■ p 00 i .� YG • - AOX aw +■+ s: aRacc kror ■.a0kuc Mus ypka 0 uus ■ > kk «« aLaosmh a.aa •-. y R7c p i».■ .-, r + 6 k O rr0 tr CCu c0�+ Ouar.. CL0 O 7ro0 y L. ••a..-. ...,N ✓Sra+ aR 0 ka > p 0. yL+ t 0 p yOO-+ ., O 0.a.sa ayA • C•-+•.+ r-I a•+ oki (�(�� Mi 4.0 ap 6M >, C•all r°+ R a A C a M r °.~r a°+ra+ tJ'a.°•1 M.°. O 9 A e i 0 0 C s. O fui 9 k t DD .-• 0 • ✓ aA G Vv & >,0 akW Y raa CG-1 k .r1 u0 as C« G • a OD�a } O O •k ■ ap 0 -} .9 0 vI" pP4 • Oaro • • 000 F }M "I6,• • • 0C .a0•"1440 on R ■r+ • a O+ G1 ra.•.,Q akM • Pk .... a -.ar Yr. 044 kk0 O✓ b 4 0 0 Y a 'WADY ha G Y Lyr•. > i0 aW kYQ0 14 wG } YY r ■.t p a • aCa • O kYa • a O• Cak>; Ck -++ ►, O ■-4+ 0 0AJ- 0 ++ Aa0 a u 0 0.0k •Cpk C k 40Q Chk a amk LI" ■ a 4} YrY « wY Ra O U14L .'F aA V iff a• MA•ab1+ 10 a1°+' "-�-1 rp-, ."] Pr.kb b M�aa •.� RkY y� pp ■C✓ tr. r • .o R C }Y • b'y •L bL+rmtPC-O.+wayr Gas ■°Y>..Ctp-r}.Y bY 040 Opll . a C . kp & k90 t k ''40Wa 0 }wap -a 0 ' kr0. -Ifi- p 2 i a Ga p as Yk04J .. m 000 ( a'" 1400%W tip u • uaaa ON W a,aa > OL W 0 0 010 0 0oub ° T m0pq 0U Om . 0 . uxA� aC GA. p Ukk p•.ra O O 0-+s. c ca4j • p +b W.. a A 0 t r « aaao Avg v a 1. u00 au a.. 3 d' N -. bar-. p+p 4J -0 aO.aU 4- s d: C+a 4411 p 1 0 w a .: AGENDA ITEM NO, m u w Era-+ ksv2fi" a. u0to ] p RAGE I OF Xi X! X1 xi I [ 1 I I RrDWHkk W 0 �a noae JMiMM rao �i aw+ rh a D 4 ■ ■ O k 0 > W i k A a a U i a 0 •a a 0 ♦04, r AV No w0 .� MWVVi F a-� k w 0Y wk a ■ H i >1 ■ Ca •}CC ■•4 C■1- ■■,,tl UCt� 0a00 ■ap 4-p pU, MCQ'V 0 isd4.) -1 OR'rU 41 OOi0-4 i ■ O.-•tiB -+a a k Mauw■ k iU• kV P,• k • r ti k■ 6 RV.7 A 0.a -1 0. 0-4 a 0.k m COk O ./k .i • UH W b1CW NW -1 0 ■ raV Ua ak•ti00% �iGmCam ,iG0�7a 4.0-0k X 41i •1OJ4,DI C >Ytyt C+y Y4�V> V.4-0 aW+ firii}p• ti A ■ a V Yra a W ar0 H-n 0aV w 6ASPt Ad i4) iYc0 i-i C0 0V It0i0.r++ V ia40aA CrArY C N Kt w o xi xi xI x! >d �d Xl xlx I xI A A xi x1 x I 3 y C>-, If k+t h h m C U 0 3 -a a c V bt a Y•+ h a O �tl O O Q a W i ¢m .+ 1 W O -1 Ck po WY m h ■ k L' 1 k R Oss A A7G O a UQt a A Ms s 6 as h R e a O R Y 'a Oa Oc Ck a V w s •tic m m rsD6C 03 tl a �t a Q .-1 a V N k0iV u >.Q V w.•� H rt+t O ■ C D.s k 0.ti bt a V C Ir ■ a a.t W h a 0.-.4 a W ,41 1 Oas h t) 0 AV .� Q. Wh a-1 O RCaC D ■ 0 a +a A ra U.- iC V-f.+aWO W o w Y X C a m 3 7 a 0 m i Y •�>y�.y w . A >. V C C V A+t x c W r u l w4 C aV -i w c V h ¢.-O k s t .0 t< -4� k■ 0�a 0 i k V 3 rl ■ -1•■Uti Cas> c Cw@0 >a. V w a C y >r•• VO 1kA.0 vE ~ eOR V k C O A O a ,4 a VA +a1wU+Y7l rUU Ca 41 w C ti $4J w Vr a. ■ -i 14 a0 a 0 V VCr+ U F Cs0 rtl a a6- -+ ■41 0 a .tia k V a A.1 AV a U W'D 0 0 O J A a C O VU r m +f YAO D Fa 41 ■ 0 41 - O A W go .4Q.0 0 39 a a Y r kaa a C IT 0 k a W ■ „ A k 0 a a LV CDLV i s L>.e■a-t > o-•+ c H m o F y b�Ot +t W C r i a k V O -+ 0 i A aH d Ii W0 •.7 -r�VNA.a�Os t 9C7C,VaVi +y11i•Y -O P. 0 + -4 S'l O 44 0 do'Dsk7 O r r• U .lz aV 0 W a� k r. YaO ■ ObYi 'AU-CiUFm�G.Wa3■iwac->Vo O .. C: k0 x Cwb O •.4 Vavc 0-1 0 7s4) 4i S. A w0 -m Ua A > - utl matow o u m-i a 05 s r + i DDD O ktla 0 a UotlO •Ol t AV -10s - a w A. to P.V O a0 t09akV / m 3ow WA -t a ■.�Ch MrlWa HD WaV Om as V 7 YC.cs3 AO 2T a m +Imr-la Rm ■ m >, OOr s 2a.Q0 m: o A u b s w Was. ■ A PkaaY A a" a A � kp41LaV 0> ri .c 1` m i I I I i I I I l i I I I r I • Y-'t 1 .t W k 1 7 t-• k 7V 6 o f rC 6 W r iC • q 1 r r w.� O •A q.IC I ■ �V a C ■ > XF iC awp A ra Oa r a o6a-+ pOAa -■•t 0>-sGLL U Y.Z+ C JC.-t a w ik0 oL.0 CO -0.0 43 k DCOF tiFO r.UOl -oAm w R a t kV w 0 + Yap .1 14 O O 4jc a - - aa'. V A Vs O V s D13 a + 4 F e y9. 4 ~ F y 7 ka) 1 1 -o" d kC � Ca ■ H a w � au m V ka k A go al 000 H M■ •-bC QmQ O MVU Cs 10a •+ -0 44 f i C V Ok n d s w 2 a C O F •.�-VrU�A•ar-+�-wo++.G0. U7V. C7>, -.a+, a V > a m D aC s hC +Ct+A+aqa AC. 41.1 m Uc a O 0-4 x a m Om k hVa 1rMC^t LVaNA+•A.y>O as WV O11 \ V'O • -t G k O O a+ 41 C V•1`• +1 a OC a C O r-4 O • U aYr- O O7 a 4) 0 Cm IWa aVA Da 014Ati 0■ m 41 aU-tUcm O mr. w > -t O V O V C Y 0 M +1 V QP -i ■ a, w Um a 0) m c u mC 0� o . tic 1+ 0 at • 0 V 14 V o aU = CCm Ycs V u a -.4C s k a 0i. " 0, -txra-ti 0 V ao. a-t Vaa m-/rak > k a 110 p = a a y O' C Hwa0 > O _4Us -4 6 0ar- V r ■ ■YrV a-, a Cw c0 ? W Y0 a U Am a 00 $4 O U O VV'0 m r0% -/ VV O 0c to 0- ti U-i ro 1 UaUc D w O 0 ;A a w wQr .0 V tl r. U V a 41 k t -t uvi a s ■ O a MC A O a x IL a W o aao V wa. o rti•+1. a 7 a .0 a s. -+ w O.+•..� k O w w 0 H-+ 12 R. a A c. a a+ o a S a U.0 f+ a A U Sf r w AGENDA ITEMS NO. ♦} PAGE ?2 OF t� FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ES MAYBE NO I. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? All of the above must be answered "no" for a negative declaration to be issued. II. DETERMINATION: ✓'� The proposed project should not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. Although the proposed project could have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, it will not in this case because of the attached mitigation measures. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. An EIR is required. Ill. REVIEWED BY: - -_DATE: DATE: PLANNING DIRECTOR ATE: �7 AGENDA ITENA, 1-23-86 PAGE OF—�-- r �I `R ` U cn oj 77 co IN ' LU Yt ALE tt �' 'fir �% / ✓ _.�� -- C LL �; . , 1 i ; ;, ii.. ■ LU oil W IRS, to AG#=NDA ITEM NO. 34 PAGEI-4-OF f REPORT TO TH$ CITY COUNCIL/RSDMLO1_MNT AGENCY DATE: AUGUST 14 , 1990 SUBJECT: Cit Allocation of Take of OcculRied Stephen 's Kangaroo Rat Hab-tat Under t. a interim Habitat Conservat on P an PREPARED REVIE APP 0 BY: HaAdu St BY: � Y: —� Hardy Stro2 ery ve erman Ron M lendy The Planning Assocs. Commu ty Dev . City Manager Dire or BACKGROUND: On June 26, 1990 , the City Council adopted several documents as part of the Section 10 (a) Permit application for the Interim Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen's kangaroo rat. In addition to the Interim Plan and supporting environmental documentation, documents detailing procedures and policies for implementing the Interim Habitat Conservation Plan were also adopted. One of the implementation documents that was adopted was an Agreement Regarding Allocation of Take (Attachment A) . DISCUSSION: The Interim Habitat Conservation Plan and implementation Agreement authorize the County and participating cities to incidentally take up to 41400 acres , or 23% of the total occupied habitat of the Stephen's kangaroo rat in the Habitat Conservation Plan fee area, whichever is less. Based on 41400 acres, the City of Labe Elsinore would be allocated a maximum of 352 acres of occupied Stephen' s kangaroo rat habitat over the two-year period Of the Interim Habitat Conservation Plan. The ability of the Citv to achieve all 352 acres, however, is not likely, as the amcunt of occupied habitat available for .ncidental take to the City of Lake Elsinore is a function of the amount of Stephen's kangaroo rat impact fees collected. Since it is likely that , relying on impact fees alone , the City would not be able to take the entire 352 acres , City staff is currently exploring optione to obtain the full 352 acres. However , even if all 352 acres were to become available to the City during the two-year Interim Habitat Conservation. Plan period, requests for future development currently exceed this amount. The City of Lake Elsinore has received approximately 100 acres of availat)le take of occupied habitat to distribute amongst public and private projects for the First six months of the Interim Habitat Conservation Plan. Because -development requests exceed the 100 acres of available take, staff has developed an allocation formula based on an assumed cost for acquisition of additional habitat and public and private development requests (EYhihit of the Resolution) which allocates take based on a proportion of project size. Once a developer has paid fees - for occupied habitat take, that take becomes vested. If, however , the developer fails to pay the fee for occupied habitat acreage, then that acreage will be re- apportioned amongst the other developers in the City. Further , if a developer chooses to pay for its occupied habitat in accordance with Exhibits A and B of the Resolution, and not use it, that developer may sell its allocated take acreage to another developer at whatever price is negotiated between the parties. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Allocation of City Take August 141 1990 Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONt It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Pursue the acquisition of the remaining 252 acres of occupied habitat that will be available to the City during the two-year Interim Habitat Conservation Plan; 2. Require that the development community participate in the acquisition of additional habitat within 30 days of the effective date of the accompanying Resolution in exchange for release of occupied habitat for take (in accordance with Attachment B or using the actual purchase price) ; 3. Reserve 20% of the allocation of take for City or other public projects; 4. The City shall allocate the take received during the first six-month period (i .e . , 100 acres) as shown on Exhibit B in the Resolution accompanying this Staff Report. 5. Direct Staff to return with an update to the acquisition prcject in eight weeks. At that time , a formal policy for distribution of either the 100 acres or the entire 352 will be adopted. E . Authorize the Community Development Wrector to immediately allocate the remaining take acreage that the City has received, upon approval of the City Manager and Mayor , if suspension of the Section 10 (a) Permit appears eminent. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE RESOLUTION NO. 90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ,LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE CITY'S ALLOCATION OF STEPHEN'S KANGAROO RAT TAX$ UNDER THE INTERIM HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, 'California adopted Resolution No. 90-62 on June 26 , 1990 adopting the Agreement Regarding Allocation of Take for occupied Stephen 's kangaroo rat habitat; and WHEREAS, the City has received 100 acres of occupied habitat under the Agreement Regarding Allocation of Take for the first Six-month period of the Interim Habitat Conservation Plant and Y WHEREAS, the City currently has developer requests for occupied habitat that exceed the 100 acrest and WHEREAS, the City is currently exploring Options to obtain the entire 352 acres it can be allocated during the two- year Interim Habitat Conservation Plan and under the Section 10 (a) Permit; and WHEREAS, the City is still likely to receive requests for occupied habitat that exceed the entire 352 acres of occupied habitat available; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore; 1. The City shall use its best efforts to pursue the acquisition of the remaining 252 acres of occupied habitat that will be available to the City during the two-year Interim Rabitat Conservation Plan, 2 • The City shall require the development community to participate within 30 days of this Resolution in the acquisition of additional, habitat in exchange for release of occupied habitat for take in accordance with Exhibit A. 3 . The City shall reserve 20% of I the allocation of take for City or other public projects, 4 • The City shall allocate the . take received during the first six-month period (i .e. , 100 acres) as shown on Exhibit B. 5. In the event that suspension 'of the Section 10 (a) Permit appears eminent, the COmmunitV, Development Director, with the approval of the City Manager and Mayor , is authorized to allocate all remaining take acreage that the City has received. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED :.by the City Council that the City Staff shall return to the City Council in eight weeks with an update on• the acquisition project . AGENDA tTEM NO. PAGE_OF PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 1990, upon the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARY M, WASEBURNr MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VT_CKI LYNNE KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE E,LSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM & LEGALITY: JOHN R. HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 I PAGE OF, XXHIBIT A OCCUPI$D RAHITAT nz ropxuLA FOR TEE STEPHEN'S mXGMOO RAT 352 Acres (total allocation under Short Term HCp) Acres (allocation during first 6-month 10 (a) 252 Acres Permit period) , 252 Acres of take $5 ►000/Acre+ 50% occupied 252 X 2 a 504 252 Occupied 252 Unoccupied 504 X 51000 - 21520 ,000 X 2 - 5,040 ,000 252 a $5 ,000//Acre = 1 ,260 , 000 $5 ,040,000 -1�0 ,000 �3 r 7 U10000 $3 , 780 ,000 - 352 - $10 ,738/Acre** # Tf actual acre acquisition cost is less than $5,000 per acre, that differential, less administrative costs, refunded to the developer. actual acre acquisition cost will be If act lfi greater than $5, 000 per acre , the additional costs will be collected from the developer. *" RequiredPayment b $1a, 73$ Per Ace + regular lmptigationu feesn9 allocation ►_ kangaroo rat Mitigation Fee Ordinance, under Stephen s AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF—SLL r- EXHIBIT 8 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ALLOCATION OF STEPHEN' S KANGAROO RAT 'FAKE FIRST SIX-MONTH ALLOCATION AUGUST 14, 1990 Project Acreage Acreaje Allocated 1. City of Lake Elsinore N/A 20 ,00 2. LD Johnson Companies 1 ,190 17.55 3. Murdock Development 500 7.39 4. Brighton Homes 11000 14.75 5. Long Beach Equities 790 11.65 6 . Pardee 11943 28. 66 100. 00 acres AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF- Attachment A AGRELKENT REGARDING ALLOCATION OP TAKE THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and among THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ( "the County" ) , THE CITY OF PERRIS, THE CITY OF LAKE EL•SINORE, THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, THE CITY OF MORENO VALLEY and THE CITY OF HEMET (.collectively the "Cities") , and the RIVERSIDE COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION AGENCY (the "JPA") with reference to the following; R E C I T A L S. A. The County, Cities and JPA are participating in a cooperative federal and local program for the conservation of the Stephens' kangaroo rat ( the "SKR" ) , an endangered species. As part of the cooperative program, the County and Cities have applied to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (the "Service") for the issuance of a Section 10(a) Permit that would allow for the incidental take of the SKR within the respective Jurisdictions of the County and Cities pursuant to the Short-Tent Habitat . Conservation Plan for the Stephens ' Kangaroo Rat (the "HCP" ) and the Implementation Agreement. B. The HCP and Implementation Agreement authorize the County and the Cities to incidentally take up to 4, 400 acres, or 20% , of the total occupied habitat of the SKR in HCP fee area, whichever is less. The HCP and Implementation Agreement also specify the terms and conditions undar which incidental take of AGENDA ITEM NO, PAS, OF SKR by the County and Cities may occur, and the monitoring activities which the County, the Cities and the Service will use to monitor such incidental take . The HCP and Implementation Agreement do not, however, specify how the allowable incidental take will be allocated between and among the County and Cities. C. The p1,1rpoae of this Agreement is to memorialize the agreement of the parties , hereto regarding the interjurisdictional allocation of incidental take authorized under the Section 10 (a) Permit, the HCP and the Implementation Agreement, MR AND IN CONSIDERATION of mutual covenants and agree- ments contained herein, the parties do hereby agree as follows: AGAEE�NT 1- MAXIMUM ALLOCATiONT CF PERMITTED TAKE The parties acknowledge and agree that the HCP and Implemen- tation Agreement authorize cumulative incidental take of SKR daring the two-year term of the short-term HCP in an amount not to exceed 4? 400 acres, or 20t, of the total occupied habitat of the SKR within the HCP fee area, whichever is less (such autho- rized incidental taice shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Permitted Take" ) . Unless modified purs;;ant to the terms of this Agreement, each of the pasties hereto shall be allocated a fixed percentage of the Permitted Take - during, the tWo-year term .of,-the HCP as follows, DE01205/05-22-90 7 d -2- AGENDA ITEM iOF_2qP._5 ._.._ PAGE _ County of Riverside 50% City of Riverside 341 City of Lake Elsinore 8% City of Moreno Valley 4% City of Perris 21 City of Hemet 21 In order to calculate each party's total Permitted Take during the two-year term of the HCP, the party's fixed percentage referenced above is multiplied by the total number of acres sub- Ject to take. To illustrate, assuming a maximum total Permitted Take of 4,400 acres, each party's maximum share of the Permitted Take expressed in acres would be as foilows: County of Riverside 2,200 acres City of Riverside 1,496 acres City of Lake Elsinore 352 acres City of Moreno Valley 176 acres City of Perris 88 acres City of Hemet 88 acres The actual amount of occupied habitat on which incidental take would be allowed could be less than described above if it is determined during the two-year term of the Section 10 (a) Permit that less than 4, 400 acres of occupied SKR habitat exist within the boundaries of the ECP Fee area, as amended from time to time. 2. SEMI-ANNUAL LIMITATIONS (}N PERMITTED TAKE In addition to the limitations on the maximum Cumulative amount of Permitted Take described in Paragraph 1 above, the parties also acknowledge that, except for the special allocation Of Permitted Take described in Paragraph 3 below, the RCP and Implementation Agreement further limit the amount of occupied DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg -3- AGENDA iTENA, PAGE OF. ..� habitat on which Permitted Take will be allowed during any six- month period following the issuance of the Section 10(a) permit (hereinafter a "semi—annual period") to an amount not to exceed by more than ten percent (10%) , in area, the amount of occupied habitat suitable for SKR reserves acquired as replacement habitat during such semi-annual period. Accordingly, the parties agree , that each party's proportionate share of Permitted Take during any semi-annual period will be further limited by the amount of replacement habitat satisfactory to the Service acquired by the JPA or other authorized means during any such semi-annual period. The parties agree that the funding source of any acquired replacement habitat will determine each party's propor- tior-ate share of Permitted Take resulting from such acquisition. Set forth below are the sources of acquisition of replacement �-- habitat and each party's corresponding share of Permitted Take during any semi-annual period resulting therefrom. A. Impact Fee Acvuisitions. For each acre of occupied replacement habitat acquired in acco•dance with the requirements of the HCF and Implementation Agreement using monies collected from the impact fee ordinances of the various parties, or Occupied habitat acquired in lieu of payment of said impact fees, each party hereto will be allocated a percentage of the resulting Permitted Take as follows : (1) During the first semi-annual period following the issuance of 'the Section- .10(a) + Permiti.. each,.party rvill:�be sa110- cated a fixed percentage of Permitted Take resulting_. fr= "impact fee acquisitions , " as follows: u DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg �q �r AGENDA ITEM NO. 1AGE.10 OF 9 County of Riverside 60% City of Riverside 25% City of Moreno Valley 6% City of Lake Elsinore 5% City of Perris 2% City of Hemet 2% For illustration purposes only, if the JPA or another entity acting on behalf of the JPA acquires 500 acres of replacement habitat during the first semi-annual period. after the issuance of the Section 10(a') Permit using monies collected from impact fees, the County of Riverside would be allocated sixty percent (60%) of such 500 acres, or 300 acres of Permitted Take; the City of Riverside twenty-five percent (25%) of such 500 acres, or 125 acres of permitted Take, etc. In order to provide additional flexibility for the Cities of Hemet and Perris, each of which only has a two percent ( 2% ) share during the first semi-annual period, it is contem- plated by all the parties hereto that both Hemet and Perris will be permitted to exceed their proportionate shares of the semi- annual Permitted Take pursuant to this Paragraph 2.A(1) so long as the total proportionate share of Permitted Take for a semi- annual period would not exceed four percent (4%) l provided, how- ever, that any additional allocation of Permitted Take pursuant to this Paragraph 2 .A( 1) shall require the prior written approval Of the JPA. It is further agreed that any increase in the proportionate share of the Cities of Hemet or Perris pursuant to this Paragraph 2.A(1) shall, unless otherwise agreed by the parties hereto, result in a decrease, on a pro rata basis, of the shares of the other parties. �- ^ DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg AGENDA f EN11 NO PAGE ( OF �� (2) Commencing with the second semi-annual period following the issuance of the Section 10(a) Permit, the propor- tionate share of Permitted Take resulting from acquisitions of replacement habitat using impact fees during any semi-annual period will be based solely on the cumulative impact lees con- tributed to the JPA by the various parties. Cumulative contri- butions of impact fees shall be calculated in accordance with the terms of Section 3 , 10.1 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement creating the JPA. Each party' s share of Permitted Take under this Paragraph 2.A(2) shall be adjusted on a semi-annual basis unless otherwise agreed by the parties. For illustration purposes only, if at the end of the first semi-annual period the total cumulative impact fee contributions equal fifteen million dollars, with ten million .y dollars coming from the County of Riverside, three million dollars from the City of Riverside, one million dollars from the Cite of Moreno Valley, etc. , the proportionate share of Permitted Take allocated to each of the parties during the second semi- annual period from impact fee acquisitions would be adjusted on a pro rata basis as follows: the County would be allocated 66.7% Of available Permitted Take, the City of Riverside 20%, the City Of Moreno Valley 6.6$ , etc. (3) Prior to the commencement of any semi-annual period during the tern, of the HCP, the parties, in consultation with the JPA and its consultants, shall attempt to project the amount of replacement habitat expected to be acquired during the -6- DE01205/05-22-9Q/7/dg PAGE OF.-�..1... upcoming semi-annual period so that each party. can determine in .. advance the number of acres of Permitted Take to be allocated to such party pursuant to this Paragraph 2.A during such semi-annual period. Monthly updates on acquisitions of replacement habitat will be provided to the parties by -the JPA pursuant to the Implementation Agreement . H. Single-Jurisdiction AcguiSitions . in addition to semi- annual allocations of Permitted Take as a result of acquisition of replacement habitat through the use of impact fees as described in Paragraph 2.A above or neutral-source acquisitions described in Paragraph 2,C below, any party hereto may also receive an allocation of one acre of Permitted Take for each acre of suitable replacement habitat acquired by or on behalf of such party using the following non-impact fee sources and methods: (1) Acquisition by a party of replacement habitat located within a study area in such -party's own jurisdiction using such party ' s own funds, tax revenues, or special assess- ments. For example, the City of Riverside would be entitled to one acre of Permitted Take for each acre of occupied habitat in Sycamore Canyon Park acquired by the City of Riverside using its own funds or tax revenues so long as the Service approves of the replacement habitat for the Permitted Take. ( 2) Acquisition of replacement habitat by a City or the County in accordance with Paragraph 7 ( iv) of the Implementa- tion Agreement ( that_Ja,._ imposition_by any,. City t or ; the ..County of a wildlife ,ronservation__easement• or, similar covenants for' the DE01205/05-22-40/7/dg AGENDA !7 LW PAGE f1F„ benefit of the SKR over and upon occupied SKR habitat owned by any City or the County but not previously managed for, or dedi- cated to, open space or wildlife conservation) , ( 3) Acquisition of replacement habitat by the JPA at the request and on behalf of any City or the County as herein- after described. Any City or the County may request that the JPA use its best efforts to acquire through negotiated purchase or by eminent domain replacement habitat within the study areas desig- nated in the H4P. Unless otherwise agreed by the requesting party and the JPA, the purchase price to be offered and paid by the JPA for any such replacement habitat shall be its fair market value as determined by an appraisal approved by the JPA. In the event that the JPA is unable to acquire replacement habitat through a negotiated purchase, the JPA, in its sole and absolute discretion, may acquire such replacement habitat through the exercise oP the JPA' s eminent domain powers. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained or implied in this Paragraph 2.B(3) , the parties hereby acknowledge and agree that any acqui- sition of replacement habitat through the exercise of eminent domain as set forth herein shall be subject to all statutory and case law requirements with respect to the adoption of a resolu- tion of necessity by the JPA for the acquisition of such prop- erty, and this Agreement shall not be construed as a contractual limitation on the JPA's unfettered discretion with respect to adoption of such resolution of necessity, nor shall the JFA be in default.. or--otherwise subject to, damagea, .or .expenses under, this DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg -$- AGENDA PAGE OF� Agreement it it does not so adopt a resolution of necessity. The requesting party shall pay the JPA its actual costs of acquiring such replacement habitat through a negotiated purchase, or it the JPA so elects, through the exercise of the JPA's eminent domain powers. Such costs shall include any amounts paid by the JPA directly to the owner of such replacement habitat, or -any sums deposited by the JPA with a court of competent jurisdiction for the acquisition of the fee interest and/or pre-judgment posses- sory interest . in and to the replacement habitat. Such costs shall include all costs, fees and expenses incurred by the JPA in connection with or related to the acquisition of such replacement habitat including, but not limited to, escrow fees, binder and title charges, appraisal fees, mailing and publishing costs, transfer taxes, the JPA's attorneys ' fees and court costs, any `-- attorneys ' fees and court costs of the owner or owners of such replacement habitat if awarded by a court, together with any damages for logs of goodwill, and any relocation expenses incurred in connection with such acquisitions. in the event that the JPA receives more than one such request, it shall make such acquisitions in the order in which the requests are received; Provided, however, that acquisitions under this Paragraph may be pooled and done in conjunction With other acquisitions by the JPA. Acquisitions under this Paragraph will be made concurrent with or following acquisitions made by the JPA using impact fees as described , in Paragraph. , 24A above-; . fThe "JPA.i shall,, proceed: as expeditiously- as . poesib-le- to make - such requested acquisitions. DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg A0EN1rA ITEM NO PAGE OF Upon any such acquisition and payment therefor, the respective City or County, in addition to receiving one acre of Permitted Taira for each acre of suitable replacement habitat acquired, shall receive a credit against impact fees payable by it to the JFA under Section 3.10.1 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agree- ment Creating Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (the "Joint Powers Agreement" ) in an amount equal to that "ortion of the actual coat of acquisition attributable to land for which it does not receive an allocation of Permitted Take. For example, if the JPA acquires 10C acres of land, 50 of which is occupied suitable replacement habitat and 50 of which is unoccupied, and the total cost of such land is $200,000, the requesting party stall receive a 50 acre allocation of Permitted Take and a credit against impact fees under Section 3,10.1 equal to $100,000 ($200,000 X . 50 ■ $100, 000) . (4) Acquisition of replacement habitat within a study area in an unincorporated area of the County by any City or the County through negotiated purchase or eminent domain in accor- dance with and pursuant to the following conditions: (i) At the time of the making of an offer of just compensation to acquire replacement habitat, no offer of just compensation or action shall then be pending by the JPA or any other City or the County to acquire the lands which are proposed to be so acquired. In addition, .he offer of just compensation shelL _not exceed--the -appraised- €air market, value .of -the_xeplace-- ment habitat sought to be acquired-.� - DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg -10- =..i ACENGH E ;`..; •.�. PAGE w OF � l ( ii) The JPA shall have approved of the proposed lands to be acquired as a desirable addition to the proposed habitat reserves and shall have approved of the proposed use by any City or the County of the exercise of eminent domain to acquire such lands if such is proposed; and ( iii ) Any lands acquired under this paragraph shall be conveyed to the JPA or to another entity approved by the JPA whose purpose is to acquire, manage and maintain wildlife habitat. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties hereto, land acquired and conveyed by any City or the County pursuant to this Paragraph 2.B( 4) shall not entitle any City or the County to a mitigation fee credit or contribution under Section 3.10 .2 of the Joint Powers Agreement. This Paragraph may only be used by a City or the County to receive an allocation of Permitted Take if acquisitions by the JPA pursuant to Paragraph 2..B(3) above are administratively infeasible at the time the Permitted Take is desired. ( 5) Acquisitions by or on behalf of the Allesandro Heights Property Owners Association by the City of Riverside and/or the County pursuant to than certain letter agreement dated May 10, 1990. Each acquisition of replacement habitat for which Permitted Take is sought by a single party pursuant to this Para- graph 2 .B shall be subject to the approval of the JPA. In no event shall the number of acres _of Permitted Take allocable pursuantt..to_ th4s Paragraph 2.B; to any City or the County exceed -11- DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg AGENDA ITEM jqQ. PAGE OF the maximum number of acres of Permitted Take allocated to such City or County under the Implementation Agreement and Paragraph l of this Agreement . C. Neutral Source Acctuisitions. A third source of an allocation of Permitted Take during any semi-annual period shall arise from acquisition of replacement habitat utilizing state or federal bond issues, grants, programs, or other "neutral" sources of funds or contributions of land. In the event that replacement habitat acceptable to the Service is acquired through "neutral" sources, the resulting Permitted Take would be shared by the County and Cities in accordance with the fixed percentages used to determine allocable shares of Permitted Take in Paragraph 1 above. Thus, for example, if the California Department of Fish and Game acquired one hundred (100) acres of replacement habitat in the Lake Matthews study area, the City of Moreno Valley would be entitled to four ( 4 ) acres of Permitted Take, the City of Lake Elsinore eight (8) acres of Permitted Take, etc. The parties further agree that federal or state sources of funds or land contributions shall be classified as "neutral" , notwithstanding that a particular jurisdiction or group of jurisdictions applied to the state or federal agency for assistance, or was otherwise prirrarily responsible for causing the state or federal agency to contribute money or land for the purpose of acquiring suitable replacement habitat. In contrast, funds raised through local bond-issues :or assessment district0 irmoiving: one;cor more- of the . gartie� -tcr,this• A*greament• shall be, apportioned_ to .such party or -12ft DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg PAGE OF�.t parties in proportion to the amount of funds collected and con•- tributed by each such party through such bond issue or assessment district, pursuant to Paragraph 2 .B above. 3. SPECIAL ALLOCATION OF PERMITTED TAKE In addition to the other sources of Permitted Take described in this Agreement, during the first six (6) months following the issuance of the Section 10(a) Permit, any City or the County may elect to receive one (1) or more acres of available Permitted Take upon the following terms and conditions: A. Prior to receiving an allocation of Permitted Take, the City or County shall pay to the JPA an amount equal to twice the amount estimated by the JPA to be necessary to acquire one acre of replacement habitat for each acre of requested Permitted Take. The estimated cost of acquiring replacement habitat under this Paragraph shall be based on an average of the fair market values of lands containing suitable replacement habitat theretofore acquired or sought to be acquired by the JPA. The fair market value of such lands shall be determined by approved appraisal, and/or actual acquisition costs incurred by the JPA. In calcu- lating the estimated costs of replacement habitat, the JPA shall use a representative sampling of lands covering not less than 20 different parcels and totaling not less than 1000 acres. The SKR leaps contained in the O'Farrell & Uptain Report (1989 ) , as updated from time to time with new or more accurate data on the abundance and disposition of SKR, shall be used to determine what -13- DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg AGENDF, . �... _ PAGE OF percentage of such ear:ple lands is occupied ' with suitable 1 ,. repiacenant habitat versus unoccupied habitat. The estimated cos} of acquiring occupied habitat shall be calculated by deter- mining the average fait market value of such .lands divided by the Percentage of such lands which contain suitable occupied SKR habitat. For example, if the JPA has representative appraisals - and acquisitions covering fifty ( 50) separate parcels cumula- tively containing over 1, 000 acres of land, and the average cost of such land is $5400 per acre, and based on the SKR maps con- tained in the O'Farrell & Uptain Reports, 601 of such lands on average are occupied by SKR, then the amount to be paid by the requesting City for each acre of Permitted Take allocated pursu- ant to this Paragraph 3 shall be as follows : M,000/acre + . 60 $8,333) x 2 ■ $16,666. The City or County receiving an alloca- tion of Permitted Take pursuant to this Paragraph 3 shall receive a credit against impact fees payable by it to the JPA under Section 3.10 .1 of the Joint Powers Agreement in an amount equal to that portion of the estimated cost of acquisition of replace- ment lands that are attributable to unoccupied land. For example, using the above example, 60% of each acre of replacement land, on an average, is occupied by SKR and 40% of each acre is not occupied by SKR. Thus, if a City desires to receive an allocation of Permitted Take pursuant to this Paragraph 3 on, for instance, 10 acres, the JPA would need to acquire an .estimated 16. 66 acres of replacement habitat (10 acres + 604 16,66 acres ) , and -such City' s credit against. impact .fees .for. unoccupied DE0,205/05-22-90/7/d9 -14- AGENDA IT&,A �,j. PAGE_d,20 0F�� habitat would Equal $33,320 (15 .66 acres X 1$5,000/ acre X 40% $2,000/acrel ) , B. The JPA shall hold any funds received pursuant to this Paragraph 3 in a separate trust account for the purpose of acquiring SKR replacement habitat within study areas and shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in all events prior to the expiration of one (1) year from the date of the receipt of funds, to acquire one acre of replacement habitat for each acre of Permitted Take allocated pursuant to this Paragraph. C. The number of acres of Permitted Take allocable pursu- ant to this Paragraph 3 shall in no event exceed a cumulative total of five hundred ( 500) acres, nor shall the maximum number of acres of Permitted Take allocable to any City or the County under this Paragraph 3 exceed the maximum number of acres of Permitted Take allocated to such City or the County under the Implementation Agreement and Paragraph 1 of this Agreement. An allocation of Permitted Take pursuant to this Paragraph 3 shall only be available during the first six ( 6) months following the issuance of the Section 10 (a) Permit. 4• ANNEXA:'IONS In the event that County lands within the HCP area are annexed by newly-incorporated cities (such as the City of Temecula) or existing cities not currently a party to this Agree- ment (such as the City of Corona) , - or, existing cities which are a party - to this Agreements it- . is contemplated. that the County's DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg 15- PAGE OF;A.5— share of Permitted Take under Paragraph 1 above will be partially ...- reallocated to any such city based on the amount of the occupied habitat annexed to or incorporated by such city that is subject to take under the Section 10 (a) Permit. For example, the City of Temecula has an estimated sixty-three (63) acres of occupied habitat within its boundaries outside of study areas. If the City of Temecula becomes a co-applicant under the Section 10(a) Permit,, the County would allocate a pro rata percentage of its Permitted Take under Paragraphs 1 and 2.0 to the City of Temecula. Current information indicates that there are approxi- mately 5,382 acres of occupied habitat outside. of study areas that are subject to take. Temecula's pro rata share of the total is approximately one percent (1t) (63 + 5382 = 1.17%) , thus, subtracting Temecula's one percent (1%) share from the County' s �- fifty percent ( 50%) share of the total Permitted Take would leave the County with a forty-nine percent (49t) share of the total Permitted Take. "Temecula's proportionate share of Permitted Take - resulting from impact fee acquisitions (Paragraph 2.A) would be based on the amount of fees collected and contributed to the program since its incorporation. Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing to the contrary, any reapportionment of any share of the County's Permitted Take resulting from annexations or incor- porations shall be subject to the review and written approval of the County.- -16- DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg �J AQ�N[)A ITEM NO-arl PAGE OF J2 - 5. REALLOCATION OR TRANSFER OF PERMITTED TAKE _ At any time during the term of the Section 10(a) Permit , any party to this Agreement shall have the right to reallocate or transfer any portion of its unused share or percentage the Permitted Take to any other jurisdiction or jurisdictions autho- rized to incidentally take . SKA, provided such reallocation or transfer between or among such jurisdictions is approved in writing by each affected jurisdiction. Copies Of any such reallocation agreements or approvals shall be immediately distributed for information purposes only to all of the parties to this Agreement and to the JPA. 6. MONITORING OF TAKE The JPA or its designated agents shall monitor the amount of Permitted Take allocated to and used b each y party during the term of the Section 10(a) Permit . In the event that any party has been allocated Permitted Take which is not used during any semi-annual period, such unused allocation shall carry over to the successive semi-annual period or periods until used or other- wise redistributed in accordance with Paragraph 4 above. 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Amendments . Except as otherwise expressly set forth in this Agreement, the terms and provisions of this Agreement may be amended only by written Agreement signed by all the parties hereto. DE01205/05-22-90/7/dg -17- AGENDA ITEM N0._a5 L PAGE OF,_ B. Successors and Assigns. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigner and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and such successors and assigns as may be expressly assigned the benefits hereof by any party hereto. C, Entire Agreeme`nt This Agreement supersedes any and all other Agreements either oral or in writing between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and contains all the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to said matter. D. Attorneys ' Fees. I,f any action at law or in equity, including any action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the losing party or parties are responsible for the attorneys' fees of the �- winning party or parties . E. Durnzicate Originals, This Agreement may be executed in any number of duplicate originals. A complete original of this Agreement shall be maintained in the official records of each of the parties hereto. F. Term of -the Agreement, This Agreement shall take effect upon execution by all of the parties and shall continue in force for the duration of the Section J0,a) Permit. C . Subject to HCP and im lementaition Agreement, The terms of this Agreement shall be subject to the terms of the HCP, the Implementation Agreementp and,,the section ld-(a-) ;Permit. -16- DEC12Q5/05-22-g0/7/dg �� AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF IN WITNESS WaRMEOF, the parties have executed this `.. Agreement as of the data or dates below written. COMY OF. RIVERSIDE Dated: By: Chairman of the Boar ATTEST: of Supervisors Clerk of the Boar CITY OF EMX= Dated: By: ATTEST: Mayor C.ty Clerk CITY OF LMM IMBINOAE Dated: By: ATTEST: Mayor ty Clerk CITY OF KORENO VALLL>y Dated By: ATTEST: Mayor City Cler (Signature Page Continued) L. DE01205/05-22-90/7/dS '19- PAGE OF , • CITY OF PERRIS V Dated: Sys Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF RIVERSIDE Dated: By: Kayor ATTEST: city 'dlerk RIVERSIDE COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION AGENCY Dated: By: Cha rman 01 the Board ATTEST: Clirk ol the Boars -20- DEOI205/05-22-90/7/dg •�`� AGENDA -5 PAGE,,OF-23. ATTACHMENT B OCCUPIED HABITAT FEE FORMULA FOR THE STEPHENS' KANGAROO RAT JUNE 1990 ASSUMPTIONS: 1. City of Lake Elsinore will be allocated 100 acres of take during the first 6-month period of the 10 (a) Permit. 2. During the 2-year Section 10 (a) permit lifetime, the City shall not be able to allow take of more than 352 acres of occupied habitat. 3 . Existing 352 acres of occupied habitat identified in the Short Term HCP in the City of Lake Elsinore is an underestimation of actual occupied habitat, based on recent biological surveys conducted. ISSUES: I . What happens under the Long Term HCP if Stephens ' kangaroo rat mitigation fees have been paid under the Short Term HCP, but take has not occurred? 2 . How can the Short Term HCP lid on the take of (4,400 acres or 20% whichever is less) in the entire program area , or 352 acres in the City of Lake Elsinore be modified as new Stephens ' kangaroo rate occupied habitat is discovered? 3 . How does the City o£ Lake Elsinore determine ; a . Flow to allocate its 352 acres Of occupied habitat that can potentially be taken over two-year 10 (a) Permit lifetime amongst the various competing interests? b. How tc ensure that the entire 352 acres of available take be allocated to the City as soon as possible (i .e . , within the first six months of the 10 (a) Permit) . AGENDA ITEM `N'O. Page 2 POTENTIAL SOLOTIONS: 1. What happens under the Long Term HCP if Stephens ' kangaroo rat mitigation fees have been paid under the Short Term HCP, but take has not occurred? POTENTIAL SOLUTION: Request that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service make explicit as part of its 10 (a) Permit that once occupied habitat has been mitigated under the Short Term HCP that no further mitigation will be required. 2. How can the Short Term HCP lid on the take of (4,400 acres or 20% whichever is less) in the entire program area, or 352 acres in the City of Lake Elsinore be modified as new Stephens ' kangaroo rate occupied habitat is discovered? POTENTIAL SOLUTION: It is very unlikely that the City of Lake Elsinore will be able to exceed its allocation of take of 352 acres under the Short Term HCP. An amendment to this acreage (and thereby an amendment to the 4 ,400 acre limitation) would necessitate an amendment to the Short Term HCP, its implementing documents and the FEIS/FEIR. 3. How does the City of Lake Elsinore determine : a. How to allocate its 352 acres of occupied habitat that can potentially be taken over two—year 10 (a) Permit lifetime amongst the various competing interests? b. How to ensure that the entire 352 acres of available take be allocated to the City as soon as possible (i .e. , within the first six months of the 10 (a) Permit) . POTENTIAL SOLUTION: One solution is for the City, working with the developers to locate occupied habitat in or near a potential reserve or viable reserve area and request that the Joint Powers Agency condemn that property on the City's behalf. By using condemnation , the cost per acre will be substantially less than outright purchase by the City. if this acreage can be AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF � Page 3 obtained in the first six months of the Section IO (a) Permit, then the City can allocate its entire 352 acres of take available under the Short Term HCP. The cost for this acreage will be passed on to the developers in exchange for acreage of occupied habitat they will be allowed , to take. The cost for this acreage could be substantial as shown below in a hypothetical example; 352 Acres (total allocation under Short Term HcP) -100 Acres (allocation during first 6-month 10 (a) 252 Acres Permit period) 252 Acres of take $5400/Acre 50% occupied 252 X 2 = 504 252 Occupied 252 Unoccupied 504 X 5,000 a 2,520,000 X 2 - 5, 040, 000 252 @ $5 ,000//Acre = 1 ,260 ,000 $S,040 ,000 -1,260 , 000 53 ,780, 000 $3,780, 000 ; 352 = $10 ,738/Accre Required payment by developers requesting allocation = $1Q ,738 Acre + regular mitigation fees under Ordinance. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF L. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL DATE: AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: C. Ray Woo , Adminis ative Ron Mol ndyk, Services Director City Ma ager BACKGROUND: We have received an application for license to operate an ice cream truck in the City. The application is complete in accordance with the requirements of Section 5. 08. 160, Sub-section A thru G of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Sub-section H of Section 5. 08. 160 requires approval of the City Council for sales on public streets. FISCAL IMPACT: There would be no fiscal impact to the City from the issuance of this license. RECOMMENDATION: The subject application is submitted for City Council consideration without recommendation. AGENOA ITEM. NO. PAGE__]_OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MEMORANDUM TO: Ray Wood, Administrative Services Director FROM: Becky Karcher, Account Clerk I � DATE: July 17, 1990 SUBJECT: Business License Application Attached, please find the additional information required from GoldiIs Ice Cream. At this time the application is complete and ready to procede to City Council . Please advise me if there are any further questions. PAGE_J_�OF_jk !ice CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BUSINESS CERTIFICATE lh YOUR BUSINESS TAX IS NOW DUE AND PAYABLE. APPLICATION TO AVOID PENALTY FEES,SUBMIT PAYMENT 13EFORE: DATE: AN/ " `-f.LJ I ICE Mlle - f 19} !Y5`31 ;2 GROSSRECEIPTS. ""_.-- .`JV_N� ` 1llES,53.QGALD�ih. �z. A - �1 G Lll�E. AN L),2 EAS Or 1l ^�� RENTAL UNITS E !v Dl 7 CA 9�O L NO.OF VEHICLES .._ LID. N MAKE Q k\/_ f9-77 ceTaS-7331 7qS-,j !VEHICLE#1._.-- MAILING ! 2 ( O ^�,� / IVEHICLE#2 �...�` al� 16 HIv4i$L5.C11] ADDRESSs �Oh r _ �tJ�'v LL'T#:10©-3431-�1OQ 1�.w r ��� NO.OF EMPLOYEES__*.... 4. ES CO VP t LSO , Cr\ T#:0_--0868 NO.VENDING OR VIDEO GAMS} 'ID CHECK FE I f l + IN CASE OF -------- --_----_ ._ WDI")DVfA1✓ CONTACTCY ZPAVI -- - - - - SF4Q�.�S_u�A1r'fe I ' - 63"8 g06l SOO ►`J + �C FEnI'D'# OTAL MUNICIPAL CODE TAX � ^ SECTION DUE J� PLEASE COMPLETE AND CORRECT ALL ITEMS ABOVE,AND RETURN THIS FORM WITH YOUR PAYMENT CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE r t; 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET SIGNATUR LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92330 TITLE '✓ DATE 1 2 R 0 IF YOU CLOSED YOUR BUSINESS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE YOUR BUSINESS CERTIFICATE WILL BE MAILED TO YOU WITHIN 30 DAYS PLEASE ENTER CLOSING DATE "— APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING DIVISION IS REQUIRED: PLANNING. DATE CONDITI NS OF APPROVAL. / r 2 DATE a PACE �0F _ ; . Cri Y OF LAKE E1.SMM - - ' 130 :tXJi'H MAIN ST. LADE Et5fl=¢at24 9 To Lake El si noee Sheri ff D"rtment pA _06-10-90 717 S. Langstaff Lake Elsinore, CA 9233`,; Attn: Lt. Caldwell ___ -• _ _ _. _Thi Wh= It May Comes. Re: Business License-for Solicitor The m'3ect in °n' Rosario Zhavi. WWI Ice Crew— _bras-w-crimiml_1 s_or is DATE May 31, `1990 •� _.___ _ word- iafiLioM5 to receive a hu Dear Lt. Caldwell, Please find attached an application for Y> solicitor's business license; plea"se"reiri- ------- all itema and conduct your usual-lnve`st.lga on Please advise this office if-we may issue +Willfm Caldwe]1,31.aeut , the business license. Lake, sirnre Station II If you have any questions, please don't - -- hesitate to contact me. Thank ybu. Very truly yours, - AUNUA ITEM NO. PAGE OP Pamela L-e-Shipley.. Account Clerk; II BY �f•__ _��. 0 0 4E-73 17- • • CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN ST. LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92330 714-674-3124 P, -K� yej rTO r Lake Elsinore Sheriff Department DATE 117 S. Langstaff . Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 Attn: Lt. Caldwell Re: Business License for Solicitor Goldi ice Creaffl DATE May 31 , '19 9 a Dear Lt. Caldwell , Please find attached an application for solicitor's business license. Please review all items and conduct your usual investigation , Please advise this office if we may issue the business license. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Pamela L..-Shipley, Account Clerk I j kSIGNED AGENDA ITEM, No I PAGE-OE OF G .LCc1Ze E!SMo to CITY HALL 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSI.NOR E, CALI FOR NIA92330 Telephone (714) 674-3125 TO: COIS BYRD RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Lake Elsinore Station 117 South Langstaff Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 Z4IAVI gospolo LAST NAME FIRST NAME MIDDLE Soo N • CDPCAI�e- US COkVI Do, CA Sao aS- ADDRESS UnP - DATE OF BIRTH PLACE OF BIRTH HEIGHT I-10 Z4575-31,2 3 WEIGHT DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBER is applying for a City of Lake Elsinore Business License. VEizi m� , far S. ANDepAs�,', ESC. , cA TYPE OF BUSINESS LOCATION OF BUSINESS Prior to issuing the license, the City of Lake Elsinore is requesting a search of the records of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department to show that there is no warrant or criminal process outstanding in Riverside County against 214 r 1 �' LAST NAME FIRST NAME MIDDLE no has there been any during the past five (5) years. Signed City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Offic RECORD SEARCH WAIVER AGENDA ITEM o. ;l PAGE of he undersigned has no objections to the City of Lake Elsinore having the 'I.J ,—criminal records checked. CELEBRATINGsJgQe)dEAPS. dub pnnli,-zn+ is-Inacc f Zr-ancc, r MAY 1 , 1 m� CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA RE: ROSARIO LABOR—ZHAVI BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I, ROSARIO GABOR—ZHAVI OF f'03. S, ANDRFASEN, �SUI7F E., ESCONDI00, CAL I FORN I A WITH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER �:��--...'—:,A�'C.0 WOULD LIKE TO CONDUCT BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Arm THERF.FOPE WO WOULD ACQUIRE A LICENSE FOP, ONE YEAR — MAY797' THRU APRIL �,IVE.70 Olt THE MATURE OF MY BUSINESS IS SFLLIVG INDIVIDUALLY PRE-PACKAGED ICE CREAM AND CANDIES IN STREET VENDING ICE CRFAM TRUCKS, THE TRUCKS ARE SPECIALLY BUILT FOR SELLING ICE CREAM AsT) is EOUiPPFT)• WITH A COLD PLATE FREEZER WHICK t4FRIS IT GOES BELOW ZERO DFCRFFS, THIS KIND OF TRUCKS DO NOT NEED ANY DRY ICE WHATSOVFR APT) KEEPS THE ICE CREAM FRESH AMD IN THE RIGHT CONSISTFNCY, I PURCHASE ALL THE ICE CREAM FROM ONE OF THE LARGEST ICE CREAM MANUFACTURERS, DARIGOLD THEY MAKE ALL NECESSARY DELIVERY IM THE COLD PLATE FREEZERS, ATTACHED PLEASE FIND ALL THE NECESSARY PAPERS TO PROCESS MY APPLICATION, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLFASF FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME AT RESPECTFULLY YOURS, r RBSARIO GAROR—ZHAVI GOLDI ICE CREAM AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 PAGE_,�OF___ �__ MAY ?� nnn CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA I, ROSARIO GAROR-ZHAVI, HAVE NOT RFEN CONVICTFn OF ANY CRIME, MISDEAMEANORS, OR ANY VIOLATION OF ANY MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE WMATSOFVER, THIS WAS ISSUED IN RFOUFST OF THE CITY OF LAKF ELSINORE ON' MAY r', i �'�' IN THE CITY OF F.SCO!��IDO, CALIFORNIA. ROSARIO GA OR,-ZHAVI GOLDI ICE CREAM AGENDA n-EM PACE'M MAY CITY COUNCIL OF. CITY OF LAKE FLSINORF. LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ON1E OF MY ICE CREAM TRUCKS IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELS I NORE AND AS I UNDERSTAND FOR THIS, I NETT) TO GET A PHYSICIANS EXAM".I N I AT I ON AMD I N MY CASE I DO NOT NEED ONE BECAUSE I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE SELLING OF AMY ICE CREAM. FORM THE TRUCKS AND SECONDLY, I ONLY SELL ARE—PACKAGFD ICE CREAM FOR FRESHNESS AND THE FREEZER IS A COLD PLATE AN!D KEEPS IT VERY FRESH, THE ICE CREAM IS BOUGHT FROM ONE OF THE LAPGFST MANUFACTURER FOR NOVELTY ICE CREAM, DARIGOLD, I CAN! HAVE MY DPIVFRS PICTURES SENT FOR YOUR OWN RECORDS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF THIS IS ACCEPTABLE, THANK YOU, RESPECTFULLY YOURS, ROSARIO GAROR—ZHAVI GOLDI ICE CREAM AGENdED'h ITEN1 No. PACE��oF ". Z a • � 0 CD M CD � b = H Sr x z a et . o } v it m A m O 1 �J Gr D L, • w N 1J 0 b nj 2 Ol � Q - A O 0 G t w to 00 90 46 v ® " - 1 J00 AGENDA TEhpil N!0. S d� PAGE i�DEI i�_— r� -L U L ! U DATE OF SERVICE t LAKE ELSINORE NAME NS 49 -3672214 FAMILY MEDICAL CLINIC TODAY S CHARGES BALANCE FORWARD .�. Bradley G Grant,MXA,,DAL,F.A.U.P. Medical DlILCtor CASH 0 CHECK AMOUNT PAID T7037 Lzke Shore Dr.•]skc Elsinore CA 923304714/674.6971 BALANCE DUE �+toe•raure•a coot WME vzum •mm rs 7ELAL DNS= wKLY$$ a1a11 Om MOMIX IaTI toElrr 0iE 1•W 81:2 EKG ►tl LALREINA W44AL 111FU 11119a vm rm !lA m3Es l3aaP6TEwraiEE- MM0 Y61TUEDrrss NEW We LFTOz5C71 vn �, aE 6tOVlr slnl ri• IEIMs II la011gE t1 05 WFUEt:n 1Mn to 2-XW-7•SCM =13 11m ONETDJCH at1M =1 NBS ts11ED OW ft H001DR►DWMR Immm fM SCALP+u lWW EMCWTY 6AMJW000OY71 IkII PICEM►f7ElaE01[TE W15 fa 7IJNOIE7-ri1 11111 661 LF TO 2300 ♦ 1 uat aGtP1LA R TERMEDU'= NOW ST IA:1^Y.A StRP am Ow I 1240A-TS010 t11K tMA SUPPLIES •[A Olt$ 8!E0LI.DEA NT W 17 HECK WX)S FEE7 0►771EM 1 Lff 55NG f>sl WILL `I IATEWT EYTENX •a0 I6 UP TO mm T1♦1 tmlN I HICK TRAY Srglaal WIN WXNT U>WRF h,NgyE 111m f± PH YSrAL THERAPY 250M-7.5C11 UW 12N2 EAR TRAY Tltl E5M RCDPA7.CRf• wN T sm II! ARSKK PEEREPY 311.1t5 17111 •15 EYE TRAY TOES E"WICY CARE MOU 1.au AM 15 MNS Pus f21 00CAL TTALY qID Tv-m i1DSPf DkL vtsrTS MANP 1 AtpN 1rb0 017 LABORATORY tLgS Holm ADMr teal ex AJO 15"NS 1n11 .b CC.rt:ECrfKvc four LIB; am no CASTM 111vn11 larr LwrEC .xc oa toN Tu c r N ae12 wa BE%s7vmiga aMo nu DEMO-0,: 2 .� HOSP11.DGO W,,f Mb2 f212 EMS 1701a f715 B13PSY"fRQ?I •710 f2M X-RAY %WRYXSST 111E0 013 !CT/CALiPA7C5 auto 1.t0 cac MRS nu ABDOWN �L1TRASDUNO alb faa7 01014 ROL a45 KLS r •dllHttZAllONS s i tE1LCOCR!T astu 02M ANKLE DPr Icn,:t717 : SED ROTE Mlst n17 it c5►E OT 117c: SURGERY PROCEDURES Isar•CLLnIFE um f7a T Si1E tT KM i t:27 TR*GER PQIN" 2M10 fin Cii COTE BL000 MOW rm L5 9-M TOF1 C7171 1770 45-r—"IQ`. 1o1W fy2 EFCTppLyTES f2Oµ 1215 p{yrt WLIEyA E72E 1157 6RCJEMEM/1My,P;,^, 11W0 f101 HEIAOG:i: wn Ib1 GA'IG_E 1►.i CT07 f12: EF'7ROCAUTERY TwRm PANEL W71 fib 8-Bow 10711 018 _A;.L"4-,L.U/LL:.AT 1010 126 ML7NOSPOT OM FM WALJDFUT Tltn SM51.tE Boo-, 11100 P.P%4EAR MW 0222 fEMIF 1L Nt MR t'11 EXW"BENGN—G1 1t4 R1ES LPNE/LCG KM .2t0 -.1GER IE IM71 01E 1 1 E%C*04 Ml_!G- --,_:W 116 PRE1 Am-WE:E MM2 K/i -COT ALLEAGY 15150 117E I F0RFCh BOGY REM EAR am fat PFEW,ML FEW E mu Ra FORFAW REM«c;SK,I, 1,113 147 Fr wig rm NANC r sO t Ru A E Asszss 1fw/ nth F- MT31 f26/ St1EC1AL PROCEDURES 7:✓-SON WA1KAGf GFAW STAN RbS f75a 16J.ERJS 1Lt.D►E 7 a557 Lae J_REMNA ti�10 f175 9V 3' M111 f7)f K1EE GIASMOSIS IJST AIIXVA a P" 71 71t1 °SDVC r -tl: • T55M 1�S=S ER 1.1 1"1 pw1wroECr:is a JAC I Lm u1 tutu to& 22t tit i-*sifts 151 Mu *-;w GLKk1 112 IOU PC - M 61u LRTCNOA IIa 111" 111gEGY A IC.± I DERMA-ms a M2! XYft:RA 1E7E11.1 ■ MA P/ELbloW W MI 00NRSlCERXYTtS am fill 11B& tK bit DASMS 1E_"Ls • 2111 WPUIGLYMAK M 7111 POST 1QWMl75AL SYII YO C7i 1TRT1G0 us MA wtmwm tP 7tu De ■ Cu ar KMENS70N 32 i fL1 PgoSWM = MU YR4L M ul au y14D/W 11 11,U 0!T.r.1ENCRR£A a C51 MYPOGLYCEAA n b1I RASH Rt btl MTN61 141 4a1 ;EDEVK 37 =3 EnPOTIrraDiO • a1u *wm a ICU WOMICE-RES90N 115 5111 #ESTTOWN DEF,M C 127t &FACM CVkAfEN It I WA SW C FEUNLeu II T112 �Mt aTlatolru 1a /10 ELT7GE1 XC OWSTV 1111 27u kjckw M5 7M.a S OLADEII P.M 2t2 nul oil alEA57/G1'STC 0, In, FNCY PLMK! .tl V" LACEAEJ101, IN, M2 a7[flrS M MU OLFAML` IIl 7H 7 RLTGAM EWALIS5 1f T1117 LARYN(X!5 • Al!. 30mm 071.12C Ot 7i0 OE3T PAN M 711.s FTiAt�F1f i 1b1 I wDoms L7t507grR all low" fr6EK1'ERACJLL w MIl CRLU.M • M2! GISiTgEi(TEiQ75/D1v1.EA •IOU 1rftj4ia/F1FW)WYo91$ m 7a1 SfAA1ly}•OSAf}lA: 11u b QU GDL•T n 27U wJW1kf4o f m • lai staAKT*Kn1oc a Its ooalsT 1+5 a s7ze EAnA7E/tEP/s:rr In Tau tEURM • 1a12 11R11E pmam. n ou >a n seal 10613MM5 •t mu IEtFrA1T rr 7» mu TE D01Rt5 m nut mrr sstoN eR es+G a au FEY4,Ru a2 1M7 ores M zu TOESUM s c Coc w mu IEARFG Lass •E a 1.1H1Cq a$ W 7M 1 L1gRM071c • mr OOLrh M0 TM2 iEWES S&P-ix IVJ!tJ1PELY1C PAJl ■ RU LR • 1tu AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE WFORMATION; RETURN: Days Weeks Months1 hereby authorize the Undersigned Physician to release any in- forrmbon acquired in the course of my exarmnawn or tnmttnenL AIJTHOR17A710N TO PAY BENEFITS TO PHYSICIAN: DOCTOR I hereby authorize Payment direettyy to the undersigned Physician SIGNATURE PFtO'.^.pER•33-0071593 S of the Surgicai and/or Medical Benefits. AGENCA ITEM tNO.111TE f PAC E ' 1 0 F--- I (,-,�— r GOLDt I.C5 C-r�EI 1M '3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 PAGE_ . OF r 0 L F FAR5 WC., F 0 I N S F Pro Jersey ���s.�.v�:e,ses,:� is t E D PRODUCT., APRIL 26, 1990 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LC SOUTH VAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92-T71') TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ROSARIO L. GABOR IS OUR TENANT AT OUR PROPERTY AT 521 SOUTH ANDREASEN, ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA, MY KNO[NILEDGE AND ASSOCIATION OF HER. CHARACTER, IS BASED ON OUR RELATIONSHIP AS LESSEE AND LESSOR AT THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROPERTY. SHE HAS FOLLOWED OUR LEASE AGREEMENT AND HAS BEEN PAYING THE AGREED LEASE AMOUNT ON OR BEFORE THE AGREED DATE, IN DUE OF THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, I CRAIG KATCHEN CAN VOUCH FOR HER GOOD CHARACTER, THIS CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED IN REPUEST OF ROSARIO L. GABOR ON APRIL ?E, 19-00 IN ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA. SING Y, CRAIG KATCHEN JC PROVIEAR, INC / PROPERTY 04:TIER AGENDA ITE&I, NO. PAGE !3j OF J.C. PRO WEAR, INC. 621 South Andreasen Drive • Escondido, CA 92025 Phone (619) 743-4477 • FAX 619-743-4063 5.08.120 BUSINESS TAXES, LICENSES AND REGULATION 5.08.160 visions of this section shall be void and of 5.08.150 License preparation and issu- no effect. (Ord. 399 § H(part), 1961) ante. All licenses shall be prepared and issued by the Business License Officer upon 5.08.120 Special permit issuance. For payment of the sums required to be paid hereunder and the furnishing to the Busi- every business or occupation which requires ness License Officer by the applicant of a special permit from the City Manager, the such information in writing (verified if so issuance of said permit shall be based upon requested by the Officer) as is necessary to a finding by the City Manager or his desig- enable the Officer to fully determine whether nee pursuant to the following standards: Chapters 5.44 through 5.20 and other City A. The business or vocation does not ordinances are applicable in the particular present a substantial danger to the public; circumstances. (Amended 1987; Ord. 399 B. The business or occupation does not 1 (1), 1961) tend to increase health hazards within the City; C. The business or occupation does not 5.08.160 Peddler and solicitor licensing. tend to promote violations of the laws of A. Applicants for licenses to commence, the State or of the City. manage, engage in, maintain, conduct or (Ord. 657 § 2, 1982; Ord. 399 § H(part), carry on the business described in Sections 1961) 5.04.080 and 5.04.120 of this code, peddler or solicitor, must furnish to the Business License Department the following additional 5.08.130 Duplicates. The Business License information: Officer shall charge the fee established by 1. - Name and description of applicant; resolution for each duplicate license issued 2. Permanent home address and full under Chapters 5.04 through 5.20 in cases local address of applicant; where the original license has been lost or 3. Brief description of the nature of destroyed. (Amended 1987; Ord. 657 § 3, the business and the goods to be sold; 1982; Ord. 399 § H(part), 1961) 4. If employed, the name and address of the employer, together with credentials 5.08.140 Error in license--Effect. Any establishing the exact relationship; error made by the Business License Officer 5. The length of time for which the or any of his deputies in preparing a license, right to do business is desired; stating the kind of business, the location 6. The place where the goods or prop- thereof, the amount of the charge therefor, erty proposed to be sold or orders taken for or in determining the proper zone, shall not the sale thereof, are manufactured or pro- prejudice the collection by the City of the duced; where-such goods or products are amount actually due under Chapters 5.04 located at the time said application is filed; through 5.20 or any other ordinance, nor and the proposed method of delivery; enforcement of any regulations applicable 7. Photograph of applicant and pho- thereto, nor shall the issuance of a license tograph of any vehicle used in such ped- authorize the carrying on of any business, dling or solicitation taken within sixty days trade or occupation in any zone or location immediately prior to the date of filing applica- contrary to the provisions of the ordinances tion; picture of applicant shall be two inches of the City. (Amended 1987; Ord. 399 by two inches showing the head and shoul- $ H(part), 1961) ders of the applicant in a clear and distin- 507 5 AGENDA ITEM N0. PAGEI lOF 5.08.1¢0 . LAKE ELSINORE CODE 5.08.160 J guishing manner; by filing with the City Manager, within four- 8. The names of at least two reliable teen days after notice of the action com- property owners of the County, who will plained of has been mailed to such person's certify as to the applicant's good character last address, a written statement setting and business respectability, or, in lieu of the forth fully the grounds for appeal. The City names of references, such other available Manager or his designee shall set a time evidence as to the good character and busi- and place for a hearing on such appeal and ness responsibility of the applicant as will notice of hearing shall be given the appli- enable an investigator to properly evaluate cant by mailing such notice, postage pre- such character and business responsibility; paid, to his last known address at least ten 9. A statement as to whether or not days prior to the date set for hearing. The applicant has been convicted of any crime, decision and order of the Council on such misdemeanor or violation of any municipal appeal shall be subject to further adminis- ordinance, the nature of the offense and trative appeal to the City Council, by filing the punishment or penalty assessed there- with the City Clerk, within fourteen days for; and after notice of the decision and order of the 10. A statement by a reputable physi- City Manager is given. cian of the City dated not more than ten E. If, as a result of such investigation, days prior to submission of application, cer- the character and business responsibility of tifying the applicant to be free of conta- applicant are found to be satisfactory, the gious, infectious or communicable diseases. City's law enforcement agency shall endorse B. At the time of filing such application, on the application its approval, execute a the fee established by resolution shall be permit addressed to applicant for carrying paid to the Business License Officer to cover on the business applied for, and return said cost of investigation of the facts stated permit,together with the application,to the therein. Business License Officer, who shall, upon C. Upon receipt thereof the original ap- payment of the prescribed fee, deliver to plication shall be referred to the City's law applicant his permit and issue a license. enforcement agency, which shall cause such F. Each license so issued shall State upon investigation of applicant's business and the face thereof the following, in addition to moral character to be made as deemed any other pertinent information: necessary for the protection of the public 1. Name of licensee; good. If, as a result of such investigation, 2. Kind of business licensed thereby; applicant's character or business responsi- 3. Category and amount paid therefor; bility is found to be unsatisfactory, the City's 4. Location of such business; law enforcement agency shall endorse on 5. Date of expiration of license. such application such disapproval and the G. To each license there shall be attached reasons for such disapproval and return photographs of licensee and of any vehicle said application to the Business License used in the business, such photographs to Department which shall notify applicant be identical with those filed by licensee with that the application is disapproved and that his application pursuant to subsection A(?) no permit or license will be issued. of this section. D. Any person aggrieved by the action of H. No person shall sell, engage in sales, the City's law enforcement agency or the or offer to sell, display or offer for future Business License Department in the denial sale or display any goods, wares or mer- of a license shall have the right to appeal to chandise in any public street or public park- the City Manager. Such appeal shall be taken 50S AGENOQ ITEM N0. PAGE OF�� 5.08.170 BUSINESS TAXES,LICENSES AND REGULATION 5.08.230 way within the City, except upon waiver of 5.08.200 License payment--Delinquency City Council. penalties. For failure to pay a business (Amended 1987; Ord. 726, § 1, 1984; Ord. license fee when due, the City shall add the 657 § $ 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, 1982; Ord. 399 following penalties: § 1(7), 1961) A. Ten percent of the business license fee on the fifteenth day of the month follow- ing the due date; twenty-five percent on the 5.08.170 Records to be kept. The Busi- fifteenth day of the second month following ness License Department shall keep a re- the due date; and fifty percent on the fif- cord in which shall be entered all licenses teenth day of the third month after the due issued, the date thereof, to whom issued, date thereof; provided, that the amount of for what purpose, the location where the such penalties to be added shall in no event same is to be carried on, any transfers that exceed fifty percent of the amount of the occur, the time when the license expires, business license fee due; and the amount thereof. (Ord. 399 § J(part), B. Twenty-five percent on the fifteenth 1961) day of the second month following the due date; and C. Fifty percent on the fifteenth day of 5.08.180 Enforcement authority. The the third month after the due date thereof; City's law enforcement agency and all Code provided, that the amount of such penalties Enforcement Officers are appointed inspec- to be added shall in no event exceed fifty tors of licenses, to examine all places of percent of the amount of the business license business and persons liable to procure a fee due. license, to see that such licenses are taken (Ord. 690 § 1, 1984; Ord. 657 g 10, 1982: out, and to see that all regulatory provi- Ord. 399 § K(part), 1961) sions of Chapters 5.04 through 5.20 are enforced; and shall have the right to enter free of charge at any time any place of busi- ness for which a license is required by a license_ fee in Chapters 5.04 through 5.20 Chapters 5.04 through 5.20 to demand the is fixed at a daily rate, a part of the day exhibition of such license for current term shall be deemed a day and the full fee shall by any person engaged or employed in the be paid for a day or fraction thereof. (Ord. transaction of such business to ascertain 399 3 M(1), 1961) that the required licenses have been pro- cured; and to enforce and perform all of the 5.08.230 License payment--Annual and regulatory provisions of Chapters 5.04 other rates. through 5.20. (Ord. 657 § 9, 1982; Ord. 399 A. Unless otherwise provided by law, § J(part), 1961) business licenses shall be issued for a one- year period and the fees, as established by 5.08.190 License payment—When due. All resolution, shall be paid in full at the time licenses specified in Chapters 5.04 through of issuance. 5.20 shall be due and payable in advance in B. If an applicant for an annual busi- full and each person required to have a ness license intends to conduct a business license shall be liable for payment of the fee for six months or less, said applicant may for the full term. (Ord. 399 § K(part), 1961) be granted a business license for six months 509 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE_L� OF. ORDINANCE NO. 899 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPERS (CENTEX REAL ESTATE, LA LAGUNA ESTATES, MARINITA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, PREMIER HOMES, MEEKER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, TOMICH/JONES, TORN RANCH, AND GOLDEN STATE DEVELOPMENT) . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore held a duly noticed public hearing on a proposed Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and The West Lake Elsinore Developers on July 18, 1990, and found that the Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore held a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on July 24, 1990, and found that (1) the Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and the West Lake Elsinore Specific Plan and (2) the previously certified environmental impact report prepared for the West Lake Elsinore Assessment District is adequate and complete for the Development Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and the West Lake Elsinore Developers, as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto, is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized to execute the Development Agreement and, following such execution, the City Clerk shall cause a copy thereof to be recorded with the Riverside County Recorder within ten (10) days. Section 2 . 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. This Ordinance shall become effective upon the expiration of thirty (30) days from and after its passage. PASSED UPON FIRST READING this 24th day of July, 1990 upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 1990 upon the following roll call vote: AGENDA ITEM NO._�� PAGE OF Page 2 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTENTIONS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Gary M. Washburn, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) APPROVED AS O FORM AND LEGALITY: John R. Harper, i Attorney City of Lake( E sinore AGENDA ITEM NC,.%5-3 �' PAGE A G E N D A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 545 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1990 POLICY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: "Only those items filed with the Secretary u, UIE! Reueveloprrneiit Agency by Noon on Tuesday, prior to the following Tuesday meeting, will be considered by the Agency at said meeting." I. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters on the Consent Calendar are to be approved on one motion unless a $oardmember requests separate action on a specific item. A. Minutes RECOMMENDATION 1. July 24 , 1990 - Regular Redevelopment Approve. Agency Meeting. B. Warrant List - July 31, 1990. Ratify. C. Lake Management Levee - Payment Authorization. Approve Payment. D. Conditional Use Permit 90-5 - Lake Elsinore Concur with Christian Fellowship. Council Action. E. Tentative Tract Map 25831, Zone Change 90-11 Concur with and Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 - The Council Clurman Company. Action. F. Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 - Long Concur with Beach Equities. Council 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS Action. None. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS None. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT 7. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 . CLOSED SESSION 9. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 545 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1990 I. CALL TO ORDER The Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting was called to order by Chairman Buck at 10: 31 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT: BOARDMEMBERS: DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WASHBURN, WINKLER, BUCK ABSENT: BOARDMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: Executive Director Molendyk, Assistant City Manager Rogers, Legal Counsel Harper, Administrative Services Director Wood, Community Development Director Gunderman, Community Services Director Watenpaugh, Public Services Director Kirchner and Clerk of the Board Kasad. 3 . CONSENT CALENDAR Boardmember Winkler advised that he would be abstaining from vote on item D. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. A. The following Minutes were approved: I. July 10, 1990 - Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting. B. Received and ordered filed the Investment Report for June 30, 1990. C. Adopted Resolution No. RDA 90--5 adopting the 1990/91 Budget. D. Accepted Letter of Termination of the Arvida Exclusive Planning and Negotiating Agreement. E. Concur with Council Action to approve in concept the West Lake Elsinore Development Agreement. 4 . PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS A. East End Floodplain & B. Lake Perimeter Land Use Plan (Specific Plan) . Executive Director Molendyk advised that after review, Arvida has withdrawn from the project and it would now be recommended that the Agency take the lead and become the master developer for the floodplain. He introduced John Ballew to show the current proposal and explain the alternatives. AGENDA ITEM NO. • PAGE.,.OF� PAGE TWO - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 John Ballew, show the proposed Land Conceptual Use Maps and explained the variations which would be options at the discretion of the Agency. He detailed key points such as public access to the lake, and the best use for the area. He reminded the Board that this is conceptual only and nothing is set in concrete. Chairman Buck questioned the time line for this plan. Mr. Ballew advised that he would be meeting with property owners starting now. Executive Director Molendyk further advised that there would probably be a group meeting in the next 30 days. MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0 WITH WINKLER ABSTAINING TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO TAKE THE LEAD AND BECOME THE MASTER DEVELOPER IN THE FLOODPLAIN. MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO CONCEPTUALLY APPROVE THE LAKE PERIMETER LAND USE PLAN AND DIRECT STAFF TO TAKE IT THROUGH THE REGULAR PLANNING PROCESS. Mr. Ballew advised that copies of the plan will be offered to the property owners as soon as possible. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT None. 7. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS None. S . CLOSED SESSION None. 9 . ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY WASHBURN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AT 10: 54 P.M. WILLIAM S. BUCK, CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD CLERK OF THE BOARD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF.2m,-- LAKE ELSINORE-RDA PAGE NO. 1 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -01 S DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE,HER WARRANTCHECK DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN 0. DESCRIPTION F ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT N0. AMOUNT ALLEW & ASSOCIATES, INC . 1492 29479 . 77 * S . R . 1493 6924 . 35 * HE PLANNING ASSOCIATES 1494 4792 . 31 * R .J .M . DESIGN GROUP, INC . 1495 9047 . 62 * STOCKWELL & SINNEY 1496 134 . 51 * LBERT A . WEBS ASSOCIATES 1497 5154 . 58 EDIN ENTERPRISES 1498 1250 . 00 CHRISTENSEN & WALLACE 1499 4667 . 68 VALLEY PARTY EQUIPMENT RENTA 1500 484 . 00 I AGENDA ITEM NO • PAGE, OFT LAKE ELSINORE-RDA PAGE NO. 2 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -01 2 DATE 07/31 /90 WARRANT CHECK PAYEE WRITTEN HER DE3AIL OF DEAIIANDS PRESENTED DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV.NO., AMOUNT N0. AMOUNT KITTEN 61934 . 82 REPAID . 00 ACCRUED . 00 TOTAL 61934 . 82 RECAP BY FUND RE-PAID JRITTEN OPERATING FUND - AREA I 910 . 00 28619 . 74 OPERATING FUND - AREA II 920 . 00 10995 . 81 OPERATING FUND -- AREA 111930 . 00 22-319 . 27 AGENDA ITEM 0. �5' P CE OP_ - LAKE ELSINORE-RDA PAGE NO. 1 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER N0. 91 -01 1 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK ,HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN 0. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO, AMOUNT ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT CO . 1476 700 . 00 * BANK OF AMERICA, NT&SA 1477 166654 . 34 * WILLIAM S . BUCK 1478 60 . 00 * CALIFORNIA DEPT . OF FISH 01432 270 . 00 * FRED DOMINGUEZ 1479 60 . 00 * ELSINORE OFFICE PRODUCTS 01460 12 . 81 * ELSINORE VALLEY COMMUNITY DE 1480 4000 . 00 * FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 1481 83 . 89 * FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 01461 4348 . 90 * FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 01462 3341 . 58 * HARPER & BURNS 01470 7500 . 00 * 1 . B . M . 1473 17691 . 69 * LAKE ELSINORE TRAVEL SERVICE 01465 408 . 00 * PETER J . LEHR 1482 3000 . 00 * PETER J . LEHR 01431 3000 . 00 * SECURITY PACIFIC NAT 'L BANK 01458 23 . 88 * SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL 01472 40000 . 00 * ILL STARKEY 1483 60 . 00 * STOCKWELL & BINNEY 01457 171 . 79 * USSELL TOURVILLE CONSTRUCTI 1484 83576 . 02 * ARY WASHBURN 1485 60 . 00 * JIM WINKLER 1486 60 . 00 * 1 LAKE ELSINORE-RDA PAGE NO. 2 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -011 DATE 07/31 /90 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK IER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT AY MOOD 1463 29 . 00 * CHARCHOL/HARTMAN & ASSOC . 1487 487 . 36 * CHARCHOL/HARTMAN & ASSOC . 01464 69 . 09 * HRISTENSEN & WALLACE 1488 3750 . 00 * ONES HALL HILL & WHIT£ D1471 33082 . 00 * IRST CALIFORNIA CAPITAL D1469 55000 . 00 * URKE WILLIAMS SORENSEN 4 GA 1468 5076 . 50 * S . PAT BOWLER, LAFCO 1459 12 . 00 * J£NSEN & DOYLE D1466 1452 . 00 * THE BANK OF NEW PORK TRYST C D1467 1146 . 37 * AGENDA tEm NO PA OF�---_"e LAKE ELSINORE-RDA PAGE NO. 3 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 91 -01 1 DATE 07/31 /9 0 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK .HER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'O INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT RITTEN 2622551 . 61 REPAID 172635 . 61 ACCRUED . 00 TOTAL 435187 . 22 RECAP BY FUND RE-PAID JRITTEN OPERATING FUND - AREA I 910 152583 . 71 67474 . 67 OPERATING FUND - AREA II 920 8525 . 94 169365 . 63 OPERATING FUND - AREA III930 11525 . 96 5711 . 31 ACEN A ITEM 0. . _ GE OF - REPORT TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: AUGUST 14, 1990 SUBJECT: MANAGEMENT LEVEE :7 PREPARED BY: fir' APPROVED BY: C. Ray Wood, Admin trative Ron Mo endyk, Services Director City Manager BACKGROUND: The Agency has, by previous commitment, participated in the cost of redesign of the Levee as related to the "M-1" plan. the expenditure of Agency funds to date has been $250, 000. E.V.M.W.D. has presented invoices totaling $692, 790 and requested payment of the difference of $442 ,790. We requested backup data to support the District's request. Upon receipt and review of the support data, we determined $602 , 777. 43 to be acceptably supported, making the remainder $352, 777 .43 . This has been discussed with E.V.M.W.D. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of paying the remainder is $352 ,777 .43 for Agency contribution to the Lake Management Project. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the payment to E.V.M.W.D. of $352, 777. 43 , to be charged to the Lake Management Project. AGENDA ITEM NO. . C. PACE��pE 33751 Mission Trail 2:":= P.O.Box 3000 Lake Elsinore,CA 92330 (714)674-3146 Elsinore Valley Municipal Wafer District Fax.(714)674-9872 City of Lake Elsinore Date: July 17, 1990 Redevelopment Agency 130 N. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 Invoice No: 7283 Attention: Ron Molendyk Terms: Net 10 Days City Manager Engineering re-design services for the Lake Management Project (per agreement between Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the City of Lake Elsinore/Redevelopment Agency dated May 9, 1989) . Please consider this as an invoice in the amount of $352 ,777 .43 . District Costs for redesigning project $692 ,790.75 Less: Paid to Date 250, 000. 00 City Share of costs to be determined 90, 013 . 32 340, 013 . 32 Redesign Project Due from City $352 ,777 .43 CITY of LAKE ELSINORE RECEIVED JUL 18194 FINANCE DEP& BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Div. #1,Charles E.Bryant,Vice-President Div.#2, Donald E.Ash Div.#3, Kenneth Stoller Div.#4,Gary F.Kelley,Secretary-Treasurer Div. #5,Nancy Shafer, President AGEUDA ITEM NO. •`' PAGES_0�_---- OFFICIAL FILE COPY CHRONO FILE 33751 Mission TrTrailX REVIEWER INITIALDATE 1 , � P O Box 1000 Lake Elsinore. CA 9 (Ira) 674 3146 SENIOR INS. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Fax. (7 14)674 987� PLANNING DIST.ENGR. FIN.ba ASST,GM LJdQVE FINAL.PROCESSING —sa To: Finance Director July 17, 1990 Through: General Manager From: Special Projects Engineer Subject: Cost of Project Re-Design, Invoice for ity of Lake Elsinore, Lake Elsinore Management Project - Paragraph 2b of the contract between EVMWD and the City of Lake Elsinore/Redevelopment Agency dated May 9. 1989, states in pertinent part the following: "2, b. From time-to-tune, as requested by EVMWD, CLE/RDA shall provide additional funds in excess of $250.000. with prior approval for the purpose of defraying expenses incurred by it in connection with the implementation of Project modifications requested by CLE/RDA. A tabulation of the costs of re-designing the Project is enclosed. This spreadsheet and the backup material consisting of the actual Black & Veatch invoices have been reviewed by staff at the City of Lake Elsinore. Some of the entries itemized in the spreadsheet are undisputed by the City; the City requires additional support and justification for other entries. The entries which are undisputed by the City are indicated by the check mark. The total value of the undisputed entries is $602.777.43. The City has already paid $250,000. leaving a balance of $352.777.43. Please prepare and transmit an invoice to the City of Lake Elsinore in the amount of $352,777.43 as an additional progress payment of the costs of redesigning the Lake Elsinore Management Project to accommodate modifications desired by the City. Copies of the task orders issued to Black & Veatch by SAWPA for re-design of the levee and copies of the actual invoices have been provided to the City earlier under separate cover. Please prepare a letter of transmittal to the City providing the above information; alternatively, you may provide a copy of this memorandum with the invoice. BOARD OF DIRECTORS: D1v at, Charles E. Bryant. Vice-President Div. a2, Donald E.Ash Div. a3, Kenneth Stoller Div. #4.Gary F. Kelley, Secretary-Treasurer Dw. a5. Nancy Shafer. President AGENDA ITEM NO. C PACE OE i LAKE ELSINORE MANAGEMENT PROJECT RE-DESIGN OF THE PROJECT INVOICES Last revision: March 23, 1990 @ 16:56:42 SUMMARY AMOUNT TOTAL INVOICES 692,790.75 PAID TO DATE 250,000.00 PAYABLE $ 442,790.75 DETAIL FIRM DATE AMOUNT ,K BLACK & VEATCH 12/19/88 1 ,067.36 X BLACK & VEATCH 01 /25/89 1,877.70 X BLACK& VEATCH 02/17/89 6,625.17 x SHAEFER-DIXON 03/10/89 19,029.45 X BLACK & VEATCH 03/1 0/89 8,278.46 BLACK& VEATCH 03/15/89 53,865.51 7 JW APPLEGATE 03/24/89 3,790.00 > SHAEFER-DIXON 04/07/89 30,295.85 x BLACK & VEATCH �-Ar�s p�w` fy� 04/1 8189 6,691.40 BLACK& VEATCH 04/20/89 75,692.76 SHAEFER-DIXON 0 5/0 5/8 9 8,974.25 X BLACK & VEATCH 05/08/89 2,790.76 BLACK& VEATCH 06/01 /89 92,790.98 LACK & VEATCH 06/22/89 42,243.15 BLACK & VEATCH 08/1 1 /89 597.92 BLACK & VEATCH 1 0/1 0/89 46,546.57 BLACK & VEATCH 1 0/20/89 104,970.99 BLACK& VEATCH 1 1 /29/89 28,583.67 BLACK & VEATCH 01 /1 9/90 93,840.53 BLACK & VEATCH 02/1 3/90 64,238.27 A 'r� G, '• ,/ S�L.JF /• /N/ IV 7 a. 7J' AGENDA ITEM 0. + PAGE OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14 1990 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 90-5: Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship; an appeal of Planning Commission denial of a request for a _ Conditional Use Permit to allow a church in an existing light industrial zoned building. PREPARED BY.- Mark Rhoades APPROVED BY: Mark Rhoades ` Dave JG "der&an_� Planning Consulta Comm. Dir. APPROVED BY: 1"LL Ron M endyk City Manager BACKGROUND At its meeting of August 1, 1990, the Planning Commission denied this request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a church facility in a light industrial zoned district. (staff report attached) . Planning Commission discussed the intent of the limited manufacturing district and indicated that they did not find a church compatible with the limited industrial zoning designation. DISCUSSION The intent of the "M-1" district is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan for certain categories of light industrial uses that are free of nuisance or hazardous characteristics and to protect these areas from intrusion by residential, commercial, and other inharmonious uses. PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERNS After review of the application and the public hearing, the Planning Commission cited the following concerns: 1. Necessity to protect and segregate industrial uses which possess objectional characteristics including dust, odor, noise, and hours of operations from less intensive uses including office, retail, residential, and public meeting facilities. 2. Avoid a precedent of allowing non-industrial land uses in industrial zoned districts. This type of land use could prevent future industries from locating in areas where non-industrial uses are located. 3 . The characteristics of industrial land uses are incompatible with residential and commercial uses. These less intense uses must be protected from the objectional qualities of an industrial use. AGENDA ITEM N0._3�_@� ! r Page 2 August 14, 1990 Subject: CUP 90-5 RECOMMENDATION it is recommended that City Council concur with the Planning Commission and that City Council deny this appeal for Conditional Use Permit 90-5 to allow a church in the M-1 Light Industrial zoned area. It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency concur with City Council action. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of is setting, is not in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use may be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. 3. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features required by this Title. 4. That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. AGENDA ITEM NO. - 1409 PAGE CF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 25831� Zone Change 90-11 and Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2: The Clurman Company; a request to approve Tentative Tract Ma 25831 for 195 lots, amend the Ramsgate Specific Plan to include this tract and a Zone Change from Rural Residential to Specific Plan. PREPARED BY: Ron Smothers APPROVED BY: Ron Smothers tDave G derman Planning Consultan m, v. Dir.APPROVED BY: " Ron Mo ndyk City Manager BACKGROUND This fifty (50) acre site is located south of Highway 74 along Trellis Lane. Is is surrounded on three sides by the Ramsgate Specific Plan area. The purpose of these applications is to approve the Tentative Tract Map and add the area to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. This will subject this tract to the development guidelines and standards of the Specific Plan. This Tract has been integrated with the Ramsgate tracts with respect to circulation, open spaces and grading. In fact two lots in this tract will be used to create an improved lot pattern in the adjacent Ramsgate Tentative Tract Map 25478 . During the review period this project was revised to increase the minimum lot size and add open space and landscape amenities. At the July 18 , 1990 Planning Commission hearing the developer was asked to modify the plans to bring the minimum lot size up to 6, 000 square feet. In addition the Planning Commission asked for improvement in the access to homeowner association maintained open space areas. At the August 1, 1990 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed a plan, modified as requested, and recommended approval of these applications subject to the Conditions of Approval. DISCUSSION Development of this Tentative Tract Map under the guidelines of the Ramsgate Specific Plan is an opportunity to improve the manner in which this project becomes part of this neighborhood. This project is located such that it is very dependent upon the development of the surrounding Ramsgate tracts. Access will otherwise be a very costly improvement, so it is unlikely this site will develop before the Ramsgate projects. The City Council in reviewing these applications is also being asked to acknowledge the completion of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by its adoption. Because this projer-t AGENDA ITEMI NO. PAGE-Or� Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Specific Plan 89--1 Amendment No. 2 Zone Change 90-11 required on-site studies and State 30 day review, the Planning Commission actions occurred prior to the completion of that review period. The only comments received regarding this project were from Cal Trans, asking that the City begin making these types of development responsible for future freeway and circulation system improvements. The Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval for this tract address this issue. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration 90-6 and approve Tentative Tract Map 25831, Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 and adopt Ordinance No. and approve Zone Change 90-11 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS - Tentative Tract Map 25831 1 . A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to address the development of this project and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to address environmental considerations to the same degree as the Ramsgate Specific Plan tracts . 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified impacts and conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies . 3 . This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Ramsgate Specific Plan. r 4 . The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. FINDINGS = Rams ate S ems, cific Plan 69-1; Amendment No. 2 1. This request and its environmental impacts associated with the development of the site as allowed under the General Plan, were addressed with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. This process makes the proposed project (Tentative Tract Map 25831) subject to the Ramsgate Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, where applicable in eliminating or substantially lessening the effects of impacts. 2 . The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified meets the Specific Plan criteria for content and systematic implementation of the General Plan established by Section 65450 of the California Government Code and Section 17 .99 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3 . Granting of the requested Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will permit reasonable development of the property consistent with its constraints and compatible with adjacent properties and proposed development. 4 . The Second Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan as modified will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the project area, nor AGENDA ITEM N0. IL •. PA,r_E 2-- OF Page 3 August 14, 1990 Subject: Tentative Tract Map 25831 Specific Plan 89-1 Amendment No. 2 Zone Change 90-11 will it be injurious to the property or improvements in that area or the city as a whole, based upon the provisions of the Plan, mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS _ Zone Change 20-11 1. This project is consistent with the Goals, Policies and Objectives of the General Plan. 2 . This request is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance governing Specific Plans. 3 . This request and its associated project will not have a significant impact on the environment. AGENDA ITEM NO-.63-'' REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: August 14 , 1990 SUBJECT: Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25538 ; Long Beach Equities: a request to create four 4parcels, where currently nine (9) exist. PREPARED BY: Ron Smothers APPROVED BY: Ron Smothers Dave Gu rman Planning Consult t Comm. . Dir. APPROVED BY: �L Ron MVndyk City Manager BACKGROUND This site is part of the area within the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan and has recently been annexed to the City of Lake Elsinore. The land uses planned for this site are Commercial/Specific Plan (west of Interstate 15) , open space, highway commercial and multi-family residential. This parcel map implements the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan by consolidating the existing property and parceling the site for conveyance, the only purpose for this parcel map. On July 18 , 1990, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25538 . Their action recommended approval with conditions, two of which the Commission added language to clarify dedication requirements and the purpose of Condition No. 8 having to do with access to an adjacent property. DISCUSSION Financial Parcel Maps are limited in their use, that of accommodating conveyance of land as opposed to prescribing development and improvement features. As such, this kind of parcel map is typically not subject to conditions of approval . The applicant, while not opposed to the conditions, has expressed concern for conditions that establish requirements prior to preparation of plans for the individual sites. The Planning Commission and staff believe the conditions give the developer flexibility in planning the use of these parcels. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt Negative Declaration 90-10 and approve Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25.538 based on the Findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. ENDINGS 1. A Negative Declaration has been prepared to acknowledge that environmental impacts have been addressed in the EIR for the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan (SCN 88090517) . 2 . Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. AGENDA ITEM NO.. -J F Page 2 August 14 , 1990 Subject: Tentative Financial Parcel Map 25638 3. This project, as approved, complies with the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. 4. The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. AGENDA ITEM NO.-3 PAGE OF