5

Riverside County Planning Commission
August 22, 2012

Page 2
Citizens United for Resources and The Environment, Inc. ~ 2873 Rumsey Drive, Riverside, CA 92506 (951) 784-7628 www.curegroup.org
projected demand on average by 33,238 acre-feet. Appendix H,
ElR at 4.9-21, 22; Appen. H.
The ElR incorrectly assumes that the Project will have no
significant impact on water supplies due to reduced residential
and commercial water use. This analysis fails to account for the
significant increase in irrigation resulting from mandatory and
incentivized agriculture as a condition of residential land use on
the same property for WC zoned land. For example, 75% of
implementing projects on sites zones WC-W must be planted
with vineyards. SWAP 1.3; ElR at 4.2-11.
ln addition, the studies evaluated and referenced in Appendix H
include some dated materials from nearly a decade ago. A
proper assessment of the impact to water supply requires
updated and current data. Since the General Plan serves as the
foundation for all future development, ensuring that adequate
water is available should be addressed at the earliest time from
a CEQA perspective.
2. lmpact to Water Quality based on lncreased Nitrate Concentrations.
The ElR acknowledges that leaching of nitrate to groundwater
can be a threat to public health but fails to identify how this will
be mitigated to insignificance. ElR at 4.9.19. Recent studies
from the University of California, Davis outline best
management techniques that can be adopted to reduce
increased nitrate loads.
To protect against these long-term impacts to water quality,
management measures and recommended practices for
reducing nitrate to groundwater from crop operations should be
analyzed and implemented. Further, any infrastructure
development necessary for water supply should include
recycled water with sufficient treatment to eliminate additional
nitrates (such as reverse osmosis). The cost of such treatment
is not included in the ElR analysis.
3. lmpact of lncreased Labor Force.
The ElR and Project Plan did not address the availability of low
income or worker housing to accommodate the increased labor
force traditionally drawn to low pay agricultural or hospitability
Riverside County Planning Commission
August 22, 2012
Page 3
Citizens United for Resources and The Environment, Inc. ~ 2873 Rumsey Drive, Riverside, CA 92506 (951) 784-7628 www.curegroup.org
jobs. Workers must have affordable, accessible housing;
whether it is provided by employers or not. ln the absence of
policies designed to accommodate a greater labor force, labor
camps or tent cities may result. This was the case in Duroville
in the east Coachella Valley. We urge the Planning
Commission to contact the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments to draw upon their analysis and recommendation
for housing migrant labor.
The ElR did not take these environmental justice issues into
consideration For example, the Proposed Wine Country
Zoning allows for farm employee housing after a conditional
use permit ("CUP) is obtained. However, this plan depends on
the willingness of farm owners to proactively build housing that
rarely occurs.
CURE requests that the impact of increased labor be
considered and analyzed, and that the County draw upon
experiences in other areas such as Coachella Valley for
militating against the impacts of increased migrant workers in a
particular area.
As proposed, the Community Plan would result in significant adverse
environmental, social and health impacts that have not been adequately
identified, assessed or mitigated in the Environmental lmpact Report. CURE
requests that the County evaluate these impacts in more detail prior to
making a final environmental determination or proceeding with the Project
Plan.
Respectfully yours,
Nicole S. Martin
ClTlZENS UNlTED FOR RESOURCES AND
THE ENVlRONMENT, lNC.
Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship
Religious Land Use & Institutionalized
Persons Act
(RLUIPA)
From: Joseph Kraatz [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 5:41 PM
To: Info Faith-Freedom
Subject: churches in wine country

There is absolutely no reason for churches in the wine
country. Forcing your religious beliefs on the pristine
wine country is disgusting. You have plenty of places to
build churches in Temecula. The wine country doesn't
need all your traffic. Go find someplace else to build
your church. Joe, Oceanside

RLUIPA
UNANUMOUSLY PASSED BY THE U.S. CONGRESS

RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND ASSEMBLIES
MUST BE TREATED ON EQUAL TERMS TO NON
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND ASSEMBLIES
42 USC 2000cc
LEONESS CELLARS WEDDING
COST $15,000.00
PONTE FAMILY ESTATE
COST $13,500.00
CALLAWAY VINEYARD & WINERY
COST $16,200.00
MOUNT PALOMAR WINERY
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION'S ANNUAL SUMMER EVENT
MISSION
SITV's mission is to build and maintain a classical
theatrical company of such excellence that it shall
overflow its local boundaries, thus creating a
renowned artistic center in the Temecula Valley;
strives to develop and preserve in our citizenry a
life-long need to cherish the arts; believes in
constantly seeking to present work of the highest
quality and in offering company members,
audiences and students the richest possible
learning experiences.
SHAKESPEARE IN THE VINES
MOUNT PALOMAR WINERY
MONTE DE ORO WINERY & VINEYARDS
LONGSHADOW RANCH WINERY
VARIETY OF ASSEMBLIES
MAURICE CARRIE VINEYARD &
WINERY
WILSON CREEK WINERY & VINEYARDS
THINGS TO REMEMBER
Equal Treatment/Equal Terms
Development and Design
Standards Control Aesthetics
Setbacks Limit Any Potential for
Conflicts
Waiver of Objections to ABC
Licenses
Impact of Incompatible Uses on Wine Country Plan
Federal State County
WINEGROWERS
Federal: TTB (Alc. & Tobacco Tax & Trade
Bureau)
Permits, Labeling & Excise Taxes

State:
Licensing, Marketing and Restrictions

County:
Zoning Restrictions
This division is for the protection of the
safety, welfare, health, peace, and morals of
the people of the State to promote
temperance in the use and consumption of
alcoholic beverages. It involves in the highest
degree the economic, social, and moral well-
being and the safety of the State and of all its
people. All provisions of this division shall be
liberally construed for the accomplishment of
these purposes.
WINEGROWERS
1. Schools
2. Churches
RETAIL LICENSEE
1. Schools
2. Hospitals
3. Public playgrounds
4. Nonprofit Youth
Facilities
5. Churches

Thou shall not be too close to
Location Restrictions
(d) The department may, if it shall
determine for good cause that the
granting of any such privilege would be
contrary to public welfare or morals,
deny the right to exercise any on-sale
privilege which is within 200 feet of a
school or church...
TYPE 20 LICENSE
Small & Virtual Wineries,
Wineries Just Starting or
Selling 3
rd
Party Wine.

Examples:
Wilson Creek (now 02)
Mapes Cellars
Cowper Family Vineyards &
Wine
Thornton Winery
TYPE 42, 47, 67 LICENSE
Hotels, Restaurants with
Full Bar, Bed & Breakfasts,
etc.

Examples:
Ponte Vineyard Inn (47)
Inn & Europa Village (67)
(a) The Department may refuse the issuance
of any retail license for premises located
within the immediate vicinity of churches
and hospitals.

400 Feet within immediate vicinity
Reimel v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd.
(App. 1 Dist. 1967) 255 Cal.App.2d 40

(b) refuse the issuance located
within at least 600 feet of schools and
public playgrounds or nonprofit youth
facilities, including, but not limited to,
facilities serving Girl Scouts, Boy
Scouts, or Campfire Girls.
200
Churches
Schools
400
Hospitals
Churches
600
Schools
Youth Facilities
Playgrounds

The county agricultural commissioner
may apply Section 11503 to the
agricultural use of any pesticide for
agricultural production within one-
quarter mile of a school with respect to
the timing, notification, and method of
application.

no foliar applications of pesticides
are allowed within mile and no
aircraft applications of pesticides
are allowed within mile of a
school in session.

Riv. County. Ag Comm. Rule
VINEYARDS
EVENING - 11 AM
SCHOOLS
7 AM - 3 PM
Ag. Spraying

Mile =
125 Acres

Mile =
502 Acres

Federal Law Allows Restrictions
RLUIPA
Substantial Burden Clause
No individualized assessments.
Prohibition is only within Plan area.
Less than 1/2% of County affected.
Equal Protection Clause
Regulatory Purpose must be legitimate
Issuance of Liquor Licenses (Centro Familiar v. City of
Yuma)
Protection of Agriculture (Williamson Act)

Incidental commercial uses, such as
restaurants, delicatessens, hotels, resorts,
and special occasion facilities, shall be
authorized only when they are secondary,
and directly related to, winery operations as
defined in the following sections. [ADD] All
uses which would impair issuance of liquor
licenses under California law or agricultural
cultivation shall be prohibited.
PublicTestimonyforWineCountryCommunityPlan
ReceivedbetweenAugust21,2012(4:00PM)September24,2012(12:00PM)
PolicyRelatedComments
DateReceived From Affiliation
SupportforCalvaryChurch/PlacesofreligiousworshipintheCommunityPlan
8/21/2012 AllysonSmith
8/21/2012 DrucillaMartin
8/21/2012 JoanPernicano
8/21/2012 Supt.JamesE.Mason,M.A ImaniTempleofTemeculaChurchof
GodofChrist
8/21/2012 Patrick&SherrieNalty
8/21/2012 SophiaNalty
8/21/2012 StephenE.Sioco
8/21/2012 TedLeavenworth
8/22/2012 BeverlyHatch
8/22/2012 CarolJones
8/22/2012 ClareMcGrew
8/22/2012 MelissaLandis,LandisFamily Resident
8/22/2012 RachelStevens
8/22/2012 SimonMelendres,Pastor TemploRocaFirme
8/23/2012 CynthiaKates
8/23/2012 ConnieH.
8/23/2012 IvetteCalhoun
8/23/2012 JanetWilber
8/23/2012 SusanEyerAnderson,D.V.M.
8/29/2012 Coppergirls
9/19/2012 ValBrowne
9/22/2012 ScottandLorieHolman
9/22/2012 KeithStill
8/21/12
9/19/12
Additional57signed petitions,emails,and
letters
ResidentsandCalvaryChurch
Members
SupportfortheproposedCommunityPlanandpreservingareafromincompatibleuses
8/21/12 CynthiaMcCoy Resident
8/21/12 MeriRosaPyrce Resident
8/21/12 JohnFalkstein
8/22/12 ChuckBrood
8/22/12 JonMcPherson MasterWinemaker,SouthCoast
Winery
8/22/12 SusanneandTomCampbell PropertyOwner
9/04/12 DavidBarnes,alsorequestadditional
languageforotheragricultureuses
CrowsPassFarm
9/17/12 ChuckandSallyWing Resident

9/20/12 RebeccaCrook MemberofRCHA
9/20/12 ChuckTobin VDCAdvisoryCommitteeMember
9/22/12 ElinMotherhead Equestrian/RidingClubMember
DevelopmentStandards
8/23/12,
9/18/12
LaurieStaude Resident
BoundaryModificationComments
DateReceived From Request
8/20/12 MicheleAStaples,JacksonDeMarcoTidus
&Peckenpaugh,ALawCorporation
representingtheCoronaFamilyLimited
Partnership
EstateDensityResidentialWinery
OverlayorexclusionfromCommunity
Plan
8/21/12 AndrewRauchrepresentingFiroozFamily ExclusionfromtheCommunityPlan
Boundary
8/21/12 RichardF.Jones,Jr ExclusionfromtheCommunityPlan
Boundaryandsuggestedrevisionsto
developmentstandard
1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 7:14 AM
To: Mehta-Cooper, Mitra; Nanthavongdouangsy, Phayvanh
Subject: FW: Overturn the ban against churches and allow Calvary Chapel to expand
From: Allyson Smith [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 9:11 PM
To: Stark, Mary; Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion
Subject: Overturn the ban against churches and allow Calvary Chapel to expand

Dear Ms. Mary Stark and Riverside County Supervisors,

Please overturn the ban against churches in Riverside County and allow Calvary Chapel to expand. In expanding
Temecula Wine Country from 7,000 acres to over 18,990 acres, you certainly have room for many houses of worship. It is
entirely unfair, unAmerican, and prejudicial keep churches out of the wine country. Please do what is right and fair, and
uphold religious freedom by including churches in Temecula Wine Country.

If you do not, then I will avoid coming to the area in the future. I was just there in May but unaware of the ban. Now that I
am aware of it, if it continues to stand, I refuse to patronize any Temecula Wine Country vintners.

Sincerely,

Allyson Smith
El Cajon, CA
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW:
From: Drucilla Martin/Vendegna [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject:

Please, think hard concerning this ruling.... We must not forget our freedoms in this great nation.... Let them
build their house of worship!!

dru
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Religious Freedom
From: J oan Pernicano [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Religious Freedom

Thisbanisunconstitutional.ThisisNOTwhatourfoundingfatherswerethinkingaboutwhentheywanted
separationofchurchandstate.
ItwastoprotectchurchesFROMthestateNOTtheotherwayaround.IagreewithCCBF and Supervisor J eff
Stone when he stated in a letter written on J anuary 25, 2010,
houses of worship and schools are the backbone of any community. And I support churches locating in the
wine country and in fact, in any zone,
and will do everything in my power to see that this is overturned.
You have awakened the sleeping giant and we are not going to allow our religious freedom to be trampled on
by godless bureaucrats who have forgotten how they got into positions of power.
As Martin Luther King so famously said, we shall overcome and well start by throwing the bums out!
Every seat IS the peoples seat.
JoanPernicano
SanDiego,CA
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Proposed Wine Country Plan
From: PS Nalty [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Cc: Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion
Subject: Proposed Wine Country Plan

To: The Planning Commissioners of Riverside County
We understand that houses of worship and private schools are not included in the new Wine Country
Plan. We respectfully request that you add religious institutions and private schools to this plan.

Sincerely,

Patrick & Sherrie Nalty

31885 Silkvine Dr
Winchester CA 92596
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Proposed Wine Country Plan
From: Sophia Nalty [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Cc: Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion
Subject: Proposed Wine Country Plan

I understand that houses of worship and private schools are not included in the new
Wine Country
Plan. I respectfully request that you add religious institutions and private schools to this
plan.

Sincerely,

Sophia Nalty

31885 Silkvine Dr
Winchester CA 92596
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: New Wine Country Plan
From: rizty [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: New Wine Country Plan

Please include religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country Plan.

Thank you for your attention.

Stephen E. Sioco
34706 Foxberry Road
Winchester, CA 92596

--

" He has shown you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justly, To love
mercy, And to walk humbly with your God?"
Micah 6:8
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: New Wine Country plan
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 5:07 AM
To: Stark, Mary
Subject: New Wine Country plan

Please include religious institutions and private schools in the new Wine Country plan. This will help the area prosper
economically as well as spiritually and culturally.

Beverly Hatch

1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: New Wine Country Plan
From: Ted Leavenworth [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: New Wine Country Plan

Attention Planning Commission:

Please include religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country Plan.

Respectfully,
Ted Leavenworth - South Temecula Resident
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Wine Country Freedom
From: Carol J ones [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:02 PM
To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Wine Country Freedom

Mr. Stark,

I saw this article on Air1.com and wonder - since I live in Southeast Texas, does my support count in
California?

Also, I am a Christain and even so, I am ashamed at how many other Christians treat people and respond to non
Christian circumstances. It is sad to think what Christians are doing to cause so many non Christians to despise
us. It's no wonder they don't want us around. We most certainly do not need to support things which are against
God, but we do not need to condemn either- that is not our place, and it pushes people away from God rather
than draw them near. I think this is just as an important issue to address as not being aloud to build Church
buildings and have house worship and private schools, do you agree?
Sincerely,
Carol Jones
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: please allow religious institutions and private schools in Temecula's winecountry.
From: Clare McGrew [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: please allow religious institutions and private schools in Temecula's winecountry.
Iamafraidofwhatinterestsareatplayhere.EnoughisenoughofantiChristianity.Ofcoursethewinecountrywasafter
thechurches.Whybanchurches,wherecommunitybecomesstrongandhealthyandchildrenlearnmorality.
PleaseThankyouClareMcGrew
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Temecula Wine Country "Community" Plan
From: Melissa Landis [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Temecula Wine Country "Community" Plan

Dear Riverside County Planning Commission,
I am writing you to ask that you would please include religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine
Country Plan.
I am a resident of wine country, a mother of two boys, and PTA President at my youngest son's elementary
school. My husband is a firefighter. My children attend the youth group and children ministries at Calvary
Chapel Bible Fellowship. My husband and I attend services at Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship twice per week
and I attend a women's bible study once per week. As you can see, as residents of wine country, our house of
worship is an integral part of our family.
Our church is teaching us to be the kind of citizens that God would want us to be as we are taught from the
Bible each time we attend any type of service at Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship. I would think that a
community, as a whole, is better when you have citizens that are God fearing people residing in them. The
same citizens who faithfully pay their taxes, keep their property in compliance with all laws, and, in general,
abide by the laws set forth within the community. As a resident of this community, we deserve to have places
of worship included as they represent the institutions that are a vital to any true "community".
I ask again, that you would please include religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country
Plan.
Sincerely,
The Landis Family
Melissa Landis
36275 Alta Mesa Court
Temecula, CA 92592
(951) 302-8559
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Churches and religious freedom
OriginalMessage
From:RachelStevens[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent:Wednesday,August22,20128:38AM
To:Stark,Mary
Subject:Churchesandreligiousfreedom
Goodmorning,
Mayyoubetouchedthismorningatthehearinginarealway.Ipraythatyouwillrealize
theimportanceofchurchesinthecommunityandlifttheban.Morethanonegroupofpeople
shouldhaveasayaboutthecommunityinwhichtheylive.IstandwithTheBarnchurchAnd
supportreligiousfreedomespeciallyinWinecountry.
Best,
Rachel
SentfrommyiPhone
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: everyone likes wine
OriginalMessage
From:Cynthia[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent:Tuesday,August21,201211:25PM
To:Stark,Mary
Subject:everyonelikeswine
MynameisCynthiaKates
Mostpeoplelovewineandmostpeoplearereligious.Iamnotsurewhyyoufeelthatyou
shouldbeabletostopchurchesfrombeingbuilt
inthearea.Itsonethingifitwasprivateproperty,butitsnot.
Youareelectedbythepeopletoallowpeopletodothisthingstheywanttonottoprohibit.
Peopleshouldbeabletogettochurchwithinreasonfromwheretheyliveespeciallywithgas
pricesgettingsohighandsomanycitiesforcingpeopleoutoftheircars(sowecansave
thefrogsorwhatever).Itwouldbegoodforyoutoreconsiderthecitiespositiononthis
becauseyouknowthisisnotgoingtogoaway.Thesereligionshavebeenaroundlongbefore
youwereandlongafteryouwillbegone.Youdontwanttowasteyourtimefightingalosing
battledoyou?
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: wine country
From: Connie [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: wine country

Hello Mary,

Too all who need to know , I am in disagreement to this appaling act of no other churches in Wine Countyor
schooling. This is not acceptable

Connie H.

1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Wine Country Freedom
From: Ivette Calhoun [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary; Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion
Subject: Wine Country Freedom

To whom it may concern:

Please include Religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country Plan.

First Amendment - Religion and Expression
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thanks,
Ivette Calhoun
1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:13 PM
Subject: Constituent Phone Call RE: Wine Country Community Plan
IreceivedacalltodayfromJanetWilber.Shewouldlikeyouto addher name in supportofchurhes
andschools.
Mary C. Stark
TLMA Commission Secretary
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 12th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
(951) 955-7436 Direct
(951) 955-1881 Fax
[email protected]

1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 7:09 AM
Subject: FW: Wine Country Plan
From: Susan Eyer-Anderson [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 9:47 PM
To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Wine Country Plan

Mary Stark, Planning Commission Secretary
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, 12th Floor
P.O. Box 1409,
Riverside, CA 92502

Could you please let the following Commissioners read this letter?

cc: Commissioner J ohn Roth, 1st District
Commissioner J ohn Snell, 2st District
Commissioner J ohn Petty, 3rd District
Commissioner J im Porras, 4th District
Commissioner J an Zuppardo, 5th District

RE: Proposed Wine Country Plan

9:48 AM8/27/2012 9:48 AM
2

I understand that houses of worship and private schools are not included in the new Wine Country
Plan. I respectfully request that you add religious institutions and private schools to this plan.
Okay...that was the canned part of the letter. (And it is a sincere request)....Here is the heartfelt,
blatant rest of the letter:

I was at the hearing yesterday on the 22
nd
. I sat through the whole thing...which really does give me
a lot of respect for the commissioners who have to do this on a regular basis.
I heard a lot of people...both winery owners and employees express anger and come up with
reasons as to why they do not want the Church... or its proposed school... included in the Wine
Country Plan. Mainly what I heard were 3 arguments:
1. The church and its school are incompatible uses and do not preserve the agriculture theme
2. The risk of lawsuit of insecticide spraying near a school is unacceptable
3. Concerns about increased traffic from the school
My thoughts:
1. Arent there churches in Europe that co-exist well among the wineries? In the Champagne
growing region in France I know of at least one instance where there was a church. It was also was
a winery.. (a monastery) that produced Dom Perringnon champagne. I believe it also had a school?
No, I think the church and its school are not "incompatible" with the wineries... especially if the
church plants 75% of its property with vineyards, and sells the grapes to the wineries.
2. The risk of insecticide spraying is mainly while "school is in session"... so why not have a
"spray day" so that the kids stay home if the insecticides have to be sprayed during school hours
(most of the spraying..if at all...has to be done at night, and before the winds pick up in the
morning). This "risk" argument does not really seem like a sound one to me..in that there are kids
and other people who live in the wine country and are there at night every night, all year round. If
the risks were really that significant...why are the residents not notified each time the wineries
spray? What about the winery employees and patrons of the wineries?? People driving by during
spraying?
There are set backs that the planners can require that could make this doable. I would suggest
having the church put the school "up front" by Rancho California road in the existing smaller
buildings (which would make it further away from Faulkner and further away from spraying)...and
9:48 AM8/27/2012 9:48 AM
3
have them build a beautiful sanctuary that looks like a winery on the area nearest Faulkner..that
would actually be a thing of beauty and only be used once a week or so. It could even be made to
look like an old European church or winery.
Getting back to the matter of risks... I heard that some of these wineries are actually allowing
people to come ride their horses there and drink wine...and actually condoning and encouraging it. I
find that absolutely unbelievable. I am a veterinarian. I advise against this practice. NOW. Alcohol
and horses do not mix. This is a recipe for disaster. I know of people personally who have been
killed doing this. Let me repeat myself. If you allow or condone people who have been
partaking of alcohol to get on horses and ride... you will have a fatality or life-changing injury
at some point within 5 years. You will also have a lawsuit. This is not a matter of "if" it is a
matter of "when". This is especially true for the general public who ride rental horses as wineries. I
cannot believe that the winery owners, and the county, and anyone else concerned, would even
dream of allowing this to occur on wine country property. The risk for a lawsuit in this situation is
exponentially higher than one from a possible spray incident at a church school. Hearing wineries
express fear of lawsuit from the church students, and turn a blind eye to this kind of risk is sadly
laughable. (I do believe that the trail network is a great project, and commend you on that
aspect...and plan on riding our horses on it someday...so please do not intertwine the two activities.
I am simply advising not to allow people to drink and ride...and the trails should avoid the general
winery public/traffic,,by at least 200 ft.. to minimize spooking the horses and showing a reasonable
attempt to protect the riders).
This brings me to my third topic...traffic.
3. The traffic that would come from the school..I believe.. is negligible (at 9:00am and again at
3:00pm weekdays) compared to the HUGE burden of traffic I have seen in the 20 years I have been
living in/near the wine country.
Lets also discuss the QUALITY of the traffic, vs quantity.
The traffic we see as residents or people commuting home via Rancho California rd is
HORRENDOUS, compared to how it used to be prior to all the wineries going in. And yes, people
ARE intoxicated when they are driving to and from wineries.
They drive erratically, do not signal, and are very very slow and inconsiderate. We as residents
know that there is a blind eye turned to this by the police and the county...and we think this is
because there is a lot at stake financially for these wineries, and they bring a lot of taxable revenue
in for the city and county. Therefore, we feel unprotected and without a voice. That is the
general consensus of the residents in the area. We simply avoid Rancho California rd on the
weekends for this reason. It is dangerous and very annoying. (Not to mention during the Balloon
and Wine festival). Let me ask you, though...arent the wineries legally responsible for these people
drinking and driving? Isnt that another lawsuit waiting to happen?
My husband had the unfortunate experience recently of pulling up behind a purple limousine at a
stop-sign on Rancho Calif rd....just in time to see the back window roll down and a woman vomit
9:48 AM8/27/2012 9:48 AM
4
out of it down the side of the limo. Isnt that lovely? Yes, the wineries do bring their flaws and
blemishes...but we residents also know that in these hard times, businesses need to survive, and we
support them anyway. Yes, in spite of all of this, I do support the wine country plan.
Well, I will leave you with that nice visual, and hope that this letter has somehow given you more
food for thought!
Thank you for your consideration :)
Sincerely,
Susan Eyer-Anderson, D.V.M.

_____________________________________
39201 San Ignacio rd
Hemet, Ca. 92544
(951)970-2252
1
From: Stark, Mary
To: Nanthavongdouangsy, Phayvanh
Subject: FW: Wine Country vs. Calvary Chapel

From: coppergirls [[email protected]]
To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Wine Country vs. Calvary Chapel
To:JohnRoth,JohnSnell,JohnPetty,JimPorras,JanZuppardo
IattendedthemorningportionoftheWineCountryvsCalvaryChapelmeetingonAug22attheTemeculaCityHall.AllI
cansayISTHISAMERICA
IwasappalledthatapprovingaChristianSchoolisevenanissue.HowdaretheseWinerieshavethepowertodenya
ChristianSchool.Iwonder
whatwouldhavehappenedifthemuslimswantedtobuildamosqueintheirpreciousarea.
Howdarethewinerieshaveanypowertodenysomethingsosorelyneededinthiscountry.Youwouldliketothinkthey
wouldbeproudtosupportandbehonoredthattheCalvaryChapelwantstoinvestsomuchmoneyandeffortto
provideaChristianEducationto125children.Allthisefforttodeny125children,dowenothavemoreimportantissues
tobattle?Thepublicschoolsarenothingbutliberalinstitutionsrunbytheunionstobrainwashingouryouthandyet
theygetapproval.TheChristianvaluesarebeingattackedfromeveryangleandyetifitweremuslimswantingtobuild
amosqueeveryonewouldbekissingtheirasses.
AmericaisaChristianCountryandwemustfighttoprotectthatandfighttodestroythepowerholdoftheGangster
Unions,LiberalsandtraitorslikeObama.IhopeyoutellthegreedysinglemindedWineriestogoblowsand.Iwillno
longertakegueststothesewineries.
AVOID MONSTANTO POISENING GMO'S VOTE YES ON PROP 37

Beware the government snoops on your emails and phone calls. The exact size and scope of the
undercutting of our right to privacy, extends beyond your wildest imagination.
OBUMMER AND ALL HIS AMERICAN DESTROYING LIBERAL COMMUNIST DEMOCRATS
MUST BE DEFEATED. DEFEND AMERICA, DUMP HUSSEIN!
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
" Thomas Paine"
\SAVE AMERICA STOP AGENDA 21! Remove ICLEI - Smart Grids & Fema Camps are being built
now!
WATCH! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM
Click to give free food and care with just a click - http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com
Sir Winston Churchill "Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion
paralyses the social development of those who follow it".
www.obsessionthemovie.com
www.christianaction.org For truth about the terrorsim from Islam in America.
2:48 PM8/29/2012 2:48 PM
2
http://www.islamreview.com/ The Islamic Strategies and The Christian
Response.
Political correctness is a suppression of free speech.
THE BATTLE TO TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT OVER
GreatestmaninHistory,namedJesus,hadnoservants,yettheycalledHimMaster.
Hadnodegree,yettheycalledHimTeacher.Hadnomedicines,yettheycalledHim
Healer.Hehadnoarmy,yetkingsfearedHim.Hewonnomilitarybattles,yethe
conqueredtheworld.Hecommittednocrime,...yetheycrucified....Him.Hewasburied
inatomb,yetHelivestoday.
1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:11 AM
Cc: Coyle, Frank
Subject: Wine Country Constituent Phone Call
IreceivedaphonecallonSeptember19,2012at4:55p.m.fromValeBrownewholivesinMurrieta.Shewantedto
verballycommentinsupportofCalvaryChapelandtheirschool.Shemadethefollowingpoints:
Keepchildrensschoolsinthesameareaastheparentsandtheirhomes.
Thechurchhasbeenthereforsolong,whyshouldtheymove.
Shehascheckedotheragriculturalareasandtheyhaveschools.
Shedoesntseethepotentialhazardstotheschool.
Shedoesntseeotherchurchescomingintothearea.
Ingeneral,thePlanningCommissionshouldallowthechurchandschoolinthearea.
Mary C. Stark
TLMACommissionSecretary
CountyAdministrativeCenter
4080LemonStreet,12thFloor
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 7:13 AM
Subject: FW: In Care of Mary Stark: New Wine Country Plan
Mary C. Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
From: Scott Holman [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 9:36 AM
To: Stark, Mary
Subject: In Care of Mary Stark: New Wine Country Plan

Mary,
Please consider including religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country Plan.
Thank you for this consideration.
Scott and Lorie Holman
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: wine country freedom
Mary C. Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
From: Keith Still [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:28 PM
To: Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion
Cc: Stark, Mary; Mehta-Cooper, Mitra
Subject: wine country freedom

Hello,

I am writing to express my strong conviction regarding Temecula Wine Country's bann against the building of
churches and private schools. I believe this to be a violation of our constitutional freedom. Please include
religious institutions and private schools in the New Wine Country Plan. Thank you for your consideration of
this matter.

Keith Still
1
From: Cindy [[email protected]]
To: Nanthavongdouangsy, Phayvanh; Mehta-Cooper, Mitra
Subject: Wine Country Preservation
DO NOT INCLUDE
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS IN THE NEW WINE COUNTRY PLAN.

The Wine Country Community Plan states:

"Mission Statement

The mission and vision of the Riverside County Wine Country Community Plan is to preserve vineyard lands
and to create an environment that encourages development of wineries with the goal of making the Temecula
Valley Southern California Wine Country known and respected worldwide, while maintaining the quality of life
for residential communities and the equestrian lifestyle within and around it."
I do not support the expansion of Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship. This development does not encourage
preservation of vineyard lands that are unique to The Inland Empire for Temecula Wine Country. I am a
resident of Temecula and have enjoyed this unique enviroment since 1995.
Calvary Chapel has aquired land to meet the goals of their agenda that does not include the best interest of the
environment and the community. I am disgusted by the proganda and the petition statements presented by
supporters of this religious institution that fails to present the facts about this issue. I am a resident of this
community and I am aware of the facts, especially as a supporter of the Christian Faith and The Bible.
Thank you,
Cynthia McCoy
31350 Congressional Dr., Temecula CA 92591

1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Letter for Planning Committee - Wine Country Church Expansion
Attachments: Letter Regarding Calvary Expansion 8-21-2012.docx
From: Meri Rosa-Pyrce [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Letter for Planning Committee - Wine Country Church Expansion
Hello Ms. Stark,

Can you please see that my attached letter gets forwarded to each of the members of the Planning Committee.

I appreciate your time and effort. Please let me know if there are any questions. Thank you.

Warmest Regards,

Meri Rosa-Pyrce
951-677-3617 home
951-551-6374 cell
Church Expansion

My name is Meri Rosa-Pyrce. I am not a winery owner nor am I a parishioner of the Calvary
Bible Chapel Fellowship Church. I am just an average citizen that has no monetary affiliation
with the parties that are in dispute. I am, however, a very faithful and spiritual individual and
teach my children to be the same. I believe and worship God every day. I am by no means anti-
God or anti-worship. Please understand this, as this is very important.

My husband and I own property in the Temecula Wine Country. We purchased our land for our
family (we have 2 children, ages 15 and 13) because we absolutely adore and appreciate the
beauty, quaintness and stress-relief Wine Country has to offer. Whenever we travel down
Rancho California Road and pass Butterfield Road, I automatically get a sense of peace and
tranquility as I set my eyes on the vines and their beauty and breathe in the aromas of the
vineyards. For me, it is pure joy and such a wonderful feeling that takes me away from the
hustle and bustle of everyday life. What a glorious treasure we have in our own backyard. We
are very fortunate.

I write to you today in opposition of allowing the Calvary Bible Chapel Fellowship Church to
expand its current facility in Wine Country. I have no idea why a church would want to have its
place of worship located in the middle of an area that is designated for wine production and
clientele that drink alcohol. It doesnt appear to be a perfect fit, but more of an obvious oddity.
It is not called "Amusement Park Country", "Sports Country", "School Country", "Suburbia
Country", "Church Country" or "Corporate Country. It is called "Wine Country", and it is
called this for a reasonfor the rolling hills of planted vines and wineries scattered throughout.
This is what makes the area so precious, unique and desirable. The wineries fit in. It is the
wineries that spend a lot of money to maintain the vines, which in turn keeps the beauty of the
area alive and vibrant. It is the wineries that make the wine that attracts people from all over the
world who want to go wine tasting, have a good time and look forward to enjoying the ambiance
that Wine Country has to offer. Lastly, it is the wineries that put Wine Country on the map. The
last thing Wine Country needs are non-fitting establishments that take away from, not add to, the
beautiful setting and ambiance it offers. There are many areas to build and expand a church. I
dont believe Wine Country was intended to be that area. In addition, the traffic congestion that
this expansion will create will do no justice to any of the residents that live in the area. The two-
lane Rancho California road is already faced with negative traffic situations, and this expansion
will only make matters worse. And, if a school is allowed, this will only build upon the already
problematic traffic congestion that the residents are faced with daily. It is not a viable situation.

To end, if you allow this expansion, the requests for non-fitting establishments will not end. You
will be setting a precedence here. Your decision should not be taken lightly, as it can
undoubtedly have a negative effect on Wine Country and potentially destroy the vision that was
planned for the area. Please protect Wine Country from those who have other agendas and do
not want to follow what is in the original Mission Statementto preserve vineyard lands and to
create an environment that encourages development of wineries with the goal of making the
Temecula Valley Southern California Wine Country known and respected worldwide." Why
have a Mission Statement if you dont uphold it? God made Wine Country a diamond of
richness and splendor, and we need to preserve what God has given to us.

Respectfully Submitted,
Meri Rosa-Pyrce
951-677-3617 home
951-551-6374 cell

1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Temecula wine country Please DO NOT let more churches in the valley!

To: Buster, Bob; Tavaglione, J ohn; Stone, J eff; [email protected]; Ashley, Marion; [email protected]; Stark,
Mary; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Temecula wine country Please DO NOT let more churches in the valley!

To whom it may concern, I live in the diamond valley and have since 1995. I feel there are more then enough churches in
our area. Please leave the law the way it is. We or they do not need anymore. Once they get in there they are going to
push things on us. If and when I want to go to church there are many choices I have. Please for the freedom of the people
all the people in the valley. What is the REAL reason they want to get in there? There is more to the story that they are not
telling. When I noticed that Chic-Fil-la was going to be providing free lunch for them, that was more then enough for me to
send out this email.

Thank you for reading this.

Chuck Brood
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Open Letter to the Riverside Planning Commissioners
Attachments: Letter to Planning Commission.docx
From: J on McPherson [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Open Letter to the Riverside Planning Commissioners
Mary
Iwasnotabletoattendtodayshearingduetoworkrelatedduties.Iwouldappreciateitifyouwouldseethateachof
thecommissionersreceiveacopyofmyletterandthatmyletterbecomeapartoftherecordconcerningthismatter.
Thankyouverymuch,
JonMcPherson

First, I would like to thank each of you for allowing me the opportunity to
speak with you via letter since I am unable to attend the hearing in person. As
a winemaker, I am tied closely to the harvest, and today, August 22
nd
, 2012, we
are harvesting Viognier from one of our estate vineyards. I am sending this
letter via email to each of you asking that you consider the following points
regarding the Temecula Valley Wine Country Policy.
The CV Zone is now, and has always been an area of contention. Ever since I
first came to the Temecula Valley in 1985, development pressure has been
ever- present. The safeguards that were put in place back in the 80s and early
90s to keep uncontrolled growth in check, have, over time, been realized as
either short-sighted or in need of revision to counter the ever changing wine
market. The efforts of numerous individuals have been monumental in
maintaining the constraints that make wine country what it is today.
To this point, the business scope of wineries and vineyards which comprise
wine country has grown to include restaurants and hotels as compatible,
ancillary uses. When speaking about compatible uses, a restaurant
complements a winery, its wine. A hotel complements the destination
environment that wine country wants to imbue. Yet, the fact of the matter is
that without agriculture, none of this would be possible. Vineyards help to give
Wine Country its country atmosphere, and without land that is available to
plant grapes on, there will be no vineyards. And of course, No vineyards
translates into No wine. This is certainly a scenario that the Cucamonga Valley
(just 50 miles north of here) demonstrates very well. The loss of arable lands to
the industrialization and development of the greater Ontario area has seen a
once prominent viticultural area become little more than a tribute to an era
gone by. It may start slowly at first, a housing tract here, a gas station there,
but when non-compatible uses are allowed in an agricultural zone, it is
precedent setting. The restrictive zoning that allowed Temecula wine country
to flourish is the very zoning that will insure wine countrys long-term survival.
Secondly, the tax revenues that are generated by winery properties are
significant. Not only are property taxes part of the mix, so are sales taxes,
excise taxes, payroll taxes and room taxes which are a continual source of
income for the city, county, and state jurisdictions. This revenue stream
cannot be realized without the land needed for grape growing. No grapes, No
wine, No tax revenue.
You may have heard testimony to the effect that the Temecula wineries are
anti-religion or anti-church. To the contrary, I would assert my own beliefs
here, but the reality is this is a land use argument, and not a freedom of
religion issue. What religion any of us may believe in is a moot point, especially
when discussing land use issues. The proposed Calvary Chapel expansion
project goes beyond the scope of what the original country church set out to
embody. The issues that are tied to a project of this size are numerous, and
ultimately, are all in conflict with the original CV Zone Policy. The discussion
of allowing only this church in the valley, should this expansion project be
allowed to proceed, will bring forth RLUIPA lawsuits (under the Equal Terms
and Exclusion Provisions of RLUIPA) by other institutions that would like to
make a home in wine country.
Honestly, Wine Country is about wineries and vineyards. Other uses that do
not enhance or compliment this dichotomy need to be relegated to the
surrounding communities and areas which are zoned for and can better
accommodate those uses.
Thank you for the chance to speak with you in regards to my perspective on
this matter.

Sincerely,

Jon C McPherson
Master Winemaker
South Coast Winery

1
From: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 2:34 PM
Subject: Questions regarding Community Plan
Pleaseconsideraddingverbagewithintheplanthatstressesotheragriculturaluses,not
justwineryoperations.Foodproductionisveryimportantaswellascomplimentaryin
creatingafullyrespectedwineculture.Inaddition,wecandirectlyaddcredenceandwell
organizedpoliticalinfluencefromalargerscopeinprotectingtheagriculturalenvironment
oftheTemeculaWineCountryPlan.
DavidandTinaBarnes
CrowsPassFarm
www.crowspassfarm.comSubmittedBy:TinaBarnes

Schools in Wine Country, Beware of What you Wish For:

Here in the Temecula Valley we have one of the finest agricultural areas in the world. While the wine is
well documented, the produce that comes from this valley is some of the best available. Temecula is
rapidly becoming a hotbed for foodies throughout Southern California. The Temecula Farmers Market is
known throughout the Southland as a great place to shop. Cooking schools have expressed interest in
locating here because of the produce. We are one of the few places in Southern California where kids
and adults can visit a real working farm. A private school in Wine Country will only benefit those
families who can attend it, while Wine Country in general is a benefit to everyone in Riverside County.
The preservation of the Temecula Wine Country is paramount to the future of agriculture in this area.
Without the ability to grow, Wine Country becomes houses.
Agriculture is only pretty from a distance. Up close its dirty, dusty, noisy, and smells like chemicals or
compost. Successful agriculture takes space and neighbors who are understanding. Schools and
agriculture are not a good fit as neighbors. Schools have too much impact on what can happen on the
adjoining properties with regards to spray applications, fertilizers, and the ability to sell wine. Advisors
from the Riverside Agriculture Dept. have said it should not happen. One school will lead to more
schools and threaten the ability of their neighbors to grow grapes, sell wine and produce food. Without
grapes, Wine Country disappears and so do the wineries and the tourism they create. The local hotels
and restaurants will be empty and many more people are out of work. Take away the agriculture and
Temecula has no more tourism.
Agritourism was one of the main arguments against the Liberty Quarry. Without Wine Country and the
jobs, tourism and tax base it creates, the Supervisors decision about the quarry may be different next
time.
Be careful what you wish for! While what you want is a campus in Wine Country, what you may end up
with is a campus surrounded by houses downwind from a quarry.
David Barnes
Owner
Crows Pass Farm

1
From: Coyle, Frank
Subject: FW: Church Options and the Wine Country Plan
Attachments: Scanned from a Xerox multifunction device001.pdf
Fyi...
FrankL.Coyle,REAI
DeputyDirector,AdvancedPlanningDivisionRiversideCountyPlanningDepartment
Riverside,CA92501
[email protected]
P:951.955.2706
C:951.201.6947
OriginalMessage
From:ChuckTobin[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent:Thursday,September20,20124:46PM
To:[email protected];Johnson,George;Coyle,Frank
Cc:[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]
Subject:ChurchOptionsandtheWineCountryPlan
John,
MerewordscannotexpresshowprofoundlydisappointedthemembersoftheValledelos
Caballos(VDC)AdvisoryCommittee,andthegeneralequestriancommunity,areinthePlanning
Commission'sapparentdecisiontopursueOption#1regardingthequestionofwhethertoallow
churchesintheWineCountyPlanstudyarea.WeallfeltthatOption#3wasfarandawaythe
superioralternativetohandlingthisissue,butweneversawanydiscussiononthepartof
theCommissionastowhythisalternativewasrejected.Instead,allofthepodiumtimewas
monopolizedbytheproponentsofthechurchexpansion,andalternativevoiceswerenever
giventheiropportunitytoaddresstheCommission.
WeareaskingfortheCommissiontoreconsiderthedecision,andgivegreaterconsideration
totheabsolutemeritsofOption#3.Option#3wascarefullydesignedbyRiversideCounty
stafftofocusexclusivelyonthemeritsoftheexpansionofCalvaryChurchitself,andnot
tangleuptheprocessingofthegreaterWineCountyPlanitself.IftheCommissiongoeswith
Option#1,weseethatasignificantamountoftimewillbespentontheshearlogisticsof
selectingtheconsultantfortheamendment,writingtheamendment,circulatingtheamendment,
debatingtheamendment,andultimatelytheappealbythe"losing"sideoftheamendmentto
theBoardofSupervisorswherethewholeprocesswillbefoughtalloveragain.Inthe
meantime,theentireremainingWineCountyPlandevelopmentwillbevirtuallyplacedonhold,
pendingtheoutcomeofthechurchfight.
WebelievethatasubstantialportionofthisangstcanbeavoidedbytheCommissionadopting
Option#3instead.ThispathwayfocusesexclusivelyontheexistingCVZareaanddoesnot
draginanyotherportionsofWineCountry.Itwillactuallyworktothebenefitofthe
Churchasitcanbeprocessedmuchquickerunderthispathwaythanaddingtheissueintothe
greaterWineCountryPlan.Infact,itisourunderstandingthatthePlanningCommission
triedthisrouteoncebefore,butforsomereasonplacedprocessingalternativeonhold.If
8:07 AM9/24/2012 8:07 AM
2
theCommissionchoosestogowithOption#3,andiftheCVZisamendedtoallowchurchesasa
permitteduse,thenCalvaryChurchcanhaveitsapplicationprocessesthroughthatzoning
classification,which,ifapproved,willbeautomaticallyincorporatedintothefinalWine
CountyPlan.PleaserememberthatallexistingzoningandapprovalintheWineCountyarea
willbeleft"asis"
evenifthenewPlanisultimatelyadoptedbytheBoardofSupervisors,andtherewillbeno
effortmadetoachieve"zoningconsistency"betweenthecurrentzoningandapprovals,andthe
newlyadoptedWineCountryPlan.
ItisforthesereasonsthatwebelievethatOption#3ispreferabletoOption#1.
IfwecannotconvinceyouandyourfellowCommissionersofthebenefitsofusingOption#3to
handletheChurchissue,andyouarestillcommittedtogoingdowntheOption#1route,then
wewouldrespectivelyrequestthatthe"equestrianzone"bedeletedfromthestudyareaof
theamendmentwhenyouconsiderthescopeofworkatyournextCommissionmeeting.Wewould
notethatthestaffreportlanguageinOption#1alreadyseemstodeletethe"residential
zone"fromthechurchstudyareaamendment,andwewouldaskforthesameconsiderationfor
the"equestrianzone":takeitout,please.
TheVDCAdvisoryCommittee,andthegeneralequestriancommunityhavebeenloyalpartners
withtheCountyinthedraftingoftheWineCountyPlan.
Thisisthefirsttimewhenwehavehadaseriousissuewiththedirectionthatthe
CommissionispotentiallyproposingtotakewiththePlan,andweareabsolutelyseriouswhen
wesaythattheCommissionneedstostopandthinkaboutthepotentialconsequencesofit
actionsifitchoosestheOption#1pathway.Wewouldliketohavetheopportunitytoaddress
theCommissionatyournextmeetingwhenyoupotentiallyconsiderafinalpathwayforthis
issue,aswebelievethattheCommissionwouldbenefitfromwhatwewouldhavetosay.
Thankyouforyourconsiderationofourrequests.Allofushavespentmanyyearstryingto
gettheWineCountryPlantothispoint,andwewouldhatetoseeallofthattimeandeffort
founderonthewrongcoursechoseninconsideringthechurchissue.Welookforwardtoseeing
youatthenextPlanningCommissionmeeting.
ChuckTobin
VDCAdvisoryCommitteeMember
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Wine Country Policy Plan & Equestrian Trails network
MaryC.Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
OriginalMessage
From:ElinsVerizon[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent:Saturday,September22,20129:09PM
To:Stark,Mary
Subject:WineCountryPolicyPlan&EquestrianTrailsnetwork
DearComissioners,
IamwritingtoyouaboutthePlanningCommissionmeetinginTemeculaatCityHallonSept26
at9am.
ThemeetingistomakeadecisionabouttheTemeculaValleyWineCountryPolicyArea.Work
onthisplanhasbeengoingonforyears.Therehavebeencompromisesandagreementsonboth
sidesbetweencitizens,wineriesandofficials.Thewinecountryequestriantrailssystemis
setwithmany,manyyearsoftime,moneyandeffortputforthbytheequestriangroupsand
thewineriesandtheCounty.AllprocessesseemedtobeontrackforapprovaluntilCalvary
Chapelrequestedtobuildaschoolandtheywanttohold"hostage"thenewWineCountry
PolicyPlan,hopingtopressureofficialsintoanagreement.
Itmakesmewonderwhattypeof"christianchurch"thisis,totrytointerruptyearsofwork
bydedicatedpeopleinwinecountry,justtotrytoputpressureonCity&Countyofficials
inordertogettheirwayregardingaschool.CalvaryChapelwouldhavetogothroughthe
samelegalapprovalprocesswhetheritwasundertodayscurrentPlanorthenewPlan.So
approvetheWineCountryPolicyPlanandmakeCalvaryChapeldealwiththeirschoolissue
seperately..
CalvaryChapelsfuturehopesforaschoolshouldbeseperatedfromthenewWineCountryPlan
andtheyshouldbemadetogothroughthesameprocessasanyotherdevelopmentthatwantsa
changeinzoning.CalvaryChapelknowsthatitcouldtakeyearsforaschoolapproval.They
knowitwouldtakeanEnvironmentalImpactReportandpossiblyaCequaand/ormanyother
studies,plustheCity&Countyapprovalprocess.
Pleasedon'tletthemuseholdinguptheNewTemeculaValleyWineCountryPolicyPlanasa
waytotrytogettheirhopedforschoolapprovedinafasttrackprocess.Don'tletthemget
awaywithruiningsomanyotherwinecountrypeoplesyears&yearsofeffort.Please
approvethenewWineCountryPlanandmakeCalvaryChapelgothroughthenormaldevelopment
processfortheirschool.
8:11 AM9/24/2012 8:11 AM

2
ElinMotherhead
AnEquestrianandmemberof2RidingClubsinTemecula.
1
From: Mehta-Cooper, Mitra
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:56 PM
To: Coyle, Frank; Nanthavongdouangsy, Phayvanh
Subject: FW: Wine Country Proposal and my 12 acres (parcel 924200010-1)
Attachments: Rancho California Highlands 10.doc
Frank,
IamsendingthislettertoPhayvanhtodocument.JustFYI.
Mary C. Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]

Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 4:28 PM
To: Mehta-Cooper, Mitra
Subject: Re: Wine Country Proposal and my 12 acres (parcel 924200010-1)

Dear Ms.Mehta-Cooper:

I hope you are in receipt of my letter of August 23, stating my position for not planting
grapes in the Rancho California Highlands residental area.

Commissioner Petty has led me to believe that he will write into the proposal that
my 12 acres will not be subjected to the planting of grapes.

I have summarized my understandings in the enclosed attached letter to Commissioner Petty,
a letter on which I "cc"ed you.

If there is any thing more I need to do for my cause, will you please let me know by phone or by
e mail? When and how will I know that my property is indeed excluded from the demand to plant
grapes, in the event that I lot-split?

Thank you very much for your help.
Laurie Staude (949-496-3628)

LAURIE STAUDE
31 St. Michael Place
Dana Point, California 92629
(949) 496-3628
email: [email protected]

Commissioner J ohn Petty, Vice Chairman
Riverside County Planning Department
P.O. Box 1409
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, California 92502

Re: Wine Country Proposal
Parcel 924200010-1 (north side of Camino Sierra Road) 12 acres
Request NOT to be required to plant 75% in grapes

September 17, 2012

Dear Vice Chairman, Commissioner Petty:

This letter is to follow up my phone call to Mary Stark and to you on
Thursday, September 6. I believe you are in receipt of my letter of August 23
requesting not to have to plant my 12 acres in the Rancho California Highlands,
in the event that I or a future owner lot-splits into 2 parcels.

Thank you for understanding my concerns and for fighting for my cause.
In the phone call I requested an appointment with you. My understanding is that
Ms. Stark spoke with you and you replied to her that such an appointment would not
be necessary since you would try to write, into the proposal, terms so that my parcel
would not be subjected to the requirement to plant grapes.

If my understandings of your communication are different from yours, will you
please let me know by email or by phone call?

In the midst of so many requests from so many people, I do not want to fall
through the cracks. Is there anything more I need to do to support my cause? How and
when will I know that my parcel will not be subjected to the requirement to plant grapes?
Thank you and all the Commissioners for your help.

Sincerely yours,

Laurie Staude
Cc: Chairman J ohn Snell
Ms. Mitra Mehta-Cooper, Project Manager

1
From: Andrew Rauch [[email protected]]
To: Stark, Mary
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Nanthavongdouangsy, Phayvanh; Mehta-
Cooper, Mitra
Subject: Opposition of Firooz Family to Plan
Attachments: Letter re Plan 082112 SKMBT_36312082206430.pdf
Please see attached letter.

Andrew K. Rauch
Attorney at Law
12526 High Bluff Drive
Suite #300
San Diego, California 92130
Telephone: (858) 792-3408
Facsimile: (858) 792-3409

*****************************************************************************************
*********************************
This email communication and any attachments contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH ALSO MAY BE
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT and is
intended only for the use of the intended recipient identified above. If you are not the intended recipient of this
communication, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, dissemination, distribution, downloading, or
copying of this communication, and any attachments, is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have
received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by reply email, delete the communication, and any
attachments, and destroy all copies.
*****************************************************************************************
******
PublicTestimonyforWineCountryCommunityPlan
ReceivedbetweenSeptember24,2012(4:00PM)September25,2012(4:00PM)
PolicyRelatedComments
DateReceived From Affiliation
SupportforCalvaryChurch/PlacesofreligiousworshipintheCommunityPlan
9/24/12
9/15/12
Additional2signedpetitions ResidentsandCalvaryChurch
Members
SupportfortheproposedCommunityPlanandpreservingareafromincompatibleuses
9/25/12 SherryTurner RCHABoardMember
9/25/12 JuanitaKoth TemeculaEqWineRidersPresident

1
From: Stark, Mary
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 6:59 AM
Subject: FW: Wine Country Plan
ForWineCountry.
Mary C. Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
From: Sherry Turner [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: Wine Country Plan
MaryStark,PlanningCommissioner
IamwritingasaboardmemberoftheRanchoCaliforniaHorsemanAssociationandamunableto
appearatthenextmeetingonthe26
th
butwantedtoaskthatyoupleaseseparatethe
church/schoolissuefromtherestoftheWineCountryPlansotheplancanmoveforward.The
amountoftime,energyandmoneythathasgoneintothatplanshouldnotbestoppedduetoa
singlepropertyownersrequesttochangetheirzoning.
Respectfully,
SherryTurner
RCHA
1
From: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Separate the Issues on Wednesday
MorecommentsforWineCountryPlanningCommission.
Mary C. Stark
Riverside,CA92501
(951)9557436
[email protected]
From: Coyle, Frank

To: Stark, Mary
Subject: FW: Separate the Issues on Wednesday

Seebelow.Canyouforwardtothecommissioners.
FrankL.Coyle,REAI
DeputyDirector,AdvancedPlanningDivision
RiversideCountyPlanningDepartment
Riverside,CA92501
[email protected]
P:951.955.2706
C:951.201.6947
From: lorraine harrington [mailto:[email protected]]

To: Coyle, Frank
Cc: J ohn Petty
Subject: Fw: Separate the Issues on Wednesday

Frank forwarding this for a local equestrian leader. Please send it on to the other commissioners as well. Thank
you

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: J uanita Koth <[email protected]>
To: Lorraine RCHA Harrington <[email protected]>
Subject: Separate the Issues on Wednesday

5:10 PM9/24/2012 5:10 PM
2
Lorraine,
EverytimeItrytosendthistotheemailsinyourRCHAemailblasttheycomebackundeliverable??Canyouplease
forwardtotheappropriatecommissioners?Thankyou,Juanita

DearTemeculaWineCountryPlanningCommission,

Asanavidtrailrider,WineCountryresidentandPresident/cofounderoftheTemeculaEqWineRiders/Memberof
RanchoCaliforniaHorsemenAssociationandCaliforniaStateHorsemenAssociation,Iamsaddenedtohearthatthe
approvaloftheWineCountryTrailsNetworkProposalisdelayedyetagain!Itseemstherearejusttoomany
componentstotheWineCountryPlanthatarereallyunrelated,otherthantheirgeography.Thetrailsnetwork
proposal,withitsmanyfacets,hasbeenaHUGEundertakingbymanylocalresidents,trailsenthusiasts,horseowners
andcity/countyofficialsforyears.WewerefinallymakingsomeprogressPLEASEconsiderseparatingtheissues
(fromthechurchsissuesrequiringanewcostlyandtimeconsumingenvironmentalstudytobedone)andallowour
muchneededandlongoverduetrailsnetworkforTemeculaWineCountrytheapprovaltomoveforward.

Alocalcowgirlsdream:OnedayIdliketoridemyhorsetoCalvaryChurchonaSunday,alongasafetrailsnetworkand
afterwardsdineatWilsonCreeksCreeksideGrilleRestaurantnowthatsalittletasteofCowgirlHeaven!Dream
untilyourdreamcomestrue

Respectfully
J uani ta Koth, Presi dent
Temecula Eq-"Wi ne" Ri ders
951-515-9964
Good friends ri di ng horses!

5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Riverside County Planning Commission

August 22, 2012

9/17/12 ChuckandSallyWing Resident

From: Allyson Smith [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Drucilla Martin/Vendegna [mailto:[email protected]]

From: J oan Pernicano [mailto:[email protected]]

From: PS Nalty [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Sophia Nalty [mailto:[email protected]]

From: rizty [mailto:[email protected]]

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Ted Leavenworth [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Carol J ones [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Clare McGrew [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Melissa Landis [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Connie [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Ivette Calhoun [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Susan Eyer-Anderson [mailto:[email protected]]

AVOID MONSTANTO POISENING GMO'S VOTE YES ON PROP 37

From: Scott Holman [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Keith Still [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Meri Rosa-Pyrce [mailto:[email protected]]

Hello Ms. Stark,

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]

From: J on McPherson [mailto:[email protected]]

8:11 AM9/24/2012 8:11 AM

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Sherry Turner [mailto:[email protected]]

From: Coyle, Frank

From: lorraine harrington [mailto:[email protected]]

You might also like