HomeMy WebLinkAbout111202 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104
ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
NOVEMBER 12, 2002- 7:00 P.M.
At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 11:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 11:00 P.M.
6:00 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code
Sections:
Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property acquisition negotiations of
property located at Interstate 15/Cherry Avenue (APN 910-262-007). Under
negotiation is the price and terms of the real property interests. The City
negotiators are Shawn Nelso~l and Bill Hughes.
Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9(a) with respect to three matters of existing litigation involving
the City. The following case will be discussed: 1) City of Temecula v.
Riverside County (French ValleyfTucalotta Hills Associates; 2) Application of
San Diego Gas & Electricity Company (U 902-E) for a Certificate of Public
Convenience & Necessity Valley-Rainbow 500 kV Connect Project before the
California Public Utilities Commission; and 3) Pratt v. City of Temecula.
Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties
may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk.
CALL TO ORDER:
Prelude Music:
Invocation:
Flag Salute:
Mayor Ron Roberts
Andrea Grangruth
Pastor Randy Ponder of Lamb's Fellowship
Councilman Naggar
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 2002-11
Resolution: No. 2002-100
R:~Agenda\l 11202
1
ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Certificate of Achievement to Larry Sepulveda, Jr. for attaining Eagle Scout rank
National Hospice Month Proclamation
Candlelight Tribute Proclamation
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on
items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on
an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter no~t listed on the agenda, a
pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to
Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item.
There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made
at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENTCALENDAR
2
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of ali ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of September 24, 2002.
R:~Agenda\l 11202
2
4
5
6
7
8
Resolution Approvin,q List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
City Treasurer's Report
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2002.
Northeast Fire Station Construction Cost A.qreement between the City of Temecula and
the County of Riverside
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the agreement between the City of Temecula and the County of Riverside
for cooperatively sharing the construction cost for the Northeast Fire Station.
Acceptance of Grant Deed - Crowne Hill Park
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Authorize acceptance of the Grant Deed for Crowne Hill Park (located in the Crowne
Hill development) and direct staff to proceed with the necessary actions to cause the
deed to be recorded.
Cell Phone Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve a two-year agreement with Sprint for City Cellular Services.
Acceptance of a Drainaqe Easement located within Parcel No. 4 of Parcel Map No. 13889
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR A
DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN PARCEL NO. 4 OF PARCEL
MAP NO. 13889
R:\Agenda\l 11202
3
9
10
11
Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Grant Application for FY 2003/04
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Receive and file the report regarding the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA)
Grant Application for the development of the Santa Gertrudis Bicycle/Trail
Undercrossing at Margarita Road and authorize the Director of Public Works to
forward said application to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Local Assistance Office;
9.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(CALTRANS) FOR BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT
FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SANTA
GERTRUDIS BICYCLE/TRAIL UNDERCROSSING AT
MARGARITA ROAD
Diaz Road Reali.qnment Project - Approval of Project and Neqative Declaration (EA-68)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPROVING THE DIAZ ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT-
PROJECT NO. PW95-27
French Valley Parkway Overcrossinq and Interchanqe - Proiect No. PW02-11 -
Acquisition Aqreement between the City of Temecula and Michael Edwin Coleman
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Approve and execute in substant:~lly the form hereto the Purchase and Sale
Agreement and Escrow Instructions between the City of Temecula and Michael
Edwin Coleman for the acquisition of certain real property in the amount of
$570,000.00;
11.2 Direct the City Clerk to record the document;
11.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~Agenda\l 11202
4
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
WORKS TO ACCEPT DEEDS OR GRANTS CONVEYING ANY
INTEREST IN OR EASEMENT UPON REAL ESTATE AS
PERMITTED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27281
12
Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Aqreement with Michael Brandman
Associates for Pechan,qa Parkway (formerly known as Pala Road) - Phase II
Improvements - Project No. PW99-11 - Environmental Study and Clearances
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Approve Amendment No. 2 to the agreement with Michael Brandman Associates to
provide professional engineering and design services for the Environmental Study
and Clearances for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II improvements - Project No.
PW99-11 - for an amount not to exceed $71,600.00 and authorize the Mayor to
execute the agreement.
13
Joint Community Facilities Aqreement with Eastern Municipal Water District for the Shea
Homes - Serena Hills Development (Tract No. 23209)
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES
AGREEMENT WITH THE EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT RELATING TO SERENA HILLS
14
Solicitation of Construction Bids for Pechanqa Parkway Soundwall Improvements -
Project No. PW99-11SW
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Approve the project plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public
Works to solicit bids for the construction of the Pechanga Parkway Soundwall
Improvements- Project No. PW99-1 lSW.
15 Harveston Acquisition Aqreement for Offsite Riqht~of-Wa¥
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Approve the Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5 authorizing
the City to use the power of eminent domain for acquisition of offsite right-of-way to
provide the necessary right-of-way for widening of Winchester Road as required in
the conditions of approval for the Harveston Project.
R:~Agenda\l 11202
5
16
Second Readinq of Ordinance No. 02-'10 (Advanced Cardiovascular)
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR AND APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR
SYSTEMS, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF GUIDANT CORPORATION
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 02-0217)
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AND
THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
R:~Agenda\l 11202
6
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. CSD 2002-01
Resolution: No. CSD 2002-10
CALL TO ORDER:
President Jeff Stone
ROLL CALL:
DIRECTORS:
'Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of
Directors on items that are not list~.d on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of
Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to
Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of October 22, 2002.
PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the Community Services District before a
public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval
of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issue.= you or someone else raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public
hearing.
R:~,genda\111202
7
2 Tract Map No. 23209 - Service Level B, Proposed Residential Street L qhtin.q: Service
Level C, Perimeter Landscapinq and Slope Maintenance and Service Level D, Trash
and Recyclin.q Collection Services Rates and Charges
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING,
CALLING, AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON JANUARY 6, 2003, REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B
AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT
MAP NO. 23209 IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B
AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XlIID,
SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
2.2 Approve the Election Notice, Ballot, and Procedures for the Completion, Return,
and Tabulation of the Ballots;
2.3 Authorize staff to mail the ballots to the affected property owners pursuant to the
aforementioned process.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, November 26, 2002, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\l 11202
8
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CALLTO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Comerchero
ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. RDA 2002-0I
Resolution: No. RDA 2002-09
Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts, Comerchero
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the
Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent
Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the
Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the C~ty Clerk. When you are called to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of October 22, 2002.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, November 26, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Bus~ness Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\l 11202
9
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or
may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s)
at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or
in written correspondence delivered to th~ City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing.
17 Development Code Amendment (Plannin,q Application No. 02-0318)
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING STANDARDS FOR MODULAR
STRUCTURES, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.10 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND MAKING OTHER MINOR
MODIFICATIONS TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 02-0318)
18 Larqe Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance (Planninq Application No. 99-0382)
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES (PLANNING APPLICATION NO, 99-0382)
19 Appeal of Cin.qular Wireless Telecommunication Facility at Chaparral Hi.qh School -
Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan (PA01-0572)
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~Agenda\111202
10
RESOLUTION NO. 02-.__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0572 - A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN, CONSTRUCT,
AND, OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT HIGH, FOURTEEN
FOOT WIDE UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION
FACILITY HOUSING SlX ANTENNAS AND ASSOCIATED
EQUIPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NICOLAS
ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD ON THE CHAPARRAL HIGH
SCHOOL CAMPUS ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 961-080-007
COUNCIL BUSINESS
20 All-Way Stop Si,qn Installation at North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Reject the Public Traffic Safety Commission's recommendation to establish an All-
Way Stop at the intersection of North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road.
21
Relinquishment of Caltrans Riqht-of-Way (State Routes 79 North and South)
(at the request of Mayor Roberts.)
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Direct the Public Works Department to proceed with the relinquishment process for
certain segments of State Route 79 South (SR 79S) and Winchester Road (SR 79N)
from the State of California to the City of Temecula;
21.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DECLARING ITS INTEREST TO ACCEPT
JURISDICTION OF THOSE SEGMENTS OF WINCHESTER
ROAD (SR 79N) AND STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH (SR 79S)
EXTENDING FROM 1-15 TO THE CITY LIMITS FROM THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
22 Community Services Commission Appointments
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 Appoint one applicant to serve a full three-year term on the Community Services
Commission through October 10, 2005.
R:~Agenda\l 11202
11
23 Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointments
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1 Appoint two applicants to serve on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for full
three-year terms through October 10, 2005.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CITY A'rrORNEY'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, November 26, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\111202
12
PROCLAMATIONS
AND
PRESENTATIONS
bio 0
0
ITEM 1
ITEM 2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
After the Closed Session that convened at 6:00 P.M., the City Council convened in Open
Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, September 24, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of
Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Present:
Absent:
Councilmembers:
Councilmember:
Comerchero, Pratt, Stone
Naggar, Roberts
City Attorney Thorson advised that a quorum has been met but that actions which require the
expenditure of funds will require three City Council votes as will the introduction of ordinances
and that other items may be adopted by two City Council votes.
PRELUDE MUSIC
The prelude music was provided by Eve Craig.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Steve Struikmans of Rancho Community Church.
ALLEGIANCE
The flag ceremony was presented by Mayor Pro Tern Stone.
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Special Achievement Award for Matthew John Sappin,qton for attaininq Eaqle Scout rank
On behalf of the City Council, Councilman Comerchero presented the award to Matthew
Sappington.
Megan's Law Public Access Computer Presentation
Advising that as of September 25, 2002, at noon, Police Chief Domenoe informed the City
Council and the public that Megan's Law information will be publicly and electronically
accessible at the Old Town Police Store Front location. In response to the Council, Mr.
Domenoe noted the following:
· That those interested in accessing the database will be required to present a valid
California I.D. and that a waiver form must be signed;
· That if a demand is recognized, Saturday hours could be made available (Monday &
Tuesday 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. and Wednesday & Thursday 12:00 - 8:00 P.M.);
· That the hours of accessibility will be posted on the City's Web.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
On behalf of a newly formed and forming citizens committee (Temecula Valley YES on
Proposition No. 47), Mr. Chuck Washington, 31205 Kahwea Road, spoke in support of the
R:\Minutes\092402
1
proposition and requested the City's support of this State School Board Measure, briefly
commenting on the financial benefits the Temecula schools would derive.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
A. By way of overheads, Councilman Pratt commented on traffic congestion and stated
that, in his opinion, the City staff/management has continued to ignore the legislative intent of
the State Congestion Management Plan.
B. Advising that the Small Business and Government Relations Committee was sponsoring
a Small Business Assistance Conference on Monday, October 21, 2002, in Diamond Bar,
Councilman Comerchero advised that representatives from various agencies will be in
attendance and recommended the participation of small business owners.
C. In response to Councilman Pratt's comment, Mayor Pro Tern Stone relayed his
opposition to blaming City staff/management on the response of the State's Congestion
Management Plan, noting that the City's staff has operated on the policies set forth by the past
and present City Councils; that the City Council has accomplished everything possible to try to
alleviate traffic within the community; and that mass transit will continue to be a very important
issue. Mr. Stone addressed the extravagant costs associated with a monorail system and noted
that mass transit will not be a reality for the City, including rural areas, until a partnership with
the Federal government can be created.
D. Questioning the proposed cost of a monorail system ($1.5 billion), Councilman Pratt
noted that he would like to further explore those costs and, therefore, requested that additional
staff time be allotted to him.
In response to Mr. Pratt's request, Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that the request to
allocate additional staff time should be agendized for the next meeting.
E. Advising that Mayor Roberts is at the American Public Transit Association Conference in
Las Vegas, Councilman Comerchero suggested that information be received from him with
regard to the monorail system.
CONSENTCALENDAR
1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
2
Resolution Approvinq List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:\Minutes\092402
2
RESOLUTION NO. 02-78
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
3 Purchase of seven City Vehicles
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Approve the purchase of the following vehicles from Rancho Ford:
· Two 2003, mid-sized Ford trucks $18,507.11 (each)
· Two 2003, ~-ton Ford trucks $22,115.69 (each)
· One 2003, %-ton Ford truck $25,663.15
· One 2003, 15-passenger van $22,735.25
· One 2003, cab and chassis stencil truck rehab $46,122.39
3.2 Approve an additional appropriation of $18,507.11 for the purchase of the second
mid-sized truck.
4 Authorization to execute the Supplemental Aqreement for the Fiscal Year 2002-2003
Community Development Block Grant Funds
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for fiscal year 2002-03
Community Development Block Grant Funds.
5 Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Agreement for perimeter landscapinR along Seraphina
Road and Rita Way for Tract Map Nos. 26828, -1, and -2
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC, for
landscaped slopes and parkways along Seraphina Road and Rita Way within Tract
Map Nos. 26828, -1, and -2.
6 Award of Construction Contract - Rancho Vista Road Drainaqe Improvements - Project No.
PW02-12
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Award a construction contract for Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvements-
Project No. PW02-12 -to McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. of Temecula,
California, in the amount of $27,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the
contract;
R:\Minutes\092402
3
6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $2,700.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
7
Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract - Margarita Road Wideninq (Interim
Phase II) - Proiect No. PW99~01
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Accept the Margarita Road Widening Project (Interim Phase II) - Project No. PW99-
01 - as complete;
7.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a twelve-
month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract;
7.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of
Completion if no liens have been filed.
8
9
Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for John WarnedSantiaclo Road
Assessment District Improvement Proiect - Hydrology Study - Project No. PW02-07
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Approve Amendment No. 1 in an amount not to exceed $8,215.00 to the
Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern
California, Inc. to provide additional design services for the John Warner/Santiago
Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study - Project No.
PW02~07 - and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment.
(Because of the absence of Mayor Roberts and Councilman Naggar, this item was
continued to the meeting of October 8, 2002, and Mayor Pro Tern Stone advised
that he would have to abstain with regard to this matter.)
Award of Construction Contract for Intersection Traffic Monitorinq System and Traffic Signal
Interconnect - Proiect No. PW99-05
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1
Award a construction contract for DBX, Inc. for the Intersection Traffic Monitoring
System and Traffic Signal Interconnect - Project No. PW99-05 - in the amount of
$945,103.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
9.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $47,255.15 which is equal to 5% of the contract amount;
9.3
Award a construction contract to MCSi, Media Consultants/System Integrators for
modification and installation of a Traffic Operation Center in an amount not to
exceed $150,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
9.4
Approve a transfer in the amount of $300,000.00 from the French Valley Parkway
Interim Southbound Off-Ramp to Jefferson Avenue Phase I project to the
Intersection Traffic Monitoring System - Project No. PW99-05.
R:\Minutes\092402
4
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 7 and 9
(Item No. 8 was continued to the meeting of October 8, 2002). The motion was seconded
by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman
Naggar and Mayor Roberts who were absent.
At 7:23 P M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and after a short recess, the City Council Meeting resumed
with regular business at 7:40 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING
10 Rancho California Road Bridqe Widening over Murrieta Creek - Approval of Project and
Miti,qated Negative Declaration
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-79
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD BRIDGE WIDENING OVER MURRIETA CREEK
PROJECT NO, PW99-18
Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (of record).
Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing.
Councilman Pratt relayed his opposition to this project for the following reasons:
· That CEQA would require the completion of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
this project;
· That the preparation of a Negative Declaration for an incremental part of a total proiect
would be in violation of the CEQA requirement;
· That an adequate Negative Declaration be prepared and that an EIR for the entire
circulation portion of the 2002-06 CIP budget of which this Negative Declaration
addresses an incremental part.
At this time, Mayor Pro Tem Stone closed the public hearing.
Strongly disagreeing with Councilman Pratt's comments, Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that staff
has adhered to the CEQA requirements and relayed his confusion with Councilman Pratt
opposing a project on CEQA grounds a project which was designed to increase traffic flow,
noting that the widening of this bridge would accommodate more traffic.
Having adhered to the environmental steps necessary to provide this infrastructure amenity,
Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that this project will be one of many public improvements which will
improve the quality of life for the citizens of this City by lessening traffic and advised that the
City has taken legal action with regard to County projects which are creating challenging
impacts to the City and, thereby, ensuring that impacts are mitigated.
R:\Minutes\092402
5
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion
was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and roll call vote reflected approval with the exception
of Councilman Naggar and Mayor Roberts who were absent and Councilman Pratt who
opposed.
11 Planning Application Nos. PA01-0522 (Zone Chanqe) and PA00-0470 (Conditional Use
Permit/Development Plan) - Rancho Community Church
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-80
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE
INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00-
0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF
JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR
APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED
AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211;
ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-
001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006.
11.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-04
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
(PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6),
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE
OF THE CITY OF TEIV]ECULA, AND ADOPTING THE
STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE
ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND
CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR
PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10
OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001
THRU -006.
R:\Minutes\092402
6
11.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-81
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-
0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION
OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39-
ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT
INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND
NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A
3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A
9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; THE PLACEMENT OF
SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS
TEMPORARY FACILITIES; FIVE SPORTS FIELDS; A
GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING
STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023
SQUARE FEET), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET
EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST
FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY
DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7~ 8,
9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 &
959-070-003 THRU -006
R:\Minutes\092402
7
11.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-
0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO
ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE
OVERALL PROJECT WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET
OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500-
SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH
ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300-SEAT, 5,856
SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT
EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT
WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY, FOUR LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING
380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF
SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH
GRADE CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL
CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM
BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDINGS
TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT
MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A
9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD
HOUSE/RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, A 16,184 SQUARE FOOT
GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT
ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79
SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH
ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000
FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3
AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001
THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006
Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), highlighting the
Planning Commission's recommendation and added conditions, advising that the Commission
unanimously recommended approval of the Zone Change, Development Plan, and Conditional
Use Permit.
Councilman Comerchero commended staff and the subcommittee on its efforts associated with
this project. For Mr. Comerchero, staff noted the following:
That the trip generation analysis comparison to the existing office professional to the
proposed PDO reflected an insignificant differential and it may have even been less
during peak hours.
Councilman Comerchero recommended that if sufficient alternate fueling facilities were
available in the City, that such options be explored versus the use of diesel. It was noted that
the applicant voiced no objection to this recommendation.
Councilman Pratt noted that he would view the proposed project as a traffic mitigator.
R:\Minutes\092402
8
At this time, Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing.
Pastor Steve Struikmans, Rancho Community Church, 29741 Camino del Sol, commended
staff on its assistance; thanked the Planning Commission for its recommendations and
approval; and relayed his concurrence with the resolutions, ordinance, and conditions of
approval
For Councilman Pratt, Mr. Malkoff, representing the applicant, noted that the tree height will be
15' to 20' at maturity; that the homes located behind the development are typically 20' to 40'
higher in elevation; and that dependent on budget, the lighting of the ball fields may be
included in the initial phase.
Ms. Cynthia Valdez, 1954 Placenta, Costa Mesa, Vice President of Bridgeport Builders,
extended her appreciation to the City Council for its review of this matter; commended the
Planning Commission and Planning Department staff on its assistance in this process; and
advised that she has reviewed the staff report and concurs with the proposed recommendation.
At this time, Mayor Pro Tem Stone closed the public hearing.
Councilman Pratt reiterated that the proposed project would be a traffic mitigator.
Councilman Comerchero commended those associated with this project on their efforts of
involving the community.
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to adopt Resolution Nos. 02-80, 02-81, and 02-82.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Councilman Naggar and Mayor Roberts who were absent..
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to adopt Ordinance No. 02-04. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of
Councilman Naggar and Mayor Roberts who were absent.
Mayor Pro Tern Stone complimented the applicant on its efforts of community involving on this
project.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
No additional comments.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Nelson commended the Planning Commission and Planning Department staff on
its efforts with regard to the Rancho Community Church project.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
With regard to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson noted that with regard to the City of
Temecula/City of Corona, et al. v. County Of Riverside, et al. case, the City Council voted 3-0-2-
0 to authorize the City Attorney's office to file a petition for rehearing and if that were denied, to
file a petition for review in the California Supreme Court. With regard to the real property
negotiation item, Mr. Thorson stated that any final agreement would be subject to approval
before the City Council at a public session.
R:\Minutes\092402
9
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:09 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 8, 2002, at
7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:\Minutes\092402
10
ITEM 3
RESOLUTION NO. 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the
Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby
allowed in the amount of $1,749,916.55.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 12th day of November, 2002.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 02- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 12th day of November, 2002 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:/Resos2OO2/Resos 02- 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
10/17/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
10/24/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
10/31/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
10/24/02 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
$ 126,632.86
880,353.82
457,420.39
285,509.48
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 11/12/02 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
165
190
192
193
194
210
261
280
300
320
330
34o
GENERAL FUND
RDA-LOW/MOD INCOME HOUSING
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND
CFD 88-12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND
RDA-REDEVELOPMENT
INSURANCE
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
SUPPORT SERVICES
FACiLITiES
$ 708,319.99
28,505.54
215,501.68
35,589.71
101,433.95
1,346.51
259,537.65
2,162.34
26,217.44
7,387.20
64,843.02
2,596.27
10,985.77
$ 1,749,916.55
$ 1,484,407.07
001
165
190
192
193
194
280
300
320
330
340
GENERAL FUND
RDA-LOW/MOD INCOME HOUSING
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
RDA-REDEVELOPMENT
INSURANCE
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
SUPPORT SERVICES
FACILITIES
TOTAL BY FUND:
PREPARED BY RETA WESTON, ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST
SHAWN NELSON, CiTY MANAGER
203,132.02
4,934.38
49,570.04
73.04
4,663.38
627.61
2,053.07
953.25
11,267.06
2,116.58
6,019.05
285,509.48
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1
10/17/2002 12:03:27PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
79837 10/17/2002 005618 ADAMS, TRACY
79838 10/17/2002
79839 10/17/2002 001375 AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION
79840 10/17/2002 000101 APPLE ONE, INC.
79841 10/17/2002
79842 10/17/2002
79843 10/17/2002
79844 10/17/2002
79845 10/17/2002
79846 10/17/2002
003376 ARTS COUNCIL, THE
005623 BAIRD, LESLIE
005624 BEL VILLAGGIO
005622 BO'II'O, MARIA ESTELA
004782 CSUS/PTS
005613 CARLSON, CYNTHIA
79847 10/17/2002
79848 10/17/2002
79849 10/17/2002
Description
Refund:Music-Piano Camp
003954 ALTERNATIVE FIRE PROTECTI Fac impr prgm:Sturbenk(Count~y Point
Membership dues:Patrick Ryan
Arreola tamp help PPE 07/13/02
Arreola temp help PPE 08/03/02
Arreola temp help PPE 08/24/02
Arreola temp help PPE 08/10/02
Atkinson temp help PPE 09/14/02
Grant Agrmnt for Special events
Refund:Beginning Baton Twirling
Refund:Building Permit:41377 Margari
Refund: Tiny Tots-Creative Beg
Traffic svcs conf;11/3-6:Deputy Scanlo
Refund: Security Deposit
002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS & Harvest Camival:Balloon Artist
005619 CORMIER, JOAN Refund:Beginning BatonTwiding
005615 COUNTRYWIDE AUCTIONEERS Refund: Security Deposit
79850 10/17/2002
79851 10/17/2002
79852 10/17/2002
79853 10/17/2002
002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATES
005598 DEHESA CHARTER SCHOOL
005621 EMERSON, RACHEL
005620 FERSTLE, ALMA
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST
Refund: Security Deposit
Refund:Breakfast with Santa
Refund: Dance-Youth Hawaiian Inter
Amount Paid
40.00
7,832.75
125.00
709.80
468.00
462.15
374.40
260.00
34,000.00
64.00
381.90
117.50
200.00
100.00
650.00
100.00
6,000.00
100.00
9.00
35.00
Check Total
40.00
7,832.75
125.00
2,274.35
34,000.00
64.00
381.90
117.50
200.00
100.00
650.00
64.09
100.00
6,000.00
100.00
9.00
35.00
Page:l
apChkLet Final Check List Page: 2
10/17/2002 12:03:27PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check It Date Vendor Description
79854 10/17/2002 002104 GRILL ROOM, THE
79855 10/17/2002 002372 HARMON, JUDY
Amount Paid
2002 Commission Recognition Dinner
TCSD instructor earnings
1,895.05
212.80
588.05
752.10
64.00
64.00
6,841.65
456.00
2,395.00
300.00
250.00
700.00
100.00
995.00
924.00
742.00
360.45
60.00
126.00
115.30
79856 10/17/2002 003106 HERITAGE SECURITY SERVIC Security Guards for 9/11 event
79857 10/17/2002 000871 HILTON
79858 10/17/2002 005618 HUBBELL, SHILLA
79859 10/17/2002 005617 IMURA, AKEMI
49 10/16/2002 000444 INSTATAX(EDD)
79860 10/17/2002 001186 IRWIN, JOHN
79861 10/17/2002 004265 JEWELL FENCE COMPANY
79862 10/17/2002 003280 JON LASKIN BAND
79863 10/17/2002 003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO
HtI:CA Namotic Conf:11/23-26:staff
Refund:Beginning Baton Twiding
Refund:Beginning Baton Twirling
Employees state UI & ETT taxes
TCSD instructor earnings
Res impr prgm:Higinio Rivera
Entertainment:First Friday Nights 9/6/
Sound sys: First Friday Summer Nigh
Broadcasting:Summer Nights 9/25-29
79864 10/17/2002 005614 LIFE LINE SCREENING OFAMEI Refund: Secudty Deposit
79865 10/17/2002 005323 LINFIELD SCHOOL, THE
79866 10/17/2002 004068 MANALILI, AILEEN
79867 10/17/2002 001258 MARRIO'FTHOTEL
79868 10/17/2002 005604 MARTINEZ, SONIA
79869 10/17/2002 005601 MC MEEKIN, BILL
79870 10/17/2002 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS
Refund:Eng deposit:13428 pamel map
TCSD instructor earnings
TCSD instructor earnings
Htl:Traffic Safety:l 1/3-6:Deputy Scanlc
Refund:Cooking-Vegetarian
Refund: Security Deposit
consultant svcs:old twn marketing
Check Total
1,895.05
212.80
588.05
752.10
64.00
64.00
6,841.65
456.00
2,395.00
550.00
700.00
100.00
995.00
1,666.00
360.45
60.00
126.00
115.30
Page2
apChkLst
10/17/2002 12:03:27PM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
79871 10/17/2002 005600 MEYER, MALLORY, L.
79872 10/17/2002 005611 MOBLEY, AMY
79873 10/17/2002 005599 MONET HOMEOWNERS ASSN.
79874 10/17/2002 005608 NEUMAN, JASON
79875 10/17/2002 000249 PETFY CASH
79876 10/17/2002 005625 P~NGEL, JOHN
79877 10/17/2002 005606 POWER RESOURCES
79878 10/17/2002 005067 PURSUITTECHNOLOGY INC
79879 10/17/2002 005626 QUALPAC SERVICES INC.
79880 10/17/2002 005595 REYES, ERLINDO
79881 10/17/2002
79882 10/17/2002
79883 10/17/2002
79884 10/17/2002
79885 10/17/2002
79886 10/17/2002
79887 10/17/2002
79888 10/17/2002
Final Check List
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description
Refund: Security Deposit
Refund:Bldg Permit:44757 Carte Banu
Refund: Security Deposit
Reimb:Fire volunteer meals for tractor race
Petty cash mimbumement
Reimb:NCNIES Conf:9/21-25/02
Refund: S~curity Deposit
Install laptops mounting sys:Fire Dept
Credit:No holes board for Ford F_xpd
Credit:Ovmhrg due to the GPS system
Refund:Bldg Permit:44239 Margarita R
Refund: S~curity Deposit
000418 RIVERSIDECOCLERK&RECO; DevelAgrmntnoticedetermination
000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RECOF Devel code Notice of Determination
000418 RIVERSIDECOCLERK&RECOF Large Family Day Care Notice of
000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONTR(; Application fee:R.C, bddge widening
005602 ROBERT JOHN NAPIER SOCCE Refund: Security Deposit
002226 RUSSO, MARY ANNE
005593 SILDORF & SHINNICK
004460 SILVERADO BLUEGRASS BAN
TCSD instructor earnings
Refund: Security Deposit
Entertainment:Summer Nights Old twn
Amount Paid
100.00
53.83
100.00
452.90
256.71
860,25
125.00
6,663.34
-459.55
-800.00
190.00
100.00
1,314.00
64.00
500.00
100.00
707.00
100.00
650.00
Page: 3
Check Total
100.00
53.83
100.00
452.90
256.71
860.25
125.00
4,403.79
190.00
100.00
1,314.00
100.00
707.00
100.00
Pages
apChkLst
10/1712002 12:03:27PM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
79889 10/17/2002 000537 SO CALIF EDISON
79890 10/17/2002 005610 ST NICHOLAS GREEK
79891 10/17/2002 005607 STORCHHEIM, ROBERT
79892 10/17/2002
79893 10/17/2002
79894 10/17/2002
79895 10/17/2002
79896 10/17/2002
79897 10/17/2002
79898 10/17/2002
79899 10/17/2002
005597 TEMECULA VALLEY POP WARN Refund: Security Deposit
005612 TESCHLER, MICHAEL AND SAN Refund:Eng Deposit:37120 Pio Pico R
Refund:Eng Deposit:9833-1 map
000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC Sound Sys&Stage:Halloween event
Teen DJ & sound svcs:July 12
Teen DJ svcs:Aug 16
005567 TOTL GEAR LLC E-Z up carrying bags:Fira Stn
005594 VAJRARUPINI BUDDHIST CENT Refund: Security Deposit
005603 VATAVE, SANGITA
005596 VILLALVA, VICKY, M.
005605 WILSON, KIMBERLY
Page: 4
Final Check List
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description
Oct 2-01-202-7330 Various meters 35,527.25
Oct 2-06-105-0654 Various meters 2,709.38
Refund: Security Deposit 100.00
Publication-Bldg Dept newsletter 38.00
100.00
5,000.00
995.00
825.00
350.00
350.00
150.85
100.00
Refund:Art-Portrait Drawing 36.00
Refund: Security Deposit 100.00
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm 75.00
Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA:
Amount Paid Check Total
38,236.63
100.00
38.00
100.00
5,995.00
1,525.00
150.85
100.00
36.00
100.00
75.00
126,632.86
Page~
apChkl-st
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
50 10/24/2002 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREME
51 10/24/2002 000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
52 10/24/2002 000444 INSTATAX (EDD)
79900 10/24/2002 000101 APPLE ONE, INC.
79901 10/24/2002 000137 CHEVRON U SAINC
79902 10/24/2002 000154 C S M FO
79903 10/24/2002 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC
79904 10/24/2002 000164 ESGILCORPORATION
79905 10/24/2002 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
79906 10/24/2002 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY I
79907 10/24/2002 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
79908 10/24/2002 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUST 45
79909 10/24/2002 000203 JOBS AVAILABLE INC
79910 10/24/2002 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN
Final Check List Page: 1
City of Temecula
Description Amount Paid Check Total
Employees state retirement 44,827.54 44,827.54
Employees fed pr taxes 56,150.22 56,150.22
Employees fed pr taxes 12,887.53 12,887.53
Acosta tamp help PPE 09/28/02 1,138.15
Kau tamp help PPE 09/28/02 520.00
Kissam temp help PPE 09/28/02 52.00 1,710.15
Fuel expense for city vehicles 208.72 208.72
Membership:G. Roberts 25240 100.00
Membership:P.Brewn 38713 100.00
Membership:K.Jester 29064 100.00 300.00
Inforum gold upgrade:Standard forms 125.00
Inforum gold upgrade: Standard forms 62.50
Inforum gold upgrade: Prjt Mgmt 968.75
Inforum gold upgrade: Expense Reimb 903.68
Inforum gold upgrade:PA/PY/HR setu 533.00 2,592.93
Plan check svcs-B&S dept 7,806.58 7,806.58
Express mail services 276.71
Express mail services 184.73 461.44
Day timer supplies - Planning Dept 592.69
Day timer supplies-City C~erk 205.33
Day timer supplies - Planning Dept 29.48 827.50
Office Supplies:Fire Dept 1,101.18 1,101.18
Retirement contributions 6,195.62 6,195.62
EE recruitment ads:Recreation/Sr Eng 266.30 266.30
Sep:Var Public Notices:City Clerk 161.68
Sep:Var Public Notices:City Clerk 71.00 232.68
Page:l
apCbkLst Final Check List Page: 2
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Ternecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
79911 10/24/2002 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST
79912 10/24/2002 000266 RIGHTWAY
79913 10/24/2002 000277 S & S ARTS & CRAFTS INC
Amount Paid
8/23-9/25/02 01-00-10003-0 Marg Rd
Various water meters
Oct 01-17-80000-1 Via Eduardo
Sept 01-08-68000-4 Main St.
Various water meters
Various water meters
Various water meters
9/19-11/03/02 rental equip:Rive~ton
10/12-11/8/02 rental equip:Paseo Pk
10/7-11/3/02 rental equip:Veterans
Rec Supplies/Halloween Carnival
16.50
779.62
73.52
34.18
10,859.68
9,057.61
1,068.77
124.36
60.78
54.39
308.61
79914 10/24/2002 000303 2/90 SIGN SYSTEMS
Signage for City Hall & West Wing
889.10
79915 10/24/2002 000305 TARGET STORE Aquatic supplies for TCSD
Misc office supplies for PW
Supplies for Team Pace
Supplies for Team Pace
79916 10/24/2002 000306 TEMECULAVALLEY PIPE & SU various parks irrigation supplies
35.22
517.61
189.30
39.14
874.55
79917 10/24/2002 000307 TEMECULATROPHY COMPAN "Past Pres./Golden Yrs' awards/St Ctr
4th qtr ee recogn award:LBelian
qty 8 mugs:"Tem. P.D."
79918 10/24/2002 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS Office supplies for Land Der
96.98
61.63
19.74
575.16
79919 10/24/2002 000325 UNITED WAY
Employee contributions
255.80
Check Total
21,889.88
239.53
308.61
889.10
781.27
874.55
178.35
575.16
255.80
79920 10/24/2002
79921 10/24/2002
79922 10/24/2002
79923 10/24/2002
79924 10/24/2002
000358 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR LAFCO cost allocation svcs
000357 RIVERSIDE CO TRANSPORTATI Traffic Signal retrofit with LED
000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA)
000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
000478 FAST SIGNS
P/T EE retirement
Repair fire alarm strobe beacons:CRC
Race for the Cure banner
5,117.80
2,919.74
2,311.86
1,256.00
546.30
5,117.80
2,919.74
2,311.86
1,256.00
546.30
79925 10/24/2002 000484 CALIF ASSN FOR LOCAL ECON( Membership:S.Nelson
445.00
445.00
Page2
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
79926 10/24/2002 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR£ Pest Control Srvcs:Paloma Del Sol
Amount Paid
215.00
Check Total
215.00
79927 10/24/2002 000524 VAN TECH ENGINEERING SAFE
79928 10/24/2002 000537 SO CALIF EDISON
79929 10/24/2002 000574 SUPERTONER
79930 10/24/2002 000638 CALiF DEPTOFCONSERVATIO
79931 10/24/2002 000645 SMART & FINAL INC
79932 10/24/2002 000728 RAMSEY BACKFLOW & PLUMB
79933 10/24/2002 000745 AT & TWIRELESS SERVICES
79934 10/24/2002 000815 ROWLEY, CATHY
79935 10/24/2002 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
79936 10/24/2002 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH
79937 10/24/2002 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS
79938 10/24/2002 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW ST
Safety Vests/Jackets:Land Dev
Oct 2-10-331-1353 Stn 84
Oct 2-24-151-6582 Overland Pass
Oct 2-02-351-5281 CRC
Sept 2-00-397-5059 various mtrs
Oct 2-19-999-9442 various mtrs
HP Printer Supplies
2002 3rd Qtr pmt;strong motion
Rec Supplies/Halloween Camival
Recreation Supplies for TCC
supplies for Sister Cities Prgm
Pks/Rec medians backflow testing sv
Cellular phone svcs:lnf Sys
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD Instructor Earnings
Citywide erosion control - sandbaggin
REMOVAL OF SILT & DEBRIS FROM
City vehicle detailing services
city vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing/fuel usage
City vehicle detailing services
City vehicle detailing services
Dupl. Blueprints:John Warner:02-07
Dupl. Blueprints:Mercantile Bldg
Old Town Latin Festival:9/14/02
Old Town extra duty patrol:8/25/02
Main Street Fund Raiser:8/31/02
373.04
1,228.19
13.39
8,440.29
7,383.86
2,099.72
133.61
2,608.57
101.85
99.85
32.95
40.00
201.99
256.00
192.00
192.00
256.00
10,500.00
6,000.00
8.00
8.00
8.00
16.00
14.14
9.50
87.50
50.00
48.00
60.88
25.72
915.12
834.44
628.08
373.04
19,165.45
133.61
2,608.57
234.65
~.~
201.99
896.00
16,500.00
249.14
86.60
2,377.64
Page3
apChkLet Final Check List Page: 4
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
79939 10/24/2002 001014 COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS
Amount Paid
Check Total
Fac impr prgm:The Beaten Path fees
190.00
190.00
79940 10/24/2002 001054 CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS
79941 10/24/2002 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
79942 10/24/2002 001065 U S C MWEST(DEF COMP)
Title 24 BIdg Energ Code Cf:12/17/02
Title 24 BIdg Energ Code Cf:l 2/18/02
Title 24 Bldg Energ Code Cf:l 1/04/02
Title 24 Bldg Energ Code Cf:l 1/04/02
Title 24 Bldg Energ Code Cf:12/17/02
Title 24 Bldg Energ Code Cf:l 1/05/02
Aug Idscp [mpr:Ridgeview
Aug Idscp impr:Campos Verdes
Employee def comp plan
40.00
40.00
40.00
40,00
40.00
40.00
230.00
70.02
16,656,19
240.00
300.02
16,656.19
79943 10/24/2002 001085 L N CURTIS & SONS
Paramedics supplies:Fire Dept
1,230.51
1,230.51
79944 10/24/2002
79945 10/24/2002
001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT
001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED (
Consulting svcs:Welty Bdg rehad
Consulting svcs:Affordable housing d
consullting svc:Education facility
Pre-employment physicals
492.50
471.88
226.25
585.00
1,190.63
585.00
79946 10/24/2002 001193 COMPUSAINC
Misc Computer supplies:Info Sys
197.66
197.66
79947 10/24/2002
79948 10/24/2002
001212 SO CAUF GAS COMPANY
001233 DANS FEED & SEED INC
Oct 091-024-9300-5 CRC
Oct 095-167-7907-2 Sm 84
9/9-10/8/02 gas mtrs-var City Fac
Propane Gas for Public Works Mntc
1,338.08
97.45
95.62
18.85
1,531.15
18.85
79949 10/24/2002
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
Kanigowski temp help PPE 10/04/02
Montecino temp help PPE 10/04/02
Martinez temp help PPE 10/04/02
Rosa temp help PPE 10/04/02
Cammamta temp help PPE 10/04/02
Bragg temp help PPE 10/04/02
Ebon temp help PPE 10/04/02
TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN
McClanehan/Ching temp help PPE 10
Rosales temp help PPE 10/04/02
Obmann temp help PPE 10/04/02
Naaseh-Shahry temp help PPE 10/04
McCoy temp help PPE 10/04/02
TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN
1,181.44
1,109.60
1,235.2o
1,198.o7
1,193.o5
1,778.18
1,397.6o
1,240.80
2,679.27
1,898,95
1,841.90
7,410.73
2,762.04
2,735.20
291662.03
Page~
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
79950 10/24/2002 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
79951 10/24/2002
(Continued)
Description
Business Cards:L. Stiles
Business Cards:M. Horton
Bus. Cards:T. Buckley/J. Pidgeon
Business Cards:D. Cambems
Business Cards:C.Adkisson
Business Cards:T. Thorson
Business Cards:J. Neuman
Business Cards:J. Stone
001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY i Pool sanitizing chemicals
Amount Paid Check Total
42.83
42.83
85.66
42.83
42.83
114.86
114.88
85.66
114.43
79952 10/24/2002 001511 FIELDMANROLAPP&ASSOCIA PROFESSIONALFINANCIALADVIS
2,090.40
79953 10/24/2002
79954 10/24/2002
001515 ASAPTRUCK,TRACTOR/FIRE~ WeedAbatementsvcs:40427Carmal
Weed Abatement svc:959-070-001
Weed Abatement svc: 959-070-002
Weed Abatement svcs: 959-070-003
Weed Abatement svcs:FY 2002-2003.
001517 INTEGRATED INSIGHTS DBA: H Employee Assistance Program
1,245.00
185.00
185.00
185.00
7,058.85
582.54
79955 10/24/2002 001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I Alarm Monitoring Svcs:Police storefr
81.00
79956 10/24/2002 001700 A PLUS TEACHING MATERIALS Teen Programsupplies:TCSD
107.70
79957 10/24/2002 001892 MOBILE MODULAR
Oct modular b]dg rental:Stn 92
777.95
79958 10/24/2002 001942 S C SIGNS
Aug post public notices
845.00
572.36
114.43
8,858.85
582.54
81.00
107.70
777.95
845.00
79959 10/24/2002
79960 10/24/2002
79961 10/24/2002
79962 10/24/2002
79963 10/24/2002
79964 10/24/2002
001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG Employeebeneflts
001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER temp help w/e 09/22 Dankworth
temp help w/e 09/29 Dankworth
001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER temp help w/e 10/06 Dankworth
001972 STANLEY R HOFFMAN ASSOCl Redhawk Fiscal Analysis Svcs
001985 A E P (ASSOC OF ENVIRO PROI Membership:D.Ubnoske Dec 83
002011 MARTIN, KATHARINA E. TCSD Instructor Earnings
250.15
540.51
354.75
354.75
2,500.00
100.00
190.40
250.15
895.26
354.75
2,500.00
100.00
190.40
Page5
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
79965 10/24/2002 002037 EXPANETS
(Continued)
Description
Telephone Maintenance Agrmnt-
Amount Paid
2,198.40
Check Total
2,198.40
79966 10/24/2002 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERING Refreshment:Council Closed Sessions
269.81
269.81
79967 10/24/2002
79968 10/24/2002
79969 10/24/2002
79970 10/24/2002
79971 10/24/2002
79972 10/24/2002
79973 10/24/2002
79974 10/24/2002
79975 10/24/2002
79976 10/24/2002
79977 10/24/2002
79978 10/24/2002
79979 10/24/2002
002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI
002126 HILLYARD FLOOR CARE SUPPL
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- A'[-rN:
002140 JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS
002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS &
002292 OASIS VENDING
002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET CL
002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH¢
002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC
002534 CATERERS CAFE
002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV
002631 COUNTS UNLIMITED INC
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
REPAIR & MAINT OF VEHICLES-
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maintJrepair svcs
various parks rental equipment
Equipment rental for PW Maint
Equipment rental for PW Maint
Equipment rental for PW Maint
Gym Floor cleaning supplies: CRC
Sep:EE Recruitment Ads:Human Reso
Sep:Display Ad for 9/11 :Sister Cities
Network Client Svcs:lnfo Sys
Entertainment:Halloween event 10/26-
Entertainment:Family Fun Night 10/18
City Hall kitchen/coffee supplies
Clean Carpets @ Sr Center
Aug 2002 legal services
Add't banner not invoiced
Clean/Storage red run banners
Refreshments:DIF fee mtg:Fire
C]tywide Channel repairs w/slurry mix
Citywide A.C. saw cutting:PW Mntc
Prof Svs:Citywide Traffic Count Data
Pref Svc:Citywide Traffic Count Data
26.67
144.89
122.73
101.65
356.52
188.30
153.51
54.96
27.99
107.73
6~89
28.69
547.50
168.75
1,102.27
1,700.00
175.00
302.62
140.00
146,529.85
263.99
168.47
18.00
5,220.00
2,120.00
10,425.00
540.00
1,094.27
256.57
28.69
716.25
1,102.27
1,875.00
302.62
140.00
146,529.85
432.46
18.00
7,340.00
10,965.00
Page~
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
79980 10/24/2002 002640 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA
79981 10/24/2002 002776 INTOUCH AMERICA
79982 10/24/2002
79983 10/24/2002
79984 10/24/2002
002793 QUICK WRAP BAGS
002900 DANIEL MANN JOHNSON
002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS
79985 10/24/2002
79986 10/24/2002
79987 10/24/2002
79988 10/24/2002
79989 10/24/2002
79990 10/24/2002
79991 10/24/2002
79992 10/24/2002
79993 10/24/2002
79994 10/24/2002
Membemhip:Beardshear 45277943
Sept cellular svcs:Sr Van TCSD
Sept cellular svcs:City Van TCSD
Bags for shipping plans:Fire Prev.
Prof design svcs:Pala Rd Impr Phase I
parts/supplies for PW Maint
parts/supplies for PW Maint
parts/supplies for PW Maint
parts/supplies for PW Maint
parts/supplies for Fire Prev.
Parts for MS-84 vehicle
002945 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL D Old twn Elect supplies:PW
003006 DEWI'I-F CUSTOM PAINTING Res imp ping: Idle, Luz
Res impr prgm: Rivera
003021 CiNGULARWIRELESS(CELLPI- 9/9 -10/8/02 cellular phone svcs
003027 ROOFTEK
003067 TEMECULA R V
003214 CAL MAT
003214 CAL MAT
003218 PELA
003223 EDAW INC
003299 OLDERTHAN DIRTGANG
Res Imprv Prgm: J. Villa
Park Adapter for PD Command Ctr RV
PW patch truck materials
PW patch truck materials
Idscp plan check svcs:79S Sidewalk
Planning Plan Check Svcs
Aug TCSD Idscp plan check svcs
Sept soundwall imprv 99-11SW
Biological svcs:Pala Rd Bridge prjt
Entertainment:10/04:OId Town
44.00
27.27
27.27
128.95
12,030.27
11.60
5.81
2.54
39.58
16.14
13.75
6.32
2,500.00
1,000.00
5,370.03
1,583.00
12.92
464.72
30.49
602.00
6,710.00
1,500.00
860.00
264.29
200.00
Check Total
44.00
54.54
128.95
12,030.27
89.42
6.32
3,500.00
5,370.03
1,583.00
12.92
464.72
30.49
9,672.00
264.29
200.00
Page~
apChkL,st Final Check List Page: 8
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor DeecHptlon
79995 10/24/2002 003347 FIRST SANKCARD CENTER
xx-6702:Meyer J:Prof Mtgs
xx-0902:O'Grady:lCMA ConFPublicat
xx-4117:Oct:W H:Memberships
79996 10/24/2002 003376 ARTS COUNCIL, THE Qtxly Community Grant Agreement
79997 10/24/2002 003485 AUDIO VIDEO SUPPLY INC Projector Bulb w/Cage:Info sys
79998 10/24/2002 003493 PRO-CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR Res Imprv Prgm: J. Bermudaz
79999 10/24/2002 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE Citywide R-O-W Weed Abatement
80000 10/24/2002 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL 8/31-9/27/02 Dsgn svcs:Murr. Crk
80001 10/24/2002 003624 HOWELL, ANN MARIE Old Twn Images for Tourism Marketin
Stock photography for Tourism Ads
80002 10/24/2002 003640 GRAYNERENGINEERING Septratro-fitsvc:MercantileBuilding
Modif to existing rocf:Childmn's Museu
80003 10/24/2002 003665 EMERITUS COMMUNICATIONS Sept long distance phone
80004 10/24/2002 003673 TECH 101 ARCUS INC HP OfficeJet D145 printers/Council
80005 10/24/2002 003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL P.D. motorcyle repair/maint svcs
80006 10/24/2002 003739 COTTON BRIDGES ASSOCIATE update the City's General Plan
80007 10/24/2002 003742 REHAB FINANCIAL CORPORATI Sept RDA Loan Sewicing
80008 10/24/2002 003756 WHITE HOUSE SANITATION Pumping svcs:Btrfield Stage R.R.
80009 10/24/2002 003771 BACK ALLEY MOUNTAIN BIKES Bicycles repairs for the Police dept
Bicycles rspaim for the Police dept
Amount Paid
80010 10/24/2002 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION
80011 10/24/2002 003849 TERRYBERRYCOMPANY
80012 10/24/2002 003862 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR.
MISC PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES
EE service award:D.Hogan
Museum phone monitoring svcs
20.00
1,248.69
230,98
10,000.00
1,857.25
1,375.00
5,000.00
4,201 .PP
923.96
359.85
1,293.75
20.08
528,66
2,499.39
596.56
3,381.60
32.00
50.00
1,241.01
1,241.01
187.22
40.53
Check Total
1,499.67
10,000.00
1,857.25
1,375.00
5,000.00
4,201 .PP
1,283.81
1,313.83
528.66
2,499.39
596.56
3,381.60
32.00
50.00
2,482.02
187.22
40.53
Pages
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
80013 10/24/2002 003959 EVERETT&EVERETTPAINTI
Amount Paid
Res imp ping: Valenzuera, Sergio
1,500.00
Check Total
1,500.00
80014 10/24/2002 003976 CAIRNS & BROTHER INC Repair Calms Iris for Station 73
800.00
800.00
80015 10/24/2002 003986 KEVIN COZAD & ASSOCIATES I Surveying Srvcs:Temecula Library
3,866.00
3,866.00
80016 10/24/2002 004111 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENTI 2nd Qtr Unemployment insurance
361.22
361.22
80017 10/24/2002 004122 KRUEGER, KIMBERLEE
Eden Sys Conf:10/13-16:Las Vegas
135.79
135.79
80018 10/24/2002 004132 TRUCK HYDRAULIC EQUIPMEN Annual Inspection:PW Boom Truck
375.00
375.00
80019 10/24/2002 004141 MAINTEXINC
80020 10/24/2002
004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI
C.R.C Custodial Supplies
Maint Facility Custodial Supplies
Senior Center Custodial Supplies
T.C.C. Custodial Supplies
C.R.C Custodial Supplies
City Hall Custodial Supplies
Maint Facility Custodial Supplies
T.V. Museum Custodial Supplies
Fuel for city vehicles:PW
35.99
32.17
153.83
125.98
105.43
231.93
196.47
182.82
449.70
1,064.62
449.70
80021 10/24/2002
80022 10/24/2002
004219 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION GR Street striping supplies:PW Mntc
Street striping supplies:PW Mntc
Street striping supplies:PW Mntc
004239 FISHER MERRIMAN SEHGAL Y~ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN:OLD TOW
649.41
102.67
33.54
15,000.00
785.62
15,000.00
80023 10/24/2002 004242 HARMONY ARTISTS INC Old Twn entertainment:M.Wenzel
500.00
500.00
80024 10/24/2002 004247 STERICYCLE INC
MEDICAL WASTE COLLECTION
52.50
52.50
80025 10/24/2002
004248 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE/ACCT DUI/Drug/Alcohol Screening svc:Poli
Fingerprints info for new ee recruitmen
Credit:DUI chrge adjustment:Police
980.00
168.00
-35.00
1,113.00
Pages
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued}
Check # Date Vendor Description
80026 10/24/2002 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
80027 10/24/2002 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES
80028 10/24/2002 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY,
80029 10/24/2002 004306 STENOSOLUTIONS
Amount Paid
OCT XXX-1941 PTA CD TTACSD
OCT XXX-5072 GENERAL USAGE
OCT XXX-0073 GENERAL USAGE
SEPT XXX-5029 GENERAL USAGE
OCT XXX-8573 GENERAL USAGE
SEPT XXX-2730 ELEVATOR
SEPT XXX-2670 911 AUTO DIALER
OCT XXX-3564 ALARM
SEPT XXX-5780 GENERAL USAGE
SEPT XXX-5840 GENERAL USAGE
OCT XXX-0074 GENERAL USAGE
OCT XXX-1603 CITY HALL
OCT XXX-3923 STONE
DUI/Drug/Alcohol Screening svc:Poli
DUI/Drug/Alcohol Screening svc:Poli
park sites locksmith svcs
City Hall locksmith services
C.R.C. locksmith svcs
P.D. transcription services
56.85
6,334.06
1,733.66
677.60
32.37
29.13
28.68
55.36
32.40
32.40
256.72
89.46
27.52
1,112.30
319.50
36.72
60.00
50,00
478.08
80030 10/24/2002
80031 10/24/2002
004368 VALI COOPER & ASSOCIATES I
004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI
Jul temp inspection svcs:P. Ryan
Aug temp inspection svcs:P. Ryan
Employees Charities contributions
10,455.00
2,720.00
136.50
80032 10/24/2002
80033 10/24/2002
004412 LEANDER, KERRY D,
004446 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL
TCSD instructor earnings
TCSD instructor earnings
TCSD instructor earnings
TCSD instructor earnings
Membemhip:S.Harvey
160.00
66.00
208.00
208.00
210.00
80034 10/24/2002 004450 DENNISA HIBBERT PLUMBING Wedding chapel water heater repairs
525.00
80035 10/24/2002
80036 10/24/2002
004451 CA AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARM A
004457 R J NOBLE COMPANY
INTER FIRE ALARM SEM:I 1/12-14:
Fire Alarm Sys:l 1/4:JN/SH/MH/NM
Prgs pmt #2:pavement rahab:02-03
770.00
580.00
131,983.51
80037 10/24/2002 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICES Fuel expense for City vehicles
156.61
80038 10/24/2002 004529 QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON P.D. motorcycle repair/maint svcs
1,771.26
CheckTo~l
9,386.21
1,431.80
146.72
478.08
13,175.00
136.50
Co42.00
210.00
525.00
1,350.00
131,983.51
156.61
1,771.26
Page:10
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANKOF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80039 10/24/2002 004545 CC SALESCO
80040 10/24/2002 004548 LIGHTNING POWDER COMPAN
(Continued)
Description
Quick shade for paramedics
Portable Fingerprinting Pad:Police
80041 10/24/2002 004569 DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATE financial advisor Butterfield Stage CF
80042 10/24/2002 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING var. parks electrical supplies
various parks electrical supplies
City Hall electrical supplies
80043 10/24/2002 004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY ReslmprvPrgm:J. Zahyna
80044 10/24/2002 004621 C-18 INC Sept Prgss:Street Striping Prgm
Retention Sept Prgss:Street Striping
80045 10/24/2002 004773 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFFS Sept 2002 Booking Fees
80046 10/24/2002 004778 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR INC Design svcs:Pavement mgrnt updates
80047 10/24/2002 004814 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING I 9/1-10/1/02 Barrier Rail Replace
80048 10/24/2002 004836 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCT Various irrigation parts:TCSD
80049 10/24/2002 004846 UNITED GREEN MARK INC irrigation supplies for TCSD
Metal grate cover:Btrfld Stage
80050 10/24/2002 004894 MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOClA Jul eng svcs:Pala Rd Ph II
Aug eng svcs:Pala Rd Ph II
80051 10/24/2002 004938 Al COMPANY.COM IPaq Individual TrainingFl'roubleshootin
80052 10/24/2002 004949 GARAGE DOOR SERVICES
80053 10/24/2002 005026 ROADWORKS, INC.
80054 10/24/2002 005052 EMCOR SERVICE
80055 10/24/2002 005058 ADAMS, AARON
Res Imp Prgm: Clack, Ronald & Heath
Traf Cntrl Cart:Davis/Raw:Il/19-20/02
H.V.A.C. Repairs @ City Hall
HVAC qtrly preventative mntc:City Hall
H.V.A.C. repair @Stn 84
H.V.A.C. repairs @ TCC
Reimb:Senator Alpert District Office M
Amount Paid
479.34
322.07
2,878.96
126.55
64.00
63.36
1,362.00
52,888.35
-5,288.83
7,396.80
1,555.50
660,00
118.67
102.30
118.53
2,426.02
650.10
950.00
645.00
180.00
97.50
1,986.00
315.23
146.25
63.80
Check Total
479.34
322.07
2,878.96
253.91
1,362.00
47,599.52
7,396.80
1,555.50
660.00
118.67
220.83
3,076.12
950.00
645.90
180.00
2,544.98
63.80
apChkLst
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check it Date Vendor
50056 10/24/2002 005075 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPL
80057 10/24/2002 005227 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF
80058 10/24/2002 005251 EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE
Final Check List Page: 12
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description Amount Paid Check Total
Uniforms:TCSD Maint Crows
Credit:Item not delivered:inv# 76148
w/h support payment
Mobile equip & truck mpaim:PW Mntc
80059 10/24/2002 005272 ROSS DISTRIBUTING CORPOR/ PAGERWIRE FORTEM POLICE
80060 10/24/2002 005275 SOCIAL TECH INC
80061 10/24/2002 005277 2 H CONSTRUCTION IN(;:
TRAK SYSTEM FOR TEM POLICE
Sept Construction Prgss: Memantile
80062 10/24/2002 005280 FEDERAL SIGNAL CORPORATI( Elect Q siren w/speakers:Medic Squa
80063 10/24/2002 005313 HUFFER MANUFACTURING INC CarnivaIGames for HalloweenCamiv
80064 10/24/2002 005363 GRAPELINE, THE Sister City wine Tour:Dutch visitors
80065 10/24/2002 005375 CAMMAROTA, SUSAN Reimb:Day planner holder trays
005384 CALIFORNIA BAGEL BAKERY & Refreshments:Neighborhcod watch m
005411 ZONES INC Pumhase/HP Omnibook Computers
005412 TEMECULA GARDEN & POWER Repair/Maint Small Equipment:PW
80066 10/24/2002
80067 10/24/2002
80068 10/24/2002
80069 10/24/2002
80070 10/24/2002
80071 10/24/2002
80072 10/24/2002
80073 10/24/2002
005416 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC
005417 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY
005418 CLEAN FLO INTERNATIONAL
005567 TOTL GEAR LLC
005578 STAMEY, DAVID W.
Paramedic squad supplies:Fire
Paramedic squad supplies:Fire
First Aid Kit Supplies:City Hall
Aeration Pump Parts:Duck Pond
SUMMER/FALL 2002 1ST PLACE AW
t-shirts for Skater Challenges/Sports
SUMMER/FALL 2002 1ST PLACE AW
Entertainment:Summer nights 10/4
749.38
-8.53 740.85
107.00 107.00
384.30 384.30
1,311.00 1,311.00
2,180.00 2,180.00
59,714.82 59,714.82
1,262.54 1,262.54
648.00 648.00
380.00 380.00
79.37 79.37
92.50 92.50
20,491.00 20,491.00
12.39 12.39
155.83
98.17 254.00
34.32 34.32
457.62 457.62
210.00
201.40
163.25 574.65
800.00 800.00
Page:l 2
apChkLst
10/24/2002 3:01:57PM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80074 10/24/2002 005632 FONTANA, CITY OF
80075 10/24/2002 005656 PAPA
80076 10/24/2002 005657 PAYNE, JERRY
80077 10/24/2002 005658 LONNIE, JENKINS JR
80078 10/24/2002 005659 LOPEZ, GLORIA
80079 10/24/2002 005660 CALIF EMS AUTHORITY
80080 10/24/2002
80081 10/24/2002
80082 10/24/2002
80083 10/24/2002
80084 10/24/2002
80085 10/24/2002
80086 10/24/2002
80087 10/24/2002
80088 10/24/2002
80089 10/24/2002
80090 10/24/2002
80091 10/24/2002
Final Check List
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
CALPACS imprementation costs
PAPA Sem:l 1/05/02:K.Harrington
Refund:Parking Cit# 42001
Refund: Cite 42001 dismissed
Refund: Security Deposit
Paramedic license renewal:Buckley
005661 GRAND PACIFIC PALISADES R Conf room rental fer Bdgt Wkshp
005663 PERFECTFIREFIGHTERCAND lyrFirecareersonlinesubscription
005664 GOSCH TOWING & RECOVERY Vehicle towing svcs:Pelice Dept
005665 BLACK'S TOWING
005666 PHIPPS, STACY
005667 WILCOXEN, JANET
005668 NICHOLAS, ROBIN
005669 NELSON, PAULINE
005670 MILTON, KAy
005671 SLEVIN, MEL
005672 DATO, KRISTINE
005673 GUSTAFSON, LINDA
Vehicle towing svcs:Police Dept
Refund:Picnic Shelter:l 1/09/02
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotta Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Ber~j Farm
Refund:permit fee:B02-0726
Refund: Security Deposit
Refund:Exercise-Belly Dancing
222.22
55.00
60.00
325.00
100.00
130.00
150.00
90.00
135.00
312.50
25.00
40.00
40.00
80.00
40.00
239.10
100.00
21.24
Page: 13
Check Total
222.22
55.00
60.00
325.00
100.00
130.00
150.00
90.00
135.00
312.50
25.00
40.00
40.00
~0.00
40.00
239.10
100.00
21.24
Page:l 3
apChkLet Final Check List Page: 14
10/24/2002 3:01:87PM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80092 10/24/2002
80093 10/24/2002
80094 10/24/2002
80095 10/24/2002
80096 10/24/2002
80097 10/24/2002
80098 10/24/2002
80099 10/24/2002
(Continued)
005674 HEWLETT, MARILYN
005675 GUZMAN, WALTER O.
005676 EMANUEL, DEBORAH
005677 BRAND, MARTY
005678 COBB, MARK
005679 BLACK, PAUL
005680 HUNTER, ROXANNE
005681 DOUBLE D PIPELINE INC.
Description
Amount Paid
Refund: Exemise-Yoga for today
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund:Ex Tn-Knotts Berry Farm
Refund: Eng Depst:Felix Valdez & 6th
35.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
160.00
125.00
Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA:
Check Total
35.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
40.00
160.00
125.00
880,353.82
Page:14
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1
10/31/2002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80100 10/31/2002 001985 A E P (ASSOC OF ENVIRO PROI
Description
Amount Paid
CEQA wkshp:J.Neuman:11/15:San D
140.00
Check Total
140.00
80101 10/31/2002 004148 AT&T
Long distance svcs: P.D.
127.00
127.00
80102 10/31/2002 000745 AT & TWIRELESS SERVICES Cellular phone svcs:police
335.57
335.57
80103 10/31/2002
80104 10/31/2002
80105 10/31/2002
003304 ADAMS ADVERTISING INC
000108 ALFAXWHOLESALE FURNITUR
005662 ALL STAR PHOTOGRAPHY
Nov Billboard rental:Old Town
Billboard Change Outs:Rod Run
Billboard Change Outs:Mystery Wken
Multi-Purpose Room Chair Caddies
Multi-Purpose Room Chair Caddies:CF
City team photo:Race for the Cum Eve
2,082.50
500.00
450.00
1,110.51
547.75
165.00
3,032.50
1,658.26
165.00
80106 10/31/2002
80107 10/31/2002
003954 ALTERNATIVE FIRE PROTECTI
002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALL
Rel Retention:Fac Impr Prgm:Country
Credit:lnv exceeds ret withheld
Sept animal control services
2,521.00
-0.50
6,531.98
2,520.50
6,531.98
80108 10/31/2002
80109 10/31/2002
80110 10/31/2002
000101 APPLE ONE, INC.
001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC
003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY
Acosta temp help PPE 10/05/02
Acosta temp help PPE 10/12/02
Acosta tamp help PPE 10/19/02
Kissam/Michael tamp help PPE 10/19
Kissam temp help PPE 10/12/02
Kau temp help PPE 10/19/02
Kau tamp help PPE 10/12/02
Kau temp help PPE 10/05/02
Atkinson tamp help PPE 09/28/02
Kissam temp help PPE 10/05/02
Schalk tamp help PPE 10/18/02
Kissam temp help PPE 10/19/02
Bottled wtr servs @ City Hall
Bottled wtr servs @ West Wing
Bottled wtr servs @ Museum
Race for the Cure Team T-Shirts
1,182.00
1,182.00
1,085.25
630.50
520.00
520.00
520.00
520.00
273.00
266.50
104.00
29.25
210.44
95.35
23.48
183.71
6,832.50
329.27
183.71
80111 10/31/2002 005703 ASPHALT INSTITUTE
Const Hot Mix Asphalt:Il/4:7 PW staff
693.00
693.00
80112 10/31/2002 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA Membership:Tom Cole 93773232
44,00
44.00
Page:l
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2
10/31/2002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANKOF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80113 10/31/2002 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGERA
80114 10/31/2002 004206 BANUELOS, TERESA
80115 10/31/2002 003466 BASKET & BALLOONS TOO!
80116 10/31/2002 003221 BEAL, KELLI
(Continued)
Description
Elect retrofit duck pond statue light
TCSD instructor eamings
Pmmo Baskets:Econ Devel
EE computer pumhase prgm:Beal
80117 10/31/2002 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV Citywide Channel repairs w/slurry mix
Citywide Channel repairs w/slurry mix
80118 10/31/2002 004176 BROADWING TELECOMMUNIC,~ Long distance &intemet svcs
80119 10/31/2002 004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROUP Cubicle adjustments:City Clerk
005564 C P S HUMAN RESOURCES SEF Account Clerk Testing Supplies
005660 CALIF EMS AUTHORITY Paramedic license renewal:Rawlings
000152 CALIF PARKS & RECREATION S Membership: G.Thurston 105694
Membership:H.Parker 019942
002520 CALIFORNIA T'S SCREENPRINT Make a Difference Day Caps:TCSD
005585 CHING, MARIA Re[mb:SCACEO Conf:10/15-16:B
005697 COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS,~ Trademark fee:imagination Workshop
002147 COMPUMENTSCOMPLAINTS& Entertainment:Race for the Cure
000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
001014 COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS
004123 D L PHARES & ASSOCIATES
security alarm monitoring upgrades
Fac Imp Prgm: Fuzzy Elephant
Nov mthly lease:Police sub-Stn
003272 DAISY WHEEL RIBBON COMPAr Plotter paper and ink:GIS
80120 10/31/2002
80121 10/31/2002
80122 10/31/2002
80123 10/31/2002
80124 10/31/2002
80125 10/31/2002
80126 10/31/2002
80127 10/31/2002
80128 10/31/2002
80129 10/31/2002
80130 10/31/2002
Amount Paid
310.00
170.00
183.86
1,971.78
9,320.00
5,465.00
350.00
1,505.42
776.60
130.00
130.00
42.50
883,55
36.18
325.00
250.00
700.00
90.00
1,849.64
465.81
Check Total
310.00
170.00
183.86
1,971.78
14,785.00
350.00
1,505.42
776.60
130.00
172.50
883.55
36.18
325.00
250.00
700.00
90.00
1,849.64
465.81
Page2
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3
10/3112002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
80131 10/31/2002 000684 DIEHLEVANS&COMPANYLLP 2002Gov'tTaxSem:12/6:LaJolla
Amount Paid
175.00
Check Total
175.00
80132 10/31/2002 005699 DIXON, CAROLYN E.
Refund: Exercise-Belly Dance In
16.86
16.86
80133 10/31/2002
80134 10/31/2002
80135 10/31/2002
80136 10/31/2002
004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI
001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATI
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
002390 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER E
Fuel for city vehicles
Fuel for city vehicles:PW & Eng
Fuel for city vehicles
Supplies for graffiti removal:PW
Supplies for graffiti removal:PW
McCoy temp help PPE 10/18/02
TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN
Ching/Mcclanahan temp help PPE 10/
Bragg temp help PPE 10/18/02
Martinez temp help PPE 10/18/02
Kanigowski temp help PPE 10/18/02
Rosa temp help PPE 10/18/02
TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN
SUSAN CAMMAROTA -TEMPORARY
Montecino temp help PPE 10/28/02
95366-02 Diego Dr Ldscp
529.41
506.72
77.72
195.63
129.18
2,711.20
2,451.68
2,050.36
1,778.18
1,235.20
1,231.36
1,198.07
1,171.01
1,074.34
1,012.51
441.31
1,113.85
324.81
15,923.91
441.31
80137 10/31/2002 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC
Inforum gold L~pgrade:Prjt Mgmt
343.75
343.75
80138 10/31/2002 005692 ELMO, ANTHONY
Reimb:lCCA Conf:9/29-10/03:Ft Worth
31.00
80139 10/31/2002 005251 EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE RebuildTCSDskiploader
888.90
888.90
80140 10/31/2002 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERING Refreshment:Stakeholders & Educati
107.75
107.75
80141 10/31/2002 003959 EVERETI-& EVERETI' PAINTI Res Imp Prgm: Bermudez, Jason & J
2,275.00
2,275.00
Page3
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4
10/31/2002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80142 10/31/2002 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
80143 10/31/2002 002037 EXPANETS
80144 10/31/2002 000478 FAST SIGNS
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
Aug Monthly Idscp svcs
Sept Monthy Idscp svcs
Sept Idscp impr: Campos Verdes
Sept Idscp impr: Ridgeview on Willow
Sept Idscp impr: Tuscany Ridge Media
Aug Idscp impr: Paseo Prk
Sept rdscp impr: Temeku Hills
Sept Idscp impr: Solana Ridge Median
Sept Idscp impr: Paseo Prk
Sept Idscp impr:Meadows Pkwy Media
Sept Idscp impr: Rustic Glen
Sept Idscp impr:Paseo Park
Sept Idscp impr: La Serena
Sept Idscp impr: Promenade Mall
Sept Idscp impr:Margarita Median
Repair & mntc city hall telephone equ
Repair & mntc city hall telephone equ
Wood Sign for parking Iot:TCSD
92,445.00
92,445.00
700.00
520.00
450.00
319.47
290.26
225.00
187.20
165.00
161.25
132.92
104.59
75.00
75.00
1,670.00
1,369.68
168.29
Check Total
188,295.69
3,039.68
168.29
80145 10/31/2002
80146 10/31/2002
80147 10/31/2002
003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER
001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL MED (
004239 FISHER MERRIMAN SEHGAL Y,~
xx-5288:Jones S:Mmbmhp:Conf
x:<-2576 Nelson:Conf expenses
xx-5875 Praff:Prof mtg
Pre-employment physicals
Pre-employment physicals
ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN:OLD TOW
1,577.31
715.25
59.47
305.00
165.00
780.33
2,352.03
470.00
780.33
80148 10/31/2002 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY I Day timer supplies ~ PW/Eng
1,496.49
1,496.49
80149 10/31/2002 005696 GILKEY, OSCAR&SANDRA Resimprprgm:Gilkey, Oscar&Sandra
75.00
75.00
80150 19/31/2002
80151 10/31/2002
80152 10/31/2002
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
004607 GRACE BUILDING MAINTENAN(~
003640 GRAYNER ENGINEERING
Office Supplies: Copy Center
Office Supplies: Records Mgmt
Custodial svcs for park restrooms
Credit:on[y performed 1 week of svcs
Structural Support svc:Mercantile Bldg
889.30
168.56
3,925.00
-130.00
1,293.75
1,057.86
3,795.00
1,293.75
80153 10/31/2002 005698 GUILLOT, BRIAN
EE computer pumh prgm
538.72
538.72
80154 10/31/2002 005700 HAUGHT, MIYUKI
Refund: Oil Painting
80.00
80.00
Page~
apChkLst Page: 5
10/3112002 11:55:21AM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80155 10/31/2002
80156 10/31/2002
80157 10/31/2002
80158 10/31/2002
80159 10/31/2002
80160 10/31/2002
80161 10/31/2002
80162 10/31/2002
80163 10/31/2002
80164 10/31/2002
80165 10/31/2002
80166 10/31/2002
80167 10/31/2002
002906 HEMET FENCE COMPANY
80168 10/31/2002
80169 10/31/2002
80170 10/31/2002
80171 lO/31/2oo2
001060 HYATT
004217 HYDRO TEK COMPANY
000193 ICMA
004833 IMPERIAL PAVING COMPANY I
000750 INTOXIMETERS INC
001186 IRWIN, JOHN
005691 JESTER, KAREN
003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO
Final Check List
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description
Res imprv prgm: Zahyna, Jim
HtI:NFPA Conf:Neuman:conf2478662
Pressure washer repairs:PW
Publications:Fire Rescue:Windsor
Citywide A.C. Repairs:PW
Credit:Invoice exceeds PO agrmnt
004219 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION GR MntcSuppliesforPWmntcDivision
001573 INLAND EMPIRE TOURISM COU Co-op ad:2003 Official CA Visitors Gui
001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPLY I Pool sanitizing chemicals
Alco Sensor IV:Police dept
TCSD instructor earnings
Reimb:Eden Conf:10/14-17/Las Vegas
Broadcasting:Hot Summer Nights
001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICES Harrington temp help PPE 09/15/02
Harrington temp help PPE 9/29/02
Harrington temp help PPE 09/22/02
Harrington temp help PPE 09/08/02
000206 KINKOS INC Stationery paper/misc supplies:Copy C
003631 KLEINFELDER INC Geotech Testing: Memantile Bldg
005701 LAVIN, DINA Refund: Music-Music for Toddlers
004905 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMOR Sept general legal svcs:HR
Amount Paid
938.00
782.16
107.96
78.42
44,985.00
-2,955.00
110.55
4,089.92
281.99
1,500.00
232,00
110.23
500.00
1,080.00
1,080.00
864.00
864.00
26.88
1,114.00
37.00
216.00
Check Total
938.00
782.16
107.96
78.42
42,030.00
110.55
4,089.92
281.99
1,500.00
232.00
110.23
500.00
3,888.00
26.88
1,114.00
37.00
216.00
Page5
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6
10/31/2002 11:55:21 AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANI( OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80172 10/31/2002
80173 10/31/2002
80174 10/31/2002
80175 10/31/2002
80176 10/31/2002
80177 10/31/2002
80178 10/31/2002
80179 10/31/2002
80180 10/31/2002
005702 LOCKHART, TRACY
80181 10/31/2002
80182 10/31/2002
80183 10/31/2002
80184 10/31/2002
80185 10/31/2002
80186 10/31/2002
80187 10/31/2002
80188 10/31/2002
80189 10/31/2002
004087 LOWE'S
004087 LOWE'S
005693 MAD MADELINES
005689 MAGANA, ADOLFO
003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS
(Continued)
Description
Refund: Tiny Tots-Creative Beg
Res Impr Prgm:Gilkey, Oscar&Sandra
Misc hardware supplies:TCSD
Refreshments:Fall Rod Run
Refund:Security Deposit
hardware for street name signs
001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SER temphelpw/e10/13Dankworth
temp help w/e 10/20 Dankworth
002693 MATROS, ANDREA TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC Printing of High Country Magazine
CD Labels & Jackets:City Marketing C
Printing of High Country Magazine
003448 MELODYS AD WORKS Reimb:June/Juiy event ads
Reimb:Newspaper insert flyers
005690 MICHELLE'S PLACE WOMENS B Refund:Security Deposit
005688 MILLER, DEBIE Refund:Security Deposit
000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUIP Various Sports Parks Playground Part
001868 MIYAMOTO-JURKOSKY, SUSAN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
004534 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES Oct emerg, satellite phone svcs
004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY
001986 MUZAK INC
005631 NEEC
Res Imprv Prgm: P. Carter
Nov music broadcast:Old Town
B.O.C. Prgm:B.Wedeking
Amount Paid
56.25
1,755.84
64.46
268.96
100.00
109.91
354.75
354.75
268.80
3,608.55
2,155.00
301.70
684.25
586.00
100.00
100.00
1,479.44
916.80
69.00
3,481.00
59.50
950.00
Check Total
56.25
1,755.84
64.46
268.96
100.00
109.91
709.50
268.80
6,065.25
1,270.25
100.00
100.00
1,479.44
916.80
69.00
3,481.00
59.50
950.00
Page~
apChkLst
10/3112002 11:55:21AM
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80190 10/31/2002 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS
80191 10/31/2002
80192 10/31/2002
80193 10/31/2002
80194 10/31/2002
80195 10/31/2002
80196 10/31/2002
80197 10/31/2002
80198 10/31/2002
80199 10/31/2002
80200 10/31/2002
80201 10/31/2002
80202 10/31/2002
80203 10/31/2002
80204 10/31/2002
80205 10/31/2002
80206 10/31/2002
80207 10/31/2002
Final Check List
City of Temecula
(Continued)
Description
Page: 7
Amount Paid Check Total
000845 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
005608 NEUMAN, JASON
002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATrN:
004842 OCONNOR CONSTRUCTION M
002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
parts/supplies for medic squad vehicle
000727 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ,~ NFPA Fall Educ. Conf:11/16-20:J.Ne
C.E.D. Mtg:R.R./J.C.: 12/05/01
Reimb:Refreshmen~s:Race for Cure
Sep:Display Ads:PW-CIP
50% Constr Doc Cost/O. T. Theatre
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
City vehicle maint/repair svcs
002258 P & D CONSULTANTS INC Sept temp bldg inspector:Hendemon
003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE ( 2500 BADGES FOR TV MUSEUM-
001248 PAPER DIRECT INC
000249 PETTY CASH
000253 POSTMASTER
002185 POSTMASTER - TEMECULA
000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN
Specialty Paper:Holiday Lights Prgm
Petty cash reimbursement
Express mail & postal services
renew annual postat permit # 147
Sep:PubiicNot[ces:City CIk
003493 PRO-CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR Res imprv prgm: J. Lovell
004627 PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGIE Radiorentals:10/26:HalloweenCamiva
004792 R H A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Sept consulting svcs:Vail Ranch Park
000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST Oct 01-99-02003-0 Floating mir
Oct 02-79-10100-1 Diaz Rd
16.63 16.63
440.00 440.00
104.00 104.00
130.78 130.78
675.00 675.00
15,000.00 15,000.00
157.87
137.42
69.83 365.12
8,640.00 8,640.00
1,616.25 1,616.25
113.90 113.90
637.77 637.77
102.65 102.65
150.00 150.00
186.25 186.25
1,120.00 1,120.00
185.46 185.46
102.50 102.50
236.05
125.82 361.87
Paget
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8
10/3112002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description
80208 10/31/2002 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS
80209 10/31/2002
80210 10/31/2002
80211 10/31/2002
80212 10/31/2002
80213 10/31/2002
80214 10/31/2002
80215 10/31/2002
80216 10/31/2002
80217 10/31/2002
80218 10/31/2002
80219 10/31/2002
80220 10/31/2002
80221 10/31/2002
80222 10/31/2002
80223 10/31/2002
Amount Paid
Dupl. blueprints:Traf. Monitoring Sys.
Dupl. blueprint:R.C. Widening
Dupl blueprints:Children's Museum
001500 REGIONALTRAINING CENTER- Confronting Negativity:11/19:N.M.
005694 REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS
005694 REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS
Childrens Mus. store logo copyright f
Childrens Mus. logo copyright fee
002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI
000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR
003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE Citywide R-O-W trash/weed abate svc
Equipment rental for PW Maint.
Aug parking citation assessments
Jul parking citation assessments
000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RECOf Ntc of Determination fees:Diaz Rd
000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RECOf Sept Aperture card duplicates
001097 ROADLINE PRODUCTS INC
000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
Parts & Supplies for PW Stencil Truck
Sep:EE Recruitment Ads:HR
000793 SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO Land Dev Inspection Scantmn forms
003843 SCREEN DOCTOR, THE
000403 SHAWN SCOTt POOL & SPA
004609 SHREDFORCE INC
000645 SMART & FINAL INC
Res Imprv Prgm: J. Bermudez
Res imprv prgm: J. Lovell
Oct TES pool maint svcs
document shredding services
Rec. Supplies/Candy:Halloween Carni
Recreation Supplies:Family Fun Night
Rec. Supplies/Candy:Halloween Carni
204.42
118.70
99.66
135.00
30.00
30.00
5,000.00
48.22
2,330.00
2,244.50
1,314.00
70.70
116.90
4,762.98
989.22
286.02
280.00
448.00
110.00
83.46
17.69
11.18
Check Total
422.78
135.00
30.00
30.00
5,000.00
48.22
4,574.50
1,314.00
70.70
116.90
4,762.98
989.22
566.02
448.00
110.00
112.35
Page3
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9
10/31/2002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check # Date Vendor
80224 10/31/2002 000537 SO CALIF EDISON
80225 10/31/2002 000282 SO CALIF MUNICIPALATHLETI
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
Oct 2-02-351-4946 Sr Center
Oct 2-00-397-5067 various mtm
Oct 2~18-937-3152 Museum
Oct 2-11-007-0455 6th St.
Oct 2-23-365-5992 Stn 92
Oct 2-20-817-9929 P.D. Front St Stn
Oct 2-18-049-6416 Front St Ped
Oct 2-22-891-0550 various mtrs
Oct 2-21-911-7892 S.Side Prk Lot
Oct 2/19-171-8568 Wed. Chapel
Oct 2-21-981-4720 Hwy 79
Oct 2-22-057-2226 6th St.
Oct 2-22-496-3439 Winchester Rd
Oct 2-18-528-9980 Santiago Rd
Oct 2-14-204-1615 Front St. Rdio
S.C.M.A.F. Institute:10/10:TCSD Staff
1,338.61
913.52
843.63
439.28
410.20
338.35
302.07
247.99
180.33
89.45
79.36
53.16
51.61
61.44
23.38
240.00
Check Total
5,362.38
240.00
80226 10/31/2002
80227 10/31/2002
80228 10/31/2002
80229 10/31/2002
000293 STADIUM PIZZA
000574 SUPERTONER
000305 TARGET STORE
004919 TECH KNOWLEDGE INC
Refreshments for SMART Prgm
Refreshments for SMART Prgm
Credit:Billing errers:inv# 3113/3155
Credit:Dupl. pmt:Ref to inv# 2019
HP Printer Supplies
HP Printer Supplies
HP Printer Supplies
Recreation Supplies for TCC
Rec Supplies - Family Fun Nights
Rec. supplies:Halloween Carnival
CONSULTANT SERVICES PROVID
59.05
39.55
-34.10
-43.33
1,225.12
616.33
55.00
132.88
59.01
53.61
2,816.93
21.17
1,896.45
245.50
2,816.93
80230 10/31/2002
80231 10/31/2002
80232 10/31/2002
80233 10/31/2002
80234 10/31/2002
003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL
004541 TEMECULA RADiATOR/AUTO R
000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPAN
000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER
004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY,
Tem. P.D. motorcycle repair/maint.
Code Enf. (Lumina) smog check
Code Enf. (S-10) vehicle smog check
Plaques for Aquatics Prgm
Fy 02/03 2nd qtr funding prat
secure/repair iron gate @ amphitheate
19.50
54.95
54.95
323.25
37,000.00
653.88
19.50
109.90
323.25
37,000.00
653.88
Pages
Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10
10/31/2002 11:55:21AM City of Temecula
(Continued)
Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total
80235 10/31/2002
80236 10/31/2002
80237 10/31/2002
80238 10/31/2002
003849 TERRYBERRY COMPANY
80239 10/31/2002
80240 10/31/2002
EE service recogn, awards:L Salazar
Parts for PW Maint Vehicles
Parts for PW Maint Vehicles
Traffic Control Supplies for PW
color paper for central se~ices
misc paper supplies for central servic
Paper for Parade App's & HI_/FS
irrigation supplies for TCSD
OCT XXX-2626 PD TARGET STOREF
OCT XXX-3526 GENERAL USAGE
OCT XXX-2676 GENERAL USAGE
002452 TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL
003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE I
002065 UNISOURCE
004846 UNITED GREEN MARK INC
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
39.40 39.40
136.45
45.26 181.71
212.81 212.81
599.30
460.33
323.85 1,383.48
46.41 46.41
205.06
83.05
28.65
80241 10/31/2002 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Phone svcs/EOC backup @ stn 84 241.90
80242 10/31/2002 004848 VERIZON SELECT SERVICES I Oct long distance phone svcs 1,127.29
80243 10/31/2002 005025 VOSHALL, JEAN Reimb:SCACEOSem:10/15-16/02 67.51
80244 10/31/2002 003931 WELLS FARGO BANK NATL AS CFD 88-12 reimbursement 3,699.01
80245 10/31/2002 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC Citywide Tree Trimming Maint Svcs 2,574.00
80246 10/31/2002 004829 WILSON GROUP LLC, THE Oct statelobbyist/consulting svcs 3,500.00
80247 10/31/2002 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLIN 7/01-8/21 meter usage 5380 copier 160.62
316.76
241.90
1,127.29
67.51
3,699.01
2,574.00
3,500.00
160.62
Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 457,420.39
Page:10
ITEM 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FIN~NCE__~
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ClTY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
November 12, 2002
City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2002
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Report asofSeptember30,2002.
Karen Jester, Assistant Director of Finance..~-~
Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant
That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment
portfolio, receipts, and disbursements are required by Govemment Code Sections 53646 and 41004
respectively. Attached is the City Treasurer's Report which provides this information.
The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635
as of September 30, 2002.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Attachments:
1. city Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2002
Cash Activity for the Month of September
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Repor~
As of September 30, 2002
Cash and Investmeets as of September 1, 2002
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of September 30, 2002
Cash and Investments Portfolio:
Type of Investment
Petty Cash
General Checking
Sweep Account
(Money Market Account)
Benet-d Demand Deposits
Local Agency Investment Fund
Certificate of Deposit
(Retention Escrow)
Checking Account
(Parking Citations)
Trust Accounts- CFD 88-12
(Money Market Account)
Maturity/
Termination
Yield Date
Delinq. Main. Reserve Account - CFD 88-12
(Investment Agreement)
Delinq. Main. Reserve Account - CFD 88-12
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Account- CFD 88-12
(Investment Agreement)
Reserve Account- CFD 88-12
(Money Market Account)
Trust Accounts-TCSD COPs
(Money Market Account)
Project Account-TCSD COPs
(Money Market Account)
Project Account-TCSD COPs
(Local Agency Investment Fund)
Delivery Cost ACCOunt-TCSD COPs
(Money Market Account)
Trust ACCOunts-RDA Refinance Bonds
(Money Market Account)
Project Account-RDA Refinance Bonds
(Local Agency Investment Fund)
Admin ACCOunt-RDA Refinance Bonds
(Money Market Account)
COl Accounts-RDA Refinance Bonds
(Money Market Account)
Vadable Bond Fund - CFD 01-2
(Money Market Account)
interest Fund - CFD 01-2
(Money Market Account)
Interest O~mtl Fund -CFD 01-2
(Money Market Account)
Delivery Cost Accouct-CFD 01-2
(Money Market Account)
Admin Aoet -CFD 01-2
(Money Market Account)
Project Fund- TPFA Harveston CFD 01-02
(Money Market Account)
City Hall n/a
Union Bank n/a
Union Bank 0.700 %
(Highmark U.S. Treasury)
Union Bank n/a
State Treasurer-LAIF 2.604 %
Bank of Sacramento n/a
Union Bank n/a
U,S. Bank (First Am, Treasury) 1.250 %
CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2017
US. Bank (First Am, Treasury) 1.250 %
CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2007
U S. Bank (First Am Treasury) 1.250 %
U S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Sank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
State Treasurer-LAIF 2,604 %
U.S. Bank (First Am, Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.260 %
State Treasurer-LAIF 2.604 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am, Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1 250 %
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1.250 %
U.S, Bank (First Am. Treasury) 1,250 %
(1)*This amount is net of outstanding checks.
(2)*At September 30. 2002 total market vague (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) was $45,129,465,358.
The City's proportionate share of thet vstue is $61,878,623.
Ait investments are liquid and currently available.
The City of Temecula's portfolio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds witl be available to meet
budgeted and actual expenditures of the City of Temecula for the next six months.
$ 84,048,025
4,267,200
(3,056,174)
$ 84,359,051
PadBook
Salance
$ 1,500
(234,815) (1)
872,000
2,692 (1)
61,569,542 (2)
4,514
78
500,000
383,900
1,531,469
42,106
420,223
2,959
2,704,551
6,450
25
10,348,846
5,197
25,136
21,507
237,459
129,836
453,661
50,005
5,150,546
ITEM 5
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE_,~
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Council/City Manager
Howard Windsor, City Fire Chief '~
November 12, 2002
SUBJECT: Northeast Fire Station Construction Cost Agreement Between the City of Temecula and
the County of Riverside.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve:
1. The attached agreement between the City of Temecula and the County of Riverside for
cooperatively sharing the construction cost for the Northeast Fire Station.
DISCUSSION:
Since the City of Temecula's incorporation in 1989, the city has contracted for their Fire
Protection/Emergency Medical Services with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and
Riverside County Fire Department. During this time, the City and County have entered into
cooperative agreements to share costs for services and infrastructure when both jurisdictions
mutually benefit from such agreements.
Fire Department Staff, based on established service response goals to provide a five-minute
response 90 % of the time, to all emergency calls within the City, have identified a need for a fire
station facility at the Northeast portion of the City. Currently under review, through the City's land
development process is the Rodpaugh Specific Plan. Fire Department Staff have conditioned the
developer of this project to provide 1.5 acres of land, and 1.2 million dollars for development and
construction costs for a fire station facility that would meet this identified need. The location of a
Northeast Fire Station as described above will have mutual benefits to the Fire
Protection/Emergency Medical Services provided to both the City and County areas surrounding this
location. Since this is the case, City Staff has requested the County contribute 1.2 million dollars of
the estimated 2,4 million dollars needed to construct this fire station facility,
Attached is the agreement that was drafted by City Attorney Staff outlining the provisions of the
agreement. Supervisor Venable's office and County Counsel have had the opportunity to review the
agreement and comment accordingly, The language in the agreement before you is the result of
input from both jurisdictions. Primarily, the agreement specifies how and when monies are to be
contributed by the County when this facility is built. Further, by formalizing this agreement, it will
ensure the monies are secured should the need for this facility be delayed, due to changes in current
development assumptions. City Council will note a provision within the agreement regarding sharing
the cost of operating and maintaining the facility once built. This agreement requires that the City
and County approve an operating agreement prior to construction.
Ct \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS%OE&UJ~NE%~ DOCUMENTS~CITY AGENDA MASTER RES AGREEMENT. DOC I 10/31/02
The County Fire Chief, Tom Tisdale will be presenting the agreement to the Board of Supervisors
at an upcoming board meeting scheduled for the end of November or the first part of December
2002. Once both jurisdictions approve and formalize the agreement, the agreement will ensure the
monies are contributed when the time comes to construct this fire station.
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. The Developers of Roripaugh will provide funding for the City's
share of construction.
ATTACHMENT: Agreement
C: IDOCb?Z~ENTS AND SETTINGS\OB~JANNB%MY DOCUmeNTS\CITY AGENDA MASTER RFS AGREEMENT.DOC 2 10/31/02
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT REGARDING NORTHEAST TEMECULA FIRE
STATION CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
This Cooperative Agreement regarding the Northeast Temecula Fire Station
Development Project (the "Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the
CITY OF TEMECULA (the "City") and the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (the "County"),
collectively the "Parties," as of this day of ,2002. In
consideration of the covenants, conditions, promises and agreements contained hereafter,
the Parties hereby agree as follows:
1. Intent of the Parties. The City and County acknowledge that there is
presently no fire station located within the northeastern quadrant of the City of Temecula
and the area adjacent thereto located in m~incorporated County of Riverside territory
sufficient to satisfy the minimum response times required by the City and County for the
provision of fire safety services. As a result, the land in this area is currently
undevelopable. Because of the need for a new fire station in this area, the City and
County desire to enter into this Agreement in order to provide for the design, equal
funding, and construction of a new fire station ("Fire Station") to be located in the
northeastern quadrant of the City of Temecula (the "Project"). The Parties intend this
Agreement to define the respective responsibilities of the Parties hereto as regards the
planning, development and staffing of this Fire Station.
2. Proiect and Construction Administration.
a. The City shall be responsible for all aspects of Project
administration related to the planning, design and construction of the Project, including,
but not limited to, the advertising, award and administration of the construction contract
for the Project.
b. With respect to construction administration, the City shall review
and oversee all work completed by the contractor to whom the contract is awarded
("Contractor"). The City shall also be responsible for the review and approval of all
plans, specifications, shop drawings, and engineering calculations submitted to the City
by the Contractor which are offered in furtherance of the Project.
3. Project Design. The City shall consult with the County during the design
process and shall reasonably incorporate County's requirements into the design of the
Fire Station.
4. Responsibility for Costs; Maximum Costs Modification to Cost Estimates.
The Parties agree that the City and County shall share equally all design, construction,
and construction administration costs for the Project. Total estimated costs for design,
construction, and construction administration are $2.4 million dollars ($2,400,000),
which is comprised of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) for design and $2.2
million dollars for construction and construction administration. If the design
consultant's estimate or the construction bids received indicate that the total Project costs
700000-1
are likely to exceed $2.4 million dollars, the City and County shall meet and confer to
determine if the design should be modified or to determine how additional costs are to be
shared. Any additional costs to be paid by the County shall be provided within thirty (30)
days of the date of written notice from the City requesting payment.
5. Payment Schedule; Reimbursement.
a. With respect to design costs, within thirty (30) days of the date of
written notice from the City regarding the City's intent to enter into a design agreement
and requesting the County's payment, the County shall deposit one hundred thousand
dollars ($100,000) with the City for the County's one-half (1/2) share of the design costs.
If the County does not deposit such funds with the City within that time, the City may
refuse to retain a design consultant until such funds are deposited with the City, or if the
City has already retained such consultant, the City may direct such consultant to suspend
all work until the time such funds are received by the County.
b. With respect to construction and construction administration costs
("Construction Costs"), after the City has advertised the Project for bid and within thirty
(30) days of the date of written notice from the City requesting the County's payment, the
County shall deposit $1.1 million dollars ($1,100,000) with the City for the County's
one-half(I/2) share of the Construction Costs. If the County does not deposit such funds
with the City within that time, the City may elect not to award the bid until the time such
funds are received from the County.
c. At the conclusion of the Project, the City shall prepare an
accounting of Project costs. The accounting shall be made in sufficient and reasonable
detail so as to allow the parties to document all Project costs. If the funds deposited by
the County exceed its one-half (1/2) share of the total Project costs, the City shall
reimburse any excess funds to the County within thirty (30) days of final cost
reconciliation. If the funds deposited by the County are less than its one-half (1/2) share
of the total Project costs, the County shall provide additional funds to the City within
thirty (30) days of the date of written notice from the City requesting payment.
6. Operation and Maintenance. Prior to award of the construction contract
for the Project, the City and County shall enter into a separate agreement regarding
operation and maintenance costs, including capital equipment replacement.
7. Ownership and Title. Ownership of and title to the Fire Station shall
reside in the name of the City for all parties.
8. Permits and Approvals.
a. The City shall obtain all City permits and shall pay all fees
required to construct the Project, including any plan check fees and City staff time.
700000-1
b. The Contractor shall obtain and pay the fees for alt other non-City
permits required for the construction of the Project.
9. Cooperation. The Parties recognize that additional issues may develop
during the design and construction phases of the Project, and each individually agrees to
assist in the resolution of such issues in a timely manner, and to work cooperatively to
resolve such issues, so as not to interfere with the orderly progress and completion of the
Project.
10. Environmental Documentation. The City shall be responsible for
managing the preparation and processing of any necessary environmental documentation
related to the Project. The costs attendant to any and all such environmental
documentation shall be equally borne by the parties.
11. Indemnification.
a. Neither the City nor any officer, employee, or agent thereof is
responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted
to be done by the County under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to the County under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant
to Government Code Section 895.4, the County shall fully defend, indemnify, and save
harmless the City and all of its officers, employees, and agents from all claims, suits, or
actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as
defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reasons of anything done or
omitted to be done by the County under or in connection with any work, authority, or
jurisdiction delegated to the County under this Agreement.
b. Neither the County nor any officer, employee, or agent thereof is
responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted
to be done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to the City under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.4, the City shall fully defend, indemnify, and save
harmless the County and all of its officers, employees, and agents from all claims, suits,
or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as
defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reasons of anything done or
omitted to be done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority, or
jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement.
12. Insurm~ce. The City, County, and their respective officers, agents,
representatives, and employees shall be named as additional insureds on all insurance
policies of the Contractor. The obligation to add the City and County to all insurance
policies shall be specified in the bid package; the Contractor's agreement to add the City
and County to all policies shall be a condition precedent to the a~vard of the bid. The
City, in its sole discretion, may waive being added to some or all of the Contractor's
insurance policies.
700000-1
13. Hazardous Waste. If any unforeseen potential hazardous waste sites are
encountered during construction of the Project, the Parties shall meet and confer on a
course of action. The responsibilities and costs for any action shall be covered by
amendment to this Agreement.
14. Miscellaneous Terms.
a. Entire Agreement; Modification; Waiver. This Agreement
constitutes the entire agreement between the l~arties relating to the subject matter hereof.
All prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, negotiations and
understandings of the Parties, oral or written, are merged into and superseded by this
Agreement. Any modification or amendment to this Agreement shall be of no force and
effect unless it is in writing and signed by the Parties. No waiver of any of the provisions
of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute, a waiver of any other provision,
whether or not similar. No waiver or consent shall constitute a continuing waiver or
consent or commit either party to provide a waiver in the future except to the extent
specifically set forth in writing. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by
the party making the waiver.
b. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
c. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure
to the benefit of the Parties and their respective heirs, legal representatives and
Successors.
d. Captions and Paragraph Headings. Captions and paragraph
headings used herein are for convenience only. They are not a part of this Agreement
and shall not be used in construing this Agreement.
e. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement or the
application thereof shall be deemed invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this
Agreement in its application shall not be affected by such partial invalidity but shall be
enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law as if such invalid or unenforceable
provision was never a part hereof.
f. Drafting. The Parties agree that this Agreement is the project of
joint draftsmanship and that should any of the terms be determined by a court, or in any
type of quasi-judicial or other proceeding, to be vague, ambiguous and/or unintelligible,
that the same sentences, phrases, clauses or other ~vording or language of any kind shall
not be construed against the drafting party in accordance with California Civil Code
Section 1654, and that each party to this Agreement waives the effect of such statute.
g. Attorneys' Fees. If any legal action is instituted to enforce or
declare any party's rights hereunder, each party, including the prevailing party, must bear
its own costs and attorneys' fees. This paragraph shall not apply to those costs and
700000-1
attorneys' fees directly arising from any third party legal action against a party hereto and
payable under Paragraph 11 (Indemnification).
h. Venue. The Parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement
was entered into and intended to be performed in whole or substanlial part in Riverside
County, California. The Parties agree that the venue for any action or claim brought by
any party to this Agreement is Riverside County. Each party hereby waives any law or
rule of court which would allow it to request or demand a change of venue. If any action
or claim concerning this Agreement is brought by any third party, the Parties hereto agree
to use their best efforts to obtain a change of venue to Riverside County.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as
set forth below.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Dated: ,2002 By:
ATTEST:
,Mayor
City Clerk
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
Dated:
., 2002 By:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
City of Temecula
County of Riverside
700000-1
ITEM 6
APPROVAl-,..,
CITY ATTORNEY /~'//~
DIRECTOR OF FINAI'~
CITY MANAGER C-.J'/.~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Servic~
November 12, 2002
Acceptance of Grant Deed - Crowne Hill Park
PREPARED BY:
Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize acceptance of the Grant Deed for
Crowne Hill Park, located in the Crowne Hill development and direct staff to proceed with the
necessary actions to cause the deed to be recorded.
BACKGROUND: Crowne Hill is a large specific plan development in the eastern
area of the City south of Pauba Road and east of Butter[ield Stage Road. The developer is
conditioned to construct and dedicate two parks to the City.
Crowne Hill Park is located at 33203 Old Kent Road and is the first of the public parks to be
completed. This 3.5 acre passive park includes age-appropriate tot lots, half court basketball,
picnic shelter, restroom, parking lot, benches, tables, walkways and open turf area. All
improvements have been completed to the satisfaction of the Community Services Director and
a policy of title insurance will be provided by the developer to accompany the transfer of title to
the City.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost for maintaining Crowne Hill Park for the remaining portion of
this fiscal year has been estimated at $25,000. This cost was budged within the City's
Park/Street Lighting Tax for Fiscal Year 2002-2003.
The developer is entitled to receive fee credit against the park and recreation component of the
City's Development impact Fee (DIF) in accordance with Parks Fee and Dedication Agreement
between the City of Temecula and Greystone Homes, Inc. dated October 22, 2002.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Grant Deed
2) Vicinity Map
EXEMPT RECORDING REQUESTED BY
CITY OF TEMECULA
PER GOV'T CODE 27383
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. BOX 9033
TEMECULA, CA 92589-9033
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE IS FOR RECORDER~S USE
A.P.N.: Order No.: Escrow No.: 00084320 CE
GRANT DEED
THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTOR(S) DECLARE(S) THAT DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX IS-0- NO CONSIDERATION DUE
computed on full value of property conveyed, or
computed on full value less value of liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale.
unincorporated area X city of TEMECULA A~Xn~
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
GREYSTONE HOMES, INC. A DELAWARE CORPORATION
hereby GRANT(S) to THE CITY OF TEMECULA
the following described real property in the County of RIVERSIDE, State of California:
LOT 2, IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSII}E, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY TRACT MAP 23143-$,
ON FILE IN BOOK 313, PAGES 35 THROUGH 38 OF TRACT MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALII~ORNIA.
GREYSTONE HOMES, INC., A DELAWARE
CQ~ORATIO~__N
BY:
Document Date: October 1, 2002
STATE OF CAL~IFORNIA
personally appeared
~onally ~o~ to me ~r ~avM t~ me c: Ih: b::k cf :a:kfaa:ary ;.i~.,.~) to be ~e ~on~ whose ~iff~ ~bscfibed to ~e ~in
~t ~d ac~owledg~ to me ~a h~ execut~ ~e s~e ~ ~/~ au~o~ ~aci~, ~d ~a by hi~ si~a~re~
on ~e instant &e ~on~ or the ~fi~ u~n beh~f of which ~e ~son~act~, execut~ the instant,
WITNESS ray hand and official seal.
This area for official notarial seal.
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: SAME AS ABOVE or Address Noted Below
Nam~ Street Address City & State
CROWN HILL PARK
ITEM 7
CITY ATTORNEY
DIR. OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Manager/City Council
Susan Jones, City Clerk
November 12, 2002
SUBJECT: Cell Phone Contract
PREPARED BY: Tim Thorson, Information Systems Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Cellular Services.
That the City Council approve a two-year agreement with Sprint for City
BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula currently has 72 active cell phones. The current contract is
with Cingular (PacBell). The contract with the current cellular carrier expires in November 2002. In
September, a study was conducted to determine the best coverage and price. The vendors that
participated were Cingular, Verizon, AT&T, Nextel, and Sprint. Cingular, Verizon, and AT&T were
eliminated due to cellular coverage limitations that were determined by examining coverage maps and
testing evaluation phones provided by the vendors. Two months worth of the city's cellular phone bills
were sent to NEXTEL and Sprint PCS to be analyzed and returned with formal proposals. Based on
Sprint's aggressive marketing, they were the most competitive in terms of price and services. Sprint had
the following advantages:
· Nationwide long-distance coverage with no roaming fees
· No charge for Samsung N240 phone
No Fee for Online voice prompt Directory (up to 500 names)
· Shared Minutes Plan
· e-Billing & Analysis
Cost comparisons are listed in the following vendor matrix:
Company Cingular (current plan) Sprint PCS NEXTEL
Phones 72 82 82
Fee/Month $4,648.00 $3,845.60 $4,607.18
Directory $987.08 0 $287.00
Total $5,635.08 $3,845.60 $4,894.18
Savings SAVE $1,789.48/month SAVE $740.90/month
Minutes 40 lines $49 plan 400 min 50 lines $57.20 plan 800 50 lines $71.99 700 rain
Plan 24 lines $79 plan 600 min rain 32 lines $31.49 300 min
8 lines $99 plan 1000 min Unlimited night/weekend 3,600 night and weekend
Unlimited phone-to-phone 100 rain direct connect
32 lines $30.80 plan 300 $.15 a min for long distance
min
No cost for command
directory
Equipment Nokia Samsung N240 i85
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is currently in place for 72 cellular devices. Adequate funds exist within
the 2002-03 Information Systems department budget to make this purchase. The anticipated annual
savings for changing cellular vendors and applying the current price structure will be approximately
$20,000.00.
PHONE NUMBER IMPACT: Switching vendors will require new cellular phone numbers for the City
Council and Staff.
ATTACHMENT: Cellular Vendor List
Cellular Vendor List
AT&T
Sher~Burrows
(626)233-1111
CIn.qular
Eric Hollowell
(714) 878-8420
NEXTEL
Geo~e Sappingfield
(909)453-0311
Sprint PCS
Brandi Kurz
(714) 470-5879
Verlzon
Dave Swanson
(949) 286-4927
Advantage Agreement for Business
(1-99 MINS)
Customer '$ Legal ~ame D/B/A Federal Tax Identoqcation Number
ess T~ (c~ck one) ~ - '
Co~ra~~~hip ~ Li~ted Li~iliw Comp~y~e~hip ~ Sole Proprietor
*Ea~ Teen.on Fee ~pll~ (see bel~). Te~ is 1 ye~ ~none sele~ed ~is A~ement ~gins on [ .200 ~ ("Effective
~ Check d~is is a Sp~t ~lia~ M~
N~e of ~lime M~ket Dine")
Subscriber~umber Commitment ~vel: ~ ~ ~ I ("~s"). A M~ is a mobile identification number ~si~ to a h~dset or o~er device
N~ES:
(1) ~ ~nt~ "~f' includes ~Js doc.m~m ~d: (~) $~ cu.~m PCS T~ ~d Co.di~o~s of S~ic~ ('Ts ~ Cs'), includin~ ~ limimrion
Ii.ilia, ind~dfidion, p~n~ ~ bvoicing o~visio~ ~ w~ll ~ $~ wdvcr ofj~ d~ ~ ~l~s actions ~d ~ abs~nc~ of w~ti~s, ~d (b)
~ ~sio~ of~ 8~ic~ PI~ Add~du~ iJCntJf~d ~ Pd ~. 8¢~io~ ~ ($~ ~SPA"), bo$ of which ~re exOr~l[ i~orpor~ted in this docume~
by this reference. A copy of~c TS & Cs ~m~ ~ yo~ PCS Phone, but ~y not ~ ~ mo~ recur version. ~e mo~ recur Ts & Cs
ob~¢d ~m your PCS Ac¢oum gcp~sen~w or by ~lling PCS Cus~mc~ Solu~io~ ~t 1-S8~-7884727 or by visiti~ our w~b sit~
~.~n~.co~. ~ t~ not defined ~ ~is ~um~t ~ ~ ~¢~ing ~wn to ~t t~ ~ ~ SPA or $~ Ts ~ Cs. If~ is ~
~ ~mvisions ~ $~ Ts · C~ ~ 8PA or ~is doc~¢n~ Sis do¢~cnt consols followed n~x~ by ~ S~A (~xc~p~ to $~ ~n~ ~i~
(2) ~STOMER ACCESS 1'~ AG~E~T BY SIGN~G T~S DOCENT OR W~N ~STOMER A~ATES SERVICES.
(3) 8e~ic~ Credit Dcp~d~8 on yo~ T¢~ ~cn~ you may r¢ccivc a c~di~ ~ow~ds ch~gcs for Sc~ic~ ("Sc~icc Crcdif'), Unless
~m~id~d b $~ SP& ~ s¢~i~¢ Credit is ~ for · 1-~. $100 for ~ ]-y~, ~d $1f0 for ~ ~-~r ~t. ~ S~ic~ Credit is ~oli~d on
fi~ ~oic~ agd~ ch~s for S~ic~s providd to ~ou. Un.s~d S~i~ Credit cd~s ov~ ~ $~ n~ invoici.~ cycle(s) (~ to ~ md~m of
invoicing cycles) ~1 ~o~lCt~l~ used. ~ S~i~ Credit is no~-~sfCBbl~ ~d h~ no c~h v~u~. ~ 8~ic~ Credit ~ot be ~plJ~d to
t~in~ion f~. C~tomer M~ ~r~ not eligible for se.i~ Credi~ ~r t~e ~xoir~tio~ ofth~ Term.
(~) E~rl~ T~r~i~tiom Cdom~r ~ t~Jn~t~ ~is A~nt b~for~ ~ ~xpJ~on of ~ T~ upon notlc~ ~o 8O~nt ~d ~ ~m~nt of ~
[~B~ion f~, U~ OT~R~S~ PRO~BD ~ T~ SPA, THE ~ER P~O~ EASY TE~ATION ~B D~G THE
~ $~ ~O~ A 1-~B $100 FOE A ]-YEA~ ~ $1J0 FOg A 3-Y~R A~E~T, Sp~t ~a~ t~inat~ ~is A~m~nf if Cu~om~
~1~, i. w~ich c~ ~ ~ly t~b~o, f~ will ~OOly. EiSer ~ m~y t~inat~ ~Js A~c~cn~ wi$out ~y ~ly ~c~batJon fc~, ~r
[~ by 8iv~g ~e o~er p~ ]0 days ~ no~ce or.ch ~c~indon.
]prim N~o.wld~ PCS .N~ork. Som~ S~ic~s ~ .o~ b~ a~l~bl~ or m~ o~ dif~n~ in cern ~liat¢ m~kc~. Contact your PCS
~ccount ~pr~s~nt~v~ for ~or~ ~o~a~on on ~ ~ct~ ~k~, ~rici~g, f~r~s, o~rio~s, oro~ofo.s ~d ~nctlonaliW.
El) ~/Custo~er ~ro0rieta~ Ne~ork I~for~tiom In ~ ~o~al cou~ of providing S~ic~s, S~rbt J~velops i~fo~tio~ $~t ~l~t~s to
info~ation ("Subscriber ~fo~afion"). If Customer is eligible ~d elec~ to p~icipate ~ ~e E~ pro~ ~ set fo~h in ~e SPA, Spr~t will
disclose to C~tomer ~y Subscriber Info~afion rela~ng to Employee M~s activated under ~e E~.
(7) CrediL Sprint may vefi~ your c~di~ or ~e credit of~e ~tiW on whose beh~f you ~e executing the A~emeng before a~ee~g to provid~
Se~ic~ ~d Pmduc~. Sprint may ~so peffo~ credit verifications at ~g time durini the Te~ of~e Atreement. Eli~ibili~ for all Sprint Se~ice
Version 10.02
Advantage Agreement for Business
(1-99 MINS)
Plans, programs and offers is subject to credit approval (as to type and credit class) which may be withheld by Sprint in its sole discretion.
(8) Confidentiality. During the Term of this Agreement, Sprint may from time to time disclose to Customer certain Confidential Information. For
purposes of this Agreement, "Confidential Information" means all nonpublic information conceralng Sprint's business including, but not limited to, all
tangible, intangible, visual, electronic, present, or future information. Written Confidential Information must be clearly marked in a conspicuous place with
an appropriate legend identifying the information as confidential and/or proprieta~. Confidential Information that is not written must be identified as
Confidential Information at the time of disclusure and eanfu'med in writing delivered to Customer within 15 days following its disclosure. Customer will
us~ the Confidential Information only to further the relationship between Sprint and Customer and shall not disclose Confidential Information to any
third puny without the written consent of Sprint. Customer must protect Confidential Information from unauthorized use or disclosure with same
degree of care as it uses to protect its own information ora like nature, but in no event with any less degree of care than reasonable care. Customer
does not have an obligation to protect Confidential Information that is: (a) in the public domain through no fault of Customer; (b) within the
legitimate possession of Customer, with no confidentiality obligations to a third party; (¢) lawfully received from a third party having rights in the
information without restriction, and without notice of any restriction against its further disclosure; or (d) indcpendanfly developed by Customer
without br~aching this Agreement or by parties who have not had, either di~ctly or indirectly, access to or knowledge of the Confidential
Information. If Confidential Information is rcqnired to be produced by law, court order, or governmental authority, Customer must immediately notify
Sprint. and Sprint may move the ordering court or authority for a pmtactive order or other appropriate relief. Confidential Information remains the
pmperty of Sprint. On termination of this Agreement or at Sprint's request, all written, recorded, graphical, or other tangible Confidential
Information (including copies) must be returned to Sprint or destroyed by Customer. Customer acknowledges that its unauthorized disclosure or use
of Confidential Information may result in irreparable harm. ffthere is a breach or threatened breach of this Paragraph 8, Sprint may seek a temporary
restraining order and injunction to protect its Confidential Information. If Customer has breached or threatened to breach'this Agreement it roay not
raise the defense of an adequate remedy at law.
A. I acknowledge that I have reviewed and agreed to version number ~ of the SPA (as defined in
Part III, Paragraph 1), and that the Service Plan(s) selected in Par~ II of this document corresponds with
the SPA.' ......................................................................................................................................... ~' Customer's Initial
B. I acknowledge that I have reviewed and agree to the most recent version of the Ts & Cs. -- ...................... ~. Customer's Initial
C. ~ ackn~w~edge that uny ~hanges made by ~r ~n beha~f ~f Cust~mer t~ the Terms and C~nditinns ~f ~his d~cument~ the Service
Plan Addendum, or the Ts & Cs, whether or not authorLzcd by a PCS Account Representative,
automatically renders the Agreement null and void. - .......................................................................... '~ ...................... ~' Customer's Initial
i'-I Credit Card Type:
~-I Cheek by
Phone
By (Authorized Signature):
Name and Title (Print): ~
Date:
Check #:
Accoun~ #:
,4ccount #:
II
By (Direct Sales Manager or above);
Name and Title (Print):
Date:
Acc°unt Representative:' ~ ~ tI
Contact Numbe,: '~ L~ - ~ ~1~
Root Account Number:
P2K Market Code:
/ISI Market Code:
'Additional Notes:
2 Version 10.02
Terms Form:
PCS Vision Version (10.02)
PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans
PCS Free & Clear Plans (with or without PCS Vision)
5v. ltorne~ ' s Name t~ Contact Person lax Ident~atlon Number
4ddres$ ' i Cit~ ~ State ~ ~tP Ca te __ -- ¥1ephone Number C
Bus.ess Pl~s; (b) new PCS F~c & CIe~ Pl~s (wi~ or wi~out Vision); or (c) ~i~ing PCS F~e & CIc~ ~d PCS Vision plxs (collectively ~e
~Se~ice Pl~s"). ~e dermis of~e new pl~s ~fe~d to in (a) ~d ~) ~ove ~ s~ fo~ on Appendix A a~hed heroin. ~e d~ls for ~e pl~s
~fe~d to ~ (e) ~ove ~ set out ~ ~e PCS Semite PI~ ~ide for Busine~ ("Se~ice PI~ Guide"). ~y of~e ~ove Semite Pl~s which ~elude
?CS Vision may ~ mf~ed to ~ "Vision Pl~". ~e Vision Pl~s work ~ Spfint's E~ced (~ird Generation) Nationwide PCS N~or~ MI of
~e S~ice PI~ ~e ~bje~ to &e t~ of~e Semite PI~ sel~ ~ ~ ~e c~e of Vision Pl~s, ~e t~ ~t fo~ in ~s Scion ~ ri of which
~ply ~ Mdifion to ~d consol over ~y confli~g te~ ~ ~e C~mer's t~ apeem~t wi~ Sprint ("A~ement'). Employee ~ acfivmiom on
fli~ble Semite Pl~s ~ subj~t to ~e Employee's a~emem wi~ Sp~t ~d &e te~ of~e S~i~ Pl~ selected. Te~s not defined herein have
3e s~e me~ing ~ set out in the ~emenC Ex.pt ~ o~e~e ~t fo~ h~ein, Cu~omer M~ activations on ~e S~ice PI~
gov~ by ~e te~s in Customer's A~eement.
P~ Vision ~hird Generation) Wirel~ Charges. ~e following iffo~ion mla~g specificflly to dam usage ch~ges for PCS Vision wireless
~ees is not ~pli~ble to Vision Pl~s ~at ~elude ~l~ited' ~lob~ of da~ For PCS Vision wimlem semites, C~omer will be eh~g~ on a
~ ~lob~e b~is, for dam used, whe~ ~t or ~eived by Cugomer's PCS Phone or o~er wi~le~ device, m~ ~ for ~nime used, ~en for
:~n ~ g~emfion voice se~ic~. ~ long ~ C~tom~'s PCS Phone or o~er ~reless device is come.ed ~ ~e ~c~ (~ ~nemfion
,Sprint Nmionwide PCS Ne~o~ Cu~m~ will be ~ng ~ u~ge chics. C~omer c~ot ~eive incom~g ~ls while ~ing ~ird gm~on
s~ices. D~ p~k~ u~ge will be m~d ~ ~1o~ ~d ~11 ~ ro~ded up to ~e n~ whole ~lob~e. Kilob~e usage will be ro~d~ up to
n~ ~II ~nt. Rounding up will occ~ ~ ~e end of e~h s~e session or tach dock hour (at ~e ~p of each hour), if ~e ~ion ~s mo~ ~ 1
cl~k hour. ~en ~veling on ~e E~ ~ Generation) Sprim Nationwide PCS Ne~orL a session ~y be ~&d ~d new semion i~tiated
fl&ou~ no ~te~ption to ~e acing dam session will o~un E~h individufl s~ion will be m~d~ up. ~e n~ber of dam p~k~ used ~d
~ged to Cu~mer will v~ widely, d~nd~g u~n &e ~e PCS Visi~ wirel~ ~plie~on or o~er se~i~ C~om~ ~s ~d &e ~o~t of
~ ~ed ~ &e ~ecific ~plication or ~ce. Customer will be chw~d for dam ~eh~ges ~ifiated by o~er ~mmet ~rs ~ well ~ ~o~ Cuaomer
~fia~. E~t~ ofda~ u~e, for ex~le, ~e si~ of do~load~le fil~ will v~ ~om wh~ C~omer acmflly ~es. Cu~mer ~11 be chmg~
for Mdifionfl dam m~ ~ ~o~ng ~d mu~g on ~e n~or~ **If Cu~om~ ~es a p~mium se~i~, C~omer will be ch~ged for dam used
~po~ ~d rou~g ~ Mdition to ~e ~ge for ~e p~i~ semite. Evm if Cu~omer h~ a PCS Vision ~el~s se~iee pl~ ~at ~clud~
~limited" ~lob~es ofda~ it will ~ill be ~ked to pay ri c~ges ~iat~ wi& ~ess to ~d ~e of premium semites. C~omer ~11 be chmg~
~or p~fl ~d ~te~pted dam do.loads or o~er use, ~elud~g ~-mnt da~ ~d for ~uccess~l anempm to ~aeh Web si~s md um o~er
~ppli~io~ ~d ~ices, ~elud~g ~ose ~ul~g ~om ~opp~ ne~ork eo~ecfions. Customer's ~voiee will not sep~tely id~ti~
dlob~s a~bu~le to Cu~m~'s u~ of sp~ific si~s, ~ions or se~ices m~. Specific ~difionfl info~ation about PCS Vision ~less m~i~s
~eluding pricing ~elud~ kilob~es ~d combining wi~ o~er PCS Semite Pl~s, is article in our ~d~d sties collate~ for PCS Vision ~reless
Se~ Pl~s or m ~.spnnmcs~com.
~er Terms Applicable to PCS Vision Usage. Use of PCS Vision S~ic~ ~qu~s &e purch~e of ~p~te, &i~ generation, w~less-~mpatible
~hone or o~er device ~d is subje~ to ~y so~, memo~, ~omge or o~er limitation in ~e phone or o~er ~uipment. Not ~1 ~pliea~ons ~d
m~ces wor~ or work ~e s~e, on ri &i~ generation ~less phones ~d d~iem. ~e matefifls accomp~ying ~omer's phone or devi~ explains
which applie~iom ~d se~ic~ it will ~ppon. PCS Vision S~ic~ ~e not av~l~le when ro~ing off ~e Spr~t Nationwide PCS Ne~or~ PCS
Vision Se~ic~ ~y not be ~ently av~lable in ~me ~liate ~.
~ Credit C~rd Typ*: ~cc~nt ~: ~piration:
Silage: By:
q~e ~: N~e ~d Tire (Print):
Terms Form:
PCS Vision Version (lO.02)
PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans
PCS Free & Clear Plans (with or without PCS Vision)
Appendix A
1. PCS Free & Clear Plans ~ith and without Vision)·
Monthly
Recurring
Charge S30.00' $40.00* $45.00* $60.00* $85.00* $100.00' $125.00 S150.00
("M~C')
Anytime 300 400 500 800 2000 2500 3500 4500
Minutes
Unlimited Night
& Weekend
Minutes** Included Included Included Included Sl0/Month $10/Month Sl0/Month Sl0/Month
Unlimited PCS
to PCS
Minutes* * S5/Month SS/Month 5~Month SS/Month Included Included Included Included
PCS Add-a-
Phone**
Not Available S20/Month $20/Month S20/Month Included Included Included Included
Unlimited
Vision (data)
Services for $10/Month $10/Month $10/Month SlO/Month Included Included Included Included
PCS Phones **
· * Described in more detail in Section 5 below.
Terms Applicable to Free & Clear Plans (with or without Vision)
(a) Anytime Minutes. Tho Anytime Minut~ included in the Fr~ & Clear
Plans (with and without Vision) are not eligible for use while roaming off
· the Network and additional charges will apply to off-NeY,YOrk usage.
Co) Off-Network Usage. Domestic Roaming uslls are ehargad at $.50 per
minute. Domestic Roaming long distance calls will be charged at an
additional $.25 per minute.
(c} Casual Vision Usage. Accounts autivating on one of the above plans
that does not include Vision can aeee~ PCS Vision for $.02 per kilobyte.
2. PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans. Employee
MINs are not eligible for these plans.
Monthly
Recurring
Charge S85.00 S100.00 S125,00 S150.00
("M~C")
Anytime
Minutes (On
or Off- 12~0 1750 2000 2500
Network, See
Below)
Unlimited
Vision (data)
Services for Included Included Included Included
PCS
Phones**
Unlimited
PCS to PCS
Minutes** Included Included Included Included
Business
Connection
Personal Included Included Included Included
Edition**
PCS Voice
** Described in more detail in Section 5 below.
Term~ Applicable to PCS Total Fl~reless Access for Business Plans
(al Anytime Minutes. Subject to the limitation below, Anytime Minutes
on the PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans arc eligible for use
both on thc Sprint Nationwide PCS Network (heralnaRer thc "Network")
and for off-Nct-,vork usage in coverad areas in thc United States, Guam,
Puerto Rico and thc U.S. Virgin Islands (hcreinax~cr "Domestic
Roaming"). Long dBtance is includsd in the Anytime Minutes, whether
on the Network or while Domestic Roaming. Domestic Roaming ~ a~
part of thc Anytime Minutes will appear on Cus~tomer's invoice es if they
oceuned on the Network. See Section 6 below for an explanation of
billing for roaming calls, international long distane~ i~ not included.
Long distance and roaming charges incur~l while intemallonal roaming
in Canada, Mexico md other foreign countries may vary.
CO) Limitation on Off-Network Usage. With re, peet to each MIN, Anytime
Minute Domestic Roaming usage per month may not exceed fiRy percent
(50%) of the total amount of Anytime Minutes used per month. In
addition, the Domestic Roaming feature included with Anytime Minate~
may not be shared among MINs in the Shared Minutes Plan although the
Anytime Minutes themselves may be shared. In the event Anytime Minu~
Dome~tio Roaming usage exceeds the aforementioned limits, Sprint
reserves the right (in its sole discretion and with no liability to Customer)
to terminate service to the applicable MINs or to transfer the ~pplinable
MINs to other Business Plans.
3. PCS Vision for Laptops and PDAs Plans
Monthly Recurring
Charge ("MRC')
$40.00 $60.00 S80.00 $12030
Vision (data) Services in
Megabytes ("MB") 20MB 40MB 70MB 120MB
Terms Applicable to PCS Vision for Laptops and PDAs
(a) Additional data usage is $.002 per kilobyte for thc 20MB, 401riB and
70MB plans and $.001 per kilobyte for the 120MB plan.
(b) Voice calls made on Sprint devices with voice capability with these
plans incur a charge nf20g per minute including domestic long distance.
4. Additional Plan Features & Terms.
The fo/lowing features and terrn~ are applicable to all PCS Total Wireless
Access for Business Plans, all PCS Fr~e & Clear Plans O~ith and without
Vision) and ~here applicable all PCS Yi~ion for Laptop$ and PD,~s Plans
[collective~ the "Business Plans"].
(a) All of the aforementioned Business Plans induda: Nationwide Long
· Distance while on the Network; Voicemail; Numeric Paging; Caller ID;
Call Waiting; and Three-Way Calling. Not all thamres are available off
the Natwork.
(b) Night & Weekend Minutes a~ Monday-Thursday 9:00 p.m. to 7:00
mm. and Friday 9:00 p.m. to Monday 7:00 :tm.
(c) Call Forwarding is available for $.10 per minute.
(d) Additional Voice minutes are $.40 per minute.
(e) Unused minutes do not can~ forward.
(O Accounts activating on one of thc PCS Total Wireless Access for
Business Plans above with a Second Generation ("2(3") Sprint device will
be provided a Wireless Web Option at no additional charge.
(g) All Business Plans require a minimum 1-year term commitment.
5. Available Options. Unless already included in a plan or
expressly, thc following options can be added to any of the PCS Total
Wireless Access for Business Plans or the PCS Free & Clear Plans (with or
without Vision) for thc specified Monthly Recurring Charge.
*Designates options that are already included in same plans.
Each option listed below is $$ per month:
Unlimited PCS to PCS Minutes.* With this option, Custumer is eligible
to u~ an unlimited number of minutes each month to make or receive calls
on the Network from one PCS handset to another PCS handset. Calls made
received on handsets that are off thc Network will be neared as off-
applicable Business Plan. Domestic Roaming and Domestic Roaming long
not available for calls made to check voicemall, ffonc user has a plan
PCS Minutes will realize thc bencfit of thc feature, while the other nser
up to 2,500 phone numlg~s. That's 500 names with each name having up
Outlook or Lotus Note~ company emall, calendar, boslneas directory and
acceptance of the license agreement before downloading safware. PCS
Business Connection Personal Edition is not available offthe Network.
PCS Business Connection Personal Edition.* Access your Microsoft
personal contacts in real time on select PCS Phones. Use is subject to
Business Connection Personal Edition is not available offthe Network.
PCS Wireless Web." Usc any or all of thc minutes included in a PCS
updates/messag~ (10g each additional update/message). Overage voice
distance calls made while roaming off thc Network er~ charged an
· domestic roaming charge, if any. Users with the Add-a-Phone Option are
the shared minutes for Wireless Web. Or, Customer can access tho Sprint
PCS Wireless Web without this option and pay 39g per minute for
Wireless Web use.
Each of the following options is $10 per month:
Unlimited Vision (data) Services for PCS Phones.* Subject to the
following limitations, Customer use an unlimited amount of Vision
servic~ with its PCS phones while on the Network. Vision services are
not available off-N~twork. Customer will be required to pay all charges
associated with access to and usc of premium servicas. Any data services
used while off-Natwork wi0 be treated as an off-Network voice call under
the abplicablc Business Plan. Sprint may deny or terminate service
without notice where use is in connection with server devices or host
computer applications, other systems that drive continuous heavy mfffic or
data sessions, or as substitutes for private lines or frame relay coonacfions.
Unlimited PCS Vision services for PCS Phones is: (a) only available with
a Vision capable PCS Phone or PCS smart phone device; and CO) not
available with Connection Cards, Aircards, or any other device used in
connection with a computer or PDA (including phones, smart phones or
other devices used with connection kits or similar phone-to-eomputer/PDA
accessories). Sprint reserves the right to deny or to terminate service
without notice for misuse.
Off-Network Option. Customers receive up to 50 roaming minutes per
month. These minutes do not include roaming long distance but can be
used when Domestic Roaming or roaming in Canada or Mexico. Long
distance and roaming charges incurred while roaming in Canada, Mexico
and other foreign countries may vary. Unusad minutes do not cany
forward.
International Long Distance Calling. Receive special rates for
international long distance calling to selected countries. See your PCS
Account Representative for details.
Unlimited Night & Weekend Minutes* Us~ an unlimited number of
Night & Weekend Minutes each month. Night & Weekend Minutes are
Monday through Thursday 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and Friday 9:00 p.m. to
Monday 7:00 a.m. Long distance while on thc Network is included at no
additional charge.
(a) Subject to limitations below, Night & Weekend Minutes on the PCS
Total Wireless Access for Bualnass Plans am eligible for use both on the
Network and for Domestic Roaming. No charges will be incurred for local
or long distance calls made while Domestic Roaming, and such calls will
appear on Customer's bill as if they occus~d on the Network. See Section
6 below for an explanation of bilting for roaming ceils. International long
distonce is not included. Long distance and roaming charges incurred
while intemmional roaming in Canada, Mexico and other foreign countries
may vary. Llmitetion: With respect to each MIN, Night & Weekend
Minute Domestic Roaming usage per month may not exceed fifty percent
(50%) of the total amount of Night & Week,nd Minutes used per month.
In the event Night & Weekend Minute Domestic Roaming usage exceeds
thc aforementioned limit, Sprint r~crves the right (in its sole discretion
and with no liability to Customer) to terminate service to the applicable
MINs or to transfer the applicable MINs to other Bnsincss Plans.
Co) Night & Weekend Minutes on the Free & Clear Plans (with or without
Vision) ate only available for nsc on the Network. Long distance while on
the Network in included at no additional charge. Calls made from or
received on handsets that are off the Network will be txeated as off-
Network usage and warning charges will apply unless thc applicable
has Domestic Roaming minutes available under the Off-Network Option.
Domestic Roaming and Domestic Roaming long distance rates am
specified in Section 6 below. International long distance is not included.
Long distance and roamirig charges incurred while international roaming
in Canada, Mexico and other foreign countries may vary.
The following option is $20 per month:
PCS Add-a-Phone* [Not available with the PCS Total Wireless Access
for Business Plans] Allows additional users with separate MINs to share
· thc included minutes on any PCS Free & Clear Plans (with or without
Vision) that are $40.00 or higher, lfthc Primary Subscriber has unlimited
Vision, an unlimited amount of megabytes is included for each additional
handset. The $20 MPC applies to each handset sharing minutes. Up to 4
MINs may be added to one account with this option (subject to eligibility
based on credit). Customers with a voice only plan cannot add subscribers
who have a PCS plan with Vision as a PCS Add-a-Phone addition.
6. Roaming and Long Disutnce Charges.
Unless included, Domestic Roaming usage is charged at a into of $.50 per
minute. Domestic Roaming long distance calls will be charged at an
additional $.25 per minute. Data usage is not available while roaming off-
Network. Long distance and roaming charges incurred while international
roaming in Canada, Mexico and other foreign coun~ias may vmy. The
invoicing for Domestic or intemabonal roaming minutes used on another
provider's network and the associated long distance charges (if any) is
completed in accordance with the practices of thc roaming service
provider. Accordingly, there may be delays before Sprint posts Domestic
or intematlonal roaming minutes to Customer's account, and they may not
be charged against Customer's Business Plan in the month in which the
usage actually occurred.
Call Forwarding, Directory Assistance, Operator Services Station-to-
Station, Product Replacement Insurance are available at mx exua charge.
Not all of these services are available off-Natwork. These services nrc
priced at the standard rates announced by Sprint from time to time and
described in Sprint sales material, available upon r~qusst and incongorated
herein by reference. If there is a conflict b~wecn thc sales material and
the Ag~ement the Agreement controls.
7. Shared Minutes Plan.
To pafftcipate in the Shared Minutes Plan, Customer must have and
maintain at least 5 Customer MINs at all tLmes during the Term of this
Agreement, Thc Shared Minutes Plan is available to all Customer MINs
activated on Business Plans with an MRC base price of $60.00 or more.
To participate in the Shared Minutes Plans, there is a one time set-up fee of
$20.00 per MIN. Employee MINs are not eligible for this plan. The
ghared Minutes Plan does not allow Customer MINs to share data.
Under the Sha~-d Minutes Plan, Customer can pool 5 or mote qualifying
voice minutes us a pool (subject to the limitations below), theschy allowing
Customer MINs must roll up to thc same liable account (i.e., Customer).
minutes under the qualifying Business Plans will pool. Anytime Minutes
fi-om PCS Total Wireless Ace,s for Business Plans can be shared,
Anytime Minute Domestic Roaming is tracked on a per MIN basis. Off-
Network Option minutes and the Unlimited Night & Weekend Minutes
user on the aceonnL The Add-A-Pboan Option is not available with the
8. ' Service Credits.
All Business Plans require a minimum of a l-year term agteemenL Based
on Customer's Term commitment, Customer M1Ns will receive one of the
following service credits for MINs activated on Business Plans:
If a 1-year Customer receives a
asrecmant** $0 service credit Der Customer MIN***
If a 2-yeat Customer receives a
agreement** $100 service cttdit per Customes MIN***
ff a 3-year Cu.~omer receives a
agreement** $150 service credit per Customer MIN***
** The following early termination fees apply to Customer MINs: $50
for a 1-year, $I00 for a 2-year and S150 for a 3-year agreement.
Service credits, if any, and termination fees for Employee MINs are
governed by the agreements between Sprint and the Employees.
***Service credits will be applied on Customer's first invoice a~er
activation against ab~rges for Services and will roll over until used (up to a
maximum of 12 invoicing cycles). Service credits are non-tmusfemble,
have no cash value and cannot be applied to offset an emly termination
fee. Service Credits are available only on PCS handsets purchased via one
of the methods approved by Sprint.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrm3, contained herein, Customer
MINs that am converted to Business Plans from olher Sprint service plans
or renewed on Business Plans shall not be eligible to receive the above
referenced service credits if service cmd~ have been issued to thc
applicable M1Ns within the past 12 months.
Employee MINs are subject to a $34.99 activation fee.
9. Electronic Billing Products. The following electronic billing
products am ofamd to Customers who have and maintain at least 5
Customer MINs throughout thc Term of the Ag~cmanL These products
am offered under thc terms and conditions of thc Agreement and this
Service Plan Addendum. Each electronic billing product provides
Customer MIN call detail record ("CDR") information; therefore, except
as provided heroin, Customer will not receive paper invoices containing
CDR information together with an electronic billing product. With thc
selection of an electronic billing product, Customer may suppress its paper
invoice or receive a suonnary invoice containing ali standard invoice
information except CDR information. Customer may choose one
electronic billing product, or eBilling & Analysis and either EDI or EBT.
Sprint reserves the right to, upon 30 days prior written notice, migrate
Customer to an updated or successor version of the selected electronic
billing product, or if none exists, an entirely new electmnin billing product.
(a) eBilling & Analysis. eBilfing & Analysis is a web-based billing
product which allows Customer to easily view and manage invoice~ in an
alectronlc format on a monthly basis. With eBitiing & Analysis, Customer
eau monitor accounts, analyze usage, and plan communication budgets
with flexible, secure reports which 9an be downloaded to Customer's
computer, eBilling & Analysis provides Customer invoice data for the
previous ttoe~ hill cycles. Th~ charge for eBilling & Analysis is $35 per
month, with a one4ime $200 set up fee.
(b) Electronic Bill Transfer C'EBT'~. EBT provides the Customer raw
invoice data which can be formatted by Customer in any manner to meet
the Customer's specific needs. EBT provides unformatled, raw, fiat file,
tilde-delimited data which can be downloaded by Customer on a monthly
basis via the PCS EBT web site. EBT provides Customer invoice data for
the previous two bill cycles and is provided by Sprint to Customer at no
charge.
(c) Elec~ronin Data Interchanee CEDI"). Customer may select to rcgeive
invoice data in EDI 811 standard format In such case, Sprint will send
Customer EDI data files on a monthly basis via CD-ROM or Cooncet
Direct EDI provid~ Customer invoice data for the previous bill cycle and
is provided by Sprint to Customer at no charge.
In addition to one of the forogning electsonia hilling products, should
Customer choose to receive detail paper invoices containing CDR
information, Sprint will provide such invoices at the following monthly
rates: (a) $100 for Customers with 500 Custoroer MINs or lass; and (b)
$250 for Customers with more than 500 Customer MINs.
10. Use of Services and Products; Availability. Customer may not use
Sowices and/er Products for any unlawful, fraudulent or abusive purpose
or in any unlawful, fraudulent or abusive manner. In the event Sprint
determines in its sale discretion that Customer is violating any of the
foregoing provialous of this Section 10, it may immediately and
without notice limit or indefinitely suspend the Services provided to
Customer. Services am available within the operating range of the
Network. Except with respect to roaming, Sprint Products will not work
with wireless services other than Sprint. Services in some areas are
managed and provided under contract with Sprint by independent affiliates
with access to the Network. Some Services may not be available or may
operate differently in certain affdiate markets.
(Version 10.02)
Sprint Confidential (Vcrsion 10.02)
Service Plan Addendum
(1-99 MINS/Split NVP)
This document sets out the service plans and pricing options available to Customer. The pricing described herein may
not be valid with previous or subsequent pricing offers. Capitalized terms not defined in this Service Plan Addendum
have the meanings set out in the Advantage Agreement for Business ("Agreement") entered into between Customer
and SprlnL A MIN is a mobile Identification number assigned to a PCS handset or other devic~ A "Customer MIN"
is a MI]V activated by Customer for lts use and for whlch Customer is financially responstbl& Unless the context
clearly indicates otherwise, use of the term "MIN" refers to Customer MINs. A MIN may also be referred to in
Sprint's terms and conditions of service as a "Number".
A. PCS Clear Wireless WorkplacesM. Customer can build a PCS Clear Wireless Workplacess~ by choosing to activate
Customer MINTs on one of the PCS service plans set out in Section B below (collectively "Business Plans"). Thc
Business Plans are broken down into four (4) general categories: (1) PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans;
(2) PCS Free & Clear Plans (with and without Vision); and (3) PCS Vision Plans for Laptops and PDAs. The
Business Plans may not be used in conjunction with certain other Sprint promotions, discounts and/or contests.
B. Description of Business Plans
*ALL BUSINESS PLANS REQUIRE A MINIMUM I-YEAR TERM COMMITMENT
1. PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans. Employee M1Ns are not eligible for these plans.
Monthly Recurring
Charge ("MRC') $85.00* $100.00' $125.00' $150.00'
Anytime Minutes (On
or Off-Network, See 1250 1750 2000 2500
Below)
Unlimited Vision
(data) Services for Included Included Included Included
PCS Phones**
Unlimited PCS to
PCS Minutes**
Included Included Included Included
Business Connection
Personal Edition**
Included Included Included Included
PCS Voice
Command**
Included Included Included Included
** Described in more detail in Section B.4. below.
Anytime Minutes. Subject to the limitation below, Anytime Minutes on the PCS Total Wireless Access for
Business Plans are eligible for use both on the Sprint Nationwide PCS Network (hereinafter the "Network") and
for off-Network usage in covered areas in the United States, Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
(hereinafter "Domestic Roaming"). Long distance is included in the Anytime Minutes, whether on the Network
or while Domestic Roaming. Domestic Roaming used as part of the Anytime Minutes will appear on Customer's
invoice as if they occurred on the Network. See Section B.6. below for an explanation of billing for roaming
Sprint Confidential (~c~sion [0.02)
calls. International long distance is not included. Long' distance and roaming charges incurred while
international roaming in Canada, Mexico and other foreign counlries may vary.
Limitation on Off-Network Usage. With respect to each MIN, Anytime Minute Domestic Roaming usage per
month may not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the total amount of Anytime Minutes used per month. In addition,
the Domestic Roaming feature included with Anytime Minutes may not be shared among MINs in the Shared
Minutes Plan although the Anytime Minutes themselves may be shared. In the event Anytime Minute Domestic
Roaming usage exceeds the aforementioned limits, Sprint reserves the right (in its sole discretion and with no
liability to Customer) to terminate service to the applicable MINs or to transfer the applicable MINs to other
Business Plans.
2. PCS Free & Clear Plans (with and without Vision).
Monthly
Recurring
Charge $30.00* $40.00* $45.00* $60.00* $85.00* $100.00' $125.00 $150.00
("MRC")
Anytime 300 400 500 800 2000 2500 3500 4500
Minutes
Unlimited
Night &
Included Included Included Included $10/Month $10/Month $10/Month $10/Month
Weekend
Minutes**
Unlimited
PCS to PCS
Minutes* * $SfMonth $SfMonth $5/Month $5/Month Included Included Included Included
PCS Add-a-
Phone**
Not $20/Month $20/Month $20/Month Included Included Included Included
Avnilable
Unlimited
Vision
$10fMonth i $10/Month $10/Month $10fMonth Included Included Included Included
(data)
Services for
PCS Phones
** Described in more detail in Section B.4. below.
· Anytime Minutes. The Anytime Minutes included in the Free & Clear Plans (with and without Vision) are not
eligible for use while roaming offthe Network and additional charges will apply to off-Network usage.
· Off-Network Usage. Domestic Roaming calls are charged at $.50 per minute. Domestic Roaming long distance
calls will be charged at an additional $.25 per minute.
· Casual Vision Usage. Accounts activating on one of the above plans that does not include Vision can access PCS
Vision for $.02 per kilobyte.
3. Additional Plan Features & Terms. The following features and terms are applicable to all PCS Total Wireless
Access for Business Plans and all PCS Free & Clear Plans (with and without Vision).
2
Sp~int Confidential (Version 10.02)
· All oftbe aforementioned Business Plans include: Nationwide Long Distance while on the Network; Voicemail;
Numeric Paging; Caller ID; Call Waiting; and Three-Way Calling. Not all features are available off the
Network.
· Night & Weekend Minutes are Monday-Thursday 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and Friday 9:00 p.m. to Monday 7:00
· Call Forwarding is available for $.10 per minute.
· Additional Voice minutes are $.40 per minute.
· Unused minutes do not carry forward.
· Accounts activating on one of the PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans above with a Second
Generation ("2G") Sprint device will be provided a Wireless Web Option at no additional charge.
4.
Available Options. Unless akeady included in a plan or expressly excluded, the following options can be added
to any of the PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans or the PCS Free & Clear Plans (with or without
Vision) for the specified Monthly Recurring Charge.
* Designates options that are already included in some plans.
Each option listed below is $5 per month
Unlimited PCS to PCS Minutes*
With this option, Customer is eligible to use an unlimited number of minutes each month to make or receive calls on the
Network from one PCS handset to another PCS handset, Calls made from or received on handsets that are on the Network
will use the PCS to PCS Minutes and will not use other included voice minutes. Long distance while on the Network is
included at no additional charge. PCS to PCS Minutes are not available while roaming off-Network. Calls made from or
received on handsets that are off the Network will be ~eated as off-Network usage and roaming charges may apply
depending on the applicable Business Plan. Domestic Roaming and Domestic Roaming long distance rates are specified in
Section B.6. below. PCS to PCS Minutes are not available for calls made to check voicemail. If one user has a plan with
PCS to PCS Minutes and the other does not, the user with the PCS to PCS Minutes will realize the benefit of the feature,
while the other user uses included minutes under that user's Business Plan.
PCS Voice Command*
Dial your PCS phone with your voice. Program up to 2,$00 phone numbers. That's 500 names with each name having up
to five phone numbers.'Availability may be limited. PCS Voice Command is not available offthe Network.
PCS Business Connection Personal Edition*
Access your Microsofi Outlook or Lotus Notes company email, calendar, business directory and personal contacts in real
time on select PCS Phones. Use is subject to acceptance of the license agreement before downloading software. PCS
Business Connection Personal Edition is not available offthe Network.
PCS Wireless Web*
Use any or all of the minutes included in a PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plan or a Free and Clear Plan for wireless
connection to Customer's intranet or thc lntcreeC Also receive 50 updates/messages (10¢ each additional update/message). Overage
voice and Wireless Web minutes are charged at the applicable voice overage rate. Long distance is not charged on Wireless Web
Browser minutes for MINs whose plans include Long Distance. Domestic Roaming long distance calls made while roaming offthe
Network are charged an additional $0.25 per minute in addition to the applicable per minute domestic roaming charge; if any. Users
with the Add-a-Phone Option are eligible for the Wireless Web Option and all users on the account can use the shared minutes for
Wireless Web.
· Or, Customer can access the Sprint PCS Wireless Web without this option and pay 39¢ per minute for Wireless Web use.
Sprint Confidential (Version 10.02)
Each option listed below is $10 per month:
International Long Distance Calling
Receive special rates for international long distance calling to selected countries. See your PCS Account Representative
for details.
Unlimited Vision (data) Services for PCS Phones*
Subject to the following limitations, Customer may use an unlimited amount of Vision services with its PCS phones while
on the Network. Vision services are not available off-Network. Any data services used while off-Network will be treated
as an off-Network voice call under the applicable Business Plan. Customer will be required to pay all charges associated
with access to and use ofpreminm services. Sprint may deny or terminate service without notice where use is in
connection with server devices or host computer applications, other systems that drive continuous heavy traffic or data
sessions, or ns substitutes for private lines or frame relay connections. Unlimited PCS Vision services for PCS Phones is:
(a) only available with a Vision capable PCS Phone or PCS smart phone device; and Co) not available with Connection
Cards, Aircards, or any other device used in connection with a computer or PDA (including phones, smart phones or other
devices used with connection kits or similar phone-to-computer/PDA accessories). Sprint reserves the right to deny or to
terminate service without notice for misuse.
Off-Network Option
Customers receive up to 50 roaming minutes per month. These minutes do not include reaming long distance but can be
used when Domestic Roaming or roaming in Canada or Mexico. Domestic Roaming long distance calls are charged at
$.25 per minute plus applicable roaming charges. Long distance and roaming charges incurred while roaming in Canada,
Mexico and other foreign countries may vary. Unused minutes do not carry forward.
Unlimited Night & Weekend Minutes*
Use un unlimited number of Night & Weekend Minutes each month. Night & Weekend Minutes are Monday through
Thursday 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and Friday 9:00 p.m. to Monday 7:00 a.m. Long distance while on the Network is
included at no additional charge.
· Subject to limitations below, Night & Weekend Minutes on the PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans
are eligible for use both on the Network and for Domestic Roaming. No charges will be incurred for local or long
distance calls made while Domestic Roaming, and such calls Will appear on Customer's bill as if they occurred
on the Network. See Section B.6. below for an explanation of billing for roamln$ calls. International long
distance is not included. Long distance and roaming charges incurred while international roaming in Canada,
Mexico and other foreign countries may vary. Limitation: With respect to each M1N, Night & Weekend Minute
Domestic Roaming usage per month may not exceed fifty percent (:50%) of the total amount of Night & Weekend
Minutes used per month. In the event Night & Weekend Minute Domestic Roaming usage exceeds the
aforementioned limit, Sprint reserves the right (in its sole discretion and with no liability to Customer) to
terminate service to the applicable MINs or to transfer the applicable MINs to other Business Plans.
· Night & Weekend Minutes on the Free & Clear Plans (with or without Vision) are only available for use on the
Network. Long distance while on the Network is included at no additional charge. Calls made from or received
on handsets that are offthe Network will be treated as off-Network usage and roaming charges will apply unless
the applicable MIN has Domestic Roaming minutes available under the Off-Network Option. Domestic Roaming
and Domestic Roaming long distance rates are specified in Section B.6. below. International long distance is
not included. Long distance and roaming charges incurred while international roaming in Canada, Mexico and
other foreign countries may vary.
4
Sprint Confidential (Version 10.02)
The following option is $20 per month:
PCS Add-a-Phone* [Not available with the PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans]
Allows additional users with separate MINs to share thc included minutes on nay PCS Free & Clear Plans
(with or without Vision) that are $40.00 or higher. If the Primary Subscriber has unlimited Vision, na
unlimited amount of megabytes is included for each additional handset. The $20 MRC applies to each
handset sharing minutes. Up to 4 M1Ns may be added to one account with this option (subject to eligibility
based on credit). Customers with a voice only plna cannot add subscribers who have a PCS plna with Vision
as a PCS Add-a-Phune addition.
5. PCS Vision for Laptops and PDAs
Monthly Recurring
Charge ("MRC') $40.00* $60.00 $80.00 $120.00
Vision (data)
Services in
20MB 40MB 70MB 120MB
Megabytes ("MB")
Additional data usage is $.002 per kilobyte for the 20MB, 40MB and 70MB plans and $.001 per kilobyte for the
120MB plna.
Voice calls made on Sprint devices with voice capability with these plans incur a charge of 20¢ per minute
including domestic long distance.
Roaming and Long Distance Charges. Unless included, Domestic Roaming usage is charged at a rate of $.50
· per minute. Domestic Roaming long distance calls will be charged at un additional $.25 per minute. Data usage
is not available while roaming off-Network. Long distance and roaming charges incurred while international
roaming in Canada, Mexico and other foreign countries may vary. The invoicing for Domestic or international
roaming minutes used on another provider's network nad the associated long distance charges (if nay) is
completed in accordance with the practices of the roaming service provider. Accordingly, there may be delays
before Sprint posts Domestic or international roaming minutes to Customer's account, nad they may not be
charged against Customer's Business Plan in the month in which the usage.actually occurred.
Call Forwarding, Directory Assistance, Operator Services Station-to-Station, Product Replacement Insurance are
available at na extra charge. Not all of these services are available off-Network. These services are priced at the
standard rates announced by Sprint fi.om time to time and described in Sprint sales material, available upon
request nad incorporated herein by reference. If there is a conffict between the sales material and the Agreement
the Agreement con~'ols.
Shared Minutes Plan. To participate in the Shared Minutes Plan, Customer must have nad maintain at least $
Customer MINs at all times during the Term of this Agreement. The Shared Minutes Plan is available to all
Customer MINs activated on Business Plans with na lvIRC base price of $60.00 or more. To participate in the
Shared Minutes Plans, there is a one time set-up fee of $20.00 per MIN. Employee MINs are not eligible for
this plan. The Shared Minutes Plan does not allow Customer MINs to share data. Under the Shared
Minutes Plan, Customer can pool 5 or more qualifying Business Plans together to allow the users to use one
another's included voice minutes as a p0ol (subject to the limitations below), thereby allowing included minutes .
to be used when they otherwise might not have been. While the pooled Customer MINs may be in different
markets, the pooled Customer MINs must roll up to the same liable account (i.e., Customer). Al/er all minutes in
the pooled Customer MINs Business Plans are exhausted, each Customer MIN's additional airtime minutes are
billed at the overage rate defined in the associated Business Plan. Only included minutes under the qualifying
Business Plans will pool. Anytime Minutes fi'om PCS Total Wireless Access for Business Plans can be shared,
5
Sprint Confidential (Version 10.02)
however the Domestic Roaming feature of the Anytime Minutes cannot. Anytime Minute Domestic Roaming is
tracked on a per MIN basis.
Off-Network Option minutes and the Unlimited Night & Weekend Minutes cannot be shared with other users
even if provisioned to more than one user on the account. The Add-A-Phone Option is not available with the
Shared Minutes Plan.
8. All Business Plans require a minimum of a l-year term agreement. Based on Customer's Term commitment,
Customer M1Ns will receive one of the following service credits for M1Ns activated on Business Plans:
If a 1 -year agreement** Customer receives a
$0 service credit per Customer MIN***
If a 2-year agreement** Customer receives a
$100 service credit per Customer MI]q**.*
If a 3-year agreement** Customer receives a
$150 service credit per Customer MIN***
** The following early termination fees apply to Customer MINs: $50 for a 1-year, $100 for a 2-year and
$150 for a 3-year agreement. Service credits, if any, and termination fees for Employee MINs are governed
by the agreements between Sprint and the Employees.
***Service credits will be applied on Customer's in'st invoice after activation against charges for Services and will
roll over until used (up to a maximum of 12 invoicing cycles). Service credits are non-trunsferable, have no cash
value and cannot be applied to offset an early termination fee. Service Credits are available only on PCS handsets
purchased via one of the methods described Section G below.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, Customer MINs that are converted to Business Plans
fi.om other Sprint service plans or renewed on Business Plans shall not be eligible to receive the above referenced
service credits if service credits have been issued to the applicable MINs within the past 12 months.
Employee MINs are subject to a $34.99 activation fee.
C. NVP Discount Program. (The NVP Discount Program is available only on PCS handsets purchased via one of
the methods described in Section G, "Ordering", below.)
To participate in the NVP Discount Program, Customer must have and maintain at least 5 Customer MINs at all times
during the Term of this Agreement.
1. Definltion of NVP Discount and Emelovee Discount: Eli~,ible MRCs. The term "NVP Discount" means a
percentage discount offthe net MRCs charged to Customer for Customer MINs on (1) the Business Plans and
(2) any other MRC expressly identified as a qualifying MRC in the Agreement. The NVP Discount, if any,
available to Customer is set forth in the table below. The term "Employee Discount" means a percentage
discount offthe net MRCs charged to Employees for Employee MINs on eligible service plans. The Employee
Discount is only available to Employees if Customer elects to participate in the EAP program as described in
Section F below.
2. Contributim, M1Ns. A "Contributing MIN" is a Customer MIN or an Employee MINI that is included in
Customer's Sprint account hierarchy and contributes to Customer's Subscriber Level. A Contributing MIN can
be activated on Business Plans (only Customer MIIqs are eligible for PCS Total Wireless Access for Business
Plans) or other eligible plans or promotions. It may take up to 2 invoicing cycles to move Contributing MINs to
the same invoicing cycle in order to start receiving the NVP Discount.
3. Subscriber Level Warranty and NVP Discount. On the Effective Date, (1) Customer warrants and represents that
its selected Subscriber Level as specified below is a good faith estimate of the number of Contributing MINs that
6
Sprint Confidential
(Version 10.02)
will be activated under Customer's Sprint account hierarchy during the Grace Period and maintained throughout
the Term of the Agreement, and (2) Sprint during the Grace Period (specified below), will provide to Customer
the benefit of the NVP Discount associated with Customer's Subscriber Level. If Customer's Contributing MINs
are not equal to or greater than the selected Subscriber Level by the end of the Grace Period, the NVP Discount
Customer received during the Grace Period will be reduced to the "Reduced NVP Discount" set forth in the table
below. Throughout the remainder of the Term, Customer's actual Subscriber Level will be checked by Sprint on
a monthly basis. If at any time afier the expiration of the Grace Period Customer's actual Subscriber Level is less
than the selected Subscriber Level set forth below, Customer's NVP Discount will be reduced to the "Reduced
NVP Discount" for the remainder of the Term.
Subscriber Level *NVP Discount Employee Discount Actual Discount Grace Period Reduced
(Customer (Employee MINs if Adjustment NVP
Discount
MINs) EAP is offered) "ADA"
* The discount specified is associated with Customer's designated Subscriber Level contained in the first column.
To the extent applicable, Customer shall notify its Employees if the discount available under this Service Plan
Addendum changes or is different (higher or lower) than the discount available to Employees under a previous
service plan addendum. Said notice shall be provided within 30 days after the effective date for the employee
discount change.
D. Electronic Billing Products. The following electronic billing products are offered to Customers who have and
maintain at least 5 Customer M1Ns throughout the Term of the Agreement. These products are offered under the
terms and conditions of the Agreement and this Service Plan Addendum. Each electronic billing product provides
Customer MIN call detail record ("CDR") information; therefore, except as provided herein, Customer will not
receive paper invoices containing CDR information together with an elec~'onic billing product. With the selection of
an electronic billing product, Customer may suppress its paper invoice or receive a summary invoice containing all
standard invoice information except CDR information. Customer may choose one electronic billing product, or
eBllling & Analysis and either EDI or EBT. Sprint reserves the right to, upon 30 days prior written notice, migrate
Customer to an updated or successor version of the selected electronic billing product, or if none exists, an entirely
new electronic billing product.
1. eBllling & Analysis. eBllling & Analysis is a web-based billing product which allows Customer to easily view
and manage invoices in an electronic format on a monthly basis. With eBilling & Analysis, Customer can
monitor accounts, analyze usage, and plan communication budgets with flexible, secure reports which can be
downloaded to Customer's computer, eBilling & Analysis provides Customer invoice data for the previous three
bill cycles. The charge for eBllling & Analysis is $35 per month, with a one-time $200 set up fee.
2. Electronic Bill Transfer ("EBT"~. EBT provides the Customer raw invoice data which can be formatted by
Customer in any manner to meet the Customer's specific needs. EBT provides unformatted, raw, flat file, tilde-
delimited data which can be downloaded by Customer on a monthly basis via the PCS EBT web site. EBT
provides Customer invoice data for the previous two bill cycles and is provided by Sprint to Customer at no
charge.
3. Electronic Data Interchange ("EDI"). Customer may select to receive invoice data in EDI 811 standard format.
In such case, Sprint will send Customer EDI data files on a monthly basis via CD-ROM or Connect Direct. EDI
provides Customer invoice data for the previous bill cycle and is provided by Sprint to Customer at no charge.
In addition to one of the foregoing eleca'onic billing products, should Customer choose to receive detail paper
invoices containing CDR information, Sprint will provide such invoices at the following monthly rates: (a) $100
for Customers with 500 Customer MINs or less; and (b) $250 for Customers with more than 500 Customer
MINs.
Sprint Confidential
E. New Promotions, Business Plans, Products and Services.
(~ersion 10.02)
Existing Customers may not be eligible for all new
business plans or promotions offered afier the Effective Date. In the event Customer is eligible and chooses a new
business plan or promotion offered afier the Effective Date, all special terms and conditions of that plan or promotion
apply in addition to and control over any conflicting term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, any
required activation fees. At the expiration of the promotion, Customer must select a Business Plan, or another eligible
promotion, unless the original promotion requires a term commitment that extends beyond the Term. Sprint may
make available to Customer new Products and Services as they become commercially available. All such Products
and Services are subject to the special terms and conditions of that Product or Service offering, which terms apply in
addition to and control over any conflicting term of this Agreement.
F. Employee Advantage Program ("EAP'). Must order as specified in Ordering If Cnstomer elects to participate
in the EAP, Sprint will make the Employee Discount specified in Section C. above available to Customer's
Employees who enter a services agreement with Sprint for at least one (1) year. Customer's Employees will be
eligible for service plans available to Employees at the time of activatiun. An "Employee" is a person in the service of
Customer and fi.om whose gross pay Customer withholds FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) contributions.
An "Employee MIW' is a MIN activated by an Employee for his/her end user use under the EAP. The provision of
Services and Products by Sprint to Employees is not governed by this Agreement. Each Employ, ce must enter into a
separate agreement with Sprint for Services and Products under the EAP. Employees must meet and maintain
satisfactory credit with Sprint in order to receive and to continue to receive Services and purchase Products under the
EAP. In order to receive the Employee Discount, Employees must purchase Products and Services through sales
channels approved by Sprint. Employees on month-to-month service plans are subject to Sprint's standard consumer
terms and conditions of service and are not eligible for the Employee Discount. If an Employee chooses a service
plan or wishes to take advantage of a discount that requires a term commitment, the Employee must sign a term
agreement with Sprint. Customer is not responsible for any charges for Services to Employee MINs or Products
purchased by Employees. Employees on qualifying service plans receive the Employee Discount only during the
Term of this Agreement and the amount of the NVP Discount received by Employees may vary depending on the
number of Cuntributing MINa afier the Grace Period. Customer and Sprint will work together to identify Employees
who are Sprint subscribers as of the Effective Date and who may be eligible to receive the Employee Discount. If
Customer elects to participate in the EAP:
I. Customer and Sprint must agree to Sprint's standard authorization process for Employees to participate in the
EAP or to a mutually satisfactory written authorization process;
2. throughout the Term, Customer agrees to cooperate with and assist Sprint in verifying the employment status of
persons claiming to be Customer's Employees;
3. within 30 days of the Effective Date and at least monthly thereat~er during the Term, Customer will communicate
to all of its Employees via Customer% company wide alectronic mail system(s), or other applicable system if
electronic mail is unavailable, that Customer has entered into an agreement with Sprint under which Employees
can receive a discount offof salect Sprint service plans;
4. at each of Customer's facilities, Customer must provide at least one (1) opportunity per month for Sprint
personnel to exclusively market and sell Products and Services available for purchase by Employees;
5. Customer will permit' Sprint to send marketing messages to the Employee base via payroll stuffers, company
magazines/newsletters, email, chair drops, or in any other reasonable manner.
Sprint may in its sole discretion elect to create, maintain and control (at no additional cost to Customer) an intranet
site describing Sprint Products and Services, the EAP and the method by which such Employees can take advantage
of the EAP. If Sprint provides the aforementioned website, each electronic communication described above will
include an electronic link (via the internet or intranet, as the case may be) to the Sprint intranet site.
All Company communications described above must be accurate with respect to the offer available under this
Agreement. Customer must coordinate the details and content of such communications and marketing with Sprint.
G. Ordering. customer may order Products by (a) delivering a wriRen order to Sprint, Co) calling Sprint's toll-free
telesales phone number followed by written confirmation, (c) utilizing the Online Sprint Store (see below), or (d)
contacting Customer's PCS Account Representative followed by written confirmation. Only persons authorized by
Customer will issue orders under this Agreement, and Sprint may reasonably rely on the authority of any person who
executes an order on Customer's behalf. Sprint may accept the order by (1) signing and returning a copy of the order
to Customer, (2) delivery of any of the Products ordered, (3) informing Customer in any manner of the
8
Sprint Confidential (Version ]O.O:Z)
commencement of performance, or (4) returning an acknowledgment of the order. Any order and any
acknowledgment of any order will be deemed amended to conform to this Agreement and any term of the order or
acknowledgement that differs with a term in this Agreement will be of no effect.
Use of Services and Products; Availability. Customer may not use Services and/or Products for any unlawful,
fraudulent or abusive purpose or in any unlawful, fraudulent or abusive manner. Without limiting the foregoing, it is
understood and agreed by Customer that it may not: (1) use the Services or Products in any manner that harmful in
any way to the prope~'y of Sprint or third parties; (2) use the Services or Products in any manner that interferes with,
disrupts or is damaging to the Services provided to Customer, any third pex~ customers, the Network or any other
portions of Sprint's system; or (3) resell or lease Services or Products. In the event Sprint determines in its sole
discretion that Customer is violating any of the foregoing provisions of this Section I4, it may immediately and
without notice limit or indefinitely suspend the Services provided to Customer. Services are available within the
operating range of the Network. Except with respect to roaming, Sprint Products will not work with wireless services
other than Sprint. Services in some areas are managed and provided under contract with Sprint by independent
affiliates with access to the Network. Some Services may not be available or may operate differently in certain
affiliate markets.
,/
ITEM 8
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
;ity Manager/City Council
,/~/illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Acceptance of a Drainage Easement located within Parcel 4
of Parcel Map 13889
PREPARED BY:
Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR A DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN
PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13889
BACKGROUND: Parcel Map No. 13889 is a four-parcel subdivision located at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Ormsby Road and Santiago Road. The proposed road
improvements on Via El Delora were designed to allow for drainage across the street from the
north to the south side of the street at a rate of 2%. Curb only will be placed on the north side,
while curb and gutter will be placed on the south side where flows will collect in an asphalt
concrete over side drain at a Iow point in front of Parcel 4. The flow will then be diverted along a
v-ditch or channel within and along the northern and western boundary of Parce~ 4. A 20-foot
long by 10-foot wide drainage easement is proposed within Parcel 4 to accept street flow and
allow for drainage improvements.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2002-
2. Drainage Easement with Exhibit "A" and "B" made parts thereof to be recorded.
R:\agdrpt\02\l 112\pm 13889 parcel 4,drainage easement dedication
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR A DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN
PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13889
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
The road improvements on Via El Delora were designed to drain at a Iow
point in front of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 13889 necessitating the
construction of an asphalt concrete over side drain and related
improvements;
B. Such drainage improvements require a 20-foot long by 10-foot wide
drainage easement;
The owner, The Legacy Group, Inc. submitted an offer of dedication for a
drainage easement that is consistent with the proposed drainage
improvements location;
D. Acceptance of the easement deed serves the public interests.
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby desires to accept
the drainage easement by The Legacy Group, Inc. as described in Exhibit "A" and shown in
Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula hereby accepts the offer of dedication of the drainage easement by The Legacy
Group, Inc.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of November 2002.
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
R:~agdrpt\02\l 112\pm 13889 parcel 4.drainage easement dedication
2
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12th day of November, 2002 by the following
vote:
AYES: 0
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
R:~agdrpt\02\1112\pm 13889 parcel 4.drainage easement dedication
3
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
City of Temecula, California
AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO:
City Clerk
City of Temecula
P.O. BOX 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
ABOVE SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE
DRAINAGE EASEMENT
THIS DOCUMENT IS RECORDED AS A BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AND IS EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEE PURSUANT TO
SECTION 6103 OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-080-012
PROJECT NO.
THE LEGACY GROUP, INC. , as Co-Trustees of the ,hereinafter
designated GRANTORS, represent that they are the owners of the hereinafter described real
property, and for a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby
grant, bargain, convey and release unto the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, in the County
of Riverside, State of California, hereinafter designated GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, a
perpetual DRAINAGE EASEMENT and right-of-way upon, through, under, over and across the
hereinafter described real property for the installation, construction, maintenance, repair,
replacement, reconstruction, and inspection of a drainage system including any and all structures
and appurtances incidental thereto designed to convey stormwater runoff through the property of the
GRANTORS, together with the right to have and hold said easement and right-of-way unto itself and
unto its successors and assigns forever and to convey said easement, or any portion thereof, to
other public agencies.
The real property referred to hereinabove and made subject to said easement by this grant is
situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, and is more particularly described as follows:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Parcel Map 13889 Lot 4 County of Riverside as recorded in Book 77,
pages 98 & 99.
(See exhibits - "A" & "B" attached and incorporated herein by this reference as set
forth in full)
The GRANTORS shall not construct buildings or structures, install trees or bushes, or otherwise
obstruct in any fashion whatsoever the use of said easement and right-of-way by the GRANTEE, its
successors or assigns without the express written consent of the GRANTEE as demonstrated by
issuance of an Encroachment Permit issued by the GRANTEE.
The GRANTEE shall have the right but not the obligation to remove any buildings, structures, trees
bushes or other obstruction that interfere with the right of the GRANTEE to use said easement and
right-of-way.
The GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, shall be responsible for maintaining and keeping in
good repair the above described works and shall have a right-of-entry upon the property of the
GRANTORS for the purposes of inspecting, operating, maintaining, and keeping in good repair the
above described works of improvement.
There is reserved to the GRANTORS, their successors and assigns, the right and privilege to use
the above described land of the GRANTORS at any time, in any manner and for any purpose not
inconsistent with the full use and enjoyment by the GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, of the
rights and privileges herein granted.
The GRANTORS for themselves, their successors and assigns, hereby waives any claim for any
and all damages to GRANTOR'S remaining property contiguous to the easement hereby conveyed
by reason of the location, design, construction or maintenance of said drainage facilities or said
easement.
WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTORS have executed this instrument this 29th day of
May ,20 02.
GRANTORS:
THE LEGACY GROUP, INC.
(sign here)
Lawrence L. Slusser
(print name here)
President
(title of signatory)
(sign here)
Carma M. Slusser
(p~nt name here)
Vice President
(title of signam~)
(All OWNERS must sign)
(Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by OWNER must be attached.)
(President or vice-president and secretary or assistant secretary must sign for corporations. If only
one officer signs, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant
secretary under corporate seal empowering that officer to bind the corporation.)
(Attach appropriate Subordination Agreements as applicable)
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California '~
County of ~{~ V~:~-'~ ( O~ / ss,
On ,..~-~_~42
Date
personally appeared
Name and Title of Officer (e.g,, "Jane Doe, Notary Public")
Name(s) of Signe~s)
~5~rsonally known to me
[] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(les), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or
the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
OPTIONAL
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document
and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.
Description of Attached D.~c~ment
Title or Type of Document: .~/-'~ N~
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer
Signer's Name:
[] Individual
· .~-'-Corporate Officer -- Title(s):
[] Partner--[] Limited [] General
[] Attorney in Fact
[] Trustee
[] Guardian or Conservator
[] Other:
Signer Is Representing: '-'~' ~ ~ ~'~ ~
Top of thumb here
EXHIBIT "A"- DESCRIPTION
A 10.00 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES IN THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA OVER AND
ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 13889 AS PER MAP FILED
IN BOOK 77, PAGES 98 THROUGH 99 INCLUSIVE, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, THE CENTER LINE OF SAID EASEMENT
BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT COURSE LABELED AS
NORTH 80°11'16'' WEST 50.00 FEET, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT
ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ViA EL DELORA;
THENCE SOUTH 09048'44'' WEST 20.00 FEET.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS
REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
SAID EASEMENT CONTAINING 200 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
SUBJECT TO COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS,
RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, IF ANY.
ALAN R. SHORT, R.C.E. 30873
REGISTRATION EXPIRES: 3/3112004
DATE:
-- ~ ~,~17' 36 '
-- ~ R=IO0 N$O'
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE /:
EASEMENT
CONTNNING 200 SQ, FT,
25911 Pinewood Lane
Legume Hills. CA 92653
(6491 566-6200
FAX 1949J 586-6667
EXHIBIT "B"
RCE 30073 EXP. 3-31-04 6/18/02 SHEET I OF I
ITEM 9
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~-----. I
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
,~/~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Grant Application for FY 2003/04
PREPARED BY:
Julie Dauer, CIP Specialist
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Receive and file this report regarding our Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Grant
Application for the development of the Santa Gertrudis Bicycle/Trail Undercrossing at
Margarita Road, and authorize the Director of Public Works to forward said application to
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Local Assistance Office.
2. Approve a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE SANTA GERTRUDIS BICYCLE/TRAIL UNDERCROSSlNG AT
MARGARITA ROAD
BACKGROUND: The Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) provides State funds
for city and county projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters.
Administered by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Local Assistance Office,
the program is intended to provide $7.2 million to cities and counties for Fiscal Year 2003/2004.
BTA funds can provide a maximum of ninety percent (90%) of the cost of an eligible project,
however, the local agency must provide ten percent (10%) of the project cost from sources
other than BTA funds. The maximum amount of BTA funds an applicant may receive for Fiscal
Year 2003/04 is $1.8 million.
The Public Works Department has prepared a grant application request that we believe meets
the goals of the BTA program guidelines. Our grant application seeks $562,500 in BTA funds to
develop and implement the design and construction of the Santa Gertrudis Bicycle/frail
Undercrossing at Margarita Road. If our grant application is successful, this project will enhance
the existing and planned bikeways identified in the City of Temecula's Multi-Use Trails and
Bikeways Master Plan.
R:tAG ENDA REPORTS~2002~I 11202\BTAProgram,GrantApp.doc
FISCAL IMPACT: The City of Temecula has identified the proposed Santa Gertrudis
BicydeFFrail Undercrossing at Margarita Road project within its five-year capital improvement
program for FY 2003-2007. The total estimated cost is $625,000. If our grant application were
successful, funding from the BTA program would provide ninety percent (90%), or $562,500
towards the overall cost of the project. It would be necessary for the City to fund the remaining
ten percent (10%) or $62,500. Upon approval by the State, the City could make any necessary
appropriations in accordance with its Capital Improvement Project Budget process for Fiscal
Year 2003/04.
Pursuant to the BTA program guidelines, applications are due to Caltrans by December 2, 2002.
Notification of award of grant funding is expected prior to the State fiscal year budget for
2003/04.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2002-
2. SiteNicinity Map
2
R:~AGENDA REPORTS',2002\111202\BTAProgram. GrantApp.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUClL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE SANTA GERTRUDIS BICYCLE/TRAIL UNDERCROSSING AT
MARGARITA ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has adopted the California Bicycle
Transportation Act, the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) for Fiscal Year 2003/04 will
provide $7.2 million in State funds for city and county projects that improve safety and
convenience for bicycle commuters; and
WHEREAS, the State has established certain procedures and criteria for reviewing BTA
grant proposals, to be eligible for BTA funds, the local agency must have an adopted Bicycle
Transportation Plan that complies with State laws and the regional transportation plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has formally approved its Multi-Use Trails and
Bikeways Master Plan, said plan has been forwarded to the Riverside County Transportation
Commission for review and approval in compliance with BTA grant application requirements;
and
WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the State require a resolution
certifying approval by the City Council of the City of Temecula for the submittal of the grant
application and the availability of the required ten percent (10%) local share of the total project
cost; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, if selected for funding, will enter into an agreement
with the State of California to carry out the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle/Trail Undercrossing
project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows:
Section 1. Approves the filing of an application for the Bicycle and Transportation
Account Program for grant assistance.
Section 2. Certifies that the City of Temecula will provide ten percent (10%) of the
projects costs from sources other than the BTA funds.
Section 3. Appoints William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, to
conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to
applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary
for the completion of the aforementioned project.
R:~AGENDA REPO RTS',2.002\111202\BTAProgram. GrantApp.doc
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a
regular meeting held on the 12th day of November 2002.
Ron Robeds, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Temecula at a regular me(~ting-thereof held on the 12th day of November, 2002, by
the following vote:
AYES: 0
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
R:~AGEN DA REPORTS~2002\I 11202\BTAProgram.GrantApp.doc
ITEM 10
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
APPROVAL /--~/~. ,,..~
CITY A3-1'ORNEY ~
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~._
CITY MANAGER ~
~ ~City Manager/City Council
~}/[~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Diaz Road Realignment Project - Approval of Project and Negative
Declaration (EA-68)
PREPARED BY:
Amer Attar, Principal Engineer
Steve Charette, Assistant Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPROVING THE DIAZ ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT
PROJECT NO. PW95-27.
BACKGROUND: The project consists of the realignment of Diaz Road to the
intersection of Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga Drive. Improvements will include
approximately 1000 feet of four-lane roadway with landscaped medians and parkways, a four-
way traffic signal at the new intersection and an interim traffic signal at Rancho Way and Diaz
Road. The project is intended to improve the area circulation west of Murrieta Creek.
Relocation of the signalized intersection to Vincent Moraga Drive will provide sufficient stacking
room west of Old Town Front Street during PM peak hours. The proposed signal at Vincent
Moraga Drive will also accommodate future traffic resulting from Phase I of the Western Bypass
and new development in the Old Town area and the County.
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), City staff prepared an
Initial Study (Environmental Assessment No. EA-68) of the potential environmental effects of the
proposed project. Based on the findings contained in that Study, staff determined that there
was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant impact on the environment
and a Negative Declaration has been prepared.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Diaz Road Realignment Project and
approve the associated Negative Declaration.
R:~gdrpt\02\l 112\DiazRealign.negdec
1
FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is anticipated as a result of City Council approval of the
project Mitigated Negative Declaration.
A'FI'ACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2002-
2. Initial Study
R:~gdrpt\02\l 112\DiazRealign.negdec
2
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPROVING THE DIAZ ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT NO.
PW95-27.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA HEREBY RESOLVES AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
A. A project is proposed by the City to realign Diaz Road to the intersection
of Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga Drive. The project improvements will include
approximately 1000 feet of four-lane roadway with landscaped medians and parkways, a four-
way traffic signal at the new intersection and an interim traffic signal at Rancho Way and Diaz
Road. These improvements will improve the area circulation west of Murrieta Creek.
Relocation of the signalized intersection to Vincent Moraga Drive will provide sufficient stacking
room west of Old Town Front Street during PM peak hours. The proposed signal at Vincent
Moraga Drive will also accommodate future traffic resulting from Phase I of the Western Bypass
and new development in the Old Town area and the County.
B. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"),
City staff prepared an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment No. EA-68) of the potential
environmental effects of the proposed project. Based on the findings contained in that Study,
staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant
impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial
Study and Negative Declaration are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by
reference.
C. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period
and of the intent to adopt the Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the
documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department
of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca.
92589.
D. The City Council has reviewed the Negative Declaration and all
comments received regarding the Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before
it, finds that: (1) The Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is
no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3)
the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.
Section 2. Based on these findings set forth in Section 1., the City Council
hereby adopts the Negative Declaration prepared for the Project.
Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the Diaz Road Realignment
Project (Public Works Project No. PW95-27) and authorizes staff to solicit bids.
Section 4. The Director of Community Development shall file a Notice of
Determination in the offices of the County Clerk of the County of Riverside in connection with
the approval of the Negative Declaration.
R:~agdrpt\02\l 112'~DiazRealign.negdec
3
section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 12th day of November, 2002.
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify
that Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly ado.~ted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on this 12"' day of November, 2002, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNClLMEMBERS:
COUNClLMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
R:~agdrpt\02~l 112~DiazRealign.negdec
4
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration
PROJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Diaz Road Realignment - Environmental Assessment No. 68
(Public Works Project No. 95-27)
City of Temecula
Diaz Road near the intersection of Business Park Drive and Rancho
California Road in the City of Temecula
The project consists of the realigmnent of approximately 1000 feet of
Diaz Road and the relocation of the signalized intersection of Diaz
and Rancho California Roads approximately 450 feet to the west. A
new intersection will be created at Business Park Drive and the new
alignment for Diaz Road, approximately 250 feet north of Rancho
California Road. The project includes the formal selection of the
road alignment as well as ultimate construction.
The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon
the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed,
revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the City Council
intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is October 24, 2002 to November 12, 2002.
Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at
the following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033. City Hall is located
at 43200 Business Park Drive.
The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through:
The Local Newspaper. _ Posting the Site. _ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact Emery J.
Papp, Associate Planner at (909) 694-6400.
Prepared by: ~"'.,..,,y/~, '~)~ ~ig~ature,
RAEAkEA68kNofice of Proposed Neg Dec 10-22-02.doc
(Name and Title)
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Agency Distribution List
PROJECT: Diaz Road Realignment (EA-068) (PW95-27)
DISTRIBUTION DATE: October 22, 2002
CASE PLANNER: Emeryi. Papp
CITY OF TEMECULA:
Building & Safety ............................................ ( )
Fire Department .............................................. (~)
Police Department ........................................... (~
Parks & Recreation (TCSD) ............................ ( )
Planning, Advance .......................................... ( )
Public Works ................................................... (~)
STATE:
Caltrans ........................................................... )
Fish & Game ...................................................
Mines & Geology ............................................
Regional Water Quality Control Bd ................
State Clearinghouse .........................................
State Clearinghouse (10 Copies) .....................
Water Resources .............................................
FEDERAL:
Army Corps of Engineers ................................ (
Fish and Wildlife Service ................................ (
(
REGIONAL:
Air Quality Management District .................... ( )
Western Riverside COG .................................. (~
CITY OF MURRIETA:
Planning .......................................................... (
RIVERSIDE COUNTY:
Airport Land Use Commission ....................... ( )
Engineer .......................................................... ( )
Flood Control .................................................. (2D
Health Department .......................................... ( )
Parks and Recreation ....................................... ( )
Planning Department ....................................... ( )
Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) ........ ( )
Riverside Transit Agency ................................ (~)
UTILITY:
Eastern Municipal Water District ................... (~)
Inland Valley Cablevision ...............................
Rancho CA Water District, Will Serve ...........
Southern California Gas .................................. (~)
Southern California Edison .............................
Temecula Valley School District .................... ( )
Metropolitan Water District ............................ ( )
OTHER:
Pechanga Indian Reservation .......................... ~
Eastern Information Center ............................. ( )
Local Agency Formation Comm ..................... ( )
RCTC ............................................................. ( )
Homeowners' Association ............................... ( )
R:qEA',EA68~No~ice of Proposed Neg Dec 10-22-0Zdoc
2
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Project Title Diaz Road Realignment (EA-068)
(Public Works Project No. 95-27)
Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Contact Person and Phone Number Emery J. Papp, Associate Planner
(909) 694-6400
Project Location Diaz Road north of the current intersection of Business Park Drive
and Rancho California Road in the City of Temecula
Project Sponsor's Name and Address 43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
General Plan Designation Service Commemial (SC) and Business Park (BP)
Zoning Service Commercial (SC) and Light Industrial (LI)
Description of Project The project consists of the realignment of approximately 1000 feet of
Diaz Road and the relocation of the signalized intersection of Diaz
and Rancho California Roads approximately 450 feet to the west. A
new intersection will be created at Business Park Drive and the new
alignment for Diaz Road, approximately 250 feet north of Rancho
California Road. The project includes the formal selection of the
road alignment as well as ultimate facility construction.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Site: Vacant previously graded commercial/industrial property.
North: Existing industrial building.
East: Vacant Murrieta Creek channel.
West: Existing office/light industrial building.
South: Commercial and office buildings across Rancho California
Road
Other public agencies whose approval None
is required
R:~EA\EA68~In~tial Study.doc
1
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use Planning Hazards
Population and Housin~l Noise
Geologic Problems Public Services
Water Utilities and Service Systems
Air Quality Aesthetics
Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources
Biological Resources Recreation
Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance
-~ None
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
~/ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1 ) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially
significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature{~) '¢ J' '
Printed narrfe
Date
for
R:\EA~EA68\lnitial Study.doc
2
1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community? (1)
b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental
effect? (1), (2)
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commemially zoned property. The proposed realignment would not divide a community or conflict with
any local or regional plans. While the proposal would alter the shape of the remaining vacant property
it would not prevent development that is consistent with the underlying zoning. As a result, no
significant impacts are anticipated.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
........ Issues and Supporting Informatior~ Soumes ..... .
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)? (1)
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? (1)
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (1)
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. The proposed realignment would not affect any housing or displace any
residents. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
R:",EA'~EA68~lnittal Study.doc
3
3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
· , , Issups~a~d~SUppoitIng Information Sour~ .......... ~ ....... ,~
a. . Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
I involving: (1)(2)
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (1)(2).
ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? (1)(2)
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
(1)(2)
iv)Landslides? (1)(2)
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (2)
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. The project is located in a seismically active portion of southern
California. The project would not expose people or structures to any additional seismic hazards not
already present at the current alignment. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
R:'~EA~EA68~lnitial Study.doc
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner, which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (3)
d. SubStantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result
in flooding on- or off-site? (2)(3)
e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map? (1)
h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structure,
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
inju~J or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (2)
Comments:
4
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commemially zoned property. The proposed realignment would not significantly alter the existing
drainage pattern or infrastructure in this already developed area. The roadway re-alignment will not
noticeably alter the drainage, water quality, or urban rUnoff in this area. As a result, no significant
impacts are anticipated.
5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan? (2)
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
~criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
R:LEA~EA68Unitlal Study.doc
5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality I
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? (1)(2)
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. While some short-term construction related air quality impacts are.
possible, these impacts are expected to be minor and have no long lasting effects. The realignment of
this intersection is expected to improve vehicular circulation on this segment of Rancho California=
Road. These improvements will reduce vehicle waiting times and would therefore result in an
incremental reduction in idle/Iow speed emission levels. As a result, this project is expected to have a
slight incremental improvement in local air quality.
6. TRANSPORTATION~rRAFFIC. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting InformatlonSources
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? (2)
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks? (1)(2)(3)
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (3)
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? (3)
f. ReSult in inadequate parking capacity?
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks?
R:\EA'~,A68\lnitial Study.doc
6
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. The realignment of this intersection is expected to improve vehicular
circulation on this segment of Rancho California Road as well as facilitate the future use of Vincent
Moraga Drive and the Western Bypass Road. By realigning this intersection, the stacking/holding
capacity of Rancho California Road in this area will be doubled. This will allow additional vehicles to
get through the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Rancho California Road during a single cycle
of the traffic light. The realignment of the intersection of Diaz and Rancho California Roads will also
enable traffic to bypass the Rancho California Road/I-15 Interchange and use the future Western
Bypass Road to access Interstate 15 and or the Santiago Road Overcrossing. As a result, this project
is expected to have a slight incremental improvement in local circulation.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (2)
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service? (2)
c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological
interruption, or other means? (2)
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? (2)
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Comments:
The project site is composed of a graded and relatively plant-free Service Commercial pad. The pad
lacks the physical characteristics or plant community necessary to support any endangered animal
species. The regional impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat will be addressed through Section 8.24
of the Temecula Municipal Code, which exempts public projects from the payment of the mitigation fee.
As a result, no significant impacts are expected to occur from this project.
R:\EA'~_A68~lnitial Study.doc
7
8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resoume that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resoume recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Comments:
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. While some mineral and aggregate resources will be used to complete
the project, the proposed realignment will not impact mineral resource areas or any identified Mineral
Resource Zones. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transportation, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials? (2)(3)
b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. : Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area? (2)
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area? (2)
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? (2)
R:~_.A~:A68~lnitial Study.doc
Ih.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands? (2)
Comments:
9
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property and will not effect or exacerbate any environmental hazards or hazardous
materials. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
10. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (1)
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels? (2)
f. For a.project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the p~;oject expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels? (2)
Comments:
10.
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. The project will not increase the exposure of people to noise levels
above those levels already found on or near the site, The project is not located within the area of
concern for any airport or private airstrip. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
R:~F_A~F. A68~In~ial Study.doc
9
11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered Government services In any of the following areas:
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associates with the provisions of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the
public services?
b. Fire protection?
c. Police protection?
d. Schools?
e. Parks?
f. Other public facilities?
Comments:
11.
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road through vacant
commercially zoned property. This modification to the road network is not expected to affect any public
services. The total amount of road surface requiring maintenance will not noticeably change. As a
result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies availabie to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
R:\EA"E. A68~Initlal Study.doc
10
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regu at ons re ated to so d waste?
Comments:
12.
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road. The project
may require some minor adjustments to the existing urban infrastructure network to accommodate the
realignment, but will not require the provision of additional services. As a result, no significant impacts
are anticipated.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
~, . . - , Issuesand Supporting IfiformaUon:SoUrces , ~, ~, ;~,'~ ,,:~'~, ~,.,~,~! ~;: ~1~'{~)~ ~ ,,~!~i~~, pa~i~'~.~, ,.
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building
within a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Comments:
13.
The Project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road. The project
will make a minor modification to an existing roadway near Murrieta Creek. Because of its relatively
hidden' location, no significant impacts are anticipated.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 (2)
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
R:~EA~EA68~lnitial Study.doc
11
Comments:
14
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road. The area of
the realignment contains no additional cultural resources that were not previously considered when the
business Park was approved and constructed. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated? (1)
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Comments:
15
The project consists of the realignment of approximately one-quarter mile of Diaz Road. The project
will not affect any existing or proposed recreation facilities. This includes an eventual trail that may be
constructed along the west side of the Murrieta Creek channel. As a result, no significant impacts are
anticipated.
16. 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 wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number of
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 impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects?
c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
R:'~F-A~,6 8\1 nitial Study.doc
12
17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR,
or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration. Section 15063(cX3)(D). In this case a discussion should Identify the following
on attached sheets.
a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state
whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are 'Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and
the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
SOURCES
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
Exhibit D for the Diaz Road Realignment project, dated October 10, 1999
R:'~E.A~EA68~Initial Study.doc
13
RANCHO
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
ITEM 11
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.,.~
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
City Manager/City Council
"~J,~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE:
November 12, 2002
SUBJECT: French Valley Parkway Overcrossing and Interchange, Project #PW02-11
Acquisition Agreement between the City of Temecula
and Michael Edwin Coleman
PREPARED BY: ,,~_mer Attar, Principal Engineer
;:/~/~.~Rcott Harvey, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Approve and execute in substantially the form attached hereto, the PURCHASE AND
SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS BETWEEEN CITY OF
TEMECULA AND MICHAEL EDWIN COLEMAN, for the acquisition of certain real
property in the amount of $570,000.00.
2. Direct the City Clerk to record the document
3. Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
WORKS TO ACCEPT DEEDS OR GRANTS CONVEYING ANY
INTEREST IN, OR EASEMENT UPON, REAL ESTATE AS
PERMI'I-FED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27281
BACKGROUND: On March 5, 2002, the City Council authorized staff to begin negotiations
for the acquisition of certain real properties required for the construction of the French Valley
Parkway Interchange (formerly, Date/Cherry Interchange) Project (Project No. PW00-25). On
March 19, 2002, the City delivered to Michael Edwin Coleman an offer to purchase the real
property interests described in the Agreement. Those negotiations have concluded as set forth
herein. The attached Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions describe the
details for the acquisition of the real property interests necessary to construct the improvements
for the future Interstate 15, French Valley Parkway Interchange. The purchase amount,
$570,000, is within the limits of the City Council authorized purchase amount.
1
R:~agd rpt',2.002\l 112\PVV00-25 McCabe 910-262-007Agree
Additionally, Government Code section 27281 permits governmental agencies to authorize one
or more of its officers or agents to accept and consent to acceptance for recordation any interest
in real estate. This authorization, by resolution of the City Council, will expedite the processing
of the real estate transactions.
FISCAL IMPACT: The French Valley Parkway Interchange Project is funded through Capital
Project Reserves. The funds for the land acquisition have been budgeted in the Capital
Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2003-2007. Adequate funds are available in Account No.
210-165-726-5700 for the total acquisition cost of $570,000.00.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
Project Location
Project Description
Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions
Resolution No. 2002-
2
R:~agdrpt~002\l 112\PVV00-25 McCabe 910-262-007Agree
0
o~ o~ o o
il~o o
0
00000 ~
Recorded at request of and return to:
Department of Facilities Management
Real Estate Division
On behalf of RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
3133 Mission inn Avenue
Rivemide, California 92507-4199
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the County of Riverside, and is
entitled to be recorded without fee.
(Govt. Code 6103)
(Space above this line reserved for Recorder's use)
PROJECT: INTERSTATE 15/CHERRYAVENUE
APN: 910-262-007
GRANT DEED
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
MICHAEL EDWIN COLEMAN, a single man
GRANTS to the CITY OF TEMECULA, a political subdivision, the real property in the
County of Riverside, State of California, described as:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and made a part hereof
PROJECT: INTERSTATE 15/CHERRY AVENUE
APN: 910-262-007
By:
~I~L EI~IN COLEMAN
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
On [~)~:~c~ ~-~J~ ~/-1, ~ G(~
a No_ta.ry Public i~n apd for'said County and State,
personally appeared
F, erscnr~::y kn~¢~n to ,~ (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the
person(s) whose name(s).is/ar~subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that he~ executed the same in his/hedthek authorized capacity(ics), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(e), or the entity upon behalf of which
the person(e) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
Signature ~.~ :~-~~::~:~
KAY M£TTERSON
Commission ~ 137701 I
Notary Public - California
~.E~m~27, ~
[SEAL]
CNS:js
3/27/02
7.531
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within deed to the
CITY OF TEMECULA, a political subdivision, is hereby accepted by order of the
Commissioners of the CITY OF TEMECULA on the date below and the grantee consents
to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date By:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT "A"
PARCEL 17, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP NO. 23561-2, ON FILE IN BOOK 168,
PAGES 71 THROUGH 73, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL MINERAL RIGHTS MORE THAN 500 FEET BELOWTHE
SURFACE, WITHOUT THE RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY AS RESERVED TO BEDFORD
DEVELOPMENT BY GRANT DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 18, 1991 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 361376 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
EASEi'I(~NT 140165:
· [ .' · ,;
1,3
J2
lO
PAF(CEL
MAP NO.
2.3661 - J
PM 1.57/4z~ .-46
I I PM JST/.4zLz~6
3625 Fourteenth:
Riverside, Ca:[iforniea92501
"Thi~. map may or may not be a survey of I
land-depicted hereon· You shoud not
upon it for any purpose other than orier
~.e~r:~e~5'~(~e~L Fir,I American Ti e
1
$
7
8
9
10
11
15
16
17
18
19
~0
~.1
PROJECT: INTERSTATE 15/CHERRY AVENUE
APN: 910-262-007
AGREEMENT
OF PURCHASE AND SALE
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA
("Buyer") and MICHAEL EDWIN COLEMAN ("Seller").
RECITALS
A. Seller owns certain real property located in the City of Temecula, Riverside
County, California, bearing Assessor Parcel No. 910-262-007, more particularly described
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Larger Parcel").
B. Buyer desires to purchase a fee interest in the Larger Parcel, identified as
APN 910-262-007, shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the
"Property") and Seller desires to sell the Property.
C. The parties desire by this Agreement to provide the terms and conditions
for the purchase and sale of the Property.
AGREEMENT
The parties therefore agree as follows:
1. PURCHASE.
Buyer agrees to buy and Seller agrees to sell and convey the Property for
the purchase price and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.
2. ESCROW.
Upon execution of this Agreement by all parties, the parties shall open an
escrow (the "Escrow") with FIRST AMERICAN TITLE (the "Escrow Holder"), for the
purpose of consummating the purchase and sale of the Seller's interest in the Property
as described herein. The parties hereto shall execute and deliver to Escrow Holder such
escrow instructions prepared by Escrow Holder as may be required to consummate the
transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Any such instructions shall not conflict with,
amend, or supersede any provisions of this Agreement. If there is any inconsistency
between such instructions' and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control unless the
parties expressly agree in writing otherwise. The Escrow Instructions shall include the
following terms and conditions of sale:
Page 1 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.1 Purchase Price.
The total pumhase price for the Property shall be the sum of Five Hundred
Seventy Thousand Dollars ($570,000.00) for an all-inclusive settlement. The purchase
price shall be paid by Buyer to Seller in cash at the Close of Escrow. Buyer shall deposit
prior to Close of Escrow the funds required to be deposited by it in order to allow the
Escrow to close.
2.2 Close of Escrow.
Escrow shall close on or before thirty (30) days or sooner, following the
execution of this Agreement (the "Close of Escrow"). If Escrow is not in a condition to
close by the Close of Escrow, any party who is not then in default may, in writing, demand
the return of its money and/or documents. Thereupon all obligations and liabilities of the
parties under this Agreement shall cease and terminate. If no such demand is made,
Escrow shall be closed as soon as possible thereafter.
2.3 Condition of Title to Property.
Seller shall cause the conveyance of his interests in the Property to Buyer
as evidenced by a CLTA Standard Form Policy or Binder of'F~le Insurance ('q-~tle Policy")
issued by FIRST AMERICAN TITLE (the 'q'itle Company") in an amount equal to the
purchase price. The Title Policy shall show as exceptions with respect to the Property
only matters approved in wdfing by Buyer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any exceptions
to title representing monetary liens or encumbrances are hereby disapproved by Buyer,
and Escrow Holder is hereby authorized and instructed to cause the reconveyance,
partial reconveyance, or subordination, as the case may be, of any such monetary
exceptions to Buyer's title to the Property at or prior to the Close of Escrow.
2.4 Escrow and ClosinR Costs.
A. Because of Buyer's status as a public agency, no documentary
transfer tax will be payable with respect to this conveyance, pursuant to California
Revenue and Taxation Code Section 11922. Similarly, no recording fees will be payable
with respect to the recording of the Grant Deed, pursuant to Government Code Section
27383. Buyer shall pay the cost of the Title Policy, the Escrow fees, and all other costs
and expenses incurred herein.
B. To the extent that Seller has prepaid any taxes or assessments
attributable to the Property, Seller shall be solely responsible for obtaining any refund due
thereon from the taxing authority. Upon written request, Buyer shall assist Seller, at
Seller's sole cost, in obtaining said refund, if any. In no case, however, shall Buyer credit
or otherwise pay Seller for that refund, if any, through or outside of Escrow.
Page 2 of 7
1
6
7
8
9
10
11
14I
15
16
17
18
19
20
~_~
2.5 Deposit of Funds and Documents.
A. Prior to Close of Escrow, Buyer shall deposit into Escrow (i) all
Escrow and Closing Costs as described above; (ii) the purchase price to be paid to Seller
through Escrow; (iii) such other documentation as is necessary to close Escrow.
B. Prior to the Close of Escrow, Seller shall deposit into Escrow (i) the
properly executed Grant Deed for conveyance of his interests in the Property to Buyer;
and (ii) such other documents and sums, if any, as are necessary to close Escrow in
conformance herewith.
2.6 Buyer's Conditions Precedent to Close of Escrow.
The Close of Escrow is subject to the following conditions:
(a) All representations and warranties of Seller set forth in this
Agreement shall be true and correct as of the date of the Close of Escrow; and
(b) Seller shall timely perform all obligations required by the terms of this
Agreement to be performed by them.
2.7 Seller's Conditions Precedent to Close of Escrow.
For the benefit of Seller, the Close of Escrow shall be conditioned upon the
timely performance by Buyer of all obligations required by the terms of this Agreement.
3. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF SELLER.
Seller makes the following representations and warranties with respect to
the Property, each of which shall survive Close of Escrow:
(a) The execution and delivery of this Agreement by Seller, Seller's
performance hereunder, and the consummation of the transaction contemplated hereby
Will not constitute a violation of any order or decree or result in the breach of any contract
or agreement to which Seller is at present a party or by which Seller is bound;
(b) To Seller's knowledge, no litigation and no governmental,
administrative or regulatory act or proceeding regarding the environmental, health and
safety aspects of the Property is pending, proposed or threatened;
(c) Seller will not enter into any agreements or undertake any new
obligations prior to Close of Escrow which will in any way burden, encumber or otherwise
affect his interests in the Property without the prior written consent of Buyer;
Page 3 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
28
(d) Seller has and shall have paid, before Close of Escrow, his pre rata
share of all taxes and assessments levied and assessed against the Larger Parcel. If not
paid pdor to Close of Escrow, Seller hereby authorizes Escrow Holder to disburse to the
taxing authority, from funds otherwise due to Seller, an amount sufficient to satisfy his pre
rata share of said taxes and/or assessments; and
(e) Seller is aware of his obligation under California Health and Safety
Code Section 25359.7 to disclose any knowledge which they may have regarding any
release of Hazardous Substances (as defined by applicable federal, state and local
statutes, rules and regulations) upon or under the Property. Seller warrants and
represents to Buyer that Seller is not aware that any such Hazardous Substances have
been generated, stored or disposed of upon or under the Larger Parcel.
4. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FULL BENEFITS AND RELEASE.
A. By execution of his Agreement, Seller, on behaff of himself, his heirs,
executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby acknowledges that this
Agreement provides full payment for the acquisition of the Property by Buyer, and Seller
hereby expressly and unconditionally waives any claim for damages, relocation
assistance benefits, interest, loss of goodwill, severance damages, claims for inverse
condemnation or unreasonable precondemnation conduct, or any other compensation
or benefits other than as already expressly provided for in this Agreement, it being
understood that this is a complete and full settlement of all acquisition claims, liabilities,
or benefits of any type or nature whatsoever relating to or in connection with the
acquisition of the Property by Buyer.
B. This Agreement arose out of Buyer's efforts to acquire the Property
through its municipal authority. Seller, on behalf of himself, his heirs, executors,
administrators, Successors and assigns, hereby fully releases Buyer, its successors,
agents, representatives (including attorneys), and assigns, and all other persons and
associations, known or unknown, from all claims and causes of action by reason of any
damage which has been sustained by Seller, or may be sustained by Seller,' as a result
of Buyer's efforts to acquire the Property or to construct the works of improvement
thereon, or any preliminary steps thereto. This Agreement does not, and shall not be
construed to, require Seller to indemnify Buyer for damages which may arise as a result
of Buyer's efforts to construct improvements on the Property.
C. Seller hereby acknowledges that he either has consulted with legal
counsel, or had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel, regarding the provisions of
the California Civil Code section 1542, which provides as follows:
"A general release does not extend to claims
which the creditor does not know or suspect to
Page 4 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
exist in his favor at the time of executing the
release, which if known by him must have
materially affected his settlement with the
debtor."
Seller acknowledges that he may have sustained damage, loss, costs or
expenses which are presently unknown and unsuspected, and such damage, loss, costs
or expenses which may have been sustained, may give rise to additional damage, loss,
costs or expenses in the future. Nevertheless, Seller hereby acknowledges that this
Agreement has been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that situation, and hereby
expressly waive any and all rights which they may have under California Civil Code
Section 1542, or under any statute or common law or equitable principal of similar effect.
This acknowledgment and release shall survive the Close of Escrow.
5. REMEDIES.
If Seller defaults under this Agreement, then Buyer may, at Buyer's option,
terminate the Escrow or initiate an action for specific performance of this Agreement, in
addition to pursuing any other rights or remedies that Buyer may have at law or in equity.
If Buyer defaults under this Agreement, then Seller may, at Sellers option, terminate the
Escrow or pursue any rights or remedies that Seller may have at law or in equity.
6. MISCELLANEOUS.
A. Notice. Any notice to be given or other document or documents to
be delivered to either party by the other hereunder may be delivered in person or may be
deposited in the United States Mail in the State of California, duly registered or certified,
with postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
Seller:
Michael Edwin Coleman
8629 Nottingham Place
La Jolla, California 92037
Buyer:
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P. O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Any notice or other document sent by registered or certified mail as
aforesaid shall be deemed to have been effectively served or delivered at the expiration
of twenty-four (24) hours following the deposit of said notice or other document in the
United States mail.
Page 5 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11:
12'
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to each and
every provision hereof.
C. Assignment. Neither this Agreement, nor any interest herein, shall
be assignable by any party without prior written consent of the other parties.
D. Governing Law. All questions with respect to this Agreement, and
the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State
of California.
E. Inurement. Subject to the restrictions against assignment as herein
contained, this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon, the
assigns, successors in interest, personal representatives, estates, heirs and legatees of
each of the parties hereto.
F. Attorney Fees. In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute
between the parties hereto, adsing out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach
thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable
expenses, attorney fees and costs.
G. Entire A.qreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement
of the parties hereto, and supersedes any prior written or oral agreements between them
concerning the subject matter contained herein. There are no representations,
agreements, arrangements, or understandings, oral or wdtten, between the parties
hereto, relating to the subject matter contained in this Agreement which are not fully
expressed'herein.
H. Additional Documents. All parties hereto agree to execute any and
all additional documents and instruments necessary to carry out the terms of this
Agreement.
I. No Mer.qer. All warranties, representations, acknowledgments,
releases, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall survive delivery
and recordation of the Grant Deed.
J. Authority to Execute on Behalf of Buyer. Ron Roberts represents to
Seller that he is the Mayor of the City of Temecu_la and that he is authorized by Buyer to
execute this Agreement on its behalf.
K. Ratification. This Agreement is subject to approval and ratification
by the City Council of the City of Temecuia.
Page 6 of 7
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CNS:js 26
3/27/02
7.531 27
L. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterpart or
duplicate copies, and any signed counterpart or duplicate copy shall be equivalent to a
signed original for all purposes.
7. RIGHT OF POSSESSION.
"It is agreed and confirmed by the parties hereto that notwithstanding other
provisions in this agreement, the right of possession and use of the subject property by
the Buyer, including the right to remove and dispose of improvements, shall commence
upon execution of this document by the Mayor of the City of Temecula or the close of
escrow controlling this transaction, whichever occurs first, and that amount shown in
Clause 2.1 herein includes, but is not limited to, full payment for such possession and
use, including damages, if any, from said date."
EXECUTED on the date or dates set forth below. This Agreement shall be
effective as of the date signed by all parties.
DATED:
/M'I~AE~L ~DWIN dOLEMAN
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Real Property Agent
BUYER:
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
RON ROBERTS, Mayor
DATED:
(to be dated by the Mayor)
Page 7 of 7
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT "A"
PARCEL 17, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP NO. 23561-2, ON FILE IN BOOK 168,
PAGES 71 THROUGH 73, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL MINERAL RIGHTS MORE THAN 500 FEET BELOW THE
SURFACE, WITHOUT THE RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY AS RESERVED TO BEDFORD
DEVELOPMENT BY GRANT DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 18, 1991 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 361376 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
I
J I PM J$7/-4zl,-46
13
,;
I ?,
la('~""~'~"~'¼'k~
~ t,*5';:w ~' ~ ~i ~ '" ""'"'
PA,lc ~_ I ~:,~;'~'/ ... /
PM 157/4 4 · 4 6 3625 Foudeenth St(~t - 787-
Riverside, Califo~n~92501
land depicted hereon. You should not r
ITEM 12
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OFFINANCE~
CITY MANAGER
ClTY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
City Manager/City Council
~/~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE:
November 12, 2002
SUBJECT: Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreement, Michael Brandman
Associates for Pechanga Parkway (Formerly known as Pala Road) Phase II
Improvements, Project No. PW99-11 Environmental Study and Clearances
PREPARED BY: ~"~'~/~,mer Attar, Principal Engineer
/,F Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment No. 2 to the agreement
with Michael Brandman Associates to provide professional engineering services for the
Environmental Study and Clearances of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, Project
No. PW99-11, for an amount not to exceed $71,600.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the
agreement.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of Amendment No. 2 is to provide the necessary additional
environmental studies and reports for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, Project No.
PW99-11.
Caltrans Local Assistance has requested several additional environmental studies as referenced in
the approved Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Form. Our Environmental Consultant (Michael
Brandman Associates) has reviewed the approved PES Form and has identified fifteen tasks. This
amendment is for the approval of those tasks. The tasks include preparation of the following
studies: Water Quality, Flood Plain, Natural Environment, Wetlands, Air Quality, Traffic, and
Cultural Resources. Amendment No. 2 also includes preparation of Draft IS/EA & MND/FONSI,
Responses to Comments & Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Final IS/EA & MND/FONSI and
Notices. The total cost of these tasks is $71,600.00.
The additional required tasks are a direct result of the City receiving the $4,000,000 Public Land and
Highways Federal Grant. This grant dictates that the environmental document must be completed
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) provision. Staff is working with Caltrans
(Environmental Department) to finalize the required tasks. The final scope of work maybe reduced.
Staff will only authorize Michael Brandman Associates to proceed with required tasks.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway (Formerly known as Pala Road) Improvement Project
Phase II is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Development Impact Fees - Street
Improvements. The cost of the original agreement and Amendment No. 1 is $48,449.00.
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement with Michael Brandman Associates is for an amount not to
exceed $71,600.00 to complete the remaining tasks. The total cost of the original agreement,
including Amendments No. 1 & 2 is $120,049.00. Adequate funds are available for the total amount
of the agreement and amendment in Account No. 210-165-668-5801.
R:~AGENDA REPORTS~002\I 11202~PW99-11 Brandman Environmental Amend 2.doc
ATTACHMENTS:
Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement with Michael Brandman Associates.
2
R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2002\I 11202\PW99-11 Brandrnan Environmental Amend 2,doc
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES
PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
PECHANGA PARKWAY PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. PW99-11
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of November 12, 2002 by and
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Michael Brandman Associates
("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties
agree as follows:
1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes:
A. On March 8, 2002 the City and Consultant entered into that certain
agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Professional Environmental Engineering
Services for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements ("Agreement") in the amount of $20,863.00.
B. The Agreement was amended on April 9, 2002, in the amount of $27,586.00.
The Agreement as amended shall be referred to as the "Agreement."
C. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this
Amendment.
2. Section 5 a Payment of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment
rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B1, Payment
Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as
though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms
in Exhibit B1 other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and
void. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Twenty Thousand Forty Nine
Dollars and No Cents ($120,049.00) for a total term of the Agreement unless
additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Consultant shall not
bill the City for and the City shall not compensate the Consultant for any travel time
to and from Temecula City Hall to conduct business with the City. However,
Consultant can bill the City and the City will compensate Consultant for travel time to
and from other agencies to conduct business on behalf of the City. In addition,
Consultant shall not charge the City a set minimum number of hours for meetings
and site visits.
3. Consultant shall not charge the City any of the tasks referenced in the proposal dated
October 24, 2002 until the City directs the Consultant to proceed by wdtten notice.
4. Exhibit B to the Agreement is hereby deleted from the Agreement and in its place a
new Exhibit B1 is added to the Agreement as set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full,
5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of
the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Michael Brandman Associates
621 E. Carnegie Dr., Suite 260
San Bernardino, CA 92408
(909) 884-2255
Thomas J. McGill, PhD., Regional Manager
Loye E. Peterwell, CFO
(Two Signatures Required For Corporations)
3
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CiTY OF TEMECULA AND
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES
PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
PECHANGA PARKWAY PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. PW99-11
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of November 12, 2002 by and
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("Cit~') and Michael Brandman Associates
("Consultant.'). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties
agree as follows:
1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes:
A. On March 8, 2002 the City and Consultant entered into that certain
agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Professional Environmental Engineering
Services for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements ("Agreement") in the amount of $20,863.00.
B. The Agreement was amended on April 9, 2002, in the amount of $27,586.00.
The Agreement as amended shall be referred to as the "Agreement."
C. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this
Amendment.
2. Section 5 a Payment of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment
rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B1, Payment
Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as
though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms
in Exhibit B1 other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and
void. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Twenty Thousand Forty Nine
Dollars and No Cents ($120,049.00) for a total term of the Agreement unless
additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Consultant shall not
bill the City for and the City shall not compensate the Consultant for any travel time
to and from Temecula City Hall to conduct business with the City. However,
Consultant can bill the City and the City will compensate Consultant for travel time to
and from other agencies to conduct business on behalf of the City. In addition,
Consultant shall not charge the City a set minimum number of hours for meetings
and site visits.
3. Consultant shall not charge the City any of the tasks referenced in the proposal dated
October 24, 2002 until the City directs the Consultant to proceed by wdtten notice.
4. Exhibit B to the Agreement is hereby deleted from the Agreement and in its place a
new Exhibit B1 is added to the Agreement as set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of
the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the
day and year first above wdtten.
ClTY OFTEMECULA
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Michael Brandman Associates
621 E. Carnegie Dr., Suite 260
San Bernardino, CA 92408
(909) 884-2255
Thomas J. McGill, PhD., Regional Manager
Loye E. Peterwell, CFO
(Two Signatures Required For Corporations)
2
EXHIBIT "B 1"
3
R:ICIPiPROJECTSLOVf99199-11~ENV1RONMENTAl, IBtL4NDMANAMEND 2.DOC
RECEIVED
OCT 9 NOZ
CiTY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Michael Brandman Associates
ENVIIC~NMiiNTAL ~ERVICIiS · PLANNIN£; NM'URAL RESOURt:ES MANAGEMENT
October 24, 2002
Steven W. Beswick, P.E.
Associate Engineer, C_apkal Projects
Gty of Temecula Depamnent of Public Works
43200 Business Park Drive
Temectfla, cMifomia 92589-9033
Subject: Environmental Study and Clearances for the Pala Road Improvements-- Phase II
Project, Expanded Scope of Work and Budget Augmentation Request
Dear Mr. Beswick
Michael Brandman Associates (MBA) is pleased to be able to provi& continued assistance to the
City in preparing environmental studies and securing regulatory clearances for the Pah Road
Improvements Phase II Project. An expanded scope of work addressing additional technical studies
required by Caltrans, revisions to the preliminary draft IS/EA, and additional MBA work effort
outside the original scope of work, with accompanying costs, is presented in the following
paragraphs.
Noise Study:. No additional effort by MBA in the preparation of a Noise Study is anticipated. You
may recall that MBA recommended to you in July 2002 that the Sound Wall Analysis Report,
prepared by Weiland Associates Inc. 0ulY 25, 2001) be submitted to Caltrans together with all other
technical data relating to traffic, hydrology/flood plain, etc. to obtain inkial feedback from Caltrans
as to whether the data prepared to date bythe City and the City's technical consultants is adequate.
Notification was received by MBA from Michael Grimes of Caltrans on July 15, 2002 by email (copy
attached) identifying the need for a noise study containing currem and projected noise levels based
on the Sound32 model to be submitted to Cakrans in standard format. It is assumed that this
reformatting is still being requested and that the technical information regarding noise is to be
reformatted by Weiland Associates to meet Cakram formatting requirements. No additional MBA
fees are required.
Water Quality. Study: Currently, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is
in the process of adopting a Regional Municipal Stonnwater Permit (MS4) in an attempt _%.~D~
to address non-source point pollution (i.e. urban runof0 within State v, aters. On-ce :Z~/~ }/ i ,~/.- .
the program is implemented, local jurisdictions (counties and cities) will assume the
funding and enforcement responsibilities for the MS4 program as "co-permittees".
In advance of the MS4 program, the RWQCBs are using the 401 program to
implement proposed MS4 best imnagement practices (BMPs) for all new projects
requMng Section 401 authorization. MS4 ]3MPs generally include measures to
15901 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 200, Tustin, CA 92780-7318
Inland Empire Kern County
909.884.2255 661.334.2755
~¢~'w. brandman.com
714. 258. 8100 F~x 714. 258. 8900
Bay Area
925.730.0061
EM^IL mba@brandman.com
Steven W. Beswick, P~E.
October 24, 2002
Page 2
reduce construction-phase and developed-condition pollutants and run-off rates upfrom. Some
BMPs recently required have included pre-treatmem basim, street sweep'rog, native revegetafion and
conservation easements, and 5-year water quality mordtoring plans. A Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) incorporating BMrs to reduce potential short-term impacts to surface
water quality during comttuction will most likely be required, generally prepared by the construction
contractor.
A written notification for 401 water quality certification will be prepared and submitted to the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for review. Upon formal notification, an
agreement should be forthcoming within 60-90 days. The request will include a detailed project
description, a &scription of proposed impacts, a water quality plan identifying project-specific Best
Management Practices (BMP's), discussion of other approvals and cenificatiom being obtained, a
mitigation plan, and a completed notification form. The submittal to the RWQCB, as described, is
contained in the original scope of work for Wetlands Delineation and remitting. No additional
MBA fees are required at this time.
Since the approval of the original scope of work for the Pah Road Improvements Phase II project,
the RWQCB has begun to require Water QualityMitigation and Monkoring Plans upfront. Provision
of this type of detailed plan was previously a condition of grading, if required at all For regulatory
diems, MBA now provides a combined document entitled a Habitat Restoration Plan (HRP), which
is consistem with RWQCB, USACE and CDFG (collectively lmown as Resource Agency) standards
in order to comply with this condition. The HRP is designed to offset the impacts as related to a
proposed project. The HRP scope and fee for the Pah Road Phase II project axe provided below.
MBA will prepare an HRP that is comistent with Resource Agency authorizations and conditions.
The HRP will provide general concepts and specific criteria for implementation of a hab'rmt
restoration program, including a plant pallet and concept planting plan to mirror existing native
habitat presently adjacent to the project site, and will include long-term erosion control and water
quality measures, including s~ and nov~structural BMPs. This revised scope of work assumes
that the City will provide MBA with existing capackies for the drainage channel paralleling rah Road
as well as Temecula Creek, together with information on the effect of the proposed Pala Road
improvements on Temecula Creek, the downstream facility. The HRP will follow the standard
guidelines set forth bythe USACE, (DFG and RWQ(2B, which include success criteria and a 5-year
monitoring plan.
A draft HRP will be submitted to the client. Based on one set of review comments from the client, a
final HRP will be prepared for submittal to the USACE, CDFG and RWQ(~. For budgeting
purposes, MBA will assurre attendance at two meetings with the City's landscape architect, one
meeting with the City, and one meeting with the Resource Agencies to refine the plan. Additional
meetings will be b'flled on a time and materials basis. MBA identified work effort for this task would
require $10,500 in additional fees.
Floodplain Study It is assumed that the Floodplain Study will be prepared either by the City or a
designated comultant who prepared the existing hydrological information. The Study will need to
meet Caltram standards and formatr, ing requirements. MBA will then review the material for
Steven W. Beswick, P£.
October 24, 2002
Page 3
CEQA/NEPA compliance, and summarize the material for inclusion in the IS/EA. MBA identified
work effort for this task would require $1,500 in =aaltional fees.
Natural Environment Study A Natural Environment Study (NES) and completed Caltrans
biology form will need to be prepared for submittal to Caltrans. A Table of Contents of a typical
NES is attached. Information from the Ininal Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) on
biological resources and project impacts can be utilized in the preparation of these additional
submittals to Caltrans. MBA would require an additional $3,200 to prepare the NES and Caltrans'
biology form.
Wetlands Study: The City's interests are best served by obtaining a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Nationwide permit for the Phase II Pala Road Improvements project, in terms of
minimizing processing time and related costs. The level of project-specific coordination required for
the processing of the Nationwide Permit, however, has exceeded the coordination level anticipated in
the o 'nginal scope of work for the following reasom: (1) Considerable coordination has been required
between MBA and the project proponem for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan to process the two
separate Nationwide Permits; and (2) Further coordination is also required with Riverside County
Flood Control District regarding their requirement for a concrete bottom in the downst~.am portion
of the drainage channel, as k is believed that acceptance of a soft-bottom in this location would
improve the City's ability to obtain respective permit approvals from the Resource Agencies. The
additional work effort that has been and will need to be performed by MBA for the added project-
specific coordination is $3,000.
Akhough the inkial feedback from USACE is that the processing of two separate Nationwide
Permits is acceptable, the USACE could still require an Individual Wetlands Permit if: (1). project
impacts are deemed in excess of Nationwide Permit thresholds (i.e. USACE finds that the City of
Temecula and the project proponent for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan cannot apply for two separate
Nationwide Permits, but must apply for a single permit for the enftre length of the Pala Road
drainage charmeD; and/or (2) k is determined that the currem USACE directive for the Temecula
watershed applies, requiring all projects to obtain an Individual Permit. Preparation of an Individual
Permit, if required, was included in the original proposal as an optional task representing $29,300.00.
This amount would be over and above the budget for Wetlands Delineation and Permitting
approved as part of the original scope of work
Air Quality Study: Although this kem was not checked by the City on the revised PES form,
Cakrans has indicated that a project-level air quality report will need to be prepared. (Email from
lvfichael Grimes of Caltrans to Ernilie Johnson of MBA dated 7/23/02 is attached). MBA previously
assumed that a short-term construction analysis would be sufficient for the project. It is anticipated
that the project-level air quality report would need to assess long-term changes in PM10 and GO
concentrations at local receptors due to project implementation. To prepare the long-term air quality
analysis, MBA will require sufficient traffic information (i.e. average daily traffic and peak hour traffic
volumes) for existing, existing plus project, and existing plus project plus cumulative traffic scenarios.
To comp'fie the long-term air quality information in Caltrans format, MBA will require $7,500.
Hazardous Material Study MBA commissioned a baTardous materials records search for the Pala
Road Corridor under the original scope of work. An Inkial Site Assessmem Checklist form for
Steven W. Beswick, P.E.
October 24, 2002
Page 4
hazardous materials has been completed by the City of Temecula Department of Public Works. No
additional City or MBA work effon is anticipated.
Traffic: A Traffic Report will need to be prepared that contains not only traffic data but analysis of
the waffic data. The Traffic Report will need to be prepared in Cakrans format bythe City's traffic
consnttant on this project (Wilbur Smith Associates), and submitted to MBA for review, summary,
and incorporation into the IS/EA. This revised scope of work and accompanying cost estimate
assume that MBA will be provided with a Traffic Report containing data and analysis. MBA
identif, ed work effort for this task would require $2,500 in additional fees.
Section 106 Study A Cukural Resources Records Search was performed as pm of the original
scope of work. Appendix B of the dra/t IS/EA (May 23, 2002) contaim the results of the records
search, and recommends that a field re-examination (Phase 1 survey) of the study area take place,
including an impact assessmem of known archaeological ske CA-RIV-4707/t-L Cakrans is reqtfiring
a Section 106 Study, in compliance with the National I-fistoric Preservation Act, required to contain
an APE Map (Area of Potential Effect) and a I-fistofic Property Survey Report (HPSR), and
necessitating coordination with Cakrans, FHWA, State I-fistoric Preservation Office (SHPO), and
local preservation groups and/or Native American Tribes. To complete the Section 106 process in
accordance with SHPO and Cakrans standards and conduct the necessary coordination, MBA will
require $8,500.
Text Revisions to the May 23, 2002 Preliminary Draft IS/EA based on Project Modiflcatiom:
MBA's initial understanding of the Pala Road Phase II project was that the City and the Wolf C_reek
project proponent would be pursuing two separate USACE Nationwide permits so as not to exceed
the threshold to trigger an Individual permk. Then the City determined that tighter control was
needed for the permitting process and notified MBA that the drainage improvements would be
processed under a single permit. It was later determined by the ~ after comultation with MBA,
that in order to accomplish the permitting goals of the G-ty and secure a more limited permit
processing timeline, separate permits wnuld be the best approach. This decisionmaking process was
taking place at a time when MBA was drafting the May 23, 2002 Preliminary Draf~ IS/EA.
Considerable revisions to the text and graphics of the documem were necessary to mirror the
planned approach of the City at each po'mt in time.
Further, MBA drafxed the May 23, 2002 version of the IS/EA on the understanding that: (1) the
Wolf Creek Specific Plan project proponent was respomible for haft-width paving of Pah Road and
relocation of the grassy swale within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area; and (2) sound wall
construction along Pala Road was to be part of the Phase II Improvements project. In June, 2002,
MBA was informed bythe City that: (1) the City would be doing the half-width paving within the
Specific Plan Area and not the Wolf C~eek project proponent, therefore requiring inclusion of this
portion of the roadway within the project area (to be reflected in graphics and impact analysis); and
that: (2) sound wall construction would not be parc of the Phase II project. Sound walls are to be
constructed independently in Fall 2002, and now need to be treated as an existing condition.
Additional time is needed to revise the IS/EA text and graphics in line with the revised project
description. MBA identified work effort for this task would require $4,700 in additional fees.
Steven W. Beswick, P2i.
October 24, 2002
P~e 5
Draft IS/EA and MND/FONSI (Task 4 in original Sco? of Work): The original scope of
work did not anticipate the number of technical studies to be prel:rared. The original scope also did
not allow for the multiple review and revision cycles that will be necessary to obtain Caltrans and
FHWA approval for public review. This revised scope of work anticipates City review with revisiom
per City comments and submittal to Caltrans. Cakrans then conducts their initial review. MBA will
revise the documents and resubmit to the City and Cattrans concurrently. Caltrans will then perform
a "proof-check? review. After MBA completes any necessary revisinns, Cakrans would then approve
the documems for public review. Caltram forwards the documents to FHWA for review, and
approval for public review.
MBA additional work effort to prepare draft documents incorporating the many technical studies
and engaging in multiple review and revision cycles in response to C~ and Cakrans comments
would require $5,500 in additional fees.
Response to Co.ments & Mitigation Monitoring_ Program (Task 5 in original Scope of
Work): Incorporation of the many technical studies into the Draft IS/EA and MND/FONSI will
increase the complexity of the documents substantially. MBA anticipates additional work effort to
prepare Respome to Comments and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Draft IS/EA and
MND/FONSL MBA is budgeting an increase of 55 hours (from 15 hours to 70 hout~) for
technical staff to respond to significant environmental issues raised during the public review period
for the Draft IS/EA and MND/FONSI. This additional work effort is envisioned to require $5,000
in additional fees.
Final IS/EA. MND/FONSI. and Notices (Task 6 in original Scope of Work): Incorporation
of the many technical studies and an increase ih complexity of the Final IS/EA and MND/FONSI
will require additional MBA work effort. Additional fees of $5,000 are requested.
Project Management and Meethags (Task 7 in original Scope of Work): The original scope of
work for the Project Management task stated that MBA would attend 20 meetings over the predicted
ll-month project duration. The number of meetin~ and associated costs were inaccurately
budgeted. It is more accurate to state that MBA will attend four meetings total over tbe life of the
project, with the flpst meeting having been held on June 25, 2002 at the project site.
Due to the substantial project managemem that MBA has already conducted for the project, MBA
has expanded the $1,573 budgeted for project management in the original contract. MBA additional
work effort for this task would require $8,500 in additional fees.
Other Direct Costs: Due to the number of technical studies to be prepared, MBA assumes that
costs associated with repmgraphics and delivery will increase. The proposed fee for additional direct
costs is an estimate since some of the technical studies will not be prepared by MBA and the length
of these studies is unknown. These additional direct costs will be billed on atime and materials basis
in accordance with the existing comract. Additional direct costs are estimated at $6,200.
Steven W. Beswick, P.E.
October 24, 2002
Page 6
MBA is requesting a budget augment of $71,600 based on the foregoing revised scope of
work (not including preparation of an Individual Permit, if required). A suii~iiaty
breakdown of the requested budget augment is presented by topical area as follows:
Noise ......................................................................................................... $ 0
Water Quality ........................................................................................... $ 10,500
Flood Plain ............................................................................................... $ 1,500
NES ........................................................................................................... $ 3~00
Wetlands ................................................................................................... $ 3,000
Air (~,~llry. ............................................................................................... $ 7,500
Hazardous Materials ............................................................................... $ 0
Traffic ....................................................................................................... $ 2,500
Section 106 ............................................................................................... $ 8,500
Text Revisiom ......................................................................................... $ 4,700
Project Management ............................................................................... $ 8,500
Draft IS/EA &MND/FONSI ............................................................ $ 5,500
Responses to Comments & Mitigation Monitoring Program ......... $ 5,000
FinalIS/EN MND/FONSI, and Notices ......................................... $ 5,000
Direct Costs ............................................................................................. $ 6,200
TOTAL ................................................................................... $ $71,600
We are prepared to begin work immediately upon receipt of a signed PES form by Caltraus and
FHWA, City authorization to proceed, and ~ty and MBA acceptance of a contract augmem.
Subsequent to receipt of the signed PES fonn, MBA will prepare a schedule to complete the
environmental documentation. The preparation of the schedule will incorporate Cakrans' and
FI--IWA's anticipated review period for the various technical reports as well as for the IS/EA and
MND/FONSI.
The tenm and condkiom of this proposal will remain valid for 90 days. Should you desire additional
information regarding this submit~ please contact either myself or Emilie Johnson at (714) 258-
$100.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES
lv~.chael E. Honlihan, AICP
Manager of Environmental Sen, ices
Enclosures ~XC~nt (PN-JN}\ 1264\ 12640003\P, evScope-Buflget Aug.doc
Section
I
II
HI
IV
V
X
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pa~e
Summary Of Findings and Concl~sion~ ................................................................................ 1
Introduction ..................... 2
Study Methodology .................................................................................................................. ~
Environmental Setting .......... ~
Important Biological Rezources in the Project Area .......................................................... 11
In-Depth Studies for Special Laws ....................................................................................... 18
Project impacts ...................................................................................................................... 18
Cumulative Impac~ ............................................................................................................... 22
Mitigation Measurez .............................................................................................................. 23
Agency Coordination '" 24
References and Personal Contacts ........................................................................................ 25
Appendix
A Biological Assessment
B Jurisdictional Study
H :~clicnt~2218~22180001 .N ES i
ITEM 13
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
APPROVAL
CITY A'i-rORNEY ~
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER ~
~l~A~villiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Joint Community Facilities Agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District
for the Shea Homes - Serena Hills Development (Tract 23209)
PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Principal Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES
AGREEMENT WITH THE EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT RELATING TO SERENA HILLS
BACKGROUND: Tract 23209 includes the construction of 220 single-family homes
and related infrastructure on 56.34 acres between La Serena Way and the future Butterfield
Stage Road. Conditions of approval for Tract 23209 require the developer to dedicate right-of-
way and construct the extension of La Serena Way from its present eastern terminus to
Butter[ield Stage Road and to construct the westerly % width of Butterfield Stage Road along
the easterly tract boundary.
Originally the developer, Shea Homes, was going to participate in and utilize the public
financing available through the Butterfield Stage Road Community Facilities District (CFD) to
fund the La Serena Way and Butterfield Stage Road improvements. Delays in forming that
CFD, attributed to the Roripaugh Ranch Development, forced Shea Homes to seek an
alternative means of public financing. Because the necessary sewer improvements represented
a significant portion of the overall cost of all the public facilities to be constructed, EMWD
agreed to serve as the lead agency in the formation of a CFD. The EMWD CFD will fund not
only the wet utilities, but the La Serena Way and Butterfield Stage Road improvements as well.
Nothing related to this JCFA or the affiliated EMWD CFD relieves the developer of condition of
approval number 31, which requires the developer of Tract 23209 to: A) participate in a public
financing mechanism that would facilitate the construction of Butterfield Stage Road between
Rancho California Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road or B) construct a two lane connection of
Butterfield Stage Road between the southern tract boundary and Butterfield Stage Road's
present northerly terminus at Chemin Clenet, should the public financing mechanism not be in
place by December 31, 2002.
1
r:\agenda reports~2002\111202\SheahomesJCFA.EM~VD
FISCAL IMPACT: Inspection fees have been collected to offset the costs associated with the
inspection of the public streets. Once accepted, the streets will require surface and/or structural
maintenance every 5 to 8 years.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 2002-
Joint Community Facility Agreement
2
r:~agenda reports~2002\l 11202\SheahomesJCFA. EMWD
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING A JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES
AGREEMENT WITH THE EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT RELATING TO SERENA HILLS
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Eastern Municipal Water District (the "Water
District") is undertaking proceedings to form Community Facilities District No. 2002-08 (Serena
Hills) (the "CFD") pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended
(the "Act"), and the CFD may issue bonds (the "Bonds") in order to finance, among other public
facilities, a portion of the costs of certain roadway improvements (the "Improvements") to be
dedicated to the City of Temecula (the "City"); and
WHEREAS, the Water District has requested that the City enter into a joint community
facilities agreement (the "JCF Agreement") with the Water District so that the Improvements
may be eligible for financing with proceeds of the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, in order to enable the CFD to provide for Bond proceeds to finance the
Improvements, Section 53316.2 of the California Government Code requires that the City and
the Water District enter into the JCF Agreement prior to the formation of the CFD; and
WHEREAS, a form of the JCF Agreement, by and between the City and the Water
District has been filed with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, with the assistance of City staff, has reviewed the JCF
Agreement, and the City Council now desires to approve the JCF Agreement and direct its
execution and delivery.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as
follows:
Section 1. Approval of JCF Aqreement. The City Council hereby approves the JCF
Agreement in the form on file with the City Clerk, and hereby authorizes and directs the City
Manager to execute and deliver the JCF Agreement in such form together with any changes
therein deemed advisable by the City Director of Finance upon consultation with the City
Attorney, the approval of such changes to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and
delivery by the City Manager of the JCF Agreement. The City Council hereby declares that the
JCF Agreement will be beneficial to the residents residing within the boundaries of the City.
Section 2. Official Actions. The Mayor, City Manager, Director of Finance, the Director
of Public Works and City Clerk, and all other officers of the City, are hereby authorized and
directed to take all actions and do all things necessary or desirable hereunder to implement the
JCF Agreement, including but not limited to the execution and delivery of any and all
agreements, certificates, documents and other instruments which they, or any of them, deem
necessary or desirable and not inconsistent with the purposes of this Resolution and the JCF
Agreement.
3
r:\agenda reports~2002\111202\SheahomesJ CFA.E MW D
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 2002.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of November, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES: 0
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
20002.04:J6460
10/25/02
4
r:~agenda reports~002\l 11202\SheahomesJCFA. EM~ND
MARKED TO SHOW CHANGES.
JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES AGREEMENT
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2002-08
(SERENA HILLS)
~o/z5/o2
~o/31/o2
This Joint Community Facilities Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated for convenience as
of November 15, 2002, is by and between the Eastern Municipal Water District, a municipal
water district ("EMWD') and the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (the "City").
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, EMWD is undertaking proceedings to form the Eastern Municipal Water
District Community Facilities District No. 2002-08 (Serena Hills) (the "CFD") pursuant to the
Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the "Act"), and the CFD may, in the
future, issue bonds (the "Bonds") in order to finance various public improvements; and
WHEREAS, the improvements to be financed with the proceeds of the Bonds may
include the improvements described in Attachment A hereto (the "Improvements"), which
Attachment is, by this reference, incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto expect that the City will own and operate the
Improvements if they comply with the standards and have been completed to the satisfaction of
the City; and
WHEREAS, Section 53316.2 of the Act requires that EMWD enter into a joint
community facilities agreement with the City, prior to the adoption by the EMWD the Resolution
of Formation of the CFD, in respect of the Improvements which Improvements may be financed
with the proceeds of the Bonds, and, upon completion, are to be owned and operated by the
City; and
WHEREAS, EMWD and the City now desire to enter into this Agreement to satisfy the
requirements of Section 53316.2 of the Act and to memorialize their understanding with respect
to the proceeds of the Bonds and the Improvements, all as more particularly set forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and mutual covenants set forth
below, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:
Section 1. Bond Funds. If the CFD issues the Bonds, the CFD may use a portion of the
proceeds of the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the costs incurred in connection with the
acquisition and construction of the Improvements. Other than the funds described in the
preceding sentence, EMWD shall have no obligation to pay for any of the costs of the
Improvements, including but not limited to any costs of planning, acquisition, construction,
installation or inspection of the Improvements. Any costs of the Improvements in excess of the
available proceeds of the Bonds will be paid by or on behalf of the landowner in the CFD.
Section 2. Construction of Improvements. The Improvements will be constructed
pursuant to plans and specifications approved by the City. The City shall not have any liability
whatsoever in respect of any work performed in connection with the Improvements; provided
that this sentence shall in no way limit any rights the City may have against any persons or
20002.04:J0162
entities in respect of the acquisition or construction of the Improvements once the City accepts
title to and control over the Improvements.
To the extent that the City incurs expenses incident to reviewing and approving design
plans and specifications, conducting construction field inspections and otherwise in connection
with the design, construction and acceptance of the Improvements, such expenses may be
reimbursed to the City upon presentation of invoices as to the nature and amount of such costs
and expenses, from any available Bond proceeds, or if there are no such available funds, then
from the owner of the land in the CFD.
Section 3. Inspection and Acceptance; Use of Bond Funds. The City shall cause
inspections to be made during the construction of the Improvements in accordance with its
customary procedures for construction projects of a similar nature. Upon completion of
construction of one or all of the improvements to the satisfaction of the City, the City shall
accept dedication of the completed Improvement(s) in accordance with its customary
procedures, and shall accept ownership, and responsibility for operation of the completed
Improvement(s) conditioned upon the passage to the City of fee title for the completed
Improvement(s) clear of all encumbrances and easements not otherwise acceptable to the City
in its sole discretion. The City shall have no responsibility with respect to the ownership or
operation of any Improvement unless and until construction of the Improvement has been
completed to the satisfaction of the City, and the Improvement has been formally accepted by
the City Council of the City. EMWD shall have no obligation to at any time own or operate any
of the Improvements.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City, in its sole discretion, may decide to inspect and
accept dedication of the Improvements in phases, as completion of portions of the roadway
occurs. Also, the City shall not, in any event, have any responsibility for the maintenance of any
landscaping included as part of the Improvements.
Section 4. Intedm Inspections. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 3 above,
upon EMWD's written request, the City agrees to inspect an Improvement to determine if it has
been "substantially completed." "Substantially Completed" with respect to an Improvement
means that, as determined by the City's inspectors, such Improvement is substantially complete
pursuant to the plans and specifications approved by the City and is available for use by the
public for its intended purpose, except for any final "punch list" items that, as determined by the
City's inspectors, are not required for the safe operation of such Improvement. Any such
inspection shall be at the expense of the party constructing the Improvement, and such
inspection shall in no way constitute acceptance by the City of the Improvement. Acceptance of
Improvements by the City shall only occur upon full satisfaction of all City requirements and
completion of all customary City procedures for the acceptance of public improvements.
Section 5. Limited Obli.qations. All obligations of EMWD under and pursuant to this
Agreement shall be limited to the proceeds of the Bonds, if any, available for the acquisition
and construction of the Improvements. No Boardmember, officer or employee of EMWD shall
in any event be personally liable hereunder.
The sole obligation of the City hereunder shall be to inspect and accept the
Improvements as described above. The City shall have no responsibility or obligation (except
as described in the preceding sentence) with respect to the Improvements for any action
occurring prior to their acceptance by the City. If, for any reason whatsoever, there are
insufficient funds to complete the Improvements or any portion thereof, the City shall have no
obligation under this Agreement to fund any such shortfall. If the City shall fail to perform any
of its obligations hereunder, the sole remedy of EMWD shall be the commencement of an
action in the Superior Court for specific performance by the City of such obligations.
Section 6. Termination. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this
Agreement shall cease to be effective and shall terminate if the Bonds are not issued by
December 31, 2003. If not eadier terminated pursuant to the preceding sentence, this
Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier of (i) December 31, 2006, or (ii) acceptance of the
ownership and operation of the Improvements by the City.
Section 7. No Obliqation to Form CFD; Agreement of Benefit to Residents. The
provisions of this Agreement shall in no way obligate EMWD to form the CFD, or for the CFD to
issue the Bonds. Notwithstanding the foregoing, by their respective execution of this
Agreement, EMWD and the City each declare that this Agreement is beneficial to the residents
within the jurisdiction of their respective entities in assuring the provision of financing for a
portion of the costs of the Improvements in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Section 8. Partial Invalidity. If any part of this Agreement is held to be illegal or
unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be
given effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible.
Section 9. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. This Agreement is for the sole
benefit of EMWD and the City and their successors and assigns, and no other person or entity
shall be deemed to be a beneficiary hereof or have an interest herein.
Section 10. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time but only in
writing signed by each party hereto.
Section 11. Entire Aqreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement among
the parties with respect to the matters provided for herein and supersedes all prior agreements
and negotiations between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
Section 12. Notices. Any notice required or permitted by this Agreement to be given or
delivered to the other party shall be deemed to have been received when personally delivered
or seventy-two hours following deposit of the same in any United States Post Office in
California, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
EMWD:
Eastern Municipal Water District
2270 Trumble Road
Post Office Box 8300
Perris, California 92572-8300
Attn: General Manager
City:
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attn: City Manager
Each party may change its address for delivery of notice by delivering written notice of
such change of address to the other parties hereto.
Section 13. Exhibit. The exhibit attached hereto is incorporated into this Agreement by
this reference.
Section 14. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
day and year first written above.
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
ATTEST:
By:
Director of Finance
By:
Secretary of the Board of Directors
CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTEST:
By:
Shawn Nelson, City Manager
By:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
20002.04:6462
-5-
ATTACHMENT a
DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
It is intended that the CFD will finance all or a portion of the costs of the following:
Butterfield Stage Road from 730 feet south of La Serena to 1,230 feet north of La
Serena (1,960 L.F.).
Improvements include grading of 76' of right of way width with slopes, one-half width
street improvements (west one-half, 2 lanes plus bike lane, sidewalk, curb and gutter,
median curb and gutter), landscaped median*, 12' easterly travel lane and temporary
asphalt curb and signage.
La Serena Way from Butterfield Stage Road west to Tract 23209 westerly boundary
(1,170 LF.).
Improvements include grading of full 88' of right of way width with slopes, full street
improvements, sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping* and signage.
* Note that the City may accept the landscaping, but will have no responsibility to maintain any
landscaping. It is expected that the Temecula Community Services District or some other entity will
provide for maintenance of any landscaping.
ITEM 14
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL -
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~i~:=,.._
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
~(,City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Solicitation of Construction Bids for Pechanga Parkway Soundwall
Improvements, Project No. PW99-11SW
PREPARED BY:
Greg Butler, Principal Engineer
Steven W. Beswick, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the project plans and specifications and
authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit bids for the construction of the Pechanga
Parkway Soundwall Improvements, Project No. PW99-11SW.
BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has completed the design and obtained
environmental clearance necessary for the Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Improvements Project.
The Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Improvements Project is included in the City's Capital
Improvement Program.
The Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Improvement Project will provide a sound wall to reduce noise
for homeowners along the southwesterly side of Pechanga Parkway from Clubhouse Drive to Via
Edwardo and along the northwesterly side of Pechanga Parkway from the Jedediah Road Right-of-
Way to 200 feet past Muirfield Drive. The construction will take approximately 10 months and minor
impacts to traffic can be expected along Pechanga Parkway.
The specifications and contract documents have been completed and the project is ready to be
advertised for construction bids. The documents are available for review in the City Engineer's
office. Our design consultant's Construction Estimate for this project is $3,000,000.00. We feel that
they have approached their estimate very conservatively. Based on our recent experience our staff
feels that the bids will come in much closer to the original $ 2,000,000 estimate that is representative
of the costs for the Pala Road Bridge sound wall. After the bids are received and the actually costs
are known the fiscal issues will be resolved.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway Soundwall Improvements, Project No. PW99-11SW
is a Capital Improvement Project funded through an agreement between the City and the Temecula
Band of Luiseno Mission Indians. This project will be funded by the Temecula Band of Luiseno
Mission Indians as part of the $4.4 Million they have committed to the ultimate project. The
Agreement states that the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians shall pay the City $1.8 million
on or before the Council acts to award the contract for construction of the Pechanga Parkway Sound
Wall.
1
ATTACHMENT:
1. Project Location
2. Project Description
2
R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2002~I 11202~PW99-11 SW,BID,doc
!
!
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
!
I
ITEM 15
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CiTY MANAGER '~
CiTY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
'/~'~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Harveston Acquisition Agreement for Offsite Right-of-Way
PREPARED BY: Ronald Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the "Agreement Pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5" authorizing the City to use the power of eminent domain for
acquisition of offsite right-of-way to provide the necessary right-of-way for widening of
Winchester Road as required in the Conditions of Approval for the Harveston Project.
BACKGROUND: The Harveston Project had certain conditions of approval requiring
the developer to make intersection improvements to various intersections on Winchester Road
prior to the issuance of the first building permit. The Development Agreement between
Harveston LLC and the City of Temecula required all of the improvements on Winchester Road
to be completed before issuance of the first building permit. The developer has pursued in good
faith the acquisition of the needed right-of-way but has reached an impasse with the owners of a
few of the parcels.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66462.5 and Development Agreement Section
3.1.3.5, when a condition of a subdivision map approval requires the installation or construction
of improvements on off-site property not owned or controlled by the sub divider, and title cannot
be obtained by negotiated purchase, a city is required to consider in good faith proceedings to
acquire off-site property by eminent domain. The developer is required to pay all cost
associated with this action and Harveston LLC has agreed to deposit $40,000 with the city as a
funding source to begin the proceedings. If the City chooses not to use the power of eminent
domain then the developer will be relieved of the condition to do the improvement.
This agreement is made to establish the rules by which the power of eminent domain will be
used as it relates to the Harveston project and as established by Government Code Section
66462.5.
FISCAL IMPACT:
cost.
None, since the Developer will be financially responsible for all acquisition
ATTACHMENTS: Agreement Pursuant To Government Code Section 66462.5 (11 Pages)
1
R:~Agenda Reports~2002\111202\Harveston Acquisition Agrmt/ajp
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66462.5
This Agreement for acquisition of real property pursuant to Government Code section
66462.5 is made and entered into as of this t~{-k, day of [,D~x/~wx[n~,~ ,2002, by
and between Harveston LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("DEVELOPER"
hereinafter) and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("CITY" hereinafter).
DEVELOPER and CITY are referred to jointly below as the "Parties."
A. Recitals.
(i) DEVELOPER has submitted, and CITY has had approved, applications for
development of a residential and/or commercial project on that certain real property of
DEVELOPER generally located north of Winchester Road and is known as the Harvestons Plan
in the CITY;
(ii) On July 12, August 14, and August 28, 2001, the CITY Council adopted the
Resolutions Nos. set forth on Exhibit "A" and Ordinance Nos. set forth on Exhibit "B", thereby
approving the Harveston Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Maps Nos.
29639, 29928, 29929 and 30088, and certifying Environmental Impact Report SCH No.
99041033 (DEVELOPER's "Project");
(iii) To facilitate the orderly development of the Project on the above-referenced
property, specific conditions of approval required DEVELOPER to cons~uct various
improvements to Winchester Road where it lies within the CITY as reflected in Tract Map No.
29639 and similar conditions to other State Route 79 entitlements, and the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program Agreement. However, construction of the improvements requires
ownership of real property neither owned by DEVELOPER or CITY (the "Off-site Properties"
hereinafter). A description of the Off-site Properties required to satisfy the conditions of
approval is attached hereto as Attachment A, and incorporated herein by this reference.
(iv) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66462.5 and Harveston
Development Agreement Section 3.1.3.5, when a condition of a subdivision map approval
requires the installation or construction of improvements on off-site property not owned or
controlled by the subdivider, and title cannot be obtained by negotiated purchase, a city is
required to consider in good faith proceedings to acquire off-site property by eminent domain.
Pursuant to said provisions, a city and subdivider may enter into an agreement to allocate the
costs and responsibilities for acquisition of such off-site property.
(v) DEVELOPER has recorded or intends to record Tract Map No. 29639 and, under
a separate subdivision improvement agreement, has agreed to undertake and comPlete all
required public improvements set forth in Tract Map No. 29639, including rights-of-way for said
Off-site Properties. Following the recordation of Tract Map No. 29639, the Temecula Public
Finance Authority has approved the formation Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (the
"C.F.D."). Proceeds from the issuance of bonds from the C.F.D. are authorized for use by the
CITY in the acquisition of the rights-of-way necessary to construct required improvements.
(vi) CITY has been provided credible evidence that DEVELOPER has made a good
faith effort to acquire the Off-site Properties but has been unable to' do so by negotiated purchase;
(vii) California Government Code Section 40404 and Califomia Code of Civil
Procedure Sections 1230.0 10 etseq, authorizes CITY to acquire by eminent domain any and all
property necessary for street right-of-way purposes; and,
(viii) The acquisition of multiple parcels will be required in order to complete the
Winchester Road improvements referenced in Recital (iii). It is not known whether
DEVELOPER will be able to acquire all of the Off-site Properties, or whether the CITY~ acting
through the CITY Council, will authorize the adoption of Resolutions of Necessity for all of the
Off-site Properties, necessary to complete the Winchester Road improvements. To facilitate the
satisfaction of the conditions of approval for the Project and the Harveston Development
Agreement, CITY and DEVELOPER now mutually desire to enter into this Agreement under
Government Code Section 66462.5 concerning the Off-site Properties and to allocate
responsibility between the respective Parties. It is the intent of the Parties that this Agreement
shall serve as a master agreement governing the relationship between the Parties with respect to
the CITY's acquisition of any or all of the Off-site Properties. · '
B. Agreement.
NOW, TH]EREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between CITY and DEVELOPER as
follows:
1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals of this Agreement which are hereby
incorporated into this Agreement.
2. The Parties recognize that CITY cannot exercise its power of eminent domain
until all legally required preconditions, including Resolutions of Necessity~have been lawfully
adopted by CITY's legislative body pursuant to law. This Agreement is solely made in
furtherance of the authority granted under Government Code Section 66462.5. It is neither a
2
commitment nor an announcement of an intent by CITY to acquire any or all of the Off-site
Properties that may be identified in this Agreement. In the event CITY elects to commence an
action after the required public hearing on one or more Resolutions of Necesaity, then CITY
shall cause the eminent domain action for the acquisition of the specified interest or interests
(whether fee, leasehold or otherwise) in and to the Off-site Properties to be filed and
expeditiously processed to completion by and through the use of CITY's power of eminent
domain. Subject to DEVELOPER's timely and continuous performance of all elements of this
Agreement, CITY shall cause the action to be pursued to completion using legal counsel and
consultants of CITY% reasonable selection. DEVELOPER agrees CITY' s selected legal counsel
is not representing DEVELOPER in any capacity and further that DEVELOPER is not a third
party beneficiary under the engagement agreement between CITY and CITY's selected legal
counsel.
3. DEVELOPER shall solely bear all Off-site Properties acquisition costs of the
Temecula Public Finance Authority, either directly or through an allocation of bund sale
proceeds from the C.F.D., or by reimbursement of funds expended from the bond sale proceeds
from the C.F.D., which shall include but not be limited to, the costs of title reports and/or
litigation guarantees, litigation expenses, court costs, attorneys' fees, deposits necessary to take
immediate possession of any such interest, deposits reflecting verdicts as to the value of any such
interest necessary to obtain any final order or orders of condemnation, any sum paid as and for a
settlement of any suit filed by CITY pursuant to this Agreement, payments for land and
improvements on the land, severance damages, fixtures and equipment payments, payments for
loss of business goodwill, precondeumatiun damages, relocation expenses, abandonment
damages, Off-site Properties owners' statutory costs and litigation expenses authorized by the
Eminent Domain Law, codified as Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.0 10, et seq. (Eminent
Domain Law), the costs of reviewing engineering data previously prepared or of retaining an
engineer for such review, cost of cooperation with DEVELOPER to provide requested data, and
anY and all fees, costs and expenses arising from or related to any of the foregoing items, actions,
and proceedings. No settlement of an action brought by CITY to acquire Off-Site Properties or
arising from CITY's action(s) shall be effective without DEVELOPER first providing its written
approval thereof to CITY, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
4. The Parties hereto recognize that if the City Council, in its discretion, adopts a
Resolution of Necessity and authorizes the filing of an eminent domain proceedings, the CITY
may not be able to obtain the fee title to the Off-site Property within the time set forth in
Government Code section 66462.5 and in recognition of this potential circumstance the Parties
waive these time requirements.
5. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement by CITY, DEVELOPER shall
deliver to CITY the sum of Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00). CITY agrees to deposit said
sm in a separate CITY account ("Separate Fund") and to use the principal sum, and any interest
earned thereon, to satisfy the CITY's costs for fees incurred by the CITY's attorneys, Richards,
Watson & Gershon LLP, and for ancillary purposes. The costs of purchasing, making deposits
on, obtaining orders of possession, payment of pre-judgment interest, or payment of judgments
on Off-site Properties specified in this Agreement shall be paid out of funds identified in
paragraphs 6 and 7 below, except to the extent deemed by the CITY not available in which case
additional funds may be required of DEVELOPER in accordance with Section 5.
6. CITY shall, on a monthly basis, or as the Parties otherwise agree, provide
DEVELOPER with an accounting of disbursements from the Separate Fund established pursuant
to paragraph 5, above and of C.F.D. funds described in Recital (v) and paragraph (7) below. The
accounting of funds drawn from the Separate Fund or from the C.F.D. account shall indicate the
use of all funds on a parcel-by parcel basis. In the event disbursements reduce the balance of the
Separate Fund to Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or less, DEVELOPER, five (5) business
days following a written request of CITY, shall deliver to CITY such additional monies as are
necessary to maintain the balance in the Separate Fund at Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00).
7. The Parties agree that upon CITY's request, Developer will tender to CITY such
funds as may be required to submit offers to purchase, to purchase, to obtain orders of
possession, to pay for pre-judgment interest (pursuant to Section 1268.310 et seq. of the
California Code of Civil Procedure) on, or to pay judgments for, the Off-site Properties. If the
CITY's expert valuation wilness determines at the date of exchange of valuation data under Code
of Civil Procedure section 1258.220 that the fair market value of the Off-site Properties is higher
than the Deposit Amount, the additional sum shall be paid for by DEVELOPER, as ordered by
any court of competent jurisdiction. CITY shall promptly deposit this additional amount with
the Court.
8. If for any reason DEVELOPER fails to maintain the Separate Fund balance
referenced in paragraph 5, above, or fails to provide the monies as required by paragraphs 6 and
7, above, CITY may utilize and draw down all or any portion of the improvement security
4
deposited (if any) pursuant to the separate subdivision improvement agreement as referenced in
Section A (Recitals), paragraph (v), above, to pay any of the costs and expenses referenced
herein for acquisition of the Off-site Properties. CITY shall not commence any activity under or
in furtherance of this Agreement until DEVELOPER provides CITY and CITY agrees with and
approves a written acknowledgment from both the DEVELOPER and the person, finn, or entity
who has provided the referenced security that: (i) the CITY may make demand on the security
for the purposes described in this Agreement; (ii) the surety will promptly pay such monies to
CITY upon CITY's demand and (iii) the amount of the security deposit is adequate to fund both
the anticipated physical improvements under the map and the anticipated costs of acquisition
pursuant to this Agreement.
9. DEVELOPER and CITY shall maintain ongoing communication of non-
privileged information on the status of pending offers, acceptances, counteroffers, and other
matters related to the acquisition of the Off-site Properties, so that DEVELOPER may offer
additional consideration or inducements to the owners of the Off~site Properties in order to
encoUrage the acquisition of Off-site Properties without the need for eminent domain
proceedings. In addition, CITY shall provide DEVELOPER with ongoing reports of non-
privileged information on the status of all eminent domain proceedings which may be or have
· been filed, in order to aid DEVELOPER's scheduling ofconslxuction activities.
10. If DEVELOPER should independently acquire all or any portion of the Off-site
Propgrties by negotiated purchase after an eminent domain action is filed by the CITY,
DEVELOPER shall immediately notify CITY of the acquisition. After DEVELOPER obtains
fee title to the subject interest CITY shall move to dismiss all or any unnecessary part of the
aetinn relating to the Off-site Properties acquired by negotiation. Ifa dismissal is filed,
DEVELOPER shall bear any and all costs, expenses and/or damages related thereto, including,
but not limited to, any condenmee's recoverable costs and/or recoverable attorneys' fees pursuant
to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1268.6 10, et seq. DEVELOPER shall pay all such costs
directly out of the Separate Fund established pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Agreement.
11. When any eminent domain action which was commenced pursuant to this
Agreement is concluded, CITY shall remit to DEVELOPER the balance remaining in the
Separate Fund within sixty (60) days ai~er full payment of just compensation, costs and all
applicable litigation expenses have been made to owners of the Off-site Properties. Additionally,
CITY shall expeditiously withdraw any funds remaining on deposit with the Court and return the
same to the Separate Fund, as originally drawn, once a final order of condenmation or a
dismissal of the eminent domain action is entered by the Court.
12. Any and all notices, requests or other communications required or permitted to be
given under this Agreement or by reason of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
deemed to have been given when: (i) delivered in person or by courier or overnight delivery
s~nwice; or (ii) five (5) business days after mailing, by certified or registered mail, return receipt
requested, to the Parties at the following addresses or any such other address or addresses as the
Parties may, from time to time, designate in writing in the manner herein specified:
CITY:
CITY OF TEMECULA
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: City Manager
and
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
355 South Grand Avenue, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-3101
Attention: Mr...Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
DEVELOPER:
Mr. Graham Jones
Senior Vice President
24800 Chrisanta Drive
Mission Viejo, California 92691
and
Craig K. Beam, Esq.
Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP
600 W. Broadway, Suite 2600
San Diego, California 92101
Facsimile (619) 645-5378
13. In the event either party brings any action as law or in equity in relation to this
Agreement, or to declare such party's rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party in such
suit or action, on trial or appeal, in addition to all other sums to which it may be entitled, may
call upon the non-prevailing party to pay a reasonable sum for its .attorneys' fees and to pay any
6
and all other costs and expenses that have been incurred by the prevailing party, either directly or .
indirectly, in connection with said action or suit, as shall be fixed by the court.
14. Each party to this Agreement agrees to cooperate by performing any further acts
and by executing and delivering any and all additional monies, items, or documents which may
be reasonably necessary to carry out the terms and provisions of this Agreement, and each party
to this Agreement agrees that it will not act in any manner whatsoever which would hinder,
impede, interfere or prohibit or make more onerous or difficult the performance of the other
party hereto under this Agreement.
15. No amendment to this Agreement shall be effective unless first provided in
writing and executed by the Parties hereto.
16. The terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not cause the Parties hereto or
any of each Parties' agents, consultants, contractors or other providers of professional services to
be construed in any manner whatsoever as partners, joint venturers or agents of each other in the
performance of their respective duties and obligations under this Agreement, or subject either
party to this Agreement to any obligation, loss, charge or expense of the other party to this
Agreement.
17. Time is expressly made of the essence of each and every provision of this
Agreement. ..
18. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon
the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assignees.
19. No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed to be exclusive but shall,
wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at or in equity.
20. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of
the State of California. Venue for any action arising directly or indirectly under this Agreement
shall be in the Superior Court of Riverside County, California.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereof have executed and entered into this
Agreement as of the date set forth above.
DEVELOPER
By: Harveston, L.L.C. a Delaware Limited
Liability Company
By: Lennar Homes of California, Inc., a
California corporation,
mber,
DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED
CITY OF TEMECULA,
a municipal corporation
By: Date:
Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor
Attest:
Susan Jones, City Clerk
Approved:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
1776359.4[WORD]
8
All-Purpose Acknowledgment
State of Califomia )
) ss
County of Orange )
On November 4, 2002 before me, Dee Baker, Notary Public, personally appeared
Graham Jones personally known to me to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in
his authorized capacities and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the
entities upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
Witness my hand and official seal.
Dee Baker, Notary Public
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: Agreement Pursuant to Government Code Section
66462.5 between Harveston and City of Temecula
Document Date: 10 - 4 - 02
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Pages:
Exhibit "A"
Resolutions Adopted by City Council of City of T~mecula
Resolution No. 01-025 July 12, 2001 Agreement General Plan
Amendment, Specific Plan
and Rezone
Resolution No. 01-026 July 12, 2001 Tentative Map No. 29639
Resolution No. 01-70 August 14, 2001 Project EIR and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting
Program
Resolution No. 01 o71 August 14, 2001 Agreement consistent with the
General Plan of the City
Resolution No. 01-72 August 14, 2001 Specific Plan
Resolution No. 01-73 August 14, 2001 , Tentative Tract Map No.
29639
Resolution No. 01-74 August 14, 2001 Tentative Tract Map No.
29928
Resolution No. 01-75 August 14, 2001 Tentative Tract Map No.
29929
Resolution No. 01-76 August 14, 2001 Tentative Tract Map No.
30088
9
Exhibit "B"
Ordinances Adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula
Ordinance No. 01-07 August 14, 2001 Rezone
August 28, 2001
Ordinance No. 01-08 August 14, 2001 Development Agreement
10
Attachment A
Potential Acquisition Parcels by Assessor's Parcel Numbers
910-310-13
910-310-11
910-300-013
910-320-035
910-320-042
910-280-003
910-283-001
910-284-001
910-284-002
910-284-003
910-284-004
910-284-006
910-284-007
910-284-008
910-283-005
910-320-030
11
ITEM 16
ORDINANCE NO. 02-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR, AND APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH, ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR
SYSTEMS, INC, A SUBSIDIARY OF GUIDANT CORPORATION
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 02-0217)
WHEREAS, Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California
and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing
and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the
Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems has been duly given in the form and manner required by
law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public
hearings on October 16, 2002 and October 22, 2002, respectively, at which time it heard and
considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect
to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Advanced Cardiovascular
Systems, Inc, that:
A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies,
general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the
Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for
industrial, commercial and residential development; and
B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of
the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the
period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures
and conditions of approval imposed; and,
C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the
uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property
subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is
consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property
consistent with the General Plan; and,
D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public
convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable
provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and,
E. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety,
or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and,
R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-10 1
F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was
published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning
Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to
the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire
protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on
the latest equalized assessment roll; and,
G. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the
date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general
explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the
location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust
administrative remedies; and,
H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from
this legislation and this Development Agreement are an increase in higher paying jobs and
increased local employment opportunities from an established local company. These
community benefits also satisfy the requirements of Municipal Code Section 17.08.050.A.
Section2. .APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "1" is hereby approved. The Mayor is
authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the
name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided,
however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect
and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement.
Section 3. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION. A detailed Initial Environmental
Study (lES) checklist was prepared for this project. Based upon the analysis contained in the
checklist, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. The analysis identified potentially
significant impacts in the areas of Aesthetics, Biologic Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology
and Soils, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems. However, because
of the mitigation measures identified in the lES, all the potential impacts will be mitigated to a
level of insignificance. The lES and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was
circulated for public review between April 1 and April 30, 2002. As a result, the City Council
hereby adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration, including the Mitigation Monitoring Program,
for this project. The approved Mitigation Monitoring Program is contained in Exhibit "2".
Section 4. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of
this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold
any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 6. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall
publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall
be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this
Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the
Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk.
R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-10 2
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 2002.
ATTEST:
Ronald Roberts, Mayor
Susan Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. 02-10 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting
of the City Council on the 22nd day of October, 2002, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was
duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of November
2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:/Ords 2002/Ords 02-10 3
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
a California Municipal Corporation
and
ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.,
a Subsidiary of Guidant Corporation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION AND TITLE
PAGE NO.
Recitals .......................................................................................................... 1
1. Definitions .................................................................................................. 4
2. Development of Project .............................................................................. 8
2.1. Ownership Interests ......................................................................... 8
2.2. Vested Rights ................................................................................... 8
2.3. Project .............................................................................................. 8
2.3.1. FloorArea Ratio ........................................................................... 8
2.3.2. Location and Size of Improvements ............................................. 9
2.3.3. Design Guidelines; Architectural and Landscape Palette ............. 9
2.3.4. Height Limitation ........................................................................... 9
2.3.4.1. Rooftop Equipment ................................................................ 9
2.3.4.2. Underground Structure .......................................................... 9
2.4. Allowed Uses ................................................................................... 9
2.4.1. Consistent Development Standards ............................................ 10
2.4.2. Use for Parking ............................................................................ 10
2.5. Perimeter Fencing and Landscaping ............................................... 10
2.6. Access ................................................................................ : ............ 10
2.7. Modifications ................................................................................... 10
2.8. Off-Site Public Improvements .......................................................... 10
2.9. On-Site Publiclmprovements...; ...................................................... 10
2.10.Dedication or Reservation Requirements ........................................ 11
2.10.1. Public Utility Easements ............................................................ 11
2.10.2. Motor Car Parkway .................................................................... 11
2.10.3. Margarita Road .......................................................................... 11
2.11. Motor Car Parkway .......................................................................... 11
2.12. Margarita Road ................................................................................ 11
2,12.1. Restriction on Improvements ..................................................... 11
2.12,2. Acquisition ................................................................................. 11
2.12.3. Compliance with Landscaping Standards ................................. 12
2.12.4. Compliance with Height and Other Requirements ..................... 12
2.13. Pedestrian Bridge ........................................................................... 12
2,13.1. Owner's Discretion .................................................................... 12
2.13.2. Location and Design; City Review ............................................. 12
2.13.3. Grant of Property Interest; Permits ............................................ 12
2.13.4. Costs, Ownership and Maintenance .......................................... 13
2.14. Development Plans ........................................................................ 13
2.14.1, Processing Application .............................................................. 13
2.14.2. Approval of Application .............................................................. 13
2.14.3. Phasing ..................................................................................... 14
SECTION AND TITLE PAGE NO.
2.14.4. Environmental Review ................................................... ~ ........... 14
2.14.5. Development Plan Modifications ............................................... 14
2.15. Term of Map .................................................................................... 14
2.16. Substitute Tentative Parcel Map ...................................................... 14
2.17. Lot Line Adjustment ......................................................................... 14
3. Development Fees .................................................................................... 15
3.1. Development Processing Fees ........................................................ 15
3.2. Expedited Review ............................................................................ 15
3.3. Development Impact Fees .............................................................. 15
3.4. Landscaping Bond ........................................................................... 15
4. Rules and Regulations .............................................................................. 15
4.1. Applicable Rules and Laws ............................................................. 15
4.2. Applicability to Future Development Approvals ............................... 16
4.3. Model Codes ................................................................................... 16
4.4, Future Enactments .......................................................................... 16
4.5. Enforceability..' ................................................................................. 16
4.6. Representation ................................................................................ 17
4.7. Amendment to Rules ....................................................................... 17
4.8. Future Mitigation Measures ............................................................. 17
4.9. Districts ........................................................................................... 17
4.10.Phasing ........................................................................................... 17
4.11.Non-conformities ............................................................................. 17
4.12.Abatement and Revocation after the Term
of the Agreement Lapses ................................................................ 18
4.13. Other Agencies ................................................................................ 18
5. Term .......................................................................................................... 18
5.1. Commencement .............................................................................. 18
5.2. Duration ........................................................................................... 18
5.3. Termination ..................................................................................... 18
5.3.1. Termination under Ag reement ..................................................... 18
5.3.2. Completion of Project .................................................................. 18
5.3.3. Judgment ..................................................................................... 18
5.4. Effect of Termination ....................................................................... 19
5.5. Effect of Agreement on Title ............................................................ 19
Amendments; Administration of Agreement ............................................. 19
6.1. Amendment ..................................................................................... 19
6.2. Operating Memoranda .................................................................... 19
6.3. Administration of Agreement ........................................................... 19
Amendment to Authorizing Statute or Change in Law .............................. 20
7.1. Development Agreement Legislation ............................................... 20
7.2. Change in State or Federal Law ...................................................... 20
7.2.1. Notice ........................................................................................... 20
7.2.2. Hearing and Determination ........................................................... 20
8. Transfers and Assignments ..................................................................... 20
8.1. Transfers ........................................................................................ 20
8.2. Assignment ..................................................................................... 21
SECTION AND TITLE PAGE NO.
8.2.1. Assignment to a Guidant Assignee ........................................... 21
8.2.2. Assignment Before Completion of Phase 1 ............................... 21
8.2.3. Assignment After Completion of Phase 1 .................................. 22
8.2.4. Notice and Acknowledgement ................................................... 22
8.2.5. Pedestrian Bridge ...................................................................... 22
9. Representations and Warranties ............................................................ 22
9.1. City's Representations and Warranties .......................................... 22
9.2. Owner's Representations and Warranties ...................................... 23
10. Compliance Review ................................................................................ 24
10.1. Annual Review ................................................................................ 24
10.1.1. Good-Faith Compliance ........................................................... 24
10.1.2. Substantial Compliance ............................................................ 24
10.2. Failure to Conduct Annual Review ................................................ 24
10.3. Initiation of Review by City Council ............................................... 25
10.4. Availability of Documents .............................................................. 25
11. Default ............................. : ....................................................................... 25
11.1. Default by Owner ........................................................................... 25
11.2. Default by City ............................................................................... 25
11.3. Estoppel Certificates ..................................................................... 25
11.3.1. Execution ................................................................................. 26
11.3.2. Costs; Reliance ....................................................................... 26
12. Judicial Review ....................................................................................... 26
12.1. Reference ...................................................................................... 26
12.1.1. Appointment ........................................................................... 26
12.1.2. Pretrial Matters .......................................................... . ............ 26
12.1.3. Trial ........................................................................................ 26
12.1.4. Judgment ................................................................................ 26
12.1.5. Post-Trial Proceedings ........................................................... 27
12.1.6. Appeal .................................................................................... 27
12.2. Specific Performance ................................................................... 27
12.3. Remedies Cumulative .................................................................. 27
12.4. Applicability of Review .................................................................. 27
12.5. Attorney's Fees ............................................................................ 27
12.6. Third-party Challenge ................................................................... 28
12.6.1. Defense of Litigation .............................................................. 28
12.6.2. Compliance with Judgment ................................................... 28
12.6.3. Review of Future Development Approval .. ............................ 28
12.7. Indemnification ............................................................................. 28
12.8. Validation ..................................................................................... 29
13. Encumbrances and Lenders ................................................................... 29
13.1. Rightto Encumber ........................................................................ 29
13.2. Notice of Default to Lender ........................................................... 29
14. Waivers and Delays ................................................................................ 30
14.1. No Waiver ..................................................................................... 30
14.2. Extension by Agreement .............................................................. 30
14.3. Force Majeure .............................................................................. 30
SECTION AND TITLE PAGE NO.
14.4. Extensions .................................................................................... 30
14.4.1. Litigation ................................................................................... 30
14.4.2. Other Delays ............................................................................ 30
14.5. Notice of Delay ............................................................................. 30
15. Notices ................................................................................................... 30
15.1. Manner of Giving Notice ............................................................... 30
15.2. Address for Notices ...................................................................... 31
15.3. Effective Date of Notices .............................................................. 31
15.4. Undeliverable Notice .................................................................... 32
15.5. Change of Address ....................................................................... 32
16, General Provisions ................................................................................. 32
16.1.
16.2.
16.3.
16.4.
16.5.
16.6.
16.7.
16.8.
16.9.
16.10.
16.11.
16.12.
16.13.
16.14.
16.15.
16.16.
16.17.
16.18.
16.19.
Opinions of Counsel ..................................................................... 32
Binding Covenants ....................................................................... 32
Relationship of Parties ................................................................. 32
Recording ..................................................................................... 32
Severability ................................................................................... 32
Interpretation and Governing Law ................................................ 32
Section Headings ......................................................................... 33
Word Usage ................................................................................. 33
No Joint and Several Liability ....................................................... 33
Time of Essence ........................................................................... 33
Counting Days .............................................................................. 33
Recitals ........................................................................................ 33
Exhibits ......................................................................................... 33
Entire Agreement ......................................................................... 33
Survival of Obligations .................................................................. 34
Third Party Beneficiaries .............................................................. 34
Ambiguities ................................................................................... 34
Counterparts; Duplicate Originals ................................................. 34
Necessary Acts ............................................................................ 34
Exhibits
4
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of the
day of ,2002 ("Agreement Date"), by ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR
SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation and a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation
· ("Owner"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a California municipal corporation ("City"),
pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California
Government Code and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution.
RECITALS
This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts:
A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms, which are
defined in this Agreement. The Parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction
with the use of the defined terms in these Recitals.
B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes City to enter into
binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in
real property for the Development of such property. The Purposes of the Development
Agreement Legislation include, among other matters:
1. Reducing the uncertainty in the Development approval process.
This uncertainty can result in a waste of resources, discourage investment and escalate
the cost of Development to the consumer.
2. Strengthening the comprehensive planning process to provide for
the most efficient use of public and private resources.
3. Assuring applicants for Development projects that, upon approval
of their projects, they may proceed in accordance with existing policies, rules and
regulations.
facilities.
4. Providing for the financing and/or construction of necessary public
5. Providing a mechanism to allow alternative means of satisfaction of
ordinances or regulations in order to promote flexibility and to respond more selectively
to given proposals.
6. Streamlining and coordinating the Development approval process
by combining discretionary approvals that would otherwise occur in separate
processes.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 1
C. In addition to the general purposes listed above, the following are among
the consideration supporting this Agreement:
1. The Owner of the Project has made significant contributions to the
City of Temecula and its citizens, including: (a) creating approximately 3,100 local
jobs, which contribute over $91,000,000 in payroll annually to the area economy; and
(b) establishing a high quality medical device manufacturing facility at Owner's Existing
Facilities.
2. The Agreement authorizes Owner to improve approximately 28
acres of light industrial and business park zoned real property in close proximity to
residential areas in the City. Completion of the Project would create jobs for the City's
citizens and reduce vehicle miles of travel by creating employment opportunities locally.
3. For both Parties, the Agreement helps provide for: (a) high quality
Development of the Property that is the subject of this Agreement; (b) certainty in the
type of Development to be undertaken on the Property; and (c) the assurance of
adequate public facilities to ensure the good of the community regardless of the City's
legal authority to impose such requirement under constitutional and statutory authority.
4. For City, the Agreement helps provide for: (a) employment growth
anticipated to result from the Project, both during construction and use; (b) an increase
in tax revenues anticipated to result from the Development of the Project; and (c) the
achievement of the goals and objectives of its General Plan.
5. For Owner, the Agreement provides for specified limitations on,
without the surrender of, the City's exercise of certain of its governmental and
proprietary powers together with the certainty of Owner's rights to develop the Project.
D. Owner desires to obtain authorization to develop the Property in
.accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Owner has not made a final decision
on whether to actually develop the Property with the Project, and requires completed
land use Entitlements as a prerequisite for making that decision.
· E. Owner has applied for and City has approved this Agreement in order to
create a beneficial Project and a physical environment that will conform to and
complement the goals of the City, create a Development project sensitive to human
needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As
part of the process of granting this entitlement, the City has required the preparation of
an initial study of environmental impacts and has issued a Mitigated Negative
Declaration as regards any potentially significant effects arising from the project and
has otherwise carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970, as amended.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 2
F. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public
hearing, the City Planning Commission approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement.
G. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public
hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council approved the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
H. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public
hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are
consistent with the City's General Plan. On , following a duly
noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No.
approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement.
I. On the City Council adopted the ordinance, a copy of which
is on file in the office of the City Clerk, and adopted findings and conditions pertaining
thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project.
J. The City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential
impacts of the project as well as the various potential benefits to the City by the
Development of the Project and concluded that the Development of the Project, as
provided herein, is in the best interests of the City.
K. In consideration of the substantial economic development benefits that
would accrue if the Project moves forward, and the strengthening of the planning
process and reduction of costs of Development which may adversely affect achieving
the goals of the City and the Project, by this Agreement the City intends to give the
Owner assurances that Owner can proceed with the Development of the Project for the
Term of this Agreement pursuant to its terms and in accordance with the City's General
Plan, the Tentative Parcel Map, and the ordinances, rules, regulations and policies
existing as of the Agreement Date, except as may otherwise be agreed to by the City
and Owner during the fudher planning of the Project.
L. in reliance on the City's covenants in this Agreement concerning
Development of the Property, Owner has incurred substantial costs in planning, design,
environmental review and site preparation, and may incur additional substantial costs
for such purposes as well as for construction and installation of major infrastructure and
facilities in order to complete the Project.
M. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation,
the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement implements the
goals and policies of City's General Plan, and imposes appropriate standards and
requirements with respect to land Development and usage in order to maintain the
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 3
overall quality of life and environment within the City; (ii) this Agreement is in the best
interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of City
and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with City's General Plan
and constitutes a present exercise of City's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is
being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section
65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development
Agreement Legislation, as it applies to City, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the
California Constitution, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, the mutual
covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this
Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:
1. DEFINITIONS.
The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this
Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth
below.
1.1. "Agreement Date" means the date of first introduction and reading of the
Ordinance approving this Agreement; provided, however, that the Agreement will be in
legal force and effect as of the first date at which the ordinance authorizing the
Agreement is in force and effect pursuant to the provisions of California law.
1.2. "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. approving
this Agreement.
1.3. "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality Act (Public
Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.) and the related California Code of
Regulations sections (the "CEQA Guidelines"), as amended from time to time.
1,4. "City" means the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation and
general law City, including its officials, council members, employees, consultants,
contractors, agencies and departments.
1.5. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of City.
1.6. "City Laws" means all codified and uncodified enactments of City and all
laws, regulations and standards of any governmental body having jurisdiction within
City.
1.7. "Days" means calendar days, not business days.
1.8. "Design Guidelines" means the document described in Section 2.3.3.
1.9. "Development" shall have the same definition as in Government Code
Section 65927, as that statute exists on Agreement Date.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 4
1.10. "Development Agreement Legislation" means Government Code Sections
65864 through 65869.5 as they exist on the Agreement Date.
t.11. "Development Code" means Title 17 of City's Municipal Code in effect on
the Agreement Date.
1.12. "Development Impact Fee" means fees imposed on Development by City
to mitigate the impacts of Development.
1.13. "Development Moratorium" means any action of City, including actions or
inactions required pursuant to a voter sponsored initiative, which prohibits or delays the
Development of the Project or any portion thereof.
1.14. "Development Plan" Or "Plan" means a plan for the Development of a
particular phase of the Project as described in detail in Section 2.14 of this Agreement.
1.15. "Development Processing Fee" means a fee routinely imposed by City to
pay the administrative costs of reviewing an application for an Entitlement for a
proposed Development.
1.16. "District" means a public improvement district, assessment district,
community facilities district, and any similar mechanism to impose, levy, collect, or
allocate special assessments, improvement district fees, reimbursement district fees,
general or special taxes, or other similar fees or charges.
1.17. "Encumbrance" means a mortgage, deed of trust or any other device by
which the Owner's interest in the Property secures a loan or indebtedness. To
"Encumber" means to create an Encumbrance.
1.18. "Entitlements" means all grants of authorization to develop real property
issued by City and the statutes, ordinances, plans, decisions, resolutions, permits,
rules, regulations, and official policies that must be complied with and/or issued as a
condition to and in accordance with authorization for Development of real property.
Examples of "Entitlements" include the general plan, zoning designations and
regulations, subdivision maps, use permits, special use permits, conditional use
.permits, temporary use permits, Municipal Code and zoning ordinance provisions, site
:plans, Development Plans, design reviews, variances, building permits, certificates of
occupancy, and amendments to any of the above. The term "Entitlements" is not
dependent on the nature (such as legislative, quasi-judicial, ministerial or
administrative) of the matter in question.
1.19. "Estoppel Certificate" means a writing, signed by the Pan',/issuing it,
certifying that: (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect.and is a binding obligation of
~he Parties; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in
writing or, if amended or modified, describing the amendments; and (iii) no default in the
performance of the requesting Party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a
default does exist, the nature and amount of any default.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 5
1.20. "Existing Facilities" means Owner's property and facilities at 26531 Ynez
Road (west of Ynez Road across from the Property).
1.21. "Fiscal Year" means the period from July 1 of one year to June 30,
inclusive, of the following year.
1.22. "Floor Area Ratio" or "FAR" means the Gross Floor Area of all buildings on
a lot divided by the gross lot area (Development Code Section 17.34.010).
1.23. "Future Development Approvals" means Entitlements to carry out
Development of the Project that are granted by City and accepted by Owner, following
the Agreement Date, and that may include'City's approval of a Development Plan, lot
line adjustment, final subdivision map, grading permit, encroachment permit, building
permit and occupancy permit.
1.24. "General Plan" means the General Plan of the City of Temecula in effect
on the Agreement Date.
1.25. "Gross Floor Area" means the total horizontal area of a building, in square
feet, including the exterior walls of all floors (Development Code Section 17.34.010).
1.26. "Indemnified Persons" means City and City's agents, officers, attorneys,
and employees.
1.27. "Law" means.any official legislative enactment of a governmental agency,
public body, or court that binds the Parties. Examples of a Law are case law,
constitutional provisions, statutes, ordinances, initiatives, resolutions, policies, orders,
rules and regulations. A matter is a Law regardless of whether it was imposed by a
legislative body (such as the City Council or State Legislature), an administrative
agency (such as the California Public Utilities Commission or City's Planning
Department), the electorate (as by initiative or referendum), or any other official body,
and regardless of whether it is federal, state or local.
1.28. "Lender" means the mortgagee of a mortgage, the beneficiary of a deed
of trust, or the holder of any other secudty interest in the Property or any portion
thereof, and its successors and assigns, including the purchaser at a judicial or non-
judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of
foreclosure.
1.29. "Litigation" means all forms of judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, such
as complaints (for damages, declaratory relief, or otherwise), arbitrations, judicial
references, petitions (for traditional mandate, administrative mandate, or otherwise),
and judicial appeals, no matter how denominated.
1.30. "Mitigated Negative Declaration" means the environmental document
under CEQA issued by the City on April 1, 2002 and adopted in connection with this
Agreement.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 6
1.31. "Model Codes" means the uniform codes governing construction and
those adopted by the State of California and binding on City, as may be lawfully
amended by City. Examples of Model Codes include the Uniform Building Code,
National Electrical Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform
Mechanical Code and the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.
1.32. "Off-Site Public Improvements" means physical infrastructure
improvements or facilities not located on the Property, for dedication to, ownership, use
or benefit of the public or a public entity or utility.
1.33. "On-Site Public Improvements" means physical infrastructure
improvements or facilities located on the Property, for dedication to, ownership, use or
benefit of the public or a public entity or utility.
1.34. "Owner" is Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., a California
corporation and a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation, and includes any assignee
authorized under this Agreement.
1.35. "Party" means City or Owner. "Parties" means City plus Owner.
1.36. "Phase I" means the Development of the Property under a Development
Plan that includes construction of at least one of the five (5) office buildings allowed
under this Agreement. The remainder of the Project may be built in one or more
additional phases.
1.37. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted
planning commission of City.
1.38. "Processing Moratoria" means any significant delay in the City's
consideration of Owner's requested Entitlements to advance Development where such
delay is caused by other than: (i) the temporary unavailability of staff or staff time
required to consider requested Entitlements, or (ii) the failure of Owner to respond to
City's request for information, or similar causes. Processing moratoria shall include
moratoria imposed by a voter sponsored initiative measure.
1.39. "Project" means the Development of the Property as described in Section
2 of this Agreement.
1.40. "Property" means the real property described in Exhibits "A" and "A-1 ."
The real pmperbj described in Exhibit "A' consists of approximately seven (7) acres,
and is owned in fee by Owner. The real property described in Exhibit "A-I" consists of
approximately twenty (20) acres held and controlled by Owner under a synthetic lease.
1.41. "Rules, Regulations and Policies Affecting Development" or "Rules,
Regulations and Policies" shall mean City's General Plan and all applicable elements
thereof, City's Zoning Ordinance, the Tentative Parcel Map, a final subdivision map
(once adopted) based upon the Tentative Parcel Map, each Future Development
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 7
Approval, and the City's ordinances, policies, rules, regulations and written policies
existing as of the Agreement Date, all as more specifically defined in Exhibit "B."
1.42. "Tentative Parcel Map" means that certain Tentative Pamel Map No.
30107, approved by City on November 8, 2001, and applicable to the property
described in Exhibit "A-1 ." If Owner files an application for a substitute tentative parcel
map application under Section 2.16, then thereafter the term "Tentative Pamel Map"
shall mean such substitute map except where the context requires otherwise.
1.43. 'q-erm" means the period of time which extends from the Agreement Date
through and including June 30th of the fifteenth (15th) full City of Temecula Fiscal Year
from the date a certificate of occupancy is issued for the first building to be built on the
Property under this Agreement, unless extended by force majeure as described in
Section 14.3. In no event shall Owner's construction on or use of any portion of the
Property for parking purposes be considered to commence the referenced fifteen (15)
year period.
2. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT.
2.1. Ownership Interests. Owner represents that it owns approximately seven
(7) acres of the Property in fee. Owner further represents that it holds approximately
twenty (20) acres of the Property pursuant to a lease agreement with Atlantic Financial
Group, Ltd., and that pursuant to the lease agreement, Owner holds all such beneficial
rights of ownership as are necessary for Owner to enter into and meet its obligations
under this Agreement. The Parties agree that Owner's interests in the Property
constitute legal or equitable interests within the meaning of Government Code Section
65865.
2.2. Vested Rights. While this Agreement is in effect, Owner shall have the
vested right to implement the Development of the Property and the Project in the
manner described herein, and as further authorized by: (i) the Rules, Regulations and
Policies affecting Development of the Project; (ii) the Entitlements; and (iii) Future
Development Approvals. City shall have the rights granted to it as set forth in this
Agreement, including the approval of Development Plans. Except as otherwise
specified in this Agreement, the Rules, Regulations and Policies affecting Development
and the Project shall control Development, Future Development Approvals, On-Site
Public Improvements and Off-Site Public Improvements relating to the Property.
2.3. Proiect. "Project" means the Development of the Property with up to
481,260 square feet of occupiable space contained in up to five buildings, plus up to
two parking structures, along with necessary public and private infrastructure, all as
further described in this Section 2.
2.3.1. Floor Area Ratio. The Project as a whole shall not exceed a Floor
Area Ratio of 0.40, exclusive of parking structures. Individual legal parcels within the
Property shall not be required to meet a specific FAR standard, provided the entire
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 8
Project meets the FAR of 0.40, exclusive of parking structures. In approving this
Agreement, City has made the findings set forth in Section 17.08.050(A) of the
Development Code.
2.3.2. Location and Size of Improvements. The location of
improvements, and the size and number of buildings (up to five), shall be in Owner's
discretion, subject to the standards contained in this Section 2.3.2. If Owner develops
the maximum authorized amount of square footage, such square footage shall be
contained in a minimum of three buildings. Each of the two parking garages, if
constructed, shall contain between 125,000 and 200,000 square feet, but in no event
less than the square footage required to meet or exceed the City's parking standard or,
at Owner's option, to provide up to five spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied space
(estimated at 500 to 750 spaces per garage) when combined with surface parking on
the Property. Except as otherwise expressly provided here, the total square footage
and number of stories in each building and parking garage shall be in Owner's
discretion. In its discretion, Owner may provide more parking than five spaces per
1,000 square feet of occupied space, by way of combined surface parking and the
parking structures permitted by this Agreement. The location of p~rking within the
Property for any specific building shall be at Owner's discretion, without regard to parcel
lines, provided that the building has legal access to the required parking.
2.3.3. Design Guidelines; Architectural and Landscape Palette.
Development of the Project, including colors, materials and landscaping, shall be
consistent with the Design Guidelines attached as Exhibit "C."
2.3.4. Height Limitation. No structure on the Property shall exceed a
maximum height of 80 feet from finished grade of building pad. Additionally, no
structure along Solana Way and Margarita Road shall exceed the height of the Setback
Planes as defined and illustrated in Exhibits D-l, D-2 and D-3.
2.3.4.1. Rooftop Equipment. The height limitations contained in
Section 2.3.4 shall be exclusive of rooftoP mechanical enclosures and
telecommunications equipment, and related screening. Nothing in this
Agreement shall authorize any third party to construct rooftop
telecommunications equipment absent compliance with the City's normal
approval process.
2.3.4.2. Underground Structure. The height of an underground
structure shall not be counted toward the height of any above-ground portion of
that structure for purposes of determining compliance with a height limitation.
2.4. Allowed Uses. Allowed uses of the Property shall include Business Park
as defined in the Development Code (including office, research and manufacturing,
compounding of pharmaceuticals, and further including all uses carried out by Owner as
of the Agreement Date at the Existing Facilities; employee day care facility; employee
commissary or cafeteria; educational/training facility; employee gym; and all other
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 9
permitted uses in the Business Park zoning district. Owner shall not be required to
obtain a conditional use permit for any use described in this Section 2.4.
2.4.1. Consistent Development Standards. The approximate seven acre
parcel described in Exhibit "A" is zoned Light Industrial. The Development standards
for this portion of the Property shall be the same as set forth in this Agreement for the
remainder of the Property, which is zoned Business Park.
2.4.2. Use for Parkinq. A portion of the Property is presently used for
parking by employees who work at Owner's Existing Facilities. The Parties agree that
use of any portion of the Property for parking by Owner's employees who work at the
Existing Facilities, and Owner's invitees thereto, is allowed and consistent with this
Agreement.
2.5. Perimeter Fencing and Landscaping. Owner shall be allowed to fence the
entire Property, and provide controlled access with guard gates at each point of entry
consistent with the Agreement's provisions for design and landscaping standards and
generally accepted engineering principles with regard to vehicle stacking, and (except
as otherwise agreed between the City and Owner) consistent with City policies.
Fencing and controlled access substantially similar to that utilized at the Existing
Facilities shall be deemed allowed under this Agreement. A Development Plan for
Phase I shall include the provision of perimeter landscaping as described in the Design
Guidelines, and fencing (if proposed by Owner) for the entire Project.
2.6. Access. Access to the Property shall be from Ynez (via Motor Car
Parkway), Margarita Road, Street "A" (as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map) and
Solana Way. Owner intends its primary access to be from Ynez; however, access shall
be authorized from Margarita Road, Street "A" and Solana Way as well. The points of
access to Margarita Road, Street "A" and Solana Way shall be as described in Exhibit
"E," and as otherwise approved by the City Engineer upon Owner's request.
2.7. Modifications. The Planning Director has the authority to approve minor
modifications to the Development standards and Design Guidelines required for the
'Project under this Agreement. The Planning Director may determine that a particular
modification requires an operating memorandum as described in Section 6.2, or an
amendment to this Agreement.
2.8. Off-Site Public Improvements. As a condition to receiving a certificate of
occupancy for Phase I, Owner shall construct the City-required Off-Site Public
Improvements specifically described in Exhibit "F." Other than by payment of existing
Development Impact Fees as specifically identified in and required by this Agreement,
Owner shall not be required to contribute financially toward the cost of, or construct or
cause to be constructed any City-required Off-Site Public Improvements that are not
specifically listed in Exhibit "F."
2.9. On-Site Public Improvements. As a condition to receiving a certificate of
occupancy for Phase I, Owner shall construct the City-required On-Site Public
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 10
Improvements specifically described in Exhibit "G." Owner shall not be required to
contribute financially toward the cost of, or construct or cause to be constructed any
City-required On-Site Public Improvements that are not specifically listed in Exhibit "G."
2.10. Dedication or Reservation Requirements. There shall be no dedication or
reservation of land for public purposes, except as provided in this Section 2.10.
2.10.1. Public Utility Easements. Owner shall convey to City or
other appropriate public agencies such easements and rights-of-way reasonably
necessary and customarily required to accommodate any On-Site Public Improvements
described in Section 2.9 which Owner dedicates or conveys to a public agency for
public services (such as storm drains and public utility lines).
2.10.2. Motor Car Parkway. Potential dedication of Motor Car
Parkway to the City shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.11, below.
2.10.3. Margarita Road. Dedication or City acquisition of additional
right of way along Margarita Road shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.12,
below.
2.11. Motor Car Parkway. Motor Car Parkway is a private street, under the
control of a private owners', association of which Owner is a member. Upon Owner's
request, City shall accept an offer of dedication for Motor Car Parkway and thereafter
own and maintain it as a public street. As a condition precedent to City's obligation to
accept the offer of dedication, Owner shall cause Motor Car Parkway to be upgraded to
public street standards as described in Exhibit "H." Owner shall be responsible for
obtaining any consents or authorizations required for the validity of the offer of
dedication. Upon Owner's request and with the concurrence of adjacent property
owners, City shall rename Motor Car Parkway to "Guidant Parkway" or some other
mutually agreeable name including the word "Guidant."
2.12. Margarita Road. Owner is making certain improvements to Margarita
Road as part of the Off-Site Public Improvements. City has indicated its interest in
widening Margarita Road in the future, at City expense, to include a third lane
southbound along the Property. City estimates that the widening would necessitate
City's acquisition of an additional 12 feet of right of way beyond the existing right of way
(the "Additional Right of Way Area").
2.12.1. Restriction on Improvements. In order to accommodate
City's efforts, Owner agrees that any Development Plan it submits shall provide
generally for landscaping of the Additional Right of Way Area. Owner shall not
construct any buildings or parking facilities within such area.
2.12.2. Acquisition. Upon City's request, Owner shall convey the
Additional Right of Way Area to City. As a condition precedent to Owner's obligation to
make the conveyance, City shall compensate Owner for the then-fair market value of
the land. The value of the land shall be determined without regard to the restriction on
improvements or landscaping requirements contained in Section 2.12.1. if the Parties
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 11
are unable to agree upon the value, then they shall jointly identify three MAI appraisers.
The Parties shall jointly select one of the three MAI appraisers, who shall conduct an
appraisal of the Additional Right of Way Area. The expense for the third appraiser shall
be divided equally between City and Owner, and that appraiser's determination of value
shall be binding upon the Parties.
2.12.3. Compliance with Landscaping Standards. The Parties
recognize that City's acquisition of the Additional Right of Way Area and construction of
roadway therein will reduce the overall amount of landscaping on the Property. Owner
shall not be required to replace such landscaping elsewhere on the Property in order to
meet City standards for landscape coverage. The Additional Right of Way Area shall
be counted as constituting "minimum required landscaped open space" as set forth in
City's Development Code Section 17.08.040, regardless of ultimate acquisition and use
by City.
2.12.4. Compliance with Hei.qht and Other Requirements. City's
acquisition of the Additional Right of Way Area shall not change the location of the
Setback Planes as described in Section 2.3.4, nor shall such acquisition affect Project
compliance with any other requirement defined or measured by reference to the size of
the Property. For example, City's acquisition of the Additional Right of Way Area shall
not alter setback requirements in the Development Code, allowed buildable square
footage or allowed parking spaces on the Property.
2.13. Pedestrian Brid.qe. Owner owns and operates Existing Facilities on the
west side of Ynez Road. Owner anticipates that there will be considerable pedestrian
traffic between those facilities and the Property. In order to accommodate the
pedestrian traffic, and to minimize the interruption of vehicular traffic on Ynez Road due
to the existing surface pedestrian crossing, the Parties wish to provide for Owner's
· construction of a pedestrian bridge linking the Property with Owner's Existing Facilities.
2.13.1. Owner's Discretion. Owner may construct the pedestrian
bridge at any time, regardless of whether Owner proceeds with the Project. Owner is
not required to construct the pedestrian bridge as a result of having entered into this
Agreement; provided, however, that if Owner proceeds with the Project and constructs
Phase I, Owner shall complete the pedestrian bridge so that it is available for use by
Owner's employees by the conclusion of the Term.
2.13.2. Location and Design; City Review. The location and design
of the pedestrian bridge shall be in Owner's discretion, subject to review by City through
the Development Plan process described in Section 2.14. Owner may submit an
application for Development Plan approval for the pedestrian bridge as a stand-alone
project, or as part of the Development Plan for Phase 1. The use of the term
'~pedestrian bridge" in this Section 2.13 shall not preclude Owner from designing the
structure for use by small, motorized vehicles, including electric carts.
2.13.3. Grant of Property Interest; Permits. At Owner's request, the
City shall convey a sufficient property interest (e.g., easement) to Owner at no cost, and
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 12
conduct any necessary proceedings to vacate the airspace in which the bridge is to be
located, so that Owner's ownership of the bridge can be the subject of title insurance
reasonably acceptable to Owner. The property interest shall acknowledge and provide
that Owner shall have the exclusive use of the bridge. City shall also issue any permits
required for the pedestrian bridge (e.g., encroachment permit). As a condition to
issuance of such permits, and based upon its review of the specific design and the
proximity of bridge structures to the public right of way, City may require Owner to
indemnify City as to Owner's construction and operation of the bridge. Any such
indemnification language may be implemented in the form of an operating
memorandum as described in Section 6.2, and shall be in a form mutually agreeable to
the Parties.
2.13.4. Costs, Ownership and Maintenance. If Owner constructs
the bridge, Owner shall pay all costs for design, construction (including relocation of
utilities) and maintenance, and for removal upon cessation of use. Owner shall own the
bridge, and City shall have no ownership interest therein.
2.14. Development Plans. At such time as Owner is ready to obtain approval
for specific structures, City shall process an application from Owner for Development
Plan approval.
2.14.1. Pmcessin.q of Application. City shall process the application
so that a final decision is made within three months from the date the application is
deemed complete and assuming timely responses from Owner; provided, however, that
if a timely appeal from the decision is filed, the three month period shall be expanded
by an additional two months, for a total of five months. The Plan shall be subject to a
public hearing before City's Planning Director, with the Planning Director's decision
subject to appeal to the Planning Commission, and from there to the City Council. The
sole basis for appeal by a third party shall be whether the Development proposed is
within the scope of Development authorized by, and is consistent with, this Agreement,
including the Design Guidelines. Any such appeal shall specifically set forth in writing
the section of this Agreement with which the Development is alleged to be inconsistent.
2.14.2. Approval of Application. City shall be obligated to approve
Owner's proposed Plan as a ministerial act, provided the Development proposed is
within the scope of Development authorized by, and is consistent with, this Agreement,
including the Design Guidelines. The proposed Development shall be considered
within the scope of Development if it meets the requirements of Sections 2.3 through
2.13, inclusive. All Development Plans, taken together, shall provide for the Project to
meet the Development standards contained in Table 17.08.040A of Section 17.08.040
of the Development Code for the Property as a whole; accordingly, no single legal
pamel within the Property shall be required to independently meet Development
standards for minimum gross area, Floor Area Ratio, maximum pement of lot coverage,
or minimum required landscaped open space.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 13
2.14.3. Phasing. Owner may submit a series of Development Plans
for approval, addressing different phases of the project. Each Development Plan shall
be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of final approval by City, with such
time extended for any force majeure event as described in Section 14.3. A valid
Development Plan shall continue in effect for the full five (5) year period, regardless of
whether the Term of the Agreement expires during such period.
2.14.4. Environmental Review. City has prepared an initial study
and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Agreement and the Project. In
conducting this environmental review, City has considered the maximum buildout of the
Project that is possible under this Agreement and any potential environmental effects
therefrom. Accordingly, no further environmental review will be required for individual
Development Plans provided that the Development proposed by such Plans is within
the scope of Development as described in section 2.14.2.
2.14.5. Development Plan Modifications. The Planning Director is
authorized to approve minor modifications to a previously approved Development Plan
applicable to the Project. The Planning Director, on the advice of the City Attorney,
shall have the discretion to determine whether a particular modification is minor and
may be processed administratively, or whether the modification requires an amendment
to the Development Plan and should thus be the subject of a noticed public hearing
before the Director.
2.15. Term of Map. City and Owner agree that multiple final maps may be filed
as to Tentative Parcel Map No. 30107, as provided in Government Code Section
66456.1. Specifically, the Parties agree that Owner may file a final map as to Parcels 4
and 5 of the tentative map, those tots being within Owner's Property and under
separate ownership from Parcels 1, 2 and 3. In accordance with Government Code
Section 66452.6(a)(1), the term of Tentative Parcel Map No. 30107 as to the Property
shall be for a term equal to the Term of this Agreement. The Parties understand and
agree that this Agreement does not apply to Parcels 1, 2 and 3.
2.16. Substitute Tentative Parcel Map. If for any reason Tentative Parcel Map
No. 30107 is withdrawn, or if Owner determines to obtain a new map applicable to the
property described in Exhibit "A-1 ," then Owner may apply for, and City shall approve, a
substitute tentative parcel map dividing such property into two lots substantially as
described in Tentative Parcel Map No. 30107. In approving such map, City may
impose substantially the same conditions of approval as were included in the original
tentative map.
2.17. Lot Line Adjustment. Upon Owner's request, City shall process and
approve a lot line adjustment to reconflgure the existing two lots on the 7-acre parcel
and (assuming a final map is filed as to the Tentative Parcel Map) the two lots on the
20-acre parcel. The reconfiguration shall be as specified by Owner, consistent with
applicable state law. The reconfiguration shall also be consistent with City
Development standards as set forth in Table 17.08.040A of Section 17.08.040 of the
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 14
Development Code, recognizing, however, that because the entire Project meets the
Development standards for minimum gross area, Floor Area Ratio, maximum pement of
lot coverage, and minimum required landscaped open space, individual parcels are not
required to meet such standards independently.
3. DEVELOPMENT FEES.
3.1. Development Processing Fees. Development Processing Fees charged
by City for filing and processing an application for an Entitlement shall be those in effect
on the Agreement Date and in such amounts as are in effect at the time of submittal of
an application for an Entitlement; provided, however, that at Owner's option, City shall
charge its actual costs for plan check and inspection for on-site grading and public
improvements. City shall charge its actual costs for other Development Processing
Fees as mutually agreed between Owner and City. The Development Processing Fees
which may be charged under this Agreement are listed in Exhibit "1,' however, nothing
in this Agreement restricts City's authority to increase the amount of those fees in the
future, in the manner allowed by law.
3.2. Expedited Review. City shall provide expedited review of all approvals
sought by Owner. City shall not impose a charge for such expedited review. For each
Development Plan submitted by Owner, City shall designate a member of its senior
executive staff as the project manager for City processing purposes.
3.3. Development Impact. Fees. Development Impact Fees imposed by City in
connection with an Entitlement for the Project shall be charged at the Industrial Rate
that existed on February 12, 2002. Development Impact Fees shall be limited to those
in existence on February 12, 2002 and charged at such fees' industrial rate (or
equivalent) that existed on that date. The total Development Impact Fee payable by
Owner in connection with the Project is listed by name and amount on Exhibit "J."
Owner shall not be required to pay any Development Impact Fee that is not expressly
set forth in Exhibit "J."
3.4. Landscaping Bond. Owner shall not be required to post a landscaping
maintenance bond, but shall post a corporate guarantee as to landscaping
maintenance obligations in a form reasonably satisfactory to City.
4. RULES AND REGULATIONS.
4.1. Applicable Rules and Laws. Except as otherwise provided in this
Agreement, the Rules, Regulations and Policies Affecting Development shall be those
that are in force and applicable to the Business Park zoning district on the Agreement
Date. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Laws governing
Development of the Property and the Project, including those governing permitted uses,
density and intensity of use of the Property, shall be those set forth in the General Plan,
and other Rules, Regulations and Policies Affecting Development, including those Laws
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 15
affecting design, improvement, construction standards, and other specifications
applicable to Development of the Property, all as applicable on the Agreement Date. In
considering Future Development Approvals, City shall act in a manner that complies
and is consistent with this Agreement, the Rules, Regulations and Policies Affecting
Development, the Laws, and the other provisions contained in this Agreement. The
Project as described in this Agreement and all Future Development Approvals shall be
deemed to be in compliance with the Development Code and all Rules, Regulations
and Policies Affecting Development, Laws and City Laws.
4.2. Applicability to Future Development Approvals. Owner shall be entitled to
apply for and receive Future Development Approvals at any time, free from
Development Moratoria or Processing Moratoria, provided that Owner's applications for
such approvals are made in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the
Rules Regulations and Policies, and such Future Development Approvals as the City
approves and Owner accepts in writing. City shall accept and timely process all
applications for Future Development Approvals in the normal and legal manner for
processing such matters and consistent with this Agreement, and the Rules,
Regulations and Policies. City shall not withhold any Entitlement, including a building
permit, final inspection or certificate of occupancy from Owner if Owner has satisfied all
conditions and requirements of this Agreement and any applicable Future Development
Approval. City shall consider and approve any other Entitlements not specifically
described in this Agreement that are reasonably necessary or a condition precedent to
accomplish the Project.
4.3. Model Codes. The City shall apply the versions of all applicable Model
Codes in effect at the time an application for Development Plan approval is deemed
complete, as to all improvements described in that Development Plan, and shall
continue to apply those same versions of Model Codes to that Development Plan for
the longest period legally allowed and without interruption. As to each Development
Plan, at Owner's request the appropriate City staff shall meet with Owner's
representatives to discuss the implementation of Model Codes and relevant timing
:.issues, in order to determine applicable Model Codes and achieve consistency of
application of such codes for that phase of the Project.
4.4. Future Enactments. During the Term of this Agreement, City shall not
enact any Law, ordinance, rule, regulation or policy applicable to the Property which
conflicts with this Agreement, except as specifically requested or approved by Owner in
writing. This prohibition shall include the imposition of limits on the density or intensity
· of use authorized for the Project and Property as provided by the General Plan.
4.5. Enforceability. Except to the extent it has been amended, canceled,
modified or suspended, and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, this
Agreement shall be enforceable by any Party notwithstanding any change in any City
Law.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 16
4.6. Representation. City represents that there are no City Laws in force as of
the Agreement Date that would prohibit the Development of the Project or use of all or
any portion of the Property in accordance with this Agreement.
4.7. Amendment to Rules. No amendment to the Rules, Regulations and
Policies Affecting Development or to Future Development Approvals shall apply to the
Property without Owner's written consent.
4.8. Future Mitigation Measures. City shall not impose on any Future
Development Approvals any land use alternatives or mitigation measures other than
those expressly described in this Agreement and the Tentative Parcel Map.
4.9. Districts. Except for Districts which are citywide and imposed .on all
properties in the City, City shall not include the Property in any District, including any
future special assessment, special tax, reimbursement, impact fee or similar District.
The Parties acknowledge that the Property is included in a pre-existing District, known
as Community Facilities District No. 88-12, pursuant to the "Agreement Regarding
Sales Tax Revenues as to Businesses Located Within the Boundaries of Community
Facilities District No. 88-12 (Ynez Corridor) of the County of Riverside, State of
California," dated June 14, 1991, as amended by the "First Amendment to Agreement
Between City of Temecula and Eli Lilly and Company, an Indiana Corporation,
Regarding Sales Tax Revenues of Community Facilities District No. 88-12 (Ynez
Corridor)," dated April 12, 1994 (collectively, the "CFD 88-12 Agreement"). A default by
the City in its obligations with respect to Owner under the CFD 88-12 Agreement, which
is not cured within the times permitted by such agreement, shall be a default by the City
under this Agreement.
4.10. Phasing. In Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d
465 (1984), the parties therein entered into an agreement through a consent judgment
concerning Development of certain property. The agreement did not specifically
provide for the timing of Development. A later-adopted initiative measure placed limits
on the number of building permits that could be issued each year. The California
Supreme Court held that the initiative prevailed over the agreement, since the parties
had failed to specifically address timing of Development. In order to avoid any potential
for a similar holding as to this Agreement, the Parties expressly acknowledge and agree
that Owner shall have the right (without obligation) to develop the Property in such
order and at such rate and at such times as Owner deems appropriate within the
exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to Owner's satisfaction of this
Agreement and the Future Development Approvals. Owner, Project and Development
of the Property shall be free of any other limitations or constraints on phasing or Project
build-out, or any other limitations or constraints on Development that are inconsistent
with this Agreement, whether by voter-sponsored initiative or action of the City.
4.11. Non-conformities. No use or structure that was consistent with this
Agreement when it was established or built shall be deemed to be non-conforming at
the time this Agreement terminates except to the extent the non-conformity arises from
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 17
a violation of a Model Code that constitutes an immediate and serious threat to health
or safety.
4.12. Abatement and Revocation After the Term of the Agreement Lapses. No
use or structure shall be subject to abatement as a nuisance, nor shall any Future
Development Approval for a use or structure be subject to revocation, if the use or
structure was consistent with this Agreement when established or built and if it remains
consistent with the Future Development Approval which authorized it, unless the City
finds that the use or structure has fallen into such a state of disrepair that it constitutes
an immediate threat to health or safety. In that event, the use or structure may be re-
established if it is re,established in a condition that does not constitute an immediate
threat to health or safety and in compliance with the Model Codes.
4.13. Other Agencies. City shall assist and cooperate with Owner, at no cost to
the City, in securing County, State or Federal Entitlements, if any are necessary to
develop the Property pursuant to this Agreement.
5. TERM.
5.1. Commencement. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the
Agreement Date. As provided in Section 1.1, the Agreement will be in legal force and
effect as of the first date on which the ordinance authorizing the Agreement is in force
and effect pursuant to the provisions of California law.
5.2. Duration. Unless sooner terminated hereunder, this Agreement shall
expire at the end of the fifteenth (15th) full Fiscal Year which follows after the earlier of
either (1) the date a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the first Project
building to be built on the Property, or (2) June 30, 2006. In no event shall Owner's
construction on or use of any portion of the Property for parking purposes be
considered to commence the referenced fifteen (15) year period.
5.3. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated upon the
occurrence of any of the following events:
5.3.1. Termination under A.qreement. if termination occurs pursuant to
any specific provision of this Agreement;
5.3.2. Completion of Project. Completion of the total build-out of the
Project to the maximum square footage and parking structures allowed by this
Agreement, or such lesser area as agreed upon by Owner and City in writing.
"Completion" under this Section 5.3.2 shall include City's issuance of all required
occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to
complete Development; or
5.3.3. Judgment. Entry after all appeals have been exhausted of a final
judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the City as a result of any Litigation
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 18
filed against City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of
this Agreement.
5.4. Effect of Termination. Termination of this Agreement shall not affect any
right or duty arising from Entitlements issued by City before termination, nor shall it
destroy any vested right arising from the completion of construction in reliance on an
Entitlement. Upon termination of this Agreement, then subsequent Development of the
Property shall be subject to City's then applicable Rules, Regulations and Policies.
5.5. Effect of A.qreement on Title. The Parties shall execute and record an
appropriate release upon termination of this Agreement.
6. AMENDMENTS; ADMINISTRATION OF AGREEMENT.
6.1. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by the mutual
agreement of the Parties. Any Party may propose an amendment to this Agreement,
and shall give notice of the requested amendment to each Party. In the event of
multiple Owners of different portions of the Property, notice shall be given to each such
Owner. The procedure for adopting an amendment shall be the same as the procedure
required under the Development Agreement Legislation for entering into this Agreement
in the first instance. No amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless it is in
writing and signed by the Parties; provided, however, that an amendment of the
Agreement as to a portion of the Property shall be binding if signed by the City and the
Owner of the portion to which the Amendment is applicable.
6.2. Operatin.q Memoranda. This Agreement requires a close degree of
cooperation between City and Owner. From time to time, the Parties may wish to clarify
or provide further detail of their performance obligations under this Agreement. During
the term of this Agreement, City and Owner may at any time agree that such
clarifications are necessary or appropriate, in which event they shall effect such
clarifications through operating memoranda approved by City and Owner. Each
executed operating memorandum shall be attached to this Agreement. An operating
memorandum shall not constitute an amendment to this Agreement requiring public
notice or hearing. The City Attorney shall be authorized to make the determination
whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section, or
whether the requested clarification is of such a character to constitute an amendment
pursuant to Section 6.1. The City Manager may execute an operating memorandum
without City Council action.
6.3. Administration of Aqreement. Any decision by City staff concerning the
interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in
accordance herewith may be appealed by Owner to the Planning Commission for
recommendation and thereafter forwarded to the City Council for final action, provided
that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) Days after Owner
receives written notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall conduct a noticed
public hearing on the appeal, and shall render its decision to affirm, reverse or modify
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 19
the staff decision within thirty (30) Days after the appeal was filed. The City Council
shall hear the matter de novo.
7. AMENDMENT TO AUTHORIZING STATUTE OR CHANGE IN LAW.
7.1. Development Agreement Legislation. This Agreement has been entered
into in reliance on the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect on
the Agreement Date. Subsequent amendments to the Development Agreement
Legislation shall not be applicable to this Agreement, to the extent of any conflict,
unless: (i) the amendments'are necessary for the Agreement to be enforceable; or (ii)
this Agreement is amended by mutual consent of the Parties to incorporate the
provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation as amended.
7.2. Change in State or Federal Law. If any state or federal Law enacted after
the Agreement Date prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of this
Agreement:
7.2.1. Notice. A Party who believes that the change in Law prevents or
precludes compliance shall provide each other Party written notice of the change in
state or federal Law. The notice shall include a copy of the change in question and a
statement describing how the change conflicts with this Agreement. The Parties shall
then promptly meet and confer in a good faith and reasonable attempt to agree how to
modify or suspend this Agreement only as necessary to comply with such change in
state or federal Law. If City is the Party sending the notice, it shall send a copy of the
.notice to any'Lender whose address is known to City.
7.2.2. Hearing and Determination. Within forty-five (45) Days of a Party's
notice under Section 7.2.1, the City Council shall hold a public hearing on the matter.
This hearing shall occur regardless of whether the Parties reached agreement on the
effect of the change in state or federal Law. The City shall give public notice of the
hearing at least ten (10) Days before it is held. At the hearing, the City Council shall
determine the exact modification or suspension which is reasonably necessary to
comply with the change in state or federal Law, while giving the maximum effect
possible to the Parties' intent and objectives in entering into this Agreement. Owner
shall have the right to offer oral and written testimony at the hearing regarding any
proposed action by City. The City Council's determination shall be subject to judicial
review as provided in Section 12.
8. TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNMENTS.
8.1. Transfers. Owner shall have the right, at any time and on such number of
occasions as it chooses, to sell or transfer any or all of its interest in the Property to any
Person or entity. Owner shall notify City of a transfer within twenty (20) Days after the
event. No transfer shall convey any rights or obligations under this Agreement unless
accompanied by an assignment as described in Section 8.2.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 20
8.2. Assignment. Owner's assignment of the Agreement, as to all or any
portion of the Property, shall be subject to the following restrictions:
8.2.1. Assignment to a Guidant Assignee. Notwithstanding the provisions
of Section 8.2.2, Owner may assign any or all of its rights and obligations under this
Agreement at any time to a Guidant Assignee. As used in this Section 8.2, "Guidant
Assignee" means an entity in which a majority interest is owned by Advanced
Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Guidant Corporation or any of their wholly-owned
subsidiaries, and which engages in the medical technology business. The City's
consent shall not be required for an assignment to a Guidant Assignee.
8.2.2. Assignment Before Completion of Phase 1. For purposes of this
Section 8.2.2 and Section 8.2.3, "Phase 1" means the construction of at least 135,000
square feet of Gross Floor Area and the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any
portion thereof. Before the completion of Phase I, Owner may assign the Agreement as
provided in Section 8.2.2.1 or Section 8.2.2.2.
8.2.2.1. Owner may assign any or all of its rights and obligations
under this Agreement, along with all the vested rights described in Section 2, but
only with the City's prior consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld,
provided that City determines that the assignee is similarly qualified in terms of its
development experience, financial capabilities and ability to generate
employment.
a. ' The City Council shall be the decision-making body to
determine whether to consent to the proposed assignment. The
City Council may, in its discretion, hold a noticed public hearing
before making the decision.
b. City shall have forty-five (45) Days to approve or deny
a proposed assignee, from the date of Owner's request for
consent. Owner and City may extend that period by mutual
agreement.
8.2.2.2. Owner may assign the Agreement, without City's prior
consent, provided that of all the vested rights contained in Section 2, only the
following provisions may be included in the assignment:
a. Allowed square footage, as described in Section 2.3;
b. Allowed Floor Area Ratio, as described in Section
2.3.1;
c. The location and size of improvements, as described in
Section 2.3.2;
d. Height limitation and required Setback Planes, as
described in Section 2.3.4;
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 21
e. Allowed uses and consistent development standards,
as described in Sections 2.4 and 2.4.1;
f. Approved access points, as described in Section 2.6;
and
g. Provisions as to widening of Margarita Road, as
described in Section 2.12.
Any assignee under this Section 8.2.2.2 shall comply with the Project Design
Guidelines contained in Exhibit "C,' and any Development Plan shall be
subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission in accordance
with the City's usual procedures. The assignee shall pay all then-current
Development Impact Fees and Development Processing Fees. The term of
the Agreement for such assignee shall be ten (10) years from the earlier of
the date a certificate of occupancy is issued for the first building to be built on
the Property, or June 30, 2006, as described in Section 5.
8.2.3. Assignment After Completion of Phase 1. After completion of
Phase I, Owner may assign any or all of its rights and obligations under this Agreement,
along with all the vested rights described in Section 2, without the City's prior consent.
8.2.4. Notice and Acknowled.qement.
8.1.1.2. Owner shall give City written notice of an assignment
under Sections 8.2.1, 8.2.2.2 or 8.2.3 within twenty (20) Days thereof.
8.1.1.3. As a condition precedent to the effectiveness of any
assignment, the assignee shall provide City with written acknowledgement that it
has received and understood the Agreement, and agrees to be bound by it. The
assignee shall also provide City with a copy of the agreement effecting the
assignment.
8.2.5. Pedestrian Bdd.qe. An assignee other than a Guidant Assignee
shall not be required to construct the pedestrian bridge as described in Section 2.13.
9. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES.
9.1. City's Representations and Warranties. City represents and warrants to
Owner as of the Agreement Date as follows:
9.1.1. City is a municipal corporation, which has been duly formed and
organized and is validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of
California.
9.1.2. City has the power, right and authority to enter into this Agreement
and to undertake the actions contemplated hereby.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 22
9.1.3. All requisite action has been taken by City in connection with
entering into this Agreement.
9.1.4. The individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of City have the
legal power, right and actual authority to bind City to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
9.1.5. Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, nor the
incurrence of the obligations herein set forth, nor compliance with the terms of this
Agreement will conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms, conditions or
provisions of, or constitute a default under, any note or other evidence of indebtedness
or any contract, indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan, agreement, lease or other
agreement or instrument to which City is a party or by which any of City's properties
may be bound.
9.1.6. This Agreement is, and all documents required hereby to be
executed by City, will be valid, legally binding obligations of and enforceable against
City in accordance with their terms.
9.1.7. City has all governmental licenses, authorizations, consents and
approvals to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement.
9.1.8. No City official has a financial interest in this Agreement within the
meaning of Government Code Section 1090, nor does any City official who makes or
participates in the making of a governmental decision on this Agreement have a conflict
of interest under the Political Reform Act (Government Code Sections 73000, et seq.).
No City official, consultant or advisor is being compensated with a fee that is contingent
on or defined by the payment of any sums to City by Owner.
9.1.9. City shall promptly give Owner notice upon the occurrence of any
event, or receipt of any notice, which might give rise to a breach by City of any of its
representations, covenants or warranties set forth in this Section 9.1.
9.2. Owner's Representations and Warranties Owner represents and
warrants to City as of the Agreement Date as follows:
9.2.1. Owner is a corporation that has been duly formed and organized
and is validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California.
9.2.2. Owner has the corporate power, right and authority to enter into
this Agreement and to undertake the actions contemplated hereby.
9.2.3. All requisite action has been taken by Owner in connection with
entering into this Agreement.
9.2.4. The individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of Owner have
the legal power, right and actual authority to bind Owner to the terms and conditions of
this Agreement.
9.2.5. Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, nor the
incurrence of the obligations herein set forth, nor compliance with the terms of this
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 23
Agreement will conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms, conditions or
provisions of, or constitute a default under, Owner's articles of incorporation, any bond,
note or other evidence of indebtedness or any contract, indenture, mortgage, deed of
trust, loan, agreement, lease or other agreement or instrument to which Owner is a
party or by which any of Owner's properties may be bound.
9.2.6. This Agreement is, and all documents required hereby to be
executed by Owner, will be valid, legally binding obligations of and enforceable against
Owner in accordance with their terms.
9.2.7. Owner has all governmental licenses, authorizations, consents and
approvals to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement.
9.2.8. Owner shall promptly give City notice upon the occurrence of any
event, or receipt of any notice, which might give rise to a breach by Owner of any of its
representations, covenants or warranties set forth in this Section 9.2.
10. COMPLIANCE REVIEW.
10.1. Annual Review. City and Owner shall review this Agreement at least once
every 12-month period from the Agreement Date. City shall notify Owner in writing of
the date for review at least thirty (30) Days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be
· conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1 and on the following
terms:
10.1.1. Good-Faith Compliance. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 65865.1, Owner shall have the duty to demonstrate its good faith compliance
with the terms of this Agreement at each periodic review. Owner may satisfy this duty
by presenting to City: (i) a written report identifying Owner's performance, along with
any reasons for nonperformance or excused performance, or (ii) oral or written
evidence submitted at the time of review.
10.1.2. Substantial Compliance. This Agreement and the
documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain thousands of requirements,
such as construction and landscaping standards, Providing and reviewing evidence of
each and every requirement would waste the Parties' resources. Accordingly, Owner
shall be deemed to have satisfied its duty of demonstrating good faith compliance when
it presents evidence of its good faith and substantial compliance with (i) any issues
requested to be addressed by City in its notice of the review; (ii) the major provisions of
a Development Plan; and (iii) restrictions on the uses, number and sizes of structures
completed. Generalized evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of
evidence that Owner's evidence and statements are untrue.
10.2. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. City's failure to conduct the annual
review shall not constitute a default by any Party nor shall such failure waive, limit or
otherwise affect City's right to conduct annual reviews in subsequent years.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 24
10.3. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the
City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice
to Owner. City shall specify in the notice the specific issues it wishes Owner to address
concerning Owner's compliance with this Agreement. Within thirty (30) Days following
such notice, Owner shall submit evidence to the City Council of Owner's good faith
compliance with this Agreement. The review and determination by the City Council
shall proceed in the same manner as set forth in Section 10.1 for the annual review.
The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 10.3 only if it has
probable cause to believe the health, safety or general welfare of residents of the City is
at risk because of specific acts or failures to act by Owner.
10.4. Availability of Documents. Upon Owner's written request, City shall
provide Owner copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated
or prepared by or for City in connection with any compliance review by City. Owner
shall reimburse City for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by City in
providing such copies. City shall provide the copies within (10) Days from Owner's
request.
11. DEFAULT.
11.1. Default by Owner. If City conducts a review under Section 10 and finds,
on the basis of substantial evidence, that Owner has not complied in good faith with
terms or conditions of this Agreement, City shall give written notice to Owner stating the
manner in which Owner has failed to comply and the steps Owner must take to bring
itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) Days after such notice, Owner does not
commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance and thereafter
diligently pursue such steps to completion, then Owner shall be deemed to be in default
hereunder and City may terminate or modify this Agreement as provided in Government
Code Section 65865.1. City shall have the right to pursue any remedy at law or equity,
including specific performance.
11.2. Default by City. If Owner determines that City has not complied in good
faith with terms or conditions of this Agreement, Owner shall give written notice to City
stating the manner in which City has failed to comply and the steps City must take to
bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) Days after such notice, City does not
commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring it into compliance and thereafter
diligently pursue such steps to completion, then City shall be deemed to be in default
and Owner may terminate this Agreement. Owner shall have the right to pursue any
remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance.
11.3. Estoppel Certificates. A Party may make a written request for an Estoppel
Certificate to another Party at any time. The Party to whom the request is made shall
provide an Estoppel Certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) Days after the
request.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 25
11.3.1. Execution. The City Manager or any person designated by
the City Manager may sign an Estoppel Certificate on behalf of City. Any officer of
Owner may sign on behalf of Owner.
11.3.2. Costs; Reliance. The requesting Party shall reimburse the
responding Party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by the
responding Party in providing the Estoppel Certificate. Any such certificate may and is
intended to be relied upon by any person, including the other Party, potential
purchasers of all or any part of the Property, Lenders, and potential Lenders.
12. JUDICIAL REVIEW.
12.1 Reference. City and Owner shall have the right to apply to a court to
enjoin any breach of this Agreement. Excepting the right to seek such relief, all claims
and matters in question arising out of this Agreement, whether sounding in contract, tort
or otherwise, shall be resolved through a general reference in accordance with Code of
Civil Procedure Sections 638 through 645.1. To initiate such a proceeding, a Party
shall apply to the Riverside County Superior Court for the appointment of a referee to
hear the dispute. The referee shall hear and determine any and all of the issues in the
action or proceeding, whether of fact or of law, and shall report a statement of decision
for a complete and final adjudication of the controversy.
12.1.1. Appointment. Owner and City shall agree upon a single
· referee. If Owner and City are unable to agree on a referee within fifteen (15) Days of a
written request to do so, each Party shall submit to the Court up to three nominees for
appointment. The Court shall appoint one or more referees, not exceeding three, from
among the nominees against whom there is no legal objection. A legal objection shall
consist of any of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure Sections 170.1 or
641. The cost of the reference proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the Parties.
12.1.2. Pretrial Matters. The Parties shall have all rights of
discovery permitted by the Code of Civil Procedure in civil litigation, except that the time
periods shall be shortened by agreement or by order of the referee, and the extent of
discovery shall also be limited, with the goal of completing all discovery within ninety
(90) Days. The referee shall hear all pretrial matters, including law and motion and
discovery.
12.1.3. Trial. The referee shall try all issues, whether of fact or law.
The referee shall follow the rules of evidence applicable in a Court trial.
12.1.4. Jud,qment. The referee shall render a reasoned statement
of decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 632, citing both the law and the
evidence relied on. The referee's decision shall stand as the decision of the Court, and
judgment shall be entered on the statement of decision in the same manner as if the
action had been tried by the Court. The judgment may include any provision or relief at
law or in equity, including injunctive relief and specific performance, which could have
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 26
been made by the Court acting without a reference; provided, however, that the referee
shall not have the power to punish disobedience of an order by contempt, that power
being reserved to the Court ordering the reference in the first instance. The
compensation of the referee and reporter as well as any other taxable costs shall be
allocated between the respective Parties by the referee as a part of the judgment.
12.1.5. Post-Trial Proceedings. The referee shall hear all motions
or proceedings that may be heard by a judge following entry of judgment, including
motions for reconsideration, to stay execution, to tax costs including attorneys' fees and
prejudgment interest, to vacate judgment and for a new trial.
12.1.6. Appeal. The judgment entered on the referee's statement of
decision shall be appealable in the same manner as a judgment entered by the Court,
under Code of Civil Procedure Section 645.
12.2. Specific Performance. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it
will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once
implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, Owner may
be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for
other benefits. City and Owner have invested significant time and resources and
performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of
this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in
implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not
possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate either
Party for such efforts. For the above reasons, City and Owner agree that damages
would not be an adequate remedy if a Party fails to carry out its obligations under this
Agreement and that each Party shall have the right to seek and obtain specific
performance as a remedy for breach of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
City shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause Owner to proceed with
the Development of the Project, or any other remedy in connection with Owner's
decision whether or not to proceed with the Project.
12.3. Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies provided in this
Agreement shall not be exclusive but shall, to the extent permitted by law, be
cumulative and in addition to all other rights and remedies existing at law, in equity or
otherwise, except those rights and remedies which have been waived. It is expressly
agreed that neither City nor Owner shall be liable for punitive or exemplary damages,
and each Party hereby waives its right, if any, to recover punitive or exemplary
damages in connection with any breach or default by the other Party under this
Agreement.
12.4. Applicability of Review. Any modification, suspension or termination of
this Agreement by any Party shall be subject to judicial review unless all affected
Parties have consented in writing thereto.
12.5. Attorney's Fees. In any Litigation by which one Party either seeks to
enforce its rights under this Agreement or seeks a declaration of any rights or
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 27
obligations under this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be awarded reasonable
attorneys' fees, together with any costs and expenses (including expert witness and
referee costs), to resolve the dispute and to enforce the final judgment.
12.6. Third-party Challenqe. The Parties shall cooperate with each other in all
reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. The
Parties shall cooperate in defending against any Litigation challenging the approval of
this Agreement or any provision therein.
12.6.1. Defense of Litigation. In the event of Litigation brought by a
third-party to the approval or implementation of this Agreement, or any aspect thereof,
City and Owner shall jointly cooperate in the defense. The Parties may, but are not
required to, develop an operating memorandum to further describe the details of their
defense of the Litigation. Each Party shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs in the
trial court unless otherwise agreed. In the event the plaintiff or petitioner obtains a final
judgment in its favor in the trial court, the Parties shall decide whether to pursue an
appeal. If both Parties wish to appeal, then each shall bear its own attorneys' fees and
costs on appeal unless otherwise agreed. If one Party wishes to appeal, but the other
does not, then the former Party shall be entitled to pursue the appeal at its sole cost
and expense, and shall indemnify the other Party against any (~ost associated with the
appeal. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while the third-party
Litigation, including any appellate review, is pending.
12.6.2. Compliance with Judgment. No Party shall be in breach of
this Agreement if it acts in conformance with a final judgment from a court of competent
jurisdiction entered because of a third-party challenge.
12.6.3. Review of Future Development Approval. If for any reason a
court of competent jurisdiction determines by final judgment that City is required to
conduct environmental review for any Future Development Approval, the City agrees
that the benefits provided through this Agreement as described in the Recitals qualify
as extraordinary benefits of the Project, for purposes of any Statement of Overriding
:Consideration, should feasible mitigation measures or alternatives not be available to
mitigate project related impacts that are deemed significant.
12.7. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the negligence or willful
misconduct of an Indemnified Person, Owner shall indemnify, defend with legal counsel
of City's reasonable approval, and hold harmless the Indemnified Persons from and
against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award
or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and
alleging that City is liable for such damages as a direct or indirect result of City's
approval of this Agreement. Owner's obligation to indemnity is subject to and
conditioned upon the Indemnified Person's timely written request to Owner to defend
and/or indemnify. Any such request shall be made immediately upon such Person's
becoming aware of a claim which could reasonably give rise to Owner's obligations
under this Section.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 28
12.8. Validation. City shall initiate and pursue to final judgment a validation
action confirming the validity and legality of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City
for one-half of City's legal fees and costs in the validation action, not to exceed
$10,000.00. To obtain reimbursement, City shall provide statements to Owner in care
of Susan L. Walker, Senior Counsel, at her address as described in Section 15.2.
13. ENCUMBRANCES AND LENDERS.
13.1. Ri.qht to Encumber. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit an Owner of
any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in
any manner, at its sole discretion, from Encumbering the Property, the improvements
thereon, or any portion thereof with a lease, mortgage, deed of trust, sale and
leaseback arrangement or other security device. City acknowledges that any Lender
may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the Project
and City agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner or
representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for
interpretation or modification. City further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold
its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such
interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement
and does not impair the Development and construction of the public improvements
identified herein. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid,
diminish or impair the lien of any Lender.
13.2. Notice of Default to Lender. After providing a written request for notice to
City, any Lender shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of default to Owner
under this Agreement. As a pre-condition to the institution of Litigation or termination
proceedings, City shall deliver to Owner.and all such Lenders written notification of any
default by Owner in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is
not cured within sixty (60) Days (the "Second Notice of Default") and shall allow the
Lender an opportunity to cure such the defaults. The Second Notice of Default shall
specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of
the Second Notice of Default, each Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within
ninety (90) Days to cure the default or, if the default cannot reasonably be cured within
that ninety (g0) Day period, to commence to cure the default, in which case no default
shall exist and City shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the
default can only be remedied by the Lender obtaining possession of the Property or any
portion thereof, and the Lender seeks to obtain possession, the Lender shall have until
ninety (90) Days after obtaining possession to cure or, if the default cannot reasonably
be cured within that period, to commence to cure the default. A Lender shall not be
required to cure any non-curable default of Owner, and any such default shall be
deemed cured if any Lender obtains possession.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 29
14. WAIVERS AND DELAYS.
14.1. No Waiver. No waiver of a breach, failure of any condition, or any right or
remedy contained in or granted by the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective
unless it is in writing and signed by the Party waiving the breach, failure, right or
remedy. No waiver of any breach, failure, right or remedy shall be deemed a waiver of
any other breach, failure, right or remedy, whether or not similar, nor shall any waiver
constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing so specifies.
14.2. Extension by A.qreement The time for performance of any obligation
under this Agreement may be extended by the mutual agreement of the Parties. The
City Manager and any officer of Owner are authorized to execute any such agreement
on behalf of their respective Parties.
14.3. Force Maieure. A Party shall not be deemed to be in default where failure
or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by
floods, earthquakes, other acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and
other labor difficulties beyond the Party's control, and (as to Owner) Laws (including
voter initiative or referenda, moratoria, and judicial decisions) occurring within or
affecting Development within the City of Temecula.
14.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by
a Party of any of its obligations hereunder shall be extended by the period of time that
any of the events described in Section 14.3 exist or prevent performance of such
obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the
following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the
Term:
14.4.1. Litigation. The period of time after the Agreement Date
during which Litigation is pending that relates to this Agreement or to the Development
contemplated thereby. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be
filed or are pending.
: 14.4.2. Other Delays. Any delay resulting from an act or omission of
City in breach of this Agreement; or the failure of any other governmental agency or
public utility to act when the failure to act is beyond Owner's control.
14.5. Notice of Delay. A Party shall give notice to the other Party of any delay
that it believes to have occurred because of an event described in Sections 14.3 and
14.4. To be effective, a notice of delay shall be given within thirty (30) Days after the
end of the delay. No notice shall be allowed during the thirty (30) day period before the
end of the Term.
15. NOTICES.
15.1. Manner of Givinq Notice. All notices required or provided for under this
Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person, or sent by first-class mail,
certified mail (return receipt requested), or overnight delivery.
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 30
15.2.
Address for Notices. Notices to City shall be addressed as follows:
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attn.: City Manager
With a copy to:
Richards, Watson & Gershon
333 South Hope Street, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-1469
Attn.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
Notices to Owner shall be addressed as follows:
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
26531 Ynez Road
Temecula, Ca. 92591-4628
Attention: Vice President Customer Service and
Site Operations
With a copy to:
Susan L. Walker, Esq.
Senior Counsel
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
3200 Lakeside Drive
Mail Stop No. S-314
Santa Clara, Ca. 94054
And with a copy to:
Michael R. Woods, Esq.
465 1s~ Street West, Suite 200
Sonoma, Ca. 95476-6600
15.3. Effective Date of Notices. When personally delivered to the recipient,
notice is effective on delivery. When mailed first class, postage prepaid, to the last
address of the recipient known to the Party giving notice, notice is effective three mail
delivery days after deposit in a United States Postal Service office or mailbox. When
mailed certified mail, return receipt requested, notice is effective on receipt, if delivery is
confirmed by a return receipt. When delivered by overnight delivery service, charges
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 31
prepaid or charged to the sender's account, notice is effective on delivery, if delivery is
confirmed by the delivery service.
15.4. Undeliverable Notice. A correctly addressed notice that is refused,
unclaimed, or undeliverable because of an act or omission of the Party to be notified
shall be deemed effective as of the first date that such notice was refused, unclaimed or
deemed undeliverable by the postal authorities, messenger or overnight delivery
service.
15.5. Change of Address. A Party may change its address for notices by giving
notice in writing to the other Party as required herein. Thereafter, notices shall be sent
to the new address.
16. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
16.1. Opinions of Counsel. Within twenty (20) Days after this Agreement has
become legally effective, counsel for City shall provide to Owner a legal opinion
substantially in the form attached as Exhibit "K." Within twenty (20) Days after this
Agreement has become legally effective, counsel for Owner shall provide to City a legal
opinion substantially in the form attached as Exhibit "L."
16.2. Bindin.q Covenants. To the extent permitted by law, the provisions of this
Agreement shall constitute covenants that shall run with the Property for the benefit
thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the
benefit of the Parties and their respective successors in interest.
16.3. Relationship of the Parties. Development of the Property is a private
project in which neither City nor Owner will be acting as the agent of the other in any
respect. City and Owner are independent entities with respect to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to create a
partnership between or among the Parties, nor shall it cause them to be considered
joint venturers or members of any joint enterprise.
16.4. Recordinq. The City Clerk shall record this Agreement and any
amendment or cancellation thereof in the Official Records of Riverside County as
required by Government Code Section 65868.5. Recordation shall be without fee as
provided by Government Code Section 27383.
16.5. Severability. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this
Agreement, or the application thereof to any circumstance, shall at any time or to any
extent, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or
unenfomeable, then the remainder of this Agreement, or the application thereof to
circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall be
valid and enforceable, to the fullest extent permitted by law, and interpreted in the
manner most consistent with effectuating the Parties' intent by the party benefited.
16.6. Interpretation and Governin.q Law. The language in all parts of this
Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 32
meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and
interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to
· any choice of law rules thereof which may direct the application of the laws of another
jurisdiction. The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to
constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract
away the legislative and governmental functions of City, and in particular, City's police
powers.
16.7. Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for
convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of any provision
of this Agreement nor affect any of the rights or obligations of the Parties.
16.8. Word Usage. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, (i) the plural
and singular numbers shall each be deemed to include the other; (ii) the masculine,
feminine and neuter genders shall each be deemed to include the others; (iii) "shall,"
"will" or "agrees" are mandatory, and "may" is permissive; (iv) "or" is not exclusive; and
(v) "include," "includes" and "including" are not limiting.
16.9. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one
Owner, no breach hereof by an Owner shall constitute a breach by any other Owner.
Any remedy, obligation, or liability, arising due to such breach shall be applicable solely
to the Owner that committed the breach. However, City shall send a copy of any notice
of default to all Owners, including those not in breach.
16.10. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this
Agreement of which time is an element.
16.11. Counting Days. Days shall be counted by excluding the first day and
including the last day, unless the last day is a Saturday, a Sunday or a legal holiday,
and then it shall be excluded. Any act required by this.Agreement to be performed by a
certain day shall be timely performed if completed before 5:00 p.m. local time on that
date. If the day for performance of any obligation under this Agreement is a Saturday,
a Sunday or a legal holiday, then the time for performance of that obligation shall be
extended to 5:00 p.m. local time on the first following day that is not a Saturday,
Sunday or legal holiday. As used in this Section, "legal holiday" means those days
observed as holidays by the City of Temecula (excluding floating and half-day holidays)
pursuant to Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.32.010 as of July 1, 2002, which
holidays are listed in Exhibit
16.12. Recitals. Each recital set forth at the beginning of this Agreement is
incorporated here by reference, as though fully set forth herein, and agreed by the
Parties to be true and correct.
16.13. Exhibits. Each exhibit attached to this Agreement is incorporated here by
reference, as though fully set forth herein.
16.14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement
between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 33
supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the Parties,
and no parole evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict
or vary the terms hereof. No Party has been induced to enter into this Agreement by,
nor is any Party relying on, any representation or warranty outside those expressly set
forth in this Agreement.
16.15. Survival of Obligations. It is understood and agreed by the Parties that
whether or not it is specifically so provided herein any term or provision of this
Agreement, which by its nature and effect is required to be kept, observed, or
performed after termination or expiration of this Agreement, shall survive such
expiration or termination, and shall be and remain binding upon and for the benefit of
the Parties until fully observed, kept or performed.
16.16. Third Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided in this Section
16.16, this Agreement is not intended, nor shall it be construed, to create any third party
beneficiary rights in any person. All provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of
City and Owner. No provision hereof shall be construed to benefit or be enforceable by
any third party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owners of properties with frontage
on Motor Car Parkway shall be express third party beneficiaries of City's obligations as
set forth in Exhibits "H," "H-l," "H-2" and "H-3," with the right to enforce performance of
such obligations.
16~17. Ambiquities. Each Party and its counsel have participated fully in the
review and revision of this Agreement. Any rule of construction to the effect that
ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply in interpreting
this Agreement.
16.18. Counterparts; Duplicate Ori.qinals. This Agreement may be executed in
any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which together
shall constitute one instrument. This Agreement may also be executed in duplicate
originals for both Parties, and each such document shall constitute an original
Agreement.
16.19. Necessary Acts. The Parties shall at their own cost and expense execute
and deliver such further documents and instruments and shall take such other actions
as may be reasonably required or appropriate to evidence or carry out the intent and
purposes of this Agreement.
//
//
//
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 34
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the day and year dated below.
Dated:
the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on
ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.,
a California corporation
By:
Name: John M. Capek, Ph.D.
Title: President
By:
Name: Mark A. Murray
Title: Vice President, Finance
And Business Development
Dated:
CITY OF TEMECULA,
a California municipal corporation
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
ACS Development Agreement 092002 Page 35
Development Agreement
Index to Exhibits
Exhibit
A
A-1
B
Title
Legal Description (7 acre +/- portion)
Legal Description (20 acre +/- portion)
Rules. Regulations and Policies Affecting Development
C
Project Design Guidelines
D
Setback Plane Illustration 1
D-1
Setback Plane Illustration 2
D-2
Setback Plane Definitions and Restrictions
E
Approved Access Points
F
Off-site Public Improvements
F-1
Margarita Road/Solana Way Striping Plan
Page 1
G On-site Public Improvements
H
Motor Car Parkway Engineering Standards
H-1
to
H-3
Motor Car Parkway - Upgrades to Public Street Standards
Development Processing Fees
J
Development Impact Fees
K
City's Legal Opinion
L
Owner's Legal Opinion
M
Legal Holidays
Page 2
Exhibit "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF APPROXIMATE 7 ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY
PARCELS 1 AND 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 23354, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON
FILE IN BOOK 152 PAGES 74 TO 76, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS,
RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND AS AMENDED BY
CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1988 AS
INSTRUMENT NO. 373108 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
EXCEPT ALL MINERAL, OIL AND GAS RIGHTS BELOW THE DEPTH OF 500
FEET BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT OF
SURFACE ENTRY, AS RESERVED TO KAISER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,
A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION BY DEEDS RECORDED DECEMBER 16,
1987 AS INSTRUMENT NOS. 354622 AND 354624 BOTH OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS.
Exhibit "A-I"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF APPROXIMATE 20 ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY
LOT 9 OF TRACT NO. 3334, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 54,
PAGES 25 TO 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
EXCEPT THAT PORTION'DESCRIBED ON EXHIBIT C OF FINAL DECREE OF
CONDEMNATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 17, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO.
2000-059678, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
Exhibit "B"
RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES
AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT
The City!s rules, regulations and policies affecting development, as defined in
Section 1.41, shall include the following:
1. The City's General Plan, as defined in Section 1.24.
2. The City's Development Code, as defined in Section 1.11.
3. City Ordinances that govern the Development of real property, in effect on
the Agreement Date.
4. The City's written submittal requirements that govern the processing of
Development applications, in effect on the Agreement Date.
5. The Tentative Parcel Map and conditions of approval, as defined in
Section 1.42.
6. Future Development Approvals, as defined in Section 1.23.
7. The Project Design Guidelines, as set forth in Exhibit "C."
The City Clerk has certified as true and correct copies, two complete sets of the
documents described in items one through seven, above. Each Party
acknowledges receipt of one set of the referenced documents.
Exhibit B City Rules 082802
Exhibit "C"
PROJECT DESIGN GUIDELINES
SECTIONS:
1
2
3
4
5
6
Purpose and Intent
Relationship to Development Code and
Citywide Design Guidelines
Architectural Design Concept
Supplemental Design Standards
Architectural and Landscape Palette Addendum
Minor Modification of the Project Design
Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of these Project Design Guidelines ("Project Design Guidelines" or
"Guidelines") is to provide additional details concerning the design of the Project,
including pre-approved colors, materials and landscaping palettes. The Guidelines are
intended to provide supplemental design information on the buildings to be constructed
as part of the Project.
The overall scale of the Project is determined in the Development Agreement between
the City of Temecula and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. ("Agreement").
These Project Design Guidelines are attached as an exhibit to the Agreement.
Capitalized terms in these Guidelines shall have the same meaning as defined in
Section 1 of the Agreement.
Section 2. Relationship to Development Code and Citywide Desiqn Guidelines.
These Project Design Guidelines supplement the general development standards and
criteria in the Development Code and Citywide Design Guidelines. When there is
disagreement between the Guidelines and the Citywide Design Guidelines, the Project
Design Guidelines shall control. If there is disagreement between the Agreement and
the Project Design Guidelines or the Citywide Design Guidelines, the Agreement shall
control. The following development standards in effect on the Agreement Date shall
apply to the Project, except as otherwise provided in the Agreement and these
Guidelines:
a) The development and performance standards applicable to the Business Park
Zone set forth in Chapters 17.08 and 17.24 of the Development Code;
b) The landscape requirements and standards applicable to office Development set
forth in Chapters 17.08, 17.24, and 17.32 of the Development Code;
c) Chapters 6 and 8 of the Citywide Design Guidelines; and
EXHIBIT "C"
Exhibit C Design Guidelines 090902
Page 1
d) The City's Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance.
Section 3. Architectural Design Concept.
The Project is not intended to replicate or overshadow any portion of the City, but rather
to complement the City and adjacent properties and to help accomplish the Project's
objective of creating a "corporate campus." The Owner's objective is that the Project
should be an asset to the City and region, as well as to the Owner. Scale, mass and
orientation should be visually interesting and appealing from the perspective of
neighboring inhabitants (both commercial and residential) and passers-by, while
simultaneously being efficient and sensitive to the Owner's needs. Structures and
amenities should be sensitive and responsive to the local climate. Colors, material and
texture are to be varied and consistent with the surrounding region and evocative of its
culture. The Project should link the Property to the Existing Facilities as needed to
facilitate any shared uses and activities.
Section 4. Supplemental Design Standards.
a) The following architectural and site design concepts shall be considered in the
design of the Project:
1)
Design should be complementary or consistent with desirable
characteristics of the surrounding area in a way that contributes to the
establishment of a positive character for the area.
2)
VVhile the principal buildings may be predominantly rectangular they shall
be designed in such a manner to avoid the appearance of a box-like
design and avoid excessive mass and bulk.
3)
Roof top equipment and machinery (exclusive of communications
antennas) will be screened from public view by parapet walls or other
integrated architectural features.
4)
The building design will incorporate varying architectural elements, such
as materials, textures, colors, window sizes and fa(~ade composition, in
order to create interest and a variety of scale.
5) Main building entrances will incorporate additional features to emphasize
their location.
6)
A variety of complementary colors should be used, not just one color. The
base color and materials for principal office buildings in close proximity to
one another should be complementary. For example, the color and
materials utilized for the Existing Facilities are consistent with these
Guidelines.
EXHIBIT "C" Page 2
Exhibit C Design Guidelines 090902
7)
Parking structures will be designed in a manner to complement the
principal office buildings. Additional architectural design elements will be
applied to highly visible surfaces.
8) Water features are encouraged to enhance outdoor spaces and create
pleasant summer micro-climates.
9) Project signage shall be approved through the submittal of a Sign
Program approved by the City's Director of Planning.
b) The following landscape design concepts shall be considered in the design of
Project landscaping:
1)
Recognize and reflect existing landscape and streetscape qualities
evidenced by established planting patterns along Solana Way and
Margarita Road.
2)
Continue and extend landscape qualities from the Existing Facilities,
including careful attention to pedestrian amenities such as shaded and
safe walkways, courtyards, open spaces and gardens.
3) Incorporate xeriscape and water conserving practices in the selection and
use of plant materials and irrigation systems.
4) Incorporate native and drought tolerant vegetation to the maximum extent
practical.
Section 5. Architectural and Landscaping Palette Addendum.
The architectural and landscape palettes for the Project are located in the Addendum to
the Project Design Guidelines, further captioned, "Project Design Guidelines and
Approved Architectural and Landscape Palettes" (the "Addendum"). The Addendum
includes various colored exhibits. Copies of the Addendum shall be maintained by the
City Clerk's Office and the City Planning Department.
a)
Part One of the Addendum sets forth the approved architectural palette for the
Project. The Development may use any of the materials and colors in Part One
of the Addendum; provided, however, that the darkest shade of sienna (page 5 of
the Addendum) shall not be the predominant color of any building, but instead
used only as an accent color, except as otherwise approved by the Planning
Director. The architectural palette is intended to facilitate modern structures that
reflect their place in time, aesthetically, environmentally and technologically. The
palette complements its location, and is cognizant of and sensitive to the
immediate neighbors and the City at large. The architectural palette includes the
list of approved exterior treatments, including glass, metal, plaster, concrete and
stone. The palette also includes color boards and photographs that show
examples of color combinations and exterior treatments. Photographs of
EXHIBIT "C" Page 3
Exhibit C Design Guidelines 090902
particular structures are intended for illustrative purposes only, to show how other
projects have made use of the approved colors and materials.
b)
Part Two of the Addendum sets forth the approved landscape palette for the
Project. The Development may use any of plant materials identified for the
characteristic landscape zones for the Project. This palette describes nine
characteristic landscape zones, and identifies suitable plant materials for use in
each zone.
c)
The architectural and landscape palette Addendum includes a site plan concept,
to provide an example of a possible configuration of structures and landscape
zones on the Property. While this configuration is consistent with the Agreement
and the Project Design Guidelines, other configurations can also satisfy these
requirements. Nothing in the Design Guidelines is intended to require that the
Owner construct the exact project or utilize the configuration shown on the
conceptual site plan. An application for Development Plan approval shall set
forth the Owner's intended configuration of structures described in the
application, and the use of approved materials, colors, landscape zones and
plant materials.
Section 6. Minor Modifications to the Project Desiqn Guidelines.
The Planning Director is'authorized to approve minor modifications to the architectural
and landscape palettes set forth in the Addendum. All minor modifications shall be
made in writing, and set forth in an operating memorandum as described in Section 6.2.
A copy of the approved minor modifications shall be maintained by the City Clerk and
Planning Department. The Planning Director shall have the discretion to determine
whether a particular modification is minor and may be processed administratively, or
whether the modification requires consideration by the Planning Commission. No public
hearing shall be required for the Planning Commission to consider any proposed
modifications. The Planning Commission's decision shall be subject to appeal to the
City Council.
EXHIBIT "C" Page 4
Exhib~CDesignGuidelines 090902
EXHIBIT "D~l":.Setback Plane Illustration 2
Exhibit "D-2"
SETBACK PLANE DEFINITIONS
AND RESTRICTIONS
Section 1. Definitions.
As used in Section 2.3.4 and Exhibits D and D-l, the following
terms shall have the stated meanings.
(a) "Solana Property Line" marks the southernmost extent of the
Property at Solana Way, extending from the Margarita Property
Line to the point where Owner's western property line meets
Solana Way.
(b) "Margarita Property Line" marks the easternmost extent of the
Property at Margarita Road, extending from the Solana Property
Line to the point where Owner's northern property line meets
Margarita Road.
(c) "Midpoints": There are four midpoints. (1) Midpoint "A" is the
point on the Margarita Property Line that is equidistant between
Owner's northern property line and the middle of Street "B" as
shown on the Tentative Parcel Map. (2) Midpoint "B' is the
point on the Margarita Property Line that is equidistant between
the middle of Street "B" and the Solana Property Line. (3)
Midpoint "C" is the point on the Solana Way Property Line that is
equidistant between the Margarita Property Line and the middle
of the access from the Property to Solana Way as shown on the
Tentative Parcel Map. (4) Midpoint "D" is the point on the
Solana Property Line that is equidistant between the middle of
the access from the Property to Solana Way as shown on the
Tentative Parcel Map, and Owner's western property line where
!t meets Solana Way.
(d) "Fifty Foot Points": There are four Fifty Foot Points,
corresponding with each of the four Midpoints. Each Fifty Foot
Point is established by extending a horizontal line from a
Midpoint thirty-five (35) feet into the Property, and then going up
vertically by fifty (50) feet.
(e) "Setback Area" extends thirty-five (35) feet from the Margarita
Property Line and the Solana Property Line, into the Property.
No buildings shall be constructed above finished grade within
· the Setback Area. Underground structures are permissible
within the Setback Area. Owner shall landscape the Setback
Area consistent with an approved Development Plan.
(0 "Setback Planes": There are four Setback Planes,
corresponding with each of the four Midpoints (and the line
Exhibit D-2 081502.doc
segment from which each was created), and each of the four
Fifty Foot Points. Each Setback Plane is established by
extending a line from the Midpoint at an angle to intersect with
its corresponding Fifty Foot Point. Each Setback Plane
continues at that angle (up and westerly from Margarita Road;
up and northerly from Solana Way). (See Exhibits "D" and D-
1 .") Each Setback Plane may be referred to by the letter of its
corresponding midpoint; e.g., Setback Plane "A" is the plane
that relates to Midpoint "A."
Section 2. Setback Plane Hei,qht Restriction.
Notwithstanding the eighty (80) foot height limitation generally
applicable to the Property, no structure shall be higher than a respective
Setback Plane. Examples: (i) A building located west of Margarita Road
and between Street "B" and Owner's northern property line shall not be
higher than the level of Setback Plane "A." (ii) A building located west of
Margarita Road and between Street "B" and Solana Way shall not be
higher than the level of Setback Planes "B" and "C." (iii) A building located
west of Margarita Road and north of Solana Way, between Margarita Road
and the access from the Property to Solana Way as shown on the
Tentative Parcel Map, shall not be higher than the level of Setback Planes
"B" and "C." (iv) A building located north of Solana Way and west of the
access to Solana Way as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map shall not be
higher than the level of Setback Plane "D."
Exhibit D-2 081502,doc
EXHIBIT "E"
APPROVED ACCESS POINTS
J
1'
GUIDANT CORPORATION CAMPUS, Temecula, California - 00287:50
Exhibit "F"
OFF-SITE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
I. Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 30107 Conditioned Public Improvements
Improve Solana Way (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) to
include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb
and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and
striping, raised landscaped median. The intent of this condition is
that the improvements shall extend along the frontage of the
Property, and that the median shall remain open at Motor Car
Parkway. The final geometric configuration of this median,
including other possible openings for existing driveways, shall be as
directed by the City Engineer at the time of final design.
Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W)
to include installation of a deceleration lane to access the private
Street "A." Said lane is to be 10 feet wide, 150 feet long, and is to
include a transitional distance of 120 feet.
Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' RNV)
to include median/striping modifications, etc. to provide for a full
turning movement driveway (i.e., left turn in from Margarita Road
onto private Street "B").
Note: Other property owners within the TPM other than the City and Guidant will
be partially responsible for a portion of these improvements required by the TPM.
II. Additional Public Improvements
Reserve 12 feet of the Property along its frontage on Margarita
Road for future City purchase to allow for an additional 12 foot wide
southbound lane, as further described in Section 2.12 of the
Agreement. The cost of constructing the additional lane shall be at
the City's expense. Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway
Standard - 110' R/W) to include median/striping modifications to
provide for double left turn lanes from southbound Margarita Road
to eastbound Solana Way, as shown in Exhibit "F-I.' The
improvements shall include modification of the traffic signal and
widening of the pavement on Solana Way east of Margarita Road
to accept the double left turn traffic. The required widening shall be
adequate to provide for two full eastbound lanes east of Margarita
Road and a transitional distance, with a combined length of up to
Exhibit F Offsites 081902.doc
600'. The City represents that it has sufficient PJW along the south
side of Solana Way to accommodate this required widening.
Improve Ynez Road at Motor Car Parkway to include installation of
a deceleration lane to access Motor Car Parkway. The lane shall
be 10 feet wide, 150 feet long, and shall include a transitional
distance of 120 feet. The deceleration lane shall be included within
existing public RNV through a combination of restriping of the
northbound side of Ynez Road, along with modifications to the
traffic signal at Motor Car Parkway.
Improve Motor Car Parkway to acceptable City standards, as
described in Exhibit"H."
Improve and reconstruct the median in Margarita Road south of
private Street "B" to accommodate a single northbound left turn into
Street "B." Signalize the intersection of Margarita Road at Street
"B" as a full function, four-way intersection.
All improvements shall include installation of paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk,
street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and raised landscaped
median as reasonably determined by the City Engineer. Engineering
specifications set forth in this Agreement shall be subject to modification by
agreement of the City Engineer and Owner as set forth in an operating
memorandum as described in Section 6.2.
III. Pedestrian Bridge
Construct the pedestrian bridge across Ynez Road in the vicinity of Motor
Car Parkway that will connect the Existing Facilities with the Project as
described in Section 2.13.
Exhibit F Offsites 081902,doc
MARGARITA ROAD/
SOLANA WAY STRIPING· PLAN
Exhibit "G"
ON-SITE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
1. Traffic signal easement to support loop detectors on the westerly
leg of the Margarita Road/Street "B" intersection.
Note: On-site public improvements which may be required by public agencies
other than City are not referenced here.
Exhibit G On-Sites 081602.doc
Exhibit "H"
MOTOR CAR PARKWAY ENGINEERING STANDARDS
Improvements to Motor Car Parkway shall be subject to and include the
following:
Removal and replacement of broken or heaved concrete within the
public right of way;
Removal and replacement of all brick pavers, asphalt pavement and
base materials with the replacement asphalt pavement structural
section to be designed to support a Traffic Index of 7.0;
Extend the storm drain system to the curbline to remove the cross
gutter and median curb inlets in the street;
Place sidewalk on both sides of the street, wherever sidewalk does not
exist as of the Agreement Date;
Replace substandard driveway approaches with commercial driveways
with handicap access, oras an altemative, at Owner's election, seek
and obtain an encroachment permit from City to allow individual
property owners to continue to maintain non-standard driveways within
the public right of way. Driveways may only remain under
circumstances where the existing sidewalk meets or can be modified to
meet ADA standards. Approval of a requested encroachment permit
shall not be unreasonably withheld by City;
Retain the landscaped median islands and modify as described in
Exhibits H-l, H-2 and H-3.
Modify the street light system to meet standards as described in
Exhibits H-l, H-2 and H-3.
Perform other improvements as necessary to meet the requirements
described in Exhibits H-l, H-2 and H-3.
o
A new City standard street dedication, 84' wide, shall be part of the
grant of dedication to City as shown on Exhibits H-l, H-2 and H-3. The
existing private street easement for Motor Car Parkway may be
quitclaimed by the property owners.
10.
The dedication of right of way for the street will create circumstances
where existing buildings are within setback areas typically required by
Exhibit H Motor Car Parkway 092602
City. City would not ordinarily allow structures or parking within such
areas. City agrees that no existing structure, on-site parking or use
shall be considered nonconforming as a result of the dedication of the
street to City, and that all such structures, parking and uses shall be
considered conforming as to setback requirements. City may require
any new buildings, on-site parking or use to comply with its applicable
setback requirements.
11.
Owner shall submit a set of improvement plans to City for its review
and reasonable approval, showing existing conditions and proposed
modifications, consistent with Exhibits H through H-3.
Exhibit H Motor Car Parkway 092602
EXHIBIT 'H-i '
MOTOR CAR PARKWAY - UPGRADES TO PUBLIC STREET STANDARDS
(REFER TO EXHIBIT H-3 FOR DESCRIPTIONS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS)
MOTOR CAR PARKWAY
AL TERNA TE I LOCATION OF
TRANSPORTER DROP-OFF.
SEE DETAIL 'A' AT LEFT
S/DEWALK
DETAIL 'A'
ALT. I LOCATION OF
RANSPORTER DROP-OFF
Planning and Engineering ~
4933 Paramount Dr. 2nd Fir.
San Diego, Ca. 9211~3
Tel 858:-751-0633 Fax 858-751-0634
DATE:9-4-02 JOB: 570.0
SCALE 1" = 8O'
LEGEND
, ALTERNATE 2
LOCATION OF iRANS-
PORTER DROP-OFF.
SEE DETAIL
'B' ON EXHBff
MA TCHLINE
EX/ST/NC IMPROVEMENTS/ACC£SS EASEMENT LINE
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT$/PUSLIC RICHT OF WAY LIN£
INDICATES 'REFERENCE TO SPECIFIC TYPES OF
UPCRADE5 OR IMPROVEMENTS - SEE EXHIBIT H-$
FOR SPEC/F/CS
570-ex ex~:b;:dw9 9-12-0-~ 3:56:32 Om EST
EXHIBIT 'H- 2 '
MOTOR CAR PARK~rAY - UPGRADES TO PUBLIC STREET STANDARDS
(REFER TO EXHIBIT H-$ FOR DESCRIPTIONS .OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS)
MA TCHLINE
ALTERNATE 2 LOCAllON
OF TRANSPORTER
DROP-OFF. SEE DETAIL
'B' BELOW RIGHT
145'd:
YELLOW 2-WAY
LEFT TURN MEDIAN
A.C. PAVING
EXIST. MEDIAN
CURB AND LANDSCAPING
SOLANA WAY
~ SCALE 1" = 80'
LatitUde 33 ,
4933 Paramount Dr. 2nd Fir.
San Diego, Ca. 92123
Tel 8,58-751-0633 Fax 8§8-75t-0634
DA~E:9-04-02 JCS: 570.0
INLETS
OCATE STREET LIGHT
MEDIAN CURB
DETAIL 'B' O
AL TERNATE 2 LOCA T/ON OF
TRANSPORTER DROP-OF['
(SEE EXHIBIT H-1 FOR PLAN LOCATION)
NO SCALE
EXHIBIT 'H- 3 '
MOTOR CAR PARKWAY - UPGRADES TO PUBLIC STREET STANDARDS
(REFER ALSO TO EXHIBIT H-1 & H-2 FOR PLAN LOCATIONS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS)
1. APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT. ALL PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS CAN BE DUITCLAIMED BY OWNERS
UPON ACCEPTANCE OF RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION BY CITY.
2. PROPOSED PUBLIC STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA DEDICATED BY THE ADJOINING PROPERTY Oi~NERS.
J. PROPOSED SIDEWALK' EASEMENT TO BE GRANTED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA BY THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TO ENCOMPASS
EXISTING MEANDERING SIDEWALK.
4. EXISTING CURB AND SIDEWALK TO GENERALLY REMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON PLAN. ALL BROKEN OR HEAVED ELEMENTS OF CURB.
SIDEWALK. & CROSS GUTTERS TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED,
5. EXISTING A.C. DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED-DRIVEWAY IS T00 STEEP TO MEET A.D.A. CROSSING STANDARDS AND IS CURRENTLY FENCED
OFF FROM USE BY PROPERTY OWNER. REPLACE ~TH NEW CURB, GUTTER, AND CONTIGUOUS SIDEWALK AND LANDSCAPING TO MATCH
EXISTING.
6~ EXISTING A.C. PAVING AND 8RICK PAVERS TO BE ENTIRELY REMOVED BETWEEN LIMITS OF CURBS/CROSS GUTTERS/MEDIAN CURBS AND
REPLACED F/ITH CITY STANDARD ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVER AGGREGATE BASE, STRUCTURAL SECTION TO MEET A TRAFFIC INDEX OF 7.0.
7. RECONSTRUCT EXISTING MEDIAN CURB INLETS AS STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT MANHOLES.
8. RAISE ELEVATION OF MEDIAN CURB IN THIS AREA TO GENERATE I I/2~ CROWN TO OUTER CURBS AND TO NEW CURB INLETS.
9. INSTALL NEW CURB INLETS TO CITY STANDARDS A T LOW POINT IN STREE'~ INSTALL STORM DRAIN CONNECTORS AS REOUIRED.
10. EXISTING STREET LIGHTS IN MEDIANS ALONG NORTH-SOUTH PORTION OF MOTOR CAR PARKWAY SHALL BE REPLACED F4TH DUAL OPPOSING
LUMINARIES EOUIVALENT TO CITY STANDARD STREET UGHTS MOUNTED ON THE EXISTING POLES FOR USE IN THE MEDIAN. IF EXISTING POLES,
OR POLES AND FOUNDATIONS, CANNOT BE REUSED FOR RETROFITTING NEW LUMINAIRES, THEN THEY SHALL BE REPLACED t~TH EOUIVALENT
CITY STANDARD POLES, OR POLES AND FOUNDATIONS. EXtSTING CONDUIT RUN5 MAY BE PRESERVED. NOTE THAT LOCATIONS OF EXISTING
STREET LIGHTS ARE APPROXIMATE 8UT THE ACTUAL LOCATION AND NUMBER OF LIGHTS MAY NOT BE CORRECTLY DEPICTED:IN EXHIBIT H-I.
I1. EXISTING STREET LIGHTS IN MEDIAN5 ALONG THE EAST-WEST PORTION OF MOTOR CAR PARKWAY SHALL BE REPLACED AS PER NOTE 10
ABOVE. IF THE. MEDIANS IN THIS SEGMENT OF ROAD ARE REMOVED. AT GUIDANT'S ELECTION, TO ACCOMMODATE NEW STREET STRIPING,
HOT, EVER, THEN THE LIGHTS SHALL BE REPLACED ~TH STANDARD CITY STREET LIGHTS LOCATED IN THE PARKWAY.
12. MEDIANS IN THE NORTH-5OUTH PORTION OF MOTOR CAR PARKWAY MAY REMAIN BUT THE LANDSCAPING SHALL BE TRIMMED OR REMOVED
F,~IERE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SIGHT DISTANCE SAFETY STANDARDS. THE TURF LANDSCAPING (GRASS) IN THE MEDIANS SHALL
BE REMOVED AND REPLACED F4TH A LOVER MAINTENANCE, LOVER WATER DEMAND MATERIAL.
i3. MEDIANS IN THE EAST-WEST PORTION OF MOTOR CAR PARKWAY MAY ALSO REMAIN IN PLACE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IDENTIFIED IN
ITEM I2 ABOVE; OR, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, AT GUIDANT*S ELECTION, MAY BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH ASPHALT PAVING AS DESCRIBED
IN NOTE.6 ABOVE IN THE EVENT THIS AREA IS REOUIREO FOR LANE STRIPING..
14.'SEE NOTE 4 REGARDING REOUIREMENT TO REPLACE ALL BROKEN OR HEAVED CONCRETE.. MAINTENANCE OF TURF IN THE PARKWAYS (STRIP
OF LAND BETWEEN CUR8 AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE) IS I~IE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE P.O.A. OR ADJACENT OWNERS AND MAY REMAIN.
~5; THESE DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE REPLACED ~ITH A CITY OF ~EMECULA 5TANOARD CONCRETE COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY tffTH STANDARD FLARES
(CURR£NTLY THE DRIVE5 ARC 'RADIUS£D RETURN' DRIVES I~,1TH ASPHALT OR BRICK PA~ING). AS AN ALTERNABVE, DRIVE MAY BE LEFT IN
PLACE AND AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT OBTAINED BY THE ADJACENT OWNER ALLO!kING THE EXISTING NON-STANDARD DRIVEWAY TO REMAIN.
lC. THESE DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED TO FLARED, CONCRETE PAVED STANDARD COMMERCIAL DRIVEWA'~ THE VERTICAL RAMP IN
THE APRON SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RETAIN ALL STREET CUTTER FLOW ~THIN THE STREET AND PREVENT STREET DRAINAGE FROM ENTERING
THE PRIVATE PROPERTY. ..- .
IZ THE OWNERS OF THE FRONI?NC PROPERTY ALONG MOTOR CAR PARKWAY MAY ELECT TO ADO A TRANSPORTER TRUCK DROP OFF A~A.
SAID DROP-OFF SHALL BE DESIGNED TO THE APPROX/MATE DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN ON DETAIL 'A' ON EXHIBIT "N~l' OR EXHIBIT 'B' ON
EJ(HIBiT H-2. THE PURPOSE OF THE DROP-OFF SHALL BE FOP THE TEMPORARY PARKING OF AUTO-TRANSPORTER TRUCKS IN ORDER TO
FACILITATE UNLOADING OF VEHICLES I~ITHOUT DISRUPTION TO TRAFFIC OR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. TWO POSSIBLE.LOCATIONS OF THIS
DROP-OFF ARE IOENTIFIEO ON EXHIBITS H-I & H-2; HOVEVER, THE FINAL LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF SAID DROP-OFF IS SUBJECT TO
'REFINEMENT BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND APPROVAL BY IHE CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA. THE CRITERIA FOR
THE SELECTION OF THE FINAL DROP-OFF LOCATION AND ITS GEOMETRY SHALL BE THE SUBJECT OF AN EVALUATION FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSIONED BY OUIDANI~
Latitude 33
4933 Paramount Dr. 2nd Fir.
San Diego. Ca. 92123
Tel '858-751-0633 Fax 858-751-0634
DATE:9-04-02 JOB: 570.0
18. EXISTING 24" DIAMETER PUBLIC STORM DRAIN PER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DWG
NO. 847-EE WITHIN STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS GRANTED PER PARCEL MAP NO.
2J$54 (TWO LOCATIONS). STORM DRAINS TO REMAIN PUBLIC AND TO BE MAINTAINED
BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
Exhibit "I"
DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FEES
Anticipated Fee Worksheet and Fee Amounts
This preliminary fee worksheet is a guide to potential fees that may be assessed for the Guidant Expansion
Project and is based upon information provided by the applicant. (The applicant is ultimately responsible for
verifying the accuracy of the fee mounts.) In some cases, until detailed project plans have been submitted, the
amounts for many of the expected fees cannot be determined.
Project Location:
Project Square Footage/Acreage:
Project Description:
Application Type:
East of Ynez Road, north of Solana Way and West of Margarita Road
Approximately 480,000 sq ft on 27.75 acres
An office complex for the Guidant Corporation in a campus setting
with parking, with accessory facilities such as a fitness center,
childcare, and food services.
Development Plan
Prior to Approval
Payable at Application Submittal to the Community Development Department
Comprehensive Development Plan for the site and structures (excludes revisions) ........ $ 5,880.00
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Fee * ............................................................ 0.00
Development Review Committee (DRC) Landscape Plan Fee ............................................. 200.00
Traffic Study (if required, the cost would be $780) ............................................................... 0.00
City of Temecula Total Application Filing Fee ......................................................................... $ 6,080.00
UCR Regents Fee (Separate Cheek) ........................................................................................ 45.00
Department of Environmental Health (Separate Check) ........................................................ 136.00
Total Application Filing Fee ......................................................................................................... $~261.00
After Approval
Planning
Payable Within For{F-Eight (48) Hours of Project Approval
Notice of Determination ** ......................................................................................................... $ 64.00
Payable Prior to Grading Permit Issuance
***
:Stephens Kangaroo Rat Mitigation Fees ($500.00/gross acre) ............................................... $ 3,500.00
Payable at Building Plan Submittal
Consistency Check (for each separate construction phase) .......................................................... $ 370.00
Payable Prior to Building Permit Issuance
Landscape Plan Check (assumes 30% site landscaping) ............................................................... $ 2,970.00
Landscape Inspection ..................................................................................................................... $ 225.00
Submit Prior to Certificate of Occupancy
Landscape Maintenance Bond (Per DA: Corporate guarantee will be accepted) ..........................$ 0.00
Building and Safety (ASSUMES TYPE H 1-HOUR CONSTRUCTION)
Payable at Building Plan Submittal
Plan Cheek ..................................................................................................................................... $67,598.63
Payable Prior to Building Permit Issuance
Permit Fee ..................................................................................................................................... $90,131.50
Strong Motion ............................................................................................................................... $ 9,301.99
Electrical, mechanical, plumbing (based on fixture coun0 .......................................................... $ 7,500.00
F:\Clients\GuidantLExlfibit I Dev Processing Fees 091802.doc
Fire Department
Payable at Building Plan Submittal
Fire Plan Check (PER BUILDING) .............................................................................................. $ 582.00
Payable Prior to Building Permit Issuance
Fire Plan Check Inspection ............................................................................................................ (included)
Fire Sprinkler (PERRISER) ............................................................................................................ $ 582.00
Manual Fire Alarm (PER SYSTEM) ............................................................................................... $ 369.00
Other Fire Suppression Systems (i.e., hood duet, spray booths, etc.) (FEE FOR EACH ONE) _..$ 369.00
Public WorksfEngineering
Fees for plan check and inspection are estimated based on site and street improvements
(flatwork) cost exclusive of building construction. The fee is based on engineer's cost
estimate. Contact Public Works Staff for assistance in calculating your Public Works fees.
Engineer's construction cost estimate
(ESTIMATES ARE FOR PRECISE GRADING ONLY. ROUGH GRADING AND
STREET IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT INCLUDED)
Payable Prior to Grading Plan Submittal
Plan Check Fees
On-site and off-site improvements
(curb and gutter, concrete flatwork, storm drain, etc.)
4% of 1st $20,000.00 $
3.5% of next $80,000.00 $
3.25% over $100,000.00 $
Grading
(0-5,000 cubic yards) $500.00 $__
(5,001-100,000 cubic yards) $750.00 $__
(+ $50.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards over 100,000 cubic yards) $1,000.00 $__
Payable Prior to Grading Permit Issuance
Engineer's cost estimate
Inspection Fees
On-site and off-site improvements (curb and gutter, concrete flatwork, storm drain, etc.)
4% oflst $20,000.00 $
3.5%of next $80,000.00 $
3.25% over $100,000.00 $
Grading
(0-500 cubic yards) $350.00 $ __
(501-10,000 cubic yards) $500.00 $ __
(10,001-100,000 cubic yards) $1,000.00 $__
(over 100,000 cubic yards) $1,300.00 + $50.00/10,000 over 100,001 cubic yards $__
Grading Deposit
$995.00
7.
?.
?.
Payable Prior to Encroachment Permit Issuance
Encroachment Permit (for each permit, $25))
Motor Car Parkway
3rl~ere will also be a fee for plan check and inspection for Motor Car Parkway;
the fee is expected to be about 7% of the engineer's construction cost estimate.
Community Services District
CSD-Maintained Landscape Plan Review
F:\Clicnts\Guidant~Exhibit I Dev Processing l~ees 091802.doc
Landscape Plan consultation with the City landscape architect (if requested, $125)) $ .9.
Landscape Inspection Fee ($2500 for the first 10 inspections) $ .9.
Street Lighting - Advance Energy Fee
(if applicable, ranges between $120 and $300 per light)
Landscape Improvements for CSD-maintained areas (e.g. medians)
Faithful Performance Bond (if necessary) 100% of construction cost estimate
Labor and Materials Bond (if necessary) 50% of construction cost estimate
Warranty Bond (if necessary) 10% of construction cost estimate
Other Agencies that will assess fees on the project include:
School Fees: Temecula Valley Unified School District
Water: Rancho California Water District (RCWD)
Sewer: Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD)
Riverside County Health Department
Riverside County Flood - Area Drainage Plan
.Telephone: General Telephone and Electric (GTE)
Electric: Southern California Edison (SCE)
$ ?.
$ ?.
$ ?.
$ ?.
Footnotes:
* No additional CEQA processing fees are anticipated because the environmental analysis and mitigation
measures have been previously identified.
** Assumes that a Notice of Determination will be filed to document that a decision was made using a
previously prepared environmental document.
***Assumes the SKR Fee has already been paid on the 20 acres at the comer of Solana Way and Margarita
Road; and that the Fee is due only on the seven acre site on Motor Car Parkway, unless receipts can be
provided indicating payment of fees in full, then no additional fees will be assessed.
F:\Clients\GuklantXExhibit I Der processing Fees 091802.doc
3
Exhibit "J"
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
1. City of Temecula Development Impact Fee (DIF), calculated at
$0.866 per square foot of gross floor area.
Exhibit J DIF 091002.doc
Exhibit "K"
CITY'S LEGAL OPINION
[Date]
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
26531 Ynez Road
Temecula, California 92591-4628
Attention: Vice President Customer Service and
Site Operations
Re: Development A.qreement between the City of Temecula and
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am the City Attorney for the City of Temecula (the "City"), and in
such capacity am familiar with the relevant facts and cimumstances in
connection with the adoption and execution of that certain Ordinance No.
of the City (the "Ordinance"), adopted by the City Council of the
City (the "City Council"). The Ordinance approves a Development
Agreement (the "Agreement") between the City and Advanced
Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. ("ACS"), authorizing the Development of
approximately 27.757 acres of land in the City. Capitalized terms not
otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings stated in the
Agreement.
I have examined and relied upon such records, documents,
certificates, and other matters as are in my judgment necessary to enable
me to render the opinions expressed herein. In such examination, I
assumed the legal capacity of all natural persons and business
organizations, the genuineness of all signatures and the authenticity of all
documents submitted to me as originals and the conformity to original
documents of all documents submitted to me as photostatic or certified
copies. I have also assumed the accuracy, completeness and authenticity
of all public records made available to me by the City. I have also
Exhibit K City Opinion 091002
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
[Date]
Page 2
assumed that all writings I have relied on which are dated as of an earlier
date are still accurate as of the date of this opinion. Based on the
foregoing, and with regard to California law, I am of the opinion that:
1. The City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly
existing under the laws of the State of California;
The Ordinance authorizing execution of the Agreement was duly
adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City which was
called and held pursuant to law with all public notice required by
law and at which a quorum was present and acting throughout,
and the Ordinance is in full force and effect and has not been
amended, modified, supplemented or rescinded;
The adoption of the Ordinance and the execution and delivery of
the Agreement' and compliance with the previsions of the
Agreement under the circumstances contemplated by the
Agreement do not and will not conflict with or constitute on the
part of the City, a breach of or default under any agreement or
other instrument applicable to or binding upon the City or any
court order, administrative order, or consent decree to which the
City is a party; and
4. Except for the validation action pending to confirm the legality of
the Owner Participation Agreement between the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and ACS
(Riverside Superior Court No. RIC 373693), there is no action,
suit, proceeding, inquiry or investigation at law or in equity
before or by any court, public board or body, pending or, to my
knowledge, threatened against the City: (a) to restrain or enjoin
the execution or delivery of the Agreement; (b) in any way
'contesting the existence or powers of the City with respect to
the execution and delivery of the Agreement; or (c) which is
likely to adversely affect enforceability of, or the authority or the
ability of the City to perform its obligations under, the Agreement
and the Ordinance.
The opinions set forth above are as of the date hereof only, and I
assume no obligation to update or supplement this opinion to reflect any
facts or circumstances that may hereafter come to my attention or any
changes in law that may hereafter occur or become effective.
The opinions expressed herein relate solely to, are based solely
upon and are limited exclusively to the laws of the state of California. This
opinion is furnished in connection with the Agreement and may not be
Exhibit K City Opinion 09 ! 002
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. '
[Date]
Page 3
relied upon in connection with any other transaction or by any person
other than you.
Very truly yours,
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
Cc:
By: Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
City of Temecula
James B. O'Grady, Assistant City Manager
Susan L. Walker, Esq.
Michael R. Woods, Esq.
Exhibit K City Opinion 091002
Exhibit "L"
OWNER'S LEGAL OPINION
[Date]
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention:
Shawn Nelson
City Manager
Re: Development Agreement between the City of
Temecula and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am counsel for Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., a
California corporation ("ACS"), and in such capacity am familiar with the
relevant facts and circumstances in connection with approval and
execution by ACS of a Development Agreement between ACS and the
City of Temecula (the "Agreement"). I am also familiar with the corporate
status of ACS. The Agreement was approved by the City through
adoption of that certain Ordinance No. , and authorizes the
Development of approximately 27.757 acres of land in the City.
Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings
stated in the Agreement.
I have examined and relied upon such records, documents,
certificates, and other matters as are in my judgment necessary to enable
me to render the opinions expressed herein. In such examination, I
assumed the legal capacity of all natural persons, the genuineness of all
signatures and the authenticity of all documents submitted to me as
originals and the conformity to original documents of all documents
Exhibit L Owner Opinion 090602
City of Temecula
[Date]
Page 2
submitted to me as photostatic or certified copies. I have also assumed
the accuracy, completeness and authenticity of certificates and of all
corporate records and information made available to me by ACS. I have
also assumed that all certificates dated as of an earlier date are still
accurate as of the date of this opinion. Based on the foregoing, and with
regard to California law, I am of the opinion that:
1. ACS is a corporation duly formed and validly existing under the
laws of the State of California;
The execution, delivery and performance by ACS of the
Agreement are within its corporate powers. The Agreement has
been duly authorized by all necessary corporate action on the
part of ACS and has been duly executed and delivered by ACS;
The execution and delivery of the Agreement and compliance
with the provisions of the Agreement under the circumstances
contemplated by the Agreement do not and will not conflict with
or constitute on the part of ACS a breach of or default under any
agreement or other instrument applicable to or binding upon
ACS or any court order or consent decree to which ACS is a
party; and
Except for the validation action pending to confirm the legality of
the Owner Participation Agreement between the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and ACS
(Riverside Superior Court No. RIC 373693), there is no action,
suit, proceeding, inquiry or investigation at law or in equity
before or by any court, public board or body, pending or, to my
knowledge, threatened against ACS: (a) to restrain or enjoin the
execution or delivery of the Agreement; (b) in any way
contesting the existence or powers of ACS with respect to the
execution and delivery of the Agreement; or (c) which is likely to
adversely affect the enforceability of, or the authority or the
ability of ACS to perform its obligations under, the Agreement.
For purposes of factual matters relevant to the opinion expressed
herein, I have relied generally upon certificates and statements of an
officer of or other counsel to ACS. I have acted as outside counsel to
ACS in connection with the negotiation, preparation and execution of the
Agreement, but am not familiar with all of the agreements and contracts of
ACS. I have not undertaken any independent investigation to determine
the accuracy of any such certificates or statements, and any limited inquiry
undertaken by me during the preparation of this opinion should not be
regarded as such an investigation. No inference as to my knowledge of
Exhibit L Owner Opinion 091802
City of Temecula
[Date]
Page 3
any matters bearing on the accuracy of any such statements should be
drawn from the fact of my representation of ACS.
In rendering this opinion, I have assumed the following:
There are no agreements or understandings among the Parties,
written or oral, and there is no usage of trade or course of prior
dealing among the Parties that would, in either case, define,
supplement or qualify the provisions of the Agreement;
2. There has not been any mutual mistake of fact or
misunderstanding, fraud, duress or undue influence; and
3. The conduct of the Parties to the transaction has complied with
any requirement of good faith, fair dealing and conscionability.
I also call to your attention the fact that under the 1989 Report of
the Committee on Corporations of the Business Law Section of the State
Bar of California, certain assumptions, qualifications and exceptions are
implicit in opinions of lawyers. Although I have expressly set forth some
assumptions, qualifications and exceptions herein, I am not limiting or
omitting any others set forth in such report or otherwise deemed standard
by practice for lawyers in California.
The opinions set forth above are as of the date hereof only, and I
assume no obligation to update or supplement this opinion to reflect any
facts or cimumstances that may hereafter come to my attention or any
changes in law that may hereafter occur or become effective.
The opinions expressed herein relate solely to, are based solely
upon and are limited exclusively to the laws of the state of California. This
opinion is furnished in connection with the Agreement and may not be
relied upon: in connection with any other transaction or by any person
other than you.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL R. WOODS
A Professional Corporation
By: Michael R. Woods
Exhibit L Owner Opinion 091802
City of Temecula
[Date]
Page 4
Cc:
Susan L. Walker, Esq.
Peter M. Thorson, Esq.
James B. O'Grady, Assistant City Manager
Exhibit L Owner Opinion 091802
Exhibit "M"
LEGAL HOLIDAYS
1. New Year's Day (January 1st);
2. Martin Luther King Day (third Monday in January);
3. President's Day (third Monday in February);
4, Memorial Day (last Monday in May);
5. Independence Day (July 4th);
6. Labor Day (first Monday in September);
7. Veterans Day (November 11th);
8. Thanksgiving Day (fourth Thursday of November);
9. Friday following Thanksgiving Day;
10. Christmas Day (December 25th).
Holidays falling on Sunday shall be observed on the following Monday. Holidays
falling on Saturday shall be observed on the preceding Friday.
(Reference: Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.32,010 as of July 1, 2002.)
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Project Description: Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and the
Guidant Corporation
Location:
Generally located north of Solana Way, west of Margarita Road,
south of Overland Drive, and east of Ynez Road in the City of
Temecula, County of Riverside, California.
Applicant:
Guidant Corporation
26531 Ynez Road
Temecula, CA 92591-4628
Aesthetics
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
(1). To ensure that the scale and character of proposed
development along Margarita Road and Solana Way are
compatible with adjacent residential uses, the final Site Plan shall
reflect the following:
· A minimum 35-foot landscaped setback shall be provided
along Margarita Road and Solana Way.
· Heights of buildings located along Margarita Road and
Solana Way at the 35~foot setback line shall be limited to
50 feet. The angle formed from Guidant's existing
easternmost property line along Margarita Road, and from
Guidant's existing southernmost property line along Solana
Way, to the 50-foot vertical building height at the setback
line shall form the angular plane that establishes maximum
building heights, not to exceed 80 feet (excluding
mechanical equipment and associated enclosures).
Setbacks on upper floors and building articulation to
reduce the bulk and mass of the buildings shall be
emphasized.
The visual mass of buildings along Margarita Road and Solana
Way shall be reduced through breaks in the structure, tree
plantings, articulation of the facade, and other architectural
devices.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation
measures as part of the final Development Plan review process.
Prior to approval of the final Development Plan.
Community Development Department
Biolo Ical Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites.
(2). Prior to development or ground disturbance, the impacts to
burrowing owls will be mitigated by a combination of pre-
construction surveying, passive owl relocation, and burrow
replacement. Two weeks before initiation of grading activities, a
qualified biologist must survey the entire project area for extant
burrowing owls. The biologist will look for burrowing owls while
walking 20-meter transects. Every potential suitable burrow will be
examined for burrowing owl sign (e.g. feathers, pellets,
whitewash, bones, insect exoskeletons). All burrows found to
house burrowing owls or sign will be flagged and mapped for
removal. When surveying for burrowing owls, it should be noted
that they frequently fly to alternative burrow(s) when disturbed. All
burrows found to be inhabited by burrowing owls will be f'~ed with
one-way doors for a period of three days. After the third day, the
one-way doors will be removed and the burrow network excavated
and closed so that re-occupation cannot occur. Before the one-
way doors are fitted to the burrows, replacement burrows must be
installed ii3 a combination of the channel easement onsite and
offs/re location to be determined. The offsite location must be
considered suitable habitat and of sufficient size. Burrows will be
replaced at a ratio of 2:1 for each burrow found occupied by
burrowing owls. A minimum of six burrows must be installed.
Burrows should be installed so that entrances randomly face the
cardinal directions and that they are randomly distributed
throughout the open space area, however at least 20% should be
installed within the existing flood control channel. The design of
the artificial burrow should be consistent with the latest widely
used design.
(3). General: In order to satisfy Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
requirements, vegetation removal should not occur between
March and August. If vegetation removal must occur between
March and August, then a nesting bird survey must be conducted
by a qualified ornithologist. Trees and shrubs containing active
nests may not be removed until the nesters have finished.
Finishing is defined as having successfully raised a brood until
they leave the nest or nest abandonment. Renesting by birds
requires the process to begin again. Raptors may nest du#ng
most any time of the year. Therefore, the barn Owl nest and raptor
nest must be surveyed prior to removal regardless of time of year.
Removal of the tree may occur when it is determined that they are
finished nesting or are not nesting.
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
(4). In the event federally endangered fairy sh#mp are found off-
site adjacent to the project site, the Applicant shall consult with the
USFWS prior to issuance of grading permits or any actions
involving ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the identified
off-site habitat area so that to the extent feasible, project
construction and/or operational activities will not have an adverse
effect on federally endangered fairy shrimp.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation
measures as part of the grading plan check review process.
Pdor to the issuance of a grading permit.
Planning Department
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
(5). Prior to issuance of grading permits the applicant shall comply
with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set
forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that
the fees have already been paid.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation
measure as part of the grading plan check review process.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Planning Department
Cultural Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation I~leasures:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5; and
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleotological resource or
site or unique geological feature.
(6). Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified
paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the developer for
consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect
to potential paleontological/archaeological impacts. A meeting
between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Community
Development Department- Planning Division staff, and grading
contractor prior to the commencement of grading operations and
the excavation shall be arranged. A qualified archaeologist and a
qualified paleontologist shall be present on-site during grading to
monitor the site for the presence of cultural or paleontological
resources. A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert,
redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery.of cultural
resources or fossils. The developer shall submit to Planning
· Department staff a copy of a contract between the developer and
a qualified archeologist and a paleontologist for monitoring
services during grading of the site.
Planning staff will vedfy compliance with the above mitigation
measure as part of the grading plan check review process.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Public Works Department
Geoloov and Soils
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
· Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction;
· Landslides; and/or
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property.
(7). Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, the
recommendations contained in soils report(s) shall be
implemented.
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible MOnitoring
Party:
Planning staff will verify compliance With the above mitigation
measure as part of the grading and building plan check review
processes.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Public Works Department
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
(8). Pdor to the issuance of grading and building permits, the
Applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department an erosion
control plan prepared in accordance with City requirements.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation
measures as part of the grading and building plan check review
processes.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Public Works Department
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
(9). Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, landscape plans
shall be prepared for all slopes created by the grading and fill of
these sites consistent with "Slope Planting Guidelines" and the
Development Code, and shall provide erosion control on
undeveloped portions of the site.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation ·
measures as part of the certificate of occupancy review
processes.
Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy.
Public Works Department and Planning Department
Noise
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project.
Ensure that the following measures are complied with during
construction:
(10). Construction shall be restricted to the hours of 6:30 A.M. to
6:30 P.M. Monday through Fdday and 7:00 A.M. to 6:30 P.M.
Saturday.
(11). The project contractor shall use construction equipment with
noise shielding and muffling devices.
(12). Construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid
operating several pieces of equipment simultaneously, which
causes high noise levels.
Specific' Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
(13). The Applicant shall notify the communities in advance of
construction activities. The construction manager's (or
representative's) telephone number shall also be provided with
notification so that community concerns can be expressed and
addressed whenever feasible. Forms of notification shall include
one or more of the following: signs posted on the site and/or
distribution of leaflets to adjacent residents.
Building and Safety staff will verify compliance with the above
mitigation measures as part of the grading and building plan check
review processes.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, and during
grading and construction.
Building and Safety Department
Transportation/Traffic
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections);
and
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways.
(14). Marqarita Way/Apartment Driveway: The proposed access
should be located directly across from the existing Apartment
Driveway and form the fourth leg of this intersection. A traffic
signal should be COnstructed with development to allow this
access point full access along Margarita Road' and additional
median modifications and re-striping will be accomplished to
maintain LOS D for existing plus project conditions.
(15). Proiect Driveway/Solana Way: This access point should be
restricted to dght-in/rfght-out only. A stop sign, stop bar, and stop
legend should be provided to control vehicles exiting the site.
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Planning and public works staff will verify compliance with the
above mitigation measures as part of the certificate of occupancy
review process.
Prior to the issuance ora certificate of occupancy.
Public Works Department and Planning Department
Utilities and Services Systems
General Impact:
Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects.
Mitigation Measures:
(16). A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with
the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water
runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and
upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or'proposed off-
site or on-site, public or pdvate, drainage facilities intended to
discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate
ouffall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage
to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity
analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or
upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water
runoff shall be provided as part of development of the project site.
The basis for analysis ands design shall be a storm with a
recurrence interval of one hundred years.
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Public Works staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation
measures as part of the grading plan check review process.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,
Public Works Department
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
R:\D A~Guidant DA\Staff Report CC,doc 17
~ ~mpra ~ner~y'comp~ny
^pri[ 4, 2002
City of' Temec~um
Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula CA 92589-9033
Attention: David Hogan
Guldant Corpera~ion, east Of Motorcar Pkwy and ¥11ez Rd, Ilorthwesterly
of Margaita Road and Solana Way - City of Teme~u~a
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the ebeve-referenead proje.~. Please note
that Southern California Gas Company has facilities tn the area where the above ~lamed
projeot is propceed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any sign~cant
impact on the environment. The sewlce Would be In a~Ordance With the Company's
poli~ies and extension miss on file with the California P~JblJc Utilities Come,sion et the
time con.actual an'angements are made.
You shOuld be aware that thJe letter is not to be interpreted as a contraekml
commitment to serve the proposed project, but Ofity as an Info~tetional sen~.e.' The
availability of natural gas service, as set fodh in fids letter. Is based upon present
conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a pubtlc ulillty, The Southern
California Gas Company i~ under the Juriscll~on of the Callfomis Publto
Commission. We can also be effe~ad by ac',Uone of federal regulatory agencies.
Should the~e agen~'fes ~ any a~n, which affects gas supply, or the conditions
under which send~ Is avs~d~te, gas service will be provided fn accordance w~ revised
conditions.
Typical denland U~e for:
a, Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearly
Single Famfly 799 then'ns/year dwelling unit
Muffl.Famlly 4 or less units 482 therms~,eer dwe,'ling unit
MulU-Family 5 or more un~ 483 thermgyear dwelling unit
These averages are based on total gas consumption In residenflal units sewed by
Southern California Oas Company, and I~ slloutd not be Implied that any partioular
home, epar'm~ant or fi'act of hemes will use these amounts of enemy.
GC-1
GC-2
b. ~ommeroi~l
Due to the tact Itrat oonatruc'don vedas so Widely (a glass building va. e heavily
ineula~e¢l building) end there Is such a wide variation In types of matmlals and ,
a ty~lcel demand figure is not available for this type orr conetru~on.
Caloulaflons woutd need to be made alter the building has been designed.
We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/Induetrlel
customem to provide assistance Jn sele~Jng the.most effe~ve appllC~flona of energy
of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commero~al/Industrlal Support
Center at 1-800-GA8-2000.
IGC-2 (cont.)
GC-3
Technical Sup~'vieor
The Gas Company (GC)
Response to GC Comment No. 1
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for
review and consideration. The concerns expressed in this letter are addressed individually
below.
Response to GC Comment No. 2
The comment is noted. The project site is located in an urbanized area in which natural
gas infrastructure is currently in place. No significant impact would occur related to natural gas
capacity or service capability. The applicant will coordinate with The Gas Company to ensure
that the most appropriate and effective applications of energy conservation programs are
implemented.
Response to GC Comment No. 3
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for
review and consideration.
R:\D A\Guidant DA\Staff Report CC.doc 18
Department of Toxic Substances Control'
~. :/"' '. ' "' ~: 'J~ I~l~ EdWal1F. LOWlT, Director
.-'ypms$,
Winston H, Hlckox i,.~,., [,~ Callfomla 90630
California Env~ronmentl~:¥._.
Protection Agenu---y ........ m'--.--.-~ .~-,~._..
April 19, 2002
Gray Davis
eovemor
Mr. David Hogan
Senior Planner
C~J of Ternecula Plennlt~g Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT'BE~EEN
CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE GUIDANT CORP PROJECT ($CH #2002041010)
Dear Mr. Hogan:
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Negative
Declaration (ND) for the ebove-rnenfloned Project.
Based on Ihs review of the document, DTSC's ~omments am as follows;
1) ne ND needs to identify and determine whether CUrrant or hlstode uses at the
Project site have resulted I~ any release of hazardous wa~ee/substences at the
PmJeot area,
DTSC.t
I DTSC-2
2) The ND needs to Identify any known orpotantlally oontamlnated site within the
proposed PmJeot area. For all ida3;;;ed sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether DTSC-3
condit~ns at the site pose a threat to human health orthe environment.
3) The draft ND should Identify the meu-'hanism to initiate any required investlaaflon
and/or remedlalton for any see that may require remedla~on, ~lnd the . ~,_ _ DTSC-4
government agenu-'y to provide appropriate regulatory oversight.
4) If the property had vegetation or agricultural use, enslte SOilS could (;ontaln
pesticide residues The site may have contdbutad to soil, and groIJrldwater DTSC-5
contamination. Proper' Investigation and remedial actions should be oonducted
at'the site prior to its new development.
5) I~ any of the adjacent properties, a.m contaminated with hazardol~ ohemlcal$,
p poses aevelopmem may fell unaer the 'Border Zone of a Coi',l~mlnated I DTSC-6
~ Printed oll R~ Paper
Mr, Dav~ Hogan
Aprillg, 2002
Page 2
6)
Property." Appropriate precautions should be taken prior to constrecifon If the
proposed project Is on a "Border Zone Property."
The project constmctl°n may require s011 excevaflan and soil filling in certain
areas. Appropriate sampling ia required prior to disposal of the excavated sbil. If
the soil is oontamlnated, proPe~y dispose of It rather than placing it in another
location. Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) may be. applicable to these soils.
Also, if the project is planning to Import sot] to back~l! the areas excavated,
Proper sampling should be conducte~ to make sure that the Imported soil is frae
of corttam[nation.
7) If the' project requires demolition, renovation and addition' of building structures,
investigate the presence of lead paints and asbestos corttalnlng materials
(ACMe) in the currently'existing buildings at the site. If the presence of lead or
ACMe are suspected, proper precautions should be taken during demolition
activities. Additionally, the contaminants should be remediated In compliance
with the California envfronmantal regulations.
8) If during construction the project, soil and/or groundwater contamination are
suspected, construction In the area ehourd cease and appropriate Health and
Safety p~ures..should be Implemented. If it is determined that contaminated
soil and/or groundwater exist, the ND should identify how any required
investigation and/or remedia0on will be ~onducted, and the government agency
to provide appropriate regulatory oversight.
DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA)
preparation and oleanup oye. rsight through the Volu'ntary Cleanup Program (VCP).
For add~onal lnformatlon on the VCP, please visit DTSC's web site at-
If you have any questions regarding this Jotter, please contact Mr. Johnson P. Abraham,
Project Manager at !714) 484.5476.
Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E.
Unit Chief
Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch
Cypress Office
tDTSC-6
(cont.)
DTSC-7
DTSC-8
DTSC-9
DTSC-tO
Mr, DaHd Hogan
Apd119,2002
Page 3
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
State Clearinghouse
P.O, Box 3044
Sacramento, California 95812-3044
Mr, Guenther W. Moskat, Chief
.Planning end Environmental Analysis SectJon
CEQA TPaoklng Center
Department of Toxic Substances Control
P.O. Box 806
Sacramento. California 95812-0806
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
Response to DTSC Comment No. 1
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for
review and consideration. The concerns expressed in this letter are addressed individually
below.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 2
Historic uses at the project site may have resulted in prior release of hazardous
wastes/substances in the project area; however, appropriate remedial activities have been
accomplished. Two dairies, consisting of four residential houses and two milking barns, were
formerly located on an overall 41.6-acre site located at the northwestern corner of Solana Way
and Margarita Road, of which the project site is a part. An Environmental Site Assessment was
performed in April and May 1990 in order to evaluate the presence of environmental
contamination on the 41.6-acre site. The site reconnaissance identified nine possible sources
of environmental concern including the following: 1) manure; 2) wastewater collected in the
ponds; 3) six aboveground gasoline and diesel storage tanks; 4) miscellaneous empty and
partially filled containers of hydraulic oil, herbicide, motor oil, muriatic acid, detergent, and
unlabeled or unidentified containers; 5) one diesel underground storage tank (UST); 6) one
gasoline UST; 7) one hydraulic oil blow-down tank (muffler) for an air compressor formerly
located in the northern milking barn; 8) a concrete-lined, subgrade, mechanic's pit in an
equipment maintenance bay; and 9) apparent patches of oil-stained soil. During further
investigation of the site, an additional compressor blow-down tank was discovered.
In order to appropriately remediate the 41.6-acre site for eventual mass grading and
future redevelopment, the following was accomplished in 1991: 1) disposal of manure; 2)
removal of water accumulated in holding ponds; 3) inspection and remediation of residences
and milking barns for asbestos; 4) packing and disposal of household hazardous materials; 5)
demolition and disposal of all structures and site improvements; 6) removal of USTs; 7) removal
of a mechanic's service pit; 8) abandonment of groundwater monitoring wells; 9) removal of
septic tanks; and 10) disposal of hydrocarbon-affected soil.
In January 1992, a Closure Report was prepared by Woodward Clyde and submitted to
the County of Riverside Department of Health Services, Environmental Health Division (DHS) in
order to satisfy Riverside County requirements to document removal of the tanks and
acknowledge that remedial activities were complete. In addition, according to the Closure
Report, during April 1990, three groundwater monitoring wells were installed within the 41.6-
acre property (which includes the project site) to assess possible impact to groundwater.
Contaminants were not detected in water samples collected from the three wells, and upon
approval from County DHS, the monitoring wells were appropriately abandoned.
In February 1992, the County of Riverside DHS issued a letter to the applicant indicating
that with the provision that the information contained in the Closure Report was accurate, no
further remediation action was required. Based on this information, it is assumed that historic
uses of the site no longer pose a hazard, as the site has been appropriately and effectively
remediated. No mitigation would be necessary.
R:\D A~Guidant DA\Staff Report CC.doc 19
Response to DTSC Comment No. 3
No known or potentially contaminated site exists within the project site. Refer to
Response to DTSC Comment No. 2. In addition, as part of the Environmental Site Assessment
that was performed in April and May 1990, a database search for hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 was performed on the 41.6-acre site,
which includes the project site. According to the records review, there are no recorded State
Superfund, National Priority List (NPL) sites, or landfills (active or inactive) within one-quarter
mile of the 41.6-acre site, including the project site. In addition, there are no Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act-permitted facilities, Cortese-listed sites or unauthorized tank
release cases within the site vicinity. The Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners Office
had no records of permits for restricted material use at the project site, and the Eastern
Municipal Water District had no record of permits that would allow the site to discharge to the
sewer system.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 4
The comment is noted. As described in detail under Response to DTSC Comment No. 2,
remedial actions took place on the project site in 1991. In February 1992, the County of
Riverside Department of Health issued a letter indicating that no further remedial action was
required.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 5
As indicated previously under Response to DTSC Comment No. 3, the Riverside County
Agricultural Commissioners Office had no records of permits for restricted material use at 41.6-
acre subject site, which includes the project site. For the time period that their records have
been maintained, the site has not been involved in agricultural production. In addition, the
project site has been investigated for potential soil and groundwater contamination, and
appropriate remedial activities have occurred. Refer to Response to DTSC Comment No. 2 for
a detailed discussion of potential soil and groundwater contamination.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 6
The project site is not located on a "Border Zone Property," as it does not fall within
2,000 feet from a contaminated site. Refer to Response to DTSC Comment No. 3. No impacts
are anticipated.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 7
As described previously under Response to DTSC Comment No. 2, prior remedial
activities have ensured that the soil currently on the site is free of contamination. The applicant
proposes to balance soils onsite in order to prepare for construction; therefore, soils will neither
be imported onto the site nor will soils on the site be exported. No impacts are anticipated.
R:\D A~Guidant DA\Staff Report CC,doc 20
Response to DTSC Comment No. 8
The project will not require demolition or renovation of building structures, as the site is
currently vacant. While structures historically were located onsite, these structures have since
been removed. Proper precautions were taken during demolition activities and the
contaminants were remediated prior to their removal in accordance with California
environmental regulations,
Response to DTSC Comment No. 9
As indicated previously, the project site has been investigated for potential soil and
groundwater contamination, and appropriate remedial activities took place in 1991 to prepare
the project site for eventual mass grading and future redevelopment. Refer to Response to
DT$C Comment No. 2 for a detailed discussion of potential soil and groundwater contamination.
Response to DTSC Comment No. 10
The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the appropriate decision-makers.
R:~D A\Guidant DA\Staff Report CC.doc 21
April 4, 2002
Mr. David Hogan
Senior Planner
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temec, ula, CA 92589-9033
Subject:
Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration for the Expansion of the Ouidant
Corporation Campus
Dear Mr. Hogan:
We recetved a ~3py of the Notice of Pmpesed Negative Declaration on Apn'l. 1, 2002 for
the Expansion of the Guidant Corpsratlon .Campus Project in the City of Ternecula and
am providing you with the following comments:
RCTC is parlJ~ipating In the development of the Riverside County Integrated
Project (RCIP) and the Community EnvlronrnentaJ Acceptability Process
(CETAP), As part of the RClP and CE-TAP, RCTC requests that 'the Expansion
of the Guidant Coq3oration Campus Project' not only be conditioned to study and
mitigate for local Impacts, but also regional impacts to the tmnspo~rtion system.
Alternatives proposed in the WinchestedTemeoula Con-tdor RCIP/CETAP study
indicate a major Interchange at the Intamtate 15 (I-15) and State Route 79
(Winchester Road) Io(~Uon. Your traffio Information provide~ no IndioaG,..1 what
Impact your.5,089 trips per day will :ha,,~ on ~dlther the..$R~79 interchange
Immediately north, of the project nor the Rancho Catifomla Read Interchange to
the south. '
It Is suggested In.your Nof~e Section 10 that all of'the traffic Impacts associated
~ffh "the Expansion of lbs Guldant Coiporeflon Campus Project" will be mitigated
to a level less than slgnEIcant (Level of 8e~lce D). RCTC Is still concerned that
existing and future year Levels of ~ (LOS) will be slgnlflcantty deter~rated
to Level of Service "F", especially at freeway Illterchange$. Potential cumulative.
Impacts are not mentioned.
2)
Please ensure that you am coo~lnating directly with Caltrans concerning t-t6 for
this project.
3)
I.RCTC-t
RCTC-2
IRCTC-3
IRCTC-4
April 4, 2002
Page -2-
4)
RCTC would like to maintain a coordinated effort for all projects that affect I
transportation in western Rivaraide County, Please conta(~ RCTC If you haveI RCTC-S
any questions concerning this prooess.
Should you have additional information, please contact Bechtel Measure "A" Project I
Coordinator, Gusfavo Quintero, at (g0g)787.7935. Thank you for giving RCTC theI RCTC-6
opportunity to comment on your proposed Negative Declaration.
Sincerely,
~u~lta, puty Exectltive D rector RCTC
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Cc: Linda Grimes, Caltrans 08
Bill Hughes, Mike Davls, Gustavo Quintero- Bechtel
Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)
Response to RCTC Comment No. 1
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for
review and consideration, The concerns expressed in this letter are addressed individually
below.
Response to RCTC Comment No.2
The project site is being developed in conformance with the City of Temecula's General
Plan and Development Code. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)(D), the
Guidant Corporation Campus Expansion Initial Study has referenced and incorporated
information from the General Plan EIR in analyzing the project's potential significant
environmental effects.
According to Section 21083.3(b) of the Public Resources Code, "If a development
project is consistent with the general plan of a local agency and an environmental impact report
was certified with respect to that general plan, the application of this division to the approval of
that development project shall be limited to effects on the environment which are peculiar to the
parcel or to the project and which were not addressed as significant effects in the prior
environmental impact report, or which substantial new information shows will be more significant
than described in the prior environmental impact report." Furthermore, as described in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15183, CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the
development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies
for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might
be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar
to the project or its site. Ultimate development of the project site has been addressed under the
City of Temecula General Plan, adopted in 1993, and analyzed within the 1993 certified General
Plan EIR (copies of these documents are available for review at the City of Temecula
Community Development Department). The proposed project's maximum potential buildout
falls within the target FAR (0.40) for the site as identified within the City's General Plan and
analyzed within the General Plan EIR. Additionally, there is no substantial new information that
would indicate that impacts would be more significant than previously described in the General
Plan EIR. Therefore, with the exception of potentially significant impacts "peculiar to the project"
which are identified in the Initial Study and mitigation measures provided to reduce these
potential impacts to a less than significant level, the Initial Study incorporates the General Plan
EIR document by reference and does not re-address the impact that the proposed project, or
the proposed project plus related projects, would have on the SR-79 interchange immediately
north of the project site or the Rancho California Road interchange to the south, as potential
impact to these intersections was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Response to RCTC Comment No. 3
The Guidant Corporation Campus Expansion Initial Study identifies significant
environmental effects related to traffic/circulation that cannot be avoided or substantially
lessened despite the proJect's incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. These impacts
associated with cumulative traffic, including impacts to freeway interchanges, are fully
addressed in the City's General Plan EIR, and are not peculiar to the project or its site.
Furthermore, the project has provided mitigation measures that ara feasible at the project-level
and has also incorporated design features that contribute to implementation of the program-
R:\D A\Guidant DA\Staff Report CC.doc 22
level mitigation measures set forth in the City General Plan EIR. In accordance with Section
15152(f)(3)(C) of the CEQA Guidelines, the only purpose of including analysis of such effects in
another environmental impact report would be to put the agency in a position to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the effects. The City previously adopted
a Statement of Overriding Considerations, acknowledging significant unavoidable impacts
related to traffic, and maximum buildout potential of the project site was addressed in the
General Plan EIR; therefore, significant environmental effects related to traffic/circulation have
been adequately addressed.
All cumulative effects for the various land uses of the project site as well as the
surrounding developments were analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report.
With cumulative traffic (estimated proposed project traffic plus traffic from future adjacent
development), all study area intersections are expected to operate at acceptable levels at peak
hours with the exception of Margarita Road at Apartment Driveway and Motor Car Parkway at
Solana Way. Incorporation of mitigation would reduce these potentially significant impacts to a
less than significant level.
Response to RCTC Comment No. 4
As indicated previously under Response to RCTC Comment Nos. 2 and 3, impacts
associated with cumulative traffic including impacts to 1-15, are fully addressed in the City's
General Plan EIR, and are not peculiar to the project or its site. Ultimate development of the
project site has been addressed under the City of Temecula General Plan, adopted in 1993, and
analyzed within the 1993 certified General Plan EIR (copies of these documents are available
for review at the City of Temecula Community Development Department). The proposed
project's maximum potential buildout falls within the target FAR (0.40) for the site as identified
within the City's General Plan and analyzed within the General Plan EIR. Additionally, there is
no substantial new information that would indicate that impacts to 1-15 would be more significant
than previously described in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, with the exception of potentially
significant impacts "peculiar to the project" which are identified in the Initial Study and mitigation
measures provided to reduce these potential impacts to a less than significant level, the Initial
Study incorporates the General Plan EIR document by reference and does not re-address the
impact that the proposed project, or the proposed project plus related projects, would have on I-
15.
For that reason, direct coordination with Caltrans concerning 1-15 was not undertaken. It should
be noted, however, that a copy of the Draft Initial Study was distributed to Caltrans, District 8 by
the State Clearinghouse. Caltrans did not submit any comments.
Response to RCTC Comment No. 5
The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the appropriate decision-
makers.
Response to RCTC Comment No. 6
The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the appropriate decision-makers.
R:~D A\Guidant DA~Staff Report CC.doc 23
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
COLOR AND MATERIAL PALETTE
(SEE SEPARATE HANDOUT)
R:\D A\Guidant DA\Staff Report CC.doc 24
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
OCTOBER 22, 2002
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:46
P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President
Stone presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Comerchero
Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of October 8, 2002.
2 Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, CSD 02-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
APPROVING THE MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS
MASTER PLAN
MOTION: Director Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 2. The
motion was seconded by Director Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception
of Director Comerchero who was absent,
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
No comment.
Minutes.csd\102202 I
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
Deputy Director of Community Services Ruse invited the Councilmembers and public to the semi-
annual Make-a-Difference Day on Saturday, October 26, 2002, at 8:00 A.M. to 12:00; reviewed the
various staging areas; and commented on the involvement various agencies such as CR&R,
County Waste Management, WRCOG, etc. In response to Director Stone, Ms. Ruse advised that
large items as well as hazardous materials, with the exception of paint, may be taken that same day
to Temecula Valley High School between the hours of 8:00 - 2:00 P.M.
Ms. Ruse as well apprised the public of the upcoming Halloween and Harvest Family Carnival on
Saturday, October 26, 2002, at Margarita Community Park from 2:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.
It was also noted that an application for the City's Electric Light Parade is available at the
Community Services Department.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
No comment.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
No comments.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:47 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, November 12, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey E. Stone, President
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
Minutes csd\102202 2
ITEM 2
APPROVAL~,o,~--'~'''
CITY ATTORNEY /
DIRECTOR OF FINA~CE.__~
CITY MANAGER ~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
November 12, 2002
Tract Map No. 23209 - Service Level B, Proposed Residential Street
Lighting: Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping and Slope
Maintenance and Service Level D, Trash and Recycling Collection
Services Rates and Charges
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Barbara Smith, Management Analyst
That the Board of Directors:
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING, CALLING AND
GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 6, 2003
REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND
CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23209 IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH
SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES
BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XlIID,
SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION.
Approve the Election Notice, Ballot, and Procedures for the Completion, Return and
Tabulation of the Ballots.
Authorize staff to mail the ballots to the affected property owners pursuant to the
aforementioned process.
BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) operates under the
authority of Community Services District Law and provides residential street lighting services,
perimeter and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services to numerous residential
subdivisions within the City of Temecula through Service Levels B, C and D.
Pursuant to the request of the property owner, staff has initiated proceedings to assume the
responsibility for long-term residential street lighting services, perimeter landscaping and slope
maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within Tract Map No. 23209 beginning Fiscal
R:~mithb~Elections',23209 Election~Staff-Nofice of Election.d~c
10/29/2002
Year 2003-2004. On September 17, 2002 and in accordance with Proposition 218, the Board of
Directors adopted the resolution of intention to file the levy report on lots 1-220 within Tract Map No.
23209. The Notice of Public Hearing was subsequently mailed to the property owner identifying the
proposed TCSD Rates and Charges for each affected parcel as follows:
Service Level B
$25.68 per residential parcel
Service Level C
$200.00 per residential parcel
Service Level D
$172.56 per occupied residential parcel
At tonight's Public Hearing, the Board of Directors must hear and consider all objections or protests to
the levy report for Tract Map No. 23209 and the proposed rates and charges. If the property owner
presents a written protest, the Board must reject the proposed fee and abandon any further
proceedings. In this instance, a homeowner's association would be required to assume the street
lighting and perimeter landscape maintenance responsibilities.
However, if the property owner does not submit a written protest against the proposed rates and
charges, the Board of Directors may then adopt the proposed fee subject to an election requiring a
majority approval of the affected property owners. In this instance, the Board of Directors can order
and call an election for January 6, 2003, and authorize staff to proceed with mailing a notice and ballot
to the property owner of Tract Map No. 23209, a copy of which is attached for your review.
Pursuant to the ballot process, staff is also recommending the approval of the attached Procedures for
the Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots. The ballot procedure explains the process for
completion, return and tabulation of the ballot and will be included as part of the mailed ballot
documents. The ballot can only be completed by the property owner of each parcel. In order to be
counted, the ballot must be completed in compliance with these procedures and returned to the City
Clerk/District Secretary prior to 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003. The City Clerk/District Secretary will
open the ballot on January 6, 2003 at 4:00 p.m. in the Main Conference Room in City Hall. The results
of the election shall be announced by the City Clerk/District Secretary at that time, and presented to the
Community Services District for formal certification at it's meeting on January 14, 2003.
FISCAL IMPACT: In the event that the Board of Directors calls for an election, staff will prepare the
notices, ballot and election procedures in-house.
If approved, upon build-out of the development, the proposed rates and charges of $25.68 and $200.00
per parcel will generate an annual levy of $5,649.60 and $44,000.00 respectively, for the Service Level
B and Service Level C maintenance programs. The proposed Service Level D charge of $172.56 per
parcel will generate an annual levy of $37,963.20. As per the contractual agreement with CR&R, Inc.,
the City franchised trash/recycling hauler, this rate shall be adjusted with the Consumer Price Index
(CPI). Pursuant of Proposition 218, these amounts may be increased by the TCSD only after
conducting a public hearing, however, mailed ballot proceedings are not required to increase Service
Level D rates and charges. Actual costs for providing long-term residential street lighting and perimeter
landscaping and slope maintenance services within Tract Map No. 23209 will be absorbed into Service
Level B and Service Level C upon installation of said improvements.
ATrACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution Calling and Noticing the Election.
Notice and Ballot Form.
Procedures for Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots.
Vicinity Map
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2002 - __
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING,
CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON JANUARY 6, 2003 REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B AND
SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO.
23209 IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B AND
SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING FISCAL
YEAR 2003-2004 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIIID, SECTION 6 OF
THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE
DISTRICT HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES, DECLARES, DETERMINES AND ORDERS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Pursuant to the requirements of Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California
Constitution, there is hereby called and ordered to be held on January 6, 2003, an election for the
purpose of submitting to the property owners of Tract Map No. 23209 in the City of Temecula
proposed Service Level B and Service Level C Rates and Charges beginning Fiscal Year 2003-
2004.
Section 2. The notice and ballot to be submitted to the property owners shall be
substantially in the form attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. The Board of Directors hereby approves the Procedures for the
Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots ("Ballot Procedures") presented to the Board at this
meeting and directs such procedu res be placed on file in the office of the Secretary of the Temecula
Community Services District and open to public inspection.
Section 3. All ballots must be received by the Secretary of the Temecula Community
Services District no later than 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003. In all particulars not recited in this
Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided in the Ballot Procedures.
Section 4. The Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District is hereby
authorized to canvass the returns of the election. The officers and staff of the Temecula Community
Services District are hereby authorized and directed to take such further action as may be necessary
or appropriate in preparing for and conducting the election.
R:~smithbXElections~3209 Electiou~Res o~ Election.doc 1
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community
Services District this 12th day of November, 2002.
Jeffrey E. Stone, President
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, Susan W. Jones, CMS, District Secretary, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing
Resolution No. CSD 2002-__ was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Community Services District at the regular meeting thereof, held on the 12th day of November,
2002, by the following vote of the Board of Directors.
AYES: DIRECTORS:
NOES: DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: DIRECTORS:
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
R:~smithb\Elections~3209 Election\Reso- Election .doc '2 10/29/2002
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF ELECTION
PROPOSED SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR
TRACT NO. 23209 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004.
Pursuant to the request of the property owners of 220 future residential lots within Tract Map No.
23209, the Temecula Community Services District has initiated proceedings to assume maintenance of
residential street lighting and perimeter landscaping and slope areas within Tract No. 23209 beginning
with the Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Pursuant to this request, and pursuant to Government Code Section
61621.2, the TCSD caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and filed with the Secretary of
the TCSD, which contains a description of each parcel of property to be charged for this maintenance
and the proposed amount of the maintenance charge for each parcel for Fiscal Year 2003-2004
The proposed Service Level B rate and charge against each of the above mentioned parcels within
Tract Map No. 23209 beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004 is $25.68. The proposed levy rate of $25.68
per parcel provides revenue for residential street lighting services within this subdivision. The
proposed Service Level C rate and charge against each of the parcels beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004
is $200.00. The proposed levy rate of $200.00 per parcel provides revenue for the maintenance of
perimeter landscaping and slope areas within this subdivision. This amount was calculated by dividing
the total estimated maintenance cost upon build-out of the development $44,000.00 by the total
number of parcels within the subdivision.
On November 12, 2002 the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing on the Report and the
proposed Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of
Directors heard and considered all objections or protests to the Report and to the proposed rates and
charges. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board determined that written protests against the
proposed fees were presented by less than a majority of owners of the parcels on which the proposed
fees were to be imposed, and levied the rates and charges subject to approval by the property owners
subject to the proposed rates and charges.
The Board of Directors encourages you to return the enclosed ballot indicating whether you support or
oppose the proposed Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges. Ballots may be mailed to
the City Clerk/District Secretary at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, or otherwise
delivered to the City Clerk/District Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California,
92590 no later than 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003.
The proposed Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges will be abandoned if the ballot is
not returned in favor of the proposed rates and charges. In the event the proposed charges are
abandoned, the homeowners association will assume responsibility for residential street lighting and
perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance services within the subdivision.
Enclosed is your ballot and the District's Procedures for the completion, return and tabulation of
Ballots. Please consult these Procedures for details regarding the ballot process. You may also contact
the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office at (909) 694-6444; by mail, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula,
California, 92589-9033; or in person, at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590, for
further information regarding this matter.
RSsmithb\Elections~23209 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 10/29/2002
OFFICIAL BALLOT
TRACT NO. 23209
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND
CHARGES FOR RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING SERVICES
AND PERIMETER AND SLOPE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
PROPERTY:
Being a subdivision of parcels 4, 5, 6 & 7
of Parcel Map recorded in Book 1 of
Parcel Maps, at Pages 44 through 46,
inclusive, records of Riverside County,
CA. Also being a portion of Section 29,
Township 7 South, Range 2 West,
S.B.B.M.
OWNER:
Mr. John B. Vance
Assistant Secretary
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
10721 Treena Street, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92131
~-~ YES, I approve of the proposed
annual levy of $25.68 for Service
Level B and $200.00 for Service
Level C on the parcels identified on
this ballot.
~--~ NO, I do not approve of the
proposed annual levy of $25.68 for
Service Level B and $200.00 for
Service Level C on the parcels
identified on this ballot.
I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury that I am the recorded owner, or the authorized representative
of the recorded owner, of the parcels identified above.
Signature
Print Name
Date
CHECK ONLY ONE BOX. BALLOTS MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK AND RETURNED
TO THE CITY CLERK/DISTRICT SECRETARY AT THE CITY OF TEMECULA, P.O. BOX
9033/43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, 92589-9033 PRIOR TO
3:30 P.M. ON JANUARY 6, 2003.
RAsmithb~Elecfions~23209 Election\Ballot Form.doc 10/29/2002
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PROCEDURES FOR THE
COMPLETION, RETURN, AND TABULATION OF BALLOTS
I. Completion of Ballots
Who may complete a ballot
A ballot may be completed by the owner of the parcel to be charged. As used in these
Procedures, the term "owner" includes the owner's authorized representative. If the owner of the
parcel is a partnership, joint tenancy, or tenancy in common, a ballot may be completed by any
of the general partners, joint tenants, or tenants in common. Only one ballot may be completed
for each parcel.
Duplicate ballots
If a ballot is lost, destroyed or never received, the City Clerk/District Secretary will provide a
duplicate ballot to the owner upon receipt of a request in writing to the City Clerk, at P.O. Box
9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, or otherwise delivered to the City Clerk/District
Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. The duplicate ballot will
be marked to show the date on which the ballot was provided and to identify it as a duplicate
ballot.
Marking and signing the ballot
To complete a ballot, the owner of the parcel must (1) mark the appropriate box supporting or
opposing the proposed rate and charge, and (2) sign, under penalty of perjury, the statement on
the ballot that the person completing the ballot is the owner of the parcel or the owner's
authorized representative. Only one box may be marked on each ballot. Ballots must be
completed in ink.
Only ballots provided by the District will be accepted
The District will only accept ballots mailed or otherwise provided to owners by the District.
Photocopies, faxes, and other forms of the ballot will not be accepted.
II. Return of Ballots
Who may return ballots
A ballot may be returned by the owner of the parcel or by anyone authorized by the owner to
return the ballot.
R:~smithb\Elections~3209 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 10/29/2002
Where to return ballots
Ballots may be mailed to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula,
California, 92589-9033, (the District has provided a return postage-paid envelope). Ballots may
also be delivered in person to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office at 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Ballots may not be returned by fax.
When to return ballots
All returned ballots must be received by the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office prior to 3:30
p.m. on January 6, 2003. The City Clerk/District Secretary will stamp on the ballot the date of
its receipt.
Withdrawal of ballots
After returning a ballot to the District, the person who signed the ballot may withdraw the ballot
by submitting a written request in person to the City Clerk/District Secretary at 43200 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Such request must be received by the City
Clerk/District Secretary prior to 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003. If any ballot has been withdrawn,
the person withdrawing the ballot may request a duplicate ballot. The City Clerk/District
Secretary will retain all withdrawn ballots and will indicate on the face of such ballots that they
have been withdrawn.
III. Tabulation of Ballots
Which ballots will be counted
Only ballots which are completed and returned in compliance with these procedures will be
counted. Ballots received by the City Clerk/District Secretary after 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003
will not be counted. Ballots which are not signed by the owner will not be counted. Ballots with
no boxes marked, or with more than one box marked, will not be counted. Ballots withdrawn in
accordance with these procedures will not be counted.
The City Clerk/District Secretary will keep a record of each duplicate ballot provided to an
owner and will verify, prior to counting any duplicate ballot, that only one ballot has been
returned for the parcel. If a non-duplicate ballot has been returned, the District will count the
non-duplicate ballot and disregard all duplicate ballots. If only duplicate ballots have been
returned, the District will count the earliest provided duplicate ballot and disregard the later
provided duplicate ballots.
How ballots will be tabulated
Ballots may be counted by hand, by computer or by any other tabulating device.
R:~smithb\Elec~ions~3209 Election\Ballot Notice and Procedures.dcc 10/29/2002
Who will tabulate ballots
Ballots will be tabulated by the City Clerk/District Secretary.
When and where will the ballots be tabulated
Ballots will be opened and tabulated on Monday, January 6, 2003 at 4:00 p.m. in the Main
Conference Room at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590. This
process is open to the general public.
Results of tabulation
The results of the tabulation will be announced following the completion of the tabulation and
entered in the minutes of the next Board of Directors meeting January 14, 2003.
IV. Resolution of Disputes
In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is the owner of the parcel to
which the ballot applies, the District will make such determination from the last equalized
assessment roll and any evidence of ownership submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary.
The District will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to ownership of
property and the District's determination of ownership will be final and conclusive.
In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is an authorized representative
of the owner of the parcel, the District may rely on the statement on the ballot, signed under
penalty of perjury, that the person completing the ballot is the owner's authorized representative
and any evidence submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary. The District will be under no
duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to whether the signer of the ballot is an
authorized representative of the owner and the District's determination will be final and
conclusive.
V. General Information
For further information, contact the City Clerk/District Secretary at (909) 694-6444: by mail, at
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033; or in person, at 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590.
R:\smithb\Elections~23209 Election~Ballot Notice and Procedures.doc 10/29/2002
VIC,!NITY MAP
~Fract No. 23209
Not to Scale
PROJECT
SITE
AHERN
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
City Council
Barbara Smith, Management Analyst ~
November 12, 2002
Supplemental information to CSD Agenda Item 2
As per City Attorney Thorson, the attached Resolution, Exhibit A and Exhibit B should replace the
Resolution and Exhibits originally submitted with this Staff Report.
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ORDERING,
CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF AN ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON JANUARY 6, 2003 REGARDING SERVICE LEVEL B
AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT
MAP NO. 23209 IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH SERVICE LEVEL B
AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES BEGINNING
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XlIID,
SECTION 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES, DECLARES, DETERMINES AND ORDERS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, effective December 1,
1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD"), to
provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction.
Section 2. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the
TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for services furnished by it, and
has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by
the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, property
taxes collected within the TCSD in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections
61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive.
Section3. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, the TCSD
caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and filed by the Secretary of the TCSD, which
Report contains a description of each parcel of real property within Tract No. 23209 and the
proposed amount of the rates and charges against each parcel for fiscal year 2003-04. The
Report containing the proposed rates and charges is attached hereto as Exhibit A, entitled
"Project Summary," and incorporated herein by this reference. A copy of the Report is on file in
the office of the Secretary of the TCSD, and is available for public inspection.
Section 4. By previous resolution, the Board of Directors acknowledged the
filing of the Report, and appointed a time and place for a public hearing on the Report and the
proposed rates and charges. Notice of the public hearing was mailed and published as required
by law and affidavits of publication and mailing are on file with the Secretary of the TCSD.
Section 5. On November 12, 2002, the Board of Directors conducted a public
hearing on the Report and the proposed rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of
Directors heard and considered all oral and written objections, protests and comments by any
interested person concerning the Report, the proposed rates and charges, and the method of
collection of such rates and charges.
Resos.CSD~Resos 2002~02- 1
Section 6. The Board of Directors hereby finds and determines that, based
on the Report and the District budget, the rates and charges as set out on Exhibit A do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the services to be provided by the TCSD within Tract 23209 for
fiscal year 2003-04.
Section 7. The Board of Directors hereby finds and determines that written
protests have not been filed by a majority of owners of identified parcels. The Board of
Directors hereby overrules any and all objections and protests and adopts the rates and
charges for fiscal year 2003-04 as set out on Exhibit A for the services to be provided by the
TCSD for fiscal year 2003-04
Section 8. The TCSD shall collect such rates and charges at the same time
and in the same manner and by the same persons as, together with and not separately from,
the property taxes collected within the TCSD. These rates and charges shall be delinquent at
the same time and thereafter be subject to the same delinquency penalties as such property
taxes. All laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes, including,
but not limited to, those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund
and redemption, are applicable to these rates and charges, except for California Revenue and
Taxation Code Section 4831. However, if for the first year the charge is levied, the real property
to which the charge relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for
value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and attaches thereon,
prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes appear on the roll, then the charge
shall not result in a lien against the property, but instead shall be transferred to the unsecured
roll for collection.
Section 9. If a property owner subject to these rates and charges questions
the classification of the owner's property for fiscal year 2003-04, or claims that an error has
been made with respect to the implementation of the rates and charges or the application of the
rates and charges to the owner's property for that fiscal year, such property owner must appeal
the levy by filing an appeal with the Secretary of the TCSD before 5:00 p.m. on December 1,
2003, pursuant to procedures established by the TCSD, in order to be considered under the
appeal of classification or correction of errors program.
Section 10. If a property owner subject to these rates and charges believes
that payment of the rates and charges for fiscal year 2003-04 would create a hardship for that
property owner during that fiscal year, such property owner must appeal the levy by filing a
hardship appeal with the Secretary of the TCSD before 5:00 p.m. on December 1, 2003,
pursuant to procedures established by the TCSD, in order to be considered under the hardship
appeal program.
Section 11. The Secretary of the TCSD is hereby ordered to transmit or cause
to be trensmitted to the County Auditor of the County of Riverside, California before August 8,
2003 the Report and the property tax roll with such rates and charges enumerated for each
parcel not exempt therefrom; and the County Auditor is hereby designated, required,
empowered, authorized, instructed, directed and ordered to make collection of all such rates
and charges as shown on that roll and to perform any and all duties necessary therefore.
Section 12. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Aci (CEQA), the
levy and collection of these rates and charges is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and Section 15273 of the State CEQA Guidelines
Resos.CSDU:iesos 2002~2- 2
because the rates and charges are necessary to maintain existing improvements within the
TCSD,
Section 13. The Secretary of the TCSD shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
Section 14. The Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges
adopted by this resolution shall take effect only if they are approved by a majority of the property
owners cf the property subject to the rates and charges voting at an election to be held on
January 6, 2003. The Board of Directors hereby calls said election and orders that said election
be conducted as a mail ballot election pursuant to the requirements of Article XIIID, Section 6 of
the California State Constitution.
Section 15. The notice and ballot to be submitted to the property owners shall
be substantially in the form attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 16. The Board of Directors hereby approves the Procedures for the
Completion, Return and Tabulation of Ballots ("Ballot Procedures") presented to the Board at
this meeting and directs such procedures be placed on file in the office of the Secretary of the
Temecula Community Services District and open to public inspection.
Section 17. All ballots must be received by the Secretary of the Temecula
Community Services District no later than 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003. In all particulars not
recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided in the Ballot
Procedures.
Section 18. The Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District is
hereby authorized to canvass the returns of the election. The officers and staff of the Temecula
Community Services District are hereby authorized and directed to take such further action as
may be necessary or appropriate in preparing for and conducting the election.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecuia
Community Services District this 12th day of November, 2002.
Jeffrey E. Stone, President
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
Resos,CSD\Resos 2002\02- 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, Secretary for the Temecula Community Services District, do hereby
certify that Resolution No. CSD 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of
Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at a regular meeting thereof held this
12th day of November 2002, by the following vote:
AYES: DIRECTORS:
NOES: DIRECTORS:
ABSENT:
DIRECTORS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
Resos. CSD~Resos 2002~02- 4
Exhibit A
CITY OF TEMECULA
TRACT MAP NO. 23209
INITIAL LEVY REPORT
Service Levels B, C and D
Temecula Community Services District (TCSD)
Commencing Fiscal Year 2003-2004
INTENT MEETING:
PUBLIC HEARING:
September 17, 2002
November 12, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
A. The TCSD
Since December 1, 1989, the Temecula Community Services District CTCSD") has
provided residential street lighting, perimeters landscaping and slope maintenance, trash
and recycling collection and other services to properties within its jurisdiction. The
boundary of the TCSD is coterminous with the boundary of the City of Temecula ("City").
To fund its services and maintain improvements within its boundaries, the TCSD collects
rates and charges ("Charges"). The TCSD was formed, and Charges are set and
established, pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Title 6, Division 3 of the
California Government Code.
Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed,
revised and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting (Service Level B),
perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance (Service Level C), trash/recycling collection
(Service Level D), and road improvement and maintenance (Service Level R) services
furnished by the TCSD, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the
tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with
and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code
Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. As required by these sections of the Government
Code, the TCSD Board approves an Annual Levy Report each year describing the
proposed rates and charges for that year.
B. This Report
This Initial Levy Report ("Report") is prepared and presented to the Board pursuant to
Section 61621.2 of the Government Code to prescribe Rates and Charges beginning in FY
2003-2004 for the parcels and territory identified as Tract Map No. 23209.
The territory identified and described in this Report includes all parcels within the Tract
Map No. 23209, a future residential subdivision that consists of 80.01 gross acres of
vacant property located on the west side of Butterfield Stage Road, east of Walcott Lane
and north of Rancho California Road, with 220 planned residential units. The owner of
record (sole property owner) has requested that the TCSD establish the parcel charges
necessary to provide ongoing revenue for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping
and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within this future
residential subdivision.
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A. Period Covered By Report
This Report describes rates and charges to be imposed for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. The
expectation of the TCSD is that these rates and charges will continue to be imposed on an
annual basis thereafter in connection with the TCSD's annual rate and charge levy
proceedings.
B. Parcels Affected By This Report
The rates and charges set forth in this Report shall affect all parcels included on Tract Map
No. 23209, recorded in Book P 1 of Parcel Maps, Pages 44 through 46 in the Office of the
Riverside County Recorder as No. 119017 recorded December 5, 1968.
C. Description of Service Levels
The proposed services to be provided to parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 include:
residential street lighting; perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance; and
trash/recycling collection.
Service Level B, Residential Street Lighting - includes alt developed single family
residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD provides on-going
servicing, operation, and maintenance of local street lighting improvements. The cost of
providing Service Level B services is $31.35 per residential parcel per year, meaning that
the cost of providing Service Level B services for the 220 parcels within Tract Map No.
23209 will be $6,897.00per year. However, in order to conform the rates and charges for
Tract Map No. 23209 with the rates and charges levied for Service Level B elsewhere
within the TCSD service area, only $5,649.60 per year of this cost will be recovered
through rates and charges levied against parcels within Tract Map No. 23209.
Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance - includes all developed
single family residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD
provides on-going servicing, operation, and maintenance of perimeter landscaped areas
and slopes within the public right-of-ways and dedicated easements adjacent to and
associated with each development. The landscaped areas associated with this particular
development include, but are not limited to, perimeter slope and landscaping, as follows:
Within Tract 23209 the perimeter slopes within Lots 224 and 226 along Walcott Lane, the
perimeter slopes within Lot 225 and portions of Lots 223 and 222 along La Serena Way
and perimeter slopes within a portion of Lots 222 and 223 along Butterfield Stage Road.
There are two (2) off-site areas located between Butterfield Stage Road and Lot 95 and
between La Serena Way, Lot 225 and the bulb of Calle Elenita.
The cost of providing these services for these areas of slopes and landscaping is estimated
to be $44,000.00 per year.
Service Level D, Trash and Recycling Services - provides for the operation and
administration of the trash/recycling collection program including street sweeping services
for all single-family residential homes within the TCSD. The current cost of providing
these services to a single family residential home is $172.56 per year. Thus, the cost of
providing this service to the 220 parcels that have been identified as developed with a
residential home within Tract Map No. 23209 will be $37,963.20 per year.
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The cost to provide services within Tract Map No. 23209 will be fairly distributed among
each assessable property by the same methods and formulas applied to all parcels within
the various Service Levels of the TCSD.
The following is the formula used to calculate each property's TCSD charges and is
applied to Service Level B (Residential Street Lighting); Service Level C (Perimeter
Landscaping and Slope Maintenance); and Service Level D (Trash/Recycling Collection):
Total Balance to Levy/Total Parcels (in Service Level) = Parcel Charge
The following table reflects the levy calculation for each Service Level.
TABLE I
Proposed Service Level Charges
For Tract Map No. 23209
Estimated Budget and Charges for Fiscal Year 2003.2004
SERVICE LEVEL Total Levy Planned Charge Per
Budget Levy Units Levy Unit
Service Level B: ~
Residential Street Lighting $5,649.60 220 $25.68
Service Level C:
Local Landscaping and
Slopes $44,000.00 220 $200.00
Rate Level #8 (C-8)
Service Level D: $37,963.20 220 $172.56
Trash/recycling Collection
The following tables (Table 1I through IV) show the methodology used to compute the
levy for each parcel affected by this Report.
TABLE II
Parcel Charge Calculation for
Service Level B
Parcel
Property Type Charge Multiplier
Single family residential $25.68 Per Parcel
Single family vacant $25.68 Per Parcel
A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open
space areas, easements and non-buildable parcels are not charged.
TABLE III
Parcel Charge Calculation for
Service Level C
Parcel
Property Type Charge Multiplier
Single family residential $200.00 Per Parcel
Single family vacant $200.00 Per Parcel
A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open
space areas, easements and non-buildable parcels are not charged.
TABLE IV
Parcel Charge Calculation for
Service Level D
Parcel
Property Type Charge
Single family residential $172.56
Multiplier
Per Parcel
This charge is imposed only on developed single-family residential parcels (with a
residential home).
APPENDIX A - PARCEL LISTING (FY 2003-2004)
The actual parcels subject to rates and charges for Service Level B, Service Level C and
Service Level D beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004 shall be those parcels within Tract Map
No. 23209 identified on the Riverside County Secured Roll at the time all TCSD rates and
charges are submitted to the County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the tax roll for
that fiscal year.
The rates and method of apportionment outlined in this Report are consistent with the
rates and methods previously approved by the TCSD Board of Directors for each
applicable Service Level contained herein. However, all rates and methods described in
this Report are subject to revision and modification within the prescribed parameters of
the law. The actual rates and charges applied on the tax roll each fiscal year shall be
apportioned and submitted according to the rates and method described in the final TCSD
Annual Levy Report presented and approved by the Board of Directors at an annual Public
Hearing.
The following pages encompass a complete listing of all parcels within Tract Map No.
23209 subject to the TCSD Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D rates
and charges beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004. This listing shows the rate and charge that
will be charged to each parcel based on development with a single family residential unit.
The rates and charges applied to each newly subdivided residential parcel will reflect the
services provided and the development of each respective parcel at the time the rates and
charges are applied.
Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Rates and Charges
Service Service Service Total
Level B Level C Level D** Assessment
1 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
2 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
3 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
4 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
5 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
6 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
7 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
8 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
9 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
10 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
11 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
12 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
t3 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
14 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
15 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
16 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
17 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
18 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
19 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
20 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
21 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
22 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
23 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
24 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
25 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
26 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
27 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
28 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
29 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
30 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
31 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
32 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
33 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
34 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
35 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
36 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
37 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
38 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
39 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
40 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
41 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
42 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
43 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
44 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
45 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
46 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
47 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
48 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
49 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
50 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
51 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
52 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
53 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
54 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
55 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
56 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
57 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
58 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
59 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
60 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
61 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
62 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
63 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
64 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
65 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
66 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
67 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
68 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
69 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
70 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
71 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
72 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
73 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
74 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
75 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
76 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
77 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
78 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
79 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
80 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
81 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
82 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
83 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
84 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
85 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
86 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
87 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
88 $25~68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
89 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
90 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
91 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
92 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
93 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
94 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
95 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
96 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
97 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
98 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
99 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
100 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
101 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
102 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
103 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
104 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
105 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
106 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
107 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
108 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
109 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
110 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
111 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
112 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
113 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
114 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
115 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
116 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
117 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
118 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
119 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
120 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
121 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
122 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
123 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
124 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
125 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
126 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
127 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
128 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
129 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
130 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
131 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
132 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
133 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
134 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
135 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
136 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
137 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
138 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
139 $25.68 $200~00 $172.56 $398.24
140 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
141 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
142 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
143 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
144 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
145 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
146 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
147 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
148 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
149 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
150 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
151 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
152 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
153 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
154 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
155 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
156 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
157 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
158 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
159 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
160 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
161 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
162 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
163 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
164 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
165 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
166 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
167 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
168 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
169 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
170 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
171 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
172 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
173 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
174 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
175 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
176 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
177 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
178 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
179 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
180 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
181 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
182 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
183 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
184 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
185 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
186 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
187 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
188 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
189 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
190 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
191 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
192 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
193 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
194 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
195 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
196 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
197 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
198 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
199 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
200 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
201 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
202 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
203 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
204 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
205 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
206 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
207 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
208 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
209 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
210 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
211 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
212 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
213 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
214 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
215 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
216 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
217 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
218 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
219 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
220 $25.68 $200.00 $172.56 $398.24
Tot~s $5,649.60 $44,000.00 $37,963.20 $87,612.80
*All lot numbers are by reference to Tract Map No. 23209 as recorded by the Riverside County
Office Recorder No. 2002-357382 recorded on June 28, 2002.
**Rates for Service Level D for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 may be increased by further action of the
City Council.
~xn£BIT B
OFFICIAL BALLOT
TRACT NO. 23209
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND
CHARGES FOR RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING SERVICES
AND PERIMETER AND SLOPE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
PROPERTY:
All parcels within Tract Map 23209
recorded in the Office of the County
Recorder of Riverside County
~YES, I approve of the proposed
annual levy of $25.68 for Service
Level B and $200.00 for Service
Level C against each parcel
identified on this ballot.
OWNER:
Mr. John B. Vance
Assistant Secretary
Shea Homes Limited Partnership
10721 Treena Street, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92131
~-~ NO, I do not approve of the
proposed annual levy of $25.68 for
Service Level B and $200.00 for
Service Level C against each parcel
identified on this ballot.
I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury that I am the record owner, or the authorized representative of
the record owner, of the parcels identified above.
Signature
Print Name
Date
CHECK ONLY ONE BOX. BALLOTS MUST BE COMPLETED IN INK AND RETURNED
TO THE CITY CLERK/DISTRICT SECRETARY AT THE CITY OF TEMECULA, P.O. BOX
9033~43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, 92589-9033 PRIOR TO
3:30 P.M. ON JANUARY 6, 2003.
R:kFORMS\CSD Ballot. DOC 11/12~2002
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PROCEDURES FOR THE
COMPLETION, RETURN, AND TABULATION OF BALLOTS
I. Completion of Ballots
Who may complete a ballot
A ballot may be completed by the owner of the parcel to be charged. As used in these
Procedures, the term "owner" includes the owner's authorized representative. If the owner of the
parcel is a partnership, joint tenancy, or tenancy in common, a ballot may be comple~l by any
of the general partners, joint tenants, or tenants in common. Only one ballot may be completed
for each parcel.
Duplicate ballots
ff a ballot is lost, destroyed or never received, the City Clerk/District Secretary will provide a
duplicate ballot to the owner upon receipt of a request in writing to the City Clerk, at P.O. Box
9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033, or otherwise delivered to thc City Clerk/District
Secretary at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. The duplicate ballot will
be marked to show the date on which the ballot was provided and to identify it as a duplicate
ballot.
Marking and siotming the ballot
To complete a ballot, the owner of the parcel must (1) mark the appropriate box supporting or
opposing the proposed rate and charge, and (2) sign, under penalty of perjury, the statement on
the ballot that the person completing the ballot is the owner of the parcel or the owner's
authorized representative. Only one box may be marked on each ballot. Ballots must be
completed in ink.
Only ballots provided by the District will be accepted
The District will only accept ballots mailed or otherwise provided to owners by the District.
Photocopies, faxes, and other forms of the ballot will not be accepted.
H. Return of Ballots
Who may return ballots
A ballot may be returned by the owner of the parcel or by anyone authorized by the owner to
return the ballot.
R:~.smllhb~Ele(~ons~23209 Electlon'~lle{ No~ce and Procedures.doc 10/29/2002
Where to return ballots
Ballots may be mailed to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office, at P.O. Box 9033, Temecula,
California, 92589-9033, (the District has provided a return postage-paid envelope). Ballots may
also be delivered in person to the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office at 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Ballots may not be returned by fax.
When to return ballots
All returned ballots must be received by the City Clerk/District Secretary's Office prior to 3:30
p.m. on January 6, 2003. The City Clerk/District Secretary will stamp on the ballot the date of
its receipt.
Withdrawal of ballots
After returning a ballot to the District, the person who signed the ballot may withdraw the ballot
by submitting a written request in person to the City Clerk/Disa'ict Secretary at 43200 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Such request must be received by the City
Clerk/District Secretary prior to 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003. If any ballot has been withdrawn,
the person withdrawing the ballot may request a duplicate ballot. The City Clerk/District
Secretary will retain all withdrawn ballots and will indicate on the face of such ballots that they
have been withdrawn.
III. Tabulation of Ballots
Which ballots will be counted
Only ballots which are completed and returned in compliance with these procedures will be
counted. Ballots received by the City Cleric/District Secretary after 3:30 p.m. on January 6, 2003
will not be counted. Ballots which are not signed by the owner will not be counted. Ballots with
no boxes marked, or with more than one box marked, will not be counted. Ballots withdrawn in
accordance with these procedures will not be counted.
The City clerk/District Secretary will keep a record of each duplicate ballot provided to an
owner and will verify, prior to counting any duplicate ballot, that only one ballot has been
returned for the parcel. If a non-duplicate ballot has been returned, the District will count the
non-duplicate ballot and disregard all duplicate ballots. If only duplicate ballots have been
returned, the District will count the earliest provided duplicate ballot and disregard the later
provided duplicate ballots.
How ballots will be tabulated
Ballots may be counted by hand, by computer or by any other tabulating device.
R:~smlthb'~Elev-'flons~ Becfion~allot Notice and Procedures.doc 10~9K2002
Who will tabulate ballots
Ballots will be tabulated by the City Clerk/District Secretary.
When and where will the ballots be tabulated
Ballots will be opened and tabulated on Monday, January 6, 2003 at 4:00 p.m. in the Main
Conference Room at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590. This
process is open to the general public.
Results of tabulation
The results of the tabulation will be announced following the completion of the tabulation and
entered in the minutes of the next Board of Directors meeting January 14, 2003.
IV. Resolution of Disputes
In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is the owner of the parcel to
which the ballot applies, the District will make such determination from the last equalized
assessment roll and any evidence of ownership submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary.
The District will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to ownership of
property and the District's determination of ownership will be final and conclusive.
In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is an authorized representative
of the owner of the parcel, the District may rely on the statement on the ballot, signed under
penalty of perjury, that the person completing the ballot is the owner's authorized representative
and any evidence submitted to the City Clerk/District Secretary. The District will be under no
duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to whether the signer of the ballot is an
authorized representative of the owner and the District's determination will be final and
conclusive.
V. General Information
For further information, contact the City Clerk/District Secretary at (909) 694-6~.a.~.: by mail, at
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California, 92589-9033; or in person, at 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590.
R:~sm#hb",,Elections~3209 Bection~allot Notioe and Procedures.doc 10/29/2002
vIC!NITY MAP
:I'ract No. 23209
Not to Scale
PROJECT
SITE
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OCTOBER 22, 2002
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:47
P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Pratt, Roberts, Stone, and Naggar
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBER: Comerchero
Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorsen, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No input.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of October 8, 2002.
MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The
motion was seconded by Agency Member Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Agency Member Comerchero who was absent.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
No comment.
AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS
No comment.
R:\Minutes.rda\102202 1
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:48 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, November 12, 2002, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California.
Jeff Comerchero, Chairman
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
R:\Minutes.rda\102202 2
ITEM 17
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN~E
CITY MANAGER ~'~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/C~)~,~cil
Debbie UbnoskS~', Director of Planning
November 12, 2002
Development Code Amendment (Planning Application 02-0318)
PREPARED BY:
David Hogan, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING STANDARDS FOR MODULAR
STRUCTURES, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.10 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND MAKING OTHER MINOR
MODIFICATIONS TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
(PLANNING APPLICATION02-0318)
BACKGROUND: The Development Code was adopted by the City Council in 1995. Since
its adoption, the Code has been periodically amended to improve its clarity and to modify
various provisions as problems have been identified. This item was continued from the
September 18, 2002 to the October 2, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. At the October 2nd
meeting, the Commission considered the amendment and, with the exception of the proposed
agriculture and large animal standards, recommended that the Council adopt the proposed
ordinance. These agriculture-related standards are not part of the Commission's
recommendation. They will be considered again by the Planning Commission at a future date.
This proposed amendment would make the following general changes to the Development
Code:
· Set standards for modular structures;
· Allow religious institutions in some commercial zones without a conditional use permit;
· Remove obsolete or unused definitions; and,
· Make other minor adjustments and changes in the Development Code.
ANALYSIS: This proposed Development Code Amendment would modify the following
requirements within the Code.
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 1
Modular Structure Standards
A need has been identified to consider allowing modular structures for religious institutions and
community organizations, as well as accessory buildings for industrial types of businesses. In
considering this concept, the primary concerns were the effect these structures may have on the
surrounding community and the potential long-term aesthetic impacts. The proposed ordinance
would also allow non-profit community organizations and religious institutions to use modular
buildings on a temporary basis. The Planning Commission is recommending that these modular
building be allowed for no more than five years. This would allow the religious institution or
community organization time to design, raise funds and construct their permanent facilities. A
copy of the proposed modular standards is contained in Attachment No. 5. If the City Council
believes the proposed modular standards are appropriate, then the Commission is also
recommending that a Supplemental Design Standards Chapter be created in the Development
Code. This new Chapter would include the proposed modular standards as well as some of the
more general standards from the Residential and Commercial/Industrial Chapters.
Religious Institutions as Permitted Uses
The Development Code currently allows religious institutions in all zones with a conditional use
permit. The Planning Commission is proposing that in most commercial zones, religious
institutions should be allowed as permitted uses with the approval of a development plan. A key
factor in making this recommendation is that in most cases, churches are most active when
commercial businesses are least active. As a result, this is expected to minimize land use and
circulation conflicts. As a result, the need for a conditional use permit may be unnecessary.
This would apply in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway Tourist
Commercial, and Professional Office zones.
Incidental Retail Sales to Industrial Uses
The Development Code currently requires that these activities obtain a conditional use permit.
This does not seem to be a reasonable requirement. As a result, the Commission is
recommending that incidental retail to an industrial use be permitted as long as the floor area
dedicated to the retail purposes is less than 25% of the business square footage. The
ordinance would not allow incidental retail activities in excess of 25% of the business floor area.
Nonprofit and Community Organization Facilities
This provision would clarify that nonprofit and community organizations are allowed in the Public
Institutional zone. At present it is not clear that these types of facilities are allowed. There is
vague language these membership halls and similar nonprofit community uses are conditionally
permitted within the Public Institutional zone. Amending this provision would clearly state that
these types of uses are conditionally permitted.
Sign Programs
The Development Code authorizes the Planning Commission or the Director at a hearing to
approve sign programs. However, in reality, the Planning Commission has always delegated
the final approval the Planning Director. This amendment would modify the Development Code
to clarify that sign programs are administrative approvals, subject to appeal to the Planning
Commission.
R:\DEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 2
Typographic Changes
Chapters 17.16 and 17.18 of the Development Code describe specific plans and village center
plans as overlays. In reality, when these plans are adopted, they become discrete zones on the
zoning map. As a result, the term overlay is confusing and staff is recommending that the word
"overlay" be removed from the titles and text in each section. This will eliminate some confusion
on how these provisions are to be implemented without changing any of the actual
requirements.
Obsolete and Unused Definitions
Staff has recently completed its review of the definitions chapter in the Development Code
(Chapter 17.34) and has determined that some of the definitions are not used in the
Development Code and are not needed in the day-to-day planning and code enforcement
functions. As a result, the Commission is recommending that these unnecessary definitions be
removed from the Development Code. The list of definitions are would be removed with this
amendment are contained in Section 3.J of the proposed ordinance (Attachment No. 1).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed amendment represents a minor
change to the Development Code. Staff has completed an Initial Environmental Study and has
determined that no negative environmental impacts would occur. As a result, the Planning
Commission is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
adopt a Negative Declaration with a de minimus impact finding for this project. A copy of the lES
is contained in Attachment No. 4.
FISCAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impacts are associated with this provision.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Proposed Ordinance - Page 4
PC Resolution No. - 2002-040 - Page 20
October 2, 2002 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 23
Initial Study - Page 24
Proposed Modular Standards - Page 25
R:\DEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 3
Typographic Changes
Chapters 17.16 and 17.18 of the Development Code describe specific plans and village center
plans as overlays. In reality, when these plans are adopted, they become discrete zones on the
zoning map. As a result, the term overlay is confusing and staff is recommending that the word
"overlay" be removed from the titles and text in each section. This will eliminate some confusion
on how these provisions are to be implemented without changing any of the actual
requirements.
Obsolete and Unused Definitions
Staff has recently completed its review of the definitions chapter in the Development Code
(Chapter 17.34) and has determined that some of the definitions are not used in the
Development Code and are not needed in the day-to-day planning and code enforcement
functions. As a result, the Commission is recommending that these unnecessary definitions be
removed from the Development Code. The list of definitions are would be removed with this
amendment are contained in Section 3.J of the proposed ordinance (Attachment No. 1).
ENVlRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed amendment represents a minor
change to the Development Code. Staff has completed an Initial Environmental Study and has
determined that no negative environmental impacts would occur. As a result, the Planning
Commission is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
adopt a Negative Declaration with a de minimus impact finding for this project. A copy of the lES
is contained in Attachment No. 4.
FISCAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impacts are associated with this provision.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Proposed Ordinance - Blue Page 4
PC Resolution No. - 2002-040 - Blue Page 20
October 2, 2002 Planning Commission Staff Report - Blue Page 23
Initial Study - Blue Page 24
Proposed Modular Standards - Blue Page 25
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.dcc 3
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
R:'~DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 4
ORDINANCE NO. 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING STANDARDS FOR MODULAR
STRUCTURES, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.10 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE, AND MAKING OTHER MINOR MODIFICATIONS
TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION
02-0318)
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted General Plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on September
18, 2002 and October 2, 2002, and recommended that the City Council approve the following
amendments to the City Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law
and local ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula
Library, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on November 12,
2002 to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
read as follows:
Modular Building Standards. Section 17.10.020.1 is hereby adopted to
"Modular Buildings and Structures.
circumstances as described in this
requirements:
Modular buildings may be allowed in some
Section if they comply with the following
Accessory Structure. Modular buildings may be approved as accessory
structures to a larger permanent building. The accessory buildings or structures
shall be smaller in size than the main permanent building. Accessory structures
can be allowed, subject to the approval of a development plan, for the following
uses or activities:
Religious Institutions in all zones, except the Open Space and
Conservation zone.
Industrial uses in the Business Park, Light Industrial, and Service
Commercial zones.
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 5
Temporary Facility and Construction Offices in all zones, except the Open
Space and Conservation zone.
Temporary Structures. Modular buildings may be approved as a temporary
structures for non-profit community organizations and religious institutions in all
zones, except the Open Space and Conservation zone. The temporary structure
may be approved subject to the following requirements:
The approval of a development plan or conditional use permit (as
appropriate) for the permanent facilities.
The site shall be fully landscaped in conformance with the approved
landscape plan.
c. The term of the temporary approval shall not exceed 5 years.
A removal bond shall be provided to ensure the removal of the temporary
structure.
Building Design and Screening. All modular units shall comply with the following
standards to soften the appearance of the structures.
If the modular is not visible from a street or a public gathering place, the
modular structure shall provide at least minimal design compatibility with
the surrounding area. Examples of minimal design compatibility include
the use of exterior trim elements, similar colors, and other features to
soften the modular appearance of the structure.
Modular buildings that are potentially visible from the public street shall
have architectural detailing similar to permanent structures. Examples
include: accentuated entrances, pop-out features, windows, integrated
with the minimal design compatibility components described above.
Supplemental landscaping, to further screening the structure may also be
required.
All accessory modular units shall be screened from the public streets and
gathering spaces in such as way as to be un-noticeable. This screening
may include a combination of the following: permanent buildings or
structures, screening walls, and landscaping.
Not withstanding these requirements, all other landscape and site layout criteria
required by the Development Code and Design Guidelines shall also apply to
modular buildings."
Section2. Supplemental Development Standards. Establish Chapter 17.10,
Supplemental Development Standards and adopt Section 17.10.010 to read as follows:"
"17.10.010 PURPOSE.
The Purpose of this Chapter is to consolidate a variety of Municipal Code sections from Title 17
that provide supplemental development standards. Some of these standards will apply to
development activities in residential, commercial or industrial zones. Other standards my apply
to activities in multiple zoning districts."
R:\DEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 6
Section 3. Typoqraphic and Minor Amendments To The City Municipal Code. The
following clarifications to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code are hereby adopted:
A. Amend Chapter 17.16, by removing the word "overlay" from all titles,
headings, sections, and subsections.
B. Amend Section 17.18, by removing the word "overlay" from all titles,
headings, sections, and subsections.
C. Section 17.06.050.N.3 is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.06.050.D.8 is
added to read as follows: "Animals Accessory to a Residential Use. The keeping of certain
non-exotic or non-wild animals is considered accessory to a residential use. No more than four
cats and dogs, over the age of four months, are allowed. Caged pets, including small
amphibians, birds, mammals, and reptiles may be kept on the premises. This provision also
includes the keeping of fish and up to two chickens. The keeping of household pets shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 6 of the Temecula Municipal Code."
D. Amend Table 17.08.030 to replace the listing for "Retail support use (15 percent
of the total development square footage in the BP and LI)" with the following:
Description of Use NC CC HT SC PO BP LI
Retail support use to a non-commercial business P P
(Limited to the sale of products manufactured or
assembled on-site and occupying less that 25% of
the floor area of the business)
E. Amend Table 17.08.030 to replace the listing for "Religious institutions, without a
daycare or private school" with the following:
Description of Use
Religious institution, without a daycare or private
school
NC CC HT SC PO BP LI
F. Amend Table 17.12.030 by adding the following line:
Description of Use
Membership clubs, organizations, lodges and similar
non-profit community uses
Public/Institutional District (PI)
C
Amend Table 17.03.010 to replace the listing for Sign Programs with the
following:
Approval
Sign Programs
Admin.
Approval
X
Planning Planning
C oC~tnYcll
Director Commission
H. Amend 17.28.280.A.2 to read as follows: "Maximum area of each sign shall be 3
square feet."
R:~DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendrnent\Staff Report CC.doc 7
I. Amend Chapter 17.34 by changing the following the phrase "Overhang, vehicle"
to "Vehicle Overhang."
J. Amend Chapter 17.34 of the Temecula Municipal Code be deleting the
definitions for the following: amusement park, animal kennel, billiard parlor family, camp public,
circulation master plan, clinic, club, condominium, drive-in operation, drive-in theater,
employees quarters, equipment rental yard or contractor yard, farm, food store, garage private,
garage public, hospital general care, inhabited area, merger, minimum building pad,
neighborhood center, land use plan, parcel map vesting, parcel map tentative, parking area
private, plat, police power, public services offices or uses, public service use facility, restaurant
walkup, retention basin, structural alterations, travel trailer, travel trailer park, truck stop, unique
natural feature, and wing wall.
Section 4. Additional Supplemental Standards. Relocate the following Municipal
Code sections to Chapter 17.10 as described below.
A. Section 17.08.050.G is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.B is
adopted to read as follows:
"Alcoholic Beverage Sales.
All businesses or establishments offering the sale of alcoholic beverages, except
for the incidental sale of beer and wine at a restaurant, shall require the
appropriate license from the state of California and the city and be subject to a
conditional use permit.
Any automotive service station which proposes to sell beer and wine concurrently
with motor vehicle fuel shall require a conditional use permit which permit shall
be subject to the provisions of Business and Professions Code Section 23790 et
seq. and shall require that:
a. The decision shall be based on written findings.
A denial of an application for a conditional use permit is subject to appeal
to the city council in accordance with Section 17.03.090 of this code.
The same procedure for noticing, and conducting the conditional use
permit hearing that is utilized by the city for all other conditional use
permits shall be used to provide for all parties to be present and to
present evidence.
The decision and findings be based on substantial evidence in view of the
whole record to justify the ultimate decision.
The above businesses shall not be located within five hundred feet of any
religious institution, school or public park. The license application shall be
reviewed by the city's police services prior to city approval."
B. Section 17.08.050.C is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.C is
adopted to read as follows:
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 8
"Arcades. Amades shall be approved subject to the approval of a conditional use permit
by the planning commission.
1. Applications for an arcade shall include following:
Three sets of typed gummed labels, listing the name and address of all
businesses within a shopping center and all landowners within a three-
hundred-foot radius of the shopping center or arcade.
A description of the types of machines, a floor plan, and hours of
operation.
The planning commission may apply any condition deemed necessary. These
conditions may address, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Need for adult supervision;
b. Hours of operation;
c. Inside and outside security measures;
d. Noise attenuation;
e. Bicycle facilities; and,
f. Interior waiting areas."
C. Section 17.08.050.S is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.D is
adopted to read as follows:
"Automobile, Motorcycle and Truck Dealership Landscape Standards. The following
standards shall be applied to all new automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships or
substantial alterations to existing automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships.
Display areas: a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape island shall be required at
the end of all display area lanes adjacent to the main entry drive lane. A one-foot
strip, made of concrete or other materials acceptable to the Community
Development Director, shall be located next to the curb immediately adjacent to
the end display parking space. Said landscape islands shall have a mixture of
trees, shrubs and groundcover shall have automatic irrigation.
Street frontages. All portions of the property which have street frontage shall
meet one of the following criteria:
A minimum of twelve feet (12') of landscaping shall be provided,
measured from the rear of the sidewalk to the display area length and
shall be surrounded by Iow growing shrubs, groundcover and turf; or
A minimum of twenty feet (20') of landscaping shall be provided,
measured from the rear of the sidewalk to the display area, with display
area allowed to encroach into eight feet (8') of the landscape area.
R:\DEVCODE',02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC,doc 9
Display areas shall be paved with concrete, a maximum of twenty
(20) feet in length and shall be surrounded by Iow growing shrubs,
groundcover and turf.
ii.
The number of display areas allowed shall be calculated in the
following manner: 3 display spaces per 100 linear feet of street
frontage. Fractional spaces (0.5 and over) shall be rounded up.
iii.
No display area shall be located immediately adjacent to another
display area. Landscaping shall be provided between display
areas.
Development adjacent to existing and proposed residential uses. All portions of
the property which abut an existing or proposed residential use shall have a
minimum ten foot (10') wide landscape buffer.
All other portions of the property which do not abut a street or existing or
proposed residential uses shall have a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape
buffer.
All customer parking on the site shall be clearly identified, either through special
paint (i.e. curb painting) or signage and shall be subject to the landscape
requirements contained in Section 17.24.050H of the Development Code.
Service bays shall not be visible from a public street and shall be.adequately
screened from adjacent residential uses.
Inventory and vehicle-in-repair storage areas on the site shall be clearly identified
and will not need to be internally landscaped. If they are located on the
perimeter or adjacent to residential development or sensitive areas they shall be
screened in the manner discussed above."
D. Section 17.08.050.F is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.E is
adopted to read as follows:
"Used Motor Vehicle Sales (Without the sales of new motor vehicles).
The minimum lot width of any site supporting a used motor vehicle sales
business shall be one hundred feet.
2. The minimum lot area shall be ten thousand square feet.
Buffer walls and landscaping shall be as provided as required for the zoning
district in which the use is located.
A building containing not less than two hundred square feet shall be maintained
on the lot supporting the business. The building shall be a permanent structure;
modular or portable buildings, or mobile homes are not permitted."
R:'tDEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 10
E. Section 17.06.050.Q is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.F is
adopted to read as follows:
"Bed and Breakfast Establishments (B&Bs). Bed and breakfast establishments shall be
developed in the following manner:
1. The facility shall comply with all land use regulations and site development
standards of the zoning district in which it is located.
2. The use shall be incidental to the primary use of the residential structure to
ensure compatibility with adjacent residential uses.
3. Owner/lessee shall reside in the primary residence and operate the business.
4. The exterior appearance of the structure shall have a residential/single-family
character.
5. Service of meals shall be for registered guests only.
6. There shall be no separate/additional kitchens for the guests.
7. No guest shall stay more than fourteen consecutive days in any thirty-day period.
8. All B&Bs shall be subject to the city's hotel/motel room tax.
9. B&Bs shall meet all of the requirements of the city fire department and county
health department.
10. The B&B shall be developed on a site that has a minimum lot size of sixty
thousand square feet.
11. No receptions, private parties or similar activities, for which a fee is paid shall be
permitted."
F. Section 17.08.050.D is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.G is
adopted to read as follows:
"Car Washes. A conditional use permit shall be required for all full-service or self-service
car washes within the commercial districts. Car washes shall comply with the following
criteria:
1. Such businesses shall be located at least two hundred feet from any residential
district.
2. Wash bays and vacuum areas shall be screened from public view.
3. Regular monitoring of the facility by an attendant shall be provided during
business hours to control noise, litter, and other nuisances.
4. Hours of operation shall be limited to seven a.m. to ten p.m., unless otherwise
specifically established as a condition of approval. Automatic shut-off of water
and electrical systems, except for security and fire protection, shall be provided
during non-business hours."
11
R:\DEVCODE',02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.dcc
G. Section 17.08.050.B is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.H is
adopted to read as follows:
"Entertainment Establishments Providing Dancing, Music and Similar Activities.
1. Noise levels shall not exceed the standards set forth in the noise element of the
general plan or the environmental performance standards of this development
code (Section 17.08.070).
2. Dancing, music, and similar entertainment uses shall be limited to between the
hours of six p.m. and two a.m.
3. The city may apply additional requirements or limitations depending on the
location, surrounding uses and other considerations"
H. Section 17.08.050.O is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.J is
adopted to read as follows:
"Outdoor Sales of Merchandise. All businesses shall be conducted complete within an
enclosed building. The following outdoor sales and commercial activities may be
permitted to operate outdoors, within their respective districts and subject to any
required reviews and permits. The outdoor display of merchandise accessory to an on-
site business is addressed in Subsection K
1. Automobile, boat, trailer, camper, and motorcycle sales and rentals (subject to a
conditional use permit);
2. Building material, supplies and equipment rental and sales (subject to a
conditional use permit);
3. Fruit and vegetable stands (required temporary use permit);
4. Horticultural nurseries (subject to a conditional use permit);
5. Gasoline pumps, oil racks and accessory items when located on pump islands;
6. Outdoor recreation uses;
7. Parking lot and sidewalk sales (subject to temporary use permit and regulations
set forth in this chapter); and
8. Other activities and uses similar to those above as determined by the director of
planning."
I. Section 17.08.050.P is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.K is
adopted to read as follows:
"Outdoor Display of Merchandise Accessory to Current On-Site Business. Any outdoor
display must be done in conjunction with the business being conducted within the
building and shall comply with the following regulations:
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 12
1. The items being displayed shall be of the same type that are lawfully displayed
and sold inside the building on the premises.
The aggregate display area shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the linear
frontage of the store front or ten linear feet, whichever is greater.
3. Items shall not project more than four feet from the store front.
No item, or any portion thereof, shall be displayed on public property; provided,
however, items may be displayed within the public right-of-way if an
encroachment permit has first been procured from the city.
Items shall be displayed only during the hours that the business conducted inside
the building on the premises is open for business.
No item shall be displayed in a manner that: causes a safety hazard; obstructs
the entrance to any buiIding; interferes with, or impedes the flow of pedestrian or
vehicle traffic; is unsightly or creams any other condition that is detrimental to the
appearance of the premises or any surrounding property; or in any other manner
is detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or causes a public nuisance."
J. Section 17.08.050.E is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.L is
adopted to read as follows:
"Permanent Indoor Swap Meet Facilities.
Indoor swap meets shall be established only in buildings containing five thousand
square feet or more of gross floor area.
City business licenses and state seller permits shall be obtained by every tenant
operating a stall space,
No more than one business license shall be granted per one hundred fifty square
feet of building floor area.
The minimum average square footage of a partitioned cubicle or stall space
(booth) shall be one hundred fifty square feet. The minimum size for an individual
stall shall be one hundred square feet, and no more than twenty-five stall spaces
shall be permitted to contain one hundred square feet.
No adult business, as defined in the Temecula Municipal Code shall be
permitted.
No loudspeakers or sound equipment which can be heard from exterior or
semipublic areas shall be used on the premises.
Each stall space shall be partitioned with partition walls at a height of not less
than five feet, six inches. Scissor-type gating shall not be used to separate
vendors or vending areas.
All floor areas of indoor tenant spaces, shall be covered with a high-grade tile or
carpeting.
R:\DEVCODE"~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 13
9. Aisles shall have a minimum width of seven feet.
10. Security personnel shall be provided during hours of operation."
K Section 17.06050.H is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.M is
adopted to read as follows:
"Senior Housing/Congregate Care Facilities/Affordable Housing. Senior housing,
congregate care facilities, and affordable housing projects are permitted in the zoning
districts identified below subject to the approval of a development plan. Affordable
senior housing projects shall comply with the affordable housing provisions contained in
Subsection 0.3.
Senior housing shall comply with all the provisions of the Development Code
unless modified by the following provisions:
a. The maximum densities for senior housing projects are as follows:
In the H residential zoning district, the maximum density shall be
thirty (30) units per acre.
ii.
In the M residential zoning district, the maximum density shall be
twenty (20) units per acre.
iii.
In the LM, L-2, and L-1 residential zoning districts the maximum
density shall be eight (8) units per acre.
iv,
In all approved Specific Plans, the maximum density shall not
exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area.
The net livable area for each dwelling unit shall not be less than four
hundred (400) square feet for an efficiency unit, five hundred fifty (550)
square feet for a one-bedroom unit, and seven hundred (700) square feet
for a two-bedroom unit. Kitchenettes may be permitted, provided they are
sized to meet the immediate needs of the occupants of the unit.
2=
Congregate care projects shall comply with all the provisions of the Development
Code unless modified by the following provisions:
The maximum densities for congregate care facilities are not limited
specifically to density requirements so long as all the site development
standards are met (i.e. required setbacks, parking, landscaping, open
space, etc.)
The handicapped units shall comply with the standards set forth in Title
24 of the California Code of Regulations.
Affordable housing and affordable senior housing projects are entitled to receive
various incentives provided the project meets the requirements of Section 65915
of the California Government Code. Affordable housing projects will receive at
least one incentive from Subsection 3.a and at least one concession from
Subsection 3.b. The project incentives and concessions are as follows:
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment~Staff Report Ce.doc 14
Density Incentives. Affordable housing projects are entitled to receive an
increase in the allowable density of at least 25% over the density target in
each residential zoning district. The maximum densities for affordable
housing projects are as follows:
In the H residential zoning district, the maximum density shall be
thirty (30) units per acre.
ii.
In the M residential zoning district, the maximum density shall be
eighteen (18) units per acre.
iii.
In the LM residential zoning district, the maximum density shall be
eight (8) units per acre.
iv.
In all approved Specific Plans, the maximum density bonus shall
not exceed 50% of the target density in the planning area.
bo
Development Standard Concessions. Any of the following development
standard concessions may be granted by the approval authority for the
project, unless a finding is made that these concessions are not
necessary to provide the affordable housing units being proposed:
i. An increase in the amount of required lot coverage;
ii. A modification to the setback or required yard provisions;
iii. An increase in the maximum allowable building height;
iv. A reduction in the amount of required on-site parking;
A reduction in the amount of onsite landscaping, except that no
reduction in on-site recreational amenities may not be approved
unless the affordable housing is in a close and easily accessible
proximity to a public park with recreational amenities;
vi. A reduction in the minimum lot area; or,
vii.
Approval of an affordable housing project in the Professional
Office zone with the approval of a conditional use permit.
The provisions of this Subsection also apply to all approved specific plans within
the City of Temecula unless the specific plan contains specific standards for the
type of housing being considered."
L Section 17.08.050.R is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.N is
adopted to read as follows:
"Self-Storage or Mini-Warehouse Facilities.
Development Standards. The following standards shall be applied to all new
self-storage or mini-warehouse facilities:
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 15
The design of the facility shall be compatible with the surrounding area in
terms of design, bulk and mass, materials and colors. Building exteriors
shall not be corrugated metal or similar surface, but shall be of finished
quality. Metal containers are prohibited.
In commercial zoning districts the rear and side yard setbacks shall be a
minimum of 10 feet. In industrial zoning districts no rear or side yard
setbacks are required. The director of planning may increase the
setbacks to a maximum of 25 feet when adjacent to an existing residential
development project. The front yard setback shall maintain the setback
for the underlying zoning classification.
c. The maximum lot coverage shall be 65 percent.
The development site shall provide a minimum of 10% landscaped open
space for a project within commercial districts. In industrial districts, the
total landscaping shall be equal to the required setback areas. No interior
landscaping is required, but the setback areas shall be landscaped.
e. A manager's residential unit may be provided, but is not required.
fo
Required parking spaces may not be rented as, or used for, vehicular
storage. However, additional parking area may be provided for vehicles,
boats, buses, trailers, etc., provided that the storage area is adequately
screened from public view with enhanced landscaping, decorative walls,
fences, or other methods as deemed appropriate by the director.
2. Performance and Use Regulations
Any business activity, other than rental of storage units, including the on-
site sale of merchandize or garage sales, and transfer/storage
businesses which utilize vehicles as part of the business is prohibited. No
servicing or repair of motor vehicles, boats, trailers, lawn mowers, or any
similar equipment is permitted.
Storage units shall not be used for the storage of flammable liquids,
highly combustible or explosive materials, or hazardous chemicals.
C°
Truck or vehicle rental is prohibited without obtaining all necessary
approvals subject to the Development Code Schedule of Permitted Uses."
M. Section 17.08.050.M is hereby repealed and a new Section 17.10.020.O is
adopted to read as follows:
"Drive-Thru Facilities. Commercial uses including restaurants, financial institutions or
other business providing drive-thru facilities shall be subject to the following
requirements.
1. All drive-thru facilities shall require the approval of a conditional use permit.
2. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the drive-thru aisles. If pedestrian
walkways do cross the drive aisles, they shall be clearly marked with paving or
striping.
R:\DEVCODB02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 16
Drive-thru aisle shall have a minimum width of eleven feet on the straight
sections and twelve feet on curved portions.
For fast food restaurants, the drive-thru aisles shall have a sufficient stacking
area behind the menu board to accommodate six cars.
The speakers shall be located so as to protect adjoining residential areas from
excessive noise."
N. Renumber the remaining subsection of Sections 17.06.050 and 17.08.050 and
make the appropriate code section references to reflect the renumbered subsection numbering.
O. Amend Footnote No. 1 to Table 17.06.030 to read as follows: "1. Affordable
housing and congregate care facilities may exceed the stated densities pursuant to the
provisions of Section 17.10.020.M."
P. Add Footnote No. 6 to Table 17.06.030 to read as follows: "6. Subject to the
supplemental development standards contained in Chapter 17.10."
Q. Amend Table 17.06.030 to include the reference to Footnote No. 6 to the
following uses: Bed and breakfast establishments, Congregate care residential facilities for the
elderly, and Agricultural/open space uses, Kennels and catteries, and the Noncommercial
keeping of horses, cattle, sheep and goats.
R. Replace Footnote No. 1 of Table 17.08.030 to read as follows: "6. Subject to the
supplemental development standards contained in Chapter 17.10."
S. Delete Footnote Nos. 4 and 6 from the end of Table 17.08.030 and replace the
existing Footnote Nos. 4 and 6 with a Footnote No. 1.
T. Amend Footnote No. 5, and renumber to become Footnote No. 4, of Table
17.08.030, to read as follows: "4. In addition to any applicable supplemental development
standards listed in Chapter 17.10, senior housing residential projects in the CC, SC, HT, and
PO zones shall use the development and performance standards for the High Density
Residential zone. Senior housing residential projects in the NC zone shall use the development
and performance standards for the Medium Density Residential zone and the applicable
supplemental development standards in Chapter 17.10."
U. Amend Table 17.08.030 by removing the existing footnote references to Footnote
Nos. 4, 5, and 6 and add a reference to Footnote No. 1 for the following uses: Alcoholic
beverage sales, Arcades (pinball and video games), Automobile dealers (new and used),
Automobile service stations with or without an automated car wash, Automobile service stations
selling beer and/or wine-with or without an automated car wash, Banks and financial institutions,
Congregate care housing for the elderly, Restaurant drive-in/fast food, Swap Meet, entirely
inside a permanent building."
V. Add Footnote No. 2 to Table 17.12.030 to read as follows: "2. Subject to the
supplemental development standards contained in Chapter 17.10."
W. Amend Table 17.12.030 to include the reference to Footnote No. 2 to the
following uses: Congregate care housing, Congregate care living facility, Residential care
facility for the elderly, and Residential-senior housing.
R:~DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 17
Section 5. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Environmental Compliance. The proposed amendment represents a
labeling change to more accurately reflect how those sections of the Development Code
operate when implemented. No additional development will result from this amendment and no
changes to the environment will occur from the adoption of this Ordinance. As a result, the
ordinance is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt
from further review or analysis.
Section 7. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full rome and effect thirty (30)
days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places.
Section 9. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage; and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City
Council members voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated
in said City.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November 2002.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
R:\DEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 18
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 02- was dully introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the ._th day of __., 2002 and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
th day of ,2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\DEVCODI:-~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC,doc 19
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-040
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 20
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-040
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING STANDARDS FOR MODULAR
STRUCTURES, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.10 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND MAKING OTHER MINOR
MODIFICATIONS TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE"
(PLANNING APPLICATION 02-0318)
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 1995, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
City's Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City has identified a need to amend the adopted Development Code;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment on
September 18, 2002, and October 2, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by
law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, an did testify
either in support or opposition to this matter;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recommendation of Approval. That the City of Temecula Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Temecula amending 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code, substantially in
the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit A.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. The proposed amendment represents a
minor change to the Development Code. Staff has completed an Initial Environmental Study
and has determined that no negative environmental impacts would occur. As a result, staff is
recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a
Negative Declaration for this project.
Section3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
nd
Planning Commission this 2 day of October 2002.
A'I-I'EST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
{SEAL}
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 21
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RiVERSiDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that PC Resolution No. 2002-040 was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2nd day of October 2002, by the following
vote of the Commission:
AYES: 3
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 2
ABSTAIN: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Mathewson, Olhasso, and Telesio
None
Guerriero and Chairman Chiniaeff
None
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC,doc 22
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 23
STAFF REPORT- PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 2, 2002
Planning Application No. 02-0318 (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS)
Prepared by: David Hogan, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING
STANDARDS FOR MODULAR STRUCTURES, ADOPTING
CHAPTER 17.10 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND
MAKING OTHER MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION 02-0318)"
BACKGROUND
The Development Code was adopted by the City Council in 1995. Since its adoption, the Code has
been periodically amended to'~mprove its clarity and to modify variousth provisions as problems have
been identified. This item was continued from the September 18 Planning Commission without
having opened the public hearing due to the lateness of the hour. These proposed changes are
intended to improve clarity, to provide additional direction, and to correct typographical errors.
ANALYSIS
This proposed Development Code amendment would do the following:
· Set standards for modular structures;
· Allow religious institutions in some commercial zones without a conditional use permit;
· Make other minor adjustments and changes in the Development Code; and,
· Relocate a number of general development standards currently located in the residential and
commercial standards to a supplemental development standards chapter.
Modular Structure Standards
As the City continues to build out, staff is beginning to see a need to allow the use of modular
structures as accessory buildings for religious institutions and for some industrial types of uses. In
considering this concept, staff was concemed about the effect these structures may have on the
surrounding community and the potential long-term aesthetic impacts. As a result, staff has
evaluated the issue and come up with a program that would allow modular structures as accessory
uses, provided they are not readily visible to the public. In staff's view, this accommodation does
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\PC2 Staff Report.doc
1
nothing to reduce the visual quality of the community but allows local businesses some additional
flexibility in how they respond to their business needs.
In the process of developing the modular standards, staff noted that it might be appropriate to allow
non-profit community organizations and religious institutions to use modular buildings on a
temporary basis. As a result, staff developed additional standards for this. The key component is
that the temporary use of the modular buildings is limited to 5 years, and that a removal bond will be
required to prevent the modular unit from becoming permanent. A copy of the proposed modular
standards is contained in Attachment No. 3.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of any portion of the modular standard
provisions, then staff is also recommending that Section 17.10, Supplemental Design Standards, be
created. For clarity and ease of future use, staff is proposing that this new Chapter be compiled
from the more general standards in the Residential and Commercial/Industrial Chapters. Section 1
of the draft Ordinance would create Section 17.10 and make the other necessary changes to ensure
the internal consistency within the Development Code. The exception is that the household pets
discussion from Section 17.06.050. N.3 will be relocated to Chapter 6.02 on the Municipal Code with
the other related household pet previsions. A sample of what Chapter 17.10 would actually look like
is found in Attachment No. 5.
Reli.qious Institutions as Permitted Uses
The Development Code currently allows religious institutions in all zones with a conditional use
permit. Staff is proposing that in most commercial zones, churches should be allowed as permitted
uses. Staffs rational is that, given the operating times for most churches, the possibility of land use
and circulation conflicts are substantially reduced in commercial zones. As a result, the need for a
conditional use permit may be unnecessary. In addition, many of the land use compatibility
concerns with adjacent residential uses are also minimized with this proposal. Listed below is the
proposed change to the Permitted Use Matrix for the commercial and industrial zones. The bolded
items represent the changes.
Description of Use
Religious institution, without a daycare or private
school
NC CC HT SC PO BP LI
P P P C P C C
Other Minor Changes
Agriculture Standards and Pet Keeping
The current ordinance provisions have combined agricultural uses (on otherwise vacant land) and
pet keeping previsions. This combination has created a numberof unintended consequences. The
first is that the current Development Code is more stringent with pet keeping for 2 ¼ acre lots than
on 7,200 square foot lots. In addition, City code enforcement officers often struggle with the current
provisions because many types of animals are not listed. In an effort to make them more useable
and logical, staff is proposing several changes, including redefining the keeping of pets as an
accessory use to residences. This will create a single citywide household pet standard. A copy of
these proposed changes, in underline/strikeout, is contained in Attachment No. 4.
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\PC2 Staff Repod.doc
2
Incidental Retail Sales to Industrial Uses
The Development Code currently requires that these activities obtain a conditional use permit. From
staff's perspective, this does not seem to be a reasonable requirement for ancillary sales, provided
that the incidental sales are a small part of the business. As a result, staff is recommending that
incidental retail to an industrial use be permitted as long as the floor area dedicated to the retail
purposes is less than 25% of the entire business and the material are either manufactured or
assembled on site. Incidental retail activities beyond 25% would not be permitted.
Nonprofit and Community Organization Facilities
Staff is proposing to clarify the permitted use matrix for the Public Institutional zone. At present it is
not clear that these types of facilities are allowed. There is vague language these membership halls
and similar nonprofit community uses are conditionally permitted within the Public Institutional zone.
Amending this provision would cleady state that these type of use are conditionally permitted.
Sign Programs
The Development Code authorizes the Planning Commission or the Director at a hearing to approve
sign programs. However, in reality, this approval authority has always been delegated to the
Planning Director (staff-level review and approval). The purpose of this amendment is to modify the
Development Code to clarify that sign programs are administrative approvals, subject to appeal to
the Planning Commission.
Typographic Changes
Chapters 17.16 and 17.18 of the Development Code describe specific plans and village center plans
as overlays. In reality, when these plans are adopted, they become discrete zones on the zoning
map. As a result, the term overlay is confusing and staff is recommending that the word "overlay" be
removed from the titles and text in each section. This will eliminate some confusion on how these
provisions are to be implemented without changing any of the actual requirements.
Obsolete and Unused Definitions
Staff has recently completed its review of the definitions chapter in the Development Code (Chapter
17.34) and has determined that some of the definitions are not used in the Development Code or in
needed in the day-to-day planning and code enforcement functions. As a result, staff is
recommending that these unnecessary definitions be removed from the Development Code. The
list of definitions are would be removed with this amendment are contained in Section 4 of the
proposed ordinance (Attachment No. 2).
Standards Relocations
The majority of the proposed Development Code Amendment involves the relocating of use specific
development standards to a supplemental standard chapter. Over the years, staff has observed that
some of these supplemental standards are actually more generic and could apply to projects in both
the residential and commercial or industrial zones. As a result, these more generic standards will be
relocated with the proposed modular structure standards. When needed, spelling and other
typographic changes have been made to some of these previously existing code sections. These
relocated sections are contained in Section 4 of the proposed ordinance.
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\PC2 Staff Report.doc
3
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed amendment represents a minor change to the Development Code. Staff has
completed an Initial Environmental Study and has determined that no negative environmental
impacts would occur. As a result, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend
that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
FINDINGS
The proposed Development Code Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the
community and is consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
The proposed Development Code Amendment is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 5
Proposed Ordinance - Blue Page 8
Proposed Modular Structure Standards - Blue Page 9
Proposed Agriculture and Pet Standards - Blue Page 10
Initial Environmental Study- Blue Page 11
Chapter 17.10 (sample view) - Blue Page 12
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\PC2 Staff Report.doc
4
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
INITIAL STUDY
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.doc 24
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Project Title Development Code Amendment: Modular Structure standards
and other minor modifications. (Planning Application 02-0318)
Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Contact Person and Phone Number David Hogan, Principal Planner (909) 694-6400
Project Location City of Temecula, in Southwest Riverside C(~)unty.
Project Sponsor's Name and Address City of Temecula
General Plan Designation Not applicable
Zoning Not applicable
Description of Project Adoption of a Development Code (Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal
Code) Amendment to make the following changes:
· Adoption of additional development standards for modular
structures
· Creation of Chapter 17.10 for supplemental development
standards (most of this Chapter will consist of relocated
sections not new standards)
· Allowing religious institutions in some commemial zones
without a conditional use permit
· Minor typographic changes and permitted use clarifications.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Citywide applicability
Other public agencies whose approval None
~s required
R:~DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\initial Study,doc
1
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use Planning Hazards
Population and Housing Noise
Geologic Problems Public Services
Water Utilities and Service Systems
Air Quality Aesthetics
Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources
Biological Resources Recreation
Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance
v' None
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
v' I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially
significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
S~"'~'nat u re -- I
Printed name
Date
For
R:~DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study,doc
2
1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
Potentially
Poten§a~ly Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting] Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ,/
b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific ,/
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an
environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ,/
natural community conservation plan?
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and ,/
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing ,/
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ,/
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
: 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) iRupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning ,/
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? v'
iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ,/
iv) Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the projectl
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment~lnitial Study.doc
3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Suppartin~ information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial ,/
risks to life or property?
e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Signi§canl Less Than
Significant Un~ess Significant No
issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact . Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorl~rated
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements? ,"
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ,/
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been (,]ranted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in ,"
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in floodin9 on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage, ,/
systems or provide substantial additional soumes of
polluted runoff? .
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ,/
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area aS
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ,/
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
~. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a ,/
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ,/
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study. doc
4
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan? ,/
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation? ,/
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient ,/
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
cqncentrations? v' '
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the proJect:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and SupDor~ing Information Sources impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that ,/
results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design features
(e.g., sharp curves, dangerous intersections)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ,/
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ,/
!g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks?
R:~DEVCOD~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study.doc
5
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
PotentialJy
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
'through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California ,/
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse (~ffect of federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, ,,-
, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, ,"
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ,/
ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat ,/
conservation plan?
8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Le~s Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Suppo~ling information Soumes Impact Incol'po,,~[ud Impact impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study.doc
6
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Signiticant Mitigation Significant No
rssues and Sup@ortinQ rnformation Sources impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transportation, use, or ,/
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or'
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result ,/
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency ,/
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss,
~njury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or. where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
10. NOISE. Would the project result in:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supportin~ Information Sources Impadt Incorporated Impact ~mpact
a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ,/
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
m the project vicinity above levels existing without the ,/
project?
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study. doc
7
10. NOISE. Would the project result in:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources Impact incorporated Impact Impact
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
w thout the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working' in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have a substantial adverse physical impacts associates
with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Potentially
Pctectially Significant Unless Less Than
issues and Supporling Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No
a. Fire protection':) ~mpact ~ncorporated Impact Impact
· ,/
b. Police protection? /
c Schools? /
d. Parks? ,/
e Other public facilities? v'
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mit~galion Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? v'
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant ,/
environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant ¢'
any ronmentaJ effects'~
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are ,/
new or expanded entitlements needed?
COD~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study.doc
8
,12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
SJgnificact Mitigation Signh3cant No
Issues end Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact rmpact
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment=
provider which serves or may. serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected ,/
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the proiect's solid waste disposal needs? ,/
'g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? ,/
13. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
Potentially
Potenfielly Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Su@porting Infon~afion Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ,/
b. Substantially d,~,,age scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building
within a state scenic highway?
' c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the ,/
area?
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues ar)d Supporting In fon~nafion Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 ~'
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57 ,"
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? ,,'
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? ,/
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment~lnitial Study.doc
9
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
Potentiarly
Potentialry Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Sign~cant No
Issues and Supportin~ In formation Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational ,/
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities v'
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
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 wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate ,/
a plant or animal community, reduce the number of
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 impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a v'
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, an~l the effects of probable future projects?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, ,/
either directly or indirectly?
17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR,
or other' CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following
on attached sheets.
a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check list were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
descdbe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and
the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
R:\DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study.doc
10
Comments: The project in question is an amendment to the Development Code to add standards for Modular
Structures, to reorganize other supplemental development standards into a single chapter, clarify the use
descriptions for accessory commercial uses in industrial areas, and other minor modifications to the Code.
These changes are consistent with the adopted General Plan, represent minor textual changes to the code,
and do not have the potential to adversely impact the environment.
R:\DEVCODE\02-0318 Amendment\Initial Study.doc
11
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PROPOSED MODULAR STANDARDS
R:~,DEVCODE~02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC,doc 25
Modular Buildings and Structures. Modular buildings may be allowed in some circumstances as
described in this Section if they comply with the following requirements:
Accessory Structure. Modular buildings may be approved as accessory structures to a
larger permanent building. The accessory buildings or structures shall be smaller in size
than the main permanent building. Accessory structures can be allowed, subject to the
approval of a development plan, for the following uses or activities:
a. Religious Institutions in all zones, except the Open Space and Conservation
zone.
Industrial uses in the Business Park, Light Industrial, and Service Commercial
zones.
Temporary Facility and Construction Offices in all zones, except the Open Space
and Conservation zone.
Temporary Structures. Modular buildings may be approved as a temporary structures
for religious institutions in all zones, except the Open Space and Conservation zone.
The temporary structure may be approved subject to the following requirements:
a. The approval of a development plan or conditional use permit (as appropriate) for
the permanent facilities.
b. The site shall be fully landscaped in conformance with the approved landscape
plan.
c. The term of the temporary approval shall not exceed 5 years.
d. A removal bond shall be provided to ensure the removal of the temporary
structure.
Building Design and Screening. All modular units shall comply with the following
standards to soften the appearance of the structures.
If the modular is not visible from a street or a public gathering place, the modular
structure shall provide at least minimal design compatibility with the surrounding
area. Examples of minimal design compatibility include the use of exterior trim
elements, similar colors, and other features to soften the modular appearance of
The structure.
Modular buildings that are potentially visible from the public street shall have
architectural detailing similar to permanent structures. Examples include:
accentuated entrances, pop-out features, windows, integrated with the minimal
design compatibility components described above. Supplemental landscaping,
to further screening the structure may also be required.
All accessory modular units shall be screened from the public streets and
gathering spaces in such as way as to be un-noticeable. This screening may
include a combination of the following: permanent buildings or structures,
screening walls, and landscaping.
Not withstanding these requirements, all other landscape and site layout criteria required
by the Development Code and Design Guidelines shall also apply to modular buildings.
R:\DEVCODE't02-0318 Amendment\Staff Report CC.dcc 26
ITEM 18
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAI'J'C..,,~
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/C~"~u ncil
Debbie Ubnosk~', Director of Planning
November 12, 2002
Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance (Planning Application 99-0382)
PREPARED BY:
David Hogan, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0382)
BACKGROUND: The issue of specific standards for Large Family Day Care Home
Facilities was originally raised when applications were first submitted for these facilities in 1999.
Based upon the concerns raised by the community and the Planning Commission, staff
researched the matter and brought the information back to the Commission. At its initial
consideration, the Planning Commission continued the Ordinance and directed staff to address
the following issues: separation distances, on-site parking requirements, noise impacts, indoor
and outdoor play area sizes, Fire Marshall requirements, garage use, days and hours of
operation limitations, and Title 22 health and safety issues. The Commission reconsidered this
matter on October 2, 2002, and is recommending that the Council adopt the proposed
ordinance. Copies of the previous Planning Commission staff reports are contained in
Attachment Nos. 3. The minutes from the February 2, 2000, Commission meeting are
contained in Attachment 4.
According to the State Code, large family day care homes provide day care services for more
than six children and must comply with "local ordinances prescribing reasonable standards,
restrictions, and requirements concerning spacing and concentration, traffic control, parking,
and noise control relating to such homes." Local and state building and fire codes for single-
family residences must also be met, though the Fire Code classification of the unit as a single
family dwelling still applies. Therefore, local governments have the authority to establish rules
and regulations addressing the local situation in these areas. Section 1597.46 of the California
Hearth and Safety Code provides three options for cities or counties to use in the regulation of
large family day care homes.
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc I
Classify these facilities as a permitted use of residential property;
Grant a non-discretionary permit to use lots zoned for a single-family dwelling to any
large family day care home that complies with local ordinances;
Require any large family day care home to apply for a permit to use a lot zoned for
single-family dwellings. The use permit shall be granted if the home complies with
local ordinances.
Attachment No. 5 contains excerpts from the Health and Safety Code relating to Large Family
Day Care Home Facilities.
Throughout this process, staff and the Planning Commission have attempted to recognize the
need of the community for a peaceful residential environment, the limited regulatory power
granted to the City, and the need for reasonable standards. The proposed Ordinance is a
balance between these diverse issues.
Hearing Approval Process
The Planning Commission is recommending that large family day care home permits be
approved following a public hearing before the Planning Director. This proposal would also
provide that every residence within 300 feet of the proposed facility receive notice of the hearing
and be informed of their right to attend the hearing. Appeals would be made to the Planning
Commission.
Traffic and Concentration
Traffic concerns and the concentration/spacing of these facilities are tightly linked. As a result,
in addition to a 300 feet (in any direction) spacing/separation requirement, a secondary
separation distance of 600 feet is being proposed for facilities located on the same residential
street is also being proposed. This secondary standard would further reduce the number of
these facilities that would rely on the same residential street(s) for access.
Parking
Parking is another important issue. The proposal includes a requirement that all large family day
care homes provide both an off-street employee parking space and a nearby loading space.
The employee parking space could be either in the garage or in the driveway, if the driveway is
either wider than two vehicles, or if the driveway is extra long. However, at least two driveway
spaces will need to remain clear for access to the required two-car garage. This requirement is
intended to reduce the likelihood that all on-street parking near the facility will be used by these
facilities. An additional designated loading space will also be required. This space can either
be at the curb in front of the facility or in the driveway. This requirement may restrict an
operator's ability to locate large family day care facilities on some cul-de-sacs. The ordinance
recognizes that the designated open driveway spaces may be used for drop-off and pick-up
purposes also during busy times.
R:\Ordinances'~Large Family Day Care\Staff Repot[ CC.doc 2
Noise
Noise was another key area of concern when the facilities were first considered. To reduce
neighborhood impacts, the Commission is proposing to restrict the hours that children can play
outside. This will help avoid excessive noise levels at neighboring properties during the times of
day where quiet is most appreciated. The proposed ordinance would allow outdoor play
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Staff prepared an Initial Environmental Study (lES)
for the proposed amendment. No potential adverse impacts were identified. The Planning
Commission concurred with the analysis and is recommending that the Council approve a
negative declaration with de minimus impact finding for the Large Family Day Care Home
Facility Ordinance. A copy of the lES is contained in Attachment No. 6.
FISCAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impacts are associated with this provision. The anticipated
typical cost for these applications will be included in the upcoming application fee study.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Proposed Ordinance - Page 4
PC Resolution No. -2002-041 - Page 10
October 2, 2002 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 13
Planning Commission Minutes- Page 17
Excerpts of the Health and Safety Code - Page 21
Initial Study - Page 22
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 3
A'FI'ACHMENT NO. 1
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 4
ORDINANCE 02-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, AMENDING TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0382)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Planning Staff prepared Planning Application No. 99-0382 (the
"Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code
and Subdivision Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the Planning Application No. 99-0382 (the "Application") has been prepared
in a manner in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in
the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on October 2, 2002, at
after a duly noticed public hearing recommended that the City Council adopted the proposed
ordinance;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and
based upon the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula
Library, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on November 12,
2002 to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 17.06.050.J of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
"J. Family Day Care Home Facilities.
Small family day care home facilities, as defined in Chapter 3.4, Division
2 of the Health and Safety Code, are permitted in all residential zoning
districts. Although no specific permit is required, compliance with the
performance standards contained in Section 17.06.050.J.3 of the
Temecula Municipal Code is required.
Large family day care home facilities, as defined in Chapter 3.4, Division
2 of the Health and Safety Code, are permitted in all single family zoning
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Repot[ CC.doc 5
districts with the approval of a permit for a large family day care home
facility pursuant to the provisions of Section 17.04.050 of the Temecula
Municipal Code. Compliance with the performance standards contained
in Sections 17.06.050.J.3 and J.4 of the Temecula Municipal Code are
required.
All day care home facilities shall comply with the following requirements.
a. All day care facilities shall be state licensed and shall be operated
according to all applicable State and local health and safety
requirements and regulations.
b. The facility shall comply with all land use regulations and site
development standards of the zoning district in which it is located.
c. An outdoor play area shall be located in the rear yard area.
Stationary play equipment shall not be located in required side
yard setbacks or in the actual front yard. The outdoor play areas
shall be securely locked and appropriately landscaped.
d. A solid decorative fence or wall at least five feet in height shall be
constructed on all property lines, except in the front yard.
Materials, textures, colors, and design of the fence or wall shall be
compatible with on-site and adjacent properties. All fences and
walls shall provide for safety with controlled points of entry.
e. All on-site lighting shall be stationary, directed away from adjacent
properties and public rights-of-way, and of an intensity appropriate
to the use it is serving.
f. Outdoor playtimes must be limited to between the hours of 8:00
a.m to 7:00 p.m.
g. On- or off-street parking must be adequate enough to
accommodate both employee parking and passenger loading and
unloading. Parking and loading/unloading areas must not restrict
access to neighboring properties or utilize the parking space of
neighboring properties.
In addition to the provisions of Subsection J.3 above, large family day
care home facilities shall comply with the following requirements.
a. In all single family zoning districts and planning areas, large family
day care home facilities shall not be located any closer than:
i. Three hundred (300) feet of another large family day care
home facility, and
ii. Six hundred (600) feet of another large family day care
home facility when the most reasonable direct route from
the arterial road network to each site utilizes the same
residential streets.
b. Large Family Day Care Home facilities must provide one (1) off-
street employee parking space. The parking space may be in the
third space of an extra wide driveway or in the garage. At least
two driveway spaces shall be open for access and loading.
R:\Ordinances'tLarge Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 6
At least one (1) loading space, either in the driveway of the home,
or at the curb immediately in front of the home, must be available
for passenger loading and unloading.
Any additional design or operational requirements that may be
necessary to ensure compatibility of the facility with the
surrounding area and protect the public health and safety."
Section 2. Section 17.04.050 creating Large Family Day Care Permits is hereby
added to the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows:
"17.04.050 Large Family Day Care Permits
Purpose and Intent. A large family day care permit is intended to allow the
establishment of large family day care home facilities, as defined in Chapter 3.4,
Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, in a manner that is compatible with the
surrounding area and that protects the general public health, safety and welfare.
Application Requirements. Applications for large family day care permits shall be
completed in accordance with the Section 17.03.030 of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
Notice. Upon the determination that a large family day care permit application is
complete, the following shall occur:
A public notice shall be sent to every residence within three hundred
(300) feet of the site. The notice shall be mailed first class and postage
pre-paid to the applicant and all occupants (at the site address) and
property owners.
The Notice shall indicate the following information:
a. The location and address of the proposed large family day care
home facility.
b. A description of the proposed activity, including the maximum
number of permitted children and the days of the week and hours
of the day that the facility is proposed to operate.
c. A statement that the City will hold a hearing for the proposed use.
The statement will inform the recipients of their right to attend the
hearing and raise their issues and concerns regarding the
proposed use. The requirements of Section 17.03.040.B.2 of the
Temecula Municipal Code to notify at least thirty (30) property
owners does not apply to the requirements of this hearing notice.
Approval. A large family day care permit may be approved, conditionally
approved or denied after a public hearing. As determined to be necessary and
appropriate, the director may refer any application to the Planning Commission.
Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council,
pursuant to Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
E. Findings. The Director of Planning, may approve or conditionally approve a large
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 7
family day care permit only when the following findings can be made:
The proposed use is compatible with the nature, character and use of the
surrounding area.
2. The proposed use will not adversely affect adjacent residents or
structures.
The nature and location of the proposed use will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, or welfare of the community and does not concentrate
children in a dangerous location.
Notice of Decision. A copy of the notice of decision shall be provided to the
applicant in accordance with Section 17.03.040.E of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
Revocation. A large family day care permit may be revoked or modified by the
director in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.03.080 of the Temecula
Municipal Code."
Section 3.
Code.
The following minor changes are hereby made to the Temecula Municipal
A. Table 17,03,010 of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to
add the following row:
Approval
Large Family Day
Care Home Facility
Administrative
Approval
Planning
Director
X
Planning
Commission
City Council
B. Footnote 1 of Table 17.06.040 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Subject to the provisions of Section 17.04.050 and Section 17.06.050.J., Family Day Care
Home Design Standards."
SECTION 4. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a coud of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30)
days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places.
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage; and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City
Councilmembers voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated
in said City.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall
cause the same to be posted as required by law.
R:\Ordinances'~.arge Family Day Care\Staff Reporl CC.doc 8
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 2002.
Ron Robeds, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 2002-__ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 22"d day of October, 2002 and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
th day of ,2002, by the foilowing vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 9
AI'I'ACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-041
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 10
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-041
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, AMENDING TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES" (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0382)
WHEREAS, the staff has prepared Planning Application No. PA99-0382 (the
"Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development
Code;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in
the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application
on October 2, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and
based upon the findings set forth hereunder;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recommendation of Approval. That the City of Temecula Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Temecula amending Chapters 17.03, 17.04, and 17.06 of the Temecula
Municipal Code to add standards for Large Family Home Day Care facilities and to create a
Large Family Home Day Care permit process, substantially in the form contained in Exhibit A.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. A Negative Declaration has been prepared
and adopted by the Planning Commission. Whereas, no further environmental review is
required for the proposed project.
Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 2nd day of October 2002.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 11
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that PC Resolution No. 2002-040 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2nd day of October, 2002, by the
following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 3
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 2
ABSTAIN: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Mathewson, Olhasso, and Telesio
None
Guerriero and Chairman Chiniaeff
None
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\Ordinances~Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 12
ATFACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTS
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 13
August 18,1999
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 14
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
August18,1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0197
Prepared By: Dave Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA99-0197; and,
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending approval of
an ordinance entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE
SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF TITLE 17 TO ESTABLISH
DETAILED STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE
HOME FACILITIES, RE-CATEGORIZE TEMPORARY
USES, AMEND YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL
ZONES, CLARIFY FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS
PROVISIONS, AND MAKE NUMEROUS MINOR
MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0197).
BACKGROUND
Staff periodically bdngs back development code amendments and clarifications to the Planning
Commission and City Council when the need for possible changes has been identified. These
proposed Development Code amendments represent a compilation of a number of identified
changes into a single staff report and ordinance. The proposed ordinance would amend several
areas of the Development Code to address the following:
The processing and approval of small and large family day care home facilities;
The categorization of temporary uses;
The clarification of residential lot sizes and accessory structure setback
requirements;
The enhancement and updating of senior and affordable housing provisions; and
Other minor clean up and typographic corrections.
ANALYSIS
Larqe Family Day Care Facilities
The City has recently received a number of inquiries for large family day care home facilities.
According to State Law, large day care homes can provide care for up to 14 children. After
R:\STAFFRPT~197PA99 PC.doc
reviewing the current code provisions, a number of corrections were proposed. The proposed
Development Code amendments would (1) differentiate between small and large family day care
home facilities, (2) provide a detail process about how the large facilities would .be reviewed and
approved (in accordance with State Law); and (3) will cladfy who has the authority to approve the
application, These corrections are contained in Sections 1,2 and 3 of the ordinance in Attachment
No. 2.
Re-Classify Temoorarv Uses
After several years of processing applications for Temporary Use Permits, staff has determined that
not all applications need the same level of review, Consequently, staff is proposing that temporary
uses be divided into two categories, major and minor. The permits for the major temporary uses
would continue to be processed much as they have been. The permits for minor temporary uses
would normally be approved either over-the-counter or, at most, a few days after the application
had been submitted. The list of temporary uses that is shown in the draft ordinance is the same
list of uses that is shown in the current code. These corrections are contained in Section 4 of the
ordinance in Attachment No. 2.
Clarify Table 17.06,040 and Aoc~ssory Use Setbacks
The residential zoning chapter in the Code has a number of provisions that seem to cause
confusion. As a result, staff has identified the following clarifications and modifications to the
Residential Development Standards table and the setback provisions for accessory structures and
second units. These corrections are contained in Section 5 of the ordinance in Attachment No. 2.
Update the Senior and Affordable Housinq Provisions
As the City's Affordable Housing Program begins to take on more diverse projects, staff has
identified a need to provide additional detail and to ensure that the City Development Code
complies with State Law. The proposed amendment further subdivides Section 17,06.0§0.H into
a subsection on senior housing and congregate care and another on affordable housing. Though
both areas relate to the need to provide appropriate housing to members of the community who
often have difficulty finding appropriate housing, the specific requirements that apply to each are
very different. The amendment also further mimics the provisions of state law in terms of the
density bonus incentives and the development standard concessions. These differences
necessitated the need to furlher cladfy this section of the Development Code. T. hese corrections
are contained in Sections 6 and 7 of the ordinance in Attachment No. 2,
Other Minor Clean-up Items
Section 8 contains numerous clarifications, minor modifications, and typographic corrections that
staff has identified. The only issue of note is the cleanup of the provisions for commercial floor
area ratio incentives. The proposed changes further cJarify the approval process and attempt to
better define when the incentive can be approved.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff prepared an Initial Environmental Study for the proposed Development Code amendments.
The analysis indicated that the project would have not impact on the environment. As a result,
staff is recommending that a Negative Declaration be approved.
R:',STAFFRPT~197PA99 PC.doc
2
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 99- ,, - Blue Page 4
Proposed Ordinance - Blue Page 7
Initial Study - Blue Page 8
R:',STAFFRPT~197PA99 PC.doc
February 2,2000
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report Ce.doc 15
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 2, 2000
Planning Application No. PA99-0382
(Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance)
Prepared By: Dave Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT. a PC Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-._
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF
TITLE t7 RELATING TO THE STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY
CARE HOME FACILITIES" (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0382)
BACKGROUND
This item was previously considered by the Planning Commission on August 18, 1999. At that
meeting, the Commission requested that staff bring this issue back at a later date with additional
information. The previous Development Code amendment proposed to further differentiate between
small and large family day care home facilities, provided a detailed process about how the large
facilities would be reviewed and approved, and clarified who had the authority to approve the
facilities. This staff report has been revised to provide the Commission with three different
approaches on how to address Large Family Day Care Home Facilities.
ANALYSIS
Because of the importance of providing home-based child care facilities, the State legislature
prescribes how local governments can regulate these facilities. Specifically, Section 1597.46 of the
Health and Safety Code dictates that the City can deal with Large Family Day Care Homes in any of
three ways. A copy of the Health and Safety Code Sections regulating Large Family Day Care
Home Facilities is contained in Attachment No. 3. The three approaches to regulating Large Family
Day Care Homes are as follows:
Classify them as a permitted use and require no additional permits. A draft Ordinance to
implement this option is contained in Exhibit A-1 of Attachment No. 2.
Grant a non-discretionary permit for property zoned for single-family residential uses that
complies with reasonable local standards such as parking, spacing and concentration, traffic
control, and noise. A draft Ordinance to implement this option is contained in Exhibit A-2 of
Attachment No. 2.
R:\ORDINANCES\LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE\382PA99 PC.doc
1
Issue a permit after a public notice has been provided to all property owners within 100 feet
of the exterior property lines of the subject property within 10 days of an application. The
notice would state that the City would issue a permit for a Large Family Day Care Home
Facility unless a request for a hearing is filed with the City. A draft Ordinance to implement
this option is contained in Exhibit A-3 of Attachment No. 2.
The draft Ordinance also includes a provision that in any residential zone, large family day care
home facilities shall be separated by at least 300 feet and, if they are located on the same street, be
separated by at least 600 feet from any other facility.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff prepared an Initial Environmental Study for the proposed Development Code amendment and
is recommending that a Negative Declaration by approved for Planning Application PA99-0382.
Attachments:
2
3.
4.
PC Resolution No. 2000- - Blue Page 3
Proposed Ordinances - Blue Page 5
Excerpts of the Health and Safety Code - Blue Page 9
Initial Study- Blue Page 12
R:\ORDINANCES\LARGE FAMILY DaY CARE\382PA99 PC.doc
2
October 2,2002
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 16
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 2, 2002
Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance
(Planning Application No. '99-0382)
Prepared By: Dave Hogan, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. 99-0382
(Large Family Day Care Facility Ordinance);
2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, AMENDING TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES" (PLANNING APPLICATION 99-0382)
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission previously considered this item concerning the regulation of Large
Family Day Care Home Facilities on February 2, 2000. At that time, a voice vote reflected
unanimous approval of a motion to continue this matter and to have staff research regulatory
issues, including: separation distance issues, on-site parking requirements, noise impacts,
indoor and outdoor play area sizes, Fire Marshall requirements, adult to child ratios, garage use,
days and hours of operation limitations, and Title 22 health and safety issues. A copy of the
minutes are contained in Attachment No. 3.
Section 1597.46 of the California Health and Safety Code provides three options for cities or
counties to use in the regulation of large family day care homes.
Classify these facilities as a permitted use of residential property;
Grant a non-discretionary permit to use lots zoned for a single-family dwelling to any
large family day care home that complies with local ordinances;
Require any large family day care home to apply for a permit to use a lot zoned for
single-family dwellings. The use permit shall be granted if the home complies with
local ordinances. Notification shall be sent to all homeowners within 100 feet of the
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report PC2.doc
home of the proposed use, and a hearing will be held at the request of the applicant
or another affected person.
According to the State Code, large family day care homes must comply with "local ordinances
prescribing reasonable standards, restrictions, and requirements concerning spacing and
concentration, traffic control, parking, and noise control relating to such homes." Local and
state building and fire codes for single-family residences must also be met, though the Fire
Code classification of the unit as a single family dwelling still applies. Therefore, local
governments have the authority to establish rules and regulations pertaining to these several
domains. Attachment No. 4 contains excerpts from the Health and Safety Code relating to
Large Family Day Care Home Facilities.
ANALYSIS
Throughout this process, staff has attempted to recognize the need of the community for a
peaceful residential environment, the limited scope of regulatory power granted to the City, and
the need to provide reasonable standards. In developing this proposed ordinance, staff was
concerned with traffic, concentration, parking, and noise issues. At the February 2°d meeting,
the Planning Commission preferred aspects of both options two and three. Issues raised at the
meeting included: the scope of the City's regulatory power in this matter (i.e., the ability to deny
an application), the types of regulations that should be adopted within the City's scope of power,
and whether or not a public hearing is necessary. As a result, the proposed Ordinance reflects
a combination of these two options.
Staff is proposing that large family day care home permits be approved following a public
hearing before the Planning Director. This approach is a combination of Options Two and
Three detailed above. Every residence within 300 feet of the proposed facility will receive notice
of the hearing and be informed of their right to attend the hearing. After the hearing takes place,
the Director would approve, conditionally approve, or deny the permit. Appeals would be made
to the Planning Commission.
Traffic and Concentration
Traffic concerns and the concentration/spacing of these facilities are tightly linked. In addition to
the 300 feet spacing/separation requirement, staff is also proposing an additional standard that
will limit the number of large family facilities relying on the same residential streets for access.
A secondary separation distance of 600 feet is being proposed for facilities located on the same
residential street.
Parking
Parking is another important issue. The proposal includes a requirement that all large family
day care homes provide both an off-street employee parking space and a nearby loading space.
This employee parking space could be either in the garage or in the driveway, if the driveway is
either wider than two vehicles, or if the driveway is extra long. At least two driveway spaces (in
front of the garage) will need to remain clear for loading and garage access purposes. This
requirement is intended to reduce the likelihood that all on-street parking near the facility will be
used by these facilities.
In addition, the ordinance is requiring that a loading space be identified. This space can either
be at the curb in front of the facility or in the driveway. However, at least two driveway spaces
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report PC2.doc 2
will need to remain clear for access to the required two-car garage. This requirement may
restrict an operator's ability to locate large family day care facilities on some cul-de-sacs. The
ordinance recognizes that the designated open driveway spaces may be used for drop-off and
pick-up purposes also during busy times. The purpose of this requirement is to make sure that
at least minimal parking is provided for the large family day care home facilities.
Noise
Noise is another key area of concern. To reduce neighborhood impacts, staff is proposing to
restrict the hours that children can play outside. This will help avoid excessive noise levels at
neighboring properties during the times of day where quiet is most appreciated. The proposed
ordinance would allow outdoor play between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff prepared an Initial Environmental Study (lES) for the proposed amendment in 1999. No
potential adverse impacts were identified at that time. Staff has since reviewed the lES and it's
previous recommendation, and has determined that no changes have occurred in the project's
potential impacts. As a result, staff is recommending that a Negative Declaration be adopted for
Planning Application 99-0382.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
PC Resolution No. - 02- - Blue Page 4
Large Family Day Care Facility Ordinance - Blue Page 7
Minutes from the February 2, 2002 Planning Commission meeting - Blue Page 8
Excerpts of the Health and Safety Code - Blue Page 9
Initial Study- Blue Page 10
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report PC2.doc 3
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
R:\Ordinances~.arge Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 17
August 18,1999
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC,doc 18
PlanC omrn/minutes~08189~1
RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-031
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING
NO. PA98-0516 (TENTATIVE
MAP 29132), LOCATED ON THE
STATE HIGHWAY DE
MISSIONS, KNOWN AS PARCEL
NO. 950-120-04
Modify-
The language of Con,
applicable.
to include the wording if
Add-
The
of Apl
by Assistant Planner Anders. (See the
5 of the minutes.)
and read into
wording on
Webster seconded the motion and voice vote reflected
US
Amendments to the Development Code (Planninl:l Application No. PA97-
p197)
Request to amend the Development Code to do the following:
Establish standards for Large Family Day care Home Facilities;
Establish permitting requirements for the approval of Large Family
Day Care Home Facilities;
Re-categorizing temporary uses;
Amend accessory structure setback requirements;
Modify the senior housing, congregate care, and affordable housing
provisions;
Clarify parts of the floor area ratio incentive bonus; and,
Make numerous other minor changes to the Development Code.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve a resolution recommending adoption of an
ordinance.
Reviewing the proposed amendments in detail, Senior Planner Hogan presented the
staff report (via agenda material); for Commissioner Fahey, provided additional
clarification with respect to page 6, Section 2.b. regarding congregate care projects; for
Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding the criteria for
increases in Floor Area Ratio (FAR), specifically with respect to page 8, Section 3; for
Commissioner Mathewson, relayed clarification regarding the language denoted on page
7, Section b; and for Commissioners Mathewson and Naggar, relayed that the Updated
Housing Element would address Low Income Housing parameters which would be
brought before the Commission potentially at the end of September.
During the ensuing Commission discussion, the following revisions were presented:
Chairman Guerriero relayed that Item Nos. 1 and 2 of the proposals for
amendment would be pulled, and therefore would not be considered with
respect to this Agenda Item.
Regarding the unintentional omission on page 6, Section 1.a., after the
phrase The maximum density, Senior Planner Hogan indicated that the text
should reflect the same density incentives as denoted under senior housing.
Commissioner Fahey recommended that the language on page 6, Section
2.b. be modified, deleting the phrase dis~tfbuted equally throughout the
project in order to solely reflect The handicapped units shall comply with the
standards set forth in Title 24 of tha California Code of Regulation.
Deputy Director of Public WonV, s Parks advised that staff concurred with
Commissioner Webster's recommendation (regarding the example denoted
on page 8, Section 3) to delete the phrase off-site signalization due to the
lack of need for provision of such specificity.
Commissioner Mathewson indicated that on page 6, Section 3.a.ii. the
numbers eighteen (20) should be corrected to reflect consistency.
Mr. Larry Markham, 41750 Winchester Road, recommended modifying page
8, Table 17.06.040 with respect to Sections HR, VL, and L-1 regarding the
standard designation to reflect minimum gross lot araa in lieu of minimum net
lot area. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that staff concurred
with the modification, and would additionally, include L-2.
VV'Ch respect to Commissioner Mathewson's comments, and the
Commission's concurrence, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that on page 6,
Section 3.1.iii. L-1 and L-2 would be deleted, and the number of units per
acre would reflect eight (8) in lieu of the indicated twelve (12.)
For Commissioner Naggar, Attorney Curley provided the definition of Affordable
Housing, which referenced the Health and Safety Code, and relayed that due to the
Commission's request he would provide additional specifications at a future point in time.
Deputy Director of Public Wor~s Pan~s relayed that the Department of Redevelopment
may be able to provide the Iow-income housing parameters to the Commission.
For Commissioner Fahey, Planning Manager Ubnoske recommended that the
Commission move forward with Section Nos. 3-7 with respect to the proposals to amend
the Development Code, and then have staff bring beck at a future point in time with the
proposed amendments to Section Nos. I and 2.
PianC omm/mlnutes/081899
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queuing with respect to the lack of specified
limits regarding Temporary Use Permits, Planning Manager Ubnoske provided additional
clarification as to the process that staff utilizes when issuing Temporary Use Permits.
For Mr. Anthony Maielta, 29747 Calle Palmas, Planning Manager Ubnoske provided
clarification with respect to the variance between Medium and Low Medium Densities.
Chairman Guerdero closed the public hea~ing.
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the proposed amendments to
the Development Code with respect to Section Nos. 3-7, as modified in the previous
discussions (* all moved modifications are referenced in the minutes in detail, and
denoted as bulleted items on page 9.)
RESOLUTION NO. 99-032
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE SEVERAL
CHAPTERS OF TITLE 17 TO ESTABLISH DETAILED
STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME
FACILITIES, RE-CATEGORIZE TEMPORARY USES,
AMEND YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES,
CLARIFY FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS PROVISIONS,
AND MAKE NUMEROUS MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO
TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
(PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0197)"
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fahey and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
10
February 2,2000
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 19
Attorney Curley le this map would extinguish over a any
action, that this action would ' owner the ~ to re-market the property
clear of any queries regarding the I )r influence on the site.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney
with respect to this action.
that the zoning would be unaffected
MOTION: Co moved to approve staff
seconded b~ner Webster and voice vote reflected
unanimous
The motion was
4
Planninq Application No. PA99-0382 (Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance)
Citywide ordinance amendin,q the Development Code - Senior Planner Dave Ho,qan
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-.__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, AMENDING THE SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF THE
TITLE 17 RELATING TO THE STANDARDS FOR LARGE
FAMILY DAY CARE HOME FAClTIIES" (PLANNING
APPLICATION PA99-0382)
Senior Planner Hogan presented a detailed overview of the staff report (of record), noting staff's
efforts to modify the existing ordinance regarding large family day care home facilities; advised
that the State governed the authority in which local government could regulate these facilities,
relaying three approaches (per agenda material) the City could utilize in regulating the facilities,
as follows: Approach No. 1 ) to classify the facilities as a permitted use (with no additional
standards), Approach No. 2) to grant a'non-discretionarypermit, which is an approval similar to
the process the City utilizes for granting businesses licenses, or Approach No. 3) to issue a
permit after notice was given to the property owners within a hundred foot parameter in order for
those individuals to have an opportunity to indicate whether or not they desired a public hearing;
and noted that the agenda material was inclusive of three draft ordinances, one for each of the
three approaches, relaying that certain aspects of one draft ordinance could be added to
another.
Seeing that there were no members of the public wishing to speak on this item, Chairman
Guerriero closed the public hearing at this time.
Based on previous Commission comments regarding large family day care home facility uses,
Commissioner Fahey, echoed by Commissioners Mathewson and Telesio, recommended that
R:Planningrninutes\020200
3
there be regulations associated with the permitting, and that there be a review and approval
process.
For Commissioner Telesio, Senior Planner Hogan specified that the care of seven (7) children
constituted a large day care home facility, noting that fourteen (14) was the maximum number of
children permitted in the day care facilities per State law; and clarified that small day care
facilities (constituting the care of less than seven (7) children) were not required to be permitted.
Commissioner Webster relayed that this issue was being driven by State law; advised that small
day care home facilities should be permitted in residential areas, noting his opinion that large
day care facilities did not belong in residential areas since this use was essentially a commercial
business; acknowledged that per State law, local government did not have the jurisdiction to opt
against permitting the large day care facilities in residential areas; recommended that the
Commission choose the draft ordinance, and approach option at tonight's meeting in order to
provide staff with the avenue to pursue, providing comments regarding modifications, and then
that the issue be continued in order for staff to address the requested revisions.
Chairman Guerriero relayed concurrence with continuing this item in order to obtain additional
data regarding specificity with regard to regulating square footage, play equipment, fencing, on-
street parking, restroom facilities, and in order to address the safety aspects of this matter.
Referencing State legislation, Attorney Curley relayed the restricted parameters the State had
mandated with respect to the City's discretion; advised that the review process could be
inclusive of the following criteria: spacing concentration, traffic control, and parking and noise
control; relayed that the legislation precluded the City from placing restrictions on building
height, setbacks, or lot dimensions unless the same standard applied to all single family houses;
advised that CEQA review was inapplicable with respect to this matter; and concurred with the
recommendation that the Commission relay its recommended modifications, in order for staff to
research the specific legal restrictions associated with regulating this use and for staff to bring
the matter back before the Commission.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries regarding an article he had recently read,
Attorney Curley relayed that he could investigate published articles regarding proposed
legislation which addressed the local jurisdiction's concern regarding the lack of regulatory
power with respect to this matter, and update the Commission at the next meeting.
In light of the lack of regulatory Power of the City, Commissioner Fahey relayed her reluctance
to recommend that the review and approval process be conducted at a public hearing due to
that fact that it implied that the public's comments and concerns could be factored into the
governing body's decision on whether to permit the use, whereas in reality, the City had
extremely restricted jurisdiction with respect to these particular uses; reiterated that to conduct
the review process in a public hearing implied that the public's comments would be taken into
consideration; and clarified that while she recommended a permitting process to ensure that
certain criteria was met, she was opposed to the review process being a public hearing.
In response to Commissioner Fahey, Attorney Curley advised that if the review process were
conducted via an administrative level the same standards would apply, noting that the only
variant would be the entity permitting the use.
For Commissioner Telesio, Attorney Curley clarified the State mandates regarding the
regulations the City placed on the large day care home facilities, advising that there could be no
R:Planningminutes\020200
4
differentiation from the regulations placed on alternate residential structures; reiterated that the
State permitted the local jurisdictions to develop reasonable standards for the following: spacing
and concentration, traffic control, and parking and noise control, clarifying that those specific
areas could be regulated within reasonable standards with respect to the large family day care
facilities; and specified the areas that could not be uniquely regulated for day care facilities.
With respect to noise control, for Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Curley clarified the
parameters for restricting this impact; and for Commissioner Fahey, confirmed that if there was
analysis completed regarding the demand in the community, and the street capacity, then
objective criteria could be developed regarding the spacing of the uses.
Concurring with Commissioner Fahey's recommendation to concentrate on spacing parameters,
Chairman Guerriero relayed the number of these particular uses the State indicated was
needed.
For Chairman Guerriero, Attorney Curley relayed that if the City could support reasonable
spacing and concentration standards via analysis and data, the City would be in compliance
with legislation.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Curley clarified the 100-foot parameter distance for
public notification, noting that it was a State standard.
In response to Commissioner Telesio's queries regarding the standards denoted in Approach
Nos. 2, and 3 with respect to fenced play areas, and lighting standards, Senior Planner Hogan
relayed the efforts to apply various minimal standards. Attorney Curley provided additional
information with respect to regulating these issues.
Commissioner Fahey reiterated her opposition with respect to the review process being
conducted at a public hearing, noting that any public member could address his or her concerns
regarding any matter at a Planning Commission meeting if they so desired; and relayed that she
strongly supported Approach No. 2 (denoted in the agenda material), advising that there be
additional specificity developed regarding regulating traffic and spacing.
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to have staff draft an ordinance based on
Approach No. 3 (per agenda material) and that staff investigate the development of specific
criteria with regard to the following: spacing issues, on-site parking requirements, noise impacts,
the size of the play areas (inside and outside of a facility), Fire Marshall requirements, days and
hours of operation limitations, the number of supervisors required on a per child basis,
requirement to utilize the garage for the parking of the applicant's personal vehicles, Title 22
health and safety issues, and front yard fencing, based on the legal parameters appropriate for
this permitting process, and that the matter be continued in order for staff to investigate the
aforementioned issues. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote
reflected denial due to Commissioners Fahey, Guerriero, and Telesio voting no.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to have staff draft an ordinance utilizing Approach No. 2
(per agenda material), developing additional specificity regarding the previously mentioned
issues (see above motion), and that the matter, be continued in order for staff to investigate the
requested regulatory issues from a legal standpoint. Chairman Guerriero seconded the motion.
(This motion was ultimately withdrawn.)
R:Planningminutes\020200
5
For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Curley provided additional information regarding
Approach No. 3.
For Commissioner Telesio, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that Approach No. 3 provided an
opportunity for public members to express their comments and concerns at a public hearing
(i.e., Director's hearing).
Attorney Curley advised that per City Code, a Director's hearing decision was applicable for the
appeal process; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed that with Approach No. 2 the Planning
Director would make an administrative decision and it would not go through the director's
hearing process, noting that it would be the issuance of a non-discretionary permit; for
informational purposes, provided clarification with respect to a public member filing a writ of
mandate, to appeal a decision on either side of this issue; and clarified that with Approach No. 3
the public would have an opportunity to express their comments at a hearing.
Commissioner Telesio relayed that while he was in favor of the public being able to voice their
comments regarding this issue, if the local governing agency had no regulatory power a hearing
would be ineffectual; and queried whether staff could address the regulatory issues,
investigating the range of authority legally permitted prior to the Commission choosing Approach
Nos. 2, or 3.
It was noted that at this time that the previous motion was withdrawn.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to have staff research the regulatory issues previously
discussed (see page 5, under the first motion), and to continue this item in order for staff to
address these matters, and that the Commission would subsequently choose the approach
option to be pursued at the time the item was brought back to the Commission, and make
recommended revisions to the ordinance at that time. Chairman Guerriero seconded the motion
and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
~".-~~noted that at 7:18 P.M. the meeting recessed, reconvening at 7:26 P.M. ~
5 P~cj Application No. PA99-0394 {Development Plan/Conditional Use,~it), located
on the ea-'~e of Ynez Road south of Winchester Road betwee~th~"'-two mall entrances
- Project Planner~rhe,mas Thornsley ~
RECOMMENDATION:~
R:Planningminutes\020200
6
October 2,2002
(Not available yet.)
R:\Ordinances~Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC.doc 20
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
EXCERPTS OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
R:\Ordinances'g_arge Family Day Care\St~ff Report CC.doc 21
EXCERPT OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
Section 1597.46. All of the following shall apply to large family day care homes:
(a) A city, county, or ~ and county shall not prohibit large family day care homes on lots
zoned for single-family dwellings, but shall do one of the following:
(1) Classify these homes as a permitted use of residential property for zoning purposes.
(2)
Grant a non-discretional/permit to use a lot zoned for a single-family dwelling to any
large family day care home that complies with local ordinances prescribing
reasonable standards, restrictions, and requirements concerning spacing and
concentration, traffic control, parldng, and noise control relating to such homes, and
complies with subdivision (d) and any regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal
pursuant to that subdivision. Any noise standards shall be consistent with local noise
ordinances implementing the noise element of the general plan and shall take into
consideration the noise level generated by children. The permit issued pursuant to
this paragraph shall be granted by the zoning administrator, if any, or if there is no
zoning administrator by the person or persons designated by the planning agency to
grant such permits, upon the certification without a hearing.
(3)
Require any large family day care home to apply for a permit to use a lot zoned for
single-family dwellings. The zoning administralor, if any, or if there is no zoning
administrator, the person or persons designated by the planning agency to handle the
use permits shall review and decide the applications. The use permit shall be
granted if the large family day care home complies with local ordinances, if any,
prescribing reasonable standards, restrictions, and requirements oonceming spacing
and concentration, traffic control, parldng, and noise control relating to such homes,
and complies with subdivision (d) and any regulations adopted by the State Fire
Marshal pursuant to that subdivision. Any noise standards shall be consistent with
local noise ordinances implementing the noise element of the general plan and shall
take into consideration the noise levels generated by children. The local govemment
shall process any required permit as economically as possible, and fees charged for
revie~v shall not exceed the costs of the review and permit process. Not less than
10 days prior to the date on which the decision will be made on the application, the
zoning administrator or person designated Io handle such use permits shall give
notice of the proposed use by mail or delivery to all owners shown on the last
equalized assessment roll as owning real property within a 100 foot radius of the
exterior bOundaries of the proposed large family day care home. No hearing on the
application for a permit issued pursuant to Ihis paragraph shall be held before a
decision is made unless a hearing is requested by the applicant or other affected
person. The applicant or other affected person may appeal the decision. The
appellant shall pay the cost, if any of the appeal.
(b)
A large family day care home shall not be subject to the provision of Division 13
(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.
(c)
Use of a single-family dwelling for the purposes of a large family day care home shall not
constitute a change of occupancy for purposes of Par1 1.5 (commencing with Section 17910
of Division 13 (State Housing Law), or for purposes of local building and fire codes.
R:~ORDINANCES~LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE~382PA99
10
(d)
(e)
Large family day care homes shell be considered as single-family residences for the
purposes of the State Uniform Building Standards Code and local building and fire codes,
except with respect to any additional standards specifically designed to promote the fire and
life safety of the children in these homes adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to this
subdivision. The State Fire Marshal shall adopt separate building standards specifically
relating to the subject of fire and life safety in large family day care homes which shall be
published in T'dle 24 of the Califomia Administrative Code. These standards shall apply
uniformly throughout the state and shall incJude, but not be limited to: (1) the requirement
that a large family day care home contain a fire extinguisher or smoke detector device, or
both, which meets standards established by the State Fire Marshal; (2) specification as to
the number of required exits from the home; and (3) specification as to the floor or floors on
which day care may be provided. Enforcement of these provisions shall be in accordance
with Sections 13145 and 13146. No city, county, city and county, or distdct shall adopt or
enforce any building ordinance or loc, al role or regulation relating to the subject of fire and life
safety in large family day care homes which is inconsistent with those standards adopted by
the State Fire Marshal, except to the extent the building ordinance or local rule or regulation
applies to single-family residences in which day care is not provided.
No later than April 1, 1984, the State Fire Marshal shall adopt the building standards required
in subdivision (d) and any other regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this
section.
(Added by Stets. f983, Ch. 1233.)
R:~ORDINANCE$~.ARGE FAMILY DAY CARE~382PA99 PC.doc
11
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
INITIAL STUDY
R:\Ordinances\Large Family Day Care\Staff Report CC,doc 22
'City of Temeculs
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Project T~e Development Code Amendment (PA99-0382)
Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033,
I Temm--!% CA 92589-9033
Contact Person and Phone Number David Hogan, Senior Planner
(9o9) 694-6400
Project Location Citywide
Project Sponsor's Name and Address City of Temecula
General Plan Designation Not applicable
Zoning Not appiicable
Description of Project An amendment to the Development Code to set =puc;;;¢
standan:ls for the review and approval of family day care
home facilities, The proposal consists of three altemafive
approaches. The three approaches are as follows:
1. De not specifically regulate large family day care
home facilities;
2. issue a non-discretionary permit for large family day
care home facilities; or
3. Provide community notice before a permit is issued
for a large family day care facility is approved.
Unless stated otherwise, the analysis contained in this initial
environmental study will evaluate the most regulatory
approach
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Not applicable
Other public agencies whose approval None,
is required
\~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~Dep~LAN NIN G~CEQA~382PA99 IES.d~x~
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
' impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use Planning Hazards
Population and Housing Noise
Geologic Problems Public Services
Water Utilities and Service Systems
Air Quality Aesthetics
Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources
Biological Resources Recreation
Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance
V' None
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
,/ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be,P.rePared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially
significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required~ but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that eartier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature
Pdnted name
Oatd
For
'~TEMEC_FS 101~VOt. l ~Dept~PLANNING~CEQA~382PA99 lES/Joc
1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
,;;.~:,~ =i...;~ ,~ i ~;i: ;;; .~..=, ~;.;=.:~!;i~? ,~!!.!::.~! =~ ~;i ~::~ ........
· · ~r,d _.____-~g ~.~,...'w~o~:$o~.~e.
a. Physi~lly divide an es~blish~ ~mmu~
b. Co~i~ ~ appli~la land use plan, poliw, or
mgulafi~ of an agen~ ~ ju~sdi~on over ~e pmje~
(in~uding, b~ ~t limited to ~e general plan, spe~c
plan, Io~1 ~as~l program, or zoning o~inan~)
adop~d for ~e pu~se of avoidi~ or mitigation an
envi~men~l effe~
c. Confli~ ~ any appli~ble ~bi~t ~n~w~on plan or
na~ral ~mmun~ ~n~wation plan?
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
:.:~ ::.i: ~!:~.! .~:.::i:i~ili:,! ?~i~::~://.::, :~i ~iiii:=iii ii::::~iiiiiiiiiii i~ ::=::=~,,~:~ :!i:~,~ ~:i!~i:=i ~i::!i~ :.!~ ;~,~'~ ·
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ~
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirecJ, ly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers (~'people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
.i :: : ~ .' ~:::~i::':i:!:i :;:: i=:,:..;L i!':i! ! i: :-::Lii.::.:i i:~:;iii~:ii::ii
a. Expose people or structures to potenUal substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a knowrt earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii)Seismic-related ground failurer including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
:~.TEMEC_FS 101 ~VOLI ~)op~PLAN NIN G~CEQA~82PAgO lES.doc
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
ar~l potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidenceT liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
dsks to life or propel'b/?
e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
waterq
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
, c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or dver, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
' d. SubStantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h. Place within a 100:year flood hazard area' structures
which would impede.or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of toss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
'4TEMEC_FS 101 &VOL1 ~ep~LANNING~,CEQA~.382PA99 IES.do~
4
5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteda pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? .
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on madsr or congestion at intersections?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks?
~\TEMEC_FS101 \vo L1 ~Defl~P[,ANNING~CEQA~382PAG9 lES.doc
5
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adveme effect on any riparian habitat
I or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
i regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
: Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established natJve resident or migratory wildlife co~idors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
........... ' ': .............................
a. Result in ~e loss of availability of a ~o~ mineral
msou~ ~at ~uld be of value to ~e region ~d ~e
msidan~ of ~ s~te?
b. Result in ~e loss ~ avai~bili~ d a Io~lly-im~nt
mineral m~u~ m~ve~ site delineat~ on a Io~1
general plan~ ~e~c p~n or o~er land use plan?
~\TEMEC_FS 101 \VO LI ~Dep~PLANNING~CEQA'~382PA~ lES.doc
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would t~e project:
· .= '::' ::::.:'::.:.::i~: ~i: ~:::.!, i' ~ :~. i:!::~- :.~::.i:i' i ii~i~!
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transportation, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeabla upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. Emit I'~,Ardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous matefiala, substances, or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d, Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962,5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
mi~es or a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for peopla residing or
working in the project area?
f. ~ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a signif'~=ant risk or loss,
injury or death involving wildlend rites, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed witt~ wildlands?
10. NOISE. Would the project result in:
: :. :" :': ': .... · ..... : :': :~,~11~.'.
a. ~sum of ~ople to severn noise levels in ex.ss of
s~nda~s es~blis~d in ~e I~1 general plan or noi~
o~inan~ or appli~ble s~ndards of other agencies?
b. ~sum ~ ~rsons to or generation of ex~ssive
gmundbome vibration or g~undbome noise levels?
c. A subs~nfial ~anent incase in ambient noise levels
in ~e proje~ vidni~ above levels e~sting wi~out ~e
, p~je~
\\TEMEC_F$101~V0 LI ~Dept~ LANNING~CEQA~382flAg9 lES.doc
7
d. A substantial tampora~ or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e. , For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a pdvate airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
, project area to excessive noise levels?
11. PUBUC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered Govemrnent services in any of the following areas:
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associates with the provisions of new or
physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered govemmental facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other pe~ormance objectives for any of the
public services?
b. Fire protection?
c. Police protection? .....
d. Schools?
e. PanV. s?
f. Other public facilities?
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
..... . · ~::':~"~.:::~ls~tmtl:S~i~S~:: .i:: :::::.. !':.::' :
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed? -
\\TEMEC_FS 101WOLf ~Depis~PLANNING~CEQAk182PA99 lES,doc
8
e. Result in a ~etermination by the wastewater treatment V'
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected!
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f. Be sewed by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ~/'
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and V'
regulations related to solid waste? ._
13. AESTHETICS. Wouldthe project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building
within a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create e new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
.... '~:': ::ii[i~i;::! :. :!:i;:: : :. · !i i~:":~TM ':::: .:: ~ ::.:..
a. Would ~e pmj~ in~se ~e use
neigh~ a~ regional ~s or o~r recreational
fa~liUes su~ ~at subs~nfial ~ysi~l deteHomtion of
~1~ ~ld o~r or be a~iemt~?
b. D~s ~ pmje~ in~ude m~eafional ~ciliUes or require
· e ~ns~on or e~ansion of m~eational fa~l~es
~i~ might have an adverse ~ysi~l effe~ on ~e
envi~ment?
~.T EMEC_FSl01 ~VOL1 tDep~PLANNING~CEQAt382PA99 IES.do~
9
16. 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 wildlife population
to drop below seE-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number of
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major pedods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable' means that the incremental effects of a
project ara considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects~ and the effects of probable future projects?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
The proposed project is an amendment to the Development Code that would modify the current provisions
reguiatJng large family day care home facilities. Day care home facilities are located within existing residential
structures and are end accessory extension of the basic residential activities. The proposed Ordinance to
regulate these activities in a manner that is consistent with State Law will not create an adverse impact on the
environment. In addition, the proposed changes continue to be consistent with the general impacts and
discussed in the adopted General Plan and Final EIR. As a result, no adverse impacts have been identified
and no mitigation measures are necessary.
~.\TEMEC_FS 101 \VO L1 ~D ep~P LANNINO~C E Q A~382PA g9 lES.doc
ITEM 19
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City,o, ~u~il
Debbie Ubnosk~, Birector of Planning
November 12, 2002
Appeal of Cingular Wireless Telecommunication Facility at Chaparral High
School, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan (PA01-0572)
PREPARED BY:
Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
1. ADOPTa resolution entitled:
CC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO
APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0572 - A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO
DESIGN, CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT
HIGH, FOURTEEN FOOT WIDE UNMANNED WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY HOUSING SlX ANTENNAS
AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
NICOLAS ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD ON THE
CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS ALSO KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 961-080-007.
BACKGROUND:
On August 7, 2002 the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. 01-0572, a
Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to design, construct and operate a twenty-six foot
high, fourteen-foot wide unmanned wireless telecommunications facility housing six antennas
and associated equipment. The project also includes the incorporation of signage on the
structure for Chaparral High School.
A written notice of decision was subsequently mailed out on August 8, 2002. On August 23,
2002, staff received correspondence from Fountain Glen Properties LLC, owner and operator of
the Fountains Senior Apartment Complex located to the north of the project site. The property
owners indicated their desire to appeal the Planning Commission decision. Staff subsequently
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.dec
1
informed the appellant that a formal application form and filing fee would need to be submitted
in order for the City to act upon the appeal. On August 28, 2002 the appellant filed the required
application and fee.
DISCUSSION
Planning Commission Hearing
At the Planning Commission hearing, there were no members of the public that spoke either in
favor of or in opposition to the project. Moreover, no written public testimony was submitted
either prior to or at the public hearing. After brief discussion, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to approve the Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan (PA01-0572) subject to
36 conditions of approval.
APPEAL:
The appellants have filed four separate grounds of appeal identified in italics below followed by
staff's response in bold.
Lar. qe Potential for Traffic Concerns. The proximity of this huge tower, which, when
painted, will amount to a huge Chaparral High School banner, near the corner of a busy
intersection, will likely cause major traffic concerns and could result in an increase in
automobile related accidents. Traffic pattems and the potential for accidents at this
comer has been a major concem of the city in the past, resulting from the death of a
child near this comer last year, as well as many other "close calls". In our opinion, the
installation of this huge tower (sign) certainly does not relieve this concem; rather it will
compound the issue tenfold.
In accordance with Section 17.12.040 of the Development Code, the proposed
telecommunications facility must achieve a twenty-foot front yard setback from
Nicolas Road and a fifteen-foot setback from the Winchester Road right-of-way.
Public Works Department staff has determined that the location of the proposed
facility will not create a site distance problem. Given that the intersection of
Winchester Road and Nicolas Road is currently signalized, the only vehicular
movement that could be affected by the facility would be a right-turn off of Nicolas
Road onto southbound Winchester Road. However, since the facility is to the right
of the driver, it would not limit the visibility of oncoming vehicles from
southbound Winchester Road. Moreover, both the Planning Commission and staff
believe the proposed facility and attached sign would not attract any more
motorist attention than any other sign along Winchester Road.
Not in Compliance with City Siqnaqe Guidelines. Per City of Temecula Code No.
17.28.110 Signs for Institutional Uses, this sign is in direct violation. Per the guideline,
freestanding signs, which is what this will amount to, are limited to twenty square feet in
area, and a maximum of four feet in height. We understand and embrace the
community's position in supporting Chaparral High School, but the signage painted
along the top of the building seems quite sufficient, and this additional signage, in its
grandiose size, detracts from all the other signage in the area. The City is not being fair
to all of its citizenry.
The appellants contend that the proposed Chaparral High School monument sign
is in direct violation of Development Code Section 17.28.110. This Section
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.doc
2
identifies specific sign standards for institutional uses within residential zones.
However, the subject property is not located in a residential zoning district.
Instead, the property is currently zoned Public Institutional (Pi). Moreover, the
City's Development Code does not specify sign standards within the Public
Institutional zoning District. According to the City Attorney, the proposed sign is
not regulated and is a permissible structure.
Adverse Marketinq Impact on Surroundinq Uses. Certain/y, the installation of this huge
monument will negatively impact the views and marketability of our project and of all
other surrounding businesses. Not only is the tower obtrusive, but it distracts significantly
from any marketing corridor and street presence that we may have for patrons traveling
north on Winchester Road. With its size, it will likely be the only thing drivers, customers
and potential residents moving along Winchester Road will ever notice.
The proposed telecommunications facility will be located between the high school
parking lot and adjacent roadways. The area is currently void of any landscaping
and has no aesthetic qualities. While the overall height of the proposed facility is
twenty-six feet, the finished pad grade of the facility is actually six feet below the
adjacent grade of both Nicolas and Winchester Roads. Therefore, the facility will
only rise twenty feet above the adjacent street grades. As part of the project,
landscaping will be placed continuously around the base of the facility so as to
further soften and enhance the aesthetics of the structure and street corner.
Staff has determined the southernmost apartment building on the appellants
property, which is two-stories in height, is approximately 200 feet north of the
proposed telecommunications facility. In addition to the trees at the perimeter of
the apartment building, a twenty-foot wide landscape planter currently exists
along the north side of Nicolas Road. This area is planted with two rows of trees,
which at maturity, will serve to significantly screen the telecommunications
facility from the apartment complex (See Attachment No. 7 for approved
landscaping plan).
Both staff and the Planning Commission believe the design of the facility,
including height; materials, color and landscaping serve to achieve consistency
with surrounding structures and land uses and would result in a visual
improvement to this street corner. Given the distance between uses and
landscaping in this area, the Commission also believes view corridors would not
be impacted by the project.
Alternate Locations are Available. Has Cingular investigated alternate locations along
Winchester? There must be better alternatives, even along the school district property,
that are less obtrusive to fewer businesses and residences which offer Cingular and the
school similar results.
The applicant, Cingular Wireless, researched several alternative locations to
establish the telecommunications facility within the general area of the project
site. However, either the property owner was not interested in entering into an
agreement with Cingular Wireless or the site did not offer existing vertical
elements that could accommodate building mounted antennas. The high school's
theatre building was also considered however, it was concluded that the building
fagade would not accommodate mounted antennas. Subsequently, both the
Planning Commission and staff concluded the proposed project site was the most
feasible alternative.
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.dec
3
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the
Planning Commissions decision to approve PA 01-0572.
ATTACHMENTS:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Draft Resolution Denying the Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision - Blue
Page 5
Appeal Application - Blue Page 6
Letter from Appellant dated August 20, 2002 - Blue Page 7
Adopted Planning Commission Resolution - Blue Page 8
Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits - Blue Page 9
Planning Commission Minutes- Blue Page 10
Fountains Senior Apartment Complex Approved Landscaping Plan - Blue Page 11
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telocommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.doc
4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
DRAFT RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
R:\C U P~2001~1-0572 Cinguiar Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.doc
5
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0572 A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN, CONSTRUCT
AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SlX FOOT HIGH, FOURTEEN
FOOT WIDE UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION
FACILITY HOUSING SlX ANTENNAS AND ASSOCIATED
EQUIPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NICOLAS
ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD ON THE CHAPARRAL HIGH
SCHOOL CAMPUS; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER 961-080-007.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
declare that:
The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and
A. Marc Meyers, representing Compass Telecom, filed Planning Application No. 01-
0572, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property generally located on the
southwest corner of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road also known as Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 961-080-007 ("Project").
B. The application for the Project was processed and a Notice of Exemption was
made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
C. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public
hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-28 approving a Conditional
Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project.
D. On November 12th, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly
noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the
opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters.
E. On November 12, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula denied an
appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve the Conditional Use
Permit/Development Plan when it adopted Resolution No. 2002-
Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in
Sections 17.04.010E and 17.05010F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
Conditional Use Permit (17.04.010E)
1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development
Code.
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Reso CUP.DOC
1
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit is
consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the
Development Code. The project as proposed meets the general requirements as
outlined in the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance. The facility shall be
located outside of all yard and street setbacks specified in the Public Institutional zoning
district. The facility, as proposed, has been designed to blend in with the surrounding
environment.
The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development
of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not
adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures.
As proposed, the telecommunication facility is designed so as to completely screen the
antennas and associated equipment. The proposed facility is twenty-six feet high of
which six feet is below grade resulting in a structure that is twenty feet in height as
viewed from street level. This design and height is consistent with the existing built
environment and will not adversely affect the adjacent buildings.
The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and
other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the
PIanning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the
neighborhood.
Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated
in the Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the
Development Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use
meets the zoning requirements for projects located within the Public Institutional zoning
district.
The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
Provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the
public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded. The project as designed is
inaccessible and will not create any concerns for the overall welfare of the community.
The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial
evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City
Council.
The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable
codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission.
Section 3. Development Plan (17.05.010F)
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city.
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for the
Public Institutional Facilities (PI) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Reso CUP.DOC
well as the development standards outlined the City of Temecula Development Code.
The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for
the type and density of the proposed twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless
telecommunication facility.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and all
construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department has
also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a
need for emergency response to the site.
Section 4. The City Council of The City Of Temecula hereby denies the appeal of a
Planning Commission decision to approve Planning Application No. PA01-0572, a Conditional
Use Permit/Development Plan to design, construct and operate a twenty-six foot high, fourteen
foot wide unmanned wireless telecommunication facility housing six antennas and associated
equipment. The subject property is generally located at the southwest corner of Nicolas Road
and Winchester Road on the Chaparral High School campus; also known as Assessor's Parcel
Number 961-080-007, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A,
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full.
Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 2002
A'I-]'EST:
Ron Robe,s, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Reso CUP,DOC
3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution
No. 2002-. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a
regular meeting held on the 12th day of November, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High Schoo~CC Reso CUP.DOC
4
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High Schoo[~CC Reso CUP.DOC
5
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No: 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan)
Project Description:
A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to design,
construct and operate a twenty-six foot high-
unmanned wireless telecommunication facility
housing six antennas and associated equipment on
the Chaparral High School campus located at 27215
Nicolas Road.
DIF Category:
Exempt
Assessor's Parcel No: 961-080-007
Approval Date:
November 12, 2002
Expiration Date:
November 12, 2004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning
Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the
amount of sixty-four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City
to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section
21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight
(48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development
Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project
granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c).
General Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any
agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from
any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside,
void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any
agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body
including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application
which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public
Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the
way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the
permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time
period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Reso CUP.DOC
deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover
anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit
once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or
cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify,
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any
of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required
deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the
applicant.
All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
conditional use permit.
This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's
Development Code.
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the
approval of this Conditional Use Permit.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D
(Site Plan), E (Elevations), F (Landscaping) contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to the colors and
materials on the existing Chaparral High School Campus.
Additional mascot logo relief, i.e. insets and projections, shall be incorporated into all
four elevations of the facility. The modifications shall be shown on the construction
drawings.
10.
The "Chaparral High School" sign and school mascot logo shall be incorporated into all
four elevations of the facility. The improvements shall be shown on the construction
drawings.
11.
The location of the proposed telecommunications facility shall achieve a 20 ft. front yard
setback (Nicolas Road) and 15 ft street side yard setback (Winchester Road) in
accordance with Section 17.12.040 of the Development Code.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecuia
Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that
Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School'tCC Reso CUP.DOC
7
13.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be
provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and
return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for
their files.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
14. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
15.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted
and approved by the Community Development Department - Planning Division. These
plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "1~', or as amended by these
conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall
be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover
page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans
shall show temporary irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
16.
Landscaping construction plans shall show the continuous placement of large evergreen
shrubs around the perimeter of the base of the facility structure. Minimum 15-gallon size
shrubs shall be utilized so as to achieve immediate screening.
17.
A maintenance/facility removal agreement shall be signed by the applicant and
submitted to the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with section
17.40.210 of the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna ordinance and shall comply
with all provisions set forth in this section.
18.
A License Agreement for Encroachment shall be signed by the applicant and submitted
to the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with all provisions
associated with the existing Transportation Corridor along Winchester Road.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
19.
All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and
the Temecula Municipal Code.
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High Schoo~CC Reso CUP.DOC
8
20.
Submit at time of plan review, complete exterior site lighting plans for the facility showing
compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All lighting shall
be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any
outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining
property or public rights-of-way.
21.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
22.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any
construction work.
23. Obtain Street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
24.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting,
fire alarm systems.
25.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
prior to permit issuance.
26.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule and mechanical
plan for plan review.
27.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
28. Show all building setbacks.
29.
Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the
hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No.
0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any
site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence.
Monday-Friday: 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday: 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays
FIRE DEPARTMENT
30.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau
reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California
Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force
at the time of building, plan submittal.
31.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall maintain an unobstructed width of not less
than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than
thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1)
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Reso CUP.DOC
9
32.
During building construction, all locations where structures are to be built or altered shall
maintain approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until
permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
33.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
34.
Provide a 2A: 10BC fire extinguisher inside each building or temporary structure on the
site.
35.
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code
permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and
approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
36.
The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E)
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand, and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in
conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the
project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Printed Name
Applicant Signature
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High Schoo[~CC Reso CUP.DOC
10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
APPEAL APPLICATION
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.dec
6
City of Temecula
~mmunity Development Department
43200 Business Park Drive * Temeodn * CA · 92590
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula · CA · 92589-9033
(909) 694-6400 · FAX (909) 694-6477
AUG ~ 8 2002
Appeal
The purpose of the appeal procedure is to provide a method of recourse for persons aggrieved by or
dissatisfied with an action taken by an administrative agency of the City in the administration or
enforcement of any provisions of the Development Code.
B. FILING REQUIREIvIENTS
1. Development Application.
2. Appeal Form.
3. Filing Fee.
C. NOTICE OF APPEAL - TIME LIMIT
A notice of an appeal by any individual who is aggrieved by or dissatisfied with a decision made by
him or in his behalf, or with any action, order, requirement, decision or determination shall not be
acted upon unless filed within filteca (15) calcadar days afar service of written notice of the decision.
D. NOTICE OF APPEAL - CONTENTS
' /
Appealingthedecisionof: ~[ (L~( U~O -~.~Y~n~ , S~t c~ r~ 0 ~ / 0-'] 0~.
(sp~ify Director of Itla~a~fing or Plannin~ Co~r~insion AND A¢fioa D~te)
sp~ify ~:tiy ~h~t i~ being ap~ed: ar-cc~ ~ ~, c~ z/~ ~c~_~
Reason or justification to support the appeal. Appellant must submit with this appeal each issue which
the appellant alleges was wrongly determined together with every agreement and a copy of every item
of evidence. (Attach separate sheet of paper if necessary).
Desired action to be tnl~en:
In the event any Notice of Appeal applicant fails to answer any information set forth above, then
the request will be returned to the appellant, with a statement of the deficiencies. The appellant
shall be allowed five (5) calendar days in which to refile the notice of appeal.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
LETTER FROM APPELLANT
AUGUST 20, 2002
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High SchoohCC Staff Report.dec
7
August 20, 2002
FOUNTAINGLEN
PROPERTIES, LLC.
2002
Mr. Matt Harris
Planning Department
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
RE:
Conditional Use Permit No. 01-0572
Cingular Wireless Equipment Shelter
Chapm'ra! High School Campus
Dear Mr. Harris:
In accordance with City of Temecuia Code 17.03.090, Zoning Appeals, FountainGlen Properties,
owner of The Fountains at Temecula on Nicolas and Winchester Roads; formally requests an
appeal of the above referenced conditional use permit to Cingular Wireless.
We request an appeal of the approval of a conditior~al use permit (Planning Application No. 01-
0572), granting Cingular Wireless approval to install a 26 foot tall, 14 foot wide square
telecommunications equipment shelter at 27215 Nicolas Road. The specific grounds for our
appeal are as follows:
Larqe potential for traffic concerns. The proximity of this huge tower, which, when painted,
will amount to a huge Chaparral High School banner, near the corner of a busy intersection,
will likely cause major traffic concerns and could result in an increase in automobile related
accidents. Traffic patterns and the potential for accidents at this corner has been a major
concern of the city in the past, resulting from the death of a child near this corner last year, as
well as many other "close calls". In our opinion, the installation of this huge tower (sign)
certainly does not relieve this concern; rather it will compound the issue tenfold.
Not in compliance with city siRnage quidelines. Per City of Temecula Code No. 17.28.110
Signs for Institutional Uses, this sign is in direct violation. Per the guideline, freestanding
signs, which is what this will amount to, are limited to twenty square feet in area, and a
maximum of four feet in height. We understand and embrace the community's position in
supporting Chaparral High School, but the signage painted along the top of the building
seems quite sufficient, and this additional signage, in its grandiose size, detracts from all the
other signage in the area. The City is not being fair to all of its citizenry.
3. Adverse marketin,q impact on surroundinq uses. Certainly, the installation of this huge
monument will negatively impact the views and marketability of our project and of all other
surrounding businesses. Not only is the tower obtrusive, but it distracts significantly from any
marketing corridor and street presence that we may have for patrons travelling north on
Winchester Road. With its size, it will likely be the only thing drivers, customers and potential
residents moving along Winchester Road will ever notice.
4220 V0n Karman, 2nd Floor
Newport Beach, CA. 92660
949.223.5000
949.223,5032 Fax
Mr. Matt Harris
August 20, 2002
Page Two
FOUNTAINGLEN
PROPERTIES, LLC,
Alternate Locations are available. Has Cingular investigated alternate locations along
Winchester? There must be better alternatives, even along the school district property, that
are less obtrusive to fewer businesses and residences which offer Cingular and the school
similar results.
Please review these grounds of appeal and respond back to us with your comments or decision.
Your prompt response and diligent efforts are greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
FOUNTAINGLEN PROPERTIES LLP
Senior Regional Manager-
Development, Marketing & Leasing
Cc: Curtis J. Miller: FGP
Glenn Carpenter: FGP
ATrACHMENT NO. 4
ADOPTED PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.dec
8
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-028
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0572, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO.
DESIGN, CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT
HIGH, FOURTEEN FOOT WIDE, UNMANNED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION FACILITY HOUSING SIX ANTENNAS AND
ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE CHAPARRAL
HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS AT 27215 NICOLAS ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 911-760-007
WHEREAS, Marc Meyers, representing Compass Telecom, filed Planning App cation No.
01-0572, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. 01-0572 was processed including, but not limited to a
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting,, considered Planning
Application No. 01-0572 on AUgust 7,2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at
which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in
support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. 01-0572 subject to the conditions
after finding that the project proposed in Planning Application No. 01-0572 conformed to the City of
Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as
required by Section 17.04.010.E and Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
Conditional Use Permit (17.04.010E)
A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the development
code.
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit is
consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the
Development Code. The project as proposed meets the general requirements as outlined in
the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance. The facility shall be located
outside of allyard and street setbacks specified in the Public Institutionalzoning district. The
facility, as proposed, has been designed to blend in with the surrounding environment.
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wire]ess Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Repo~l.doc
7
The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of
adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely
affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures.
As proposed, the telecommunication facility is designed so as to completely screen the
antennas and associated equipment. The proposed facility is twenty-six feet high. This
design and height is consistent with the existing built environment and will not adversely
affect the adjacent buildings.
The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other
development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning
Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood.
Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the
Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the Development
Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning
requirements for projects located within the Public Institutional zoning district.
D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
Provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the
public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded. The project as designed is inaccessible
and will not create any concerns for the overall welfare of the community.
E. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial
evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council.
The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes
and ordinances before the Planning Commission.
Development Plan (17.05.010F)
F. The proposed use is in conformance with the general plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no
fish~ wild life, or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife, or
habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in-fill site. The project will
not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in
Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
G. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected forthe Public
Institutional Facilities (PI) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards outlined the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore
properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the
proposed twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless telecommunication facility.
R:~C U FA2.001~1-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
8
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application
No. 01-0572 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15332 (In-
Fill Development Projects, Class 32). This project is an in-fill development and meets the following
criteria:
· The proposed project is consistent the General Plan policies, as well as the
Telecommunications .Facility and Antenna Ordinance.
· The site has'been previously developed and has no value as habitat for endangered, rare,
or threatened species.
· The approval of the project will not result in any adverse effects related to traffic, noise, air
quality or water quality.
· The site is currently served by all required utilities and public services,
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit) a request to
design, construct and operate a twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless telecommunication facility
located on the southwest comer of Winchester Road and Nicolas Road and known as Assessors
Parcel No. 911-760-007.
Section 5.
Commission this 7th day of August 2002.
ATTEST:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 2002-028 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of August, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Guerdero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio,
and Chairman Chiniaeff
None
None
None
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA01-0572 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN
R:\C U F~2001~1-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No: 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan)
Project Description:
A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to design,
construct and operate a twenty-six foot high-unmanned
wireless telecommunication facility housing six antennas
and associated equipment on the Chaparral High School
campus located at 27215 Nicolas Road.
DIF Category: Exempt
Assessor's Parcel No: 961-080-007
Approval Date:
August 7, 2002
Expiration Date:
August 7, 2004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department- Planning Division a
cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of sixty-four
Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
R:~C U F~2001~D1-0572 Clngular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High Schcct~Staff
Report.doc
11
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify,
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its
officem, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.
All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
conditional use permit.
This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03,080 of the City's
Development Code,
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this Conditional Use Permit.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D
(Site Plan), E (Elevations),-F (Landscaping) contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to the colors and
materials.on the existing Chaparral High School Campus.
Additional mascot Iogb relief, i.e. insets and projections, shall be incorporated into all four
elevations of the facility. The modifications shall be shown on the construction drawings.
10.
The "Chaparral High School" sign and school mascot logo shall be incorporated into all four
elevations of the facility. The improvements shall be shown on the construction drawings,
11.
The location of the proposed telecommunications facility shall achieve a 20 ft. front yard
setback (Nicolas Road) and 15 ft street side yard setback (Winchester Road) in accordance
with Section 17.12.040 of the Development Code.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
13.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
14. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
12
15.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted and
approved by the Community Development Department - Planning Division. These plans
shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F', or as amended' by these
conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be
shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page
shall identity the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall
show temporary irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
16.
Landscaping construction plans shall show the continuous placement of large evergreen
shrubs around the perimeter of the base of the facility structure. Minimum 15-gallon size
shrubs shall be utilized so as to achieve immediate screening.
17.
A maintenance/facility removal agreement shall be signed by the applicant and submitted to
the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with section 17.40.210 of the
Telecommunications Facility and Antenna ordinance and shall comply with all provisions set
forth in this section.
18.
A License Agreement for Encroachment shall be signed by the applicant and submitted to
the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with all provisions associated
with the existing Transportation Corridor along Winchester Road.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
19.
All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the
Temecula Municipal Code.
20,
Submit at time of plan review, complete extedor site lighting plans for the facility showing
compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All lighting shall be
shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside
lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property er
public rights-of-way.
21.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
22.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
23. Obtain Street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~taff
Report.doc
13
24. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting, fire
alarm systems.
25.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered Professional with original signature on plans pdor
to permit issuance.
26.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule and mechanical plan
for plan review.
27.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
28. Show all building setbacks.
29.
Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours
of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04,
specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one-
quarter mile of an occupied residence.
Monday-Friday: 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday: 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau
reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California
Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in fome at
the time of building, plan submittal.
31.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall maintain an unobstructed Width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1)
32.
During building construction, all locations where structures are to be built or altered shall
maintain approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanerlt
roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface for 80,000 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
33.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
34. Provide a 2A: 10SC fire extinguisher inside each building or temporary structure on the site.
35.
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit.
These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per
the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
36.
The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
R:\C U F~2.001'~1-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign al Chaparral High School~Staff
Report,doc
14
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports, (CFC Appendix II-E)
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand, and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Printed Name
Applicant Signature
R:~C U P~.~001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report,doc
15
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High Schocl~CC Staff Report.doc
9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 2002
Planning Application No. 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan)
Prepared by: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0572 pursuant to Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0572, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO
DESIGN, CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT
HIGH, FOURTEEN FOOT WIDE UNMANNED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION FACILITY HOUSING SIX ANTENNAS AND
ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE CHAPARRAL
HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS AT 27215 NICOLAS ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 911-760-007
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Cingular Wireless
REPRESENTATIVE: Compass Telecom
PROPOSAL: To design, construct and operate a twenty-six foot high, fourteen-
foot wide unmanned wireless telecommunication facility housing six
antennas and associated equipment.
LOCATION: 27215 Nicolas Road (Chaparral High School Campus)
EXISTING ZONING: Public institutional (PI)
SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Planned Development Overlay-3 (PDO)
South: Community Commercial (CC)
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
1
East: Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan (SP-1)
West: Harveston Specific Plan (SP-13)
GENERAL PLAN:
Business Park (BP)
EXISTING LAND USE: Chaparral High School Campus
SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
North: Senior Housing Complex
South: Commercial
East: Commercial/Residential
West: Residential
PROJECT STATISTICS
Structure Floor Area:
196 square feet
Structure Height:
26 feet
BACKGROUND
The application was submitted to the Planning Department on November 19, 2001. Staff requested
additional application materials on December 19, 2001. The applicant's representative submitted the
requested materials on May 15, 2002. Staff requested clarifications and revisions to the materials
on June 5, 2002. The requested revisions were provided on June 19, 2002. Analysis of the project
was completed and the applicant was informed that the item would be scheduled for Planning
Commission.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to design, construct and
operate a twenty-six foot high, fourteen foot wide unmanned wireless telecommunication facility
housing six antennas and associated equipment. The facility is proposed to be located at the
southwest corner of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road on the Chaparral High School Campus.
The intent of this facility is to provide cellular telephone coverage along Highway 79 North and the
surrounding neighborhood for Cingular Wireless customers. The proposed site location was
selected to provide specific coverage to an area that is constrained by topography. Currently this is
an area where Cingular Wireless customers drop calls due to the lack of coverage.
The six proposed antennas and associated telecommunications equipment will be fully housed
within the structure and thus will be completely screened from public view. The interior of the
structure will be accessed via a three-foot wide door. Given the location and high visibility of the
facility from both Nicolas and Winchester Roads, the applicant is also proposing the facility serve as
a monument sign for Chaparral High School. The proposed monument sign will replace the high
school's existing freestanding pylon sign located along the school's Winchester Road frontage (see
Exhibit G for photo of existing pylon sign).
The exterior of the facility will be finished with stucco and painted to match the existing buildings on
the school campus. Facility elevations indicate that the words "Chaparral High School" will be
painted on the stucco at the top of the structure on the north, south and east sides. A multi-line
electronic marquee sign will also be incorporated into the north, south and east sides of the
R:\C U P~001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
2
structure that will be used to advertise upcoming events at the high school. In addition, the school's
mascot logo will be painted on the stucco in the middle of each of these elevations. Floodlights are
proposed at the base of the structure so as to illuminate the mascot Iogos.
ANALYSIS
Facility Design
An elevation has not been provided for the west side of the facility. This side of the facility will be
visible to eastbound traffic on Nicolas Road as well as the high school parking lot. While the
electronic marquee sign would not be necessary on this elevation, staff recommends that the
"Chaparral High School" sign and school motto logo also be incorporated so as to enhance the
aesthetics of this elevation. This has been made a recommended condition of approval. In an effort
to further enhance all four elevations of the facility, staff also recommends that a three inch deep
box be incorporated into each side of the structure and that the school mascot logo be located in the
middle of the box and project out three inches so as to be flush with the wall plane of the structure.
This treatment would serve to provide some additional relief and formalize the facility.
Landscaping
The finished pad grade of the facility will be six feet below the adjacent grade of Nicolas and
Winchester Roads. Therefore, the overall facility will rise twenty feet above these adjacent street
grades. To further soften the facility and enhance its aesthetics, staff recommends that landscaping
be introduced a minimum twelve feet back from the footprint of the facility. The City's landscape
architect consultant recommends the conceptual landscape plan be modified to show large
evergreen shrubs (i.e. Ligustrum Japonicum texanum, Xylosma congestum) placed continuously
around the perimeter of the base of the facility. It is further recommended the shrubs be a minimum
15 gallons in size so as to provide immediate screening.
Liqhtinq
The ground lighting proposed for the project does not meet the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance.
It is the intent of the ordinance to restrict the permitted use of certain light fixtures emitting into the
night sky undesirable light rays, which have a detrimental effect on astronomical observation and
reseamh. The ordinance classifies this type of lighting as Class III (Decorative Lighting) and states
that it should be shielded. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed lighting for the project does not
meet the intent of the ordinance and is not supported by staff. It appears the ground lighting is only
intended to illuminate the school mascot logo. As an alternative, staff recommends that an
ornamental sconce light be placed at the top of the recommended inset box above the logo thereby
providing illumination to the logo in a downward direction rather than upward. Staff has conditioned
the project to submit a revised lighting plan that conforms with the Mount Palomar Lighting
Ordinance.
Transportation Corridor
Both sides of Winchester Road in the vicinity of the project site have been designated as a Transit
Corridor. The corridor, which is an established easement located 25 feet beyond the Winchester
road right-of-way line, is intended to provide for future mass-transit facilities along this State
Highway. The proposed telecommunication facility will be located within this existing Corridor. Staff
is unaware of any specific facilities planned to be constructed within the Corridor in the foreseeable
future. However, Corridor standards require that property owners constructing structures within the
boundary of the Corridor enter into a License Agreement for Encroachment. The Agreement
R:\C U P~001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\St~ff
Report.doc
3
requires the property owner to remove the structure/facility upon being noticed by the City. This has
been made a recommended condition of approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff has reviewed the project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based
on staff's review, the proposed project is eligible for a CEQA exemption (Class 32- In Fill Projects)
pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following reasons:
· The proposed project is consistent the General Plan policies, as well as the
Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance.
· The site has been previously developed and has no value as habitat for endangered, rare,
or threatened species.
· The approval of the project will not result in any adverse effects related to traffic, noise, air
quality or water quality.
· The site is currently served by all required utilities and public services.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff believes the required findings necessary to approve a twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless
telecommunication facility in the Public Institutional zoning district can be made. The project, as
proposed, is consistent with the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance and complies
with all applicable development standards of the Public Institutional zoning district. Staff believes the
height of the proposed telecommunication facility is compatible with the surrounding environment.
The internalization of the antennas in the facility structure makes them completely invisible from view
from the public right of way. The design of the facility, including colors, materials and landscaping
serves to achieve consistency with surrounding structures and land uses. The proposed Chaparral
High School monument sign is non-regulated given that the City's Development Code does not
specify sign standards within the Public Institutional zoning district.
FINDINGS
Conditional Use Permit (17.04.010E)
The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the development
code.
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit is
consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the
DevelopmentCede. Theprojectasproposedmeetsthegeneralrequirementsasoutlinedin
the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance. The facility shall be located
~utside~fa~~yardandstreetsetbacksspeci~edinthePub~ic~nstituti~na~z~ningdistrict. The
facility, as proposed, has been designed to blend in with the surrounding environment.
The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of
adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely
affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures.
As proposed, the telecommunication facility is designed so as to completely screen the
antennas and associated equipment. The proposed facility is twenty-six feet high. This
design and height is consistent with the existing built environment and will not adversely
R:\C U P~2001 \01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
4
As proposed, the telecommunication facility is designed so as to completely screen the
antennas and associated equipment. The proposed facility is twenty-six feet high. This
design and height is consistent with the existing built environment and will not adversely
affect the adjacent buildings.
The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other
development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning
Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood.
Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the
Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the Development
Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning
requirements for projects located within the Public Institutional zoning district.
The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
Provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the
public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded. The project as designed is inaccessible
and will not create any concerns for the overall welfare of the community.
The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial
evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council.
The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes
and ordinances before the Planning Commission.
Development Plan (17.05.01 OF)
The proposed use is in conformance with the general plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no
fish, wild life, or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife, or
habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in-fill site. The project will
not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in
Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for the Public
Institutional Facilities (Pi) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards outlined the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is
therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and
density of the proposed twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless telecommunication facility.
Attachments-
1. PC Resolution - Blue Page 6
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Reporl.doc
5
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit) - Blue Page 10
Exhibits for PA01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit) - Blue Page 15
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Vicinity Map
Zoning Map
General Plan Map
Site Plan
Elevations
Landscape Plan
Photo of Existing Chaparral High School Pylon Sign
R:\C U P~001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
APPROVING PA01-0572
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0572, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO
DESIGN, CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT
HIGH, FOURTEEN FOOT WIDE, UNMANNED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION FACILITY HOUSING SlX ANTENNAS AND
ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE CHAPARRAL
HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS AT 27216 NICOLAS ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 911-760-007
WHEREAS, Marc Meyers, representing Compass Telecom, filed Planning Application No.
01-0572, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. 01-0572 was processed including, but not limited to a
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered Planning
Application No. 01-0572 on August 7,2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at
which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in
support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, atthe conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. 01-0572 subject to the conditions
after finding that the project proposed in Planning Application No. 01-0572 conformed to the City of
Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
01-0572 (Conditional Use PermitJDevelopment Plan) hereby makes the following findings as
required by Section 17.04.010.E and Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
Conditional Use Permit (t7.04.010E)
A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the development
code.
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit is
consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the
Development Code. The project as proposed meets the general requirements as outlined in
the Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance. The facility shall be located
~utside~fa~~yardandstreetsetbacksspecifiedinthePub~ic~nstituti~na~z~ningdistdct. The
facility, as proposed, has been designed to blend in with the surrounding environment.
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
8
The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of
adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely
affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures.
As proposed, the telecommunication facility is designed so as to completely screen the
antennas and associated equipment. The proposed facility is twenty-six feet high. This
design and height is consistent with the existing built environment and will not adversely
affect the adjacent buildings.
The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other
development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning
Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood.
Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the
Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the Development
Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning
requirements for projects located within the Public Institutional zoning district.
D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
Provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the
public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded. The project as designed is inaccessible
and will not create any concerns for the overall welfare of the community.
E. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial
evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council.
The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes
and ordinances before the Planning Commission.
Development Plan (17.05.0"10F)
F. The proposed use is in conformance with the general plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish orwildlife ortheir habitat. There are no
fish, wild life, or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife, or
habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in-fill site. The project will
not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in
Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
G. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for the Public
Institutional Facilities (PI) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards outlined the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore
properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the
proposed twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless telecommunication facility.
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High SchooIgStaff
Report.doc
9
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application
No. 01-0572 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15332 (In-
Fill Development Projects, Class 32). This project is an in-fill development and meets the following
criteria:
The proposed project is consistent the General Plan policies, as well as the
Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance.
The site has been previously developed and has no value as habitat for endangered, ram
or threatened species.
The approval of the project will not result in any adverse effects related to traffic, noise, a~r
quality or water quality.
The site is currently served by all required utilities and public services.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit) a request to
design, construct and operate a twenty-six foot high-unmanned wireless telecommunication facility
located on the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Nicolas Road and known as Assessors
Parcel No. 911-760-007.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 7th day of August 2002.
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
I Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning commission of the C ty
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of August, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES: 0
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA01-0572 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
11
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No: 01-0572 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan)
Project Description:
A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to design,
construct and operate a twenty-six foot high-unmanned
wireless telecommunication facility housing six antennas
and associated equipment on the Chaparral High School
campus located at 27215 Nicolas Road.
DIF Category: Exempt
Assessor's Parcel No: 961-080-007
Approval Date:
August 7, 2002
Expiration Date:
August 7, 2004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a
cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of sixty-four
Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
ReporLdoc
12
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnity,
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its
officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.
All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
conditional use permit.
This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's
Development Code.
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this Conditional Use Permit.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D
(Site Plan), E (Elevations), F (Landscaping) contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to the colors and
materials on the existing Chaparral High School Campus.
Additional mascot logo relief, i.e. insets and projections, shall be incorporated into all four
elevations of the facility. The modifications shall be shown on the construction drawings.
10.
The "Chaparral High School" sign and school mascot logo shall be incorporated into all four
elevations of the facility. The improvements shall be shown on the construction drawings.
11.
The location of the proposed telecommunications facility shall achieve a 20 ft. front yard
setback (Nicolas Road) and 15 ft street side yard setback (Winchester Road) in accordance
with Section 17.12.040 of the Development Code.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
13.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
14. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
13
15.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted and
approved by the Community Development Department - Planning Division. These plans
shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these
conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be
shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page
shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall
show temporary irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
16.
Landscaping construction plans shall show the continuous placement of large evergreen
shrubs around the perimeter of the base of the facility structure. Minimum 15-gallon size
shrubs shall be utilized so as to achieve immediate screening.
17.
A maintenance/facility removal agreement shall be signed by the applicant and submitted to
the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with section 17.40.210 of the
Telecommunications Facility and Antenna ordinance and shall comply with all provisions set
forth in this section.
18.
A License Agreement for Encroachment shall be signed by the applicant and submitted to
the Planning Director. The agreement shall be in accordance with all provisions associated
with the existing Transportation Corridor along Winchester Road.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
19.
All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the
Temecula Municipal Code.
20.
Submit at time of plan review, complete exterior site lighting plans for the facility showing
compliance with Ordinance No. 855 for the regulation of light pollution. All lighting shall be
shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside
lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or
public rights-of-way.
21.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
22.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
23. Obtain Street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
R:\C U P~001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
14
24. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
25.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior
to permit issuance.
26.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule and mechanical plan
for plan review.
27.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
28. Show all building setbacks.
29.
Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours
of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04,
specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one-
quarter mile of an occupied residence.
Monday-Friday
Saturday
6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays
FIRE DEPARTMENT
30.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau
reviews building plans. These conditions will be based on occupancy; use, the California
Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes, which are in force at
the time of building, plan submittal.
31.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall maintain an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1)
32.
During building construction, all locations where structures are to be built or altered shall
maintain approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent
roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
33.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
34. Provide a 2A: 10BC fire extinguisher inside each building or temporary structure on the site.
35.
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit.
These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per
the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
R:\C U P~2001~01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
ReporLdoc
15
36.
The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E)
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand, and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Printed Name
Applicant Signature
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff
Report.doc
16
A'rrACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School~Staff
Report.doc
17
CITY OFTEMECULA
Project Site
CASE NOS. - PA01-0572
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- August 7, 2002
VICINITY MAP
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff ReporLdoc
18
CITY OF TEMECULA
Project Site
>\
000000
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
Community Commercial (CC)
Project Site
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - Community Commercial (CC)
CASE NOS. - PA01-0572
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - August 7, 2002
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff Report.doc
19
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0572
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - August 7, 2002
SITE PLAN
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff Report.doc
20
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0572
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - August 7, 2002
ELEVATIONS
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff Report.doc
21
CITY OF TEMECULA
pLANTING PLAN
PLANTING LEGEND
mm mm e mm,
mm'mm mmm . mm
CASE NO. - PA01-0572
EXHIBIT -F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - August 7, 2002
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff Report.doc
22
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0572
EXHIBIT - G PHOTO OF EXISTING CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL PYLON SIGN
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - August 7, 2002
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure disguised as a sign at Chaparral High School\Staff Report.doc
23
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 7, 2002
R:\C U P~2001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Tetecommunications structure at Chaparral High School~CC Staff Report.doc
10
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0572 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines;
7.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-028
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0572, A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT/ DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN,
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWENTY-SIX FOOT
HIGH, FOURTEEN FOOT WIDE UNMANNED WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION FACILITY HOUSING SlX ANTENNAS
AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE
CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS AT 27215
NICOLAS ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS
PARCEL NO. 911-760-007
Senior Planner Hazen provided an overview of the project plan (per the staff report),
highlighting the location, the proposal to mount the antenna panels inside of the
monument sign, the dimensions of the monument, and the reader board; advised that
this proposal was being dealt with as a stealthing device for the telecommunication
panels; presented the landscaping plan; noted staff's recommendation to place the
Chaparral "C" on all four sides of the monument sign; advised that due to this monument
sign being installed, the existing sign located further down on Nicolas Road would be
removed; and with respect to the proposed lighting, relaying that staff was
recommending that there be a reveal inset where the "C" was located and that the
lighting either be placed at the top of the reveal inset, or be eliminated.
Commissioner Guerriero recommended that there be specific language addressing the
timing of the removal of the existing sign.
For Commissioner Guerriero, Senior Planner Hazen provided additional information
regarding the reader board; for Chairman Chiniaeff, relayed that in allowing the 26-foot
height the approximate 30-foot height of the existing sign was considered.
In response to Commissioner Guerriero, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that due
to the transportation easement on Winchester Road, the applicant would be required to
sign an agreement stating that if in the future that easement was needed for
transportation, Ihe sign would have to be moved.
For Commissioner Telesio, Assistant City Attorney Curley relayed that the focus of this
action was the antenna structure, noting the applicant's plan to consider all the
requirements of the antenna facility and subsequently create a useable structure to
house the antenna, which in this case was the monument sign.
In response to Commissioner Guerriero, Senior Planner Hazen noted that consent of the
property owner (the School District) was submitted as part of the initial application
process.
For the record, the applicant's representative, Mr. Marc Meyers, noted agreement with
the Conditions of Approval, with moving the lighting from the ground, as recommended
by staff, as well as creating a reveal inset for the Chaparral "C."
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to close the public hearing; and to approve
staffs recommendation, subject to the applicant moving the lighting, as recommended
by staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Oihasso and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
In response to Commissioner Olhasso's queries regarding the dead grass area
depicted in the photograph associated with Agenda Item No. 7, Senior Planner
Hazen relayed that the area was located on partial right-of-way and School
District property.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Ao
Director of Planning Ubnoske introduced the Planning Department's newest
addition to staff, Mr. Dan Long.
Associate Planner Long provided a brief overview of his work history, noting that
he looked forward to working for the City of Temecula.
Commissioner Guerriero noted that he was pleased with Mr. Long being added
onboard, that he would be a great addition to staff; and welcomed him.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:13 P.M. Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next re~qular
meetin,q to be held on Wednesday~ August 21~ 2002 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Chairma i~iaeff, ~
Debbie Ubnoske,
Director of Planning
ATrACHMENT NO. 7
FOUNTAINS SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX APPROVED LANDSCAPING PLAN
R:\C U P~001\01-0572 Cingular Wireless Telecommunications structure at Chaparral High School\CC Staff Report. doc
11
PROPOSED CELLULAR
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
APPROVED CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR FOUNTAINS
PROPERTY
i~' ' '
ITEM 20
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINAN,,C~E
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Ali-Way Stop Sign Installation
North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road
PREPARED BY: Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - Traffic
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council reject the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission's recommendation to establish an all-way stop at the intersection of North General
Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road.
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-._
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING AN ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT
THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD AND
GOLDEN ROD ROAD
BACKGROUND: A petition of ninety-four (94) signatures was received from Mr. Steve Chavez,
representing sixty-three properties in the Golden Rod Road and North General Kearny Road area
requesting the installation of Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of North General Kearny Road
and Golden Rod Road and Golden Rod Road and Franciscan Court, which is in the County of
Riverside. Thirty-eight (38) of the petitioning properties are located on North General Keamy Road.
Additionally, Councilman Naggar and Commissioner Connerton met with the residents of Golden
Rod Road to discuss the residents' concerns regarding vehicular volumes and pedestrian activities
in the vicinity of this intersection. Golden Rod is a T-intersection at North General Kearney.
Staff Evaluation
An evaluation of traffic conditions was performed for the intersection of North General Keamy Road
and Golden Rod Road and the minimum warrant criteria for the installation of multi-way stop were
not satisfied. The average daily traffic volume on North General Kearny west of Golden Rod Road
is 2,374. The average daily traffic volume on Golden Rod Road north of North General Kearny
Road is 1,100. Because, of concerns regarding the continuing development in the area adding
additional trips to the roadways, our warrant analysis was done assuming the currant and projected
volumes. The 85th percentile speed on North General Kearny is 30 MPH with an average speed of
25 MPH. On Golden Rod Road the 85th percentile speed is 30 MPH with an average speed of 26
MPH. Because pedestrian movements were identified as the driving justification for the ali-way stop,
our staff also observed the pedestrian volumes, but the volumes were so Iow that they would not
have influenced the warrant analysis.
1
r:\Agenda Report',2002\111202\stopbutterfielddepodola.reso
The City has adopted guidelines to evaluate stop sign requests based on guidelines established by
Caltrans for the installation of multi-way stop signs. In absence of any unusual conditions or
circumstances, and utilizing sound professional engineering judgment, staff has consistenUy applied
these guidelines to make recommendations. Although this request specifically cited the need for
safe pedestrian crossings in the area, staffs investigations did not reveal conditions or pedestrian
volumes that were measurably significant to justify the multi-way stop signs.
Commission Recommendation
At their meeting of September 26, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission considered the results of
the Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis and unanimously (5-0) denied the staff recommendation to
maintain the present level of control at the intersection and recommended that the City Council
adopt a resolution establishing an All-Way Stop control at the intersection of North General Kearny
Road at Golden Rod Road. The Commission's recommendation to install a multi-way stop was
based on the residents' testimony that the stop signs would provide a safer intersection, would slow
vehicular speeds, would correct erratic turning movements, and provide a pedestrian crossing
location. The traffic study and recent enforcement activities did not indicate a speed problem in the
area and the conditions in this case are very similar to many streets in the City. The Commissioner's
comments and justification for recommending the stop included comments that the street was a long
stretch without a stop, there were sidewalks missing along some sections of the street, and the area
is growing with a number of new developments in the area. The Commission's decision was also
influenced by the petition submitted.
Consequence of this stop s(qn installation
It should be noted that two of the Commission's justifications for installing a multi-way stop were not
correct observations. First there are no missing sidewalks along North General Kearny, and the
growth in the area will not substantially add more trips because the developing areas have better
and more direct routes to take rather than using Nodh General Kearny Road.
Besides the technical evaluation not supporting the installation of the multi-way stop, it should be
noted that several operational precedence setting issues might arise from this installation. This stop
sign will create a staggering effect of cars along North General Kearny Road during busy times that
will make it more difficult for drivers to back into the street or for pedestrians to find gaps to cross the
street at other locations than exist now (similar to Old Town Front Street); there may be a slight
diversion of drivers to Sierra Madre Drive; several homes will lose on-street parking with the
installation, and it is likely that the City will receive complaints from those residents near the
intersection due to the increased noise from accelerating and decelerating vehicles. Also, as many
as 2,374 vehicles a day will be required to stop on North General Kearny Road for no apparent
reason. It is our experience that this will become a roll-through stop, it will promote a lack of respect
for properly placed traffic control devices, and it will encourage reconsideration of other requests to
install stop signs at other similar unwarranted locations. Another concern is that by using
inappropriate stop signs to slow traffic encourages a lack of respect for the inherent dangers of
using the public streets for recreational purposes. As can be seen from the attached photographs,
at least three residents along North General Kearny Road are using the road for rollout basketball
goals, and bicycle and skateboard ramps. By putting up stop signs we are not changing motorist
behavior, but leading residents to believe that the streets are safer for inappropriate uses.
It is requested that the City Council hear the staff report, receive public testimony, and deliberate to
determine a course of action on this matter. If the City Council elects to move forward with the multi-
way stop, the appropriate resolution is attached.
2
r:',Agenda Repod~2002\l 11202\stopbutterfielddeportola.reso
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in Public Works Signing and Striping Account.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution No. 2002-
Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "B" - Public/Traffic Safety Commission Agenda Report - September 26, 2002
Photographs
3
r:~Agenda Report~2002\l 11202\stopbutterfielddepor~ola.reso
RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING AN ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT
THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD AND
GOLDEN ROD ROAD
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the facts justifying the need for the stop signs
proposed for the location described in this resolution. The City Council hereby finds and determines
that installation of the stop signs pursuant to this resolution will enhance the public health and safety
and general welfare at this location and the proposed stop signs will not create any adverse
conditions in the area.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 10.12.100, of the Temecula Municipal Code, the following
Ali-Way Stop intersection is hereby established in the City of Temecula.
North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November 2002.
Al-rEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
4
r:\Agenda Repod~002\l 11202~stopbutterfielddeportola reso
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of November 2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
5
r:~Agenda Report~2002\l 11202~stopbulterfieiddeportola.reso
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
~-~li Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
September 26, 2002
Item 2
Multi-Way Stop Signs - North General Kearny Road at Golden Rod Road
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommend:
1. That the present level of traffic control be maintained at the intersection of North General Kearny
Road and Golden Rod Road; and
2. That the LED speed limit advisory signs be installed on North General Kearny Roadjust east and west
of Golden Rod Road in compliance with the City's policy.
BACKGROUND:
A petition was received from Mr. Steve Chavez, on behalf of the residents of Golden Rod Road and North
General Kearny Road, requesting the installation of Multi-Way Stop signs at the interseCtion of North General
Keamy Road and Golden Rod Road. A similar request was submitted to the County of Riverside for the
installation of Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of Golden ROd Road and Franciscan Court. An
evaluation of traffic conditions has been performed at the North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road
intersection to determine if minimum warrant criteria for the installation of Multi-Way Stop signs is satisfied.
The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this matter through
the agenda notification process and by letter.
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission has considered the issue of speeding on North General Kearny Road.
numerous times in the past and numerous studies have been performed for the area. The use ofmultirway stop
controls along North General Kearny Road has been evaluated at least five (5) times in the past five (5) years,
not including the latest evaluation. During those evaluation periods, Golden Rod Road did not connect to the
single-family residential developments located to the north in the County of Riverside.
In response to the residents' petition, the LED speed limit advisory sign was installed on Golden Red Road just
east of North General Kearny Road on September 5, 2002, to raise the motorist's awareness of the posted
speed limit and advise them of their speed. Pursuant to the sign's installation policy, the sign will remain on
Golden Rod Road for a period of up to th~ (30) days.
North General Kearny Road is a forty-four (44) foot wide residential street that functions as a collector street
providing direct access to Nicolas Road for numerous single-family dwelling units. The Average Daily Traffic
(ADT) on North General Kearny Road is approximately 2,200 west of Golden Rod Road. The speed limit is
posted at 25 MPH on North General Kearny Road.
1
Golden Rod Road between North General Kearny Road and the City limit is a forty-four (44) foot wide
'residential street that functions as a collector street. There are approximately ten (10) single-family dwelling
units that front on Golden Rod Road. The speed limit is posted at 25 MPH on Golden ROd Road within the
City limits. There is a stop sign for southbound traffic on Golden ROd Road. Beyond the city limits, in the
County of Riverside, Golden ROd Road is a forty-four (44) foot wide residential collector street with no single-
family dwelling units fronting the street. In the County's segment, Golden Rod Road provides access to
Willows Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road for numerous single-family residential units. The County has
posted the speed limit at 40 MPH on this segment of Golden Rod Road.
In order to evaluate the need for multi-way stop signs, entering vehicular volume data was collected for a
seventy-two (72) hour period from September 3 through 5, 2002. This data was used to perform a multi-way
stop warrant analysis. The Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that the multi-way stop signs may be useful at
loeafiuns where the volume of traffic on intersecting roads is approximately equal and/or where a combination
of high speed, restricted sight distance and an accident history indicates that assignment of fight-of-way is
necessary. Multi-Way Stop controls should not be used for controlling vehicular speed. There are three (3)
criteria that Caltrans has established for the evaluation of multi-way stop signs. These criteria are as follows:
Where signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multi-way stop may be an interim measure that
can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal
installations.
An accident problem, as indicated by five (5) or more reported accidents within a twelve (12) month
period of a type susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents include
right and left-tom collisions as well as right-angle collisions.
3. Minimum Traffic Volumes
The total vehicular Volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least
500 vehicles per hour for any eight (8) hours of an average day, and
The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must
average at least 200 units per hour for the same eight (8) hours, with an average delay to
minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour,
but
en the 85 percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 rmles per hour,
the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements.
The multi-way stop warrant analysis performed for the intersection indicates that the minimum traffic volume
warrant is not satisfied and multi-way stop signs are not warranted at the intersection.
Because the east leg of North General Kearny Road was closed when the origina! data was collected, a
subsequent evaluation was performed using revised data collected during a forty-eight (48) hour period from
September 11 through 13, 2002, after the opening of the east leg of North General Kearny Road. The
subsequent analysis indicates that the minimum traffic volume warrant is not satisfied and multi-way stop
signs are not warranted at the intersection. Our evaluation under both scenarios did not reveal any unusual
circumstances or conditions that would suggest that the intersection requires special consideration for the use
of multi-way stop signs. Copies of both analyses are included as Exhibit "B'.
The vehicular volume data collected on September 11, through 13, 2002, indicates that following the opening
of the east leg of North General Kearny Road there was a thirty-seven (37) percent reduction in vehicular
volumes on Golden Rod Road and a similar percentage increase in vehicular volumes on the east leg of North
2
General Kearny Road. This confirms the residents' observations that Golden Rod Road was being used as the
primary access to Nicolas Valley elementary School during the road construction closure.
In addition to the multi-way stop warrant anaylsis, an evaluation of vehicular speeds was performed on North
General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road on September 10, 2002, after the opening of the road closure.
The spot speed analysis indicates that the 85th percentile speed on North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod
Road within the City limits is approximately 30 MPH. The 85t~ percentile speeds observed on North General
Keamy Road are consistent with those observed in 1999. Copies of the spot speed analysis are included as
Exhibit "C".
The residents also expressed concerns regarding the lack of adequate sight distance at the intersection due to
obstructions (parked vehicles, utility boxes and vegetation) and the execution of improper roms by eastbound
to northbound let~-tum vehicles which effectively encroach into oncoming traffic traveling southbound on
Golden Rod Road.
An evaluation of the sight distance was performed and it was determined that if vehicles stop at the limit line
(approximately 10 feet behind the extension of the curb line) on Golden Rod Road, the visibility of
approaching westbound North General Kearny Road traffic is limited when a vehicle is parked at the northeast
comer of the intersection. However, the line of sight does improve when a vehicle pulls out beyond the limit
line to a point where parked vehicles do not restrict their line of sight. Using an approach speed of 25 MPH,
the minimum stopping sight distance required at this location is approximately one hundred eighty-five (185)
feet. Our evaluation indicates that the stopping sight distance is becomes less restricted when a vehicle edges
out beyond the limit line. The restriction of on street parking to improve the mira'mum sight distance will
~ffectively remove the only available on street parking in front of the two single family residences located on
the northeast comer of North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road. The sight distance looking west
was unobstructed. Considering that the 85th percentile speeds along North General Kearny Road are relatively
low and the fact that there have been no reported traffic collisions at this intersection in the past twenty-four
(24) months, it is staff's opinion that the current sight distance is adequate for conditions and the restriction of
parking is not necessary at this time.
For these reasons, staffrecommends that the present level of traffic control be maintained at the intersection of
North General Keamy Road and Golden Rod Road. Staffalso recommends the installation of the LED speed
limit advisory sign on North General Kearny Road just east and west of Golden Rod Road to raise the
motorists' awareness of the posted speed limit and advise them of their speed.
In addition to the recommended action, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission could consider other alternatives
such as: the installation of centerline striping on North General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road to produce
a narrowing effect and guide vehicles at the intersection; the installation ora supplemental fmc sign located
· below the existing speed limit sign on Golden Rod Road; and request that the Police Department provide
additional enforcement on No~.h General Kearny Road and Golden Rod Road.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Public Works Routine Street Maintenance Account.
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A" - Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" - Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis
3. Exhibit "C" -Spot Speed Analysis
4. Exhibit "D"- Sight Distance Visibility Analysis
5. Exhibit "E" - Letter and Petition from Steve Chavez received August 23, 2002
3
ITEM 21
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE__~I
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
/~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
November 12, 2002
Relinquishment of Caltrans Right-of-Way (State Routes 79 North and
South)
PREPARED BY: Beryl Yasinosky, Management Analyst
Eric Weck, Assistant Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Direct the Public Works Department to proceed with the relinquishment process for
certain segments of State Route 79 South (SR 79S) and Winchester Road (SR 79 N)
from the State of California to the City of Temecula.
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DECLARING ITS INTEREST TO ACCEPT
JURISDICTION OF THOSE SEGMENTS OF WINCHESTER ROAD
(SR 79N) AND STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH (SR 79S) EXTENDING
FROM 1-15 TO THE CITY LIMITS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
BACKGROUND: Winchester Road (SR 79N) and State Route 79 South (SR 79S) are State
Highways and have been under the jurisdiction of Caltrans for decades. As a result, any
proposed improvements within the State Highway right-of-way must comply with Caltrans
standards and always results in lengthy review and approval processes. Such processes have
often delayed the City's efforts to process street widenings; aesthetically enhance the facilities
with landscaping, raised medians, and pedestrian improvements; install, repair and regulate the
timing of traffic signals; and the review and approval of development projects. It is very
apparent that the residents of Temecula and motorists would be better served if the State
Highways that run through the City limits functioned as local thoroughfares rather than State
controlled highways.
The following information has been prepared to inform the City Council of the processes, costs,
advantages and disadvantages of pursuing the relinquishment of those segments of Winchester
Road (SR 79 North) and State Route 79 South (SR 79S) that pass through the City of
Temecula.
R:\agdrpt\02\l 112\CaltransRelinquishment. SR79
1
Relinquishment Process
Caltrans has an ongoing program whereby they may relinquish their jurisdiction over State
Highways to the local agencies. The relinquishment program generally proceeds on two fronts.
There is a legislative procedure that has to be followed in Sacramento and then there is a
parallel procedure whereby Caltrans and the local agency enter into a cooperative agreement
solidifying the relinquishment.
Leqislative Process:
The first step in the process of relinquishing State highway from Caltrans is for the City Council
to adopt a resolution indicating the City's interest in pursuing the relinquishment process. An
Assemblyman or Senator's office would then be asked to sponsor and draft the necessary state
legislation that allows Caltrans to relinquish these roadways from the State Highway system.
Passing the City Council resolution will enable the City to be included in the legislative calendar
for next fiscal year, but it does not commit the City as far as following through with the process.
The legislation, once passed, would not become effective until January 1, 2004. At any time
after that date, the City could choose whether or not to proceed with the relinquishment process.
Adopting such a resolution merely keeps the City's options open on the relinquishment issue
and pursuing further negotiations with Caltrans.
Caltrans Aqreement:
After the legislative process, the City of Temecula could then enter into negotiations/discussions
over the terms of a proposed joint cooperative agreement with Caltrans. Caltrans typically
commits to a negotiated amount of money, which, in theory, would be used for repairing or
restoring to acceptable conditions the sections of highway to be transferred to the City. The
amount of funds committed by Caltrans would depend on the amount and type of improvements
negotiated between the two agencies. Once the agreement is signed by both agencies, the
California Transportation Commission (CTC) is the final authority to approve the payment from
Caltrans to the City. These funds come to the City with no strings attached. According to
Caltrans' representatives, the entire relinquishment process, including the legislative action,
normally takes approximately 18-24 months to complete, however, City staff will try to expedite
this process.
Advantaqes and Disadvantaqes:
Staff has interviewed several other cities that have pursued relinquishment programs of
Caltrans right-of-way. The common reasons cited by cities for pursuing such action were to
acquire more local control and to lessen the lengthy Caltrans processes and standards. The
cities indicated that the benefits of controlling development and the construction of right-of-way
improvements along the route, including signal timing and repairs, have far exceeded their
concerns about additional liability and maintenance costs. In summary, staff has identified the
following advantages and disadvantages of accepting Caltrans right-of-way:
Advantages:
1. Local control of design and development processes;
2. Local control of traffic and parking;
3. Local control of median, parkway, and sidewalk improvements; and
4. Local control of the repair, installation and timing of traffic signals.
R:\agdrpt\02\l 112\Calt rans Relinquishment. S R79
2
Disadvantages:
1. City accepts the liability from Caltrans; and
2. Costs for maintenance and repair become the City's responsibility.
Estimated Costs
The relinquishment of Winchester Road (SR 79N) would include approximately 2.32 miles of
State highway, extending from 1-15 to the City limits. There are seven (7) signalized
intersections and sixty-two (62) streetlights. Existing roadway conditions are considered good.
Ongoing annual maintenance costs for this segment of the highway are estimated at
approximately $60,000 per year.
The relinquishment of State Route 79 South (SR 79S) would include approximately 3.95 miles
of State highway, extending from 1-15 to the City limits. There are nine (9) signalized
intersections and forty-two (42) streetlights. Existing roadway conditions are considered good.
Ongoing annual maintenance costs for this segment of the highway are estimated at
approximately $100,000 per year.
The City's acceptance of the additional sixteen (16) signals within these routes may warrant the
City Council's future consideration of implementing an in-house or contract signal maintenance
program and abandoning the existing signal maintenance contract with Riverside County.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of this City Council
resolution. Passing the resolution enables the City to be included in the legislative calendar for
next fiscal year, but does not commit the City as far as following through with the process. The
State would undertake the expense of all necessary reviews, studies, negotiations and other
actions required to complete the relinquishment process. Upon such time that the City actually
negotiates an agreement with Caltrans, the roadways would be added to the City's pavement
management program and there would be an ongoing fiscal impact for future road maintenance.
It is anticipated that the future acceptance of the roadways could be completed in conjunction
with the City's annual fiscal year budget process.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit A:
2. Exhibit B:
3. Exhibit C:
Resolution No. 2002-
Map of Winchester Road (SR 79N) Relinquishment Area
Map of SR 79S Relinquishment Area
R:\agdrpt\02\l 112\CaltransRelinquishment. SR79
3
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF
TEMECULA DECLARING ITS INTEREST TO ACCEPT
JURISDICTION OF CERTAIN SEGMENTS OF WINCHESTER
ROAD (SR 79N) AND STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH (SR 79S)
EXTENDING FROM 1-15 TO THE CITY LIMITS FROM THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Winchester Road (SR79N) and State Route 79 South (SR79S) is currently
under the jurisdiction of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the State of California has an ongoing program whereby jurisdiction can be
relinquished to a local agency; and
WHEREAS, as part of the State's program, State legislation must be passed deleting
Winchester Road (SR79N) and State Route 79 South (SR79S) from the State Highway System;
and
WHEREAS, any such legislation must specifically delineate those portions of the State
Highway System within the City of Temecula.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula is interested in pursuing the
possibility of having the State relinquish jurisdiction of certain segments of Winchester Road
(SR79N) and State Route 79 South (SR79S) to the City and requests that any legislation
proposed deleting these highways from the State Highway System include those segments of
Winchester Road (SR79N) and State Route 79 South (SR79S) within the City of Temecula.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall forward a certified copy of this Resolution to our State
legislative representative for the purposes of introducing a bill to the State Legislature
requesting the relinquishment of those certain segments of Winchester Road (SR79N) and
State Route 79 South (SR79S) from the State Highway System.
PASSES, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a
regular meeting held on the 12th day of November 2002.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
R:\agdrpt\02\l 112\CaltransRelinquishment. S R79
4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12t" day of November
2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS
R:\agdrpt\02~l 112\CaltransRelinq uishment. SR79
5
Exhibit B
Winchester Road (State Route 79 North)
October 23, 2002
Legend
Proposed Relinquishment Area 2.32 miles
Highways
Centedine
C~ty
/
/
/
/
ITEM 22
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOROFFINA~CE~
CITYMANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
~ Susan W. Jones
"' ~,~ City Clerk/Director of Support Services
November 12, 2002
Community Services Commission Appointments
PREPARED BY:
Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary
RECOMMENDATION: Appoint one applicant to serve a full three-year term on the Community
Services Commission through October 10, 2005.
BACKGROUND: The term of Commissioner James Meyier expired on October 10, 2002.
The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling Commission
vacancies by advertising the opening in two different local publications. Notices were also posted at
various locations within the City and on the City's Web page. When the deadline was reached for
receiving applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor
Roberts and Mayor Pro Tern Stone for review and recommendation. Both Mayor Roberts and Mayor
Pro Tem Stone recommend the reappointment of James Meyler to serve a full three-year term
through October 10, 2005. All applicants are registered voters and live within the City of Temecula.
Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of October 15, 2002.
ATrACHMENTS:
Two (2) Applications for Appointment
Agenda Repods~Appointment Community Services
RECEIVED
City of Temecula . . . d0 2o0
43200 Business Park Drive Jl CommissionAppomt~e_en~ II
Temecula, CA 92590 I . . ~I3N CLB~K$ DEPT
www.cityoftemecula,org(909)694-6444 I A p p h c a t ~ o n IJ '
[, . "Cjt':~ ot~T~mec~la and./i'R~i~tq'r~.Vote~ in::th~,~t~:'o~e'm~c~/i::~ .~: -.
I
Please Check One:
__ Planning X Community Services __ Public Traffic Sa[~ty
Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident '~-O Are you a City Registered Voter?
NAME: J,AH~'~
ADDRESS:
DAYTIME PHONE:L~O~) ~,~-,ou,-C, EVENING
EMPLOYER NAME: -~ 4~..~'~..~-~
EMPLOYER ADDRESS: ~-,~-~ ~..~-~
!
PHONE:
E-MAIL K4g.~
I
Educational Background/Degrees:
L!st any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of
service:
List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service):
State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position.
Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of Paper if necessary.)
I understand that any or all info,mation on this form may be verified. I consent to the
release of this info,~ation for public information purposes.
Signature: ~__( t~ ~t~'~/-e-~t Date:
City Clerk's Office,, 43200 Business Park Ddve (909) 694-6444 (OR)
Please return to:
Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE
ClTYOF TEMECULA
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
ATTACHMENT FOR JAMES A MEYLER
OCCUPATION:
President
Mesa Business Services, Inc.
31813 Via Campanario
Temecula, CA 92592
Associate
Donald McLean & Co., CPA's
38760 Sky Canyon Dr., Suite C
Murrieta, CA 92563
COMMrrrEES OR COMMISSIONS SERVED:
1992 - 1993 - Served on Economic Development Committee for formation of General Plan for
City of Temecula
1997 to Present - Served as Community Services Commissioner (incumbent). Was Chairman in
2002. Served on numerous committees for development of recreational activities, library,
museum, children's museum and Cultural Arts Master Plan
2001 to Present - Served on Citizen's Advisory Committee for update of General Plan for City of
Temecula.
MEMBERSHIP/ACTIVITIES IN ORGANIZATIONS:
Arts Council of Temecula Valley - Founding member - served three years as President.
Resigned in 1999 to avoid conflict of interest as a Commissioner. Currently serving as financial
adviser.
Temecula Sunrise Rotary Club - Member since 1989. Director for eight years. Treasurer and/or
Foundation Treasurer for seven years. Currently founder and district chair for Rotary District
5330 music competition.
Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce - Member since 1982 (currently through association
with Donald McLean). Director for five years, three years as Treasurer. Also served as Chair of
Ambassador's Committee. 1985 nominee for Business of the Year.
Assistance League of Temecula Valley - (Spouse is a member) Volunteer and Accountant.
California Society and National Society of Enrolled A,qent.~ - Served on executive board and as
vice president of Palomar Chapter.
University of California, Riverside Planned Givin,q Advisory Board - 200e - 200~ Chairman for
Southwest Riverside County.
American Society of Mechanical En.q neers - served on Los Angeles Section Executive
Committee and one year as Chairman of this six thousand member group.
QUALIFICATIONS FOR SERVING ON COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION:
The City of Temecula is placing more and more emphasis on arts and cultural activities. This is
evidenced by the City's development of a Cultural Arts Master Plan and the continuous funding to
implement the plan. I assisted in development of this plan have offered my services as a
Commissioner to assist the Community Services Department to oversee the implementation of
the plan.
I have attended and participated in most Of the meetings leading to the development of the
Temecula Valley Museum and of the Children's Museum currently under construction.
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
ATTACHMENT FOR JAMES A MEYLER
QUALIFICATIONS FOR SERVING (Continued)
Mrs. Meyler and I have been members of the Friends of the Library for many years and we intend
to participate in the development of the new library when funds become available.
In 1982 my wife and I formed General Business Services in Temecula. This tax and accounting
practice grew to be the largest of its kind in the Temecula Valley, and in 1989 we sold the
business to Donald McLean & Co., CPA's with whom I have been continuously associated. I
served for six years as manager of this CPA firm. My accounting and financial background has
been helpful in providing input to the Community Services Commission.
I love Temecula and I can help to keep it improving by continuing as a Community Services
Commissioner.
City of Temecula
RECEIVED
OCT 12 2092
Appointment
Appli~
Please Check One:
~Planning r~. Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety
Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 2.+ Are you a City Registered Voter? .~._~
NAME:_~)NIALD ~. V,~x/ ~LLJe
OCCUPA~ON:
I~.RTIF. ED
DAYTIME PHONE: (~'0~) ~)3 ' 0Z45 EVENING PHONE:
EMPLOYER NAME:
E"PLOYERAOORESS:_ ~/~
.~..~]~_~ucationa, Backgro,un,d/Degrees: /~SS(~J~'T~. ~ J~ C/~~ ~-~/
NOLC~"/M~MENT.
List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on whictj you have served and the year(s) of service:
y rgb. mcn you o~ ong [proTess~onm. [ecenlcel, community service):
PTA -
S~te ~y you wish to sewe on ~is ~mmlesion, aed ~y ~u believe you a~ q~ ~ ~e ~siUon.
Please ~ s~cific. ~ou may a~ch a separate sh~t of pa~r
I unde..nd that any or all ,~..lon on .Is ~ m~. ve~.. I .ri.n, to the~. ~Als In~.at~
public I~malon
PI~ m~m to: Ci~ CleA's ~, 432~ Busine~ Pa~ Ddve (9~) 69~ (OR)
Mail ~: P.O. Box ~33, Te~la, CA 92~9-~33
Please ~ aw~ of the a~eAised d~dline
ITEM 23
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OFFINAN~E
CITY MANAGER
ClTY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM: ~Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services
DATE: November 12, 2002
SUBJECT: Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointments
PREPARED BY:
Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary
RECOMMENDATION: Appoint two applicants to serve on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission
for full three-year terms through October 10, 2005.
BACKGROUND: The terms of Commissioner Mark Katan and Commissioner Charles Cee
expired on October 10, 2002. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established
procedure for filling a Commission vacanc;' by advertising the opening in two different local
publications. Notices were also posted at various locations within the City and on the City's Web
page. When the deadline was reached for receiving applications, the applications were forwarded
to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Roberts and Mayor Pro Tern Stone for review and
recommendation. Mayor Roberts recommends the reappointment of Mark Katan and would like to
discuss the second recommendation at the Council Meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Stone recommends
the reappointment of Mark Katan and the appointment of Pete Ramos. All applicants are registered
voters and live within the city limits of Temecula. These terms are through October 10, 2005.
Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of October 15, 2002.
ATFACHMENTS:
Thr~e (3) Copies of Applications for Appointment.
Agenda Reports/Appointment to Traffic Commission 1
]0-15-02 P03:~3 ~N
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Ddve
Temecula, CA 92590
www.cityoffemecula.org
(909) 694-6444
RECEIVED
OCT 1 5 2002
CITY CLERKS DEPT.
.... ,For prqper c~nslderation,.y~u must'C~n~ntly I~p,rasldent Of ~h~, , , ' Ii
. City of Temecula.and a Registered Voter In the City. of Teme?ula .
__ Planning __ Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety
Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ___ Are you a City Registered Voter? yes
NAME: Charles Coe
ADDRESS: 30554 Grsenway Circle
OCCUPATION: Sales Manager
DAYTIME PHONE: 909-851-4221
EMPLOYER NAME: OMNI Concepts
EVENING PHONE: 909-676-7408
EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 1056 Old Taylor Rd, Vista, CA
E-MAIL temchuck@earthlink.net
Educational Background/Degrees:
University of Toledo, BS
Paramount HS, Diploma
Exxon Management/Marketing Graduate
List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service:
Public Traffic/Safety Commission (9 yrs)
Ust any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service):
Hope Lutheran Church Advisory Board
State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position.
Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.)
I have been a commissioner for 9 years, and it might be presumed that I have "seen it all" and that I might even
be jaded, prejudiced or even "burned out" having listened to many similar requests and complaints over the
years. Nothing could be further From the troth. Every monlh I enthusiastically study the upcoming agenda, and
when necessary, spend many hours sitting and observing the vadous locations to be discussed. Throughout my
tenure my integrity has been without reproach and my decision making has ALWAYS been on a case by case
public Information
ao..t.ra:
Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694'6444 (OR)
Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, TemeCUla, CA 92589-9033
Please be aware of the advedJsed deadline
I have been a commissioner for 9 years, and it might be presumed that I have "seen it all" and thai I
might even be jaded, prejudiced or even "burned out" having listened to many similar requests and
complaints over the years. Nothing could be further from the math. Every month I enthusiastically
study the upcoming agenda, and when necessary, spend many hours sitting and observing the various
locations to be discussed.
Throughout my tenure my integrity has been without reproach and my decision making has ALWAYS
been on a case by case basis. Example: this past meeting several residents quoted some previous
comments of mine regarding stop signs, thinking I would be against them. I supported their cause.
My city continues to have significant traffic and safety issues and it is imperative that we retain a
commissioner (myself) that has a complete understanding of current needs and future development, has
the interests of the community at heart and the respect of city staff.
I have worked hard to make Temecula a better place these past years, and as I look around I can find
many examples of great Council deeisions that were influenced by The Traffic Commission, some of
which were influenced by me.
I thank the City of Temeeula for allowing me to serve them and I hope to continue in that service.
43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment
Temecula, CA 92590
www,cityoftemecula.org A p p l i c a t i o n
(909) 694-6444
.., ·., .. ..... -,,., : :,:.:-' '; .~;: ~ 5 ....... ' -,.,. :,. '~- ,,..: · ,:,. -. ;,,',~... ';, -.~ CEIVED
' ., C~ty o~Temecula'and.'a R,e. glst~re~oter In:~e,~!!:~:of,:T.~me~'.:' ,~ :::~
' · '" ' ...... ' '":': ~' ...... "~ :' .... :'"'"'-' -? 2002
Please Check One: ~'Y CLERKS DEPT.
Planning __ Community Services Y~ Public Traffic Safety
Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident '[~ Are you a City Registered Voter?
DA~IME PHONE: ~R9-001-13~ EVENING PHONE:
EMPLOYER N~E: ~~ ~0~
OCCUPATION:
~'09--699-9305'
EMPLOYER ADDRESS=
Educational Background/Degrees: ,4, .5,
List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of
List any organizations to which you belong (professional, !echnical, com. munity service):
State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are guaiified for the position. ~ .
Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) ~ ~-T,~rz. 7"&4,-/- ::~ ,/-/-~v'W
I understand that any or ifil information on this form may be verified. I consent to the
release of this i]~tormation for public information purposes. ·
'slgnatttre:,.-t'/~d~ ~'"'~-'~t ~ - Date: ' ~/~'/~'~
° Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE
RECEIVED
City ofTemecula I . . .
43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appo t DEPT.
Temecula, CA 92590 mpplJcd'i~.~
www,cityoftem ecula.org
(909) 694-6444
Please Check One¢
__ Planning __ Community Se.ices. ~ Public Traffic Safety
Number of years as a Ci~ of Temecula Resident [ ~ Are you a C~ Registered Voter?
NAME: ~ ~,_~,~4,o.,~ OCCUPATION: ~,~-~,~Of~
ADDRESS: '~o2-~'1 Cnw,~lo C_~w~po.~' ~/~---~b~-~'~ -FEI,~_C_~Li.-.~ ~7--~'~ I
DAYTIME PHONE:~,~o~'1 ~."~- O ~, O "~ EVENING PHONE: ~'~
EMPLOYER NAME: Tl~rt~.~,~----------------~ ~,~.-.-.-.-.-.-.-~o ~_~ '? '~I~A._ '~?
EMPLOYER ADDRESS:.~t~o [',~_Gt.W~,¥ "[ ct -~. E-MAIL
Educational Background/Degrees:
List any Ci~ or CountyBoard~m~e or Commission on which you have sewed and the year(s) of.
List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service):
State why you wish to se~e on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position.
Please be specffic.(You may a~ach a separat~sheet o~ paper if necessg~.)
] ~detst~d that ~y oz ~] tafomattoa on this fo~ ~a7 be veztfied. ] consent to the
release of this tafo..atJoa for public tafomatJoa p~oses.
Signat~e: ~ ~~' Date: ~ ~ ,~ ~
Please retvm to: Cit~ C[e~'s Offi~, 43200 Basi. ess Park Dr[~ (909) 694-6~ (0~)
Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Tem~eola, ~ 9~589-9033
PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE