HomeMy WebLinkAbout091404 CC Minutes
I
I
I
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF
THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 14, 2004
The City Council convened in Closed Session at 5:30 P.M. and in Open Session at 7:00 P.M.,
on Tuesday, September 14, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Present:
5
Councilmembers:
Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, Washington, and
Naggar
Absent:
0
Councilmembers:
None
PRELUDE MUSIC
The prelude music was provided by Vronti Kelly.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Rabbi Hurwitz of Chabad of Temecula Valley.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was presented by Councilman Stone.
PRESENT ATIONIPROCLAMA TIONS
Sister Citv Association Presentation
While celebrating the 10th anniversary of our Sister City relationship in Leichtendam-Voorburg in
April/May of 2004, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero advised that the City's Sister City had honored
the City of Temecula by naming a new civic square which houses a new Fire Station and Police
Station as Temecula Plane. To further honor the City, Mr. Comerchero advised that a replica of
this street sign was provided to the City; he displayed the street sign; and presented it to Mr.
John Lieberg, representing the Sister City Association.
National Preparedness Month Proclamation
Proclaiming the month of September as National Preparedness Month, Mayor Naggar
encouraged residents to partake in the Temecula Citizen Corps Program.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A. Apprising the City Councilmembers of businesses that no longer exist in Old Town, Ms.
Lorena Spencer, Temecula, reiterated and submitted a petition opposing the Farmers' Market.
B. As a shop owner in Old Town, Ms. Valerie Harris, Temecula, expressed her support of
the Farmers' Market but clarified the definition of a certified Farmers' Market and encouraged
that the original intent of a Farmers' Market be resumed - flowers, fruits, vegetables, and
handmade crafts. She noted that a lot of the smaller stores in Old Town are not able to
R\MinuteslO91404
I
I
I
compete with what is being sold at the Farmers' Market, stating that it has turned into more of a
retaillflee market affect.
C. Concurring with the opposition of a flee market directly competing with the Old Town
shops, Mr. Doc Lane, Temecula, suggested that the City Council take this matter seriously.
D. Commenting on the Saturday morning impact on her business, Ms. Lynne Di Cenzo,
Temecula, as well requested that the City Council halt the wholesale to retail portion of the
Farmers' Market.
E. Ms. MaDonna White, Temecula, requested to be placed on the City Council agenda for
the September 28, 2004, City Council meeting to provide a presentation of her business called
The Hidden Wineries of Southern California.
Mayor Naggar suggested that Ms. White e-mail or write to the City Manager and/or the
City Council members with that request after which it would be evaluated and placed on the
agenda if someone chooses to do so.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Councilman Washington apprised the public of an upcoming workshop (Thursday,
September 16, 2004 - 6:30 P.M. to 8:30 P.M. in Lake Elsinore) conducted by the Riverside
County Transportation Committee to evaluate the possibility of a new route from Riverside
County to Orange County.
Mr. Washington apprised the Council, as Council liaison to the Information Systems
Department, of technology advances to improve City services, commenting on the collaboration
with other public agencies such as the School District.
Mr. Washington advised that Councilman Roberts had nominated him as Council liaison
to the Senior Citizens of the community.
Councilman Washington thanked the Council and the City for its support of the
Temecula-on-Stage fundraiser for the Theater Foundation and extended special appreciation to
the Rotarian volunteers.
Commenting on the success of the recent Temecula Valley International Film and Music
Festival, Mr. Washington commended Ms. Joe Moulton and organizers of the Festival on a job
well done.
B. Echoing previously made comments made by Councilman Washington with regard to
evaluating the possibility of new routes from Riverside County to Orange County, Councilman
Roberts address the major investment study (18 months) to explore funding of a second major
roadway for Orange County to Riverside County.
Advising that the Governor has signed SB 87 (Caltrans relinquishment of SR 79 North
and South), Councilman Roberts noted that matter be go before the California Transportation
Commission in November.
C. Having previously reported that Riverside Transit Agency had lowered its fare on the
commuter link route from Temecula/Murrieta to the Transit Center in the City of Oceanside from
R\MinuteslO91404
I
I
I
$4 to $1 in an effort to increase ridership, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero advised that figures
indicate that an increase in ridership has occurred due to the reduction in fare and that the $1
fare will remain in place until the end of the year at which time all fares will be analyzed.
Mr. Comerchero commended Councilman Washington on his efforts associated with the
Temecula-on-Stage Fundraiser for the Theater Foundation. Having met with Housing and
Redevelopment Director Meyer, Mr. Comerchero advised that he has requested that
consideration be given to providing additional funding for the Special Events budget for July
2005.
D. Echoing the comments of success of the Temecula Valley International Film and Music
Festival, Mayor Naggar requested that additional funding for this event be considered in next
year's budget.
CONSENT CALENDAR
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
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004 - City Council/Planning Commission
Workshop;
2.2 Approve the minutes of August 10, 2004;
2.1
2.3 Approve the minutes of August 24, 2004.
3
Resolution approvina List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 04-96
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
R:\MinutesIO91404
I
I
I
4
5
6
Citv Treasurer's Report
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1
Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of July 30, 2004.
Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30. 2004
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
5.2
Receive and file the Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004;
Approve an appropriation of $700,000 to Police Department budget;
5.3 Approve a budget transfer of $54,000 to Sales Tax reimbursement from Planning
Department;
5.4
Approve an appropriation of $52,300 to Rancho California Road Widening and
Median east of Ynez Road to be funded from Development Impact Fees - Street
Improvements.
Two-vear Cell Phone Contract Renewal with Sprint
6.1
7
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a two-year agreement with Sprint for the renewal of City Cellular Services.
Microsoft Software Licenses - Annual Renewal
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
8
Authorize the annual purchase of 250 Client Access Licenses (CAL) of Microsoft
Windows Professional from ASAP Software for $54,972.50.
Approve the Sponsorship Reauest for The Great Tractor Race Event
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
8.2
R\MinutesIO91404
Approve the event sponsorship agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute the
following event sponsorship agreement;
Approve the event sponsorship agreement for actual City-support costs in the
amount up to $12,500 for The Great Tractor Race.
I
I
I
9
Amendment to Aareement for Advance Pavment of CFD 88-12 Reimbursements
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve an amendment to the City's agreement which provides for advance
payment of reimbursements for certain parcels within CFD 88-12;
9.2 Appropriate $65,134 from the un allocated reserves of the General Fund to provide
for an increased payment amount.
9.1
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-9. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Washington and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
At 7:33 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:38 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular
business.
PUBLIC HEARING
10
An Appeal of the Plannina Commission's approval of PA03-0027 (Conditional Use Permit
& Development Plan) - a proposal to develop a 24.287 SQuare foot church facility on a
4.72 acre lot
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration;
10.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 04-97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PAO3-0027 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND UPHOLIDNG THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA03-0027 TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A
LATTER DAY SAINTS CHURCH FACILITY CONSISTING OF
SANCTUARY, MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM, CLASSROOMS, AND
MEETING ROOMS TOTALING 24,287 SQUARE FEET ON A 4.72
ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
PAUBA ROAD AND 140 FEET WEST OF CORTE VILLOSA ALSO
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 955-050-017
Mayor Naggar reviewed the process of the public hearing.
City Attorney Thorson advised that under Section 17.02.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code,
this public hearing must be limited to the five points set forth within the filed appeal.
R\MinutesIO91404
I
I
I
Planning Director Ubnoske reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material). Both Planning
Director Ubnoske and Public Works Director Hughes referenced and provided clarification with
regard to the five specific issues cited in the appeal, noting the following:
Issue No.1 - Adjacent property owners question how the existing drainage ditch along
the eastern property line will be improved?
Analysis
. That a 6' to 8' grade difference currently exists between the subject property and the
existing residences to the east; that a drainage easement and brow ditch exists at the
tow of the slope along the eastern property line; that at the public hearing, church
representatiYes agreed to construct an 8' high CMU retaining wall between the church
and the adjacent residences to the east; that the retaining wall will enable the rear yards
of the residences to be leveled off thereby creating a larger useable area;
. That the Public Works Department has indicated that necessary drainage
modificationslimprovements associated with the proposed retaining wall have not yet
been provided by the applicant's engineer; that Condition No. 27 will require the
developer to submit a drainage study which will address both onsite and offsite drainage
concerns; that the drainage study will be submitted and reviewed concurrently with the
grading permit and will recommend how the existing glows along the west side of lots 20
through 26 of Tract No. 22916-1 will be picked up and conveyed to an appropriate outlet.
Staff Comments
. That currently there is a brow ditch on the adjacent residential property;
That, within 6' to 10' of the residential properties, there is a drainage easement on the
residential properties not on the church property;
. That any drainage work would have to be completely contained on the church property
and would have to comply with civil engineering requirements;
. That with regard to backfilling the 8' retaining wall, the church would offer grading
services to the individual property owners as work will be completed on the church
property; that there was no discussion at the Commission meeting of the church being
financially responsible for grading costs;
That a retaining wall would not be necessary for the purposes of filling the backyards;
that a retaining wall would not necessarily be a needed function for the church but more
of an accommodation to the residents;
That drainage will be necessary for the church parking lot as well as additional drainage
will be placed on the backside of the retaining wall; that the appeal issue pertains to who
will be responsible for building the drainage and that the construction of the retaining
wall is an unresolved issue;
. That moving the retaining wall closer to the church and, thereby, creating an easier
grade for multiple-level grading would create a concern with impacting parking spaces;
R:\MinutesIO91404
I
I
I
Issue No.2 - The church has proposed the gate off the eastern property line during the
overnight hours. Area residents are requesting that the western property line also be
gated.
Analvsis
Subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing, staff spoke with Mr. Rocky Snider,
LDS Church project manager. Mr. Snider indicated that the church would have no
objection to also constructing a gate at the western driveway and closing both gates
from 10:00 P.M. through 6:00 A.M. seven days a week.
Issue No.3 - Area residents believe the size of the facility, is too large for the
neighborhood and that the colonial architectural style is incompatible with surrounding
buildings in the area.
Analysis
After reviewing the staff report and project plans and after considering all public
testimony, the Planning Commission determined that both the size of the facility and
architectural style of the building are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood as
conditioned.
Staff Comments
. That the residents had expressed that the proposed architectural style is inappropriate.
Issue No.4 - Area residents are requesting that proposed youth dance activities cease
by 10:00 P.M. rather than 11 :00 P.M. as approved by the Commission.
Analysis
After reviewing the staff report and considering all public testimony, the Planning
Commission subsequently required the applicant to draft and conform to Youth Dane
Operational Guidelines. In addition, the Commission required the church to have a
reliable phone contact available seven days a week that area residents may contact
should problems arise. Based on these requirements, the Commission determined that
the operation of youth dances until 11 :00 P.M. would be appropriate and compatible with
the surrounding residences.
Staff Comment
. That the primary entrance to the church would be on the west side of the building, not
adjacent to the residential homes;
. That the residential homes sit approximately 6' to 8' above the level of the church
parking lot.
R:\MinutesIO91404
I
I
I
Issue No.5 Adjacent property owners to the east are requesting that larger trees be
planted along the eastern property line so as to provide more immediate screening.
Analvsis
Upon reviewing the conceptual landscape plan and the staff report, which listed the
maturity rates for the proposed trees, the Commission determined that the trees were
adequate to provide long-term screening. Since the hearing, staff has worked with the
City's landscape architect consultant to determine what modifications could be made to
achieve more immediate screening. Should the Council wish to require more immediate
screening, the consultant recommends that 24" box pepper trees be planted 15 feet on
center along the entire length of the eastern property line along with groupings of 24"
box Arizona Cypress. The pepper trees are faster growing than the cypress. Moreover,
to achieve further screening, the consultant recommends that the size of all threes
proposed along the east side of the church building be enlarged to 36" box to achieve
quicker growth rates.
Staff Comments
That screening would be on the east side of the church property as part of the 20'
landscape buffer (residential from church);
. That area residents requested substantial screening to mitigate the view of the church;
that the proposed landscape plan will address the screening concerns;
That the construction of a retaining wall will affect the type/height of trees chosen;
That planting the trees on the plateau of the slope could be a possibility; that in the long
run, the approach with the retaining wall and the trees located on the lower section
would be a more desirable buffer for the residents; that trees will be more effective when
located lower and the crown of the trees will be blocking the views;
For Councilman Stone, Planning Director Ubnoske advised that the church had made the
following concessions in response to the area residents' concerns, noting that staff would be of
the opinion that the church has adequately addressed staff's concerns as well as the area
residents' concerns:
Relocating the church to the center of the site and, thereby, creating substantial
setbacks
Providing substantial landscaping
. Agreeing to place a gate on the west side and to keep the gates located from 10:00 P.M.
to 6:00 AM.
. Providing ample parking
Moving the light poles on the east side of the property to the end of the landscape
fingers --- 40' away from the property line; that the light poles be hooded
. Agreeing to mitigation measures indicated in the traffic study.
For Councilman Stone, Planning Director Ubnoske noted that the height of the church will be 31'
and that as per the Development Code, only the steeple section in the front will be 50' high.
In response to the Council, it was noted by staff that a traffic study was completed and
consistent with the City's standards; that the goal was to determine impacts on an average daily
week; and that imposing No parking on Pauba Road condition was not part of the application
R:\MinutesIO91404
I
I
I
nor was it a condition imposed by the Commission. Because of the volume of traffic and site
distance problems, Councilman Roberts commented on how dangerous that situation may be.
It was noted by staff that this matter could be addressed at the time of the actual street
improvement plans.
At this time, Mayor Naggar opened the public hearing.
The following residents spoke in opposition to the proposed church project:
Mr. Stephen Longo and Mrs. Rebecca Longo
Ms. Beth Ceja
Temecula
Temecula
For Ms. Ceja, City Attorney Thorson reiterated that the appellants are limited to addressing, at
the public hearing, the five points noted in the appeal which are the issues that are in question
about the Planning Commission's decision.
The above-mentioned residents expressed the following concerns and made the following
recommendations:
. That the existing brow ditch is currently located on residential property adjacent to the
project site
That the existing catch basin should be relocated to outside of the property line (Lot 1)
0 It was noted by Public Works Director Hughes that one option could be that each
property could have its own individual drainage, draining onto the church
property and then connecting into the church system
0 Another option could be that each property could have a new V-ditch on top of
the retaining wall, dropping into the catch basin from a higher point
. That along with the 8' retaining wall, residents as well requested fencing at the top of the
slope but also backfilling the properties and including the reconstruction of the wing walls
(wooden fencing for the area that is being backfilled) after backfilling to complete the
transition from the retaining wall to the existing grade, allowing residents to level off the
property and reducing noise levels from the parking lot as well as a dust barrier; that the
existing backyards have existing drains that drain toward the street; that none of the
property owners are desirous of a slope; that because of already existing mature
landscaping, the property owners would not be willing to have some of the proposed
church landscaping located on their newfound property; that the impacted property
owners would have no objection with backfilling the already landscaped slope area but it
was noted that existing irrigation has been installed as well by the property owners; that
the property owner of Lot 1 who would be desirous of retaining an existing tree;
0 That by backfilling the slope area, the property owners' backyards will be
extended by approximately 16 feet or more
. That the size of the church as well as the colonial architecture are neither consistent nor
compatible with the southwestern Mediterranean architectural design of the adjacent
neighborhood
That the church site directly abuts residential housing
. That it was requested that the church be reduced in size to 18,000 square feet; that the
proposed size of approximately 25,000 square feet with a height of 50 feet for the
steeple area would not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; that it will
create unreasonable negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood and will not be
compatible with the surrounding areas in relation to scale and surrounding uses; that the
R\MinuteslO91404
I
I
I
proposed use would be more suitable in another location where it would create less
impact and, therefore, request that this project be denied
That with regard to Issue No.2 (the gate), the hours of proposed vehicle access to the
church only pertains to the easterly gate and should as well apply to the westerly gate,
referencing security issues; that the opening of the gate at 6:00 AM. is too early and
should be at 7:00 AM.; that there is a concern with vandalism, not necessarily just for
the residents but as well for the church facility
0 It was noted by Planning Director Ubnoske that after discussing the matter with
the church representatives, both gates (east and west) will be locked between
the hours 10:00 or 11:00 P.M. to 6:00A.M., seven days a week
0 That verbiage could be incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit, requiring
that if vandalism were to occur, it would be mitigated by security
That the proposed activities within the structure will not be compatible as well; that the
residents were not notified of the operational changes prior to the public hearing; that
hours of operation for the primary activities have been extended and these activities
have not been specified in the Conditional Use Permit; for example, that the LDS dances
are not limited to LDS members but that guests are as well allowed to attend; that blood
drives are being planned to be held at the proposed facility; that the types of activities,
the times, the frequency, and the number of participants must be identified; that who will
be responsible for monitoring the compliance of these activities; that all primary and
secondary activities must be identified as part of the Conditional Use Permit; that the
increased activities will have a negative impact on the lifestyle of the neighboring
residents
0 It was noted by Planning Director Ubnoske that the parking lot will be strictly for
parking and no outside activities in the parking lot
0 That an operational statement describes the kinds of events that will be occurring
at the facility; that all events will be inside the facility; that the primary activities
are described in this operational statement
. That with regard to the retaining wall issue, the residents are of the opinion that they are
being penalized, noting that the church has agreed to construct the retaining wall but has
not agreed to construct the wing walls (separating the residents) and to provide the
backfill and compaction; that such action on LDS' part would be good public relations as
a good neighbor; that fair compensation would be for the developer to absorb the cost of
the retaining wall, the wing walls, and the backfilling of the properties
That with regard to the traffic report, the traffic from the proposed facility as well as the
existing neighboring schools including the high school will not be tolerable.
For Mayor Naggar, Mr. and Mrs. Longo noted that they had filled out the appeal based on the
collective resident input.
At 9:04 P.M. a short recess was called, Mayor Naggar reconvened the meeting at 9:15 P.M.
Proponents ofthe proiect
Mr. Kevin Osborne, Temecula, commented on the value this project would provide to many
residents of the City as well as the community as a whole; advised that the submitted petition in
support of the church included a majority of signatures from residents of the City but not
necessarily members of the church; and noted that the church facility could be utilized for other
community activities not limited to the church.
R\MinutesI091404
10
I
I
I
Mr. Kent Cornwall, representing Cornwall Associates Architects (retained by the church),
Pasadena, reviewed and highlighted the planning/design review process of this project which
included the neighboring residents, noting that as a result, significant changes were made such
as moving the building to the west away from the neighbors, increasing the landscape buffer,
doubling the number of islands with trees in the parking lot, and constructing a second driveway;
noted that a neighborhood meeting was called in March 2003; that as a result of this meeting,
additional changes were made such as the parking lot light poles were moved away from the
property line (40' away), a wall was added to the west property line, the landscape planter was
widened on the west property line, 50% more trees were added on the east property planting
buffer, the steeple was lowered by 20', a full traffic study was requested, a gate was added to
the east driveway which would be locked throughout the weekdays to limit access on the
easterly property line, and the primary building access was created on the west side. Mr.
Cornwall advised that a second neighborhood meeting was held in September of 2003 and the
primary issue of concern pertained to traffic. It was noted that in May of 2004, the first Planning
Commission public hearing was held. With regard to the five points of concern noted in the
appeal, Mr. Cornwall noted the following:
Retainina wall alona the east property line
That the City would require, as a standard condition, a 6' masonry wall; that an 8'
retaining wall has been offered by the church at its expense; that the church would
not be willing to construct work not on its own property and would not be in a position
to offer money or compensation for neighbors to complete work on their own
property; that for the applicant to complete work on the owners' property would
create legal issues;
That whether a retaining wall were constructed or not, the drainage on the neighbors'
side would continue to function until it is backfilled; that once the slope is backfilled, a
drainage issue would be present;
. That the applicant will hire a grading contractor and will contractually have that
contractor make himself available to the neighbors to move dirt and to provide
excess dirt but that such work would be completed through an arrangement with the
neighbors
. That the retaining wall will be built on the church's property
With regard to the retaining wall, Councilman Washington suggested that following:
That the slope be moved; that the top of the slope be on the property owners'
property line and then slope down, eliminating the need for a wall and eliminating the
need to duplicate drainage; that the existing V-ditch would be covered but the slope
would then direct drainage toward the new drainage that the homeowners would
have to construct on their property anyway, eliminating two different drainage
systems
. That the trees could then be planted on the slope of the church's property and still
achieve the desired screening affect.
In response to Councilman Washington suggestions, Mr. Cornwall noted concurrence with
constructing a slope on the church's property within the 20' setback but continued to express
concern with backfilling the portion for the property owners.
R:\MinutesI091404
11
I
I
I
West driveway aate
That this gate will be constructed
That if there were any vandalism on the church property, the church would
immediately gate that driveway; that the church's original intent would not be to gate
its facilities, appearing as though people are being shut out
That the east gate will be locked 24 hours a day during the weekdays; that when a
majority of the parking will be needed such as on Sundays, this gate will be open
That the west gate will be opened at 6:00 A.M.
Size. scale. and desian of the church
That uses of the proposed church include the following:
0 A larger sanctuary for special meetings and for the State Conferences
held twice a year
0 A Stake administrative offices and Council room for meetings
0 A full-sized basketball court
0 A stage for cultural events
0 A baptistery
0 A permanent satellite dish for the occasional special programs
0 A family history center (space for it)
That the size of the Murrieta-stake center building is at approximately 25,000 square
feet
That no kitchen will be provided
That with regard to the style of architecture, the church has four basic styles - all
Colonial/New England style with variations, representing the church's image
Hours of Operation
That the proposed hours of operation are to meet the needs of the church
That the church will not be used continuously from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.; that
typically there will be no activity at the church after the high school seminary program,
which ends at 7:00 AM. until around 7:00 P.M.; that the seminary program would
include approximately 60 to 80 students;
. That the church has been authorized 12 primary activities per year authorized to
11 :00 P.M.; that a dance would be defined as a primary activity
Trees in the buffer zone
That the approved plans of 15 gallon trees has been changed to 24" box trees along
the eastern landscaped planter; that staff is proposing 36" box trees to achieve a
quicker growth rate; that the applicant's landscape architect's experience has
indicated that a 24" box tree will be optimum for quickest growth rate;
. That Arizona Cypress trees will be planted, per the approved landscape drawings, at
12' on center through the entire 400' length of the eastern property; that a variety
trees will be utilized along the eastern property line.
In closing, Mr. Cornwall quoted the support comments made by Chairman Telesio of the
Planning Commission, noting that the church will intend to function as a good neighbor.
R\Minutes1091404
12
I
I
I
To further address the issue of the applicant completing specific work on the neighboring
residents' property, Mr. Rocky Snider, project manager for the applicant, Lake Elsinore, noted
the following:
That the liability of performing contract work on someone else's property would be
tremendous
. That the applicant will already be incurring a significant cost to mitigate concerns
. That dirt will made available to the residents free of charge
Raising an important issue with regard to liabilities of the church, City Attorney Thorson as well
commented on complex legal issues, noting that it may be addressed by the homeowners
directly contracting with the contractor, eliminating the church. Mr. Thorson also stated that
another issue to address by the City Council would be what will be the impact of this project on
these properties and will those impacts only be solved by a retaining wall and backfilling or may
it as well be solved with a block wall and the drainage issues accommodated. In closing. Mr.
Thorson commented on the difficulties associated with the City imposing a condition which
would require an applicant to complete work on other people's property, referencing liability
issues, product liability issues, noting that under State law, if the people were not to agree, the
City could not enforce that condition.
Although the dirt may be free, Councilman Roberts expressed concern with the homeowners
being financially responsible for the moving of the dirt and for the completion of the grading
work.
In lieu of some of the landscaping and berming issues, Councilman Stone suggested that the
church make a small contribution to the seven property owners, provide dirt, provide a $5,000
allowance to import the dirt and to extend the fence to the retaining wall, and, in turn, the church
will be held harmless.
Once the properties have been backfilled, Public Works Director Hughes advised that a new V-
ditch would have to be constructed on top of the retaining wall, noting that if a monetary
contribution were made, sufficient funds should be allocated to ensure the rebuilding of the V-
ditch to City standards and, thereby, eliminating the church from the drainage issue.
Public Comments
SpeakinCl in favor of the Appeal
By way of overheads, the following individuals spoke in support of the Appeal:
Mr. David Kimball, Temecula
Mr. James Hill, Temecula
Ms. Jenny Elliott, Temecula
Mr. John Wilshire, Temecula
Ms. Kristen Boano, Temecula
Mrs. Susan Reed, Temecula
Mr. Chris Reed, Temecula
Mr. Jim Johnston, Temecula
Ms. Marjorie Gregory, Temecula
Ms. Beth Ceja, Temecula
Ms. Bobbie Korn, Temecula
R\MinutesI091404
13
I
I
I
Mr. Kenneth Ray, Temecula
The above-mentioned residents spoke in support of the Appeal and noted the following:
. That the applicant choose to obtain land that was not zoned for the proposed intent - a
choice made by the applicant
. That if this Conditional Use Permit were denied, there would be no encumbrance on the
applicant
. That the hours of operation conflict and, thereby, impact the neighboring residents' daily
lifestyle
. That the enormity of the facility/parking lot will be equivalent to seven hoùses
. That there may be concern with future expansion of the proposed facility
That he had purchased his home with the understanding the area was rural residential
. That the retaining wall should be constructed
That the proposed facility will be approximately 140' from her bedroom sliding door,
eliminating her view
That the proposed project would not be compatible with the surrounding use -
massiveness
That a smaller church be proposed or that it be relocated
That the construction of the retaining wall, backfilling of the dirt, resolving the drainage
ditch, and constructing the wing walls would be an acceptable resolution
. That the quality of life of the existing neighborhood will be impacted, commenting on the
size of the facility, appropriateness of the use of the land, and privacy of the adjacent
residents
That buildings of this size are not constructed in residential communities; that there will
be 300 parking spaces on this site
That the church has provided compromises but the size of the facility will not be
acceptable
. That the applicant just recently closed escrow on a parcel of land over 5.5 acre, less
than three miles from the proposed site on Highway 79 South, east of Butterfield Stage
Road
. That the impact of the proposed facility goes beyond impacting the seven neighboring
residents and that it will impact the neighboring community
. That the homeowners of Vintage Hills and Paloma del Sol currently have 14 public use
facilities within one and a half miles of the proposed church site; that although these
uses provide invaluable services to the community and to the extended communities,
these uses do impact the residential nature and the privacy of the owners home lifes
That there are already existing traffic concerns on Pauba Road; that as a result, there
are concerns that emergency vehicles would not be able to reach the neighborhood in
. adequate time
. That if it weren't for the Religious Institution Act, the City would not permit a facility of this
massiveness in a residential area
That the General Plan, Policy 1.4, states that the City should consider the impacts on
surrounding land uses and infrastructure when reviewing proposals for new
development; that Goal 3 dictates a Land Use pattern that will protect residential
neighborhoods, noting that a building of the proposed size will not be protecting the
established neighborhood
. That the applicant was requested to provide additional concessions because the
proposed facility will be built in a residential area
R:\MinutesI091404
14
I
I
I
. That although Councilman Washington's suggestion would be a favorable resolution, the
resident continue to not support overall construction of the church
. That a clearer definition of primary/secondary activities and the associated number of
people be provided
. That the project will create noise issues and will as well block the existing neighbors'
views
. That the proposed parking plan will be inadequate; that the church owns approximately
2.5 acres immediately adjacent to the proposed site to the north; that half of this acreage
be rededicated as parking for the proposed site; that, if approved, an additional 100
parking spaces be provided for this particular site
The following individuals spoke in support of the project:
Mr. Thom Landro, Temecula
Mr. Stewart Morris, Temecula
The above-mentioned supported the proposed project, noting the following:
That the accessibility of a religious building is important to his family
. That churches don't create a deterioration of a neighborhood; that data indicates that
there is great security, safety, community diversity.
Appellant Rebuttal
Readdressing the City Council, Mr. and Mrs. Longo stated the following:
. That having visited the existing LDS churches in the City and not having viewed an
abundance of activity, maybe those facilities are underutilized
. That although they were not able to attend the recent church dance to which they were
invited, they did drive by to observe the function; that there was no function on the
indicated date at the North General Kearney site nor at the SR 79 site
That they had purchased their home last year in September from members of the LDS
church
. That if the applicant were not in a financial position to compensate the neighbors for the
backfilling, the retaining wall, and the compaction, how will the neighbors be able to fund
these costs
. That Councilman Washington's suggestion would be a favorable resolution
. That the proposed facility will have a stage, a basketball court, and offices, and an area
for worship; that a great deal of space has been provided for sports/entertainment and
administration usage
That the other two LDS churches are not directly next to a residential area
. That Planning Commissioner Chiniaeff had expressed concern with the overall massing
affect of the proposed project and its impact on the surrounding area; that the proposed
facility would not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood
. That size and location of the proposed structure is a primary concern
. That the architectural style will not be compatible with the neighborhood
. That the approximated amount of $5,000 to compensate the neighbors would not be
sufficient
R\MinutesI091404
15
I
I
I
Applicant Rebuttal
Mr. Cornwall noted the following:
. That. no property in the City of Temecula is zoned for a church
. That the proposed facility will not be expanded
That schools and churches are facilities placed within neighborhoods
That the existing churches are being overused; that the proposed facility is needed
. That the church will concede to construct the west gate
. That with regard to design and size, the proposed facility is what is needed
. That hours of operation have been presented and approved by the Planning
Commission
That with regard to treesllandscaping, the church would be willing to work with staff
That with regard to Councilman Washington's recommendation, applicant would propose
to construct a 10' retaining wall, to berm that up by 4' to ensure City's standard of a 6'
wall; that the church would complete all the improvements on its site; that by doing so,
tree screening would be placed several feet higher from its proposed location; that the
church would be willing to monetarily contribute to the seven homeowners to ensure the
needed improvements are made
. That the church has no plans for the 2.5 acres to the north of the proposed site
That a Stake is usually anywhere from 6 to 10 Wards, depending on the geography; that
the proposed church will be designed for 3 Wards; that each Ward encompasses
approximately 500 to 600 members; that if a need foradditional parking were necessary,
arrangements could be made with neighboring schools and carpooling to the facility
At this time, Mayor Naggar closed the public hearing.
Not having all seven property owners in attendance of this meeting, Councilman Roberts
suggested that this public hearing be continued; that a subcommittee be formed to address the
grading issue; that, in his opinion, all other issues have been properly addressed; and that in an
effort to address noise concern, those attending the church be required to park on the west side
of the building, locking the east side gate.
Although an argument could be made that the proposed use may not be an appropriate or a
compatible use with the neighborhood as per the City's General Plan, Mayor Pro Tem
Comerchero advised that the proposed use is an allowable use; that although sympathetic to
the church's need for additional space, the issue before the Council is a planning issue; that he
would concur with Councilman Roberts' comments; and that if the church were approved and as
a result does create certain impacts on the neighbors, those property owners must be made
financially whole.
Not viewing traffic as a concern with the already existing LDS churches in the City, Councilman
Washington stated that he would be of the opinion that traffic for the proposed use may not be
the issue of concern as some residents may feel at this time; that for Mr. Washington, Planning
Director Ubnoske advised that the church will be 31' high; that the top of the homes and the top
of the church would be at approximately the same height; and that he would be interested in the
property owners' response to the church's suggestion of a dirt slope.
R\Minutes1091404
16
I
I
I
Noting that churches, in any zonings, provide value to the neighborhoods/industrial areas and
promote a piece and tranquility for the entire community, Councilman Stone, in reviewing the
original proposal, applauded the applicant's efforts in meeting with the neighborhood and as
well in attempting to mitigate the impacts of this large facility; that the church has agreed to work
with landowners to mitigate the visual impacts by compensatory contributions; that the church
has lowered the height of the building by 20'; that the church has agreed to provide additional
mature landscaping; that traffic studies have validated that there will be no change in the level of
service as a result of the proposed project; that the church will be a good neighbor; that the
impacts currently envisioned will be minimal once completed; that living adjacent to North
General Kearney with the location of two churches, he has not experienced traffic issues with
regard to these two facilities during the week or even on Sundays; that the church has been
sensitive to the ingress/egress of their facility; and that he would concur with the formation of a
Council Subcommittee to negotiate with the adjacent landowners and the church to come to an
agreement that will effectively make the adjacent homeowners whole by eliminating the visual
impacts.
Thanking those in attendance for a cooperative public hearing, Mayor Naggar stated that
churches, under the Religious Institution Act, may be constructed in any zone but that it should
be incumbent upon the churches to be a good neighbor and the churches should be held
responsible for mitigating the impacts; that the bermlretaining wall issue will need to be
addressed; that the landscape issue will need to be clarified; that the lights in the parking lot
should be studied especially for the east side; that the hours of operation are a little vague in
defining a primary activity; and that parking on Pauba Road be prohibited within the area of
discussion.
MOTION: Councilman Stone appointed Mayor Naggar and Councilman Roberts to serve on the
Council Subcommittee to address the unresolved issues of concern with regard to fencing,
grading, retaining wall, parking restrictions on Pauba Road, defining primary activities; to limit
discussion at the next public hearing solely to those issues; and to continue the public hearing
to the October 12, 2004, City Council meeting. Councilman Roberts seconded the motion and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
In light of an upcoming business trip, Councilman Roberts requested that Councilman Stone
amend his motion to appoint Councilman Washington to the Subcommittee.
City Attorney Thorson noted that restricting parking on Pauba Road would have to be
considered as a separate agenda item.
AMENDED MOTION: Councilman Stone appointed Mayor Naggar and Councilman
Washington to serve on the Council Subcommittee to address the unresolved issues of concern
with regard to fencing, grading, retaining wall, and defining primary activities; to limit discussion
at the next public hearing solely to those issues; and to continue the public hearing to the
October 12, 2004, City Council meeting. Councilman Roberts seconded the motion and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
R:\MinutesI091404
17
I
I
I
COUNCIL BUSINESS
11
Interim Zonina Ordinance No. 04-09
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt an interim zoning ordinance entitled:
URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 04-09
AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN
THE CITY
City Attorney Thorson presented the staff report (as per agenda material).
Providing brochures to the City Clerk, Mr. Lanny Swerdlow, Palm Springs, Director of the
Marijuana Anti-Prohibition Project/American Harm Reduction Association, stated that the use of
marijuana for medicinal purposes to provide substantial relief to a variety of ailments is law; that
the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Federal law making the medicinal use of
marijuana illegal is unconstitutional in California and, therefore, may not be enforced; that State
law is the only law regulating medicinal marijuana; that the concerns of citizens of the City, who
are legal medical marijuana patients under California law, must be considered; and that a citizen
task force should be formed to address this matter.
Mrs. LaVonne Victor, Temecula, a Cannabis patient, would be willing to volunteer her time to
address this issue and commented on the positive affects the use of marijuana for medicinal
purposes has had on her quality of life.
Concurring with Mr. Swerdlow's comments, Mr. Martin Victor, Temecula, as well volunteered his
time to serve on a task force; commented on the City need for the use of marijuana for
medicinal purposes; and referenced Senate Bill 420.
City Attorney Thorson read by title only the Urgency Ordinance and advised that the passage
of this ordinance will require a 4/5ths vote.
Although appreciating the testimony given, Councilman Stone, as a pharmacist/pain control
specialist and an assistant professor of pharmacology, provided a different viewpoint, noting
the following:
That he is well aware of the active ingredient in marijuana
That marijuana is not a drug of choice for multiple sclerosis
. That the active ingredient in marijuana is tetrahydrocannabinol - a very potent drug that
should be utilized only under the supervision of a physician just like morphine
. That the active ingredient of marijuana could be attained by way of a prescription
through a drug called Marinol (pill version); that by taking the pill version, the patient
would be monitored by a physician and may be regulated because these drugs are
potentially addictive drugs
R:\MinutesI091404
18
I
In light of his comments, Councilman Stone expressed his opposition to the cultivation and
utilization of marijuana plants by anyone without the expressed prescription of a physician that
has, in fact, prescribed the active ingredient in marijuana, commenting on the advise of a
physician with regard to drug interactions, potential addiction, and use with alcohol.
MOTION: Councilman Washington moved to adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 04-09. The
motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and electronic vote reflected unanimous
approval.
Because of the nature of this ordinance, City Attorney Thorson advised that this ordinance will
be readdressed at a public hearing in 45 days, noting that this ordinance does not deal with the
right for personal medicinal use of marijuana; that such use is set by State law; and that any
questions regarding that use, should be directed to the Sheriff's Office or the District Attorney's
Office.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
No comments.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
With regard to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson advised that there were no issues to
report but noted that Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero had not participated in the County litigation
discussion on the RCIP.
I
ADJOURNMENT
At 12:13 AM. on September 15, 2004, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to a
regular meeting on Tuesday, September 28,2004, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers,
43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
;/"
I
[SEAL]
R\Minutes1091404
19