HomeMy WebLinkAbout102400 CC MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
OCTOBER 24, 2000
The City Council convened in Closed Session at 5:30 P.M. and convened in a regular meeting
at 7:02 P.M., on Tuesday, October 24, 2000, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City
Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Present:
Councilmembers: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, and Stone.
Absent: Councilmember: None.
PRELUDE MUSIC
The prelude music was provided by Ellie Macdondald.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Member Ciera Saunders of Baha'i Community of Temecula.
ALLEGIANCE
The salute to the Flag was led by Councilman Roberts.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A. Ms. Evelyn Hughes, 27475 Ynez Road, addressed the need for leadership as well as the
need for elected leaders to represent all City residents and not just a few special group activists
which, in her opinion, tend to not represent the opinions of the majority population. In closing,
she thanked Mayor Stone for his leadership.
B. Mr. Chris Pedersen, 31052 Wellington Circle, reiterated previously noted concerns with
regard to Spencers (located in the Mall) and the display and sale of adult paranephalia.
Mayor Stone advised that the City Council is aware of the issue of concern and that
efforts are underway to ensure that sensitive store items are safeguarded out of the view of
children.'
C. Mr. and Mrs. Scott and Shani Wolf, 31274 Jan Steen Court, Winchester, representing
the non-profit MaryLou Pickle organization, apprised the City Council of the organization's
mission to promote world respect and requested assistance with a scheduled canned food drive
at JoAnn's on Saturday, November 11, 2000, advising that the collected food cans will benefit
the Team Community Pantry benefiting families in the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta. In
closing, they noted that the organization will be trying to break the Guinness World record of
collected canned food (9,974 cans).
D. Ms. Ana Vlahes, 30600 Feather Court, voiced dismay with regard to comments made at
the October 10, 2000, City Council meeting as well as comments pertaining to child care.
Apologizing for his comments, Councilman Roberts suggested that the City provide child
care for City Council nights to ensure that the entire family, if desirous, may attend the meetings
and, thereby, also providing an alternative to a certain segment of people that would otherwise
not have the ability to attend meetings.
R:\Minutes\102400
1
E. Ms. Michelle Anderson, 43797 Barletta Street, informed the City Council that Citizens
First of Temecula Valley will pursue an initiative to purchase the proposed site for Temecula
Ridge Apartments as open space and to preserve it as open space. She requested that the City
provide to her information as to what undedicated land parcels within the City are available for
purchase.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Commenting on the tremendous outcome of the Race for the Cure event, Councilman
Naggar commended and thanked the volunteers associated with the Race for their efforts.
B. Councilman Naggar noted that a Trails Master Plan Workshop has been scheduled for
Saturday, October 28, 2000, at 10:00 A.M., at the Community Recreation Center, and
encouraged the community to participate in the Temecula Community Clean-Up Day on
Saturday, November 4, 2000.
C. Councilman Pratt requested that it be determined by the Council if staff time could be
utilized to complete a land use inventory for the City which would examine the following:
· in-fill parcels to determine availability of residential units
· parcels with the intent to purchase for specific plan residential development
· present to public in a map/chart form with accompanying financial analysis
· receive public input
· ultimate goal to put the matter before the voters of the City by calling for a
special election to approve an assessment for the purchase of these targeted
properties.
D. By way of a video, Cot)ncilman Roberts provided a detailed description of the Magnetic
Levitation (MagLev) test track in Germany, noting the following:
· test track in Germany is 28 miles
· top speed is 240 miles per hour
· Southern California is one of seven areas which is applying for the $950 million
grant to build the MagLev
· If a grant were awarded, track should be built by 2009
Mr. Roberts noted that he will be traveling to Germany to visit the test track and that he
wil~ keep the Council and public apprised.
E. Although he would not support a City Council imposed sales tax initiative for the
purchase of open space, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchere relayed his support of the public's right to
vote for a sales tax increase.
F. Commenting on the need for increased patrols/controls for red-light runners, Mayor Pro
Tem Comerchero advised that he continues to receive public input with regard to this safety
issue and, therefore, requested that the matter be agendized for the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission meeting of November 16, 2000, to ensure the matter is addressed.
G. Advising that he, on behalf of the City, had received a commemorative, platinum-level
plague for the City's participation in the Race for the Cure, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero
commended the outcome of this Race and the presented the plague to the City.
R:\Minutes\102400
2
H. Advising that the Race for the Cure had raised $800,000 of which $600,000 will directly
benefit the City of Temecula, Mayor Stone thanked all the corporate sponsors, especially
Albertson's, as well as the Police Department with keeping everything organized, and also
thanked Lt. Governor Bustamonte for his attendance.
I. In response to a resident suggestion in an effort to address crosswalk safety concerns,
Mayor Stone requested that the Public/Traffic Safety Commission explore the option of painting
crosswalks. To address this safety issue, Mayor Stone advised that four motor officers have
been assigned to address the problem. Mr. Stone suggested that the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission explore a program which would allow those four officers to target particular
intersections each month and, thereby, creating a focused observance at highly trafficked
intersections.
J. Commending the Enforce Responsible Alcohol Consumption in Temecula (ERACIT)
Program, Mayor Stone commented on the success of eliminating drunk drivers from City streets
and thanked the Police Department for its strong efforts.
K. Concurring with Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero's comments, Mayor Stone relayed his
interest in the concept of a local initiative to buy open space but relayed his opposition to
support a sales tax increase and to utilize the City's reserve.
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.
Resolution approvinq List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
3
Extension of Contract for Bankinq Services
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Approve a four-year extension of the City's contract for banking services with Union
Bank of California;
3.2 Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute all necessary agreements.
R:\Minutes\102400
3
4 Award of Construction Contract for the Pala Road Bridqe Soundwall Project - Project No.
PW97-15SW
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Award a contract for Pala Road Bridge Soundwail- Project No. PW97-15SW o to
R.J. Bullard Construction, Inc. for a base amount of $320,000 and authorize the
Mayor to execute the contract;
4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $32,000 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
5 Purchase of Microsoft Office 2000 Professional
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Authorize the purchase of 165 licenses of Microsoft Office 2000 Professional Suite
from MicroAge of Sacramento for the total amount of $32,435.55.
Mayor Stone noted that staff did consult with local stores in the area and were advised
that none of those stores could supply the need.
6 Adoption of Resolution denyinq Plannin.q Application No. 99-0317 - Temecula Ridqe
Apartments (located on the south side of Rancho California Road, southeast of the
intersection of Rancho California Road and Moraqa Road - approximately 20.88 net
acres)
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 99-0317 AND DENYING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO, 99-03'17, WHICH CONSISTS OF AN
APPLICATION FOR A 246-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD (ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 944-290-011)
(This item was pulled for separate discussion; see pages 5-1'1.)
7 Second Readinq of Ordinance No. 2000-12 (Marf:larita Villaqe Specific Plan)
RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Adopt a ordinance entitled:
R:\Minutes\102400
4
ORDINANCE NO. 2000-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA00-0261 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5) TO AMEND
THE TEXT WITHIN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC
PLAN'S DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR VILLAGE B RELATED TO
THE SIZE AND VARIATION OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING
UNITS TO BE BUILT IN PLANNING AREAS 8 AND 10/11/12
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD OFF PROMENADE CHARDONNAY HILLS, EAST OF
MEADOWS PARKWAY, SOUTH OF PARDUCCI LANE, AND
NORTH OF RUE JADOT CONSISTING OF ALL LOTS IN
TRACT NOS. 23100-6, -7, AND -8
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Comerchere moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 5 and 7
(Item No. 6 was pulled for separate discussion; see pages 5-11 ). The motion was seconded by
Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM CONSIDERED UNDER SEPARATE DISCUSSION
6
Adoption of Resolution denyinq Planninq Application No. 99-0317 -Temecula Ridqe
Apadments (located on the south side of Rancho California Road, southeast of the
intersection of Rancho California Road and Moraqa Road - approximately 20.88 net
acres)
RECOMMENDATION:
7.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 99-0317 AND DENYING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 99-0317, WHICH CONSISTS OF AN
APPLICATION FOR A 246-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD (ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 944-290-011)
City Attorney Thorson presented the staff report (of record), advising that at the October 10, 2000,
City Council meeting a public hearing was held for the consideration of Temecula Ridge
Apartments; that at the conclusion of that public hearing, the City Council voted 4-1 (with Mayor
Stone dissenting) to instruct him to prepare a resolution of denial with the appropriate findings; and
that he has prepared that resolution based on the City Councilmembers' comments and concerns
raised at the October 10, 2000 meeting. Because State law requires that written findings be made,
Mr. Thorson stated that the appropriate vote for the denial of the project would be a yes vote for the
proposed resolution.
In response to Mayor Stone, City Attorney Thorson advised that public speakers wishing to address
the matter at this time will be limited to two minutes each.
R:\Minutes\102400
5
Mr. Sam Alhadeff, 41530 Enterprise Circle, representing the applicant, requested that the City
Council take one of two following actions this evening:
Continue the matter for two weeks to discuss matters of concern
Provide the opportunity, this evening, to verbally respond to the proposed findings
and supplement verbal responses with additional writings.
Mr. David Rosenthal, 40575 California Oaks Road, Murrieta, representing the Southwest Riverside
Manufacturing Council, addressed the need for affordable housing within the City and the lack of
apartment complexes in the City.
Mr. Bent Christensen, 419 Main Street, Huntington Beach, partner of A.G. Kading Group, LLC,
commented on diligent efforts expended by the applicants and representatives with the City's
Planning Department; stated that, in his opinion, the City Council has unfairly treated the applicants;
relayed his opposition to the construction of a Iow-costJlow-rent development on the site of
discussion and, therefore, appealed to the City Council to delay the denial of this project and work
with the applicants in an effort to construct a complex which would be acceptable to all individuals.
Advising that this project started two years ago, Mr. A.G. Kading, the applicant, 35411 Paseo
Viento, Capistrano Beach, noted that he and his representatives have closely worked with the
Planning Department which has resulted in numerous redesigns; that the project received approval
from staff; and that the project received approval from the Planning Commission. During this
process, Mr. Kading noted that he was never asked to change the density of the project; that there
were never any implications that the project would not be in compliance with the General Plan and
that no other suggestions were offered. He, therefore, requested that the matter be continued in
order to further address the issues.
In response to Mr. Kading, Councilman Naggar advised that he had met with Mr. Kading's
representatives and had expressed concerns about the project as did other City Councilmembers.
In light of the request to continue this matter in order to find an equitable resolution, Mayor Pro Tem
Comerchero relayed his willingness to resolve the concerns with the inclusion of reducing the
proposed density to some degree.
Ms. Kathleen Kading, 35411 Paseo Viento, Capistrano Beach, relayed the applicants' desires to
maintain a quality project; addressed the proposed density of 11.7 units per acre; commented on
the property tax generation; requested clarification as to the term amenity as noted in the City's
Growth Management Policy; and encouraged the City Council to have a vision for the City which
would reflect and represent the overall community and not a small interest group.
Mr. Lon Brusegard, 23766 Via Madrid, Murrieta, representing Southwest Riverside's Manufacturing
Council, encouraged the development of a mixed-use community; spoke in support of the project;
and noted that no growth/slow growth will not benefit to the City.
Mr. Tom Dodson, 2150 N. Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, representing the applicant, relayed
his opposition to the content of the resolution for denial based on the following:
Findings are not substantiated by the record for this particular project
Intent of Policy 5.1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan is for the City to
provide incentives to the developer to encourage development of transit facilities.
Ms. Monica Sams, 30221 Mira Loma Drive, commented on the need for such housing and
encouraged the City Councilmembers to strive for a balanced community.
R:\Minutes\102400
6
By way of overheads, Mr. Robert Oder, 29911 Mira Loma Drive, representing Mira Loma
Apartments, reviewed maximum occupancy standard guidelines of neighboring propedies such as
90 persons per acre, 78.5 persons per acre, 72.4 persons per acre, and 65 persons per acre,
advising that the proposed project would be 47 persons per acre. Mr. Oder requested that the City
Council continue this matter in order to further discuss issues of concern.
Mr. Bob Oder, 29911 Mira Loma Drive, relayed his opposition to stopping growth in the City and
noted his support for the project.
Having herself spoken to the potential neighbors of this project, Mrs. Helen Oder, 29911 Mira Loma
Drive, noted that the majority of those individuals are in support of the project. She relayed her
opposition to the construction of Iow-cost housing and expressed her support of the proposed
project.
Ms. Tamar Stein, 2049 Century Park East, attorney representing the Oder Family, questioned the
adequacies of the findings to support the resolution of denial, noting the following:
· That because this project will include 50% one bedrooms, the project will have fewer
children than most multi-family projects; therefore, questioned the finding that too
many school-aged children and proper paths and shuttled to schools are not
provided for them; that the School District voiced no opinion;
· That garages were rejected as an amenity;
· That the 25 meter pool was rejected as an amenity.
Councilman Naggar noted that the School District provided information to the applicant as to how
many children would be anticipated and where these children would be attending school
Because the project, as designed, would withstand the requirements of the City's General Plan and
because the proposed findings are inadequate, Mr. Bart Buchauter, 30000 Rancho California Road,
noted that denial of this project would have adverse consequences to the City and, therefore, urged
the City Council to reconsider the matter.
Ms. Linda Egbert, 29911 Mira Loma Drive, resident/apartment manager, relayed her support of the
project.
Mr. Harold Provin, 44750 Villa Del Sun, stated that, in his opinion, Councilman Naggar should have
abstained with regard to this matter; commended Mayor Stone on his principles; and spoke in
support of the project.
In response to Mr. Provin, City Attorney Thorson advised that Councilman Naggar was legally able
to participate in the matter because the proximity of home was more than 2,500' from the project,
noting that the proximity of 300' would presume a conflict and 300' to 2,500' the impact would have
to be evaluated.
In light of the comments with regard to the proposed findings and because of Mr. Kading's
willingness to address changes, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero viewed it as the City Council's
obligation to create an atmosphere where resolution would be a viable option and, therefore, spoke
in support of a continuance in order to give the City Councilmembers, staff, and property owners the
ability to discuss and resolve the issues of concern, if resolution of those concerns were not
possible, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero noted his support for the resolution of denial.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero moved to continue the matter to the November 14, 2000,
City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts. (The motion ultimately
reflected approval; see page11.)
R:\Minutes\102400
7
Because this matter has been discussed, Councilman Naggar relayed his opposition to a
continuance, noting that the issue is not whether or not to construct apartment complex but that it is
about density, impacts, adjacent land compatibility, and safe routes for school children. Mr. Naggar
reiterated that he has, at four different meetings, discussed with the developers' representatives his
concerns and proposed suggestions, noting that none of his suggestions were implemented such
as a trail system. Noting that cedain individuals are not present this evening because they were of
the opinion that the project had been denied, Mr. Naggar relayed his opposition for a continuance.
Although sympathetic with the property owners and the associated expenses for this project,
Councilman Pratt stated that until the City's traffic situation is resolved, such projects cannot be
approved.
Mayor Stone requested clarification from Councilman Pratt, questioning whether it would be his
desire that the City resume the discussion of a moratorium to which Mr. Councilman Pratt
responded in the affirmative.
Differing in opinion with his Council colleagues, Mayor Stone addressed the proposed validity of the
written findings and mentioned the following: (The bolded text reflects verbiage from the
proposed resolution.)
· Issue of fairness - the applicant followed the blueprint of the City's General Plan.
Deputy City Manager Thornhill, in response to Mayor Stone, noted that the proposed
project is in conformance with the City's General Plan and that Planning Department
staff has met with the applicant for the past 11/2 years to guide the project through
the General Plan process;
City Attorney Thorson noted that if the City Council were to adopt this resolution, the
Council would be making the finding that this project would not be in conformance
with the density requirements (medium density allowing a range of 7 to 12 dwelling
units per acre) of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, noting that the
proposed project would be at the higher density (11.7). If the Council were to adopt
this resolution, the Council would be requesting that the project be completed at the
lower end of the density range. Mr. Thorson advised that the Planning Department
staff made a recommendation based upon their view of the General Plan and their
expertise, as Planners, but that the City Council is the ultimate decision-making
authority as to the project's conformance with the General Plan;
· Density-
At the time the Growth Management Plan was considered, Mayor Stone stated that
he was of the opinion that this Plan would be applicable to larger Specific Plans not
to a 20-acre parcel which may have the potential density of 7 to 12 units per acre.
· Compatibility between uses (Seciton IV.A. 1)-
In light of the surrounding uses, Mayor Stone noted that the proposed project would
be ensuring compatibility between uses. It was stated by Mayor Stone that the
developer has agreed to reduce grading to ensure the retention of views for three
residential homes adjacent to this project.
R:\Minutes\102400
8
Policy 5.1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan -
Mayor Stone noted that the developer has agreed to waive their 50% Quimby credit
and will be paying 100% of the Quimby Fee which will be a direct public
benefitJamenity. Mr. Stone as well advised that the developer is required to provide
25% landscaping and that 43% of landscaping is being provided;
25 meter, Olympic-sized swimming pool has been offered to the use of swim teams;
General Plan does not require the applicant to provide enclosed garages; that
carpods provide less of an attractive architectural amenity; that garages are more
expensive to provide but provide a desirable safety feature to the residents of the
complex;
Developer has designated units for Iow-income housing;
Section 2.B.1 of the Growth Management Action Plan -
Growth Management Plan is a policy by the City Council; that it is a guide toward
development but that it is not a part of the General Plan and until it becomes a part of
the General Plan, these written findings cannot be supported;
Mr. Stone noted that the Planning Commission voted to approve the project. He
recommended that staff continue to work with the applicant and spoke in support of
the project;
Specific density 7 to 12 dwelling units per acre range of the Medium Density
land use designation has not previously been established for the site by the
City -
Mayor Stone stated that the surrounding densities are higher than what is being
proposed;
Proposed density of the project is too high and should be established at the
lowest density of the medium land use designation range because the proJect
does not have sufficient amenities to support the highest density -
Mayor Stone stated that the proposed project will provide many features which will
make it an attractive multi-family housing; that amenities such as a tot lot, recreation
center, swimming pool, enclosed garages, and street improvements are public
amenities which would not be provided by a Iow-moderate project;
Mr. Stone noted that the project could be decreased to a two-story structure, garages
could be detached, and, thereby, the additional landscaping would be eliminated;
Increased landscaping is not an amenity sufficient to support the highest
density on this site because the landscaping is both required by Chapter 17.03
of the Temecula municipal Code and is to adapt the project to the hilly
topography of the site -
Mayor Stone noted that if this rule were applied to this developer, same rules would
need to apply all future developments;
R:\Minutes\102400
9
· improvements to the Moraga Drive and Rancho California Road intersection -
Ii was noted by Mr. Stone that those improvements were not ones imposed on the
developer but were offered by the developer;
· Project does not provide added parkland beyond the requirements of the
Temecula Municipal Code -
Mayor Stone stated that the developer has offered to waive the Quimby
requirements and, therefore, is providing added parkland in the way of money which
he would view as an amenity;
· Extensive grading (200,000 cubic yards of soil) -
Mayor Stone questioned what impact the grading will have on the health and safety
of the residents, noting that another developer in the City will be removing more
cubic yard of soil than the proposed project;
· Intersections of Rancho California Road at 1-15 southbound ramps, at 1-15
northbound ramps, and at Ynez Road are operating at level of service D-
Mayor Stone questioned whether the intent of the findings would be to reject this
project because of the unforseeability of County projects developed in the
unincorporated areas of Riverside County, east of the City of Temecula, which will
utilize Rancho California Road; if that were the intent, he stated that such a policy
should then apply to all future developments;
· Bus and shuttle service for the residents is not being provided by the owner of
the project-
Mayor Stone questioned since when does the City impose such a condition on the
approval of a project;
Project inconsistent with Policy 3.2 of the Community Design Element of the
City's General Plan. A sufficient buffer does not exist between the high-
density, multi-family residential units proposed for the project site and the
single-family residential neighborhoods southerly and easterly of the project
site -
Mayor Stone advised that the existing ridge view of the neighboring two or three
residential units will not be impacted; and that the developer had already indicated a
willingness to address that issue;
Mayor Stone stated that, in his opinion, the process the developer has had to follow has not been
fair and that the outcome of this process is an example of why individuals am distrustful of
government. He noted that the project adheres to the City's General Plan; that staff has worked
with the applicant to ensure compliance to the General Plan; that this project followed through the
process prior the City's adoption of the Growth Management Plan; that the project will be providing
amenities, justifying the density approval; and that the proposed project would be at a lower density
than any other apartment complex in the City. Were the City Council to deny this project, Mayor
Stone stated that such action could create a legal disaster for the City with economic impacts; that
the denial of this project could result in a Iow-moderate development at the site which would permit,
as per State law, a 50% density bonus resulting up to 360 total units. Referencing Mr. Tom
R:\Minutes\102400
10
Dodson's comments, Mr. Stone reiterated that multi-family developments create less traffic than
single-family dwelling units. In closing, Mr. Stone stated that he would view the proposed project as
a visionary project for the City.
Noting that a City Council decision was made with regard to this project at the October 10, 2000,
City Council meeting, Councilman Pratt stated that the City Attorney has prepared the appropriate
resolution for denial and the City Council should vote on it.
At this time, Mayor Stone requested that a roll call vote be taken on the previously made motion to
continue the matter to the November 14, 2000, City Council meeting.
AYES:
Comerchero, Roberts, Mayor Stone
NOES: Naggar, Pratt
ABSENT: None.
At 9:01 P.M., Mayor Stone called a short recess and reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:15
P.M. At 9:16 P.M, the City Council convened as the Community Services District and the
Redevelopment Agency and reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:18 P.M.
8 Rancho Hi~lhlands Drive General Plan Amendment (Planninq Application No. PA99-0451)
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0451;
8.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR A LOCATION ON
RANCHO HIGHLANDS DRIVE FROM OPEN SPACE TO
HIGHWAY TOURIST COMMERCIAL IDENTIFIED AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 944-330-019 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0451)
Planning Director Ubnoske presented the staff report (of record), reviewing the application,
advising that staff would view the proposed recommendation as a clean-up or mapping error on
the General Plan Land Use Map and, therefore, it is being recommended to change the
designation of the 1.4 acres from open space to highway tourist commercial. She advised that
the Planning Commission had denied the request, voicing concerns that the amendment would
increase developable area and, thereby, as well could potentially increase traffic. By way of an
exhibit, Planning Director Ubnoske relayed that the County's Specific Plan identifies general
boundaries for the planning areas. While the area of discussion is designated as open
space/manufactured slope, she noted that it would be staff's opinion that these general
boundaries were established with the intent of being refined once projects were submitted to the
City and stated that it would be staff's opinion that the site was originally envisioned to contain
manufactured slopes which would have provided a buffer between two the planning areas.
Referencing the conceptual grading plan, Planning Director Ubnoske advised that the area of
discussion has been listed as natural open space but noted that there are actually no areas of
R:\Minutes\102400
11
natural open space on the exhibit. She stated that, in staff's opinion, the open space areas
were eliminated when the Specific Plan was amended in 1988. Subsequent to the Planning
Commission meeting, Ms. Ubnoske advised that the City Attorney had received information
indicating that on an approved map the site of discussion is reflected as a commercial parcel
and that a commercial assessment has been levied on the property of discussion by way of
CFD 88-12.
For Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero, Planning Director Ubnoske reiterated that the property owner
has been paying a commercial assessment.
With the property owner paying a commercial assessment, City Attorney Thorson advised that
this would be one in a number of factors indicating that the property in question has been
treated as commercial property and because the Specific Plan does not reflect precise meets
and bounds descriptions of open space/manufactured slopes/commercial, it would be necessary
to review all the various factors with respect to the Tentative Maps.
In response to Councilman Naggar, Planning Director Ubnoske advised that an application for
the site of discussion has been received by staff; that staff has been talking with the
representatives regarding the construction of a hotel; that staff, after some research, had
previously determined the mapping error but had not presented it to the City Council for action
until an application had been presented to staff; and that the applicant was unaware of the park
and ride requirement but that staff will work with the applicant.
To his understanding, Councilman Naggar noted that Planning Area 2 was divided into three
separate lots (Marie Callendars, hotel, and open space). Because the Specific Plan as well
requires the construction of a park and ride, Councilman Naggar questioned where it would be
staff's intent to construct the park and ride. For Councilman Naggar, Planning Director Ubnoske
clarified that the requested amendment would not eliminate the Specific Plan requirement for a
park and ride; advised that the park and ride requirement was placed on both Planning Area I
and 2 and, therefore, it may be constructed in either Planning Area; stated that a park and ride
may not be constructed on property designated as open space; and clarified that the City
currently has one park and ride by Carl's Jr. (Winchester Road) and that three additional sites
are planned - one at the mall, one on SR79, and another at the site of discussion.
In light of the potential of a Freeway Flyer, Councilman Roberts spoke in support of the park and
ride at the site of discussion and stated that the area has no use as open space.
City Attorney Thorson, for Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, confirmed that the proposed General
Plan amendment will not waive the Specific Plan requirement to construct a park and ride.
At this time, Mayor Stone opened the public hearing.
Ms. May Lorah, 35555 Monte De Oro, representing Citizens First for Temecula Valley, relayed
her opposition to the proposed amendment and stated that under the California Environmental
Quality Act, the amendment must be evaluated for environmental impacts and, therefore, an
Environmental Impact Report should be completed.
Mr. Bill Johnson, 29400 Rancho California Road, primary property owner of the Rancho
Highlands Plan, noted that the open space designation along the freeway is an important part of
the Specific Plan as well as the General Plan; that the site of discussion would give the City the
opportunity to create a desirable entrance development to the City of Temecula, along Rancho
California Road; and that in light of this property being the last remaining entry property to the
City, he recommended that careful attention be given to the site.
R:\Minutes\102400
12
There being no additional input, the public hearing was closed by Mayor Stone.
If a General Plan amendment were necessary to ensure the development of a park and ride on
the site of discussion, Councilman Naggar, echoed by Councilman Pratt, relayed his support of
the request. If the amendment were not necessary for the park and ride, Mr. Naggar relayed his
opposition to the amendment.
Mayor Stone as well relayed his support for a park and ride.
City Attorney Thorson noted that the City Council must decide whether the site of discussion
should be designated as highway commercial or open space. If the open space designation
were determined, a resolution would need to be adopted by the City Council. If it were
determined to leave the designation at highway commercial, then the resolution before the City
Council should be adopted. Mr. Thorson noted that the park and ride issue should be treated as
a separate issue and reiterated that the park and ride, to his understanding, may be either
constructed on Planning Area 1 (of record) 2.
Since there is no urgency with regard to this matter, Mayor Stone suggested to continue the
matter and discuss the feasibility of constructing a park and ride in the area of discussion and if
not there, staff to determine other possible alternatives.
MOTION: Mayor Stone moved to continue this matter off calendar and to renotice the issue
when it is reagendized. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and voice
vote reflected unanimous approval.
9 Planninq Application No. PA99-0261 - Zoninq Amendment, Map Chanqe, and Planninq
Application No. PA99-0371 - General Plan Amendment - Temecula Creek Villaqe Project
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Receive the Subcommittee's verbal report and provide the appropriate direction.
Having met with the applicant, Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero advised that Councilman
Naggar and he served on the subcommittee which is recommending the development of a
project with approximately 150 residential units and the balance to be commercial.
At this time, Mayor Stone opened the public hearing.
Mr. Marasco, 12625 High Bluff Drive, San Diego, applicant of the project, advised that the
County had imposed an assessment on the property and, thereby, making an assumption of
City zoning which, in turn, imposes a certain economic factor on the property; that there was
a downzoning, which now makes the assessment inconsistent with the zoning; and that,
therefore, it is being requested to approve the amendment to the zoning map.
For Mayor Stone, Mr. Marasco advised that the subcommittee's recommendation would not
be a viable solution; that downsizing the property would be inconsistent with the County's
action; and, therefore, would further exacerbate the problem.
Mr. Charles B. Christensen, 444 West C Street, San Diego, Old Vail Partners, requested
that his letter of October 27, 2000, be incorporated into the record; stated that these 32
acres have been taxed as commercial property from the time District No.159 was formed;
that an economically viable solution must be approved; and that he would encourage
approval of the request.
R:\Minutes\102400
13
There being no additional input, Mayor Stone closed the public hearing.
City Attorney Thorson clarified that when this matter was discussed in Closed Session
approximately one year ago at the request of the applicant, it was for the discussion of the
Settlement Agreement, not the actual approval of the zoning.
To determine the issue of economic viability, Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero questioned
whether it would be feasible for the City to hire an independent consultant to review the
issue and make a recommendation as to viability.
Mayor Stone stated that the issue of discussion has been a political/legal issue for the past
eight years; that the General Plan endorses the Village Center concept; and that he would
support the project.
For Councilman Naggar, Mr. Christensen advised that the project (32 acres), as a whole,
would equate to 12 units per acre. Mr. Christensen informed the City Council that he
would be willing to enter into a Settlement Agreement and requested that the City Council
make a decision this evening regarding this matter.
in light of Mr. Christensen's comment, the following motion was offered:
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero moved to convene into Closed Session based on
potential litigation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote
reflected unanimous approval.
At 10:22 P.M. the City Council convened in Closed Session and reconvened in Open
Session at 10:35 P.M.
City Attorney Thorson advised that no action was taken in Closed Session and that
discussion included the litigation aspects and liabilities if there were release of the
previous lawsuits.
City Attorney Thorson noted that the ordinance approving the requested zoning
amendment will require a second reading during which time the details of the release,
signed by the applicant, could be formulated and would go into effect contingent upon the
language of the release.
MOTION: Councilman Pratt moved to introduce the ordinance contingent upon the
language of the release. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice
vote reflected unanimous approval.
ORDINANCE NO. 2000-13
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA FOR THE SOUTH SIDE OF STATE ROUTE 79
(SOUTH) EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 961-010-006, AND ADDING
SECTIONS 17.22.130 THROUGH 17.22.138 TO THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 4 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 99-0261
R:\Minutes\102400
14
COUNCIL BUSINESS
10 Community Services Fundinq Proqram Committee Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2000-
0~
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Review and approve the 2000-01 Community Service Funding Program grants per
the committee's recommendation of 43 organizations totaling $160,000;
10.2 Approve an operating transfer of $10,000 from the unallocated Capital Reserves.
Mayor Stone reviewed the staff report (of record).
With regard to No. 56 (Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 4089), Councilman Roberts requested
that the maximum allocation of $5,000 be approved. Advising that the additional allocation of
funds would be possible, Finance Director Roberts noted that it would require an additional
transfer of funds from unallocated Capital Reserves.
Having had some difficulty in the past with obtaining the necessary financial data, Mayor Pro
Tem Comerchero commended T.E.A.M. - Community Pantry - on a job well done,
MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to approve the recommendation with an amendment to
the Veterans of Foreign Wars organization to receive the maximum $5,000 and, thereby,
approving fund transfer from unallocated Capital Reserves. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
11 Holiday Schedule for City Council Meetinqs
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Direct the City Clerk to set the schedule for City Council meetings during the holiday
season and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the
Government Code.
City Clerk reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material).
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero moved to schedule a joint meeting for November 21,
2000, at 7:00 P.M., with the City of Murrieta to honor Congressmen Calvert and Packard and to
schedule the December meetings for December 12th and 19~h, 2000. The motion was seconded
by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
12 Public/Traffic Safety Commission Appointment
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Appoint one applicant to serve a full three-year term on the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission through October 10, 2003.
As a subcommittee member along with Councilman Roberts, Mayor Stone relayed the
subcommittee's recommendation to reappoint Mr. Scott Lanier.
R:\Minutes\102400
15
Having been out of town, Councilman Roberts apologized for not having contacted all the
applicants. Commenting on the number of qualified applicants, Mr. Roberts, echoed by
Councilman Naggar, commended Mr. Lanier on a job well done.
MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to reappoint Mr. Scott Lanier to a full three-year term.
The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
13 Consideration of Emerqency Traffic Circulation Plan
(Placed on the agenda by Councilman Pratt)
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Consider steps as recommended by Councilmember Pratt in his report dated
October 10, 2000, Emergency Traffic Circulation Plan.
Due to the lateness of the meeting and the importance of this issue, Councilman Pratt
recommended that the matter be continued for 30 days.
City Clerk Jones advised that she had received a faxed letter (copies of which were distributed
to the City Council) from Mr. Terry Gilmore, relaying his opposition to the addition of a vehicle
tax.
MOTION: Councilman Pratt moved to continue the matter for 30 days. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
14 SATISFY 2020 Implementation Committee A,qreement for the development of a
Transportation Uniform Mitiqation Fee in Southwestern Riverside County
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Approve the Implementation Agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute the
agreement;
14.2 Appoint a Councilmember and alternate to the implementation Committee that will
be formed pursuant to the agreement.
Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record), advising that Councilman
Roberts has been engaged in this process for the past 11/2 years and, therefore, suggested that
Councilman Roberts be appointed to the Implementation Committee.
MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve the staff recommendation and to appoint
Councilman Roberts to the Implementation Committee and that Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero be
appointed as the alternate. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero and voice
vote reflected unanimous approval.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
No additional comments.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
R:\Minutes\102400
16
City Manager Nelson confirmed that the Community Clean-Up Day will be Saturday, November
4, 2000, noting that information regarding this event will be provided by way of a press release
as well as the City's Website.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
City Attorney Thorson advised that the City Council discussed two of the three potential litigation
matters; that only the item with respect to real estate negotiations with Kearny Real Estate
Company was discussed; that no repodable actions, under the Brown Act, were taken with
respect to these matters; and that the City Council adjourn this meeting to Wednesday, October
25, 2000, at 5:30 P.M. to discuss Closed Session items only.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:05 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Wednesday, October 25,
2000, at 5:30 P.M., in the Main Conference at City Hall, for the purpose to discuss Closed
Session Items only, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
tey Stone, Mayor
E.
R:\Minutes\102400
17