HomeMy WebLinkAbout012301 CC MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 23, 2001
The City Council convened in Closed Session at 6:30 P.M. and convened in a regular meeting
at 7:01 P.M., on Tuesday, January 23, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City
Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temeeula, California.
Present:
Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero
Absent:
PRELUDE MUSIC
Councilmember: None
The prelude music was provided by Aaron Breid.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Rabbi David Barnett of Congregation B'Nai Chaim of Murrieta.
ALLEGIANCE
The Flag Ceremony and salute to the Flag was led by Troop 148.
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Ron Packard Presentation
Having served this City and this Congressional District for the past 18 years, Mayor
Comerchero, on a personal note, relayed his pleasure of having had the opportunity to work
with Congressman Packard.
At this time, Mayor Comerchero presented Congressman Packard with a Certificate of
Appreciation and commented on Mr. Packard's last action to ensure the addition of specific
language in a Bill pertaining to funding for Murrieta Creek, saving the City approximately $20
million.
With appreciation, Congressman Packard accepted the Certificate and introduced his wife,
Jean, and thanked her for her support and assistance over the years. Mr. Packard relayed his
delight in having had the opportunity to serve with the City Council in the betterment of this
community, noting that the City has grown into a beautiful, prosperous, and wonderful place to
live.
Expressing his regret in seeing Congressman Packard retire, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts thanked
Mr. Packard for always having been there for the City.
R:\Minutes\012301
1
Press Enterprise Presentation to the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival (Inland
Empire's Readers' Choice Award of Favorite Festival)
Ms. Maria D'Avanzo, Advertising & Community Relations Manager of Southwest Riverside
County for the Press-Enterprise, informed the public that the Temecula Valley Balloon and
Wine Festival has been awarded the Readers' Choice Award for the Favorite Temecula
Community Event. Thanking the sponsors and volunteers, Ms. Carol Popejoy-Hime, General
Manager for the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival, expressed appreciation and noted
that this event would not be possible without the efforts of the sponsors and volunteers.
Proclamation to Van Avery Prep School for the receipt of the Bravo Award
Ms. Tina Naber and Angel Pena, co-principals at Van Avery and Kids World Preschool and
Elementary school, graciously accepted the proclamation and extended their appreciation for
the recognition.
Presentation of 10-year service pins to Mayor Pro Tern Ron Roberts, Planninq Commission
Chairman Ron Guerriero, and Former Community Services Commissioner Jeff Nimeshein
Mayor Comerchero presented each individual with a 10-year service pin. Mayor Pro Tem
Roberts advised that in January 1990 the Traffic Director Program was formed and that, at that
time, the City had half the population; had two overcrossings; had one lane traveling each way
with stop signs; and noted that the traffic was worse at that time; and that the City incorporated
in an effort to take control of the situation and has since accomplished many benefits with
regard to traffic.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A. Inviting the public to attend, Mr. David Rosenthal commented on the upcoming
Business-to-Business Expo on Friday, January 26, 2001, at the Pechanga facility, noting the
Expo is being hosted by the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Thanking and relaying appreciation to the three individuals who received their 10-year
service pins, Councilman Stone commended them for their years of public service, noting that the
City would not be the wondedul place that it is without their service.
B. Councilman Naggar reported on the Multi-Species Habitat Component of the Riverside
County Integrated Project, advising that a meeting has been scheduled for next week with
representatives from the cities of Lake Elsinore and Murrieta in an effort to address their concerns
with regard to this component and noting that he would report on the outcome of this meeting.
As members of the Electrical Needs Subcommittee, Councilman Naggar advised that Mayor
Comerchero and he had met with members from the Chamber of Commerce, representatives from
Southern California, and staff and noted that a number of measures will be implemented, including
the scheduling of a Community Workshop.
C. Councilman Pratt relayed his appreciation to Congressman Packard for his last action
with regard to the funding for Murrieta Creek.
R:\Minutes\012301
2
Reading his letter into the record (copies provided to the City Council), Councilman Pratt
clarified his stance with regard to growth, noting that he would not be desirous of stopping
growth but that he would be desirous of responsible growth. Mr. Pratt requested that the City
Council agendize for its February 13, 2001, meeting discussion of a Special Election, limiting
annual residential building permits to 450 residential units and that this remain in effect for a
minimum period of two years until acceptable traffic circulation/mitigation of convenient effective
local/urban public transportation system, financed with the Development Agreement of a
public/private partnership and adequate school funding to meet the increased school demands
are in place as determined by the citizens.
City Attorney Thorson advised that, as per the Brown Act, the City Council may make a
motion to agendize the matter for the next City Council meeting but that any discussions
regarding the matter must be brief.
MOTION: Councilman Pratt moved to agendize his request to the February 13, 2001, City
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar. (This motion ultimately
failed; see below.)
Councilman Naggar advised that reviewing the viability and feasibility of limiting the number of
building permits is currently an element of the City's Growth Management Plan.
With regard to Councilman Pratt's comments, Councilman Stone stated that although Mr. Pratt
may not be calling it growth control, in his opinion, that is what Councilman Pratt is trying to
accomplish; noted that the citizens will have the ability to vote in November for three City
Councilmembers; and relayed his opposition to such a motion because of the amenities quality
projects such as this one bring to the City such as new roads, parks, library, Police Station, and
infrastructure.
At this time, voice vote on the previously made motion reflected denial of the motion with
Councilmembers Pratt and Naggar supporting the motion and Councilmembers Roberts and
Stone and Mayor Comerchero voting in opposition of the motion.
Councilman Naggar requested that the matter we agendized to a future General Plan
Subcommittee meeting.
D. Having spent last week in Washington, D.C., at the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Mayor
Comerchero advised that the adoption of a rail policy for America was set as a chief legislative
priority for the year 2001, noting that a $10 billion measure will be introduced at the Senate
level.
Advising that the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) is working on establisliing a'freeway-
flyer system from the City of Temecula, Mr. Comerchero commented on resource problems to
accomplish this task, noting that other local organizations are being contacted as well as grant
funding is being explored in order to review transportation options.
For the benefit of the public, Mayor Comerchero advised that the Electrical Needs
Subcommittee has compiled a list of key legislators, along with fax numbers, to contact with
regard to the Energy Crisis.
R:\Minutes\012301
3
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
2 Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
3 Purchase of Compaq Proliant Server
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Authorize the purchase of a dual Compaq Proliant Server and Disk Storage Array
System from Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc., of Riverside, California, for the total
amount of $57,618.72.
4 Maintenance Facility Modification Project- Phase III - Project No. PW00-16
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1Reject all bids received August 29, 2000, for the Maintenance Facility Modifications
- Phase Ill - Project No. PW00-16;
4.2 Approve the revised Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the
Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Maintenance Facility
Modifications - Phase III - Project No. PW00-16.
5 Disadvantaqed Business Enterprise (DBE) Proqram
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:\Minutes\012301
4
6
RESOLUTION NO. 01-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1,
2000, TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE ELEMENTS OF TITLE 49,
PART 26, OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR)
ENTITLED PARTICIPATION BY DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISES IN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS AND DESIGNATING
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER AS THE
DBE LIAISON OFFICER AND AUTHORIZING THE DBE
LIAISON OFFICER TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL
OVERALL GOAL PERCENTAGE AND ADJUST SUCH
PERCENTAGE EACH FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR AS
NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ENSURE
COMPLIANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTING AND
MONITORING OF THE DBE PROGRAM
Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event in Old Town (Old
Town Front Street between Moreno Road and Second Street and other related streets)
7
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET
CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA ROD RUN 2001 EVENT AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT
FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT
(Councilman Stone abstained with regard to this item.)
Amendment to Annual A.qreements - CIP Proiects approved for FY 2000-2001
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
7.2
Approve Amendment No. 1 of the annual agreement with Kleinfelder, Inc., to
provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing services by extending the
agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by
$25,000;
Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with Converse Consultants to
provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing by extending the agreement
through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000;
7.3
Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with Kevin Cozad & Associates
to provide as needed survey services by extending the agreement through June 30,
2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000;
R:\Minutes\012301
5
7.4
7.5
Approve Amendment No.1 of the annua~ agreement with O'Malley Engineering
Corporation to provide as needed survey services by extending the agreement
through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000;
Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with Robert Shea Purdue Real
Estate Appraisal to provide as needed appraisal services extending the agreement
through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000;
7.6 Authorize the Mayor to execute these amendments.
Records Destruction Approval
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the
City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
9 Resolution of Support
(Requested by Mayor Comerchero)
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Adopt a resotution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 01-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA URGING STATE SUPPORT TO PRESERVE AND
EXTEND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE (ZEV) PROGRAMS
10 Letter of Support for Riverside County Transit A,qency (RTA) Grant Application
(Requested by Councilman Pratt)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Authorize the Mayor to sign a Letter of Support for the Riverside County Transit
Agency (RTA) to include in an upcoming application to receive grant funds for transit
planning.
(Pulled for separate discussion; see page 7.)
11 The 2000 General Plan Implementation Report
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION REPORT
R:\Minutes\012301
6
(Pulled for separate discussion; see page 7-8.)
12 Communitv Service Fundinq Pro.qram - Veterans of Foreiqn Wars
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Approve a reallocation of Community Services Funding to the Veterans of Foreign
Wars (VFW) in the amount of $5,000.
(Pulled for separate discussion; see page 8.)
MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 9 (Item Nos. 10,
11, and 12 were pulled for separate discussion.) The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who abstained
with regard to Item No. 6 (Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event).
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS CONSIDERED UNDER SEPARATE DISCUSSION
10 Letter of Support for Riverside County Transit Agency (RTA) Grant Application
(Requested by Councilman Pratt)
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Authorize the Mayor to sign a Letter of Support for the Riverside County Transit
Agency (RTA) to include in an upcoming application to receive grant funds for
transit planning.
Assistant City Manager O'Grady reviewed the staff report (of record).
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
11 The 2000 General Plan Implementation Report
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION REPORT
Advising that the General Plan Implementation Report is a statutory requirement, Deputy City
Manager Thornhill provided a brief overview of the staff report (as per agenda material).
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved to approve staff recommendation and adopt
Resolution No. 01-10. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote
reflected unanimous approval.
R:\Minutes\012301
7
12 Community Service Fundinq Pro.qram - Veterans of Foreign Wars
RECOMMENDATION:
12.2 Approve a reallocation of Community Services Funding to the Veterans of Foreign
Wars (VF~N) in the amount of $5,000.
Briefly reviewing the request, Mayor Comerchero reiterated his request, made at the January 9,
2001, City Council meeting, to reprogram the previously approved $5,000 grant to VFVV for
improvements to the current site because the organization will be vacating the site and,
therefore, suggested that the $5,000 grant be reallocated toward relocation expenses.
Mr. Tom Stultz, 32076 Corte Soledad, apprised the City Council of discussions that he will be
having with the Temecula Town Association in an effort to preserve a meeting site, in the City of
Temecula, for the Veterans. For Councilman Naggar, Mr. Stultz advised that the organizations
rent was raised from $150 a month to $990 plus water.
Mr. Armando Lopez, representing VFW, expressed his appreciation and thanked the City
Council for its support, not only for the monetary support, but as well for the inclusion in City
activities.
Mr. Tony Luna, 29000 Pujol Street, thanked the City Council for its support.
Appreciating the attendance of the Veterans and their families, Councilman Stone thanked the
Veterans for their years of service and requested that a $10,000 ($5,000 from Community
Service Funding and an additional $5,000 from next years Community Service Funding) be
allocated to the VFW.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to allocate a total of $10,000 ($5,000 from Community
Service Funding and an additional $5,000 from next years Community Service Funding) to the
VFW. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar. (This motion was ultimately
superseded by an amended motion.)
Concurring with Councilman Stone's suggestion, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts recommended the
formation of a subcommittee to review the matter and offered to serve on the subcommittee.
AMENDED MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to allocate $10,000 and to form a
subcommittee, comprised of Mayor Comerchero and Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, which would
make a recommendation to the City Council with regard to the use General Fund Reserves, as
necessary, in order to accommodate the Veterans' needs. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Councilman Naggar suggested that the subcommittee explore the use of CDBG monies.
Councilman Pratt recommended the continued involvement of Mr. Stultz.
At 7:54 P.M., Mayor Comerchero convened as the Community Services District and the
Redevelopment Agency and after a brief recess, reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:11
P.M.
R:\Minutes\012301
8
PUBLIC HEARING
13 Wolf Creek Specific Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-
0482) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTION OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH.
13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-
0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE WOLF
CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557
ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD,
BETWEEN LOMA LINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD
(FORMERLY FAIRVlEW AVENUE), AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-
180-001, -005, -006 AND -010, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS
AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT
13.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF
CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-
0481)
13.4 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-01
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING ZONING STANDARDS FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481)
R:\Minutes\012301
9
13.5 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-
0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE
SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH
CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE,
SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC
PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD,
BETWEEN LOMALINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -
033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010
13.6 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-02
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY
AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND S-P MURDY,
LLC" (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0029)
Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material); commented
on City Council's direction that staff work with the applicant in an effort to formulate a condition
relating to Level of Service (LOS) D on Pala Road and the interchange and the intersection
between Pala Road and the freeway which reads as follows:
Prior to the approval of Tentative Tract Maps for Planning Area Nos. 20, 21, 22,
23, and 24, inclusive, and while recognizing State Route 79 South (SR79S) and
Interstate 15 are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of California as
acknowledged in the General Plan, the City may consider the health, safety, and
general welfare of the residents of the City. The City may then authorize the
Director of Public Works of the City to make a reasonable determination based
upon traffic studies then conducted or authorized by the City that the Level of
Service for traffic at the intersection of:
o Interstate 15 Freeway Southbound ramps (north/south) and Highway 79
South (east/west) has fallen below Level of Service D;
o Interstate 15 Freeway Northbound ramps (nortWsouth) and Highway 79
South (east/west) has fallen below Level of Service D;
o Bedford Court and SR79S has fallen below Level of Service D;
o La Paz and SR79S has fallen below Level of Service D.
Such traffic studies shall be based on traffic generated only by (1) land uses of
projects that are currently existing as approved by the City or the County of
Riverside as of the date of the approval of this project and (2) traffic circulation
patterns existing as of the date of the approval of this project. The traffic studies
shall use (1) documentation of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the
project using the traffic analysis study area applicable to the project; and (2)
evaluate traffic conditions as applicable to the project using the current (now
existing) Temecula General Plan Traffic Model.
R:\Minutes\012301
lO
This action shall be taken after the City makes a finding that such condition
exists that is detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of
Temecula or its residents.
City Attorney Thorson as well noted that the City Council must reconcile the differences
between the Planning Commission and staff's suggested modifications to six of the
recommended conditions of approval.
With regard to the proposed condition pertaining to LOS D, City Attorney Thorson, for
Councilman Naggar, advised that the proposed condition would not empower the City anymore
than it currently is empowered; that the proposed condition would require that prior to the
developer obtaining the right to continue to build out, a traffic study would be required; that, at
this point, the City would evaluate the impact of the traffic upon the existing established
patterns; that if it were determined that the level of service has reached a level below LOS D
and findings have been made that it would be adverse to the health, safety, and general
welfare, further issuance of building permits could be prohibited until corrected for this project
along the corridor.
For Councilman Naggar, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that the proposed condition
differs from the condition proposed by the Planning Commission in that it requires a finding to
be made prior to the approval of the Tentative Tract Maps and that the requirement of Bedford
Court and La Paz have been included.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Deputy City Manager Thornhill confirmed that the
proposed LOS condition has been structured so that it would be based on existing land use
patterns in the General Plan and, therefore, the developer would not be subject to County-
induced changes.
Based on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Councilman Pratt relayed his opposition as it
relates to traffic circulation and noted that the LOS D condition would be a mute point since, in
his opinion, it could not be executed.
Deputy City Manager Thornhill confirmed that staff is confident that the proposed condition has
been structured in a manner to make it effective; that if there were any uncertainty with respect
to the Southwest Area, it would be within the County; that most changes that have occurred in
terms of land use, since the adoption of the City's General Plan, have been in the County and
not the City; that the County's continual approval of major land use changes have caused
changes in the cumulative traffic analysis; and that individuals are simply driving more than
they ever have.
Councilman Pratt relayed his opposition to Deputy City Manager Thornhill's comments.
Continuing with an overview of the project, Deputy City Manager Thornhill addressed the modifications
recommended by the Planning Commission, noting the following:
Augment the Mitigation Monitoring Program with the General Plan EIR mitigations
o That Condition No. 6 of the Specific Plan requires the applicant to comply with all
applicable mitigation measures contained in the adopted City of Temecula
General Plan; staff is of the opinion that there is sufficient language in the
condition of approval to assure compliance with these mitigation measures
R:\Minutes\012301
11
Specify only one option for narrower streets
o That it is important to have flexibility with respect to the street sections and that
Condition No. 15 of the Specific Plan addresses narrower streets
Require that the City hire an architect consultant to review the Planned Development
Overlay
o That the language in Condition No. 16 of the Specific Plan was changed to read
as follows: When courtyard homes are implemented, a Planned
Development Overlay (PDO) shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Planning Commission as opposed to a Planned Development Overlay;
that because design guidelines in the Specific Plan are sufficient and because
the Planning Commission and staff review the PDO, staff has concerns with
hiring an outside architect
· Delete the split garage option
o That staff would request flexibility with regard to this item
Require garages in lieu of carports in the multi-family senior housing projects
o That staff would request flexibility with regard to this item; that the project is a 10-
year build out project and that it would be difficult to determine, at this point in
time, what the market may dictate in the future
Require Product Review approval from the Planning Commission
o That the Development Code requires that product review is discussed at the
Director's hearing and that deviating from that process would require a change to
the Development Code.
Commenting on the Development Agreement (DA), Mr. Thornhill referenced Section 4.6 (Off-
site Improvement Funding) of the Agreement, noting that an exhibit would be attached to the DA
to clarify all improvements referenced in Section 4.6. Advising that he has received a letter of
concern from Pechanga with regard to the monitoring of cultural resources, Mr. Thornhill
advised that it would be staff's opinion as well as the developer's that a cultural resource
observer be on site at the time the property is graded and that a condition be imposed or that
the existing condition be enhanced.
Having as well reviewed the letter from Pechanga, City Attorney Thorson referenced the EIR,
page 35, Section 3.8 (Cultural Resources) and noted that no additional language would be
necessary, advising that those issues of concern would be addressed in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
Further addressing the project, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted the following:
R:\Minutes\012301
That the Fire Station will be comprised of 1.5 acres; land to be immediately dedicated to
the City by way of Grant Deed
That the developer will provide a $700,000 interest-free loan for the construction of the
Fire Station
That, as per the DA, the developer, if the permanent facility were not completed on time,
would pay for the fire vehicle, operation, and maintenance if an interim facility
That it would be staff's goal to have the Fire Station completed prior to the construction
of the 250th dwelling unit
That the option for narrower streets has been reentered into the DA
That the developer will be providing $200 per unit fee for public art/open space/and
habitat, noting that the City has not previously imposed such a condition on a developer
12
That based on the developer's participation in the Assessment District and the off-site
improvements, the project will not be subject to any additional Transportation Uniform
Mitigation FEE (TUMF)because the developer will be constructing facilities which would
have been included in the TUMF.
Community Services Director Parker confirmed that the Quimby value for this project would be
$3.6 million; advised that the parks, with the exception of the Sports Park, will be developed
through the park development impact fee credits and that the Sports Park will be developed by
the City, an expenditure which has already been budgeted in the ClP.
Councilman Naggar, in his opinion, stated that the prepared EIR was based on outdated
material such as the City's General Plan EIR as it relates to the service of electricity, noting that
changes have occurred with regard to this issue. Mr. Naggar requested the imposition of an
additional condition as follows: that no building permits be issued within a specified time (2 to 6
months) of a Stage 3 Alert being called, stating that he would not be able to approve 2,000
dwelling units without being certain that electricity could be provided to those units.
In response to Councilman Naggar, Planning Director Ubnoske advised that staff had consulted
Southern California Edison and that their reply was that power could be supplied to those units
and that no concerns were expressed; that the EIR for this project was not based on the City's
General Plan EIR; and that the project EIR was based on current information.
Viewing the electricity situation as a State problem, Councilman Stone stated that the pressure
should be on the State to enact new legislation to remedy the situation, not on the industrial
users of the State of California, commenting on the potential economic downfall of such action.
Mr. Naggar as well advised that residents have expressed concern to him with regard to school
funding and questioned where the children from this project will be attending school. Although
the developer will be paying a Development Impact Fee for the construction of schools, Mr.
Naggar noted that the fee would be supplemented by the State and expressed concern if State
funding were not available which would result in children attending schools out of their
neighborhoods which, in turn, would create additional traffic.
At this time, Mayor Comerchero invited public input.
Deferring his comments until after public input, Mr. William Griffith, applicant, representing
Spring Pacific Properties, advised that he was present.
Commenting on the amenities Wolf Creek would be providing to the City such as a sports park,
schools, and needed housing to accommodate the growing population, Ms. Margaret Whiston,
43166 Camino Casillas, addressed the lack of available senior housing throughout the City and
spoke in support of the project.
Mr. Joseph Terrazas, 31160 Lahontan, representing the Wolf Valley Homeowners Association,
relayed concerns with regard to density, traffic, and noise and requested that the sound wall be
constructed to Via Eduardo from Rainbow Canyon and that six lanes be constructed to Via
Eduardo.
Although voicing no opposition to development, economic development, or projects like Wolf
Creek, Mr. Robert Wheeler, 29090 Camino Alba, noted that such development depends on
when and where it is located. Concurring with Councilman Naggar's concerns relative to
electricity, water, and traffic, Mr. Wheeler stated that the electrical impact is cumulative.
R:\Minutes\012301
13
For Councilman Stone, City Attorney Thorson advised that because the developer will be paying
a mitigation fee for schools, the City has no legal mechanism to limit the number of dwelling
units tied to the function of an elementary/middle school within the particular Specific Plan; that
a Statewide mitigation fee was imposed several years ago for school facilities and, thereby, the
State eliminated the cities authority to impose mitigation requirements for schools; therefore, it
would not be a criteria to approve or disapprove this Plan based on those issues.
Addressing the project as it relates to school facilities, Mr. Jeff Okun, representing the Temecula
Valley Unified School District, Assistant Superintendent of Business Support Services of the
District, noted the following:
· That the site for the middle school has been graded with State funds and will continue to
be graded; that the grading contract has not been cancelled; that the School Board
cancelled the construction contracts because the District has not received State funding;
· That State funding for the construction of the elementary/middle schools has not been
guaranteed; that State allocation has been received for design and site studies;
· That the District has a Purchase Agreement; that the property is in escrow; that there are
three agreements on this particular piece of property - a Mitigation Agreement and two
Purchase Agreements (one for an elementary school and one for a middle school);
· That State funds are allocated quarterly. Mr. Okun briefly reviewed pending District
projects, as per State ratings, noting that the funding for a high school is the District's
highest priority;
· That the District has an agreement with the developer to pay $3.03 (Level 2 of State
funding) per square foot which would equate to $12 million, based on approximately
2,000 dwelling units, for this particular project prior to the sports complex;
· That the total cost, including acquisition of land, for the elementary school would be
approximately $9 million (land only approximately $2.1 million); that the total cost,
including acquisition of land, for the middle school would be approximately $20 million
(land only approximately $2.9 million);
· That the proposed project at approximately 2,000 dwelling units will generate
approximately 1,500 students; that the project will not fully fill a middle school or a high
school but would almost fill an elementary school;
· That the Trustees have entered into a Mitigation Agreement which reflects that this
project has mitigated its impacts.
Mr. Okun briefly reviewed alterative funding options available to the School District to ensure the
construction of schools, noting that if schools were not constructed, other schools sites would be
provided to the children of this project.
Addressing comments with regard to the project, Mr. Griffith advised that the middle school has
been graded and that escrow has been set up under the representation that the site was
approved and funding has as well been approved; that under the terms of the Purchase
Agreement (land acquisition only), the middle school site may close escrow without paying for
the site and payment would be dependent upon receipt of State funding for the site; that the
elementary school has a different timeline; that elementary school would be necessary to
service the needs of this project; and that the elementary school would be considered by way of
Community Facilities District (CFD) funding.
Mr. Okun noted that the CFD funding will assist in the funding of the construction of both
schools but that it would not cover the entire cost.
Although voicing no opposition to growth, Mr. Mark Broderick, 45501 Clubhouse, requested
more reasonable growth, noting that he would oppose the project as presented. Mr. Broderick
R:\Minutes\012301
14
stated that the proposed amenities would not outweigh the significant impacts (air quality and
traffic) to the community. With regard to traffic, he suggested that another traffic study be
completed. If the project were approved, Mr. Broderick recommended the following:
· That the lot size for Planning Area No. 6 (proposed 5,000 square foot lots) be increased
to 7,200 square foot lots in an effort to preserve and protect the property values of the
existing homes;
· That approving the highest allowable density zoned for the area in Planning Area No. 18
(Senior Housing) would be setting an undesirable precedent.
In response to Councilman Naggar who was of the opinion that the cumulative traffic impact has
not been properly addressed, Mr. Broderick noted his support of the imposition of a condition
that if LOS were to drop below D at the key intersection, no additional building permits would be
issued. Mr. Broderick as well noted that if lot coverage were addressed in a Design Review
Committee, he would be satisfied.
Having lived in the City of Temecula for the past 12 years, Ms. JoAnn Galuska, 31320 Via
Eduardo, noted that she would not concur with Mayor Pro Tem Roberts' comments that traffic
has gotten better over the years. Ms. Galuska relayed her opposition to the approval of this
project and encouraged the City Councilmembers to equally weigh both sides of the issues.
For Ms. Galuska, Councilman Stone advised that the project, as proposed, would actually be
less dense than allowable; that the property of discussion is heavily indebted to provide public
infrastructure not only for the proponent of this project but as well if the City were unsuccessful,
in the County areas, in inhibiting some of the growth, stating that the only way for individuals to
travel through this City will be by way of public improvements and noting that without
development the City will not obtain parks, streets, and .regional infrastructure. Mr. Stone noted
that the debt on the property would not permit half the density as proposed plus get all the
public improvements.
Submitting a letter of concern to the City Clerk, Ms. Pamelo Miod, 31995 Via Saltio, voiced her
opposition to this project because of key issues of concern, noting primarily the following:
Cumulative traffic impacts
· Suggested to prepare an update to the traffic study which does not consider new
cumulative impacts and recirculate for public review and comment
Air Quality
· Questioned how a sports park and bus turnout could be deemed as amenities
which are considered as overall benefits to the community and outweigh the
harn~ of air quality impacts.
Prior to approving this project, Ms. Miod requested that it be proven to the citizens of Temecula
that the City, as a result of this project, will not experience traffic gridlock on SR 79 South.
Since funding for the school has not yet been identified, she requested that this project not be
approved until those details have been resolved. Ms. Miod concurred with concerns expressed
relative to the electricity and power crisis and as well commented on her desire to preserve the
land between Redhawk and the proposed project, noting that this land would be key to
implementing the Trails Master Plan.
Advising that the City is attempting to prevent LOS F - a level which would create gridlock,
Mayor Comerchero noted that LOS D is an acceptable level.
R:\Minutes\012301
15
In response to Councilman Naggar's recommended condition to prohibit the issuance of building
permits if the level of service were to drop below D, Ms. Miod questioned on who would be
making such a determination and noted that some individuals would view LOS D as
unacceptable.
Applicant Rebuttal
In response to the public comments, Mr. Griffith relayed efforts that have been undertaken to
communicate with many individuals as it relates to this project and noted the following:
That the traffic study prepared for Wolf Creek has been thoroughly reviewed by
staff and has been augmented on several occasions
That the Circulation Plan reflects several points of access to be considered for
this area
That no overriding consideration is being requested for traffic, commenting the
two rigorous LOS conditions potentially being imposed
That two overriding considerations are being requested - one is a consideration
that the City considers in every instance in approving projects and the other is
loss of agriculture land; that both overriding considerations are covered in City's
General Plan and the project EIR
That Planning Area No. 6 (5,000 square foot lots) is separated by a 124'
drainage parkway and the right-of-way for Pala Road which requires 250' of
separation from those home which have a minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet
That the General Plan specifically provides senior housing at a permitted density
of 22 units per acre; that no exception is being requested; but that he would
recommend 25 units per acre, advising that at that level the City would reach the
State mandate
That the school elements of the project have been adequately addressed; that
the high school has been relocated, originally located on the property to the
Redhawk side; that the middle school was negotiated with the School District but
would not be required for a significant period of time (dependent on occupancy);
that at build out, half a middle school would be required; that the elementary
school will proceed on its own timeline (dependent on occupancy); that the
property for the elementary school has been agreed upon and escrow has been
set up
That as landowner a contribution of $1.2 million has been made to AD 159 with
an additional $10.5 million to be made
That viewing growth in the sense maturation, the area of discussion needs to
mature (schools, fire station, parks, shopping, etc.) in an effort to address
existing deficiencies; that not approving this project based on uncontrollable
issues (water, electricity, etc.) would as well put the addressed deficiencies at
risk
In closing, Mr. Griffith thanked staff, the citizens, the members of the Planning Commission, and
the members of the City Council for their time and interest in this project, advising that the time
and interest has helped define a better project.
In response to Councilman Naggar, Mr. Griffith stated that the appropriate time to verify the
level of service on Pala Road and Highway 79 would be at the Tentative Tract Map phase and
not at the issuance of building permits, noting that the Tentative Tract Map phase is subject to a
public hearing and a finding process under the EIR; that if the homes were built and it were
determined that the level of service were below D, individuals may have already bought homes.
R:\Minutes\012301
16
Mr. Griffith noted his concurrence with the revised condition pertaining to LOS D as suggested
by Deputy City Manager Thornhill.
Clarifying the Planning Commission condition with regard to LOS D and the condition being
proposed by staff with regard to LOS D, City Attorney Thorson advised that staff's proposed
condition limits the scope of the traffic study to the traffic circulation patterns and the land use
projects and approvals that are currently existing; that the traffic study would be limited to what
the EIR reviewed as it pertains to this project; that if traffic were to fall below LOS D, it would be
determined that there is a health, safety, and general welfare impact on the resident and the
Tentative Tract Map for this specific area would not be permitted to progress; that the condition
does not address the approval of maps or building permits for any areas other than the Wolf
Creek Specific Plan; and that with the approval of this condition, the City will have the protection
that Wolf Creek will develop and will have impacts that have already been identified.
Councilman Naggar reiterated that, in his opinion, the cumulative traffic impacts for this corridor
have not been properly addressed or studied.
Commenting on the draft form traffic study completed by Wilbur Smith, which Councilman
Naggar continues to reference, Mr. Griffith advised that this study was never circulated or
criticized; that the Wolf Creek traffic study has been developed per the approved Temecula
traffic model which is consistent with the Circulation Plan as identified within the General Plan;
and that the study has been reviewed by Public Works Director Hughes, City's traffic staff, and
has been updated on numerous occasions. Mr. Griffith reiterated his acceptance of the LOS
condition as proposed with the qualification that the same modification be applied to the LOS on
Pala Road prior to the Tentative Tract Map approval.
For Councilman Pratt, Mr. Griffith advised that, if approved, the first homes would be available
within 18 to 24 months; that at the time the Tentative Tract Map were approved, the traffic
conditions of the project would have to be reaffirmed; that the City's General Plan reflects a goal
to attain a LOS D and does not indicate denial of a project with a LOS of D. In an effort to
address Mr. Pratt's concern, Mr. Griffith advised that he as well as another developer would be
willing to participate in a public education process with regard to public transportation.
At this time, Mayor Comerchero closed the public hearing.
Reiterating his concerns, Councilman Naggar stated that the Wolf Creek EIR relies upon the
City's General Plan EIR which was completed in 1993; that the information is outdated and
unreliable; and that the cumulative impacts have not been properly addressed, expressing
concern with the impacts on the intersections in the area of discussion.
Viewing it as inappropriate and unfair, Mayor Comerchero stated that the City should not
request this developer nor any other developer to resolve all traffic impacts within the area of
discussion and that the City should assure that the developer be responsible for those impacts
created by this project.
Councilman Naggar noted that the completed EIR for AD 159 is as well outdated; that the AD
will not cover all ultimate funding for the corridor improvements; and that the City Council has
not received the materials necessary to proceed with due diligence. Mr. Naggar reiterated his
concern with regional traffic impacts.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to adjourn to 11:00 P.M. as a time certain. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Mayor Comerchero announced that the meeting would not proceed after 11:00 P.M.
R:\Minutes\012301
17
Commenting on the benefits this development will be contributing to this community,
Councilman Stone advised that the City's EIR, when completed, was based on population
densities far greater than what currently exists, noting that the City's originally approved
densities have been reduced by 8%; that this development will be paying the price to mitigate
the impacts it would impose upon the City; that the developer should not be held responsible to
mitigate more than his fair share; that it has been confirmed by Public Works Director Hughes
that if Pechanga were to create three times more traffic than projected, there would still be 25%
excess capacity along Pala Road; that the City Council should depend on staff expertise; and
that the proposed project is a quality project which adheres to the City's Growth Management
Plan and will provide public amenities the City would otherwise not be able to provide.
Concurring with Councilman Stone's comments, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts commented on the
benefits of the proposed infrastructure improvements.
For Councilman Pratt, City Attorney Thorson clarified that if the level of service at the corner of
Pala Road and Highway 79 South were to drop to LOS F at the time this development were
ready to sell homes, the City would have to determine the calculation of LOS F and if calculated
on currently existing approved projects by City/County and the traffic circulation patterns
existing as today, the developer would not be able to proceed with the Tentative Tract Maps. If
LOS F were created as a result of County projects and other analysis does not reflect it as F,
the developer may proceed.
Mr. Pratt reiterated his desire for public transportation.
For Councilman Naggar, City Attorney Thorson advised that if the LOS F were based on
existing land uses of projects currently existing and approved, the developer would not be
permitted to pull building permits,
Considering product review would not only pertain to this project but for the City overall, Mayor
Comerchero suggested that product review be agendized to a future City Council meeting and
that if changes were made, those changes would be applied to the Wolf Creek project.
At this time, a straw vote with regard to the condition for LOS D reflected unanimous approval.
Straw votes with re,qard to modifications recommended by the Planninq Commission -
reference pages 11 and 12
Auqment the Mitiqation Monitorinq Proqram with the General Plan EIR mitiqations
· Straw vote reflected unanimous approval with staff's recommendation
Specify only one option for narrower streets
· Straw vote reflected approval with staff's recommendation
Require that the City hire an architect consultant to review the Planned Development Overlay
· Straw vote reflected approval with staff's recommendation
Delete the split qaraqe option
· Straw vote reflected unanimous approval with staff's recommendation
R:\Minutes\012301
18
Requ re gara.qes in lieu of carports in the multi-family senior housinq projects
· Straw vote reflected unanimous approval with the Planning Commission
Require Product Review approval from the P annin.q Commission
· Straw vote reflected unanimous approval with staff's recommendation
With regard to Condition No. 74 (infrastructure Phase B), Mr. Griffith requested that A.
Circulation, Section iii, be amended as follows: Prior to the 1557th building permit, deleting the
words to the opening of the City Sports Park. City Council and staff voiced no opposition to
this request. With regard to Condition No. 75, Mr. Griffith requested that consideration of LOS D
be reviewed at the Tentative Tract Map Stage at the Planning Commission, amending the last
paragraph to read as follows: Regardless if a financing mechanism were established, no
Tentative Tract Maps will be approved that will result... City Council and staff voiced no
opposition to this request.
With regard to the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) condition, Mr. Griffith requested that
because MWD is not an approval agency, verbiage be amended to reflect coordination with
the District versus approval from the District. City Council and staff voiced no opposition.
City Attorney Thorson requested that each recommendation be separately considered.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.1 and to adopt Resolution
No. 01-11. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected
approval with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in opposition.
Mr. Griffith confirmed, for Councilman Naggar, that the proposed school sites will not be
developed as homes sites unless the School District were to choose to not acquire the property,
reiterating the previously noted agreements with the School District.
Councilman Naggar requested that a condition be imposed prohibiting the issuance of building
permits within six months of a Stage 3 Alert being called.
Because the electricity issue is not within the City's control and because such a condition has
not been imposed on other projects, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts relayed his opposition to such a
condition.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.2 and to adopt Resolution
No. 01-12. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected
approval with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in opposition.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.3 and to adopt Resolution
No. 01-13. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected
approval with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in opposition.
City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No.01-01 and read it by title only.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.4 and to introduce
Ordinance No. 01-01. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote
reflected approval with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in
opposition.
R:\Minutes\012301
19
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.5 and to adopt Resolution
No. 01-14. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in opposition.
City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 01-02 and read it by title only.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve recommendation 13.6 and to introduce
Ordinance No. 01-02. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote
reflected approval with the exception of Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt who voted in
opposition.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
14 Selection of City Council Committee Assiqnments
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City
Commissions and Committees and to the Pechanga Tribal Council:
· Community Services Commission
· Old Town Local Review Board
· Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee
· Planning Commission
· Public/Traffic Safety Commission
· PechangaTribal Council Liaison
14.2 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following external
committees:
· City of Murrieta Liaison (2 Members)
· County General Plan Update Committee- RCIP
· French Valley Airport Committee (2 Members)
· League of California Congress - Voting Delegates (Member and Alternate)
· Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee
· Murrieta Creek Advisory Board (Member and Alternate)
National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2001 Voting Delegate (Member and
Alternate)
· Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency
· Riverside County Transportation Commission (Member and Alternate)
· Riverside Transit Agency Representative (Member and Alternate)
· Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors
· Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/Traffic Committee (2 Members)
· Trails Master Plan Development Committee
· WRCOG Representative
· Senior Center Expansion Design Committee (Member and Alternate)
14.3 Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Advisory
Committees:
· City's General Plan Update Committee
· Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee
R:\Minutes\012301
20
14.4
· Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee
· Finance Committee
· Joint City Council/Temecula Valley Unified School District Committee
· Library Task Force
· Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory
Committee
Public Works/Facilities Committee
Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Council
Subcommittees:
· Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee
· Development Overlay Subcommittee
· Electrical Needs Ad Hoc Subcommittee
· Hotel Conference Center Ad Hoc Council Subcommittee
· Lennar Project Subcommittee
· Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
· SAF-T-NET Subcommittee (one Councilmember and one Public/Traffic Safety
Commissioner)
· Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee
· Via Cordoba Subcommittee
· Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee
· Water Park Subcommittee
· Wolf Creek Development Agreement Council Ad Hoc Committee
.MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to continue this item to the February 13, 2001, City
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
15 State Ballot Initiative
(Requested by Councilman Stone)
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Provide direction to the City Attorney and staff regarding drafting of a State Ballot
Initiative which would provide funding for public transportation projects.
MOTION: ' Councilman Stone moved to continue this item to the February 27, 2001, City
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
16 City Council Meetinq Adjournment Time
(Requested by Councilman Stone)
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Provide direction to staff whether to amend Ordinance No. 2.04.020 regarding the
time of adjournment for City Council meetings.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to continue this item to the February 13, 2001, City
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
R:\Minutes\012301
21
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
No comments.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
No comments.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:03 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, February 13, 2001,
at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTES¢:
// ~us~tn ~. Jon¢,s;-~MC I
[SE~IL] .
R:\Minutes\012301
22