The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About110993 CC AgendaAG;:NDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER -28816 PUJOL STREET NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 7:00 PM At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM CALL TO ORDER: Invocation Flag Salute ROLL CALL: EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:00 ' PM - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54956.9(b) to discuss ending litigation. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 93-19 Resolution: No. 93-87 Mayor J. Sal Mufioz presiding Pastor George Simmons, Temecula Valley House of Praise Councilmember Birdsall Birdsall, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Mufioz PUBLIC FORUM This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with an opportunity to discuss topics of interest with the Council. The members of the City Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak on any matter which is not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak' form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. · · ,: /~g~a~/11OII3 11/04/13 For all other agenda items a 'Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENTCALENDAR NOTICE TO THF PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar ere considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 2 Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of October 12, 1993. Resolution ADoroving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A /eerde/1 lOel,T 2 11/04/13 ~ 4 Citv Treasurer's Reoort 5 6 7 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of September 30, 1993. Council Meetino Holiday Schedule RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Direct staff to take the appropriate steps to notice cancellation of the meeting of December 28, 1993. Award of Contract for Bridoe and Street Imorovements on Liefer Road at Nicolas Road (Project No. PW 93-02) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Award a contract for the bridge and street improvements, Project No. PW93-02, to K.E. Patterson for ~ 167,475.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,747.50, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 6.3 Approve an advance from the Development Impact Fund of ~184,222.50 to the Capital Projects Fund. Award of Contract for the Purchase end Installation of a Pre-fabricated Concrete Bridge at Liefer Road Crossing (Project No. PW93-02) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Award a contract for the purchase and installation of pre-fabricated concrete bridge tees, Project No. PW93-02, to Spancrete of California for $20,650 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 7.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,065 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 7.3 Approve an advance from the Development Impact Fund of 822,715 to Capital Projects Fund. 11/04/11 8 McGruff Truck Program " RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve participation in the McGruff Truck decal program end participation in the City-wide McGruff safety program. Direct staff to prepare a letter of endorsement of the Temecula Community Partnership to serve as the umbrella organization end authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary application for participation. 9 Travel Policy (Continued from the meeting of 10~26/93) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Continue to the meeting of November 23, 1993. 10 Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Tract No. 21764 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Authorize the release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond for Sewer System Improvements in Tract No. 21764, and Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and release the Bond to the Surety. 11 Reduction in Bond Amounts in Tract No. 22627-F RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Authorize a fifty (50) percent reduction in street, and sewer and water system Faithful Performance Bond amounts; 11.2 Accept the Faithful Performance Bond Riders in the reduced amounts; 11.3 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and Surety. Aemdl/110NI3 4 11/04/13 12 Comoletion and Acceotance of Gradino. Pavin0 and Site Construction at the Temecula Senior Center - Proiect No. PW 9~-07 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Accept the Grading, Paving and Site Construction at the Temecula Senior Center, Project No. PW92-07, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10%' of the contract; Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 13 Contract Chanoe Orders No. :~7 throuoh No. 29 for Ynez Road Widening Project. PW 92-05. CFD 88-12 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve Contract Change Orders No. 27 through No. 29 for Ynez Road Widening Project, PW92-05 for labor and equipment for various items of work, in the amount of $9,371.25. 14 Rioht-of-Wav Weed Control Prooram for Fiscal Year 1993-94 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Award contract for Fiscal Year 1993-94 Right-of-Way Weed Control Program to Pestmaster Services, the lowest responsible bidder, for the sum of $29,250. 15 Used Oil Recvclino Block Grant Program RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE USED OIL RECYCLING FUND UNDER THE USED OIL RECYCLING ENHANCEMENT ACT FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL USED OIL COLLECTION PROGRAM /~erede/110193 i I 17 Pechanoa Casino Status Reoort (Continued from the meeting of 10/26/93) 16.1 Receive and file report. Membershio on Develooment Code Advisory Committee RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Re-appoint Dennis Chiniaeff to continue to serve on the Development Code Advisory Committee. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 18 Second Readinq of Public/Traffic Safety Commission Ordinance Amendment RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93-18 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 12.0 1 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 Consideration of Proposed Skateboard Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Receive report and provide direction to staff to prepare a skateboard ordinance. PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. .~eende/110ie3 6 11/04/13 ~ 20 21 Aooeal of Planning Commission Aooroval of Planning Aoolication No. 93-0158. Amendment No. I - Exoansion to the Existinn Temecula Valley Unified School District Facility in Two Phases RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0158, AMENDMENT NO. 1, AND APPROVING THE PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATELY SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PHASES ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES LOCATED AT 31350 RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 954-020-002 General Plan Adootion RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Review the Housing Element, remaining Clean-up Items, Environmental Impact Report, Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and direct staff to incorporate any changes into the final General Plan; 21.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA 21.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA : Agedd1101e3 lt/04~3 21,4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA 21.5 Adopt e resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA COUNCIL BUSINESS 22 23 Status Report on the Detailed Imolementation Strate(iv and Regional Air nualitv Programs RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Review the attached material and Direct staff to prepare specific implementation programs for the Council's consideration. Temecula Museum (Continued from the meeting of 10/26/93) RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Approve the modification and amendment of the City's land lease of Sam Hicks Monument Park with the Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation; 23.2 Appoint two members to serve on a Project Committee for the Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project; 23.3 Authorize City Staff to set a public hearing and prepare the agreements necessary to provide the Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation with $500,000 in Redevelopment funding to improve the existing church facility and construct a new museum facility. /~end~110ee3 8 11/04~3 24 Discussion of Chanaes in Planning Procedures and Public Notice Reauirements (Continued from the meeting of 10/26/93) 24.1 Provide direction to staff. · 25 Discussion of Widening of Margarita Road from La Serena to Rancho California Road (Oral Report - Placed on the agenda at the request of Mayor Mufioz) RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Direct staff to investigate reimbursement options. CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: November 23, 1993, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California TEMECULA COMMUNITY SFRVICFS DISTRICT MEETINn - (To be held at 8:00) CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PUBLIC COMMENT: CONSENT CALENDAR I Minutes President Patricia H. Birdsall DIRECTORS: Muftoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink 'Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name end address for the record. RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of October 12, 1993. DISTRICT BUSINESS 2 Design Services Contract - Rancho California Soorts Park Imorovement Project RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Award contract of $105,850 to J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. for the preparation of schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for the Rancho California Sports Park Improvement Project. 3 Design Services Contract - Sam Hicks Monument Park Imorovement Project RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award contract of $32,800 to the Alhambra Group for the preparation of schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project; 3.2 Transfer $32,800 from Development Impact Fees to the Capital Projects Account, which will be reimbursed with Redevelopment Funds subject to City Council approval following the required public hearing. AOende/110193 10 11,'04/l,I GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: November 23, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula' Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California /~6ende/1108193 1 ! "11/04/98 TEMFCUI A HFDFV~I OPMFNT AGENCY MEETIN~ CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PUBLIC COMMENT: AGENCY BUSINESS 1 Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberts, Stone, Parks Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name and address for the record. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of October 12, 1993; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: November 23, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California Aeenda/11099,1 12 11/04/13 ITEM NO. 1 ITEM NO. MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD OCTOBER 12, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order on Tuesday, October 12, 1993, 7:20 P.M., at the Temeculs Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor J. Sal Mufioz presiding. PRESENT: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsell, Perks, Robarts, Stone, Mufioz ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney Scott F. Field, City Clerk June S. Greek end Recording Secretary Gall Zigler. f:X;CUTIVI= SI:SSION A meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:45 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to adjourn to Executive Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to discuss pending litigation regarding Pechanga Tribal Council vs. the City of Temecula; City of Temecula vs. McDowell; Dawes vs. City of Temecule Redevelopment Agency and 54956.9(b). The motion was unanimously carried. The meeting was reconvened at 7:20 P.M. in regular session with all members present. City Attorney Scott Field advised the Council discussed real property negotiations concerning Donna Reeves, Honda of Temecula and the Bank of California property, Rancho core area, during executive session. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Assistant City Manager Herwood Edvalson. FLAG SALUTF Mayor Pro Tam Roberts led the flag salute. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS A Certificate Of Appreciation was presented to Community Services Commissioner William D. Hillin for serving on as a Commissioner for the past four years. The Certificate was accepted for Commissioner Hillin by his wife.- Mayor Mufioz proclaimed October 15, 16 and 17, 1993, "Help Retarded Children Days", sponsored by the Knights of Columbus local chapter. A "Tootsis Roll" drive will be sponsored CCMINIOI12/93 -I- 10/24/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 19, 1993 by the Knights of Columbus dudng these dates to raise funds for retarded children. The proclamation was accepted by John Dedovich on behalf of the Knights of Columbus. Mayor Mul~oz proclaimed the month of October, 1993 as "Domestic Violence Awareness" month. The proclamation was accepted by Beverly Speak and Karen Redfield on behalf of the local domestic violence office, Alternative to Domestic Violence. Peter Archulets, representing the Eastern Municipal Water District, provided the Council with an introduction to the Santa Margarita/San Luis Rey (SM/SLR) Watershed Agency and invited the City to become a member of this agency. Mr. Archuleta outlined the present agency members, the Mission Statement, organizational structure, SMISLR watershed and the JPA structure. Councilmember Parks asked staff to prepare a report and place this item on a future agenda for Council discussion. PUBIIC COMM;NT Howard Omdahl, 45850 Via Vaquero, Temecula, stated he supports the Old Town proposal by Zev Buffman and encouraged the City Council to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 5, the Memorandum of Understanding. Mr. Omdahl advised the Council the Southwest Museum is planning an expansion and is currently looking for a site having future tourist growth and an area that has extensive Indian culture to build a new museum. Mr. Omdahl said there is interest in the City of Temecula and asked the Council to put together a package encouraging the museum to move to Temecula. Pat Keller, 39201 Salines Drive, Temecula, advised the Council she is a member of the Transportation Now Coalition in Riverside. Ms. Keller asked the Council to nominate five or six individuals to serve on a task force committee to address transportation issues. Ms. Keller said she will be requesting that Murrieta appoint committee members also. Councilmember Parks suggested each Councilmember submit one name and the file of previous applicants to the Traffic Commission be used for referrals. Robert Scott, 30350 Santa Cecilia Drive, Temecula, informed the Council that the Temecula Valley Republicans Group will be sponsoring a candidates forum for the Temecula Valley School District Govenoring Board on October 21, 1993, 7:00 P.M. at the Temecula Community Center. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Birdsell advised she has received notification from the State Compensation Insurance Fund Office regarding impostere performing illegal workmen compensation audits on businesses. CCIdlN 10/12/93 -2- 10/24/93 CITY COUNr~II MINUTI:S OCTOBI;I 1 ~. 1993 Councilmember Birdsall asked staff to provide an advance schedule for the November and December meetings to allow for holiday scheduling. Councilmember Stone advised he artended a meeting on "Visual Terrorism" which he felt was very informative. Councilmember Stone said legislation should be going to the State Senate in the next month. CONSI:NT CAI FNDAR Mayor Pro Tern Roberrs removed Item Nos. 6, 10 and 11 from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Mayor Mufioz removed Item No. 5 from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Stone abstained from Consent Calendar Item No. 9. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Perks to approve Consent Calendar Items 1 - 4, 7 - 9, and 12, with Councilmember Stone abstaining from Item No. 9. The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Birdsall, Mut~oz None None Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinance and resolutions included in the agenda. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of September 14, 1993. CCMIN1 0112/93 4- 10/;4/98 CITY COUNCIL MINUTI:S 3. e ge Resol,~tion Aoorovinn Iist of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 OCTOBql 19, 1993 Adopt s resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93-82 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Annual Street Maintenance Contract - Re)ection of Bids RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 In accordance with the contract documents, reject all bids for the annual Street Maintenance Contract and direct staff to continue using the City's established purchasing procedures modified as attached to perform daily street maintenance. Award Contract to Pave Easement Access Roads and Repair P.C.C. Sidewalks st Via I obo Channel RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Award a contract for paving an access road and repairing P.C.C. sidewalk at Via Lobo Channel to Nelson Paving and Sealing, the lowest responsible bidder, for the sum of $19,930.00. Award Contract to Construct a Single Concrete Box Culvert at 28960 Ynez Road RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Award contract for construction of a single concrete box culvert located at 28960 Ynez Road to Monteleone Excavating, the lowest responsible bidder for the sum of $12,450. Award Contract to Install Three 36" x 40' CMP's at Two Locations of John Warner Road RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Award a contract for road grading and of installing three 36" x 40' CMP's at two locations on John Warner Road to Monteleone Excavating, the lowest responsible bidder for the sum of $22,950. CCMIN 10/12/93 -4- ¶ 0/24/93 CITY COUNtt-li MINUT;S OCTnn;R 1.~, 1993 10. Contract Amendment No. I for Professional Rentices Ind-stri*l Inc. for Materials Testing at the Community Recreation Center. Project No. 9~-0~9B Councilmember Stone Mid he discussed this issue with Community Sentices Director Shawn Nelson and understands the necessity of this amendment. Councilmember Stone suggested that in the future, staff should know the amount of inspections that are going to be required on a given project. Director Nelson advised there were a specific number of hours required for the testing sentices and staff feels these costs are justified. Steve Ford, 29000 Via Alturas, Temecule, project coordinator for the Community Recreation Center, explained the reason for the additional inspections was to assure the structural safety and integrity of the facility. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Robarts, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 10.1 Approve Contract Amendment No. I for additional material testing to Professional Services Industries, Inc. for the construction of the Community Recreation Center, Project No. 92-029B, in an amount not to exceed ~ 15,000. The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Mufioz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 11. Public/Traffic Safety Commission ADoointment Mayor Pro Tam Robarts asked the Council to support reducing the Commission to five members. Mayor Pro Tam Robarts said the Chairman has stated it is difficult to achieve a quorum with a seven member commission. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Robarts, seconded by Councilmember Parks to appoint Steve Sander end Charles Cos to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and to direct the City Clerk to place an Ordinance reducing the Public/Traffic Safety Commission to a five member committee on the next agenda. CCMIN 10/12/93 -6- 10/24/03 CITY COUNCIL MINUT~=S The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: SECOND READINt~ OF ORDINANC;S 12. OCTOBFR 1 ~. 1993 Birdsall, Mufloz None None Parks, Robert. s, Stone, Second Readin- of Ordinance No. 93-17. Reoealina Ordinance 93-13 (Walmart) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO.93-17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 Memorandum of Understanding Reaarding Develooment of Old Town Temecula into a Maior Destination Entertainment Facility. Zev Buffman expressed his support of the M.O.U. and told the Council he hopes the project will be successful. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs to approve staff recommendation as follows: 5.1 Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a "Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Development of Old Town Temecula into a Major Destination Entertainment Facility", The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Robarts, Stone, Mufioz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None CCMINIO/I 2/93 -6- 10f24/M CITY COUNCIl MINUTI:S 6. Adootion of Travel Policv OCTOB;~ 1 .~, 1993 Mayor Pro Tam Roberrs said he would like to see the language in the policy unchanged. Councilmember Stone agreed. Councilmember Peru said he is not opposed to the proposed change in policy language or the language as it is now written. Mayor Mufioz said he did not support taking the approval authority away from the City. Council for out of state travel. Finance Officer Mary Jane McLamey advised the policy includes, Councilmembers, Commissioners and employees. She agreed all out of state travel should be approved by the City Council. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsell to continue this item for to October 26, 1993, The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsell, Parks, Robarts, Stone, Mufioz NOES: ABSENT: PRESI:NTATION 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Temecula Volunteer Fire Department Captain Kurt Verhoff presented the City Council with a Certificate of Appreciation for their donation towards a new squad truck, which was made available for viewing during the recess. COUNCIL BUSINESS Mike Thesing, representing the Old Town Merchants Association, requested Agenda Item No. 16 be continued for two weeks. CCMIN10/12/93 -7- CITY COUNCIL MINUTFS OCTOBI~ 1 ~. 1993 It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue Item No. 16 to October 26, 1993. The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 Birdsell, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Mu~oz COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None RECESS Mayor Mufioz declared a recess at 8:50 P.M. The meeting reconvenad at 10:15 P.M. 15. Consideration of Temecula Valley Film Council Loan City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsell to authorize a $5,000 loan to the Temecula Valley Film Council and instruct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary lending documents. 13. The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mufioz None None Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Aooeal of Plannino Commission Denial of Tentative Tract Mao No. ~5338. Amendment No. 1 - A ~8 Unit Condominium Project on ~.56 acres - east of Maraarita Road end Solona Way Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Mayor Mu~oz opened the public hearing at 9:50 P.M. Leigh Waxman, 53 Edgar Court, Newbury Park, stated he is opposed to the Planning Commission denial of his request for an appeal. He said the project, not including the landscape plan, had been approved by the County. Mr. Waxman explained the reason for the delays were a result of the project being transferred from the County to the CCMINIO/12/93 -e- 10/24/92 CITY COUNCIL MINUTI:S OCTOB;q 1 ~. 1993 City where his files were misplaced within the City for saverel months. The economic conditions have added further delays to the project. Mr. Waxman stated all the grading is complete on the project. He said that he delivered the drawings for the grading to the City and they also were lost. Mr. Waxmen asked for time to get the project prepared for staff. Banning Director Gary Thornhill clarified the application was submitted to the County, however, it was never approved by the County. Mayor Pro Tem Robarts said he feels the request for an additional two years is unreasonable and he supports the Banning Commission action. He asked the applicant when he plans to start the project. Mr. Waxman asked the Council to give him one year and he should be able to complete the drawings in six (6) months. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Robarts, saconded by Councilmember Stone to extend the meeting from 10:00 P.M. to 10:30 P.M. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Mufioz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Director Thornhill said that the Rot Ban has expired and the applicant will have to apply for a new Rot Ban. Councilmember Stone asked Mr. Waxman if he could provide the necessary documents to start the application process in 90 days. Mr. Waxman asked for 120 days. Councilmember Stone asked legal council if the Council could mandate that if the documents are not provided in 120 days the project will be denied without prejudice. City Attorney Scott Field advised the Council they could permit the applicant 120 days to submit all documents required by staff and failure to do so will result in denial of the project without prejudice. If the documents are presented, the application will be re- submitted to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and the applicant shall pay all fees related to the public hearing. CCMIN1OI12/93 -9- 10/24/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUT;S OCTOB;R 19, 1993 14. 17. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Perks to approve a 120 day period to allow the applicant to submit all documents as required by staff. Failure to submit these documents will result in denial without prejudice. Further it was directed that upon timely submission of the documents, the matter will be re- submitted to the Planning Commission for Public Hearing and the applicant shall bear ell costs for additional noticing. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsell, Parks, Stone, Mufioz NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Robarts ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None City of Temecule P-eneral Plan. Imolementation Program. Environmental Imoact Report end Mitioetion Monitorino Procram Mayor Mufioz opened the public hearing at 10:15 P.M. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, October 26, 1993. The motion carried unanimously as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Consideration of Auto Mall Maroue Funding Birdsall, Mui~oz None None Parks, Robarts, Stone, City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report. Dan Atwood, Toyota of Temecula, 26631 Ynez Road, representing the Automobile Dealers Association, said the dealers support the agreement. Councilmember Stone asked for clarification on the use of RDA bonds. City Attorney Scott Field clarified that the RDA bond funds are to be used for public improvements. He said up to 10% of those funds could be used for industrial development, however the City intends to reserve the 10% for other purposes. CCMN1~12/93 -1~ IN24J92 CITY COUNCIl MINUTI:S OCTOBFR 1 ~. 1993 Mr. Atwood asked for clarification of what the City is paying for the funds and what the dealers will be required to pay in e few years. He said he is not concerned with the number of dealers participating. Mr. Atwond he is concerned that should the dealers not generate $46,000 in any one year, they be allowed to carry-over any negative amount to the following year and at the end of ten years, if they haven't paid the debt, the dealers would be assessed for the remaining total. Mayor Pro Tam Robarts clarified that the $46,000 was an average amount par year and the agreement calls for the new sales tax to be applied. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Perks to extend the meeting from 10:30 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks, Robarts, Stone, Mut~oz NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Mayor Mu~oz commended Councilmember Stone and Mayor Pro Tam Roberrs on their negotiations with the auto dealers, however he said he will not support the motion based on his belief that public funds should not be used to provide for amenities that a private entity should be required to pay for as a cost of doing business. Councilmember Parks stated he views this es an' investment in the future that represents a public/private partnership which will add value to the City's Redevelopment Agency tax increments. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve a loan in the amount of $280,000. to fund an Auto Mall Marque end directed staff to prepare the appropriate loan documents. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Robarts, Stone NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Muf~Oz ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER REPORT None CCMINI 0/12/93 -11 - 10/24/93 CITY COUNCIl MINUTES OCTOBI:R 19. 1993 CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Roberrs, seconded by Councilmember Stone to adjourn at 11:00 P.M. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula City Council will be held on Tuesday, October 26, 1993, 7:00 P.M. at the Temscula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Mayor J. Sal Muftoz June S. Greek, City Clerk CCMIN1OI12/93 -12- IO/24/93 ITEM NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMF_,CULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERIV~NE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $484,690.32. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 9th day of November, 1993. ATTEST: J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] Re~o~336 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 93- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 9th day of November, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 CO~CILlVIEIVIBERS: CO~CILIVm~ERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: lune S. Greek, City Clerk 336 2 10/21/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 10/28/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 11/09/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 10/2t/93 TOTAL PAYROLL: CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS $92,122.48 $45,824.69 $244,330.09 $102,413.06 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 11/09/93 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 100 190 191 192 193 210 250 280 /_.300 10 ,~20 330 340 GENERAL GAS TAX TCSD TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C CAPrTAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ (CIP) TCBD-CIP RDA-CIP SELF-INSURANCE VEHICLES INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS COPY CENTER FACILITIES PAYROLL: 001 100 190 191 193 300 320 330 GENERAL (PAYROLL) GAS TAX (PAYROLL) TCSD (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A (PAYROLL) TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C (PAYROLL) SELF-INSURANCE (PAYROLL) INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL) COPY CENTER (PAYROLL) TOTAL BY FUND: $20,675.51 $14,743.52 $9.87 $7,405.68 $125,822.27 $21,564.95 $23,970.30 $256.85 $536.70 $4,847.43 $2,568.47 $632.33 $63,088.66 $17,694.28 $16,239.73 $414.90 $1,692.62 $542.11 $1,206.26 $1,534.50 $464,6~0.32 $382,277.26 $102,413.O6 $484,690.32 ,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. VOUCHRE2 10/21/93 11:13 CiTY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 COIlUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191. TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193' TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL INPROVENENT PROJ FUND 300 INSURANCE FUl) 310 VEHICLES FUND 32O ]NFORNAT]ON SYSTENS 330 COPY CENTER FUND 340 FACILITIES TOTAL mT /,8,530.17 10,316.16 12,905.i'8 14,561.26 2,018.30 250.00 356.85 118.99 1,887.81 1,058.66 118.50 VOUCHRE2 1Q/-"~93 VOUCHER/ CHECK NLINBER 12391 203405 203405 203405 203~05 203405 203/*05 203/*05 203405 203405 203405 203405 203405 203405 203405 203405 203405 2,..-- ~,6 286~6 286/*46 286446 286446 286446 286446 286446 286/*46 286446 286446 286446 286446 286446 286~6 12395 12396 12397 12398 12399 12400 11:13 CHECK DATE 10/14/93 10/14/93 '10/14/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 VENDOR NtNBER 0010/,7 0010/,7 001183 000~ OOO~~. 0004~ 000/,44 000/~ 000/*4/* O00Z,~. 000444 000/.4~. 0004/~. 00044~ 000/*~ 0004~ O00Z~/* 0004/~ 0002~,4 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 '000283 000283 000283 000283 000102 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT BOAT TECH MARINE & SKI REPAIR CYCLES BOAT TECH MARINE & SKI REPAIR CYCLES CALIFORNIA REGIONAL MAT REVIEV MATER QUALITY DO FIRSTAX (EDD) 0004/,4 SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 000/*~ SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) O00A4A SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 000444 SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) O00Z~4 SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 000/~4 SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 0004/*~ SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 0004~P/* SOl FIRSTAX (EDD) 000444 STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) 0004~4 STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) 000/~44 STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) 000/~4 STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) O00Z~4 STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) O00Z~ STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) 000~/~ STATE FIRSTAX (EDD) 0004~4 STATE FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL FIRSTAX (]RS) 000283 FEDERAL FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL FIRSTAX (]RS) 00028] FEDERAL FIRSTAX (IRS) 00028] FEDERAL FIRSTAX CIRS) 00028] FEDERAL FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 HEDICARE FIRSTAX ([RS) 000283 MEDICARE FIRSTAX (ZRS) 000283 MED[CARE FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 NEDICARE FIRSTAX CIRS) 00028] MEDICARE FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE FIRSTAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE CHY IMP'EXP OETTLE, GREGORY RANDAZZO, LEONI SIGNATURE SHOt4 TEAN WHEELER, ViRGiNIA AMERICAN FENCE CONPANY REFUND/CHY ]MP-EXP OETTLE/REFUND RANDAZZO/REFUND SIGNATURE/REFUND WHEELER/REFUND TEMPORARY FENCE RENTAL 001-170-999-5214 001-170-999-5214 210-166-627-5802 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 001-199-4056 190-183-4982 190-183-~982 001-199-4056 001-199-4056 190-180-999-5238 203.25 436.84 250.00 /*92.37 153.80 173.08 6.82 26 2.81 20.18 21.98 2,409.63 720.43 483.93 19.05 25,56 56./.5 15.11 9,708.33 2,957.82 2,268.26 76.16 239.25 83.25 247.11 2,2/,1.67 638.03 569. 15.21 59.01 19.24 45.02 49.02 35.00 20.00 36.00 35.00 35.00 1/.5.00 PAGE I CHE~ 640.09 250. O0 4,67/e.59 19,311.36 35.00 20.00 36.00 35.00 35.00 145.00 VOUCHRE2 10/21/93 11:13 CiTY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECKREGISTER FOB ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR Nt. IeBER DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOtJNT NUHBER ITEM ANOIJNT CHECK 12601 10/21/93 000110 12601 10/21/93 000110 AHERICAN BUSINESS SYSTE AHERICAN BUSINESS SYSTE 12602 '10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12602 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12602 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12602 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12602 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12402 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12402 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS 12402 10/21/93 000122 BSN SPORTS NAINT. AGREEMENT 307AS6 1010L [/0; MAINTENANCE NSSHBSET SHUFFLEBOARD E WIX)I(500 50 PERSON FIRS RA&37XXX CHECKERS NAPC-1XX CARDS (POKER) NAPC-3XX CARDS (BRIDGE) 40_~.XXXX MONOPOLY FRE I GHT TAX :330-199-999-5217 330-199-999-5217 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 190-181-999-5301 650.00 165.00 396.00 96.00 26.00 29.90 31.90 53.60 63.12 ~8.92 595.00 7~ .26 12603 10/21/93 000131 CARL WARREN & CO. 12404 10/21/93 000155 DAVLIN LOSS 81171931CASTELLO VIDEO/AUDIO TAPE 300-199-999-5205 001-100-999-5250 102.50 701.67 102.50 701.67 12605 10/21/93 000160 12605 10/21/93 000160 12605 10/21/93 000160 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPtENT EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPENT EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPENT 3RD QTR UNEMPLOYNNT & T :SLID QTR UNEleLOYIIT & T 3RD QTR UNENPLOYIIT & T 001-2350 100-2350 190-2350 1,167.63 313.96 2,559.03 4,020.62 12406 10/21/93 000170 12406 10/21/93 000170 12406 10/21/93 000170 12406 10/21/93 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY FRANKLIN QUEST COHPANY FRANKLIN QUEST COHPANY FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY OPEN BINDER WITH 1.5" 3 HASTER FILLER ;t~38; 5.5 FREIGHT TAX 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 65.00 25.95 6.95 6.04 12607 10/21/93 000176 12607 10/21/93 000174 12407 10/21/93 000176 12607 10/21/93 000176 12407 10/21/93 000176 12407 10/21/93 000176 12607 10/21/93 000176 GET PAGED GET PAGED GET PAGED GET PAGED GET PAGED GET PAGED GET PAGED JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL JUNE PAGER RENTAL 190-180-999-5238 001-162-999-5238 320-199-999-5238 100-164-999-5238 001-170-999-5262 001-160-999-5250 100-164-999-5238 88.00 33.00 11.00 7.:34 18.33 7.33 55. O0 220.00 12608 10/21/93.000177 12408 10/21/93 000177 12408 10/21/93 000177 12408 10/21/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFF]CE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES NlSC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 001-160-999-5220 35 11.26 7.9~ 18.80 73.62 12409 10/21/93 00018~ GTE 12409 10/21/93 000184 GTE 909-699-2675/PW 909-699-8632 OCT 100-164-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 31.65 17.68 12610 10/21/93 000186 12410 10/21/93 000186 12610 10/21/93 000186 12410 10/21/93 000186 HANKS HARDMARE HANKS HARDMARE HANKS HARDWARE HANKS HARDWARE NISC. TOOLS & SUPPLIES NZSC, HAINT. SUPPLIES HASTER LOCKS #1 - KEY # TAX 100-164-999-5262 100-164-999-5218 100-164-999-5218 100-164-999-5218 262.82 10.30 192.30 16.90 660.32 12611 10/21/93 000192 12611 10/21/95 000192 12611 10/21/93 000192 12611 10/21/93 000192 12611 10/21/95 000192 GLOBAL COI4PUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE C2787 HP LASERJET IIISI CI(:,&l VERBATIM ~ DL90 C5789 PC SECURITY KIT FREIGHT TAX 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 361.97 73.95 27.95 17.19 35.20 VOUCHRE2 lo/,~9~ I/OUCHER/ CHEC, I~ NffER 12612 12612 12612 12612 12612 12612 12612 12613 lZ414 11:13 CHECK DATE 10/21/93 10/21/93 30/21/93 10/21/9~ 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 00019~ 000196 000196 0001~. 000194 0001~. 0001~ 000206 000214 VENDOR MANE ICMA RETIREHINT ZCHA RETIRERENT ICHA RETIRERENT ICI4A RETIREMENT ZCHA RETIREMENT ICMA RETZREMENT ICNA RETIREMENT KINKO'S COPIES LUNCH & STUFF CATERING CITY OF TERECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERZODS [TEN DESCRIPTION 000196 DEF CONP 00019/, DEF COle 000196 DEF CONP 000196 DEF CONP 00019/, DEF CONP 00019/, DEF CONP 000194 DEF CONP MISC. PRINTING SERVICES CiTY COUNCIL MEETING 12615 10/21/93 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 0002/,6 PER REDE 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000266 PER REDE 12615 10/21/93 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREM 0002/,6 PERS RET 12615 10/21/93 0002/~ PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 0002/,6 PERS RET 12615 10/21/93 O002~& PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 0002/,6 PER$ RET 12615 10/21/93 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 0002/,6 PERS RET 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS' RET 12615 10/21/93 0002/,6 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 0002/,6 PERS RET 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 0002/,6 PERS RET 1~5 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 0002/,6 PENS RET 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 SURVIVOR "..j 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 StJRVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 SURVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000266 SURVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000266 SURVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 SURVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 SURVIVOR 12615 10/21/93 000266 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 SURVIVOR 12416 12417 12417 12618 12618 000262 000320 000320 000325 000325 000326 000326 000326 000339 000376 000376 000376 000376 12419 12419 12419 12420 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 RANCHO WATER TOWN CENTER STATIONERS TOWN CENTER STATIONERS UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE VEST PUBLISHING COHPANY SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 12421 12421 12421 12421 8/13-9/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 000325 U~ 000325 UU 2 SETS OF UNIFORMS CLEA UNIFORM RENTAL FLOOR HAT SERVICES; CIT PUBLICATIONS OO/02/93 - 10/0&/93 OO/02/93 - 10/06/93 0~/08/93 - 10/0~/93 09/08/93-10/0~/93 ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2080 100-2080 1~0-2080 191-2080 193-2080 300-2080 330-2080 330-1~-~-5220 001-100-f~-5260 001-2130 100-2130 001-2~90 100-23~0 190-23~0 191-2~90 300-2~0 320-2390 ~0-~ 001-~ 100-~0 1~0-~0 191-3~0 300-~0 ]20-~ ]]0-~0 193-180-~-5260 1~0-180-~-5220 1~0-180-~-5220 001-2120 190-2120 100-164-~-5263 1~)-180-~-5243 340-1~-~-5250 001-120-~-5228 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 ITEM AHQUNT 1,601,35 564.15 696,96 34.08 41.06 25.36 5O.0O 6.26 80.00 107.35 107.35 10,960.61 2,6?5.38 2,329.21 ?5.7'7 27~. 16 96,20 232.35 2~6.59 50.24 12,56 12,0~ .62 1.44 .66 1.86 1,176.61 5.12 4.91 87. O0 17.50 - 23.00 33.10 34.50 88.81 35.31 140.61 233.26 57.43 PAGE 3 CHECK AI40tJNT 2,813.56 4.26 80.OO 17,167.93 1,176.41 10.0~ 104.50 90.60 88.81 10/21/93 0003?5 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-42O4/WE 001-110-999-5208 47.453 VOUCHRE2 10/21/93 VOUCHER/ CHECK NLXllER 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12422 12423 12423 12423 12424 12425 12426 12427 12428 12428 12429 12430 12430 12430 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 12431 11:13 CHECK DATE 10/21/93 10/21/93 J0/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/~3 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/~J 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/95 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 10/21/93 VENDOR NUMBER 0003~ 0003~ 0~3~ 0003~ 00~ 00~ 00~ 0003~ OO~ OO~ 000375 000389 OOO389 000389 000~18 0004,26 000656 000465 000467 000467 000475 000519 000519 000519 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 000537 VENDOR NA~E SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPIIOIt SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPIION SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON ,SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHOR SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHOM SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON ~OUTHERN CALIF TELEPHOR USCM/PEBSCO, (ORRA) USCH/PEBSCO, (ORRA) USCH/PEBSCO, ((iRA) RIVERSIDE COUNTY CLERK RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL POULTER, AMBER STRADLEY, KATHY TEHECULA VALLEY TAEKI3N TEMECULA VALLEY TAEIQ40N CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPHEN SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDi SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDZ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED! SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED[ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI CiTY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION 909-202-4751 909-202-4753 909-202-4754 909-202-47'55 909-202-4756 909-202-4757 909-202-4758 909-202-4160 909-202-4762 909-202-6763 909-202-676~ 909-202-4765 909-202-6769 ;~:)~-202-4770 rTS rBH rKH rVAN rTH rJG rRR rUNASS I GNED rRP rPB rBB rJS rDD 000389 PT RETIR 000389 PT RETIR 000389 PT RETIR N.O.D. FEE JANZTORIAL SUPPLIES 80X CONTRACT CLASS 80~ CONTRACT CLASS 80~ CONTRACT CLASS 80~ CONTACT CLASS RDA INSTITUTE/NOV. 1-3/ FIRST MONTH APPLICATION PEST CONTROL/NAY PEST CONTROL/OLD BUILD 8/31/93-09/30/93 08/51/93-09/50/93 08/31/93 - 0~/30/93 08/31/93 - 09/30/93 09/0 1/93 - 9/30/93 08/3 1193 - 0~/30/93 8/3 1/93 - 09/30/93 8/3 1/93 - O9/3O/93 8/31 / 93 - O9/3O/93 08/31/93 - 09/30/93 08/31/93 -09/30/93 08/31/93 -09/30/93 08/31/93-o9/)o/93 9/o1/93-9/3o/93 8/3 1/93 - o9/3o/9'~ ACCOUNT NUMBER 100-164-~-5208 190-180-999-5208 1~0-180-999-5208 1~0-180-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001 - 120-~-5208 001 - 1 O0 - 999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-100-9~-5208 001-100-999-5208 100-164-~-5208 100-164.-999-5208 001-100-999-5208 001 - 110-~-5208 001-2160 100-2160 190-21S0 001-161-999-5248 1~0-180-~-5212 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5:330 190-18~-999-5330 001-140-999-5261 190-181-999-5250 340-1W-~99-5212 340-1~-F~9-5212 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 ITEM 54.00 51.33 49.12 38.67 35.04 38.43 57.61 35.04 69.55 42.45 61.23 94.80 50.66 81.24 17.28 139.78 227.24 ~28.00 78.~4 187.20 224.00 224. O0 168.00 390.00 54.00 42.00 42.00 38.67 43.~4 19.61 20.08 8.76 37.48 40.54 60.67 43.21 42.26 62.39 42.80 43.21 9,403.0~ 37.~0 pAm: 6 CHECK AROUMT 8O6.80 384.30 928.00 ?.24. O0 392.00 390.00 138.00 VOUCHRE2 PAGE 5 10~93 11:13 CiTY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOG ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOG NUMBER DATE NLIqBER VENDOG NH ZTEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AHOUNT CHECK ANOUNT 12431 10/21/93 000537 12431 10/21/9~ 000537 12431 .10/21/933 000537 12431 '10/21/93 00053? 12431 10/21/93 00053? 12431 10/21/93 000537 12431 10/21/93 000537 12432 10/21/93 000558 SOUTHERN CALIFOGN]A EDI ,~LrI'HERN CALIFOGNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFOGNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFOGNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFOGNIA EDi SOUTHERN CAL/FOGNIA EDI SOUTHERN CALIFOGNIA EDI ADVANCED HO!iILECONI4 8/'51/93 - 9/30/93 8/3 1 / 93 - 9/30/93 8/3 1/9'5 - 09/30/93 09/16/93-09/30/93 08/31/93-09/30/93 8/31/93 - 09/30/93 8/31-9/30 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-9F~-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 I40NTHLY ELSINOGE BASE U 320-1~-;-520~ 37.19 128.84 32.46 3,660.25 40.90 34.~5 28.~6 315.00 13,8~7.16 315.00 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 HFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 12433 10/21/93 000727 NFPA 1993 NATIONAL FIRE ALAR 001-171-999-5228 AUTONATIC SPRINKLER SYS 001-171-999-5228 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION F 001-171-999-5228 KIRK'S FIRE INVESTIGAT[ 001'171'999'5228 FREIGHT 001-171-999-5228 TAX 001-171-999-5228 ANNUAL REVEgAL OF FIRE 001-171-999-5228 30,50 70.50 46.25 61.60 4.15 13.98 351.00 557.78 12434 10/21/93 000815 RCNLEY, CATHER[ME 80X CONTRACT CLASS 190-183-999-5330 12435 10/21/93 000860 JOCHUM, LORI 80/. CONTRACT CLASS 190-183-999-5330 10/21/93 0008?8 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB DRAU 001-1500 \ 12437 10/21/93 000886 KHALSA, ATNA KAUR 80X CONTRACT CLASS 190-183-999-5330 153.60 253.60 5,8??.54 201.60 153.60 253.60 5,877.54 201.60 12438 10/21/93 000946 DISCOUNT FEED & TACK DOG FOOD K-9 001-170-999-5327 80.78 12439 10/21/93 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY JOB ANNOUNCEHENT 001-150-999-5254 17.28 17.28 12440 10/21/93 000965 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CI OCT 27 MEETING/RR & SN 001-100-999-5258 40.00 40,00 12441 10/21/93 000978 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRO USER AGENCY FEES 001-171-999-5274 1,312.50 1,312.50 12442 10/21/93 000980 COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 12~42 10/21/93 000980 COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 21.55 137.86 159.41 12443 10/21/93 000992 RANONA TIRE TIRE SERVICES FOG CITY 310-164-999-5214 118.99 118.99 12444 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910024/DD 001-110-999-5258 124~ 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666~03910057/SN 190-180-999-5260 124~ 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 54i'5666~03910065/SN 001-100-999-5258 12~+4 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 547'~NS6~O39100T~/RP 001-100-999-5258 12444 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 547'5666403910081/RR 001-100-999-5258 12444 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - NATIONAL SENINARS/9/27/001-120-999-5261 12444 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - AIRFARE 001-120-999-5258 124~4 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910164/SN 001-100-999-5226 12~4 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 54i'5666~0391016~/St1 001-100-999-5260 124~ 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666~0391016~/SN 001-100-999-5258 124~ 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 547'~566~03910107/HE 001-110-999-5260 ~ 10/21/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910107/HE 001-110-999-5258 630.62 14.28 11.66- 332.29 169.49 129.19 133.00 33.33 11.10 500.00 14.37 503.80 VOUCHRE2 10/21/93 11:13 CiTY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR [TEN NtJMBER DATE NUIIER NNE DESCRIPTION 12444 10/21/93 QQ1QO2 FIRST iNTERSTATE RANK - 56/3~-f,f,&O3910107/HE 12444 10/21/93 O01002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5673666403910107/HE 12~5 10/21/93 001030 MINI'GRAPHIC STSTEMS, I MICROF]CHE 12/,45 10/21/93 001030 MINI'GRAPHiC STSTENS, I STORAGE BOXES 12~6 10/21/93 0010~7 BOAT TECH MARINE & SKI REPAIR CYCLES 12/~7 10/21/93 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE TRIM EUCALYPTUS TREES 124~8 10/21/93 001065 USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. COMP. 001065 12AA8 10/21/93 001065 USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. COle. 001065 12~8 10/21/93 001065 USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CORP. 001065 12A~8 10/21/93 O01065 USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. COle. 001065 12~,8 10/21/93 001065 USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. COMP. 001065 DEF COMP DEF COliP DEF CCl4P DEF COle DEF COMP 12~9 10/21/93 001122 SCOTCH PAINT CORPORATiO WHITE GLOSS 12650 10/21/93 001165 FIRE SAFETY SUPPLY CO. HELMET 12650 10/21/93 001165 FIRE SAFETY SUPPLY CO. TAX ACCOUNT NUllER 001-1170 001-150-999-5271 001-120-999-5250 001-120-999-5250 001-1iq)-999-5216 193-180-999-5615 001-2080 t00-2080 190-2080 300-2080 320-2080 100-166-999-5218 001-171-999-5242 001 - 171-999- 5262 12651 10/21/~j 001150 CARY O'BRIEN FENCING CO INSTALLATION OF APPROX. 100-164-~-5262 12652 10/21/93 001160 PACTEL CELLULAR-LA 6015202/TH 320-199-~-5208 12453 10/21/93 001182 ALEXANDER, DAVID 80~ CONTRACT CLASS 190-18~-t-5330 12454 10/21/93 001184 BREVELER], LORRE/THE A DEPOSZT ON SPONSOR PART 190-183-~-5370 12455 10/21/93 001185 CPRS DISTRICT XZ/RANCHO GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEET 1~0-180-~f~-5258 12456 10/21/93 001186 IRWIN, JOHN 80X CONTRACT CLASS 190-11G-~-5330 12457 10/21/93 001187 t~301)S, LESLIE RET%REMENT RECEPTION/RR 001-100-999-52&0 12458 10/21/93 001188 ASSOCIATION O~ AMERICAN POCKET GUIDES/HAZARDOUS 001-16~-999-5220 12459 10/21/93 001190 ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN & PUBLICATION 001-150-999-5228 TOTAL CHECKS iTEM ANOIJNT 4~3.20 980.99 338.98 596.07 73.28 150.00 3,179.69 267.98 256.32 3.47 312.50 7.60 6.98 990.00 &1.25 7{0.60 140.00 30.00 180.00 21.00 71. O0 36.95 PAGE 6 CHECK 3,90~.00 935.05 73.28 150.00 3,999.76 7.60 96.98 9~0.~00 Z$O .60 160.00 30. O0 18o.oo 21.00 71.00 92,122.48 VOUCHRE2 15:19 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERZOOS PAGE FUND 001 100 190 191 192 193 210 250 280 310 320 330 TITLE GENERAL FUND GAS TAX FUND COHHIJNITY SERVICES DiSTRiCT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C CAPITAL ZNPROVENENT PROJ FUND CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD REDEVELOPNENT AGENCY - CIP VEHICLES FUND INFORHATIOR SYSTEMS COPY CENTER FUND FACILITIES TOTAL AMOUNT 13,075.59 4,699.40 3,805.73 182.26 9.87 5,387.38 607.50 12,911.00 1,115.30 417.71 2,959.62 139.50 513.83 45,8~4.69 VOUCHRE2 10/28/93 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 15:19 CHECK DATE CiTY OF TENECULA VOUCHERICNECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER]ORS VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NLIIBER MANE DESCRIPTION NLNBER AMOUNT 12~61 10/21/9r5 001128 VOLUHE SERVICES CITY PICNIC 001-2172 12661 10/21/9] 001128 VOLUME SERVICES CITY PiCNiC 001-150-999-5265 12667 12668 12668 12469 12670 12670 126 70 12671 12671 12671 12672 12673 12676 12474 12476 12676 12676 12676 12476 12676 12676 12476 12676 12676 12675 12675 12675 12675 12675 12675 12675 12476 12677 I0/28/9] 10/28/9] 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 12478 000100 000100 000101 000106 000106 000106 000137 000137 000137 000165 000170 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000178 000178 000178 000178 000178 000178 000178 000184 00019] 000195 000216 124 79 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES HEALTH FEES REFUND/BUTT ALLIED BARRICADE CONPAN 50120 REPLACEMENT CUTTE ALLIED BARRICADE CONPAN TAX APPLE ONE RECEPTIONIST/IO/09/9] 001-2210 100-164-999-5218 100-16~-999-5218 001-160-999-5250 ALFAX LE 62 MobiLe TabLe T.V. 190-180-999-5262 ALFAX FREIGHT 190-180-999-5242 ALFAX TAX 190-180-999-5262 GAS/SEPT 1993 GAS/SEPT 1993 VEHICLE REPAIR CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. FEDERAL EXPRESS FEDERAL EXPRESS FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 1996 CALENDARS FOR STAF ENX82V-360V; OVERHEAD P TAX KF12KET600'1'3 FILE FOL ET PC~O0 - 10 - GY ETM1526E END POCKETS 3 TAX K6302 I,/ALNUT PLACQUE P272240 JIJHBO CLIPS 5348 NAILING ADDRESS LA B2SRI115BK BINDERS 11/ FC60163 UNIBALL PENS BL FC60144 UNIBALL PENS RE TAX GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENN]ES OFFICE PRODUCT GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 1fib DRAM (REPLACEMENT R GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 1MB SIHN (REPLACEMENT R GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO CREDIT FOR 256K RAN REM GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO TAX GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO VGA 168IT 2561( CARD GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO FREIGHT GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO TAX GTE 909-695-3564 SERVICE CONTRACTING QUI ICNA ASCON HASLER NAILING SY METER RENTAL LUNCH & STUFF CATERING COUNCIL flEETING 001-110-999-5262 001-170-999-5262 310-164-999-5216 001-162-999-5230 190-180-999-5220 360-199-999-5262 340-199-999-5262 001 - 120-999- 5220 001-120-999-5220 001 - 120- 999 - 5220 001 - 120-999- 5220 001 - 120-999-5220 001 - 120-999-5220 001 - 120-999-5220 001 - 120-999-5220 *001 - 120-999- 5220 DO1 - 120-999- 5220 001 - 120- 999-5220 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5208 001-160-999-5228 330-199-999-5239 001-100-999-5260 20~.00 10.17- 57.00 655.00 50.76 61.92 109.00 23.00 8.65 32.88 67.53 183.67 22.10 66.96 91.85 7.12 118.75 104.50 130.00 27.38 163.08 2.60 20.97 62.76 5.52 5.52 20,17 280.80 188.00 48.00- 32.61 ' 210.00 3.29 16.28 268.51 48.50 7.50 80.00 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOIJNT 19] .83 57.00 705.76 61.92 140.65 286.08 22.10 ~6.9~ 760.02 682.98 268.51 48.50 7.50 VOUCHRE2 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 124,80 12480 12681 12681 12481 12681 12481 12481 12481 12681 12681 12681 12681 12481 12481 12481 12681 12482 12682 12483 12484 1248~ 12485 12486 12486 12486 12486 12486 12486 12486 12486 12486 12687 12488 12488 12488 12689 12689 15:19 CHECK DATE 10/28/93 10/28/93 t0/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/9] 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 VENDOR NUMBER 000220 000220 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000269 000253 000253 000253 000253 000255 000262 000262 000266 000296 000294 000296 000296 000294 000296 000294 000294 000294 000302 000303 000303 000303 000305 000305 VENDOR NAME NAURICE PRINTERS gUICK NAURICE PRINTERS GUICK PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH POSTMASTER POSTMASTER POSTMASTER POSTMASTER PRO LOCK & KEY RANCHO gATER RANCHO gATER RIGHTgAY STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. STATE COMPENSATION INS. SYSTEM SOURCE SYSTEM 2/90 SYSTEM 2/90 SYSTEM 2/90 TARGET STORE TARGET STORE CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION RECOGNITION DIMMER COlel TAX CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CIT~ PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH TCSD PETTY CASH TCSO PETTY CASH TCSO PETTY CASH TCSD PETTY CASH EXPRESS MAIL/SEPT 93 EXPRESS MAIL/SEPT 93 EXPRESS MAIL/SEPT 93 EXPRESS MAIL/SEPT 93 LOCKSMITH SERVICES 8/26-9/21 8/26-9/21 RENT ON PORTABLE TOILET EXPER 11130 FOR MARCH EXPER NOD FOR MARCH EXPER NOD FOR MARCH EXPER NOD FOR MARCH EXPER NOD FOR MARCH EXPER NOD FOR MARCH EXPER t400 FOR MARCH EXPER MOO FOR MARCH EXPER MOO FOR MARCH rAPR fAPR fAPR /APR fAPR /APR /APR 'APR 'APR PANEL gALL MOUNT 63(8B; NAMEPLATE; gALL M FRE 1GHT TAX RECREATION SUPPLIES RECREATION SUPPLIES ACCOUNT NOMBER 001-100-999-5265 001-100-999-5265 001-163-999-5260 001 - 163-999-5220 320-199- 999- 5262 320-199-999-5221 001 - 160-999-5258 001 - 160-999-5258 001-161-999T5260 001-161-999-5220 001-100-999-52.58 100-164-999-5218 001-150-999-5220 190-181-999-5301 190-183-999-5320 190-180-999-5220 190-183-999-5370 001-161-999-5230 001-120-999-5Z30 001-150-999-5230 001-163-999-5230 190-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5260 190-180-999-5260 100-164-999- 5238 001-2370 100-2370 190-2370 191-2370 192-2370 193-2370 320-2370 330-2370 001-1182 340-199- 999- 5262 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-180-~-5301 190-181-999-5301 ITEM AMOIJNT 63.00 4.88 85.90 32.21 10.76 11.62 15.00 39.50 12.20 17.23 5.28 6.68 16.09 50.60 38.15 11.~5 18o~ 37.85 39.85 9.95 13.95 39.64 5,312.51 676.92 57.39 6,505.68 1,315.60 1,450.82 182.26 9.87 74.87 93.82 132.00 · 35.19 276.70 61.20 4.00 4.74 255.26 87.28 PAGE 2 CHECK AMI31JMT 67.88 3(~.61 101.60 39 5,987.63 57.39 7,799.91 276.70 69.96 342.56 10/28/93 000320 TCNN CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-163-999-5220 110.29 VOUCHRE2 10128193 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 12490 12691 12691 12492 12493 124~. 12695 12495 12695 12696 12497 12497 12498 124~ 12500 12500 12500 12500 12501 12501 12501 12502 12503 12504 12504 12504 12505 12505 12505 12505 12505 12505 12505 12506 15:19 CHECK DATE 10/28/93 ~0/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 000320 000322 000322 O00356 000358 000375 000~14 000414 000~14 000~26 O00576 000574 000576 000587 000592 000592 000592 000592 000596 000596 000596 000~03 000011 000638 000638 000638 000704 00070~ 000704 000704 000704 00070~ 000704 000765 M TONI CENTER STATIONERS UNIGLONE BUTTERFIELD TR UNIGLONE BUTTERFIELD TR RIVERSIDE COUNTY HEALTH DIXON, DAVID F. SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON LONGS DRUG STONE LONGS DRUG STONE LONGS DRUG STONE RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL SUPER TONER SUPER TONER MESA HONES MUNOZ, leARIO LAB SAFETY SUPPLY, INC. LAB SAFETY SUPPLY, INC. LAB SAFETY SUPPLY, INC. LAB SAFETY SUPPLY, INC. LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF CABLE & HIRELESS CONHUN CITY OF TEHEOULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION OFFICE SUPPLIES AIRFARE TO SAN FRAN/DD AIRFARE TO RONTEREY/DD VECTON CONTROL JULY'SEP LEAGUE/OCT 16-19/I)D 00~-202-6761 FILM PROCESSING FILM CREDIT NERO JANZTONZAL SUPPLIES HPII[ LASERJET CART TAX OVERPAYMENT ON GRADING SENION CENTER JARITON WA-12700 GRAY LENS - HA-9788 EYEHASH REPLACE FREIGHT TAX CC NEH LAW & ELECTIONS FINANCIAL MGMT SEMINAR LEGISLATIVE IMPLEM BRIE SEPT 16-OCT 15 TEXACO REFINING & NARKE FUEL/DD CALIFONNZA DEPARTMENT 0 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 0 CAL[FONNIA DEPARTMENT 0 3RD QTR 93 5RI FEES 3RD QTR 93 5111 FEES 3RD QTR 93 gll FEES SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, /NC,/INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, ]NC,/INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, INC,/INLAND OIL FUEL SKS, ]NC,/INLAND OIL FUEL AT & T - CELLULAR 619-987-1828 08/18-09/1 ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-180-999-5220 001-110-f99-5258 001-110-999-5Z58 001-162-999-5250 001-110-94~-5258 001-100-~-5208 100-180-999-5250 100-180-~-5250 190-180-999-5220 190-180-f99-5212 320-1~-;-5221 320-199-999-5221 001-2670 100-181-~-5250 100-164-~9-5262 100-164-94~-5262 100-1(~.-999-5262 100-164-~-5262 001-120-~-5258 001-110-~-5258 001-110-999-5258 320-1~-99~-5208 001-110-9f9-5263 001-2280 001-2200 001-162-422~ 190-180-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 100-164-~-5263 100-164-999-5263 001-110-~-5262 190-180-99~-5263 001-162-999-5263 001-160-999-5208 ITEM N4OUNT 141.00 179.00 101.60 539.43 137.21 21.00 21.00 21..%- 195.00 15.11 200.00 200.0O 75.50 28.00 7.90 .02 195.00 180.00 95.00 1,701.82 15.02 2,000.48 lZ3.4~" 82.27 68.56 3/,7.65 4/,6.29 22.36 92.32 68.08 11.23 PAGE 3 CHECK N~OUNT 165.19 320.00 101.60 539.63 137.21 20.~6 ~6.95 210.11 200.00 111.42 470.00 1,701.8~ 15.02 2,~5.30 1,127,53 11.23 VOUCHRE2 10//~'q3 VOUCHER/ CHECK Nt.I~BER 12507 12507 12507 12507 12507 12507 12508 12509 12509 12510 12510 12510 12510 12510 12510 12510 12510 12512 12513 12514 12515 12516 12516 12517 12518 12519 12519 12520 12521 12522 12522 12522 15:19 CHECK DATE 10/28/93 10/28/93 1.0/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10128193 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10128193 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 10/28/93 VENDOR NtliER 000820 000820 000820 000820 000820 000820 00087'5 000~03 OOO903 00O907 00O9O7 000907 000907 000907 000907 000907 000907 000927 000927 000927 000957 000980 000991 000~3 001002 001002 001030 001120 001122 001122 001130 001139 001140 001140 001140 VENDOR NAME WINCHAN:, KItIS WINCHAK, K:RIS WINCHAN:, KItIS WINCHAK, KRIS WINCHAN:, K:RIS WINCHAK, KRIS ROBERTS, RONALD H. MISPAGEL, DANIEL J. MISPAGEL, DANIEL J. TEHECULA CAR WASH TEMECULA CAR WASH TENECULA CAR WASH TEMECULA CAR WASH TEHECULA CAR WASH TEMECULA CAR MASH TEHECULA CAR MASH TEHECULA CAR WASH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY RESCtJE SOURCE, THE FREEDOM COFFEE, INC. FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, I ESOY, VITO P. JR. SCOTCH PAINT CORPORAT!O SCOTCH PAINT CORPORATIO MK BATTERY CHIP NORTON PHOTOGRAPHY HENBERGER CO. HENBERGER CO, HEHBERGER CO, CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION OCT. WORKHENS CONP PLAN CHECK LIEFER ROAD AT NICOLAS OVERFLOW ]MPROVEHENT & OVERFL{N ]NPROVEHENT & EXPERIENCE MOI)/BORK CON LEAGUE/OCT 16-19/RR CONSULTANT SERV]CES FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES OIL CHANGES/CAR MASHES OIL CHANGES/CAR WASHES OIL CHANGES/CAR MASHES OIL CHANGES/CAR WASHES INVOICE 560(S VOIDED OIL CHANGES/CAR MASHES OIL CHANGES/CAR WASHES OIL CHANGES/CAR MASHES PROFESSIONAL $ERVICES/J PROFESSIONAL SERV./JULY PROFESSIONAL $ERV,/AUG REIMB POSTAGE IRRIGATION HELMETS WHITEWATER ACCOUNT NLt!BER 001-1182 001-163-999-5249 210-166-627-5802 001-163-999-5249 001-1g-999-5249 001-1182 001-100-999-5258 280-199-999-5264 280-199-999-5264 310-110-999-5214 310-164-999-5214 310-162-999-5214 310-180-999-5214 310-162-999-5214 310-164-999-5214 310-162-999-5214 310-180-999-5214 250-190-129-5804 250-190-129-5804 250-190-129-5804 280-199-999-5264 190-180-999-5212 001-171-999-5242 COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HA 340-199-~-5250 54736664039100g~ SEPT/J 001-100-~-5220 547366640391012~ SEPT G 001-161-999-5260 CARD STOCK STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 5 GALLOR RECYCLE PAINT MISC. SUPPLIES FOR CLEA BATTERIES FOR CITY VEHI ART FESTIVAL POSTERS 50/,2 PORTABLE 5 GALLON FREIGHT TAX 001-120-999-5250 210-166-627-5802 100-16/,-999-5218 100-164-999-5218 310-180-999-5214 190-180-999-5301 100-164-999-5610 100-164-999-5610 100-164-999-5610 ]TEN AMOUNT 127.37- 1,075.00 337.50 212.50 175.00 35.19- 176.52 967.50 22.50 10.75 180.18 64.65 21.95 19.35- 29.53- 17.95- 21.95- 9,493.00 3,358.00 60.00 125.30 90.55 107.21 140.08 42.02 19.70 260.97 270.00 25.00 40.19 45.29 29.09 599.00 8.00 46.42 PAGE CHECK AMOUNT 1,6~7.44 176.52 990.00 188.75 12,911.00 125.30 90.55 107.21 140.08 61.72 260.97 270.00 65.19 45.29 29.09 653.42 VOUCHRE2 10128/93 15:19 VOIJCHER/ CHECK: CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NIJMBER DATE ~ER NAME 1252:3 10/28/93 001150 O'BRIEN, CARY 12526 10/28/93 001160 PACTEL CELLULAR-LA CiTY OF TBECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER[Cl)S ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER ADDITIONAL REPAIRS AND 100-1~4-999-5262 SD-1075255 09/13-10/11 001-160-999-5208 12525 10/28/93 0011~ LEAGUE OF CALIFORN]A CI SEHINAR/12/OT/93/JG 12526 10/28/93 001200 HPELRA 12527 10/28/93 001201 BUSINESS k/EEK 12528 10/28/93 001202 REGENTS U.C./CPER 12529 10/28/93 00120~ ECONOMIST, THE 12530 10/28/93 001205 MC DERHOTT, TIM K. 12531 10/28/93 001208 CRAFTSMEN 001-120-~9~-5258 SUPERVISORS LABOR RELAT 001-150-~-5228 SUBSCRIPTION POCKET GUIDES 30 ISSUES REIMB CSFNO t~EEKEND PLUMBING/SENIOR CTR 001-110-999-5228 001-150-999-5228 001-160-999-5228 001-160-;-5258 190-181-~99-5212 TOTAL CHECKS ITEM AllOtIT 121.37 104.00 25. O0 25.95 48.26 69.90 22~.30 305.00 PAGE 5 CHECK 990.~ 121.37 104.00 25.00 25.95 48.26 69.90 2~,30 305.00 VOUCHRE2 lo/,~ 16:22 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 COI/IJNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 210 .CAPITAL ]NPROVENENT PROJ FUND 250' CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 280 REDEVELOPI4ENT AGENCY - C]P ~'30 COPY CENTER FUND TOTAL AIIOUNT /,,755.08 77,7~6.98 3,964.00 124,964.77 8,653.95 22,855,00 1,390.31 2,r~,330.09 VOUCHRE2 10/28/9~ VOUCHER/ CHECK NUI4BER 12535 12535 12535 12536 12536 12537 12538 12539 12540 12541 16:22 C]TY OF TEHECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ]TEN DATE NU!49ER NN4E DESCRIPTION 11/09/93 11/09/93 13/09/93 11/09/93 11/09193 11/09/93 11109193 111O9193 11109193 000126 000126 000126 000135 000135 000217 000250 000238 000240 000332 11/09/93 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA NARGARITA OFF/C]ALS ASS HUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES FINAL TOUCH HARKETING ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI PRUNE AND LACE SEVEN TR REI4OVE DEAD PINE TREE ( PROVIDE ALL LABOR AND N SIGNS NEEDED FOR EMERGE TAX ADULT SOFTBALL GAHES, NEW CONTRACT FOR ASSESS HARKETING PROGRAH CONTR STRIPING/SCHOOL ZGNES SEPT 93 PLAN CHECKS 12542 11/09/9~ 000340 WHITE CAP BITS 12542 11109/9] 000~0 WHITE CAP TAX 12542 11/09/93 0003~0 WHITE CAP ELECTRICIANS TAPE 12542 11/09/93 000~40 WHITE CAP TOOLS 12542 11/09/93 0003~0 WHITE CAP TAX 12543 12543 12543 12544 12544 12545 000:$4,5 000:~5 000345 000481 000~81 000538 000883 00088~ 000884 000928 000948 000948 000979 001007 001007 001007 001007 001007 001007 12546 12546 12547 11/09/9] 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11109/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11109193 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI XEROX CORPORATION BILLI XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11/09/93 11109193 11109193 11/09/93 12548 12549 12549 12550 12551 12551 12551 12551 12551 12551 METER USAGE; 5100 COPIE 7032; ]RAGING TONER CAR TAX GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM GRAD]NG CONTROL/SENIOR GEOTECHN[CAL & ENVIRONM R.J. NOBLE COMPANY MONTELEONE EXCAVATING · INTELEONE EXCAVATING LARUE PAINTING LEKOS ELECTRIC, INC. NATIONWIDE SPORTS DISTR NATIONWIDE SPORTS DISTR DEL RIO ENTERPRISE NPG CORP. NPG CORP. NPG CORP. NPG CORP. NPG CORP. NPG CORP. FINAL GRADING REPORT RETENTION DUE YNEZ ROAD BOX CULVERT WORK OROER tle93-94-46 GRAFFITI RENOVAL SEPT. RETENTION DUE RENINGTOR HODEL 870, 12 SANE SPECS AS ABOVE WIT WORK ORDER 93-94-42 WORK ORDER d1~3-~-28 WORK ORDER dl~3-~4-32 ASPHALT OVERLAY WORK ORDER 1F73-~4-33 **EXTRA: REI4OVE AND REP il)RK ORDER 93-94-26 ACCOUNT NUNBER 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 100-164-~-52~ 1~0-183-~-5380 190-180-~-5370 280-199-~-5264 100-164-~-5410 001-162-~-5248 100-164-~-5242 100-164-~-5242 100-164-~-5242 100-164-~-5242 100-1(~.-~-5242 330-199-~-5239 330-1ff-~-5220 330-199-~<.,.~-5220 210-1~9-801-5804 210-1~9-801-5804 210-2035 1'00-164-~-5401 100-164-~-5402 100-164-~-5402 210-2035 001 - 170-~.-5242 001 - 170-~-5242 100-1~.-~-5402 100-164- ~- 5402 100-164-~<~- 5402 100-164-~-5402 100-164-~-5402 100-164.-~-5402 1 O0-164- ~- 5402 [TEN AI~OUNT 630.00 100.00 480.00 1,417.60 109.86 1,254.00 1,500.00 13,355.00 14,232.~4 2,580.:~ 2.66 1.21 1,108.01 85.87 97'5.31 387.00 30.00 2,521.90 900.00 64,564.99 12,450.00 9,292.00 1,120.00 10,778.00 1,58~.16 585.58 2,000.00 4,125.00 8,275.00 1,700.00 8,275.00 4,515.00 5,617.00 PAGE I CHECK ANOUNT 1,210.00 1,527.46 1,254.00 1,500.00 13,355.00 14,232.M~ 2,580.34 1,Z~08 1,]90.31 3,421.90 21,742.00 1,120.00 10,778.00 2,174.74 2,000.00 32,507.00 VOUCHRE2 1 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUNBER 12552 12552 12552 12552 12553 12554 12555 12555 12556 12557 12557 12558 16:22 CHECK DATE 11109193 11109193 1.1109193 11109193 11109193 11109193 11/09/9;5 11/09/93 11/09/95 11/0~/93 11/09/93 11 / 09/93 VENDOR NUlqBER 001014 001014 001014 001014 001116 001119 001124 001124 0011~ 001152 001152 001163 VENDOR NAME COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS PROPERTY N)VISORY CORSU HOUSTON PIPE CLEANING CUNNINGHAle-DAVIS CORP. CUNNINGHAN-DAVIS CORP. BORAL RESOURCES H & P UNDERGROUND, INC. H & P UNDERGROUND, INC. $POONERSWOODgORKS, INC CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION OF PRE-CAS CONSTRUCTION OF FOUNDAT SOLE PROPRIETOR TAX APPRAISAL OF DEALERSHIP HYDROgASH/~INCHESTER CR RETENT I ON/CRED I T RIVERTON PARK ENGINEER] RAINBCN CANYON RD 1800' CRC UNDERGOLIND UTILITIE RETENTION FABRICATE AND INSTALL K ACCOIJNT NUNBER 210-190-134.-5804. 210-199-801-5804 210-190-1:34.-580~ 210-190-134.-580~ 280-199-999-5264 100-164-999-54.01 210-2055 210-190-131-5804. 100-164-999-54.02 250-190-129-5801, 250-2035 210-199-801-5804 ITEH ANOUNT 3,537.60 1,333.~5 3,Z39.63- 274..16 9,500.00 1,936.00 4.,500.00' 4.5,000.00 1,450.00 9,626.50 972.55- 3,794.00 PAGE 2 CHECK ANOUNT 1,905.88 9,500.00 1,936.00 40,5 O0. O0 1,450.00 8,653.95 3,7~4..00 TOTAL CHECKS 2,r~.,330.0~ ITEM NO. 4- APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer DATE: November 23, 1993 SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 1993 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of September 30, 1993. DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio and receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with the Code Sections as of September 30, 1993. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 1993 2. Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1993 3. Schedule of Cash Receipts and Disbursements by Fund for the Month of September 1993 City of Temecula City Treasumr's Report As of September 30, 1993 Cash Activity for the Momh of September: Cash and Investments as of September 1, 1993 Cash Receipts Cash Disbursements Cash and Investmems as of September 30, 1993 41,098,833 3,373,717 (3,341,141) 41,131,409 Cash and Investments Portfolio: ,_Type of Investment Jtty Cash General Checking Benefit Demand Deposits Local Agency Investment Fund Deferred Compensation Fund Deferred Compensation Fund Defined Contribution Fund Trust Accounts-TCSD Bonds Trust Accounts-RDA Bonds City Hall First Interstate First Interstate State Treasurer ICMA PEBSCO PEBSCO Bank of America Bank of Amedca Yield 4.430% 2.738% 2.738% Balance 800 132,197 7,743 18,652,295 281,407 132,795 15,208 4,679,150 17,229,814 41,131,409 (1) (1) (1)-This amount is nat of outstanding checks. Per Government Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with the City of Temecula's investment policy and them are adequate funds available to meat budgeted and actual expenditures of the City of Temecuie for the next thirty days. Prepared by Tim McDermott, Senior Accountant am ,, C) C> ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY (~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council City Manager PREPARED BY: November 9, 1993 Council Meeting Holiday Schedule June S. Greek, City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to take the appropriate steps to notice cancellation of the meeting of December 28, 1993. BACKGROUND: At the request of Councilmember Birdsall, the matter of the Council meeting schedule during the holiday period has been reviewed. It is staff's recommendation that the regular meeting of November 23, 1993 and December 14, 1993 be held. The City Council also requested that staff work out a mutually convenient date to hold a joint meeting with the City Council of the City of Murrieta. The fifth Tuesday in November (November 30, 1993) is the date that seems to be best for both City Councils. As for the meeting of December 28, 1993, which falls between the Christmas and New Years holidays, it is staff recommendation that this meeting be canceled. JSG R:~emle.r;tt, Hdiday.eed 1 ITEM NO. APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer November 9, 1993 Award of Contract for the Bridge and Street Improvements on Liefer Road at Nicolas Road (Project No. PW93-02) PREPARED BY:/~/'/Raymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer - Land Development RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Award a contract for the bridge and street improvements, Project No. PW93-02, to K.E. Patterson for ~ 167,475.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract end; 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,747.50, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount and; 3. Approve an advance from the Development Impact Fund of $184,222.50 to the Capital Projects Fund. BACKGROUND: On September 14, 1993, the City Council approved the construction plans and specifications, and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. This includes construction of the foundation for a pre-fabricated bridge, channel improvements, and relocation of an existing 12" water main. The engineer's estimate for this project was $175,000. -1- pw15%agdrpt%93~l lO9~ow93-O2.a 1101 Ten (1 O) bids for the project were publicly opened on October 21, 1993. The bids received were as follows: 1. K.E. Patterson $167,475.00 2. Ronald L. Harris ~ 176,705.50 3. Nottson Construction i 196,048.60 4. Slater Inc. $202,975.50 5. Riverside Construction Co. $211,126.00 6. Commercial Contractors Inc. ~218,357.75 7. Paladin Construction $226,251.60 8. Joslen Construction $237,487.00 9. StimpeI-Wiebelhaus $239,486.00 10. Dobson Equipment ~275,008.35 The construction schedule is for sixty (60) working days, with work expected to begin in early November and be completed in early February, 1994. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs will be advanced by the Development Impact Fund. However, up to 93.75% of the project cost will be reimbursed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the State of California Office of Emergency Services per Damage Survey Report Number 97284. In addition~ Rancho California Water District has agreed to reimburse the City for the costs associated with the relocation of the water line. The remaining cost should be deferred to the proposed Zone R Assessment for Liefer Road from Liefer Road Bid in account number 210- 165-629-5804. -2- pwlS~egdrpt%93%11091pwS3-O2,e 1101 crrY OF TEMECULA, PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR PROJECT NO. PW 93-02 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 9th day of November, 1993, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as 'CITY', and K.E. Patterson Company, LTD, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1.8. CONTRACT DOCUMFNTR. The complete. Contract includes ell of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. law 93- 02 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND S s ,r.k: S IMPROVENIENTS, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Plans and Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans end Technical Specifications, City of Temecula Standard Drawings for public Works Construction and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW 9302 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 3055 Ovedand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the Plans and Specifications of this Contract. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over end be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. CONTRACT CA-1 pwOSt, oip~i;~rojeete%pwi3-O2~aontreot 8 Where the Plans or Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. The Contract Documents am complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by ell. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOP; OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility end transportation service. required for the following: PROJECT NO, PW 93-02 LIEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND ~ i I(u: i IMPROVEMENTS All of said work to be performed end materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted-by CITY. nlTY APPROVAl. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. CITY agrees to pay end CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: One Hundred Sixty Seven Thousand Few Htmdred Seventy rwe DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($167,475.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed sixty (60) working days, commencing with the date specified in the Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are 'approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMFNTS. On or about the thirtieth (30th) day of the month next following the commencement of the work, there shell be paid to the CONTRACTOR a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed since the commencement of the work. Thereafter, on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid such sum as will bring the payments each month up to ninety percent (90%) of the previous payments, provided that the CONTRACTOR submits his request for payment prior to the last day of each preceding month. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after CITY acceptance of the work and the CONTRACTOR filing a CONTRACT CA-2 pwOb'%d~%proje~te%pwg,l-O2~amntret one-year waftamy with the CITY on a waffanty form provided by the CITY. Payments shall be mode on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by 8 cart, feat, signed by the City Manager, stating that the work'for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. WARRANTY RFT;NTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY shell rat.in · portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: ~ONTRAr~I'AMOIJNT $25,000- $75,000 $75,000-$500,000 Over $500,000 RFTFNTItlN PERIOD RETFNTION PERCFNTA~F 180 days 3% 180 days 2% One Year 1% 10. Failure by the CONTRACTOR to take corrective action within twenty-four (24) hours after personal or telephonic notice by the CITY on items affecting use of facility, safety, or deficiencies will result in the CITY taking whatever corrective action it deems necessary. All costs resulting from such action by the CITY will be deducted from the retention. The amount of retention provided for her.in shall not be deemed a limitation upon the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR to carry out the terms of the Contract Documents. LInUIDATED DAMAnFS: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. Unless · shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract; the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAIl ING WAnI=S. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of par diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Coreract, from the CONTRACT CA4 pwO~eip~projee~%pd3-O2~mtumet 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Director of the Department of Industrial Relatiora. Then rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Cierk's office of TamscuM. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as · minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the proviions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as s penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid les~ than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. IIABILITY IN-qURANCF. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "1 am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." TIM; OF THF FRSI=NCF. Time is of the essence in this Contract. INnFMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and ell liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) end damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations harein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDFNT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by CITY for purposes of letting this Contract out to bid will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the CONTRACTOR to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. r-RATUITIFS. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with 8 view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFIICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that ha is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other puerperel of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been CONTRACT CA-4 pwOS~ip%projeete%l~wO3-O2~Netfaot 17. 18. 19. project. CONTRACTOR further waftants that no person in his/her employ hae been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. ~nNTRArrf'nR'S AFFInAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shah file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and parsons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that them am no claims outsanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be sat forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. RI~NATURF nF P-ONTRAr:rnR Coroorations: The signature must contain the name of the corporation, must be signed by the President and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, and the corporate saai must be affixed. Other parsons may sign for the corporation in lieu of the above if s certified copy of a resolution of the corporate board of directors so authorizing them to do so is on file in the City Clerk's office. Partnerships: The names of all persons comprising the parmership or co-partnership must be stated. The bid must be signed by all partners comprising the parmership unless proof in the form of a certified copy of · certificate of partnership acknowledging the signer to be a general partner is presented to the City Clerk, in which case the general partner may sign. Joint Ventures: Bids submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer. Individuals: Bids submitted by individuals must be signed by the bidder, unless an up-to-date power of attorney is on file in the City Clerk's office, in which case said parson may sign for the individual. The above rules also apply in the case of the use of a fictitious firm name. In addition, however, where the fictitious name is used, it must be so indicated in the signature. SUBSTITUTED SFCURITY. In accordance with Section 22300 of the Public Contracts Code, CONTRACTOR may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the CONTRACTOR, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the CITY or with a State or Faderally chartered bank or an escrow agent who shall pay such · monies to the CONTRACTOR upon notification by CITY of CONTRACTOR's satisfactory completion of the Coreract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shell be 8pproved by the City Attorney's office. CONTRACT CA-6 pwOS~ip~projem~pw93..O2~eonuaeT 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. RFSOI LITION OF nl AIMS. Any dispute or claim arising out of this Contract shall be arbitrated pursuant to Section 10240 of the California Public Contracts Code. NnTInF Tn t~-ITY nF I ARnR nlSPI ITFR. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND Rr~ORnR. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such pert thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection end audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. UTILITY 10CATION. CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. RI:e-IONAI NOTIFICATION CENTI=RS. CONTRACTOR agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2. TRFNCH PROTFCTION AND FXnAVATION. CONTRACTOR shell submit its detailed plan for worker protection during the excavation of trenches required by the scope of the work in accordance with Labor Code Section 6705. CONTRACTOR shell, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon as CONTRACTOR, or any of CONTRACTOR'e subcontractors, agents, or employees have knowledge and reporting is possible, of the discovery of any of the following conditions: i. The presence of any material that the CONTRACTOR believes is hazardous waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code; ii. Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated in the specifications; or III. Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract. Ce Pending a determination by the CITY of appropriate action to be taken, CONTRACTOR shall provide security measures (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent the hazardous waste or physical conditions from causing bodily injury to any person. CITY shall promptly investigate the reported conditions'. If CITY, through,' end in the exercise of its sole discretion, determines that the conditions do materially differ, or do involve hazardous waste, and will cause a decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work, then CITY shall issue a change order. de In the event of s dispute between CITY and CONTRACTOR as to whether the conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause · decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any pert CONTRACT CA-6 pwOS~ip~projeete~pwgl-O2~eoemeet 26. 27. 28. 29. of the work, CONTRACTOR shall not be excused from any scheduled completion date, end shall proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. CONTRACTOR shall retain any and all rights which pertain to the resolution of disputes and protests between the pertiM. INRPt:n'rlC)N. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY, Rancho California Water District, and the City's authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and ell other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shell be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shell be subject to final inspection end acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. nlR~-RIMINATIC)N. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. GOVI;RNIN~ I AW. This Contract end any dispute arising hereunder shall be govemed by the law of the State of California. WRITTEN NOTICI:. Any written notice required to be given in any pert of the Contract Documents shell be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, end to the CITY addressed as follows: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-7 pwOS~ip~~wt~.02~eeuet IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hareto have Mused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR By: Prim or type NAME Prim or type TITLE DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF TEMECULA By: J. Sal Mufioz, Mayor Scott F, Field. City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek. City Clerk CONTRACT CA-I pwOSiilmjeetalwl3-021m~m~t ITEM NO. 7 APPROVAl CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer November 9, 1993 Award of Contract for the Purchase end Installation of a Pre-fabricated Concrete Bridge at Liefar Road Crossing. (Project No. PW93-02) PREPARED BY: ~u~-/Raymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer - Land Development RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a contract for the purchase and installation of pre-fabricated concrete bridge tees, Project No. PW93-02, to Spancrete of California for $20,650 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract and; Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,065 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount and; e Approve an advance from the Development Impact Fund of $22,715 to the Capital Projects Fund. BACKGROUND: In October of 1993, the Public Works Department in conformance with the City's current purchasing procedures requested and received an informal bid from one (1) contractor for a pre-fabricated concrete bridge structure to be installed at Liefar Road Crossing in conjunction with the bridge and street improvements on Liefar Road at Nicolas Road (Project No. PW93-02). After a Staff level value-engineering review was performed analyzing design options it was determined that a precast bridge was the most efficient design solution for this crossing. The bid received is as follows: Spancrete of California $20,650.00 pwl 5~egdrpt%93%1109%epenorte.e 1101 Spancrete of California is the only supplier of this type of bridge structure. They have performed work in the past in the City of Temecula and their work was satisfactory. In addition, they can proceed with the work upon notification of Council award and completion of executed contract documents. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs will be advanced by the Development Impact Fund. However, up to 93.75% of the project cost will be reimbursed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the State of California Office of Emergency Services per Damage Survey Report Number 97284. The remaining cost should be deferred to the proposed Zone R Assessment for Liefer Road from Liefer Road Bid in account number 210-165-629-5804. pwl S~egdqat~93~1109~mpermrte,e 1101 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBI, I~ WORKS DEPARTllg~ FOR PROJECT NO. PW 93-02 LIEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 9th day of Novenbet, 1993. by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Sencrete of C'srle_,la, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1,e. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PIN 93- 02 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND S. ewj=. IMPROVEMENTS, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Plans and Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, City of Temecula Standard Drawings for public Works Construction and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW 93-02 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, end construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the Plans and Specifications of this Contract. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. CONTRACT CA- 1 pwOS~ip%projem~pwg3-02~ontram. PFB s Where the Plans or Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. The Contract Documents are complementary, and whet is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the installation of the pre-cast bridge tees for the following: PROJECT NO. PW 93-02 UEFER ROAD BRIDGE AND ~ ~ m~: ~ IMPROVEMENTS All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinsbove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAl. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished end work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCH;:DULF. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: Twenty Thousand Six Hundred Fifty DOLLARS and ZERO CENTS ($20,650.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in s period not to exceed five (5) working days, commencing with the date specified in the Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be epproved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMFNTS. On or about the thirtieth (30th) day of the month next following the commencement of the work, there shall be paid to the CONTRACTOR a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed since the commencement of the work. Thereafter, on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of. each successive month as the work progresses, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid such sum as will bring the payments each month up to ninety percent (90%) of the previous payments, provided that the CONTRACTOR submits his request for payment prior to the last day of each preceding month. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be CONTRACT CA-2 pwOb'~dp~4x'ojeats~owga-O2',,oofitreot. PFB e e 10. made sixty (60) days after CITY acceptance of the work and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year warranty with the CITY on a warranty form provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by · certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. LInUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One Thousand Dollars (~1,000.00) par day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract; the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WARES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of par diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shell post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less then the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. IIABILITY INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "1 am aware of the provision of Section' 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract.' CONTRACT CA-3 pwOE~p~rojeets~w93-O21ntre~t. Pli 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. TIMF OF THF FSSFNCF. Time is of the essence in this Contract. INDI:MNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of parsons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to proparty, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIRATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as 8 result of failure to make the necessary indepandent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by CITY for purposes of letting this Contract out to bid will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the CONTRACTOR to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. RRATUITIFS. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFIICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other puerparal of the Drawings and Spacificatione for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR Corporations: The signature must contain the name of the corporation, must be signed by the President and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, and the corporate seal must be affixed. Other parsons may sign for the corporation in lieu of the above if a certified copy of a resolution of the corporate board of directors so authorizing them to do so is on file in the City Clerk's office. CONTRACT CA-4 pwOS%dp%projeots~w93-O2%oontraet.Pf:B 18. 19. 20° 21. 22. 23. 24. Partnerships: The names of all parsons comprising the partnership or co-partnership must be stated. The bid must be signed by all partners comprising the partnership unless proof in the form of a certified copy of a certificate of partnership acknowledging the signer to be a general partner is presented to the City Clerk, in which case the general partner may sign. Joint Ventures: Bids submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer. Individuals: Bids submitted by individuals must be signed by the bidder, unless an up-to-date power of attorney is on file in the City Clerk's office, in which case said person may sign for the individual. The above rules also apply in the case of the use of s fictitious firm name. In addition, however, where the fictitious name is used, it must be so indicated in the signature. SUBSTITUTED SECURITY. In accordance with Section 22300 of the Public Contracts CoOs, CONTRACTOR may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expanse of the CONTRACTOR, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the CITY or with a State or Federally chartered bank or an escrow agent who shall pay such monies to the CONTRACTOR upon notification by CITY of CONTRACTOR's satisfactory completion of the Contract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shall be approved by the City Attorney's office. RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS. Any dispute or claim arising out of this Contract shall be arbitrated pursuant to Section 10240 of the California Public Contracts CoOs. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall' immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, end plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY.. UTILITY LOCATION. CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government CoOs Section 4215. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. CONTRACTOR agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2. TRFNCH PROTECTION AND EXCAVATION. CONTRACTOR shall submit its detailed plan for worker protection during the excavation of trenches required by the scope of the work in accordance with Labor Code Section 6705. CONTRACT CA-6 pwOS%oip~rojeete~ow93-O21~Httre~t.R 25. 26. 27. CONTRACTOR shell, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon as CONTRACTOR, or any of CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, agents, or employees have knowledge and reporting is possible, of the discovery of any of the following conditions: i. The presence of any matedHal that the CONTRACTOR believes is hazardous waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code; ii. Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated in the specifications; or iii. Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract. be Pending a determination by the CITY of appropriate action to be taken, CONTRACTOR shall provide security measures (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent the hazardous waste or physical conditions from causing bodily injury to any person. CITY shall promptly investigate the reported conditions. If CITY, through, and in the exercise of its sole discretion, determines that the conditions do materially differ, or do involve hazardous waste, and will cause a decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any pert of the work, then CITY shall issue a change order. d8 In the event of s dispute between CITY and CONTRACTOR as to whether the conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause a decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work, CONTRACTOR shall not be excused from any scheduled completion date, and shall proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. CONTRACTOR shall retain any and all rights which pertain to the resolution of disputes and protests between the parties. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY, Rancho California Water District, and the City's authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. GOVERNING I AW. This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by the law of the State of California. CONTRACT CA-6 pwOb'~oip~projeote~pw93-O2~ontreet. Fi:B 28, WRITTFN NOTIC;. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be parformed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Tim D. Seriet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR By: Prim or type NAME Print or type TITLE DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF TEMECULA By: - J. Sal Mufioz, Mayor Scott F. Field, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk CONTRACT CA4 pwOS~oip%projemx%pw93-02~ontreet. PIt ITEM NO. 8 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Chief of Police DATE: November 9, 1993 SUBJECT: McGruff Truck Program RECOMMENDATION: Approve participation in the McGruff Truck decal program and participation in the City-wide McGruff safety program. Direct staff to prepare a letter of endorsement for the Temecula Community Partnership to serve as the umbrella organization and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary application for participation. BACKGROUND: The Temecula Valley Unified School District is acting as the lead agency for a Community Partnership Demonstration Grant, funded by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP). The grant goal include the implementation, evaluation and dissemination of a model community prevention program; with a specific project objective for community committees to plan and implement prevention initiatives. The program provides a way for publicly-owned, regulated or franchised organizations, whose vehicles are identified by a company logo and have immediate direct access to two-way communication, to offer help in emergency situations to youth and community members. The National McGruff House Network screens each organization that applies to participate in the program and requires endorsement letters from agencies familiar with the organization's reputation in the community. McGruff Truck organizations are required to operate the program in accordance with the established standard requirements developed by the National McGruff House Network (NMHN). Making neighborhoods safer for children is the goal of the program which provides a way for participants to offer help in emergency situations to anyone, especially young people. The approval of the City's participation will include all public works, parks, police, fire and building and safety vehicles. These vehicles, which are equipped with two-way communication, will display the McGruff decal which contains an image of McGruff, the well-known Crime Dog. FISCAL IMPACT: None - funding is provided through the CSAP Grant. JSG R:~gende.r~t~IRcGruff 1 November 2, 1993 Executive Committee National McGruff Truck Program 1879 South Main Street, Suite 180 Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 Dear Committee: The following is a letter of endorsement for the Temecula Community Partnership to serve as the umbrella organization to implement the McGruff Truck Program in our community. The City of Temecula would like to have its police, fire and city vehicles participate in the program. The Temecula Community Partnership is a coalition of both pdvate and public organizations, within the Temecula community. joining in the effort to prevent alcohol and substance use by youth and the abuse of alcohol and other substances by adults. The Partnership which is made up of community members from law enforcement, city government. education, human services, health, and business is taking the lead in coordinating a city-wide McGruff Truck Program. The Partnership would serve as the contact agencyTn coordinating the training and connecting with the McGruff National Headquarters. As a local governmental agency, we are extremely interested in participating in this program. Sincerely, ITEM NO. 9 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Mary Jane McLarney Finance Officer November 9, 1993 Adoption of Travel Policy /x~PROV/~T. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Continue to the meeting of November 23, 1993, to allow staff time to develop requested information. swj ITEM NO. 10 APPROVAl CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER ' CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: ,,~ Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: November 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond in Tract No. 21764 PREPARED BY: ~ Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council AUTHORIZE the release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond for Sewer System Improvements in Tract No. 21764, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and release the Bond to the Surety. BACKGROUND: On December 6, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision agreements with: Warmington Homes 119 N. Maple Street, Suite M Corona, CA 91720 for the installation of sewer system, end subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by: Developers Insurance Company as follows: Bond No. 960239S in the amount of $51,000.00 to cover sewer improvements. Bond No. 960239S in the amount of $25,500.00 to cover material and labor. Bond No. 960240S in the amount of $8,100.00 to cover subdivision monumentation. On August 11, 1992, the City Council accepted the Sewer System Improvements and the Subdivision Monumentation, and accepted the Faithful Performance Warranty Rider in the -1- pwO1%agdrpt%93%1109%tr21764.rd amount of ~5,100 (Ten percent of the Faithful Performance Bond amount) end a subdivision agreement rider thereby initiating the one-year warranty period. Material and Labor Bonds posted to ensure payment to suppliers and workers were authorized for release by the City Council on March 13, 1993. The one-year warranty period has run with minimal or no maintenance required. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Faithful Performance Warranty Bond, which assures that any required repairs/replacement of deficient improvements are made, be released. Street and Water system improvements are secured as a portion of faithful and performance and material and labor bond amounts for Tract No. 20881. Those several bonds will be reduced/released when all required improvements in Tract No. 20881 are completed and accepted by City Council. The affected streets are a portion of Del Rey Road and Calls Pit~a Colada. Attachment: Vicinity Mal~ -2- pwO 1%agdfpt%93% 1109%tr21764.rel Project TRACT NO. 1.p, Ac.r t,,'~ ,.~z~~s lb TO Sin Da9o VICINITY MAP ITEM NO. I 1 TO: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. $erlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer November 9, 1993 Authorize Reduction in Bond Amounts in Tract No. 22627-F Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council AUTHORIZE a fifty (50) percent reduction in street, and sewer and water system Faithful Performance Bond amounts; ACCEPT the Faithful Performance Bond Riders in the reduced amounts; and DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and Surety. BACKGROUND: On March 26, 1991, the City Council epproved Final Tract Map No. 22627-F. Agreements and Faithful Performance end Material Labor Bonds were filed by: Van Daele Development Corporation 2900 Adams Street, St·. C-25 Riverside, CA 92504 for the installation of street improvements, sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued in the following amounts by: Golden Eagle Insurance Company Bond No. SUR 12 71 16 in the amount of $539,500.00 to cover street improvements. Bond No. SUR 12 71 improvements. Bond No. SUR 12 71 improvements. 17 in the amount of $78,000.00 to cover water system 18 in the amount of $70,500.00 to cover sewer system -1 - pw01%agdrpt~93~1109~22627 Bond No. SUR 12 71 19 in the amount of $40,000.00 to cover subdivision monumentation. e Bonds No. SUR 12 71 16, SUR 12 71 17, end SUR 12 71 18 in the amounts of $269,750.00, $39,000.00, and $35,250.00 respectively to cover materials and labor. The subdivider seeks a reduction in Faithful Performance Bond amounts. There are several issues to be worked out with the developer that currently preclude Staff recommending acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council at this time· The terms of the Subdivision Agreement for this tract permit reductions in bond amounts at only two points: am · When between 25% and 50% of the contractual work has been satisfactorily completed, and When the project is complete and ready for City Council acceptance of the improvements. In the subject instance the developer has virtually completed the contractual work subject only to resolution of issues dealing with acceptance of numerous homeowner-modified street improvements, and a policy determination. Therefore the subdivider is submitting riders to the Faithful Performance Bonds under the term of the agreement, which permits reduction of the subject bonds by a maximum of 50%, to the following amounts: Streets Water System Sewer System Total = $269,750.00 $ 39,000.00 $ 35.250.00 $344,000.00 Staff will recommend acceptance of improvements, reduction to the 10% Faithful Performance warranty amounts, and initiation of the warranty period upon resolution of the policy issue dealing with buyer-modified street improvements. The Monumentation security will remain in place until the Survey Monumentation is completed and approved. The Material and Labor Bonds will remain in place until the City Council accepts the public improvements and initiates the one-year warranty period, the statutory period for filing liens for material and labor claims has run, Staff recommends release, and the City Council authorizes release of these bonds/securities as well. The affected streets include Silver Ridge Court, and a portion of Sierra Madre Drive and Cross Creek Court. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Faithful Performance Bond Rider -2- pwO 1 ~agdrpt~93~ 1109~22627 1:'.11. 214,70-1 I-8 PROJECT TRACT NO. 22627' SEC. 49, T73, R2W, S.i~B.M. VICINITY MAP No 5CAL~ · ITEM NO. -12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer November 9, 1993 Completion and Acceptance of Grading, Paving & Site Construction at the Temecula Senior Center - Project No. PW92-07 PREPARED BY: ~ Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the Grading, Paving & Site Construction at the Temecula Senior Center, Project No. PW92-07, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract, and e Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On November 10, 1992, the City Council awarded and authorized a contract for the grading, paving & site construction at the Temecula Senior Center, Project No. PW92-07, to IoP.S. Services, Inc. Improvements to the site included grading and the installation of a decorative retaining wall, an asphalt parking lot with lighting, curb and gutter, and a stamped concrete drive entrance. The contractor completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released thirty-five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded.. pw 131agdrpt%93%1109%pw92-O7.ecc 1028 FISCAL IMPACT: ~" The contract amount for this project was ~311,892.00 with e contingency of ~31,189.20. Contract Change Order Nos. 01 through 06 were approved in the amount of $28,156.25 for s total project cost of ~340,048.25, which was within the 8343,081 .20 authorized for the construction contract and 10% contingency. Attachment: Notice of Completion pw 13%egdq)t%93%1109~pw92-07 .ecc 1028 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. e The full address of the City of Temecula is 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. e A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to: I.P.S. SERVICES, INC. to perform the following work of improvement: Grading, Paving & Site Construction at the Temecula Senior Center - Project No. FW92-07 e Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on NOVEMBER 9, 1993. That upon said contract the VIGILANT INSURANCE COMPANY was surety for the bond given by said company as required by law. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: PARCEL 3 of PARCEL MAP NO. 24038. 6. The street address of said property is: 41845 SIXTH STREET, TEMECULA. Dated at Temecula, California, this day of · 1993. JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk pw13%agdrpt%93%1109%pw92-O7.e~c 1028 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) ss I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia and do hereby certify under penalty of pedury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this day of · 1993. JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk pw13%agdrpt%93%1109~ow92-O7.aoc 1028 ITEM NO. !3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer November 9, 1993 Contract Change Orders No. 27 through No. 29 for Ynez Road Widening Project, PW92-05, CFD 88-12 PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Contract Change Order No. 27 through No. 29 for Ynez Road Widening Project, PW92-05 for labor and equipment for various items of work, in the amount of ~9,371.25. BACKGROUND: During the construction of the Ynez Road Widening Project the following items of work have resulted in a change to the contract: CHANGE ORDER NO. 27 The contractor was required to relocate the existing parking lot lighting for the adjacent auto dealerships. During the light standard relocation phase of the project, the contractor discovered that new underground electrical conduits and wiring would need to be installed for the lighting system. SUBTOTAL (Estimate): $3,180.00 CHANGE ORDER NO. 28 When the contractor relocated the curb and gutter on the north west and north east corners of Ynez Road and Motor Car Parkway, four of the existing traffic signal poles were vertically displaced from the new curb and gutter. The traffic signal pole foundations are required to be removed and re-constructed at the ultimate grade. SUBTOTAL: $4,134.00 pwl 5%agdrpt%93%1109%pw92-05 110193 CHANGr ORD;R NO. ~9 · To eliminate the potential left turn movements into and out of the Chili's driveway on the west side of Ynez Road just north of Rancho California Road the contractor is required to extend the new median island. SUBTOTAL (E~timate): $2,057.25 TOTAL: $9,371.25 FISCAL IMPACT: On January 26, 1993, the City Council awarded · contract for the construction of Ynez Road Widening from Rancho California Road to Palm Plaza, to Vance Corporation for ~2,61 2,811.29. Contract Change Order No.'s 01 through 26 were approved for a total amount of $427,161.84. Contract Change Order No. 27 through No. 29 is in the amount of $9,371.25. Therefore, an additional ~9,371.25 must be appropriated for the Ynez Road Widening Project from CFD 88-12. There are adequate funds available in the CFD 88-12 construction account. pwl b'~gdrpt~93%1109~0w92-06 110193 "' City of Temecula ].98~~~ 43174 Business Park Drive · Temecula, California 92590 (909J 694-1989 ° FAX (9091 694-1999 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 027 CONTRACT NO. PW92-05 PROJECT: Ynez Road Widenino - CFD 88-12 'SHEET I of 1__ TO CONTRACTOR: Vance Corporation NOTE: This change order is not effective until aDDroved by the Enaineer CHANGE REQUESTED: Project coordinator A. EXTRA WORK: The contractor was required to relocate the existing parking lot lighting for the adjacent auto dealerships. During the light standard relocation phase of the project, the contractor discovered that new underground electrical conduits and wiring would need to be installed for the lighting system. TOTAL (Estimate): $3,180.00 Original Contract Amount: ................................... Adjusted Contract Amount: ................................... Change Order No. 027 ........................................ 'Total Contract Amount: ..................................... $ 2,612,811.29 $ 3,039,973.13 $ 3,180.00 $ 3,043,153.13 0 Adjustment of Working Days: ................................. Approved: Principal Engineer By: ,,~~. ~ Date: //- ~' ~ We the undersigned contractor have given careful consi rati to the change proposed and hereby agree~ If this propose is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish ~~as may otherwise be noted above, and perfoJ all services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above. Dated Accepted: ~-~ Contractor:/ffS//(--~' t'~_c~,~nam ' "' (compan e) (print) If the contractor does not mort acceptance to this order, hie a~ention is directed to the requirements of the specifications to proceeding with the ordered wo~ and filing a ~i~en prote~ within ~e ~me therein specified. pwO4%cip\projects%pw92-05\coo%cco27.cco 110193 City of Ternecula '43174 Business Park Drive · Ternecula, California 92590 1909l 694-1989 · FAX 19091 6~99 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 028 CONTRACT NO. PW92-05 PROJECT: Ynez Road WidehinD - CFD 88-12 SHEET I of I TO CONTRACTOR: Vance Corporation NOTE: This chenoe order is not effective until aDoroved bv the Enaineer CHANGE REQUESTED: Project coordinator A. EXTRA WORK: When the contractor reiDcared the curb and gutter on the north west and north east corners of Ynez Road and Motor Car Parkway, four of the existing traffic signal poles were vertically · displaced from the new curb and gutter. The traffic signal pole foundations are required to be removed and re-constructed at the ultimate grade. TOTAL (Estimate): 14,134.00 Original Contract Amount: ................................... Adjusted Contract Amount: .................. T ................ Change Order No. 028 ....................................... Total Contract Amount: ..................................... 2,612,81~-3~9 3,043,11 '~ 4,134.00 3,047,287.13 Adjustment of Working Days: ................................. 0 is proposal:''':"":' ' r t n the change propot h y r is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish ell mat may otherwise be noted above, end perform all services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above. Name: (print) If the contractor doll riot Ngfi acceptaficI to thia order, his ar(sntiofi is directed to the requiremenm of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing · written protest within the lime therei~ spacified. pwO4~,cip~orojects~ow92-05%cco%cco28.cco 110193 City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive · Temecula, California 92590 (909) 694-1989 · FAX (909) 694-1999 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 029 CONTRACT NO. PW92-05 PROJECT: Ynez Road Widenine - CFD 88-12 SHEET 1__ of I TO CONTRACTOR: Vance Corporation NOTE: This chanae order is not effective until aDDroved bv the Enaineer CHANGE REQUESTED: Project coordinator A. EXTRA WORK: To eliminate the potential left turn movements into and out of the Chili's driveway on the west side of Ynez Road just north of Rancho California Road the contractor is required to extend the new median island. TOTAL (Estimate): $2,057.25 Original Contract Amount: ................................... Adjusted Contract Amount: ................................... Change Order No. 029 ....................................... Total Contract Amount: ..................................... 2,612,811.29- 3,047,287.13 2,057.25 3,049,344.38 Dated Accepted: ~/,~'_'~ By:~~) Adjustment of Working Days: ................................. 0 Approved: Principal Engineer By: ~ Date: i o r ve i · u co si · · c an · ro · an ere a ree. is ro osal ell services necessary for the work above specified, end will accept es full payment therefore the prices shown above. (compan) ) Title: , (~/~t~'_~/- f'~-~"~;;~""""~""'~ If the contractor does not sign acceptance to this order, his attention is directed to the requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a writ'ten protest within the time therein specified. pwO4%cip~rojects~pw92-05\cco~oco29.cco 110193 ITEM NO. 14 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAl CITY ATTORNEY ~(~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer November 9, 1993 Award Bid for Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program for Fiscal Year 1993-94 PREPARED BY: (~f/~ Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award contract Fiscal Year 1993-94 Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program to Pestmasters Services, the lowest responsible bidder for the sum of $29,250. BACKGROUND: In October of 1993, the Public Works Department in conformance with the City's current purchasing procedures requested and received informal bids from one (1) contractor. During the informal process, the Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program was advertised in the trade papers and local newspapers for fourteen (14) days. During this time period only two (2) bid packages were obtained from the City Clerk's office, Staff contributes the low response to this program due to the City's established license and insurance requirements, plus additional licensing and insurance which are required to address all environmental concerns and to provide minimal risk of off site movement, of soil or groundwater contamination for the Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program, The Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program consists of pre-emergent and post-emergent herbicide applications to specified areas in order to maintain a neat, weed-free right-of- way. Pre-emergents are to be applied in the winter of 93194. Post-emergents are to be applied as spring/summer follow-up for weed "escapes" in the previously treated 8r68s. The bid received is as follows: Pestmaster Services $29,250 1 pwl 5%r:~aOdfpt%93%1109%ewdweed.egn Pestmaster Services has performed work in the past for the City of Temecula, Public Works Department and we have found their work to be satisfactory. In addition, they can proceed with the work upon notification of Council award and completion of executed contract documents. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Public Works Department Routine Street Maintenance Account #100-164-999-5402 for the proposed Right-Of-Way Weed Control Program. Attachments: 1. Locations 2. Map 2 pwl 5%r:%agdrpt%93%1109%awdweed.agn CITY OF TEMEC~ THIS AGR~-MENT, made this 9th day of November, 1993, by and between the City of Temecula a municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, h~ caned {'ConU-actor'. WlTNESSETH 1. The Contractor, in consideration of the promises of the City hereinaf~ set forth, hereby agrees to furnish all tools, equipment, labor and materials necessary to pedorm and complete in a workmanliica manner, all of the work required for the construction of the improvements described in Work Order No.91 attached hereto. The work shall be performed according to the City of Temecula's Procedures For Informs! Ridding For 'Public Work~ Street M~inten~nce Work Orders of $25.000 or Less. Fiscal Year 1993-94. (*Informal Bidding Procedures*). Where the Work Order or the Informal Bidding Procedures describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, the latest version of the City of Temecula. Department of Public Works Standards r~rawings for Public Works Construction (*Standard Drawings'), and Standsrd ~l~'i~cstions for Public Woric,~ Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California thereinafter, *Standard Specifications*) shall control. Copies of the Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 In case of any conflict between the Standard Drawings and the Standard Specifications, the Standard Drawings shall control. Where the Work Order, the Informal Bidding Procedures, the Standard Drawings, or the Standard Specifications only describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. 2. The City, in consideration of the performance of this Contract, agrees to-pay the Contractor and the Contractor agrees to accept in full satisfaction for the work done hereunder the sum of twenty-nine thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($29.250), in accordance with the bid of the Contractor which sum shall be paid to the Contractor within the time and in the manner set forth in the Informal Bidding Procedures, final payment to be made within thirty-five (35) days after filing Notice of Completion of said work and improvement with the Riverside County Recorder. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevsillng rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. 1 r:~naint~wssdagrm.btd These rates are on file in the office of the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office in Temecula. Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions Section 1773.8, 17"/5, 1776, 177/.15, 1777.6, and 1813 of the labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in viohtion of the provisions of the Contract. 4. Contractor, by executing the Contract, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in acandance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the pexfonnance of the work of this Contract.' 5; All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site, shall be at the risk of Contractor alone. Contractor agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend City, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (Contractor's employees included) and ~tnage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by Principal, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City. 6. Contractor and subcontractors shall obtain all necessary licenses, including but not limited to City business license. IN VdTNF. SS WHEREOF, the City has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto subscribed and affixed by the [Mayor/City Manager] and attes~ to by the City Clerk, both thereunto duly authorized, and the Contractor has hereunto subscribed this Contract the day, month and year hereinabove written. CITY OF ~CULA P~-~TIViAST~.R (conwactor) By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROV!~ AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney r:.~maint'..wedaSrm.brd mmmm II III N limp o u~ r~ i l| r~ co E " C D A ~l B % / #, I .... /- I t I ,: eelS'?" I ,r.-- I 2 t \ I I | t | LI I I ...!-.-- 4 dlf'- ! I i.*"'*°'~ ___' ~-'--~ ....... " ,- , ' D E I | | I I I I I ....... + .... ~ ~ e" , TEr~,=L , I 1 I I ! I I ¶ D E I I I I I t I 27636 Ynez Road L-7, Ste. 101 Temecula. CA 92591 (909) 699-5877 Qualifications for Roadside Weed Control Pre and Post Emergent Applications 93-10 Licenses: Agricultural Pest Control Business License (State of Calif) Qualified Applicator License (State of Calif) Category C: "Right of Way" also several other categories. Pest Control Adviser License (PCA) Category E: "Weeds" also several other categories. Insurance: Commercial General Liability (per occurrence) $1,000,000 (see attached) "Sudden and Accidental Pollution Liability" "Care, Custody, and Control for Property of Others" Equipment: 100 gal hydraulic spray system Two 5 gallon backpacks Experience: We have demonstrated experience in performing contract "Right-of- Way" weed control for the City of Temecula. Contact Brad Buron. Also California Street Maintenance (for the City of Canyon Lake). Contact Jerry Costello 800/225-7316. Also Commercial Contractors, Inc. (for Cal Trans). Contact Bob Valock 619/552-3457. Also Rancho California Water District. Contact Ollie Oliphant 909/676-4101. Finally, I have been involved in weed control since 1975, .when I started with the California Dept. of Food and Agriculture as a Weed and Vertebrate Biologist. In 1981, I moved to the Monsanto Company where I was a Field Sales Representative specializing in herbicides. Key clients included: Caltrans, MWD, LADWP, flood control districts, etc. Thank you for your consideration. Serving All Your Pest Control Needs CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE PROOUCER Sedgwtck james of California-, Inc. 2555 Third Street. Sutta !100 Sac,'anmnto. CA 95818 (916)444-9520 INSURED Pestmaster Services of Temecula 43726 Buckeye Road Temecula, CA 92592 ISSUE DATE: 12/04/92' THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A HATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLI)[R. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED Irf THE POLICIES BELOW. COqPANY LETTER A California Insurance CanCrony COMPANY LETTER B CCNPANY LETTER C COMPANY LETTER D CDqPANY LETTER E ":"" ............................~"*""""':'~?"':'tF~'"'.'q:!!~"T~':' COVERAGES ,:"'~':~'"":: "::~":'::t';T"'~"r"'=:~'T~'"n'.'.'~"':"','n.'ff'~t ........, ............'.," ' '."".:': ......:'.':'..... ....... : 'T.-.'S -'S TO C-.'.~T i-'V' THAT"T,-."'~L-~C,"ES C.;"INSURANCE L-'STED"eE,'OW a;;-'."~SEE~'i'S,j~I~D':~C"T!iE'ifNS~jR.--:"N~M, E3"~C/-: ~CR' THE' POLICY .... PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREHENT, TEIM OR CONOITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DCX~ENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR HAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERHS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES, LIMITS SHONN HAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY CLAIHS, CO POLICY EFF. POLICY EXP. LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NLHBER DATE DATE GENERAL LIABILITY X COPHERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAXHS HADE [~QCCURENCE O~NER!S & CONTRACTOR'S PILOT, EXCESS PUBLIC ENTITY LIA8, A PC912-8503 12/04/92 12/04/93 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO HIRED AUTO~ -- -- NON-OWNED ALL OWNED AUTOS AUTOS -- -- GARAGE SCHEDULED AUTOS LIABILITY EXCESS LIABILITY UMBRELLA FORM OTHER THAN Lt4BRELLA FORM J kORKERS' COMPENSATION EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ALL LIMITS IN THO~OS GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000, PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG, $ 2,000, PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY $ 1,000, EACH OCCURRENCE" $ 1,000, FIRE DAMAGE (Any 1 fire) $ 100, MEDICAL EXP. (Any 1 pets. ) $ 5, CCHBINED SINGLE LIMIT* $ BODILY INJURY (Per Person) $ BODILY INJURY (Per Acc,) PROPERTY DAMAGE $ (EACH ACCIDENT) (DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT) (DISEASE-EACH IEHPLOYEE) OTHER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS CERTIFICATE HOLDER City of Temecula Ca~n. unity Services Division P.O. ~ox 3eGO Te~c_ula, CA 923g0 CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRISED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY)WILL P~IL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAileD TO THE LEFT. BUT FAILURE TO HAIL SUCH A NOTICE SHALL I /~0 OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY · Ref. SACTO .q 2 ,'.I 0 g g '1 LXCENSE NO. 01406-00007 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION 1220 N STREET SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 (916) 322..4647 AGRICULTURAL PEST CONTROL BUSINESS LICENSE BRANCH LOCATZ0N THZS .~ .:~-. LZDENSE EXPZRE DEC 31, i9~3 PESTHASTER SERVZCES ZNC (Z) PESTHASTER SERVZCES INC 45726 BUCKEYE ROAD TEMECULA CA 92590 POST THZS LZCENSE PROHZNENTLY ZN PU]3LZC VZEW THIS LICENSEIS NOTTRANSFERABLE-ANYCHANGEIN OWNERSHIP REQUIRESA NEWLICENSE. ITEM NO. 15 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council Shawn D. Nelson,~/, Director of Community Services November 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Used Oil Recycling Block Grant Program PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: .~./Phyllis L. Ruse, Senior Management Analyst That the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE USED OIL RECYCLING FUND UNDER THE USED OIL RECYCLING ENHANCEMENT ACT FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL USED OIL COLLECTION PROGRAM BACKGROUND: The California Used Oil Recycling Block Grant Program is an annual, noncompetitive grant program administered by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (Board). The grant provides funds to local governments for local used oil collection programs and public education programs that encourage recycling or appropriate disposal of oil. To be eligible to apply for grant funding, a city must have a used oil recycling center which is certified through the Board within its jurisdiction or monthly curbside recycling for all residents. At this time, the City of Temecula does not meet either of these requirements and cannot apply individually for a grant. The program does, however, provide for a regional grant. The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) is submitting a regional application on behalf of the Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Norco, San Jacinto, and Temecula. Funds are to be used for a public education program to benefit all participating Cities. WRCOG will administer the grant on behalf of the Cities. FISCAL IMPACT: None RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE USED OIL RECYCLING FUND UNDER THE USED OIL RECYCLING ENHANCEMENT ACT FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL USED OIL COLLECTION PROGRAM WHEREAS, the people of the Slaw of California have enacted the California Oil Recycling Enhancement Act that provides funds to cities and counties for establishing and maintaining local used oil collection programs that encourage recycling or appropriate disposal of used oil; and WtlEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Board has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the pwgram within the state, setting up necessary procedures governing application by cities and counties under the program; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the California Integrated Waste Management Board require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application before submission of said application to the state; and WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into an agreement with the State of California for development of the pwject. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DEFER.MINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Temecuh approves the f~ing of the application for the California Used Oil Recycling Block Grant Program under th California Oil Recycling Enhancement Act for state grant assistance for the project specified above. Section 2. That the City of Temecuh appoints the Executive Director of Western Riverside Council of Governments as agent of the City of Temecula to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of the Resolution. Reso~ 337 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERS]DE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 93- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1993, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Rm 337 ITEM 16 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROV~ CITY ATTORNEY , FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning November 9, 1993 Pechanga Casino Status Report Prepared By: Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File BACKGROUND Mayor Mu~oz and Planning Staff met with the Pechanga Reservation Representatives and their consultants, herein referred to as the Pechanga Representatives, on October 15, 1993. During this meeting, the available information regarding the environmental process and the project design features was discussed. This meeting was very positive in tone and showed that the Pechanga Representatives are willing to work with the City on mitigating the impacts of the project. They further stated that they want to build a successful project to blend with the existing community. Pechanga Representatives assured the City that all the environmental impacts included in the September 30, 1993 correspondence from the City to the Pechanga Reservation will be addressed in the Environmental Assessment being prepared for the project which will include mitigation measures. They further indicated that various studies are being prepared to address these impacts. Mitigation measures will be recommended as a part of these studies. Even though the Environmental Assessment process does not require a public review period, it has been a policy of the Indian Gaming Commission to make the Environmental Assessments available for public review and comment. Therefore, the City will be receiving a copy of the Environmental Assessment when it is completed. The consultants did not specify a completion date for the Environmental Assessment. It should be noted that the Indian Gaming Commission has never required an Environmental Impact Statement for this type of a project. Additionally, some preliminary details of the project were revealed. A golf course open to the public is proposed to be placed immediately to the southeast of Via Eduardo to provide a transition buffer between the existing residences and the proposed casino. Also, there is no proposed access from Via Eduardo to the project site; all access will be from Pala Road. The project is proposed to be built in two phases, as follows: R:~LqTAFFRFf~PECHANGA.CC 11/2/93 klb 1 PHASE I · Gaming Facility: Retail Commercial: · Golf Course: · Recreational Vehicle Park: · Recreational Facility: Includes bingo and card games and may include off-track betting with 60,000 square feet for the building. The size may increase to 120,000 square feet if machine games are approved by the State and Federal Governments. Retail shops with 50,000 to 75,000 square feet of area, if supported by a Feasibility Study. Eighteen (18) hole or executive nine (9) hole. Exclusively for short stays. Family oriented recreational facility. PHASE II · Upscale Hotel The Pechanga Representatives indicated that they will make a Site Plan available to the City shortly. FISCAL IMPACT None R:XSX$TAFFRFIMaECHA~OA.CC 11F2/9~ lib 2 ITEM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATI'ORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER \ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning ' November 9, 1993 Membership on Development Code Advisory Committee. PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND John Meyer City Council re-appointment of Dennis Chiniaeff to continue to serve on the Development Code Advisory Committee. Because of Mr. Chiniaeff's recent resignation from the Planning Commission, he will no longer be able to serve as the Commission's representative on the Advisory Committee. The Commission will appoint a new representative at an upcoming meeting. Mr. Chiniaeff's experience and contributions have made him a valuable member of this Committee. The Committee is scheduled to meet two or three more times before completing its review of the draft Development Code. For consistency, staff would like to see Mr. Chiniaeff continue to sit on this Committee as a member-at-large. \S\DEVCODE\CHIN R:~S~DEVCODE~CHIN State Deadline for General Plan Adoption: November 26, 1993 1 ITEM NO. 18 ORDINANCE NO. 93-18 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAFFER 12.01 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECLTLA DOES I-n:~-REBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 12.01 of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "12.01.010 Publicffrnffic Commission l~-~tnhlished. Pursuant to Section 1.06.010 of this Code, there is hereby created an advisory commission to the City Council which shall be known as the "Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission.* 12.01.010 Commission Composition and Membership. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission shall consist of five (5) Members appointed by the City Council pursuant to Section 2.06.050 of this Code. No officers or employees of the City or person under an employment contract subject to the jurisdiction of the City Council shall be members of such Commission. 12.01.030 Term of Office. Terms of office for Public/Traffic Safety Commissioners shall be three (3) years with staggered terms. Initially, all five (5) members may be selected at once. In order to achieve staggered terms, one member shall be appointed for a term of three (3) years; two members for terms of two (2) years; and two members for terms of one (1) year, said terms to be determined by the drawing of lots. At the completion of any term, a Commission member may be reappointed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 2.06.050 of this code. 12.01.040 Staff Assistance. The City Manager shall ensure that adequate staff will be allocated to provide necessary technical and clerical assistance to the Commission. 12.01.050 Time and Place of Meeting,. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission shall establish a regular date, time, and pla~. for Commission meetings, which shall be open tot eh public. Said meetings shall occur no less frequently than once a month. 12.01.060 Duties. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission shall advise the City Council on all matters subject to the jurisdiction of the Council pertaining to the public and traffic safety. The duties of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission shah be established by Resolution of the City Council. Ords 93-18 12.01.070 Public H,~rings. Whenever the Commission determines, by a two-thirds (2/Ys) majority of those Members present, that its deliberations with respect to a particular matter or matters would be substantially aided by the Fesentation of W, stimony from the citizens of the City, or of a cerlain area of the City, the Commission may direct a public hearing be held concerning such matter or matters. Notice of such a hearing shall be provided by publication in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Temecula, and/or by posting the same in at least three (3) public places, not later than seven C/) days prior to the date of the hearing. Such hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules established for the conduct of hearings before the City Council unless the Council, by Resolution, shall otherwise provide.' Section 2. Chapter 11.01 of the Temecuh Municipal Code is hereby repealed. Section 3. SI:-VI:-RARIIITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invafid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (3) days after its passage. Section S. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 9th day of November, 1993. ATTEST: J. Sai Mu~oz, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] Ords 93-18 STATE OF CAI/ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS crry OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greei, City Clerk of the city of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 93-18 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of October, 1993, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of November, 1993, by the following roll call vote. CO~CILMEMBERS: NOES: CO~CIMEMBERS: COUNCH-~JVXBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Ot~ 93-18 ITEM NO. 19 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVA CLTY ATTORNEY CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning November 9, 1993 Proposed Skateboard Ordinance Prepared By: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: Receive Report and Provide Direction to Staff to Prepare a Skateboard Ordinance BACKGROUND The City Council has received several inquiries from citizens and business owners requesting that the City adopt an ordinance regulating skateboard usage. City staff has reviewed other cities' ordinances and has compiled the following alternatives for the Council to consider. Private Property Several business owners have requested that the City adopt an ordinance which would prohibit skateboarding on private property. The Police Department is unable to prohibit such activity in the absence of an ordinance· Such an ordinance could be written in one of the following ways: Prohibit all skateboarding on private property without the property owner's consent· This would allow property owners, with no approval from the City, to post their properties with signs that would prohibit skateboarding. Prohibit skateboarding on private property in those areas designated by resolution of the Council. This would require property owners to petition the Council to declare by resolution the prohibition of skateboarding for a.particular property. In shopping centers, some cities require the property owner to petition the Council where other cities require a majority of the tenants to petition the Council. Streets and Sidewalks Vehicle Code Section 467 allows skateboarding in a public street only in the absence of a sidewalk. Vehicle Code Sections 21967 and 21969 authorize local authorities to adopt rules and regulations prohibiting or restricting persons from riding or propelling skateboards or engaging in roller skating on highways, sidewalks or roadways. Therefore, the Council may choose to either prohibit skateboarding on public streets and/or public sidewalks entirely or on a limited basis in the following manner: 1. Prohibit skateboarding on all public streets and/or public sidewalks; Prohibit skateboarding on all public streets and/or public sidewalks except those areas designated by resolution of the Council; e Permit skateboarding on all public streets and/or public sidewalks except those areas designated by resolution of the Council; It should be noted here that the Public Works Department feels that skateboards should be prohibited on all streets and sidewalks unless authorized by resolution of the Council while the Sheriff's Department feels that skateboarding should be permitted on all public streets and sidewalks except those areas designated by resolution by the Council. The Community Services Commission, when discussing the potential skateboard park for the Rancho California Sports Park, expressed a desire that skateboarding be allowed on sidewalks and bike lanes. The Commission wanted these areas available to skateboarders to enable them to travel to and from the proposed skate park. Public Parks On October 8, 1991, the City of Temecula adopted Ordinance No. 91-37, regulating uses in public parks. Section 5.B. of Ordinance No. 91-37 states: "No person shall ride or operate a skateboard in any park, except in designated areas." The Council would need to make such a designation for the area of the proposed skateboard park in the Rancho California Sports Park. If the City does construct the proposed skateboard park, Ordinance No. 91-37 would need to be amended to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 25906. Section 25906 requires local public agencies which own or operate a skateboard park to adopt an ordinance requiring users to wear a helmet, elbow pads and knee pads. In addition, the City Attorney recommends that the City obtain liability waivers from users of such facilities. Staff. has spoken with the City's insurance broker. The City would be able to obtain insurance coverage for the skateboard park. The insurance broker has forwarded to the Director of Community Services design suggestions that would limit the City's liability in the operation of the facility. Should the Council desire, both the declaration for the skateboard park and the amendment to Ordinance No. 91-37 could be done in conjunction with this proposed Skateboard Ordinance. Finq~ The Council must consider if the ordinance is to contain provisions for fines or other punishments for violators of any of the above provisions of the ordinance. FISCAL IMPACT If the City prohibits skateboarding on public property, public sidewalks, and certain public streets, the City would incur the cost of obtaining and posting the required signs. The purchase and posting of a sign would cost the City approximately $125.00 per sign. Also, if skateboarding is prohibited on private property, the ordinance will need to state whether the City or the property owner is responsible for posting said property. Attachments: 1. City Attorney's Letter Regarding Proposed Skateboard Ordinances - Page 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY ATTORNEY'$ LETTER REGARDING PROPOSED SKATEBOARD ORDINANCES R:~,~TAFFRFI'~,qKA'I~I~RD.CC IO/2N~ idb 4 SUITE I CAt.|lr011NlA g3010 (~.OSI ~,87-34e8 I,.AW 3s~O~ IIIISTC)i.. S?IICO'T SUITE e4c:) COI, TA MIPIA. CAI-IIrORNIA BB6Z6 ell WIrIT SIXTH $Tl~rET, SUITE ISOC TEI. ECOP~IER: Ell3] 13e-zTOO February 17, 1993 RECEIVED Mr. Gary Thornhill Planning Director City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California. 92590 Re: Skateboarding Ordinance For Temecula FEB 18 1993 AWd ............ Dear Gary: This letter will discuss the results of our research on the City of Temecula's authority to adopt an ordinance regulat- ing/prohibiting skateboarding on public and/or private property. STATE LAW Vehicle Code Section 21113 (copy attached) provides in pertinent part: "(f) A public agency.. .may adopt rules or regulations to restrict, or specify the conditions for, the use of bicy- cles, motorized bicycles, skateboards, and roller skates on public property under the jurisdiction of that agency." Section 21113(b) requires that every legislative body "shall erect or place appropriate signs giving notice of any special conditions or regulations that are imposed under this section. . ." In addition, Vehicle Code Sections 21967 and 21969 authorize local authorities to adopt rules and regulations prohibiting or restricting persons from riding or propelling skateboards or engaging in roller skating on highways. sidewalks. or roadways. Thus, there is express state law authorizing general law cities to regulate/prohibit such activities on public property. However, the Vehicle Code does not provide similar authority for regulating skateboarding on private property. Therefore, the Mr. Gary Thornhill Planning Director February 17, 1993 Page 2 . city will have to rely on its general police powers for authority for such regulation. Regarding Councilmember S=one's inquiry on having city- operated skateboard parks without incurring liability, Health and. Safety Code Section 25906 (copy attached) mandates operators of skateboard parks to require users of the park to wear a helmet, elbow pads and knee pads. The statute was amended in 1992 to address skateboard parks owned or operated by local public agencies and provides the following: "(b) With respect to any [skateboard park] owned or operat- ed by a local public agency- · .that is not supervised on a regular basis, the requirements of subdivision (a) may be satisfied by compliance with the following: (1) Adoption by the local public agency of an ordinance requiring any person riding a skateboard at the facility to wear a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads. (2) The posting of signs at the facility affording reason- able notice that any person riding a skateboard in the facility must wear a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, and that any person failing to do so will be subject to citation under the ordinance required by paragraph (1)." The above amendments give cities the ability to meet the law's requirements without having constant supervision of the park., However, it is not clear from the statute that compliance with this law would completely immunize the city from all liebil- ity for any injuries occurring in a city-operated skateboard park. Therefore, if the City of Temecula decides to designate areas in any city parks for skateboarding, it is recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 25906 discussed above. Furthermore, due to the risk of injury which is greater than at a typical park, it is also recommended that the City obtain liability waivers from users of such facilities to hold the city harmless from any liability for resulting injuries. Mr. Gary Thornhill Planning Director February 17, 1993 Page 3 SA.MI:~T~ ORDINANCES Enclosed for your information are copies of skateboarding ordinances from the Cities of Dana Point and Mission Viejo. The ordinances are very similar in that they both provide for prohib- iting certain activities on both public and private property when such property has been designated by resolution of the City Council and posted as a restricted area. The Mission Viejo ordinance includes prohibiting certain activities outside of a designated area when such use creates a "nuisance." The basic penalties for violations of both ordinances are infractions punishable by a fine of Fifty Dollars ($50.00). However, the Dana Point ordinance permits third and subsequent violations to be punishable as a misdemeanor. We hope the foregoing information is useful to you. If you have any questions or require additional information or would like a similar ordinance drafted for the City of Temecula, please contact us. Enclosures jry truly yours, ~aO he~r CC: Shawn Nelson, Director Community Services Scott F. Field City Attorney TEMI1 lOZ29E,.LTR ITEM 2O TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROV~ CITY ATTORNEY . FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning~''~''' November 9, 1993 Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 - Expansion to the existing TVUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase I consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840' square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office located at 31350 Rancho Vista Road. Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0158, AMENDMENT NO. 1, AND APPROVING THE PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATELY 34,440 SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PHASES ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES ' LOCATED AT 31350 RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 954-020°002. BACKGROUND The proposed project was approved 5-0 by the Planning Commission at their November 4, 1993 meeting. This item has been appealed to the City Council at the request of Mayor Mu~oz and Councilmember Stone. Planning Application No. 93-0158 was originally scheduled for the September 20, 1993, Planning Commission meeting. The item was continued to the November 4, 1993 meeting at the request of the applicant. They requested the continuance because of an error contained in a letter that they mailed to property owners within 600 feet of the project. This letter stated that the hearing was to be held on September 21, 1993, when in actuality, it was to be held on September 20, 1993. R:\S~qTAPPRP~l~58PA93.CC 1111193 klb 1 The Planning Commission received testimony from two (2) individuals at the hearing on September 20, 1993. Staff was directed to address their concerns for the next meeting. These concerns related to the environmental problems, zoning and the process that would need to be followed should the use change. In addition, the applicant provided responses to some of the concerns: storage of hazardous materials, time schedule for the project (including the removal of the buses), a definition of the word "facilities", source of funding for the project, specific hours of operation and the types of products stored in the warehouse. Two individuals spoke at the November 4, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. One of the individuals was in favor of the project. The second individual raised the following concerns: starting and operational time for the facility; warehousing; storage of hazardous materials (i.e. big drums of paint thinner); aesthetics related to roof equipment; traffic impacts; and a rezoning of the property in the event that the School District leaves the property. A letter was also submitted from this individual that expressed concerns over removing the temporary school from the site, parking spaces for employees and visitor parking and height limitation (reference Attachment No. 7). FISCAL IMPACT None. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Resolution No. 93- - Page 3 Resolution No. 93- - Page 9 Draft Planning Commission Minutes (September 20, 1993) - Page 14 Draft Planning Commission Minutes (October 4, 1993) - Page 15 Planning Commission Staff Report (October 4, 1993) - Page 16 Exhibits - Page 17 Development Fee Checklist - Page 18 Letter to Staff - Page 20 R:\S~FAFFRPT~ISSPA93.CC 1111/93 klb 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S~TAFFRP~I58PA93.CC 11/1/93 Idb 3 ATFA~ NO. 1 RESOLIYrlON NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THY~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TINIECULA DENYING ~ APPEAL OF THY- PI.,ANNING COMMt~SION'S DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0158, AME~~ NO. 1, AND APPROVING TRE PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATi~-I-Y 34,440 SQUARE FEET OF WAB~ROUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE FI~-KT OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PHASES ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES LOCATED AT 31350 RANCite VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCF, L NO. 954-0204}02. WHEREAS, Temecula Valley Unified School District ~ed Planning Application No. 93-0158 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Planning Application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WH!~.EAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on September 20, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Planning Application; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application to October 4, 1993; WIIF~REAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on October 4, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Planning Application; WItEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission approved said Planning Application; WHY~REAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission decision was made in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; Wt!E~, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WRF~, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on November 9, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Appeal; and R:\S~rAFFRPTXI58PA9~.CC 1111/9~ lab 4 WFll~R~tS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal; NOW, TFr!~RE~'X)RE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETER.MINE AND ORDER AS F0[JX)WS: Section 1. Findini, s. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Cede Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months fortowing incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the gcncral plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. Them is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following: R:'~,STAFFRPT~I~SPA93.CC 1111193 a. There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93- 0158, Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c) of Ordinance No. 348, no plot plan may be approved unless the foliowing findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The City Council, in denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve the proposed Planning Application, makes the following fmdmgs, to wit: 1. There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is Public/InsU'tutional Facilities. The draft General Plan states: "Additional public and institutional uses may be developed in the residential or non-residential land use designations under the procedures established in the Development Code." Until the Development Code is adopted, Staff utilizes the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 348. As mentioned above, Ordinance No. 348.2922 (the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school administrative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. 2. There is lime or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. The land use designation for the site is identified in the draft General Plan as Public/Institutional Facilities. Uses which are consistent with the Public/Institutional Facilities land use designation will ultimately be permitted on this site, and would include educational facilities. 3. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section 65360, and Ordinance No. 348. The proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village. The project is located within Planning Area No. 28 of Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, and is identified as a 11.0 acre school R:\S~STAFFRP~i58PA93.CC 1111193 klb 6 administration site within the Specific Plan. The project as designed and conditioned meets all the requirements of Specific Plan No. 199. 4. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general weftare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use. In addition, the project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. Access to the project site is from a publicly maintained road (Margarita Road). F. As condi~oned pursuant to Section 3, the Planning Application proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Initi31 Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 to construct approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases on a parcel containing 10.94 acres located at 31350 Rancho Vista Road and known as Assessor' s Parcel No. 954-020-002 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. R:~S~STAFFRPT~I$SPA93.CC 11/I/93 life Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Re,solution. Section 5. PASSE!), APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of November, 1993. J. SAL MU OZ MAYOR ATTF~T: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALn~ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I l:ff, lll~,RY CERTWY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November 1993 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNC~ERS: COUNTERS: RTNE S. GI~PPK CITY CT-PP, K R:\S~qTAFFRPT~I~SPA93.CC 11/!/93 klb 8 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S~'TAl~RPT~I581sA~3.CC II11193 Idb 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLIYrlON NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF T!~, CITY OF TI~!F~CULA AFFIR.MING ~ APPEAL AND DENYING PIANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0158, AMENDlVI~-NT NO. 1, TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMAT~.I.Y 34,440 SQUARE FEI~.T OF WAREFtOUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE FI~.gT OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PHASES ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES LOCATEr} AT 31350 RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEl. NO. 954-020-002. W!~REAS, Temecula Valley Unified School District filed Planning Application No. 93-0158 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHI~REAS, said Planning Application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on September 20, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Planning Application; WttEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application to October 4, 1993; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on October 4, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Planning Application; WtIF. REAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission approved said Planning Application; WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission decision was made in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on November 9, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Appeal; and WHI~REAS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal; R:XS\STAFFRPT~I58PA93.CC 11/I/93 klb ~ 0 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOIJ~OWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency fmds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or smdiod or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state hw and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest A/ca Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecuh as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP, however, it does meet the requirements set forth in 'Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: plan. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The City Council finds, in approving pwjects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: R:~SX,~TAFFRF~ISiPAg~.CC 1111/93 klb 11 a. Them is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93- 0158, Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. Them is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action does not comply with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances for the reason set forth in Section E. 1. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c) of Ordinance No. 348, no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The City Council, in denying the proposed Planning Application, makes the following fmding, to wit: 1. The overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general weftare; does not conform to the logical development of the land and is not compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. The project proposes to store hazardous materials. In addition, the project is not compatible with surrounding residential land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage does not create a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. The project proposes an intensity of use that is inconsistent with surrounding residential development. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. ~"~ R:\S~TA'FFRFT\I58PA93.CC 1111193 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVEB AND ADOPTED this 9th day of November, 1993. J. SAL uu oz MAYOR ATI~ST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE. OF CALr~ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMEEULA) I HEREBy CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November 1993 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CH~MEIVIBERS: JUNE S. GI~RRK CITY CLERK R:~SISTAFFRPT~ISSPAg~.CC 11/!193 klb 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRF~l~lPA93.CC 1111/~3 klb '~ 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 1993 The overall consensus of the Commission was to support the proposed revised map based on the environmental analysis and staff report. applicant develop e production schedule. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5. Plannine Aoolication No. 93-0158. Amendment No. I Chairman Ford suggested the DRAFT Proposed expansion to the existing TVUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase I consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office. Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. He noted the following changes to the Conditions of Approval; Public Works No. 31 and No. 32, amend by adding the language "if applicable" to the end of these conditions. Condition No. 18, modify to read "The applicant shall provide the Director of Planning a landscape maintenance agreement to insure the maintenance of the plantinge for a period of one year. Said · landscape maintenance agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Commissioner Hoagland questioned Condition No. 14, which requires all roof mounted equipment to be properly screened from the surrounding residences. Planner Fagan advised that the only roof-mounted equipment are exhaust fans. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Lettie Boggs, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, advised the Commission the intent is to store materials used in the daily operation of the school and not maintenance or garage type materials. Ms. Boggs concurred with the Conditions of Approval, however, asked the hours of operation to read 7:00 A.M. She said that although there would not be anyone employed at the facility at 7:00 A.M., some delivery trucks will arrive prior to the 8:00 A.M. start time. Commissioner Hoagland questioned how long the Conditions of Approval are effective. He said he is concerned there may be directives in the future, mandating delivery trucks operate during off hours. Commissioner Hoagland asked what would be the school district's recourse. Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske suggested language be added providing flexibility with Planning Director approval. Betty Kimbro, 31231 Corte Alhambra, Temecula, stated she was in support of the school district's proposal. PCMIN 10/04193 Octotxr10,1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT OCTOBER 4, 1993 Joe Sequin, 41640 Avenida de la Reina, Temecula, advised the Commission the homeowners approved the proposal based on the 8:00 A.M. start time. Mr. Sequin also stressed that the facility is to be used for light warehousing. He said he feels the roof equipment should be painted to blend into the surrounding neighborhood. Lettie Boggs responded that the materials that will be stored at the facility are general administrative materials. She said the intent of the warehouse is to take products in and move them out in the same boxes they arrived in. Commissioner Fahey said she feels adding in language to make the start time more flexable might create additional concerns and suggested that since the applicant has agreed with the Conditions of Approval, there should be no modification to the start time. Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske advised that this item will not go on to the City Council: the Planning Commission has final approval. It was moved by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner Fehey to close the public hearing at 7:35 P.M. and Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application 93-0158, Amendment No. 1, Adopt Resolution No. 93-23 approving Planning Application 93-0158 subject to the Conditions of Approval, amending Conditions No. 31, 32 and 18, as recommended by staff. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair~ Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT None PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINESS None PCMINIO/O4tg3 -4- CMtake 10, t9~3 ~ ATTACHMENT NO. 4 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 R:~q\STAFFRPT~I$6PA93.C'C 11/1/93 klb '~ E~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 90. 1993 Craig Ruiz presented the staff report. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 6:20 P.M. Howard Parsell, representing the applicant as the project architect, concurred with the Conditions of Approval. ~ It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to close the public hearing at 7:20 P.M. and Adoot Resolution No. 93-(next) approving PA93-0132 revised Plot Plan. The motion was unanimously carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford Planning Aoolication No. 93-0158. Amendment No. I Proposed expansion of the existing TVUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase 1 consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office located at 31350 Rancho Vista Road. Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan advised the Commission that the applicant requests this matter be continued to the next meeting due to an incorrect Planning Commission meeting date referenced in a letter the school district mailed to the surrounding property owners. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at' 6:25 P.M. Lettie Boggs, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, advised the Commission the letters sent out to the surrounding property owners from the school district, advising them of the public hearing, incorrectly stated the meeting was to be held on Tuesday, September 21, 1993. Ms. Boggs said the TVUSD requests the continuance to ensure the affected property owners would all be able to attend the meeting. Frank Kimbro, 31231 Corte Alhambra, Temecula, asked for an explanation of the warehouse uses at this facility. Mr. Kimbro also asked staff what will happen with the filling station located on the site. He asked for clarification of the following: What is F'CMIN09120193 .rJ. 9127/93 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SFPTEMBFR .t0. 1993 a Negative Declaration? What is the time schedule on the new construction? What is the school district's definition of facilities? David Ciabattoni, 41686 Avenida De La Reina, Temecula, said he would like the City to get involved in controlling the hours of operation and types of hazardous materials to be stored at this facility. Mr. Ciabattoni said the original intended use for this site was an administrative facility and he would like assurances that once the school district moves the bus facility end uses from this site, future uses would be limited to administrative uses only. Planning Director Gary Thornhill said staff would respond to the concerns in writing. It Was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to continue Planning Application No. 93-O158, Amendment No. I to October 4, 1993. The motion was unanimously carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 9. Planninq Aoolication No. 93-0027. Amendment No. 2 - Public Use Permit Proposed church facility to be constructed in three (3) phases located at the northeasterly corner of Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Roads. Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report and advised Condition No. 12 has been corrected to require a check in the amount of $1328.00 payable to the County Clerk. Commissioner Fahey said she had concerns regarding the limited access this site. Commissioner Chiniaeff questioned whether the applicant could utilize the water district easement as secondary access to the proposed site. Principal Engineer Ray Casey advised the Commission the Metropolitan Water Water District is not agreeable to grading of their easement. Director Thornhill said the Commission could direct staff to address whether Rancho California Water District would consider. access from their easement. Commissioner Blair expressed a concern that the access allowed for a left hand turning movement across Margarita which is a heavily traveled road with a 50 mph speed PCMIN091201i3 -e- g127/g3 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 4, 1993 R:%S\STAFFRPTX1.SSPA93.CC 11/1/93 klb '{ 6 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 4, 1993 Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I -'Expansion of the existing Temecula Valley Unified School District ri'VUSD) facility in two (2) phases. Phase I consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten {10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 consists of a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office. PREPARED BY: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1; and ADOPT Resolution No. 93- , Approving Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. BACKGROUND This item was continued at the request of the applicant at the September 20, 1993, Planning Commission meeting, The applicant requested the continuance because of an error contained in a letter that they mailed to property owners within 600 feet of the project. This letter stated that the hearing was to be held on September 21, 1993~ when in actuality,, it was to be held on September 20, 1993. ANALYSIS The Planning Commission received testimony from two (2) individuals at the hearing on September 20, 1993. Staff was directed to address their concerns in this agenda report. Staff provided responses to the following items: Negative Declaration defined, R-1 defined (the Agenda Report dated September 20, 1993, incorrectly identified zoning on the site as R-R (Rural-Residential); however, the correct zoning for the site is Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. ~-- .~w=-199 - Margarita Village, R-1 use and development standards), and what process would need ... · e:~s~"rAFFnrr~sat~^93.K:z 9/29/93 km 1 to be followed should uses on the site change To uses other than those associated with Public/Institutional Facilities. The applicant has provided responses to the following concerns (reference Attachment No. 4): storage of hazardous materials, time schedule for the project (including The removal of the buses), a definition of the word "facilities", where the funding for the project will come from, specific hours of operation and the types of products stored in the warehouse· Staff received a telephone call from a concerned resident on Tuesday, September 21, 1993. Staff requested additional responses regarding the following items: the use of forklifts and other machinery on site and loading/unloading of the trucks. Neastive Declaration A Negative Declaration is defined in Section 15371 of the California Environmental Equality Act (CEOA) Guidelines as: a written statement by the Lead Agency briefly describing the reason that a proposed project, not exempt from CEQA, will not have a significant effect On the environment and therefore does not recluire the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The City of Temecula is the Lead Agency for the project as described above. Staff prepared an Initial Study for the project and determined that the project would not have a negative effect on the environment. Since the project was determined to not have a negative effect on the environment, the legal mechanism for stating this under state law (CEQA) is the Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration is considered and adopted by the Planning Commission. A Notice of Determination for a Negative Declaration is then mailed to the County Clerk and posted for thirty days after its adoption. Rural Residential/R-1 Defined As mentioned above, the zoning for the site is Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village). Uses permitted for the site include public school administration buildings and facilities as well as those contained in Section 6.1 of Ordinance No. 348 (R-1: One-Family Dwellings). Uses permitted in fie R-1 zone include: .field crops, flower and vegetable gardening, noncommercial keeping of horses, public parks and home occupations. Uses permitted provided a plot plan has been approved include: beauty shops operated from a home, temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision and nurseries, horticulture. Uses permitted with a conditional use permit are: mobilehome parks. The Process to Chanae From Uses Other Than Public/Institutional Facilities The draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Public/Institutional Facilities. The Plan states: "The public and institutional designation is intended for a wide range of public and private uses including schools, transportation facilities, government offices, public utilities, libraries, museums, public art galleries, hospitals, and cultural facilities." If a use is proposed on the site which is not consistent with the Lend Use Designation, then a General Plan Amendment will be necessary. Upon adoption of the Development Code, if a use is proposed . on the site which is not consistent with the zoning designation for the site, then a change of zone application will be necessary. Both processes will require environmental review and a noticed public hearing prior to approval. · R:!~fI'A/rFI. Y~ISII~A93.1~'2 9/29/93 IrJb 2 The current zoning for the site is Specific Plan (S.P. 199 - Margarita Village). The Land Use designation for fie site is School Administration. If a use is proposed on the site which is not consistent with the Land Use Designation within the Specific Plan, then a Specific Plan Amendment will be also necessary. Again; this process will require environmental review and a noticed public hearing prior to approval. The following issues were addressed by TVUSD: Storaoe of Hazardous Materials The warehouse will not store any hazardous materials other than paint thinner, rubber cement, and bleach. This was identified by the TVUSD Safety Officer who oversees all Material Safety Data Sheets on stored products. These items will be stored in their original containers. Time Schedule for the Proiect The project timeline, pending Planning Commission approval in October, would be to begin construction of the warehouse in January 1994, with completion in mid-April 1994. The removal of the maintenance and transportation functions could not occur until the completion of a separate project which would provide a new facility for those functions at another location. That project is currently projected to be complete in August, 1994. If all approvals go smoothly, and the August date can be met, all maintenance and transportation functions would be moved to the new location at that time. Definition of "Facilities" The facilities that TVUSD is considering for the project includes offices, printing services, warehouse and book depository activities and teacher and staff training rooms. Fundino of the Project Funding for the project is from bonding of the school district pass-through increment of the City Redevelopment Agency. Hours of OPeration and Types Of Products Stored in the Warehouse The school district warehouse will not be in operation prior to 7:00 AM and will have very light traffic before 9:00 AM. A condition of approval has been added that limits the hours of operation for the warehouse facility between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM. As mentioned above, the warehouse will paint thinner, rubber cement, and bleach in their original containers. In addition, the warehouse will be used to store furniture and supplies needed for the operation of the schools. Use of Forklifts and Other Machinery on Site/Loading and Unloadino of the Trucks The new warehouse facility will allow TVUSD to store materials inside. These items were previously stored on the outside and therefore forklifts had to be used on the site to transport materials. Upon completion of the warehouse facility, forklift activity would be from the unloading dock to inside the warehouse. Any other machinery would be transferred to the new Transportation and Maintenance Facility upon its construction. R:~S~frAD'RP~!51PA93.PC2 9/29/93 IrJb 3 Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 5 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 Planning Commission Staff Report, September 20, 1993 - Blue Page 16 Temecula Valley Unified School District Letter, September 22, 1993 - Blue Page 17 R:~'~'TAFb"~lSIPA93.PC:2 9/29/93 IrJb 4 ATTACHMENT NO. '1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93: P,:~S~qTAFFPT~!~IPA~J.IsC2 ~Z29/~3 kt 5 ATrA~ NO. 1 PC RF. SOLUTION NO. 93-- A RESOLUTION OF TRE PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEM~Ct~A APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-01-~8, AMEND~ NO. 1 TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATE!' -Y 34,440 SQUARE FE~',T OF WAREHOUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE F!~T OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PItASES ON A pARCEl, CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES LOCATED AT 313~0 RANClIO VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCk'I, NO. 9.~120-002. W~ER~'AS, Temecula Valley Unified School District filed Phnning Application No. 93-0158 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, plnnnlng and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; ~FFIERI~.JiS, said planning Application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WI~I~.F. AS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on September 20, 1993, at which time inte~ persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition w said Planning Application; ~, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on September 20, 1993; WItERF. AS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on October 4, 1993, at which time interested persons had oppommity to testify either in support or opposition to said Planning Application; WBERI~AS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Planning Application; NOW, Tm~'.I~ORE, ~ HANNING COMlV!IgSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOI J OWS: Section 1. Findin[,s. That the Temecula pinnning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Punuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a General Plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a General Plan be adopted or the requirements of state hw that its decisions be consistent with the General Plan, if all of the following requirements are met: R:~S~%'TAFFRP~lSIPA93.PC~ 9/29~ lab ~ General Plan. The city is procee&nE in a timely fashion with the pr~uation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of buffcling permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being c. ons~ or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable ti!~e. b. There is little or no probability of submantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted Czencral Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of sta~ law and local ordinsnces. B. The Riverside County Geneaal Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinaf~r "SWAP") was adopted prior to the ~co~ration of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At ~ time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission, in approving of the proposed Plot Plan, nmkcs the following fmdings, to wit: 1. There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being-considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft Gcncral Plan land use designation for the site is Public/Institutional Facilities. The draft General Plan states: "Additional public and institutional uses may be developed in the residential or non-resideDtial land use designations under the procedux~s established in the Development Code." Until the Development Code is adopted, Staff utilizes the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 348. As mentioned above, Ordinance No. 348.2922 (the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school administrative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. 2. There is little or no probability of substantial dtnrLment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. The land use designation for the site is identified in the draft General Plan as Public/Institutional Facilities. Uses which arc consistent with the PublicfInstitutional Facilities land use designation will ultimately be permitted on this site, and would include educational facilities. 9/29/93 klb 7 requirements of state hw and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with Cnlifornia Governmental Cod~ Section 65360, and ~ce No. 348. The proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margaritn Viiiage. Th~ project is located within Planning Area No. 28 of Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, and is identified as a 11.0 acre school admini.~'tration site within the Specific Plan. The project as designed and conditioned meets all the r~luir~ments of Specific Plan No. 199. 4. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and genenl 'welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and funn, e logical development of the surrounding Fwpc~ty. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intn~sity of use. In addition, the pwject is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical rehtionship with adjolnin~ protK~ti~s. ~n~ project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicuhr tnffic. Access to the project site is from a publicly msintnined road (Matgafita Road). D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 2. ~vironmental Complinnce. An Initial Study prepare~ for this project indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not he a significat~ effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecuh Planning Commission hereby appwves Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 W construct appwximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases on a parcel containing 10.94 acres located at 31350 Rancho Vista Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 954-020-002 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. R:~S~TAFFRIv~I~PA93.P{~ 9/29~J3 lab 8 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND AllOPTED this 4th day of October ,1993. STfWEN I. FORD CHAIRMAN I mmv. Ry CIat'i'IF~' that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commiqion of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 4th day of October, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANN~G COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONIIS: GARY THORNFH~ SECRETARY "· R:~I'AFFRFr%I~iPAg'I.PC~ 9/'29/9~ bJb 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~TAFFRP~!~IPAsYJ.PC:2 9~ ~a, '] 0 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I Project Description: To construct approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse apace and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phasea. Assessor's Parcel No.: 954-020-002 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL The use hereby permitted by this Plot Plan is for approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases. Hours of operation for the warehouse facility shall be between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM. The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. e This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. e The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on the Site Plan marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these conditions, 5. Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on .Exhibit E. Colors and materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit F (color material board). A minimum of 193 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. Two hundred twenty-four (224) parking spaces shall be provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit D. .. , ' it:~,VrAI~'~UmT~.!SIPAf'.J.I~ 9/29/93 Idb 11 ® A minimum of five (5) handicapped perking spaces shall be provided as shown on Exhibit D. 9. Thirteen (13) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided as shown on Exhibit D. 10. Landscaping of the site shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit D. WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT 11, The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars .' ($78.00) fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 12. Three (3) copies of a Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Ban shall be submitted to the Banning Department for approval and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Bans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along streets and within the parking areas. 13. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 2 (warehouse expansion and office expansion), the applicant shall file an application for approval by the Planning Director for the elevations for Phase 2. Accompanying the application shall be three (3) sets of elevations and the appropriate filing fee. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS 14. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view. 15. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans. 16. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. R:~STAFFRPT~IJlPA93.PC2 9/29/93 I~b 12 17. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be.identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-streat parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephone In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each perking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 18. A maintenance bond, to guarantee the installation of plantings and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shell be filed with the Department of Planning. Said bond amount shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for review and approval prior to the submittal of the bond. 19. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 20. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code. 21. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. 22. Prior to the commencement of any construction work, obtain all building plan and permit approvals. 23. Provide occupancy approval for all existing buildings (i.e. finialed building permit, Certificate of Occupancy). 24. All existing buildings and facilities must comply with applicable handicapped accessibility regulations. 25. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. R:~STAFFRP~ISIPA93.PC2 9/29/93 26. Restroom fixtures, number and type, shall be in accordance with the provisions of the 1991 edition of the uniform plumbing code, Appendix C. 27. 28, The applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans submitted for plan review. The applicant shall provide electrical plan including load oalcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 29. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 30. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Rood Control and Water Conservation District. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 31. The Applicant shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact, 32. The Applicant shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to -be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Applicant requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Applicant shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to the Applicant. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Applicant shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Applicant understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Applicant will waive any right' to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Applicant is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. R:~S~I'AFFRF~!JlPA93.PC2 9/29/93 IrJb 14 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMITS 33. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within the existing City right-of-way. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS 34, The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 35. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. OTHER AGENCIES' 36. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated August 6, 1993, a copy of which is attached, 37. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated August 9, 1993, a copy of which is attached, 38, The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated August 11, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:~S~STAFFRPI~ISIPA93,PC:2 9/29/93 IrJb 15 TO: FROM: RE: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CITY OF T~'MECULA PLANNING DEP;r. ~'~~nmental Heath Specialist IV PLOT PLAN NO. i>A93-0158 RECEIVED AUG 12 1993 DATE: Augu.~ 6, 1993 The Deparmm~t of Envinmmental Health has review=t the ~ ~m of ~ T~ V~q U~ ~1 1. h~~~~y~a~~~~ ~~~efo~o~ 2. ~~~~~~~~~aC~2S~~PI~. ~ ~~mof~~~~~~a~~~of~~ z ~ p~ p~ ~. ~ ~i~ ~ ~y ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ve ~t ~ ~ ~ c ~e~E~~of~~l~~~~len~""~ ~ not m ~ ~ m a ~ ~~ n - ~ ~ ~). OR ~z ~ ~-~t B~. (~) 35~. (~9) ~7549~ R/VERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 W'r, ST SAN JACINTO .A.VI~NUE C/1-4,) 657-3183 00 T0: Temecula Planning Department ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: PA93-0158 August 9, 1993 With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced plot plan, the Fire Deparr3nent recozmends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Ci:y of Te~ecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: !. The Fire Department is required to set a minimumfire flow for the remodel or construction of all cou~ercial buildings using the procedure established in Ordinance 546. 2. Provide or show there exists a water sysuem capable of delivering 2000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 3. A combination of on-sine and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6"x4"x2-2 1/2"), Will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 4. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with fire hydrmnts 5. The required fire flow my be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire protection. 6. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant type, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall 'be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the ~iverside County Fire Department", 7. Install aI complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve ~-d fire department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, ~-d a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s)· A. statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building plans. 8. A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must appear on the title page of the building pl~-~. 9. Prior to final inspection of any building , the applicant shall prepare ~d submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site ply- designation required fire lanes with appropriate lane paint. I0. Install portable fire extinguishers with aminimumrating of 2A10BC Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00 to the City of Temecula for plan check fees· Please reference Pi~ Check number with remittance. 12. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall deposit, 'with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of $.25 per square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts· This amount must be submitted separately from the plan check fees. 13. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the building and safety office. All _uuestions. regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred =o the Planning and Engineering Staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Deparment Planner Fire Safety Specialist ucho Water OtTacerr: doh~ F. HemWar PhilliD i_ Fm T~m ~uet~ C. ~e e( P~ ~ ~uck ~dm ~L & He~on RECEIVED August 11, 1993 Mz. Matthew Fagan City of Tcmccula planning Department 43174 Business Park Driye Tcmccula, CA 92590-3606 AUG 13 19-.°3 ~'dB.~CT: Water Availabffity APN 954-020-002 CPA.gS-0158) Dear Mr. Fagan: Please be advised that the above-referenced property. is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water Disu'ict [RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between R~ and the propert7 owner. Water ava~ability would bc contingent upon the propera/owner signing an Agency A~rccmcnt which assiEns water management rigbin, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Dohcny. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Development Engineering Manager SB:SO:eb129-2/F186 cc: Senga Dohcrty, Engineering Technician Rawadam (::dEW Wm~m,' D.~ MTDtaZ PdaaMI · Pmmtt~Ttee Bem fOtT· TIawcMIm. CaIi~I258~TT · ,gOIIGTG-,I, 101 · FA.XIIOIIITG,,NIS ,/,astern 1 V~unlclpat Vv aL~rjJlsLr~cL C,.,w,'..pi J. o,.fmrfw ,...._Rd Re. ot,:ne ,rid 5~ftill P, oSefs M. Cox %~tPAL ~DEC ~/ August 17, 1993 AUG20 t Matthew Fagan, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: Temecula Valle~ Unified School District Plot Plan (PA 93-0158) Dear Mr. Fagan: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposed expansion of the existing Temecula Valley Unified School District facility located on the north side of Rancho Vista Rd., between Avenida De La Reina and Via E1 Greco, (Assessor Parcel No. 954-020-002). The subject project is located within the District's sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's pe~nit to operate, and the service agreement between the Dis=riot and the developer of the subject project. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. DiStrict's Other Issues The subject project representative must contact the District's Customer Service Department in.order to arrange for the following actions: M~iI To: Post Office Box 8~00 · San Jscinto, C21ifornia 92581-8300 · Telephone (~09) 925-7676 · F= (5N39) 929-0257 · M~n Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, Sanjar. into · C,,,t~ffpr Stt-vi2/Fngint-eriqg Ann~: 440 E, Osklsnd Avenu~ liemet CA Matthew Fagan PA 93-0158 August 17, 1993 Page 2 · plan check of oneire plumbing · field inspection of onsite plumbing · revision to existing service account to reflect expanded facility Shouldyou have anyquestions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Senior Engineer Customer Service Department DGC/cz AB 93-863 (wp-nn~-PA930|5~.ciz) ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAff REPORT SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 · - · ]t:~'TAFFRPT~I~IPAgZ.PC2 9/29/93 16 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 20, 1993 Planning Application No. 93-O158, Amendment No. I Prepared By: Matthew Fag.n, Assistant Planner The Planning Del~artment Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1; and APPROVEPlanning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) REPRESENTATIVE: BGRP Architecture and Planning PROPOSAL: Expansion of the existing 'I'VUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase 1 consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 consists of a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office· LOCATION: 31350 Rancho Vista Road EXISTING ZONING: R-R (Rural Residential) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: S-P 199 {Margarita Village Specific Plan) R-R (Rural Residential) S-P 199 (Margarita Village Specific Plan) S-P 199 (Margarita Village Specific Plan) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: School/School Administration R:%S%STAFFRP"~1SIPAO3,PC 1/8193 mf SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Single-Family Residential Temecula Valley High School Metropolitan Water District Easement/Single-Family Residential Single-Family Residential PROJECT STATISTICS Building Area: ' Phase 1 - Warehouse: Phase 2 - Warehouse: Offices: Total: 19,140 square feet 15,300 square feet 13,824 square feet 48,264 square feet Parking Spaces Required: 193 Parking Spaces Provided: 224 BACKGROUND Planning Application No. 93-0158 was submitted to the Planning Department on July 23, 1993. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on August 12, 1993. Additional clarification of the site plan was requested at that time. Staff also requested a copy of the existing Transportation Reduction Plan for the TVUSD facility, a copy of the air emission and noise study prepared for the site and a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Planning Application No. 93-0158 was deemed complete on August 26, 1993. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Application No. 93-0158 is a proposal to expand the existing 'i'VUSD facility in two (2) phases and relocate the bus maintenance and storage facility. Phase 1 consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility/ to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers, the drivers lounge and the bus maintenance and storage. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office. ANALYSIS Project Phasina As mentioned above, the project is proposed to be constructed in two (2) phases. In addition to the information stated above, paving of the northwest portion of the site and removal of existing trailers on the site will occur during Phase 1. Architecture The warehouse facility that will be constTucted during Phase I of the project will be concrete block material. Pilaster elements have been included on the elevations to break up the vertical R:~-'~"TAFFRI~ISIPAI3.PC l/Ill3 mf 2 plane and a two (2) foot wide band Traverses the building which breaks up the horizontal plane. The building is compatible with the existing buildings in terms of design and colors. As mentioned above, designs for the Phase 2 (warehouse expansion and office expansion) will be reviewed by Staff prior to the issuance of building permits for these items. Designs for the Phase 2 (warehouse expansion and office expansion) will be reviewed by Staff prior to the issuance of building permits for these items. Compatibility With Adjacent Uses Homes are located adjacent to the northern and western boundaries of the project site. These · homes have views into the site because the site is lower in elevation. Potential impacts have been mitigated through the use of landscaping along the perimeter of the site. Staff transmitted the landscape plan to the City's landscape architect for review and comment and the landscape architect determined that views of the facility from residences along the north, east and west sides will be sufficiently screened with the addition of these new plantinge. Noise The project will result in an overall decrease in existing noise levels. The site is currently developed with a more intensive use (bus storage and maintenance) which will be relocated as a result of this project, The noise impacts from the buses which have been an issue would be substantially reduced when all phases are completed and the bus maintenance facility is relocated. This is based upon information contained in an acoustical report prepared for this site by Med-Tox Associates, Inc, dated January 21, 1991. With The removal of the buses from the site noise impacts are anticipated to decrease, Traffic The project will not generate additional traffic..The relocation of the bus storage and maintenance facility will result in a less intensive use of The site. Ultimate buildout of the site will include additional warehouse facilities and office/administration uses. A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan has already been established for this site and is currently being implemented. The TDM program is required under State Law and serves to mitigate any potential impacts to the traffic in the area as a result of development. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Existing zoning for the site is Specific Plan (S.P. 199 - Margarita Village). The Specific Plan land use designation for the site is school administration. Ordinance No. 348.2922 {the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school administrative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is Public/Institutional Facilities. The draft General Plan states: "Additional public and institutional uses may be developed in the residential or non-residential land use designations under the procedures established in the Development Code.' Until the Development Code is adopted, Staff is utilizing the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 348. As mentioned above, Ordinance No. 348.2922 (the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school administrative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. R:~S~"'fAFFRrr%158PAI3.PC 9/I/93 mf 3 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Pursuant to me California Environmental QualiW Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects will not be considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions of Approval added to the project. These will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and therefore a Negative Declaration will be adopted. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Planning Application No. 93-0158 is a proposal to expand the existing 'I'VUSD facility in two (2) phases and relocate the bus maintenance and storage facility. The building which is proposed in Phase I is compatible with the existing buildings in terms of design and colors. Designs for Phase 2 (warehouse expansion and office expansion) will be reviewed by Staff prior to the issuance of building permits for these items. The project will result in an overall decrease to existing noise levels and will not generate additional traffic. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village}, Ordinance No. 348. and the draft General Plan. The Initial Study prepared for the project determined the impacts associated with this project are not significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions of Approval added to the project. RNDINGS There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0158. Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is Public/Institutional Facilities. The draft General Plan states: "Additional public and institutional uses may be developed in the residential or non-residential land use designations under the procedures established in the Development Code." Until the Development Code is adopted, Staff utilizes the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 348. As mentioned above, Ordinance No. 348.2922 (the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school administrative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The project as proposed is consistera with Specific Plan No. 199 {Margarita Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. The land use designation for the site is identified in the draft General Plan as Public/Institutional Facilities. Uses which are consistent with the Public/Institutional Facilities land use designation will ultimately be permitted on this site, and would include educational facilities. R:%S~l'AFFRFT%lSIPAI3.PC 9/I/93 nd 4 The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section 65360, and Ordinance No. 348. The proposed projecl: is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village. The project is located within Planning Area No. 28 of Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, and is identified as a 11.0. acre school administration site within the Specific Plan. The project as designed and conditioned meets all the requirements of Specific Plan No. 199. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the !and and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use. In addition, the project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. Access to the project site is from a publicly maintained road (Margarita Road). Attachments: 2, 3. 4. Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 6 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11 Initial Study - Blue Page 17 Exhibits - Blue Page 35 R:~,S~"TAFFRPT%lSIPAS3.PC 9/I/~3 mf 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93~ R:t,S'kqTA~ISIPAI3.PC I/I/13 mf 6 ATTACHI~-IENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93.- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIVrtRSION OF TwE ~ OF TEM CULA APPROVING PI.At~'NING AFFLICATION NO. 93-01~8, AMEND1VrENT NO. 1 TO CONSTRUCT APPROXIMATI~-Y 34,440 SQUARE Fl~-k'7 OF WABk'~tOUSE SPACE AND 13,824 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE IN TWO PHASES ON A PARCFL CONTAINING 10.94 ACRES LOCATED AT 313~0 RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCel. NO. 954020-002 WIII~.EA.q, Temecuht Valley Unified School District fled Planning Application No. 93-0158 in accordance with the Riverside County I and Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WRERF-~kS, said Planning Application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; IVFn~E~, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Planning Application on September 20, 1993, at which time inte~ persons had oppormmty to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and WIrK~'.AS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Planning Application; NOW, THElz~'.FORE, ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEVIECI~A DOES RESOLVE, DETER~ AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Seaion 1. Findints. That the Temecuh Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a General Plan within thirty (30) months foEowing incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a Genenl Plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the General Plan, ff all of the following requirements are met: General Plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the prepantion of the R:~S',STAFF!nFT%l SBPAI3.PC I/I/93 nd 2. The planning agency finds. in approving projects and taking other actions. including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that'the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which wffi be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted G=--neral Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately -inconsistent with the plan. c.' The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordimmces. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (heminaRer "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorpontion of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At thi,~ time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General C. The Planning Commission, in approving of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is Public/Institutional Facilities. The draft General Plan states: "Additional public and institutional uses may be developed in the residential or non-residential land use designations under the procedures established in the Development Code." Until the Development Code is adopted, Staff utilizes the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 348. As mentioned above, Ordinance No. 348.2922 (the Ordinance adopting Specific Plan No. 199) includes public school ~dmini.~trative buildings and facilities as permitted uses. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margatitn Villsge), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. 2. Them is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan ff the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. The land use designation for the site is identified in the draft Cm-neral Plan as Public/institutional Facilities. Uses which are consistent with the Public/InstiUnional Fac~ities land use designation will ultimately be permitted on this site, and would include educational facilities. 3. The proposed use or action complies with atl other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section 65360, and OrdinnnC~ No. 348. The proposed pwject is co,-~i~ent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita VillnL, e. The projea is located within plnnning Area No. 28 of Specific Plan No. 199 - Maxgarita Villnge, and is identified as a 11.0 acre school R:%S'~"TAFFNrr~lSBPAOa. PC 9/I/93 mf 8 administration site within the Specific Plan. The project as designed and conditioned meets all the requirements of Specific Plan No. 199. 4. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general weftare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use. In addition, the project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining p~os. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated n'ght-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. Access to the project site is from a publicly maintained road (Matg~ta Road). D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to thc logical development of its propo~ site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 2. l=*nvironmentaJ Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1 to construct approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases on a parcel containing 10.94 acres located at 31350 Rancho Vista Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 954-020-4302 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND AI)OFfiil) this 20th day of September ,1993. STEVEN I. FORD CHAIRMAN R:'~S~qTAFFRP~I SBPAI3.PC 1/I/93 mf 9 I tTER~'.Ry CERTIFY that the foregoing P~soluflon was duly adopted by the Planrang Commission of the City of Temecula at a re..~ular meeting thereof. held on the 20 th day of September, 1993 by the foUowing vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: .' 'ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THOENI4Tt -~- SF. CRErARY R:~AIc~158PAI3.PC 9/I/13 mf 10 ATi'ACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~,S'~AI=FRIrI'~IEIPAI,3,PC I/I/13 mf I 1 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I Project Description: To construct approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases. Assessor's Parcel No.: 954-020-002 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General The use hereby permitted by this Plot Plan is for approximately 34,440 square feet of warehouse space and 13,824 square feet of office space in two phases, The permit~ee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Planning Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. 1. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding agains~ the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial constTuction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial LKiliZstiOn contemplated by this approval, The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on the Site Plan marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these conditions. 5. Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E. Colors and materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit F (color material board). A minimum of 193 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. Two hundred twenty-four (224) parking spaces shall be provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit D. R:%S~'T:AI=FRF/%lSIPAI3.PC $/IN3 mf 12 , A minimum of five (5) handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on Exhibit D. 9. Thirteen (13) Class II bicycle racks shell be provided as shown on Exhibit 10. Landscaping of the site shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit D. Within Forrv-Eioht (48) Hours of fie Approval of this Project 11. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources . Code Section 21152 and 14 Col. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, {Fish and .Game Code Section 711.4(c)). Prior to the Issuance of Buildino Permits 12. Three (3) copies of a Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along streets and within the parking areas. 13. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 2 (warehouse expansion and office expansion), the applicant shall file an Administrative Plot Plan (PPA). Accompanying the PPA shall be three {3) sets of elevations and the appropriate filing fee. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 14. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground vieW. 15. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans. 16. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 17. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectprized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 R:%S~qTAFF~ISIPAI3.PC 9/I/93 mf 13 , inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephone 18. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 scluare feet in size. A maintenance bond, to guarantee the installation of planrings and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed with the Department of Planning, Said bond amount shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for review and approval prior to the submittal of the bond. 19. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 20. 21. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Bectrical Code: California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code, Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. 22. Prior to the commencement of any construction work, obtain all building plan and permit approvals. 23. Provide occupancy approval for all existing buildings (i.e. finialed building permit, Certificate of Occupancy}. 24. All existing buildings and facilities must comply with applicable handicapped accessibiliW regulations. 25. 26. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. Restroom fixtures, number and Wpe, shall be in accordance with the provisions of the 1991 edition of the uniform plumbing code, Appendix C. 27. The applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans submitted for plan review, 28. The applicant shall provide electrical plan including load calcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review, R:t,S~STAFFFFT%lSIPAI3.PC l/I/13 mf 14 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Prior to Issuance of Gradina Permits 29. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the projec~ is shown to be exempt. Prior to Issuance of Bulldine Permits ' 30. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Rood Control and Water Conservation District. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid, 31. The Applicant shall deposit with fie Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact. 32. The Applicant shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Applicant requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Applicant shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to the Applicant. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Applicant shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Applicant understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Applicant will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Applicant is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. Prior to Issuance of an Encroachment Permits 33. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within the existing City right-of-way. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 34. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. R:~S~qTAFFIIr~ISIPAI3.PC 9/I/93 mf 15 35. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. OTHER AGENCIES 36, Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health [:)epartment's tTansmittal dated August 6, 1993, a copy of which is attached. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittel dated August 9, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 38. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water DistTict's tTansmittal dated August 11, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:%S~T'AFFRFI~lSIPAI3.PC 9/I/93 mf I 6 TO: FROM: RE: Uounty oI Kxvers de DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT. ~~v~~nmental H:th Sl:~-dalist W PLOT PLAN NO. PA93-0158 RECEIVED AUG 12 1993 ~'tt. "'- DATE: Augur6, 1993 The Departmint of Envimmmmal Health has reviewed the Im}imsed :-. ,r - *~t of the Temenla Valley. Unified School Dismet Fneility ml has the following c~- ...... ^,. taq,,;.~g,.~t lnatditiem, itmaybenmmamtytowm-ifythesit~ofllm.sys~mbyobmmm_-agopy. ofthe buadmg permit and =.=djob card.n..~ mgiv=si~ county 4. Detailed mils trotlag my be required ff the above mnnot be a thear~aisw~thinahigimwatcrtablenoranareaw~soilshav~po~leachingcha~ b thenininsubsm',a=e.sysmn~vefailed~=failiag. c the~.mingsubsm. far~.m~z~mm~of~sizeorkxm~ii,,m,,,,..~l~MNe~ea(lp~mi,~ a~e not to be to=mad in a vetxicular tmtfrdpm~-_- arm - paved or utmpavmi~ 5. A ~vill-serve" l~h~r a~.a th~ qency providing water. OR 6. Should sanitary sewer be available, a "~ill-s~rve" let~r a~,,~ lh~ ~ ~ distrigt Illall be rmltUzm~ 7 PRIOR TO BbTLDING PERMIT I, SSUANCE, clmnm~ from Rive~id= ~ Eke_ ~ of H-n,'dous ~vicea M--mais bh..,~.,.~r Brm:2a (909) SM:~r (909) 275-89g0 I.M. I4ARI~ ~""'--' FIRECHIIEI: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AV'ENI.~ * PLRRIS, CALIFORNL~ 92~'70 (714) 6:.S7-318~ T0: Temecula Pl~-ning Department ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: PA93-0158 August 9, 1993 With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced plot plan, the Fire Deparnmenn recon=nends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City of Te~ecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: !. The Fire Department is required to set a minimumfire flow for the remodel or construction of all con~nercial buildings using the procedure established in Ordinance 546. 2. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 3. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrsnts, on a looped system (6"x4"x2-2 1/2"), Will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet firom any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available firom any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 4. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with fire hydrants 5. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire protection. 6. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant type, location and spacing, and the systemshall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department". 7. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 23 feet from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building plans. 8. A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must appear on the title page of the building plans. 9. Prior to final inspection of any building , the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designation required fire lanes with appropriate lane paint. I0. Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimumrating of 2A10BC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applic~mt/developer shall be responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00 to the City of Temecula for plan check fees. Please reference Plan Check number with remittance. 12. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall deposit, with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of $.25 per square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be submitted separately from the plan check fees. 13. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the building and safety office. All quesZions regarding nhe meaning of condinions shall be referred no zhe Planning and Engineering Snarl. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner Laura Cabre/ Fire Safeny Specialist R~Iph K Daily Ns~w. IL Huffms Cssbs F. b Lisa D. PetePsou Rle. haf~ D. Steffey August 11, 1993 Mr. Matthew Fagan City of Temecula pLqnning Deparunent 43174 Business Park Drive Tcmeeula, CA 92590-3606 Sb'KTE~: Water Ava~abiiity APN 954-020-002 (PAgS-01S8) Dear Mr. Fa~n: RECEIVED AU6 13 1993 Please be advised that the above-referenced property. is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water Distfia CRCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Water availabili~ would be contingent upon the property owner si~ing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, ff any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Development Engineering Manager S~:$O:eb129-2/F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician ,,t. 2N61Dmx P, md. Peet(34Veee klOlT · TmCalii~tm il? · e~gs6T64101 · rAXIIOe~e'r&411S . .,astern icipat W a er J istrict AUG20 Matthew Fagan, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: Temecula Valley Unified School District Plot Plan (PA g3-0158) Dear Mr. Fagan: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposed expansion of the existing Temecula Valley Unified School District facility located on the north side of Rancho Vista Rd., between Avenida De La Reina and Via E1 Greco, (Assessor Parcel No. 954-020-002). The subject project is located within the District"s sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available capabilities of the District's systems ere continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service.requirements, ~e timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. other Issues The subject project representative must contact the District's Customer Service Department in.order to arrange for the following actions: Mail To: Post Office Bex 8300 · San Jetinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 92~-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 ~ Off~: 2045 ,~ Saa JKinm Avem~Sen jmmo - O~-~-S~v~/~ Am~r 440 F.. Oea,~-a Avea~i4,em~, CA Mat=hew Fagan PA 93-0158 August 17, 1993 Page 2 plan check of onsi=e plumbing field inspection of onsite plumbing revision to existing service account to reflect expanded facility Should you have anyquestions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL ~ATER DISTRICT David G. Senior Engineer Customer Service Department DGC/cz AB 93-863 (wp-mw~-PA9301~8.:U) ATTACHMENT NO. 3 INITIAL STUDY R:~'~'~T&FFRP'T%1SIPAI3.PC 1/1/13 mf 17 City of Temecula Pl nnin Department Initial Environmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMA~ON 1. Name of Project: Temecnia Valley Unified School District CFVUSD) Warehouse Facility 2. Case Numbers: Planning Application No. 93-0158, Arr~ndt~'nt No. 1 3. Location of Project: 31350 Rancho Vista Road Description of Project: ExpansiOn to the existing TVUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase 1 consists of the constntaion of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion w the District Office. S. Date of Environmental Assessment: August .7.5, 1993 6. Name of Proponent: -'Temecula Valley Unified School District CFVUSD) Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 3 1350 Rancho Vista Road Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 695-7340 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC~ (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Seaion II~ 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering. of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surfa,z relief features? The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical fp_,n,res? X Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? R:XS%STAFFNPT%1SIPAI3.PC 9/8/93 mf 'J 8 f. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, ground failure, or similar hazards? Any development within an Alquist-Prio|o Special Studies Zone? Will the proposal result in: Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objec~onable odors? Alteration of air movement, te.u~amre, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally?. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage panems, or the rate and mount of surface runoff?. c. Alterations w the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the mount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge inw surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperann'e, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the mount of wa~r otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Yes X Maybe X ~:~S~qTAFFFUrT~I BBPAI3.PC:: S~)!3 mf I 9 Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees. shrubs, ~,TaSS, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threaw. n~, or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of n~w species of plants into an arsa of na~ive vegetazion, or in a barrier to the ~ormal repleni~hm,,pt of existing species? d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop? Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Chan~e in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, firda, amphibians, shellfish, benthic organisms, and/or insects).'? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threazened, or endangered species of animals? c. The introduction of new wild life species into an area? d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals? e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of peopie to severe noise levels? c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or General Plan? Maybe N__o X X R:~q~q'r~lsIPkl3.Pc l/I/13 f~ 20 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the relezse of any haz~dous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals, oil or radiation)? b. The use, stora2e, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? c. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Homing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Cixtuladon. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?. b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycl ists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following arm: a. Fire protection? .. , · R:~'T~/'AIcFFFT%1SIPAI3 .PC 9/8/93 mf 21 Yes M av~}e X X X X 15. 16. 17. 1S. b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads7 f. Other governmental services: Ener~. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water systems? d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? e. Swrrn water drainage systems? f. Solid waste disposal systems? Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient pn-_L~rn of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. The exposure of people w potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive recepwrs (such as hospitals and schools) w toxic pollutant emissions? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: Maybe X X a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? R:%S~q'rAI:FRIr~ISBPAI3.PC: 9/8/93 mf 22 19. 20. Yes b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? Reeren~on. Will the proposal result in an impa~t upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resour~s or opportunities? Cultural Resour~s. WHI the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object?. c. Any potential to cause a physical change which would ~ unique ethnic cultural values? d. Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Maybe N,_~o R:~'~,STAF'FI~T%lSIPAI3.PC 9/I/13 mf 23 HI. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL II~IPACTS l.b. 1.C. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. No. The proposal will not result in unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures. Manufactured slopes already exist on the site, and additional landscaping is included in the project for erosion control. Construction and grading for this development will not be at depths which would affect any geologic substructures. No impK'u are foreseen as a result of this project. Yes. The proposal will result in the disruption, displacement, compaction, or overcovering of the soil. All grading activity requires some form of disruption, displacemenT, compaction and/or overcovering of the soil. Impacts are not considered significant because the site has previously been graded and because the amount of disruption, disply-era, mr. compaction and overcovering of the soil will be minimal (grading is less than 50 cubic yards). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The proposal will resuk in a change in the sit~ mpogra~y and ground surface relid futures. The topography of the site has already been modified into its cmTem configuration. Additional grading is proposed for the project (less than 50 cubic yards), however, since the mount of grading will be minimal, modification to topography and ground surface relief features not be considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The proposal will not result in the desInaction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features. No unique ~eologic features or physical features exist on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. Development of the site will not result in incressed wind and water erosion of soils both on and off-site. Harriscape will be placed in the remaining portion of the site which is currently unimproved (din). In addition, as mentioned in response 1 .a., additional landscaping is included in the project for erosion control. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The project proposal will not result in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Reference responses 1 .a. and l .e: No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The proposal will not result in modifications to any 'wash, channel, creek, river or lake. None exist on the project site, nor are proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:~S~q'rAFFRPT%l SBPAI3.1~ 9/I/93 mf 24 l.h. Air 2.a..b. Water 3.a. 3.b. 3.c. Yes. Developmere of the site will expose people and property m unhquake hazards since the project is located in Southern California, an area which is seismically active. Any potential impacts will be mitigated through building construction which is consistera with Uniform Building Code standards. Information contained in the City of Temecula General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (dated August 12, 1992), the Southwest Area Conununity Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (adopted May, 1989) and the Margarita Village Specific Plan Enviromental Impact Report (certified April, 1986) states that the project will not expose people or property to geologic hazards such as landslides, mudslides, ground failure or liquefaction. No known landslides are located on the site or proximate to the .site. The same is true for mudslides. The potemial for ground failure and liquefaction is also low in this area. No. The proposal does not include developmere within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone as identified by the Stare of California, Resource Agengy Depatunent of Conservation Special Studies Zone Map. Therefore, no significant impa~s are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The project will result in air emissions both in the short and long-nm. Air emissions and objectionable odors will occur during the constru~on phase of the project. These impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant. The site was previously used for school, office/adm!n_iswaxive, warehousing, and storage and nnimenanco of buses. The project proposes w relocate the bus storage and maintenance and replace it with additional warehousing operations and office/administrative uses. This will ultimately result in a less intense use of the site. The impact to air emissions created by the buses was not considered significant. Because of this and since the site will not be used as intensely due to the conversion of uses on the site, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The project will not result in altermons of air movement. temperature, or moisture, or in any change in climate either locally or regionally. The scale of the project precludes it from crutm~ any significant impacts on the environment in this area. No. The proposal will not result in changes-to .currents, to the course or direaion of water movements in either marine or fresh waters. The project site is not located adjacent to either marine or fresh water sources. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this pwject. Yes. The proposal will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage panems and the raze and mount of surface runoff. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by consn'uction of buildings, accompanying bardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, impacts are mitigated through site design. Existing drainage conveyances safely and adequately handle the existing runoff and any potential runoff which will be created by this project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The proposal will not result in alterations to the course or flow of flood waters. The projea is not located within or adjacent to an identified floodway. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. FI:%S~qTAFl:FIPT%lSIPAI3.PC: 9/8/13 mf 25 3.d. No. The proposal will not result in a change in the amount of surface water in any waterbody. No major waterbodies are located in the subjea project area, therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The proposal will result in discharges inw surfmz watch or in any alteration of surface.water qualiW. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the developer will be required w comply with the requir~ of the National Polintant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permi_-_~ until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be miu'gated to a level less than significant. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The proposal will not result in an alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwaxen. Construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this pwject. 3.g. No. The proposal will not result in a change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direa additions, withdrawals, or through inzrception of an aqulfor by cuts or excavations. Reference response 3 .f. No significant imp. acts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.h. No. The project will not result in the reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies. Water service et~rendy exists at the project site. Additional water service will be provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD) upon completion. of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner (based upon tr~,t~mi-~l dated August 11, 1993, a copy of which is on file with the Planning Department). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.i. No. The proposal will not expose people or property to water related hazards such as flooding. Reference response 3.c. In addition, the project site is not located within the boundaries of the Dam Inundation Area as identified in the General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula dated August 12, 1993. Plant Life No. The proposal will not result in any change to the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants. The site has been previously graded,. developed, and landscaped. The projea is considered "inftll" with development existing on the site, to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.b. No. The proposal will not result in a reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants. There are no unique or rare, threatened or endangered species of plants on the site, therefore, none will be significantly affected (Reference response 4'.a.). No significant hnpacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:'~%'%STAFFIFT%ISIPAI3.PC 9/8/93 26 4.c. No. Development of the site will not result in the creation of a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species due to the fact that the projea is considered "in-fill" and is surrounded by existing development to the north, south, east and west. Although the project proposes species of plants which do not currently exist on the site, it is not being introduced into an area of native vegetation. No significant impsets are anticipated as a result of this projea. 4.d. No. The proposal will not result in a reduction in ti~ acreage of any agricultural crop. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project since no prime farmland, farmland of statewide or local importance, or unique farmland is locat~ within the project site. Animal l,i[e 5.a.b.d.e. 5.c. No. The project will not tmult in a change in the divm-sity of species, or numbers of species of ankuals. The project site lies within the Riverside County Stephem Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservatiou Plan Preliminary Study Alza, however, the project itself will not impact the habitat of the Stephem Kangaroo Rat (SKR). The site has beeu prmviousiy develolx~i and consists of structures, halxt~, landqrmping and dirt. The project is considered "infill" with development existing to the north, south, ~ast and west. Tnm~ is no potmxtial for the change in the diversity and number (reduction) of the species, or in producing a barrier to the migration of Stephens Kangaroo Rat as well as the deterioration of its habitat exists within the project area. SKR Mitigation Fees are not required for the development of parcels used by local governmental entities (as per Seaion 10(e) of Ordinance No. 663). No other sensitive species have been identified upon the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. The proposal will not result in the introduction of any new wildlife species into the area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Noise 6.a. No. The proposal will not result in increases to existing noise levels. The site is currently developed with a more intensive use (bus storage and maimchance) which will be relocated as a result of this project. Noise impacts from the buses were considered significant but had been mitigated on the site. This is based upon information contained in a report prepared for this site by Med-Tox Associates, Inc. dated January 21, 1991. With the removal of the buses from the site, no significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.b. Yes. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the development/construction phase (short run). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can c-__,_,=,e hesring damage from steady 8- hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore will not be considered signjficant. 6.c. No. The proposal will not result in the exposure of people to severe vibrations. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:~'~qTAFF'FPT%1SIPAJ3.PC 9/~/93 mf 27 Li~,ht nnd Glare Yes. The proposal will ultimately produce and result in light/glare as all development of this · nature results new light sources. Potential light and glare impacts upon adjacent residences can be mitigated through the use of low height lighting devices (under 10 feet high). The project is located lower than the adjacent residences. In addition, all light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. No impacts are foreseen from light and glare since any future development on the site will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). Land Use 8.a. No. The proposal will not alter the present land use of the area, because the site is currently used for school/admini-~tration uses. The project as proposed is comistent with the Margarita Village Specific Plan (SP - 199). In addition, it is likely that the proposal will be consistent with the future General Plan land use designation for the site which identifies the site as Public/Institutional Facilities. No significant i,~acts are sntidpsted as a result of this project. 8.b. No. The proposal will not result in an alteration to the future planned land use of the site as described in the Margarita Village Specific Plan or the City's funfie General Plan. Reference response 8.a. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.a.b. Maybe. The proposal may result in an increase in the rate of use of any _nn_n, val resource or in the depletion of nonrenewable resource(s). Development of the site will result in an increase in the rate of use of natural resources (~ustruction a?,=,_-~'ials, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent depletion of these non-renewable natural resources. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts are not seen as significant. Risk of Upset 10.n.b. No. The proposal will not result in a risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditiom, since none are proposed in the request. The same is true for the use, storage, trampon or disposal of any hazardous or toxic m-,-riels. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. lO.c. No. The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an etnergency evaluation plan. The subject site is not located in an area which could irr~.act an emergency response plan. The project will take access from a maintained street and will therefore not impede any r. me. tg~ response or emergency evacuation plans. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Population 11. No. The project will not result in altering the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of the area. The limited scale of the project will not result in the relocation of people. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:~tSTAFFRPT'%lSIPAI3.PC l/I/13 mf 28 '* e Housing 12. No. Reference response 11. Projects of this nature do not cause people to relocate, and merefore, additional housing needs will not be created. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Trnn.;orm~on/Cireula~on 13 .a. No. The proposal will not result in the generation of substantial additional vehicular movement. The relocation of the bus storage and maintenance facility will result in a less intensive use of the site. Ultimate buildout of the site will include additional warehouse facilities and Office/_ndminl-gtratiOn tt$~. A Transportation Demand Management CFDIVf) plan h~ already been established for this site and is currently being implemented. The TDM program is required under State Law and serves to mitigate any potential impacts to the traffic in the area as a result of developmenL No significant impacts are expected from development of the site. 13 .b. Yes. The project will result in an increased demand for new parking. Currently, one hundred and seven (107) parking spaces exist on site. One hundred ninety-three (193) parking spaces will be required as a result of project build-out. The project as proposed will meet the amount of parking spaces required under Ordinance No. 348. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13 .c. No, The proposal will not create impacts upon existing tnnsportation system, including public transportation. The site is located adjacent to a fully improved secondary street (Rancho Vista Road). A Rivehide Transit Agency (RTA) mute is available in the area where the project is located (the mute goes past the interseaion of Margarita and Rancho Vista Roads and the site is approximately 2500 feet from this intersection). In addition, a Transportation Demand Management CfD!VO plan has already been established for this site and is an'rently being implemented. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this projea. I3.d. Yes. The proposal will result in alterations to present ps_n_erns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods. The site is currently used for the storage and maintenance of buses. The project is a proposal to relocate the bus facility and expand warehousing activities and office/adminiswation uses. This will logically alter the present circulation pattern. Since the proposal will result in a less intensive traffic impacts, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this projecL 13 .e. No, The proposal will not result in alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic since none exists currently in the proximity of the site and none are proposed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.f. Yes. The proposal will result in an increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. The hazards will increase as the project develops due to increased activity on the site. These impacts are not seen as significant. Impacts have been mitigated to a level less than significant through the site design, which is consistent with City standards. R:'~'~"TAFFIFT%168PAO3.PC 9/8/93 29 Public Services 14.a.b. No. The proposal will not have a substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire or poli~z prot~zion. The additional buildings will innzmen~ly increase the need for fire and police protection, however, due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts ere not seen as significant. 14.c. No. The proposal will not have a s,,bs'-nd,! effect upon or result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The projea is for school facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this projea. 14.d. No. The proposal will not have a substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered parks or other recreational facilities. F. xistin,~ facilities on site will service the need generated by the projea. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.e. Yes. The proposal will result in a need for the n~intenant-e of public facilities, including wads. Fundil~ for mninh, nnnCe Of rontl~ iS d~'iV~[ from th~ Gasoline Tax which iS diStributed to the City of Temecula from the State of California. Impam to ¢un'~ and future needs for mnintetlsqce of roads as a result of development of the site will be inct~, however, they will not be considered significam. ThiS iS because the Ga~line Tax iS sufficient to cover any of the proposed expenses. 14.f. No. The proposal will not have a substantial affect upon or rmult in a need for new or altered governmental services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of thiS project. 15.a. No. The proposal will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or ~mergy. As mentioned in responses 9 .a. and 9.b. the proposal may result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resource or the depletion of any nonrenewable resource. Development of the site will result in an increase in the rate of use of pnmral resources (construction materials, fuels for daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent depletion of these non-renewable n~m,ral resources. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts are not seen as significant. 15 .b. No. The project will not result in a substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, nor will the project require the development of new sources of energy. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of thiS project. Utilities 16.a No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or sobsmntial alterations to power or natural gas. The projea site iS within proximity of existing facilities. The project iS seen as an "in-fill" projea with existing uses to the north, south, east and' west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of thiS project. 16.b. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to communication systems (reference respome No. 16.a.). No significant im.nn_~g .are anticipated as a result of thiS pwject. R:~"~qTAFFIFT%lSBPAI3.PC I/I/93 mf 3O 16.c. No, The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to water systems. Reference response 3.h. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.d. No, The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to sanitary sewer system. The pmjea is Ioeatecl within Eastern Municipal Water Distria's (EIVlWD) sanitary sewer service area. Based upon information contained in the General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (dated August 12, 1993) adequate facilities exist (and are proposed) which will adequately service the project. No significant impms are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.e. No, The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to on-site storm water drainage systems. Since the projea is considered *in-fill" and a large pomon of the site has been previously developed, the proposal will utilize existing drainage systems. No. significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f. No, The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or subsmnti~ alterations to solid waste disposal systems. Any potential im,n, ms from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling lawgrams which are implemented by the City. No significant impms are anticipated as a ruult of this project. 16.g. No. The proposal will not result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above. (reference response No. 16.a.). No significant impms are anticipated as a result of this project. Human Health 17.a.b. No. The proposal will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. The County of Rivehide Health Services Agency has reviewed the project and its recommendations shall be included as conditions of approval for the projea (as per County of Riverside Health Services Agency transmittal dated August 6, 1993, a copy of which is on file with the Planning Department). In addition, the proposal will expose not people'to potential health hazards. No significant impms are anticipated as a result of this projea. 18.a. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public. The project is considered in-fill, with development located to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this pwjea. 18.b. Maybe. The proposal may result in the creation Of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. The projea proposes to locate buildings where there were previously trailers and vacant areas. Homes adjacent W the project have views into the site because the site is lower in elevation. Any potential impacts have been mitigated through the use of landscaping along the pctia, t~r of the site. No significant impms are anticipated as a result of this project. 18.c. Maybe. The proposal may result in detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area. Reference response 18.b. Any potential impacts have been mitigated to a level less than significant through the use of landscaping along the perimeter of the site. R:~q~STAFFRFf~I 58PA93.PC 9/8/93 31 Recresfion 19. No. The proposal wUl net result in impacts m the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opponunitias. The site is mntly being used for ~luc~ionnl, bus msiqtensnCe and storage, warehousing and office/pdmini~?atlv~ us~. P, gcl~gtionnl facilities e0cist on the site to accommodate the ~ild~qlt$, thefefol~ additiohal r~l"~Mionsl facil~ above those provided on site will be needed. No significant im,ng:t$ ate atllicipllllld as a t~sult of this project. Cultural Resources No. The proposal will net result in the altm'ation or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site. Although both the City of Tetnecula Draft General Plan. Environmental Impact Report (dated August 12, 1992) and the Southwest Area Community Plan. Final Environmental Impact Report (adoptsl May, 1989) indicate that there is a possibility that paleonmlogic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic sire may exist on the subject project site, the Final Environmental Impact Report for Msrl~ Village indic~es that no historic sites and only one archeological site were found within the Specific Plan area. The subject project site is net in proximity to the archaflogical site. In addition, the site has been previously graded and the potential for any significant resources to be locat~ on this site is very low. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 20.b. No. The proposal will not result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects m a prehistoric or historic building, smscture or object. Reference nspome 20.b. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 20.c. No. The will net have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values. No "unique" ethnic cultural values exist on-site or in proximity to the site. No significant impacts are andcipated as a result of this project. 20.d. No. The proposal will not result in restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. None currently exist on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:'~"'%STA~I~IPAI3JmC 9/I/93 mf 32 -IV. MANDATORY FINDENTGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the enviromne~ subsmutially reduce the habits of a fish, wildlife or bird species, came a fish, wildlife or bird population W drop below self sustaining levels, threateB to eliminsw- a plant, bird or animal sp~ci., or eliminar~ importare examples of the major periods of CAlifenfla hiswry or prehismry? Yes Maybe X Does the project have the pomntial m achieve short erm, w the disadvantage of long tin'm, environmental goals? (A short tmn impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long ~ impacts will endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulm'ively comiderable? (A project's impact on two or more separa~ resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) , Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAlVIE 'DE haNIIVlUSn IMPACT FINDINGS Yes Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, either individually or cumulativeiy, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viability" (Seaion 711.2, Fish and Game Code). __ X R:~qTAFFRP~I SBPAIa.PC 9/!/93 mf ENVHtONIVtENTAL DET!~..MINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposui projea COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION wH! be prepared. I find tha~ although the proposed project could have a signifu:ant effect 'on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the ar~,ed sheets and in the Conditiom of Approval tha~ have been added to the project will mitigate any poteutia!iy significant in~acU to a level of imignificance, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a siSni~cant effea on the environment, and an EIqVIRO~~ IMPACT REPORT is required. Mal:~ew Fn~,m. Assisw~ pisnn~' Name and Title R:'~G%STAFFIFT'%1glPAI3.PC 9/9/93 mf 34 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 .xe,errs R,'It~TAFFIqF~IlIPAI3.PC 1/1/13 elf 35 ATTACHMENT N0.4 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIRED SCHOOL DISTRICT LETTER SEPTEMBER 28, 1993 it:'~'~"T~ISLBAfJ./C:2 9/29~ kt 17 TEMECULA VALLEY Unified School District SUPERINTENDENT Pm B. my, Ed.D. BOAFID OF' EDUCATION Flos|e Vanoen-.aa,~ Joan F. SOarKrf~in Dr. Davd Eunc~, Wa~t Sw~Uaa Bamara Too~er September 28, 1993 Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Planning Application No. 93-0158 District Administration Center, Warehouse Proposal Dear Mr. Fagan: I am enclosing a sample of our letter which was sent to the mailing list of neighbors. In the letter we defined those hazardous materials which are stored in our warehouse: paint thinner, rubber cement, and bleach. These substances were identified by our Safety Officer who oversees all Material Safety Data Sheets on stored products. ' Funding for this project is from bonding of the school district pass through increment of the City Redevelopment Agency. The facilities that the District is considering for the District Administration Center would include offices, printing services, warehouse and book .depository activities, teacher and staff training rooms. Current warehouse activities are in a facility that is inadequate. This limited space makes it necessary to move pallets outdoors during the day, then back in again at night. We are also using temporary storage containers for warehouse items. Both these activities make it necessary to use the forklift outside the warehouse. The new warehouse would allow us to stole inside. The forklift activity would only be from the loading dock to inside the warehouse, thus reducing significantly the outdoor activity by the forklift. The other machinery currently stored and serviced at the site would transfer to the new Transportation and Maintenance Facility upon approval and construction of that project. 31350 Rancho Vista Road / Temecula. CA 92592 / (9091 676-2661 Planning Application No. 93-0158 Page 2 Please refer to the enclosed letter for our response to the other public questions. Respectfully, TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Lettie Boggs Coordinator of Facilities Planning cc: Dave Gallaher, TVUSD TEMECULA VALLEY Unified School District :, =,=~;NTENDE.NT September 27, 1993 Re: District Administration Center Warehouse Proposal Dear Neighbor: At the Planning Commission meeting on September 20, 1993, the School District asked the Commission to postpone a final decision regarding this proposal until its next meeting because of the confusion over the date. This would allow anyone who had made plans to attend, but couldn't because of the date, a chance to hear the proposal and make their comments to the Commission. The Planning Commission is now scheduled to hear this item at their regular meeting, October 4, 1993, meeting at Vail Elementary School at 6:00 P.M. Several questions were raised at the meeting last Monday, some of which the City planning staff will address, and some which I will respond to in this letter. We hope that this will help you better understand the project. The project timeline, pending Planning Commission approval in October, would be to begin construction of the warehouse in January 1994 with completion in mid-April. The removal of the Maintenance and Bus functions will not occur until completion of a separate project at a different location. That project is currently projected to be complete in August of 1994. If all approvals go smoothly and the August date can be met, all Maintenance and Transportation functions would be moved to the new location at that time. District Administration Center Warehouse Proposal Page 2 The proposal before the Commission at the October 4 meeting is for the construction of a warehouse at the District Administration Center, it also includes significant additional landscaping, including 113 trees. The existing transportation maintenance building will be converted to additional warehouse for items that are currently stored in container bins. We will then be able to remove all the storage container bins from the site. The fuel tank and fuel island will be removed from the current location when bus operations move to their new site. There will be no fuel storage or dispensing at the Administration Center after the new Maintenance and Transportation project is completed. Both the Warehouse project and the Maintenance & Transportation project are being funded from City Redevelopment proceeds. They will not affect your General Obligation Bond school tax assessment on your property tax bill in any way. The school district warehouse will not be in operation prior to 7:00 A.M. and will have very light traffic before 9:00 A.M. The warehouse does not store any hazardous materials other than paint thinner, rubber cement, and bleach. These items are only stored unopened in their original packaging. The warehouse will be used to store furniture and supplies needed for the operation of the schools in our community. We have plans for the new project available in our Facilities Office for anyone who would like to see what we are proposing. We invite you to come see the plans and ask any Questions that you have regarding this proposal. You may also call me at 695-7340. Respectfully, TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Lettie Boggs, Coordinator of Facilities Planning CC: Mr. Matthew Fagan, City of Temecula Patricia B. Novotney, Ed.D., Superintendent, TVUSD John Brooks, Assistant Superintendent Business Services, TVUSD ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS R:\S~%'TAl~'RPT~I58PA93.CC 11/1/93 klb 'l 7 CITY OF TEMECULA N E';. CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: A P.C. DATE: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93.0158, AMENDMENT NO. 1 VICINITY MAP SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 R:'I,S%.STAFFIFT%158PAI3.PC 8/30/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA SITE DRAFT GENERAL PLAN - EXHIBIT B DESIGNATION: PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONALFACILITIES SITE ZONING - EXHIBIT C DESIGNATION: S-P 199 - MARGARITA VILLAGE CASE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0158, AMENDMENT NO. 1 ~--.~QATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 R:~S~,STAFFRFT%158PAI3.PC 8/30/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA ,..nO T ,.. AO, l~jdk' / · I CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: D P.C. DATE: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-O158, AMENDMENT NO. 1 SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 R:~%'~'TAFFFF~ISIPAI3.PC:; 1/30/93 mf ATTACHMENT NO. 7 DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST R:\SVSTAFFRPT~l.~SPA93.CC 11/1/93 klb ~ 8 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST PLANNING APPLICATION NO.: 93-0158, AMENDMENT NO. I The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan Condition of Approval N/A N/A Condition No. 32 Condition No. 31 N/A Condition No. 37 Condition No. 30 YES YES R:\S~STAFFRPT~ISSPA93.CC 1111193 klb 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 LETTER TO STAFF R:~S~STAFFRPT~I58PA93,CC 11/1/93 klb 20 ITEM NO. 21 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning November 9, 1993 City of Temecula General Plan, Implementation Program, Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program. PREPARED BY: John Meyer and David Hogan RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the City Council: Open the public hearing and receive public testimony; Review the Housing Element, remaining Clean-up Items, Environmental Impact Report, Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and direct staff to incorporate any changes into the final General Plan; and, Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA. State Deadline for General Plan Adoption: November 25, 1993 R:'tS\GEI'~PI.A,ffiOPCCII 1111193 klb Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA. BACKGROUND Over the past several months, the City Council has held seven public hearings on the Draft City General Plan. To date, all the individual Elements have been reviewed by the Council. At the November 9, 1993 meeting, it is anticipated that the City Council will review the remaining clean-up items, Certify the EIR and approve the General Plan. CLEAN-UP ITEMS AND REVISIONS ADDENDUM The following section includes a number of minor aspects of the General Plan that require City Council direction: Land Use Element Southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez (known as the WaI-Mart site) In the first draft of the General Plan, the Planning Consultant recommended that this site be given the land use designation of Office Professional. Subsequently, the City Council directed that the designation of the draft General Plan be revised to Community Commercial on June 15, 1993. This designation was consistent with the pending Specific Plan for the area as well as the pending rezoning and a plot plan application for the WaI-Mart project. The City Council approved the ordinance rezoning the property to the zoning designation of CPS on July 15, 1993. Subsequently, a referendum petition was received on the rezoning ordinance. In response, the City Council rescinded the rezoning ordinance, the effect of which was to leave the property with an existing zoning designation of Rural-Residential. Given this history of events, Staff and the City Attorney have considered the planning, land use and legal issues concerning the appropriate Land Use designation for this site. State Deadline for General Plan Adoption: November 25, 1993 R:~S~,OENPL.A,N~OPCCII 11/3/93 ]db 2 As a result staff is recommending the Land Use Designation remain Community Commercial and that additional language be added to the text under Section C. Specific Plan Overlay, page 2-36. The section would read as follows: The Specific Plan Area designation is intended for those portions of the community which because of size, location, and special development opportunities require a coordinated, comprehensive planning approach. In areas identified as Specific Plan Overlay (Figure 2-5), with an aggregate area of 100 or more acres, approval of a specific plan is required prior to approval of any discretionary land use entitlement or issuance of any building or grading permit. The purpose of this language is to provide comprehensive planning of large areas without breaking out or piece-mealing individual sites. This is particularly important on larger sites, of 100 acres or more, which typically involve major circulation improvements. This General Plan revision would apply not only the Temecula Regional Center, which includes the former WaI-Mart site, but all other pending specific plans. In this matter, the City Council can have a better assurance that the development of individual site with a specific plan area will be consistent with the overall development of the specific plan. Land Use Request #67 A second land use request was briefly discussed at the October 26th meeting. The subject area is generally located at the northeast corner of Solano Way and Ynez Road, including the north and east side of Motor Car Parkway (see exhibit 1 ). At issue, is the appropriateness of land use designations for the various grouping of parcels. Currently there are two auto dealers, one commercial center and various vacant lots. Upon reviewing existing and potential development of this area staff makes the following recommendations: Location Land Use Northside of Motor Car Parkway (owned by ACS, Pontic Dealer) Business Park South & East of Motor Car Parkway (Nissan Dealer and vacant lots) Service Commercial Northeast Solano and Ynez (existing commercial center and two lots fronting Ynez) Community Commercial The recommendation is based on the maintaining the corner parcels as community commercial to preserve the existing commercial center. The Service Commercial land use designation would allow uses on the corner parcels or in the center that could distract from the commercial uses that currently exist or allowed in that commercial center. CONCLUSION State Deadline for General Ran Adoption: November 25, 1993 R:\S~,O!~4'PLANXGPCCII 3. l/3/93 klb 3 The General Plan Consultants and Planning Department believe the Draft Element has been adequately revised to respond to comments received by individuals, groups, and other agencies and recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No(s) 93- , Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program, adopting the City of Temecula's first General Plan and adopting the Implementation Program as contained in Attachment No(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4. Attachments: '1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Resolution Certifying the EIR - Page 5 Resolution Adopting Mitigation Measure Program - Page 10 Resolution Adopting General Plan - Page 14 Resolution Adopting General Plan Implementation Program - Page 18 Exhibit No. I - Page 22 State Deadline for General Ran Adoption: November 25, 1993 R:~S\OE.~LAN~OPCCZ~ ~f3~3 k~b 4 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE EIR R:~S~OP, NPLAN~GPCCII 11F3/93 klb ~ ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL FOR TIff, CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING TIff- FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TFIE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING A STATEM~-NT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR ~ GENERAL PLAN FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA. Wn~,~, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a · comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; and W!~,REAS, Sections 65302 of the Government Code requires that a general plan address the following issues: land use, circulation, housing, conservation of natural resources, open space, noise, and public safety; and WHY, RE/kS, Sections 65303 of the Government Code allows the City to include any other issues or concerns into the general plan which may relate to the physical development of the City; and WHF_,REAS, the process of preparing the General Plan has included a number of opportunities for public and citizen involvement included a number of town meetings, technical committee meeting and public hearings, and by making numerous copies of the plan and associated documents available to the public; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Sections 21000 through 21177 of the Public Resources Code), requires that prior to the approval of any project the Lead Agency consider the potential impacts and effects of said project, consider alternatives to the project, and identify mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate the impact of the project on the environment; and WHEREAS, the City' of Temecula prepared an Initial Study for the General Plan and determined that an Environmental Impact Report (I~3R) would be required for the General Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared by the Office of Planning and Research; and WHF~REAS, the City of Temecula issued a Notice of Preparation on May 12, 1992; and WHEREAS, the a number of comments were received concerning the scope and content of the EIR for the General Plan which were used to guide the preparation of the Draft EIR; and Wi~EREAS, the City of Temecula issued a Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR on August 12, 1992; and R:~SXG!~m4PLAN~OPCCI1 11/3193 klb 6 WItERi~AS, the Draft EIR was available for public review and comment from August 14 through September 27, 1992; and W!n~,,a,S, the City received a number of letters with comments and concerns about the content of the Draft EIR for the General Plan; and WHEreAS, the State Clearinghouse notified the City on October 2, 1992, that the Draft EIR had been circuhted in accordance with the pwvisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR for the General Plan identified a number of significant impacts rehting to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biology, cultural resources, education, fire services, geology and seismic hazards, land use, library, light and glare, noise, open space, parks and recreation, police services, risk of upset, sewage treatment, solid waste, transportation and circuh~on, and water resources; and WtlEREAS, the ~ determined that a number of significant impacts could be mitigated and reduced to a level of insignificance for the following: aesthetics, cultural resources, fwe services, geology and seismic hazards, land use, library, light and glare, open space, parks and recreation, police services, risk of upset, sewage treatment, solid waste, and water resources; and W!:IEREAS, the ~ determined that, even with the application of ave, liable mitigation measures, the following could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance: air quality, agricultural resources, biology, education, library, noise, and transportation and circuhtion; and Wt~'.RIP. AS, the Planing Commission has held duly noticed public hearings on October 19th, November 2nd, November 23rd and December 7th, 1992, and January 4th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and WI:W.~, on January 4, 1993, the Planing Commission recommended to the City Council that the Council certify the Environmental Impact Report and approve and adopt the draft General Plan; and WtW,~, the City provided a copy of the Response to Comments to all responsible agencies on September 9, 1993 as provide in State hw; and WI:FF, RF, AS, the City Council has held duly noticed public hearings on February 16th, March 16th, April 6th, April 20th, May 18th, June 15th, August 17th, September 21st, October 12th, October 26th and November 9th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report and Statement of Overriding Considerations. R:~S~GI~'PLA.~OPCCII 11/3/93 NOW, TI~tI~i~ORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEnF, Ry RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOtJ~OWS: Section 1. The City Council has reviewed the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the City General Plan, has considered the information contained within R, and hereby certifies that the Report has been prepared in accordance with the pwvisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended. Section 2. The City Council fmds that to the extent that any impacts attributed to the General Plan remain unmitigated, such impacts are acceptable in light of the overriding social, economic and other considerations which will result from implementing the City General Plan. As a result, the Council fmds that the benefits of the General Plan outweigh the unmitigated impacts which may result and hereby adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the following environmental impacts: agricultural resources, air quality, biologic resources, education, library services, noise, transportation and circulation. R:~\OBI~PLAI~OPCCII 11/3/93 klb ~ Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of thi.~ Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFlED this 9th day of November, 1993. ATT~T: j. SAL MU OZ MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [Sr AL] STATE OF CALn:tORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMF~IKA) I B'EREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: JUNE S. GRPTIK CITY CT-PRK R:\S\GENPLAN1GPCCII 1113/93 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:~S\GBNPLAI~OPCCI1 11/3/93 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA ADO FrlNG ~ MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT I~EPORT FOR ~ GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TEMECUI, A. WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as wen as any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; and WHY~REAS, Sections 65302 of the Government Code requires that a general plan address the following issues: land use, circulation, housing, conservation of natural resources, open space, noise, and public safety; and WHEREAS, Sections 65303 of the Government Code allows the City to include any other issues or concerns into the general plan which may relate to the physical development of the City; and WHEREAS, the process of preparing the General Plan has included a number of opportunities for public and citizen involvement included a number of town meetings, technical committee meeting and public hearings, and by making numerous copies of the plan and associated documents available to the public; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Sections 21000 through 21177 of the Public Resources Code), requires that prior to the approval of any project the Lead Agency consider the potential impacts and effects of said project, consider alternatives to the project, and identify mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate the impact of the project on the environment; and W!tEREAS, the City of Temecula prepared an Initial Study for the General Plan and determined that an Environmental Impact Report CEIR) would be required for the General Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared by the Office of Planning and Research; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula issued a Notice of Preparation on May 12, 1992; and WHEREAS, the a number of comments were received concerning the scope and content of the EIR for the General Plan which were used to guide the preparation of the Draft mR; and WH~,REAS, the City of Temecula issued a Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR on August 12, 1992; and R:~S\(~EN'PLAI~OPCCll 11/3/93 klb '] '[ WHRREAS, the Draft EIR was available for public review and comment from August 14 through September 27, 1992; and WwEREA$, the State Clearinghouse notified the City on October 2, 1992, that the Draft EIR had been circuhted in accordance with the provisions of CEQA; and Wi:!ERI~,&S, the City received a number of letters with comments and concerns about the content of the Draft Ell for the General Plan; and WI~,REA~, the Draft Ell for the General Plan identified a number of significant impacts relating to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biology, cultural resources, education, fire services, geology and seismic hazards, land use, library, light and glare, noise, open space, parks and recreation, police services, risk of upset, sewage treatment, solid waste, transportation and circuhtion, and water resources; and WHEREAS, the Draft Ell identified a number of mitigation measures which reduced these significant impacts to a level of insignificance for the following: aesthetics, cultural resources, fire services, geology and seismic hazards, land use, library, light and glare, open space, parks and recreation, police services, risk of upset, sewage treatment, solid waste, and water resources; and WI:rEREAS, the following impacts, even with the application of available mitigation measures, can not be mitigated to a level of insignificance: air quality, agricultural resources, biology, education, library, noise, and transportation and circuhtion; and WBEREAS, the Planing Commission has held duly noticed public hearings on October 19th, November 2nd, November 23rd and December 7th, 1992, and January 4th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, on January 4, 1993, the Planing Commission recommended to the City Council that the Council certify the EnvLronmental Impact Report and approve and adopt the draft General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City provided a copy of the Response to Comments to all responsible agencies on September 9, 1993 as pwvide in State hw; and WHY-REAS, the City Council has held duly noticed public hearings on February 16th, March 16th, April 6th, April 20th, May 18th, June 15th, August 17th, September 21st, October 12th, October 26th and November 9th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WI~REAS, the City Council Certified the ~IR and adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration on October 26, 1993. R:L~GDIPLAN~OPCCII 11/~/9~ klb 12 NOW, TIlleRFORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL FOR T!:!t, CITY OF T[2V[F, CULA DOES ItE!IERy RF~OLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOt-I~)WS: Seaion 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program, as amended, and directs Staff to implement the measures identified in the Program as needed to mitigate and reduce the environmental impacts associated with and resulting from the City General Plan. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSE!I, APPROVED AND ADOFrEt} this 9th day of November, 1993. ATT~T: SAL MU' OZ MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I B'ERERy CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November, 1993 by the foilowing vote of the City Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CO~CH, MEMB~: CO~CH~MEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: JUNE S. GI~k'3:IK CITYCI-~,K R:~\GBIqPLAI~OI%'2CII 1113193 klb 'l 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN R:~S\GI~qPLAN~OPCCII 11/1191 ~o 14 ATFACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECUIA ADOPTING ~ GENERAL PLAN FOR ~ CITY OF WIIEREAS, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; · and WItE~, Sections 65302 of the Government Code requires that a general plan address the following issues: land use, circulation, housing, conservation of natural resources, open space, noise, and public safety, W!t~,REAS, Sections 65303 of the Government Code allows the City to include any other issues or concerns into the general plan which may relate to the physical development of the City; and WIt~,~, the process of preparing the General Plan has included a number of opportunities for public and citizen involvement included a number of town meetings, technical committee meeting and public hearings, and by making numerous copies of the plan and associated documents available to the public; and W!tEREAS, Section 65360 of the Government Code requires that all new Cities to adopt a General Plan within 30 months of incorporation; and WltF, REAS, the City of Temecula was incorporated on December 1, 1989; and WItY~REAS, the Director of Planning and Research, in accordance with the provision of Section 65361 of the Government Code, has extended the deadline for adoption of the General Plan from May 1, 1992, to November 25, 1993; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as mended (Sections 21000 through 21177 of the Public Resources Code), requires that prior to the approval of any project the Lead Agency consider the potential impacts and effects of said project, consider alternatives to the project, and identify mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate the impact of the project on the environment; and WItEREAS, the City of Temecula has prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared by the Office of Planning and Research; and R:\S\GENPLAN'xGPCCII 11/3/93 klb I 5 WIlERE&S, Section 65302 of the Government Code requires that the City of Temecula submit a copy of its draft Safety Element to the Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) for their review and comment; and WIll;alE&S, the City of Temecula submitted its draft Public Safety Element to the DMG on August 26, 1992; and WFIERE~, the City of Temecula has made changes to the draft Public Safety Element in response to the concerns raised by DMG; and W!n~.Rii'.&S, Section 65585 of the Government Code requires that the City of Temecula submit a copy of its draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for their review and comment; and WItERI~.&S, the City of Temecuh submitted its draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (I-ICD) on May 18, 1992, January 20, 1993, and August 3, 1993; and WI~EREAS, the City of Temecuh has made changes to the draft Housing Element in response to the concerns raised by HCD; and WI:!ERE&S, the Planing Commission has held duly noticed public hearings on Ocwber 19th, November 2nd, November 23rd and December 7th, 1992, and January 4th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Enviwnmental Impact Report; and WltEREAS, on January 4, 1993, the Planing Commission recommended to the City Council that the Council appwve and adopt the. draft General Plan; and WI~.~, the City Council has held duly noticed public hearings on February 16th, March 16th, April 6th, April 20th, May 18th, June 15th, August 17th, September 21st, October 12th, October 26th and November 9th, 1993 to consider the pwposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, the City Council Certified the EIR, adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation MoniWring Program for the i:IR for the General Plan on October 26, 1993. NOW, TItEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES tlERERY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby appwves and adopts the General Plan for the City of Temecuh, as amended. Section 2. The City Council hereby determines that until the new zoning ordinance for the City of Temecula is brought into conformance with the General Plan, development decisions shall be based upon the General Plan land use designations and policies, 'and not the R:XS\GENPLANXOPCCll 11/~/93 lifo existing zoning when these two documents are in conflict, in accordance with the consistency requirements of State Law. Section 3. The City Council hereby directs Staff to submit a copy of the final General Plan to the Riverside County Ahpon Land Use Commission for their review and comment on airport related issues in accordance with the pwvisions of Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 9th day of November, 1993. j. sat, mr oz MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS crrY OF TEMECULA) I [{F, RERY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: CO~CILMEMBERS: JUNE S. GPRRK CITY CLER~ R:~XGENPLAN~GPCCll I1/3/93 klb 17 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR THE GENERAL PLAN I~:~S\GENPLA~OPCCII 11/3/93 kib 18 ATTA~ NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCR, FOR ~ CITY OF ~ ADOPTING ~ IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR TFW~ GENERAL PlAN FOR ~ CITY OF TEMECULA. WltRRE&S, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; and WIlERE&q, Sections 65302 of the Government Code requires that a general plan address the following issues: land use, circuhtion, housing, conservation of natural resources, open space, noise, and public safety; and W!t~,~, Sections 65303 of the Government Code allows the City to include any other issues or concerns into the general plan which may relate to the physical development of the City; and WtlEREAS, the process of preparing the General Plan has included a number of opportunities for public and citizen involvement included a number of town meetings, technical committee meeting and public hearings, and by making numerous copies of the plan and associated documents available to the public; and W!tEREAS, Section 65360 of the Government Code requires that all new Cities to adopt a General Plan within 30 months of incorporation; and WltEREAS, the City of Temecula was incorporated on December 1, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Director of Planning and Research, in accordance with the provision of Section 65361 of the Government Code, has extended the deadline for adoption of the General Plan 'from May 1, 1992, to November 25, 1993; and WIW, REAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as mended (Sections 21000 through 21177 of the Public Resources Code), requires that prior to the approval of any project the Lead Agency consider the potential impacts and effects of said project, consider alternatives to the project, and identify mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate the impact of the project on the environment; and WItEREAS, the City of Temecula has prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared by the Office of Planning and Research; and R:~\GENPL.AI~GPCCII 111~193 klb ~ 9 W!~,REAS, the Planing Commission has held duly noticed public hearings on October 19th, November 2nd, November 23rd and December 7th, 1992, and January 4th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and W~EREAS, on January 4, 1993, the Planing Commission recommended to the City Council that the Council approve and adopt the draft General plan; and WFIERE~kS, the City Council has held duly noticed public hearings on February 16th, 'March 16th, April 6th, April 20th, May 18th, June 15th, August 17th, September 21st, October 12th, October 26th and November 9th, 1993 to consider the proposed General Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and Wl~RRR~,S, the City Council Certified the ~ adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the ~ for the General Plan on October 26, 1993; and WInr. R!?.A~, on October 26, 1993, the City Council appwved and adopted the draft General Plan, as amended. NOW, THEREFORE, THY~ CITY COUNCIL FOR ~ CITY OF TE1VIECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby appwves the Implementation Program to implement the General Plan, as amended, for the City of Temecuh and hereby directs staff to begin to implement the implementation measures and actions identified in the Plan. R:\S'~3P, NPLA!~OPCCll 11~19~ 2O Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVEr} AND ADOlvff-r} this 9th day of November, 1993. ATTEST: J. SAL Mu- oz MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALmORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVHRSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMF, CULA) I I~.RERy CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCH-MEMBERS: COUNCH,MEMBERS: JUNE S. CITY CY-~-RK R:~S',OF, NPLAN',(iPCCII 11/1/93 lab 2 '[ ATTACHMENT NO. 5 EXHIBIT NO. I R:~S\GP, NPLAI~(3PCCll 11/3/93 lib 22 EXHIBIT NO. I ~ YNCZ - ReAD - 0 0 s_ 'X 'O ,,I--I ITEM N O. 2 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ,~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning~'~2' November 9, 1993 Status Report on the Detailed Implementation Strategy and Regional Air Quality Programs PREPARED BY: David W. Hogan, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: Review the attached material and Direct staff to prepare specific implementation programs for the Council's consideration. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this Agenda Report is to provide the Council with information regarding the effectiveness of the Transportation Control Mechanisms (TCMs) identified in the August 24th Agenda Report, inform the Council about the effectiveness of the various TCM's, and to get the Council's guidance and direction on which transportation control mechanisms the City should implement. DISCUSSION: Subreaional Approach On August 24, 1993, the Council was presented with information concerning the transportation control mechanisms (TCMs) identified by the Air Quality Management District and the member agencies of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). Since the August meeting, the WRCOG Board has finalized the subregional approach to the implementation of the various TCM's. This information has been added to Attachment 1. The strategy calls for six core strategies which will be implemented throughout Western Riverside County and additional measures which will be implemented by all the governments in the Area Planning District. In addition, the cities and the County can implement any additional measures desired by the local government. Riverside County and the Cities of Temecula, Murrieta, Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore are in the Southwestern Planning District. · ..o AlftQ~AIRQUAL3.CC The Western Riverside County Core Transportation Control Measures are: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Economic Development {Jobs:Housing Balance); Alternative Mode Support Facilities; Public Information and Promotion; Increasing Alternative Transportation Modes; TDM Design Guidelines; and, Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements. The Southwestern Planning District Transportation Control Measures are: 2. 3. 4. 5. Shuttle Services; Telecommuting; Teleconferencing Facilities; Mixed Use/Land Use Design to Encourage Biking and Walking; and, Onsite Child Care. Effectiveness of the TCM's In response to a request from the City Council for quantification of the proposed TCM's, staff has attempted to quantify both the short and long term effectiveness of each measure identified in the Subregional Approach. The effectiveness of each TCM is discussed in terms of its' short-term and long-term effectiveness at reducing the number of vehicle trips. The short-term effectiveness is measured in terms of a percent of the total number of trips which the City would be responsible for reducing in 1994 if the City had a specific trip reduction target. The long-term effectiveness consists of the relative effectiveness of the measure (per the AQMD) and an estimate as to how effective the measure would be at reducing trips in the years 2000 and 2010. As indicated in Attachment 2, some of the transportation control measures are more effective at providing short-term trip reductions while others will be more effective at reducing trips in the future. Backstop Rule If a local government fails to participate in the regional trip reduction program or fails to meet its' trip reduction targets, then the Air Quality Management District will invoke a special rule to achieve additional trip reductions. The District released a draft of the proposed Backstop Rule (Rule 1504) for public review and comment on October 20, 1993. The District wants comments by November 29, 1993. The draft Rule proposes to establish a process by which a local government or subregion would be allowed to implement any or all of the transportation control measures to achieve their local trip reduction target. The District would then evaluate the local program to determine it effectiveness and categorize the local government accordingly. If the local or subregional program does not reduce enough vehicle trip to meet its' target, then additional trip reduction activities would be required from local businesses· If an area chooses to not implement the program, it is automatically classified as a Category III City. The District's local government classification program and Backstop Rule is shown below· AIRQ~AIRQUAL3.CC 2 AQMD CATEGORY PERCENT OF LOCAL TARGET ACHIEVED Greater than 90% II 75 to 89% III Less than 75% ADDITIONAL MEASURES REQUIRED OF LOCAL BUSINESSES BY THE DISTRICT No additional trip reduction measures or activities are required. Business with between 50 and 99 employees will be required to submit and implement trip reduction plans. Business with between 50 and 99 employees will be required to submit and implement trip reduction programs and implement a program where employees would have to pay to park their vehicles while at work. FUTURE ACTIVITIES: In the next few months, staff will begin preparing a number of implementation programs and ordinances to implement these transportation control measures and the Air Quality Element of the General Plan. Where appropriate, some these items will eventually be incorporated into the City's Development Code. FISCAL IMPACTS: The costs of implementing these programs are unknown at this time. ATTACHMENTS: 1. August 24, 1993 Agenda Report - Page 4 2. Summary of Trip Reduction Methods by Area Planning District and Local Government - Page 5 AIRQ~IRQUAL3,CC ~3 AT'I'ACHMENT NO. 1 AUGUST 24, 1993 AGENDA REPORT AIRQ~e~IRQUAL3. CC 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning August 24, 1993 Status Report on the Detailed Implementation Strategy and Regional Air Quality Programs PREPARED BY: David W. Hogan, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: Review the attached material and direct Staff to prepare specific implementation programs for the Council's consideration PURPOSE: The purposes of this Agenda Report are to inform the Council about the status of regional air quality programs, to discuss the City's role in the process, and to get the Council's guidance and direction on which trip reduction methods the City should use. BACKGROUND: The South Coast Air Basin has some of the worst air quality in the country and has been designated a nonattainment area for Ozone, Nitrous Oxides, Carbon Monoxide and Particulate Matter. Because of the poor regional air quality, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (District) has been required by both the Federal and State Clean Air Acts to prepare an biennial air quality management plans since the 1970's. The next Air Quality Management Plan is currently being prepared by the District. The current Air Quality Management Plan (Plan) resulted in trip reduction targets and also contained a number of control measures which local governments were expected to implement. In response to this requirement, WRCOG developed a subregional or areawide approach to air quality implementation. This approach was endorsed by the District and eventually approved by the City Council on November 24, 1992. DISCUSSION: Subregional ADoroach At this time the City is in the process of participating with WRCOG and its' member agencies in the implementation of the Subregional Air Quality Program. The City Council approved a resolution supporting WRCOG's Subregional Air Quality Program on November 24, 1992. The program identified a number of activities which the City would support and participate in. The table below summarizes the status of the City's implementation efforts. AIRQ~AIRQUAL2. CC STATUS OF SUBREGIONAL APPROACH IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS Adopt a resolution supporting WRCOG's Subregional Approach. Adopt a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance to meet the 2. requirements of the Congestion Management Program and the Air Quality Management Plan. Promote voluntary programs to meet the 3. goals of the air quality and congestion management programs. Agree to participate in the development of future area and subregional air quality action plans (Detailed Implementation Strategies) to meet trip reduction targets. Develop trip reduction programs for City employees. Agree to provide information to WRCOG to document local implementation measures. STATUS Completed; the City Council approved a Resolution on November 24, 1992. Completed; the City Council adopted an Ordinance on January 28, 1993. The City is currently exceeding this requirement by including an Air Quality Element in the General Plan· This activity is ongoing and is a primary focus of this Agenda Report. City Staff is currently reviewing how other firms and agencies operate their own trip reduction programs. City Staff is cooperating with WRCOG to document our air quality activities. The schedule prepared by the District envisions that cities will notify them about the measures they intend to adopt by June 30, 1993 and adopt the strategies, programs, measures, and ordinances by the end of 1993. Trip Reduction Tarqets One of the requirements of the Plan is to begin to reduce the number and length of vehicle trips within the region by 2010. This has resulted in trip reduction targets for 1994, 1997, 2000, and 2010. The four countywide trip reduction targets which resulted were based upon a combination of the number of jobs and the number of housing units. The District then encouraged the subregional agencies such as WRCOG to further breakdown the targets and assign specific trip reduction targets to individual cities. However, the cities in Western Riverside County decided not to assign trip reduction targets to individual cities and to work as a region to reduce the trips that could be reduced. This means that the WRCOG area will either succeed or partially succeed as a whole at meeting its' trip reduction target. The 1994 trip reduction target for the WRCOG area is 31,417 vehicle trips per day. WRCOG will provide the District with a estimate of the total number of vehicle trips being reduced by the measures the WRCOG members have agreed to implement. AIRQ~AIRQUAL2.CC 2 If a local government fails to participate in the regional trip reduction effort (or if a subregion fails to meet its' trip reduction targets) the Air Quality Management District could invoke a "backstop rule" to implement additional transportation control programs to achieve the target. The District is currently working on a draft of the Backstop Rule. It is expected that a draft of the rule will be available for public review and comment later this fall. Area Plannina Districts To implement this regional approach, WRCOG has established six Area Planning Districts (APD's) which cover the WRCOG area. Each District represents a contiguous area with similar opportunities and constraints. Temecula is in the Southwest Planning District which includes the Cities of Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, and Murrieta, as well as adjacent unincorporated communities of Wildomar, Sun City and Menifee. The City of Temecula is cooperating with the other Southwest APD agencies to address the Temecula Valleys' particular needs. The initial preferred trip reduction methods have been consolidated in meetings with the Staff of the Cities within the Southwest District, the-County, and WRCOG. The preliminary trip reduction methods for all the Area Planning Districts are shown in Attachment No. 1. A supplemental description of potentially feasible transportation control measures and the type of vehicle trips they are most effective at reducing is included here in Attachment No 2. This list is similar to the list which was provided to the City Council at its' March 23, 1993, meeting. Many of these measures will only be effective at reducing vehicle trips in Temecula over the long term. Included in Attachment 2 is a description of the type of vehicle trips that each measure is intended to address. The types of vehicle trips have been categorized into three groups: commute, non-commute, and non-work. Commute trips, which represent 31% of all trips regionwide, are the vehicle trips between the home and the work place. Non-commute work trips, represent 8% of all trips, consist of work related trips which occur during the work day. Non-work trips, representing 61% of all vehicle trips, include a wide range of personal trips, such as going to the store, running errands, or transporting family members. Detailed Implementation Strateav The Detailed Implementation Strategies (DIS) contains the activities and measures that local governments will implement to achieve the trip reduction targets mandated by the District. The DIS and Action Plan will identify those measures to be implemented within each APD. This Detailed Implementation Strategy for the Southwest Area Planning District is included in Attachment No. 3. FUTURE ACTIVITIES: In the next six months, City Staff will begin preparing a number of implementation programs and ordinances to implement these transportation control measures and the Air Quality Element of the General Plan. Where appropriate, some these items will eventually be incorporated into the City's Development Code. FISCAL IMPACTS: The costs of implementing these programs are unknown at this time. AIRQ~AIRQUAL2.CC 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 SUMMARY OF TRIP REDUCTION METHODS TO MEET THE 1994 SUBREGIONAL TARGET AIRQ%AIRQUAL3.CC 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 SUMMARY OF TRIP REDUCTIONS TO MEET THE 1994 SUBREGIONAL TARGETS TRIP REDUCTION METHODS AND DESCRIPTIONS INCREASING ALTERNATE 0% TRANSPORTATION MODE OPTIONS - Provide offier meam . of nmportetjmt in the future to - encouregeffieueeof dternelivee t~ 1he eingle- occuFent vehide. [REGIONWIDE CORE TCM] SHUTTLE SERVICE - Provide < 1% simile ~ lrsnsi~ am service snd employment districts. [PLANNING AREA TCM] BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN < 1% IMPROVEMENTS - Requ~e bicycle parking, lookre, andIra' showe~ faclitiee st all employment, Gorere·fold and Wansit centee~, and provide · citywide bicycle rou~ nelwofk. [REGIONWIDE CORE TCM] CONDUCT EDUCATION, 6% INFORMATION, AND PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES - Undertake s public educelion campaign to increase public awareness of the problems and solutions to sir quality. IREGIONWIDE CORE TCM] ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0% AND THE CREATION OF LOCAL JOBS - Expand the local employment base to provide additional employment opportunities for local residents. [REGIONWIDE CORE TCM] RIDESHARING PLAN FOR EMPLOYERS W1TH 50 TO 99 EMPLOYEES- Require Employers with between 50 and 99 employees to prepare trip reduction plans. Multi-tenant sites could also be included. PERCENT OF THE 1994 REDUCTION TARGETm WHICH MIGHT BE REDUCED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES THAT SUPPORT THIS TCM LU: 6.1, 6.2 CIR: 1.4, 3.4, 3.6, 3.6, 3.7, 4.6, 4.9, 6.6 HOU: 1.6 ORC: 8,1, 8.3 GMPF: 1.1 AQ: 2.3, 2.4 CIR: 1.4, 3.4, 4.9 AQ: 2.3 LU: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 CIR: 4.6, 6.1, 6.4, 6.6 OSC: 8.1, 8.3, 8.4 CD: 1.1, 1.4 AQ: 2.3, 2.4 AQ: 4.2, 4.3 LU: 1.6, 8.4 AQ: 1.1 GMPF: 2.6 ECD: 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 11% CIR: 1.4, 4.10 TCM EFFECTIVENESS AND THE LONG TERM TCM EFFECTIVENESS AQMD r.i-H:CTIVENESS OF THIS TCM 18 UNKNOWN. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Medium-High 2010: Very Hig~ AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS TCM 18 UNKNOWN. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Medium 2010: Low-Medium AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM 18 APPROXIMATELY 112%. LONG-TBiM EFFECTNENESS 2000: MndeHigh 201 O: Medium-High AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 2%. LONG-TERM EFFECTNENES8 2000: Medium-Low 2010: Low AQMD EFFECTIVENESS 18 UNKNOWN. HOWEVER IT 18 EXPECTED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE LONG TERM TRIP REDUCTIONS. LONG-TERM ~.FF~.CTNENESS 2000: Medium 2010: Medium-Nigh AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 7%. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Low-Medium 2010: Low 41) The lateenrage of City m mtuoed here been developed ueing the Ak Queity ~ Dbtriote' etanderd trip quentifir, mion methodology and ~ eem~ning thet the City Ixogmm would not noffnelly require thet the TCM he immediately ;,,~Y ,~s.~ed by existing bueinesn8 in exiting devebfemnt. (2) Thereietivee~miveneme~tim~te~theme~eur~diit~t~mhieve2~end2~1~tripmdu~ti~nterget~endt~m~beignifieentehengembmdxegi~nd e tranepoetetion Fitteens. Higher growth me for Iocl peofemionel/offioe emlioymem, end in area eunounlng the viiage oentem oodd increaee the "' effectivenee of eome of these rheaurns. ~ AIFIQXAIRQUAL3.CC 6 .L TRIP REDUCTION METHODS AND DESCRIPTIONS NON-EMPLOYER BASED RIDESHARE MATCHING - Organize citywide fideshare programs. This could also include establishing of · Commuter Information Center to support the ridesharing activities among eraslier employers. ALTERNATE MODE SUPPORT FACILITIES - Provide bus ~e~eute, ael~, ahdtee, r~am'vid van pod pmrking, and ueofdlenetivemodeeof (REGIONWIDE CORE TCM] TELECOMMUTING AND WORK AT HOME - Requrre employers with between B0 ~nd 99 emldoyeee provide tdeeontmuling program for their emldoyeee. IPLANNING AREA TCM] TELl;COMMUTING AND TELECONFERENCING CENTERS talecommuting end [PLANNING AREA TCM] MIXED USE/LAND USE DESIGN TO ENCOURAGE BIKING AND WALKING - Require new devdopment to provide m varbty of bmi use ~ a~d feclitiee to encourage the use of alteffmljve forn~s of lranepor- totion and die~uragee ~e use of mingle occupant vehicles. [PLANNING AREA TCM] LAND USE INTENSIRCATION AROUND TRANSIT STATIONS - Increase futwe land me &mmmi~km and inteneiljel around exieljng l~aneil centers. .[CITY TCM] EXISTING DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO NEW COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS - Increase land use density/intensity around proposed transit centers. PERCENT OF THE 1994 REDUCTION TARGETnm WHICH MIGHT BE REDUCED <1% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% GENERAL PLAN POLICIES THAT SUPPORT THIS TCM CIR: 1.4 LU: 6.1 CIR: 1.4, 3.4, 4.4 AQ: 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 AQ: 2.1 LU: 1 .B AQ: 2.1 LU: 1.3, 6.1, 6.2, 6.G, 6.6, 6.7, 6.11 CIR: 4.6, 4.7, 4.9, 6.6 HOU: 1.6 OSC: 8.4 AQ: 1.2. 2.1 LU: 6.1, 6.6, 5.6, 6.7, 6.8, 8.4 HOU: 1.6 AQ: 1.2, 2.1 TCM EFFECTIVENESS AND THE LONG TERM TCM EFFECTIVENESS AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 2%. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Low 2010: Low AQMD U-.~-CTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 1%. LONG-TERM EFFECTNENES~ 2000: Medium 2010: law AQMD EFFECTIVENE8~ OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 2%. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: L~w-Medium 2010: Low-Medium AOMD EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS TCM IS UNKNOWN. LONG*TERM EFFECTIVBESS 2000: Low-Medium 2010: Low-Medium AQMD rj-m-m-CTIVENi OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 6 TO 10%. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Low-Medham 2010: High AQMD EFFECTNENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 6%. LONG-TERM EFFEC:!'!VENESS 2000: Low 2010: Medium-High AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 0%. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Nil 2010: Nil (1) The mmmmegee of Cityt~pe mdued hevm been deveiNxd uebg the Air Qudity l~' ,%. ,~_d. Dimtmkmtm'etmedmmd tHl~qu-Rff';, l: nmmthoddogy mnd~_.~ eeeumbg that the City Fe~gr~ w~uld N>t newtely ,quire that the TCM be immedimehf '-,~a~ .... 4ed by exWting bueineeeee bt e~ethg (2) T.h~.mWtiv~e~e~tivmmeeeetimetee~emee~um~biityt~edtieve2~mtd2~1~tHpmdue~etee~et~~~~~" effectiverim ofeonmoftheeerrmeeum. AIRQ~AIRQUAL3.CC 7 TRIP REDUCTION METHODS AND DESCRIPTIONS ON-SITE CHILD CARE 0% FACILITIES - Requ~e that large employment entere Wovtde for |PLANNING AREA TCM] REDUCED PARKING SPACE 0% · REQUIREMENTS - Reduce number of peking apses required, eeteldieh · meximum number of perking epeee~ for no~-reeiderdbl dlvelolL,lz~T, or require that exlTa parking spaces be committed to Perk-N- Ride or public: fin·it use, [PLANNING AREA TCM] USE OF ALTERNATIVELY 0% FUrl;r~ VEHICLES, - Deign for and aclively encourage the me of dtornetive fudecl vehicle. This could include use eleceic vehicle aging stations or the nee of golf cam in large [CITY TCM] TRANSIT DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) DESIGN GUIDELINES - Adept an ordinance to address liTeat etonclerde, pednetrian and bikeways. mixed use development to encourage the use of ·ltorrmtive eaneportation. [REGIONWIDE CORE TCM] ENHANCE ENFORCEMENT OF 0% POLLUTING VEHICLES - Greeter amphash on the enforcement of laws against "smoking vehicles ".. [CITY TCM] PERCENT OF THE 1994 REDUCTION TARGETm WHICH MIGHT BE REDUCED (Incorporated into other GENERAL PLAN POLICIES THAT SUPPORT THIS TCM LU: E.1 AQ: 2,1 CIR: 1.4, 3.6 LU: 6.1 CIR: 4.6 AQ: 2.6 (Incerporated into other meaeuree) AQ: 2.E TCM EFFECTIVENESS AND THE LONG TERM TCM EFFECTIVENESS AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF TCM IS APPROXIMATELY 6%, LONG-TERM EFFECTNENESS 2000: Low-Median 2010: low-Medium AQMD EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS TCM IS UNKNOWN. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Low-Medium 2010: Low THIS TCM WOULD REDUCE AIR POLLUTION WHILE NOT REDUCE VEHICLE TRIPS. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Low4indhan 2010: Medium LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Not ·ppli~aMe 2010: Not applicable Not included in AQMD TCM Ordinance Haedbook. LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS 2000: Ni 2010: Ni (1) The pementegee of CRy tr~pe reduced have been developed ueing the Air Quality M M,_.,a.A DietS-re' etanclerd trip quaratification methodology end · starting that the City progmrn would not normally require that the TCM be b-~nedbtely ~,,~a4 ,,,~ed by existing buineeee in existing clevelar,e.A. I2) The rebt~e effectivenee mira·tee the me··wee ebity to echleve 2000 and 2010 t~p mciation targets and to mice eignifk~nt changes in eubegiond trenqx~lation patterns. Higt~ growth ·tee for local profmioneVeffice etnluioyme~t. end in m surrounding the viii·g· ;efttern aoub incmae the effectivenee of some of thee measures. AIRQ%AIRQUAL3.CC 8 ITEM N O. 2 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAG R E \ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council (~. Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services November 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Temecula Museum PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: 1. e Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services That the City Council: Approve the modification and amendment of the City's land lease of Sam Hicks Monument Park with the Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation. Appoint two members to serve on a Project Committee for the Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project. Authorize City staff to set a public hearing and prepare the agreements necessary to provide the Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation with $500,000 in Redevelopment funding to improve the existing church facility and construct a new museum facility. DISCUSSION: On October 2, 1990, the City Council approved a lease with the Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation for forty (40) years for $1.00 per year. The purpose of this lease was to allow the Museum Foundation to construct a museum facility and renovate the old church on Sam Hicks Monument Park. The approval of this lease was prior to the first meeting of the Community Services Commission (formerly Parks and Recreation Commission) held on October 22, 1990. The provisions of this lease include that the Museum Foundation construct a museum facility of no less than 3,000 sq. ft and renovate the church facility in Sam Hicks Monument Park. The design and location of the facility must be approved by the City. Operation and .maintenance of the museum and church will be the responsibility of the Museum Foundation. Also, the lease stipulated that construction of the facilities would begin at the park by January 1, 1994. r:%nelsons\egenmus2.sdn 102993 The Museum Foundation has requested that the City extend the construction provision in the lease to allow the museum the ability to complete the first phase of the museum facility by January 1, 1996. The City has allocated $500,000 in Redevelopment Funds (RDA) for the development of a museum facility and $475,000 in RDA funds to improve Sam Hicks Monument Park. It is recommended that the Museum Foundation and the City coordinate in master planning Sam Hicks Monument Park and allow the Museum Foundation to coordinate the construction of their improvements. This will provide the integration of the Museum's improvement plans with the overall design of the park. On October 11, 1993, the Community Services Commission approved locating the museum facility on Sam Hicks Monument Park and extending the construction provision for the museum facility to January 1, 1996. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of improving the church facility and constructing the museum and public restrooms is budgeted at $500,000. Cost of completing the park improvements at Sam Hicks Monument Park is budgeted at $475,000. Monies have been budgeted by the City Council in the City's Redevelopment Funds. r:%nelsons\agenmus2.sdn 102993 MODIFICATION AND AMENDMENT OF LAND LEASE DATED JANUARY 1, 1991 THIS MODIFICATION AND AMENDMENT OF LAND LEASE is entered into this 1st day of October, 1993, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called "Lessor" and THE TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, formerly known as THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA HISTORICAL MUSEUM. FOUNDATION, hereinafter called "Lessee". WHEREAS, Lessee has obtained funding to construct a museum facility on the Property, and has submitted design concept plans to Lessor for approval, and WHEREAS, the Land Lease provides that construction of a museum facility shall commence on or before January 1, 1994. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and promises hereinafter mentioned, the parties, Lessor and Lessee, agree to modify and amended the Land Lease as follows: 5. USE OF THE PROPERTY. The Property shall be used for the construction and operation of a museum of a minimum of 3,000 square feet, including public restrooms. Lessor agrees to construct -public restrooms for use by park visitors. Construction of the museum structure shall commence within 6 months of design concept approval by Lessor and may be constructed in phases. In addition, a final inspection or certificate of occupancy of the first phase shall be obtained on or before January 1, 1996. The Property shall also be used for the relocation of a church of 1,200 square feet. Other construction projects on the Property, not specifically permitted by this Lease are prohibited, unless the written consent of Lessor is first obtained. The design and location of museum structures shall be subject to Lessor's approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessee also agrees to comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances of every governmental body or agency whose authority extends to the leased Property, or to the business conducted upon the leased Property. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have. executed this Modification and Amendment of Land Lease the day and year first above written. LESSOR: LESSEE: CITY OF TEMECULA, A Municipal Corporation THE TEMECULAVALLEY MUSEUM, a California Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation By: J. SAL MUNOZ Mayor By: NANCY J. MADRICE President ATTEST: By: JUNE S. GREEK City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: SCOTT F. FIELD City Attorney LAW OFFICES OF JEFFREY C. STEARNS, A.P.C. By: JEFFREY C. STEARNS Museum Attorney EXEMPT RECORDING KEQUP..STED BY City of Temecula · Pursuant to Govt. Code § 6103 And when Recorded mail to: . City of Temecula 43172 Business Park Drive "T~,mecula, Ca 92390 0 " (Space above this line for Recorder's use only) THIS LEASE is entered into as of January 1, 1991, between the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called *Lessor,* and THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA HISTORICAL MUSEUM FOUNDATION, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, heroinafter called 'Lessee.' Lessor acquired title in the name of the CITY OF TEMECULA to the real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described in Exhibit 'A', attached hereto, by deed dated February 12, 1991 . NOW, THI~I~FOKE, in consideration of covenar~ts and promises hereinafter mentioned, the parties, Lessor and Lessee, agree as follows: 1. DESCRIFrlON OF PROPERTY. Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee here hires and takes from Lessor, the Property to be defined as that land to be occupied by the museum as per the attached plot plan (Exhibit ~A* attached hereto) located on Moreno Road, Temecula, California, hereinafter called the "Property.' 2. TERM. The term of this agreement shall be forty (40) years, commencing on November 1, 1990, and ending on October~31, 2030. This Lease may be extended as set forth in paragraph four (4) of this Agreement. 3. RENT. Lessee agrees to pay Lessor as rent for the use and occupancy of the Property the sum of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00) per year, payable in advance on the first (ls0 day of lanuary of each year commencing with Janvary 1, 1991, and continuing thereafter during Lessee's use and occupancy of the Property. If the Lessee renews the term of this Lease as provided in paragraph four (4), the Lease shall continue for the same rental rate. Rent shall be payable in lawful money of the United States to Lessor at the address stated herein or to such other persons or at such other places as Lessor may designate in writing. 4. OPTION TO RENEW. As pan of the consideration for the execution of this · . Lease, Lessor hereby grants to Lessee, an option to extend and renew the provisions of this Lease for a twenty-year tel-m, upon the same terms and conditions hereof. The option to renew and extend the provisions of this Lease must be exercised, if at all, by notice in writing given to-Lessor not less than sixty (60) days prior to the expiration on the previous term. 5. USE OF THE PROPERTY. The Property shall be used for the construction and operation of a museum of a minimum of 3,000 square feet, including public restrooms. Construction of said structures shall commence within three (3) years of the date of this Leas~. In addition, a final inspection ~r certificate of occupancy shall be obtained within five (5) years of the date of this Lease. The Property shall also be used for the relocation of a church of 1,200 square feet. Other construction projects, not specifically permitted by this Lease are prohibited. The design and location of said structures shall be subject to Lessor's approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessee also agrees to comply with all appllcable laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances of every governmental body or agency whose authority extends to the leased Property, or to the business conducted upon the leased Property. ,~- 6. ALTERATIONS. Lessee may not m~ce any alterations (other than insubstantial ones) to the leased Property or sUmctures thereon without Lessor's prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessee, at Lessee's own expense, shall comply with all present and future governmental requirements arising out of, in connection with, or necessitated by such alterations.. 7. FIXTURES. All fixtures p~aced on the leased Property by Lessee shall at all times be and remain the personal property of Lessee, and Lessee shall have the right to remove such fixtures at any time during the term hereof and also within five (5') business days after the termination of this Lease. Lessee shall, at Lessee's sole expense, restore and repair any damage to the leased Property caused or occasioned by the removal of the fixtures. Such repair and restoration shall be performed within five (5) business days after the expiration of this Lease and shall be performed in compliance with the terms and conditions of Pangraph 8 of this Lease relating to repairs. 8. REPAIRS. Lessee accepts the Property as being in good order, repair and condition. At all times during the term of this Lease, Lessee shall, at Lessee's own cost and'" ' expense, and at no cost and expense to Lessor, maintain the PrOperty and all portions of the Property in good order and repair and make all repairs and replacements that may become necessary to the Property, any buildings or impwvements on the Property, or any sidewalks, landscaping, driveways, or parking areas that are part of, or appurtenant to, the Leased Property. Any and all repairs and replacements required by this pwvision, both ordinary and extraordinary and both structural and nonstnictural, shall be made promp~y by Lessee as required and shall comply with all applicable governmental' laws, ordinances, and regulations. Lessee hereby waives the pwvisions of sections 1941 and 1942 of the CaIifomia Civil Code rehting to Les~or's duty for tenantable premises and Lessee's right to make repairs and deduct the expenses of such repairs from the rent. 9. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. Lessee shall recognize that the installation and maintenance of landscaping on the Property is an integral part of the lease. Lessee shall maintain and care for landscaping on the Property using generally accepted methods of cultivation and watering. Lessee shall maintain that standard of care necessary to prevent the land.~'..aping from deteriorating to the ~.xtent that its value as landscaping is destroyed. Lessee shall also maintain landscape of Property in a manner and design reflecting the 1890 theme of the TEMECULA HISTORICAL OVERLAY. If Lessee fails to maintain the landscaping in such proper condition, Lessor my give written notice of such deficiency to Lessee. If the Lessor gives notice to Lessee of a deficiency, Lessee shall have ~ (30) business days .within which to take reasonable steps to cure the deficiency. If Lessee has not commenced corrective activity within such thirty (30) days, the City may elect to take the steps necessary to insure that the landscaping is maintained and cared for. At least fifteen (15) days prior to entering the Property to perform any such corrective work, Lessor shall either personally serve a notice of its intent to enter the premises for this purpose on the Lessee or mail a copy of such notice by certified mail to the Lessee's last known address, or as shown on the tax rolls. Lessor may enter the Property to perform such corrective work as it reasonably considers necessary and proper to return the landscaping to its proper condition. Lessor may act either through its own employees or through an independent conWactor to perform such corrective work. If Lessor incurs costs, including administrative costs and at~orney's fees in returning the landscaping to its proper condition pursuant to the procedure set forth in paragraph 7 above, Lessor may make a demand upon Lessee for payment of such costs as are reasonable under the circumstances. If Lessee fails to pay such costs within thirty (30) business days after the date demand is made, the terms and provisions of this lease shall terminate. 10. MECHANICS' LIENS. Lessee hereby agrees to lceep the leased Property and the improvements thereon or hereafter erected or placed thereon, and every pan thereof, ' and every estate, right, title, and interest therein, or in or to any 'pan thereof, at all times during the term of this Lease, free and clear of mechanics' liens and other liens for labor, service, supplies, equipment, or materials. Lessee also agrees to fully pay and discharge and wholli/protect and save harmless Lessor and all and every part of the estate, right, title, and interest of Lessor in and to all ~nd every pan of said demised Property and improvements against any and all demands or claims that may or could ripen into such liens or labor claims. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Lessee may, if Lessee furnishes Lessor with a bond or other security against loss or liability by reason thereof in a form acceptable to Lessor, contest, at Lessee's sole cdst and expense, any such liens or claims and liftgate the same final judgment; in the event Lessee shall have taken an appeal from an adverse judgment, Lessor shall at all times during the pendency of such appeal prevent the execution of such judgment pending appeal. 11. DF. STRUCTION OF PROPERTY. Should any building or improvements on the leased Property be damaged or destroyed by fire, the elements, Acts of God, or other causes not the fault of Lessee or any person in or about the leased Property with the express or implied consent of Lessee, they shall be repaired or replaced by Lessee at its own cost and expense; however, should the cost of repairing or restoring any buildings or improvements so damaged or destroyed exceed fifty percent (50%) of the replacement cost of all buildings and improvements to be located on the leased Property, Lessee may, at its option, either repair and restore the damaged buildings and improvements or cancel this Lease. 12 ...... SURI~NDER OF PROPERTY. On expiration or sooner termination of this Lease, or any extensions or renewal of this Lease, Lessee shall promptly surrender and deliver said Property to Lessor in as good condition as it is now at the date of this Lease, reasonable wear and tear and repairs hereafter required to be made by Lessor excepted. Lessee may surrender the property leaving the buildings relocated or constructed pursuant to this Lease in place with the consent of Lessor and at no cost to Lessor. This paragraph is subject to the conditions of Paragraph 7 relating to removal of fixtures. On file with the City Clerk of the City of Temecula arc photographs of the property in its condition as of the date of execution of this Lease. 13. P,T~TT~NABTLTTY OF PROPERTY. Nothing in this Lease shall be construed to restrict the alienability of said Property. Lessor retains the right to sell or encumber said Property at any time during the term of this Lease. 14. UTILITIES. Lessee agrees to pay for all utilities, including telephone, water, gas, electricity, and any and all other services which may be used in or upon the leased Property during the term of this Lease without liability of Lessor. For each service, Lessee shall pay the cost for the use of the service direc~y to the utility provider prior to the time that the charge becomes delinquent. 4 134993 15. TAXES. During the term of this Lease, Lessee shall pay before delinquency (1) all taxes, assessments, license fees, and any other charges of any type whatsoever that are levied, assessed, charged, or imposed on or against Lesse~'s possessory interest and/or personal property installed or located in or on the leased Property and that become payable during the term of this lease and (2) all real property taxes and general and special assessments levied and assessed against the leased Property. 16. WASTE OR NUISANCE. Les.s~ shall not commit or permit the commission :' by others of any wast~ on ~aid Property, including graffiti; Lessee shall not maintain, commit, or permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance as de.~med in Section 3479 of the C=llfornia Civil Code on said Property; and ~ shall not use or permit the use of said Property for any unlawful purpose. 17. ASSIGNlVsRNT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may assign this Lease or an interest therein and may also sublet the Property, provided ~ first obtains the written consent of Lessor to any such assignment or subletting. If, during the term of this Lease, Lessee requests the written consent of Lessor to any assignment or subletting, Lessor's consent shall not unreasonably be withheld. A consent to one assignment or subletting, and any subsequent assignment or subletting without Landlord's consent shall be void and shall, at Landlord's option, terminate this Leas:. Any approved assignment or sublease shall not relieve Lessor of liability under the terms of this Lease. 18...*- INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE. Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold Lessor harmless from and against any and all claims arising from any a~t, omission or negligence of Lessee, or its contractors, license~.s, agents, servants, or employees, or arising from any accident, injury or damage whatsoever caused to any person or property oc, cur~g in, on, or about the Property, the sidewalks adjoining the Property, and from and against all costs, expenses and liabilities incurred in or in connection with any such claim or proceeding brought thereon, including, but not limited to, court costs and reasonable attomey's fees. Lessee shall mainmln in full force during the term of this Lease, a policy or policies of general liability insurance in the minimum mount for the first year of the term of this Lease of Two Hundred Fifty Thousad D~llars ($250,000.00) combined single-limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. Upon the final inspection for certificate of occupancy for the Museum described at Section 5 of this Lease, the mount of said insurance shall increase to One lVtillion Dollars ($1,000,000.00). Lessee shall name-- Lessor as an additional insured on such policies. ~ shall furnish Lessor with a Certificate of Insurance with respect to such policy or policies prior to entry on the property. The policies shall further be endorsed with a *broad form* endorsement so as to provide comprehensive general liability insurance for the joint benefit of lessor and lessee for personal injuries. Lessee shall maintain in force, at Lessee's expense, a policy or policies of insurance protecting against the following: (1) Fire and other perils normally included in the extended coverage insurance with special fox'm, to the extent of at least one-hundred percent (100%) of the insurable value of the building(s) and other improvements. placed on the property pursuant to the Lease, exclusive bf wade fixtures and equipment belonging to Lessee. (2) Fire and extended coverage insurance with respect to Lessee's fixtures and equipment located on the property with vandalism and malicious mischief endorsements to ~e extent of one-hundred percent (100~) of their insurable vahe. During the term of this Lease, the proceeds of any such policy or policies for fire insurance should be used solely for the repair or replacement of the fixtures or equipment so insured. (3) Lessee shall furnish Lessor with a Certificate of Insurance with respect to all policy or policies required pursuant to this Lease prior to entry on the property, and occupancy of any buildings constructed or re, located onto the pwperty. If any · such insurance required in ~s Lease has a deductible clause, the deductible mount shall not exceed $1,000.00 per occurrence, and Lessee shall be liable for any such deductible mount. (4) The coverage mounts for all insurance requirements pursuant to the City shall increase annually at a rate equal to the Consumer Price Index for Riverside County. 19. INSPECTION. Lessor may enter upon the Property at any reasonable time for the purpose of inspecting the Property. *Reasonable time' shall be defined as during normal operating hours. 20. INSOLVENCY. The insolvency of Lessee as evidenced by a recdver being appointed to t~k-e possession of all or substantially all of the property of Lessee, or the making of a general assignment for the benefit of creditors by Lessee, shall terminate the Lease and enti~e Lessor to renter and regain possession of leased Property. 21. UNLAWHJL DETAINI!R. In the event of any breach of this Lease by Lessee, Lessor, in addition to any other rights or remedies it may have, may give Lessee a thrce-day notice to cure the breach or quit the premises. If Lessee fails to do either, Lessor may bring a-statutory proceeding in unlawful deminer to regain possession of the Property. Any notice given by the Lessor pursuant to this paragraph does not constitute termination of this Lease unless expressly so declared by Lessor in the notice. 22. WAIVER OF BREACH. The waiver by Lessor of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition herein contained sb~ll not be deemed to be a waiver of such 134995 term, covenant, or condition, or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition herein contained, The subsequent acceptance of rent hereunder by Lessor shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any prior occuning breach by Lessee of any term, covenant, or condition of this Lease, other than the failure of Lessee to pay the - particular rental so accepted, regardless of Lessor's knowledge of such prior existing breach at the time of acceptance of such rent. 23. ABANDONMENT. In the event that Lessee shall be absent from the ". demised Property for a period of 30 days after default in payment of rent or other obligations imposed on Lessee by this Lease, such absence shall be deemed to constitute an abandonment "of Lessee's interest in the aemised Property and an abandonment by Lessee of any personal property left on the demised Property, and Lessor my thereupon reenter the Property as hereinbefore provided. 24. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS. The provisions of this Lease shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and legal representatives of the pardes hereto. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a consent by Lessor to any assignment .of this Lease or any interest therein by Lessee except as provided in Paragraph 18 of this Lease. 25. NOTICES AND PAYME~S. Whenever notices and payments are required to be given pursuant to the provisions of this Lease, they shall be sent to either party, in writing and postage prepaid by registered mail, addressed as follows: To the Lessor City ofTemecula 43172 BUsiness Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 To the Lessee at: The Old Town Temecula Historical Museum Foundation, A C~lifornia Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation P.O. Box 792 Temecula, CA 92390 Ether party may change such address by written notice by registered mail to the other party. 26. DEFAULT, NOTICE OF DEFAULT, BREACH. A-default in the performance of any promise of, or of any obligation imposed upon Lessor and Lessee, shall not constitute a breach of this Lease unless the party in default fails to cure such default within thirty (30) days after the written notice of default has been served, except that failure to cure a default in the payment of rent shall constitute a breach of this Lease if such default is not cured within five (5) days after written notice of default has been served. If either 7 party breaches this Lease, the other party shall be entitle! to pursu~ every legal and equitable remedy available, including (but not limit~! to) the right to tenninate this Lease and the right to recover accrued rent, paid in ~vance. Lessor, in addit/on to other remedies it may have, shall have the immediate right to teentry, and may remove all persons and property from the Proln'ty, such property may be stored at the cost of Less~. The prcvalJing party shall be reimbursed attorncy's fees. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease the day and year first above written. LESSOR: CITY OF TEMECULA, A Municipal Corporation THE .OLD TOWN TEMECULA mSTORICAL MUSk;uwl FOUNDATION a California Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation By: RONALD J. PARKS Mayor ATltST: ,,.~- "~~S. Gg~K City Clerk APPORVED AS TO FORM: By: ,~"~/~ SCOT'F F. City Attomcy 8 STATF- OF CALIFORNIA 134995 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE On ~pril 9, 1993. before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared Beeca Nakaya ,personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ate subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized cap..civ/(ies), and that by kis/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the antiv/upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the insttumenL WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~ W..JONES NOSy PulNc-Callfon'ta RrVERSlDE COUNTY My Commmlon Exam November 18. 1994 STATE OF CALIFORNIA cotn rrv RXVEEmv. 134995 On' 4-9-91 before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared Ronald a. Patks, aune S. Greek & SCott F. Fiel,~lefsonally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ate subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. - - - WITNESS my hand ~t~d official seal. 134995 EXHIBIT "A " ~ In the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: That portion of Lot 6, and'of the unnamed road in Block 2, as shown by Map of Subdivision of the Pauba Land and Water Company, in the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown by Map on file in Book 11, Page 507 of Maps, Records of San Diego County, California, described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly corner of Lot 32, Block 1, of the Town of Temecula as shown by Map on file in Book 15, Page 726 of Maps, Records of San Diego County, California; thence South ~.~- degrees 25'05" West, along the Northwesterly boundary of said town of Temecula, a distance of 141.45 feet to a point on the Northerly right of way line of an unnamed road (60 feet wide) as described in dedication and easement deed to the County of Riverside by deed recorded April 22, 1969 as Instrument No. 39504 of Official Records of Riverside County, California; thence Westerly continuing along said Northerly line being the arc of a tangent curve concave Northerly and having a radius of 375.78 feet through a central angle of 19 degrees 01'17", a distance of 124.75 feet; thence North 17 degrees 08'42" East~ along the Easterly line of said unnamed road a distance of 290.87 feet; thence South 45 degrees 02'38" East, a distance of 271.1 6 feet to the point of beginning. lIT i TOTI;~_ P. 0:~ ITEM N O. 2 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning November 9, 1993 Discussion of Planning Procedures and Public Notice Requirements RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to Staff. BACKGROUND As a result of the City Council's concerns relating to the Planning Commission approval of an Arco Mini-Mart/Gas Station recently, the Council directed staff to place this matter on this agenda for discussion and direction to staff. The matter has been scheduled for two prior Council meetings, but, because of heavy agendas, continued at the request of the Council. DISCUSSION One of the main issues of concern as it relates to this matter is that the Council believed that it did not have an opportunity to consider the project approved by the Planning Commission. It was their feeling that, because of the type of project and the proposed location of it, that the matter should have come before them for review. Moreover, the Council also believed that members of the public should have had the opportunity to express their concerns over the project at the Council level. Therefore, in order to better address the approval and appeal process for development proposals, this matter is before the Council for input and direction to staff relative to any changes in procedures and public notice requirements which might be necessary to prevent situations like this from occurring again. To this end, Staff has given careful consideration to the matter, and it is our opinion that the best course of action for the City is the following: Review those issues which may cause concern on the part of the Council and require a higher level of review and public notice for these projects. Staff has reviewed the zoning ordinance and developed a list of conditionally permitted uses (attached) which may warrant special consideration. Improve the current appeal procedure on all projects by providing action agendas (recently implemented) on all Planning Commission actions. '~ 2:~S~STAFPRPT~/~PH.CC 11/1/93 vgw 1 3. Improve public noticing on projects of special concern by: Enhancing the visibility of the current notice of public hearing signs posted on site. Staff has already contacted the sign manufacturers and they will be producing a new prototype sign shortly which will be much more readable at distances (pursuant to Mayor Mur~oz's suggestion). b. Increasing the notice radius from the current 600 foot standard to 1,000 feet. C Increasing the size of the legal notice in the newspaper, so that notices are more effective. FISCAL IMPACT None Attachments: 1. City Council Report - Uses Requiring Conditional Use Permit Approval, September 28, 1993 - Page 3 R:L~'TAFFRFI~OPH.CC 1111/93 v~w 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL REPORT - USES REQUIRING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL SEPTEMBER 28, 1993 R:~S~STAPPRFr~OPH.CC 1111/93 vrw 3 ITEM 25 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES, DISTRICT TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1993 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order on Tuesday, October 12, 1993, 9:05 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. President Patricia H. Birdsall presiding. PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: Muf~oz, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Birdsall None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney F. Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek end Recording Secretary Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMFNT None CONSENT CALI:NDAR It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Muf~oz to ap~ove Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was unanimously carried as follows: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 Minutes DIRECTORS: Mufioz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall DIRECTORS: None DIRECTORS: None RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 14, 1993. DISTRICT BUSINESS 2. TCSD Maintenance of Commercial Landscaoe Community Services Director Shawn Nelson presented the staff report. CSDMIN10/12/93 -1 - 10124/93 COMMUNITY SI:RVICFS DISTRICT MINUTFS OCTOBrR 1 ~, 1993 Director Parks asked if anything could be dons to ensure the plant material is watered. He suggested the City could place a lien on the property to cover the costs incurred in maintaining the landscape. City Manager Dixon said that usually the City is unaware when the water is turned off and finds out after the landscape improvements start to die. He suggested that staff could review this and bring back a recommendation. Director Mufioz questioned how the City would get reimbursed for the cost it could incur while maintaining the landscape. City Attorney Scott Field said the City currently records a landscape maintenance agreement on the property, obligating the property owner to maintain the landscape. In the event that they fail to do so, the City can step in and take over the maintenance of the property. Howard Omdahl, 45850 Via Vaquero, Temecula, clarified his recommendation requires no funds from the City and the City's only expenditure would be for administrative costs. Mr. Omdahl said he would see the City placed before the first lien holder on the deed. Dorothy Omdahl, 8755 Oak Beach, Commerce Township, Michigan, speaking as a property owner in the Crystal Ridge Business Park, stated when the business park was developed there was a one-year maintenance bond, which has expired. She expressed concern that the landscape will be dead before anything is done with the property. Community Services Director Nelson expressed concern regarding the source of the funds to be used for the maintenance. It was moved by Director Mufioz, seconded by Director Parks to direct staff to return with a recommendation to the Board which addresses emergency landscape maintenance needs on commercial properties for periods of up to one year and with recommendations to cover funding of these measures. The motion was unanimously carried as follows: AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Mufioz, Perks, Robarts, Stone, Birdsall NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None GENERAL MANAGI:R'S REPORT None CSDMIN10/1 2193 -2- 10124/93 OCTOBER 1 .~. 1993 COMMUNITY SI:RVICI::S DISTRICT MINUTES DIRI:CTOR OF COMMUNITY SI:RVICI:S RI::PORT None BOARD OF DIRI:CTORS RI:PORT None ADJOURNM;NT It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Muf~oz to adjoum at 9:45 P.M. The motion carried unanimously. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District will be held on October 26, 1993. President Patricia H. Birdsall ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk CSDMIN10/12/93 -3- 10124/93 ITEM NO. APPROVAL CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: David F. Dixon, General Manager DATE: November 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Design Services Contract - Rancho California Sports Park Improvement Project PREPARED BY: ~,~S(~hyllis L. Ruse, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors award contract of $105,850 to J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. for the preparation of schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for the Rancho California Sports Park Improvement Project. BACKGROUND: On July 26, 1993 the City solicited Statements of Qualifications from landscape architectural firms for design services for the expansion of park improvements on approximately ten (10) acres at the Rancho California Sports Park. The improvements will · include a restroom/snack bar facility, picnic areas, access and parking improvements, and a skateboarding facility. This project will more cohesively link the existing sports fields and tot lot to the new improvements while providing additional parking and improved access from Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road. The construction budget for this project is $900,000. The City received several Statements of Qualifications which were reviewed and ranked by a review committee. The four (4) firms judged to be the most qualified were invited to offer an oral presentation to a selection committee comprised of two (2) members from the City Council (Mayor Pro Tem Ron Roberts and Councilmember Jeff Stone), two (2) members from the Community Services Commission (Claudia Walker and Henry Miller), and City staff. The selection committee ranked J.F. Davidson as the most qualified firm for this project. Staff has negotiated with J.F. Davidson a final Scope of Work and a cost proposal of $105,850 for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of this Design Services Contract is $105,850. This project was budgeted and approved in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 1993-94. 1 a~agendeg~jfdvdeon. age 110193 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT,-made and entered into this day of , 19 , between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and J.F. DadIn Assodates, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: SERVICES. Consultant shall parform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" attached' hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit "A". PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, parform all tasks described her. in. e PAYMENT. The City egress to pay Consultant monthly, at the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit "B" attached her.to, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount will not exceed $109,500 (One Hundred Nine Thousand Five Hundred Dollars end Nol100) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving an invoice from the Consultant, the City shall pay Consultant for work done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section. If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described her.in to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work her.under, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default. 2/forms/ARG-O4 Rev 1/22/92 -1- pwOl~grnteVnatere~)4 012292 If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on the first date stated above and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described her, in are completed, but in no event later than March 31, 1995. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Consdtsnt shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services. Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, et sea. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used. reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any of the Consultant'a officers, employees or agents, except as herein set forth. The Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services her.under for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services her. under. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. 2/formslARG-O4 Rev 1122/92 -2- pwO1%egmte~eetere%04 012292 10. 11. 12. The City, and its officers and employees, shell not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Cormultant to comply with this section. NOTICF. Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula , California 92590, and the Consultant at 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 115, Temecula, CA 92590 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant'a sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. LIABILITY INSURANCE. The Consultant shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with e Beets' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: A. Minimum Scooe of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Form No. GL-0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office Form No. GL-0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" Form No. CG-0001). Insurance Services Office Form No. CA-0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" and Endorsement CA-0025. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions insurance. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance no less then: General Liability: ~1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 2/forme/ARG..04 Rev 1122/92 -3- pwO1%egrnte%meetere~4 012292 Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. e Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: Workers' Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Other Insurance Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: ae All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cenceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. be General Liability and Automobile Liability coveraoes. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Consultant's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials, employees or volunteers. The Consultsnt's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. Worker's ComPensation and Emolovers' Liability Coveraoe. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City. 2/formelARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -4.- pwO1%egmte~vtetere%04 012292 Verification of Coveraoe. Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance eftacting coverage required by this clause. The certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expanses. 13. LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary licenses, including but not limited to City Business License. 14. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement end any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from end after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. :~/fom,alARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -5- pwO1%egmte~neetere%04 012292 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONSULTANT CITY OF TEMECULA By: George E. PriM, Jr. Regional Office Manager/Principal Engineer By J. Sel Munoz, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk 2/formelARG-04 Rev 1/22/92 -6- pw01~agrnte~tetere~4 012292 Rancho California Sports Park Improvements Project City of Temecula EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES/FEE SCHEDULE (REVISED 10/27193, 10129193) This Scope of Services/Fee Schedule incorporates and elaborates on J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc.'s (JFD) understanding of fie elements of the work program set forth in the Request for Qualifications, Pre-Contract and Scope Development Meeting, and details our overall approach to providing park design services for the Rancho California Sports Park Improvement Project. This Scope is based on the City's expressed requirements, discussions with our Special Design Consultant, and the consulting team's considerable past experience with similar projects. The proposed work elements are designed to bring about the completion of the program in a logical sequence of easily defined tasks. In preparing the following Scope of Services, the following assumptions were made: Staff time is valuable and limited; therefore, most research assignments will be performed by the consulting team. Staff participation will focus on management and review, or as directed otherwise by Staff. Q Progress memoranda will be provided on a bi-weekly basis for review. Q Time allocated to staff review is 1-2 weeks from the date of delivery of the documents to be reviewed. This can be modified if current workloads or review procedures dictate otherwise. Q The project is more than 5 acres and will require NPDES permit processing. Q A construction budget of approximately $1,000,000 is envisioned. Q A total of 24 weeks has been estimated as the. maximum construction time. Our fees respond to this time-frame. A shorter time-frame will result in a corresponding fee reduction; Construction beyond 6 months may require an addendure. Q Construction Staking has not been included. Specific site amenities will be determined through "brainstorming" between the Project Committee, Kevin Thatcher, the JFD skateboard element consultant, and discussion with Staff, however, for the purpose of this Scope of Services/Fee Schedule, the following design elements may be anticipated. Q Skateboard Park, Facility. Q Restrooms with concession facility and possible equipment rental. Q Park entry area, park signage, and lighting. -1- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California Sporte Park Improvemente Project City of Temecula Picnic area including shade structures, picnic tables, and trash receptacles. Location of ddnking fountains, benches, and bicycle parking. Walkway, secudty lighting, and possible security observation/spectator locations. Trees, shrubs and other landscaping (identified by type). Parking for up to 300 cars. The proposed work program is presented below: SCOPE OF SERVICES: This section is divided into four parts: TASK A - TASK B - TASK C - TASK D - TASK E - Topographical Survey Conceptual Design Geotechnicai Investigation Construction Bidding Documents, Specification and Cost Estimates Bidding Assistance and Construction Management TASK A. TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY Compile and plot aerial survey data at a scale of 1 "=.40' with a 1-foot contour interval, for the Project Area. The survey data will be delivered on a reverse reading matte mylar, one sheet 36" x 48" in size. The data will also be delivered on 5.25" floppy diskette per AUTOCADD release 11.0 data files (DWG). One set of 9" x 9" B & W contact prints will also be furnished. Along with the above topographic survey, field detail information will also be obtained, i.e. precise pavement elevations in existing parking areas, inverts of existing sewers and elevations on existing water and storm drainage facilities. TOTAL FEE TASK A: $ 2,900 -2- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California ~ports Park Improvemente Project CIty of Temecula TASK B. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Meet with City Staff to develop or refine overall program for City needs, requirements and schedule of work. Verify Scope of Work, Fees, Coordination methods, and contact personnel. $ 300 2. Review topography, existing improvement plans, and existing utility documents provided by the City or offer agencies. $ 500 3. Perform site visit for Design Staff. $ 200 e Prepare an Opportunities and Constraints map using the topographic mapping prepared under Task A. The map will indicate items such as important trees, Metropolitan Water Distdct easements and facilities proposed, stream and slope improvements being designed under a separate project by the City and any other items that may impact the development of this area of the park. This exhibit will be used dudng Project Committee Meeting Number 2. $1,000 Meet with City Staff to refine program/agenda for initial Project Committee Input Meeting. JFD will prepare a draft agenda for the meeting. $ 300 6. Attend/conduct Project Committee Meeting Number 1. The Director of the Community Services Department will open the meeting and present an overview of the project, and set the goals and objectives of the Project Committees' effort. JFD will conduct the meeting after the opening statements to obtain the desires and components of the Skateboard Facilities and offer park amenities. JFD representatives will be George Prine, Alan Fishman, and Kevin Thatcher. Prepare synopsis of information derived from meeting in the form of a written report/memorandum. $1,300 -3- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California SporEs Park Improvements Project City of Temecula e 10. 11. 12. 13. Working with the Project Committee and Staff, JFD and Kevin Thatcher will schedule a field trip to various skateboarding facilities. The goal of the trip is to observe other successful facilities. A 10 hourll day tdp has been budgeted. $ 2,400 Conceptual Plans for 2 or 3 park design/Skateboard Fadlity alternatives will be prepared, combining ideas presented at the initial Project Committee Meeting and the field tdp. These alternatives, along with their preliminary Cost Estimates, will be discussed and a strategy formulated for presentation at the Project Committee Meeting. Concepts will sketch "bubble" (schematic) level. $ 3,000 Meet with the Project Committee for Meeting Number 2 to review the Conceptual Design altematives, obtain input from the Committee with the goal of the meeting to come away with information to either eliminate or combine the good points of the conceptual alternatives into a Final Conceptual Design. Prepare synopsis of information derived from meeting in the form of a written report/memorandum. $1,300 Prepare the park Conceptual Design and meet with Staff to present the plan. Preliminary Cost Estimate will also be prepared. A strategy/agenda will be developed for the Project Committing Meeting Number 3. $ 3,000 Present the Conceptual Design to the Project Committee Meeting Number 3, and receive comments. Prepare a synopsis of information derived in the form of a written report/memorandum. $1,300 Meet with Staff and discuss the comments received at the Project Committee Meeting Number 3 and come away with direction for the Final Conceptual Design. $ 700 Prepare the Final Conceptual Design Cost Estimate and suggested phasing. A final meeting with the Committee is included. $1,700 -4- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc, Rancho California Sports Park Improvements Project CIty of Temecula 14. 15. Present the Final Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate to the Community Services Commission, with a Staff meeting pdor to this meeting to discuss strategy/agenda. - JFD representatives will be George Prine, Alan Fishman, Kevin Thatcher, and Russell Rumansoff. $1,300 Present the Final Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate to the City Council to obtain authorization to proceed to the Construction Drawing, Specifications and Estimate phase of the project. $1,200 Kevin Thatcher, the JFD Skateboard Design Consultant, will be in attendance at the meetings described in Task B, Item No.'s 6,9,11,14, and 15. TOTAL FEES TASK B: $19,500 TASK C. GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Geo-Soils, Inc. will review readily available soils and geologic data for the area, including the review of stereoscopic aerial photographs, and their previous report for the site. Meet with Underground Service Alert to mark proposed subsurface explorations, as required by law. Excavation and geologic logging of one to two exploratory borings to a minimum of between 10 and 40 feet in depth or refusal, with one of the bodng proposed specifically at the proposed location of the restroom. The bodng would be excavated to determine geologic and soil profiles, obtain bulk and undisturbed samples at approximately 1 to 2 foot intervals (as appropriate), of representative materials, and delineate soil parameters that may affect the proposed improvements. The boring would be backfilled with native materials. Geologic mapping of exposed conditions would also be performed dudng our site reconnaissance· Appropriate laborstory testing for the determination of classification and compaction, shear strength, gradation, consolidation characteristics, and "R" Values (1) of selected materials sampled, as necessary. -5- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California Sports Park Improvements Project CIty of Temecula e e General areal site seismicity study and liquefaction evaluation with respect to the · proposed improvements. Prepare a soils engineering and geologic report which would include fie logs of fie exploratory test boring, laboratoW test results, settlement evaluation, seismic and liquefaction evaluation data, groundwater constraints, geotechnical design parameters, and earthwork construction details, shrinkage and bulking estimates, and preliminary pavement design. TOTAL FEE TASK C: $4,500 TASK D. CONSTRUCTION BIDDING DOCUMENTS, SPECIFICATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES 1. Prepare landscape working drawings to include: - Landscape Construction Staking Plan - Irrigation Plan and detajls (including calculations and processing as required for AB 325). - Planting Plan and details. - Specifications and Cost Estimates. - Coordination with all consultants and DPW. $13,250 2. Prepare park Infrastructure and Grading Plans to include: Parking area and overall site grading and horizontal location plans. On-site sewer, and storm drainage design. Required Plan and Details for Skateboard Facility. Specifications and Cost Estimates. Coordination with all consultants and DPW. $18,250 3. Prepare Architectural Plans for restrooms/concessions building to include: - Architectural Plans and Sections. - Required Details. - Specifications and Cost Estimates. L -6- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California Sports Park Improvements Project CIty of Temecul8 e Required Structural and Mechanical Design and Calculations. Coordination with all consultants and City's Building Department. $ 8,500 Prepare Site Electrical Plans and Building Electrical Plans to include: Site Security Lighting and Electrical Plans. Building Electrical Plans. Coordination with all consultants and DPW. Specifications and Cost Estimates. $ 6,250 Attend DPW Staff Meetings to present and discuss the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (estimated 3 meetings). $ 1,000 e JFD will process the Plans to gain approvals regarding the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fish and Game Division of State of California, Metropolitan Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District, Rancho California Water District, and the City of Temecula for NPDES, and Building Permits. All submittal plan check and permit fees will be paid by the City of Temecula. $ 4,500 TOTAL FEE TASK D: $ 51,750 TASK E. BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Dudng the bidding period, JFD will be available to attend a pre-bid meeting, answer questions of bidders submitted to the City of Temecula's Department of Public Works (DPW), and assist in the preparation and issuance of one Addendum prior to the receipt of bids. $ 700 Upon receipt of the bids, review and analyze the bids and make a recommendation to the DPW as to the recommended bidder. $ 1,500 Assuming a 24 week construction period, representatives of JFD will attend weekly or bi- weekly construction coordination meetings, offer plan and specification interpretations, review field construction, and assist Staff in the preparation of change orders and punch lists. Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc~ -7- Rancho California Sports Park Improvements Project CRy of Temecula All inspections am included (Substantial Conformance, maintenance, final). $16,300 Prepare As-Built Plans at the completion of the project from marked-up Progress Plans prepared by the contractor. Time & Matedal Not-to-Exceed. $ 1,000 TOTAL FEE TASK E: $19,500 TOTAL ALL TASKS $ 98,150 REIMBURSABLES: Q 100 sets of working drawings/specification bid document $ 4,000 Q Miscellaneous printing, xerox, photowork $ 1,500 Q Kevin Thatcher travel $ 1,000 Q Field trip travel (JFD) $ 300 Q Processing mileage, miscellaneous travel $ 900 TOTAL ESTIMATED REIMBURSABLES $ 7,700 TOTAL FEE (LABOR AND REIMBURSABLES) $105~50 OPTIONAL SERVICES: JFD is prepared to provide the following optional services if requested by the City of Temecula. Compensation for optional services will be agreed upon and added as an Extra Service to the contract prior to proceeding with the work. Q Rendered presentation site plans or perspectives (computer generated "before/after or hand rendered. Q EIR preparation (studies) or environmental assistance. Q Traffic Impact Studies Q Acoustical Studies -8- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. Rancho California ~ports Park Improvements Project CIty of Temecula CONTRACT AMENDMENT If the Scope of Work presented in Exhibit 'A" is altered dudng the course of this contract, for reasons unknown at this time or otherwise unforseen by the City or Consultant Team, a revised Scope and Fees shall be negotiated by the City and Consultant (JFD) and mutually agreeable to both parties. 20071 :pmposal:AE5:P44381 ~e~d 10129193 -9- Scope of Services/Fee Schedule J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. EXHIBIT abe d. F, I~BVIClIOn Am--oc:ial~mm.w Inu, SCHEDULE OF HOURLY BILUNG RATES EFFECTWE THROUGH JUNE 30~ 1994 Principal $100.00 - $125.00 Director $t00.00 P,82 GeM it: C:lh, mt:. ENGINEERING & DESIGN SERVICES RATE5 Engineer V 100.00 Engineer IV 95.00 Engineer IIi 80.00 Engineer II 65.00 Engineer I 55,00 Transportation Engineer IV Transportation Engineer III Transportation Engineer !1 Transportation Engineer I Designer IV Designer III Designer II Designer I 85.00 70,00 60,00 45,00 PLANNING SERVICES_ Planner IV Planner III Planner II Planner I 85.00 80,00 65.00 45.00 TECHNICAL SERVICES Computer/Systems Manager Computer Technician Graphics Designer Drafter IV Drafter III Drafter II ,Drafter I Engineering Aide Inspector Plan Checker 65.00 45.00 65.00 65,00 50.00 40.00 35.00 35.00 60.00 60.00 SURVEYING SERVICES RAT_,_ E Land Surveyor IV Land Surveyor III Land Surveyor II Land Surveyor I Survey Analyst 05,00 80,00 70.00 65,00 55.00 Field Sunmy: 1-Person Survey Party 2-Person Survey Party 3-Person survey Party 135.00 170.00 Travel TIme: (when in excess of 8 hours work per day) 1-Person Survey Party 2-Person Survey Party 3-Person Survey Party 34.00 60.00 86.0O LANDSCAPE _ARCHITECTURE SERVICES Landscape Architect IV Landscape Architect II! Landscape Architect Ii Landscape Architect I 80.00 75.00 60.00 45.00 AVAILABLE SUPPORT SERVICES Accounting Computer Machine Time (CADD/Intergraph) In-house Reproduction Graphics/Supplies SecretadaWVord Processing $35.00 35,00 COST COST + 1CP/0 35,00 Expert Witness or Utigation (4-hour minimum, Including preparation time) Purchased Svcs-Subcontracts 175,00 COST + 15% Spedat Consultants Travel Subsistence COST + 15% .36/r~e ITEM NO. 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER /~r~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors David F. Dixon, General Manager November 9, 1993 Design Services Contract - Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project PREPARED BY: Phyllis L. Ruse, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Award contract of $32,800 to The Alhambra Group for the preparation of schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project. 2. Transfer $32,800 from Development Impact Fees to the Capital Projects Account, which will be reimbursed with Redevelopment Funds subject to City Council approval following the required public hearing. BACKGROUND: On September 13, 1993 the City solicited Cost Quotes from landscape architectural firms for design services for the expansion of park improvements at Sam Hicks Monument Park. The improvements will include picnic areas, parking facilities, and landscaped circulation improvements to an approximately 1.5 acre, L-shaped parcel adjacent to the existing park. It is proposed that this project be coordinated with the improvements requested by the Temecula Museum Foundation on the park site. Those improvements consist of restoration of an existing historical church on the site, construction of a museum facility, construction of a public restroom, and access from the park to the Senior Center. The City received two Cost Quotes which were reviewed and ranked by staff. It was determined that the Alhambra Group was the best qualified firm for this project. The attached agreement represents the final Scope of Work and compensation for the design services contract. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of this Design Services Contract is $32,800. This project was budgeted in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 1993-94. It is requested that $32,800 be transferred from Development Impact Fees to the Capital Projects Account, which will be reimbursed with Redevelopment Funds subject to City Council approval following the required public hearing. 1 e%agendes~semhicks.ege 110393 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this __day of 1993, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and The Alhambra Group, a sole proprietorship, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: SERVICES. Consultam shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit "A". PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Consultam monthly, at the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks· This amount will not exceed $32,800.00 (Thirty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars and Noll00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council· Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. Invoices must be submitted to: City of Temecula Accounts Payable 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultam shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving an invoice from the Consultam, the City shall pay Consultam for work done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section. If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement· BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultam for any work performed after the data of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultam to make progress in the performance of work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes 2)formslARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -1 - pw01%egmts~meeters%04 012292 ,e e beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default· If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Conealtant shell have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Conealtant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other ' provision of this Agreement. to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on the first date stated above and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described her. in are completed, but in no event later than December 31. 1994. Any disputes regarding performance. default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Conealtant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Conaultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, etse~. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant-is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as her. in set forth. The Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries. wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services her.under for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services her.under. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or 2/~orms/ARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -2- pwO1%egmteVnatem~)4 012292 10. 11. 12. in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all. such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. NOTICE. Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590, and the Coneultant at The Alhambra Group, 28441 Rancho California Road, Suite G, Temecula, CA 92590 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes· ASSIGNMENT. The Conmaitant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due her. under, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. LIABILITY INSURANCE. The Consultant shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work her.under by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Beets' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: A. Minimum SCOpe Of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Form No. GL-0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office Form No. GL-0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" Form No. CG-0001). Insurance Services Office Form No. CA-0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, Code I "any auto" and Endorsement CA-0025. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions insurance. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance no less than: 2/formelARG-04 Ray 1/22192 -3- pw01%agmte%rneetere~.04 012292 General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. Automobile Liability: e 1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: Workers' Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: ~250,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to end approved by the City. Other Insurance Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. be t'-eneral Liabilitv and Automobile Liability coverages. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consdtant, or automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Consultant's insurance, Any failure to comply with the reporting 'provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials, employees or volunteers. The Consdtant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. Ce Worker's Comoensation and Employers' Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its 2/forme/ARG-04 Rev 1122192 4- pwO 1%egmte~netere%04 012292 officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Consdtant for the City. de Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of lobes and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. 13. LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary licenses, including but not limited to City Business License. 14. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, lobes, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date first stated above. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. e 2/formelARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -5- pwO1%agrnteVneetere%04 012292 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONSULTANT CITY OF TEMECULA By: Vincent Di Doneto, Owner, Landscape Architect #2017 By J. Ssl Munoz, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk 2/formelARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -6- pwOl~gmte~etereM)4 012292 EXHIBIT A -,,, ALHAMBRA OROUP Lendm~epe Arohlteoture rio, AGREKMEI~ BETWEEN OWZER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OCTOBER 30, 1993 1.00 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The Alhambra Grou (Landscape Architects) shall provide master plan, cons[ruction documents and professional Landscape Architect services required for the landscape development of Sam Hicks Monument Park in Temecula, California described herein: 2,00 SCOPE OF WORK Landscape Development Plans for areas shown on exhibit provided by the City of Temecula. 2.01 Master Plan {Total Park): a. Site visit and analysii· ~ b. Provide a topo ra hlc urv¥ c. Pre are base s~ee~s @. "=2 -~" scale. te °nt d. Mee[ings with Cit as re u're . e. Pre are color rendered ~an. f. Mee[in s with designate~ Project Commit e. f. Presen[at$on to Conununity Services Commissi . · Presentation to City Council. ~. Preparation of a tilnetable for the im lementa ion of the park design to the completion of {he project. i. Preliminary Budget Estimate Construction Documents 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12 Site improvements including: Architectural plans for the restroom/snackbar facility, (1200 s.f. max.), walkways and parking improvements. Staking plan including but not limited to; play equi ment, drinking fountains, benches, trash receptacles, ~ picnic tables· c. Construction Details: Walkways{ drinking fountain, play area surface, parking Improvements and park sign. Grading Plans Utility Plan (Water & Sewer to Restroom) Planting Plans Irrigation Plans Planting & Irrigation Details & Specifications. Budget Estimate Parking Area Lighting Plan Bidding Assistance Coordination with City Staff as required. See Items 5.01 and 5.02. 28441Fl Road, Suite G, Temecek, CA 92590 (ec8) 6F6-0226 Fex (ece) 694-1587 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 4.00 5.00 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTBERS All necessary architectural and en ineerin his work including, but not limited to, the following: Site electrical and utility layouts. Related information to irrigation water supply and points of connection. Structural details for any retaining walls and wall footings. TIME OF PERFORMANCE The Landscape Architect agrees to commence work t immediately upon receip of the signed contract. The services of the Landscape ArchItect will be coordinated with the City and undertaken in a sequence to ensure their timely completion in n~nety days. FIELD OBSERVATIONS The Landscape Architect shall provide the tollowing field observations: 5.01 a. Landscape Mounding. b. Concrete Walk Forms. Parkan Area Layout. Irriga[ion Main Line Pressure Test. Irri ation Coverage. Plan[ Material Accep nce and Layout. ta Ri Tot Lot Layout. Final Walk Thru (Beginning of Maintenance Period) i. Final Progress Report @ end of Maintenance. 5.02 Restroom / Snack bar facility as required. 6.00 6.01 6.02 PROCESSING AND APPROVAL The City or its representative shall be responsible for the payment of all landscape related permits and application fees. The landscape construction documents shall conform to all pertanent City of Temecula C.S.D. landscape codes and City requirements. 7.00 7.01 7.02 7.03 COMPENSATION AND FEE SCHEDULE Compensation for this pro'set shall be $32,800.00 (Thirty two thousand eight hundred dollars) and payable per the following monthly invoice submittals: Master Plan Phase (including survey) Construction Document Phase Contract Administration Phase Reproduction (including vellums enlar ement~ copies and u to fifty {~0) bid documents an~ specifications). TOTAL Consultants Not In Contract: $ 4,500.00 $25,300.00 ........... $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00. reduction bonds photo sets of t~e { cons ruction $32,800.00 Soils Engineer (Preliminary Soils report by the City) This proposal is valid for 90 days. The Alhambra Group is pleased to submit this pro osal for your consideration. We look forward to the oppor[unity to work with you on this project. Respectfully submitted, Vincent Di Donato Landscape Architect #2017 VD:/rr ~-- EXHIBIT "B" ALHAMBRA GROUP CURRENT BILLING SCHEDULE January 1, 1995 LANDSCAPF 'ARCHITECTURE Principal Proiect Manager Project Designer Senior Draftsperson Draftsperson $95 $80 $60 $50 $45 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Administrative Assistant Word Processing Operator $45 $40 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES AND EXPENSES Mileage Subsistence Outside Services Materials & Other Expenses 0.35/mile Cost Cost plus 10% Cost plus 20% REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on Tuesday, October 12, 1993, 9:45 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Muftoz, Roberts, Stone, Parks ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney F. Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gall Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENT None AGENCY BUSINESS 1. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 14, 1993. It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Muf~oz to approve the minutes of September 14, 1993 as mailed. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks None None Mu~oz, Roberrs, Stone, Memorandum of Understanding Reoarding Development of Old Town Temecula Into a Maior Destination Entertainment Facility RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 RDAMINIOI1 2193 Approve and authorize the Chairperson to execute a "Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Development of Old Town Temecula Into a Major Destination Entertainment Facility". -1- 10124163 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES OCTOBER 12, 1993 City Attorney Scott Field presented the staff report. Zev Buffman introduced himself and his wife Zelma and expressed his enthusiasm for getting started on the project. It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mur~oz, Roberts, Stone, Parks NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT None AGENCY MEMBER'$ REPORT None ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Mu~oz to adjourn at 9:45 P.M. The motion carried unanimously. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency will be held on Tuesday, October 26, 1993, 7:00 P.M. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks June S. Greek, City Clerk RDAMIN 1011 2193 -2- 10/24193