HomeMy WebLinkAbout121101 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104
ADA Title Iii
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
DECEMBER 11, 2001 -7:00 P.M.
At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 11:00 P.M.
5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency pursuant to
Government Code Sections:
1. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property negotiations, property located within
the Pujol neighborhood (Pujol and First Streets- APN Nos. 922-062-010, -016, -019, -
017, and 021 - approximately one acre). Under negotiation are the price and terms of
the real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of
Temecula/Redevelopment Agency and Habitat for Humanity. City/Agency
negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim O'Grady and John Meyer.
2. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property negotiations, property located at APN
No. 921-680-014, APN 92t-680-002, and APN 921-680-018, generally located east of
Ynez Road and Motor Car Parkway. Under negotiation are the price and terms of the
real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of
Temecula/Redevelopment Agency and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., a
subsidiary of Guidant Corporation (Guidant). City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim
O'Grady, and John Meyer.
3. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property negotiations, property located at the
northwest corner of Diaz Road and Winchester Road - approximately 35 acres. Under
negotiation are the price and terms of the real property interests. The negotiating
parties are the City of Temecula and Tres D, LLC. The negotiating parties are Shawn
Nelson, Jim O'Grady, and John Meyer.
4. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.9(a) with respect to two matters of existing litigation involving the
City. The following case will be discussed: 1) City of Temecula v. Lennar Homes and
2) Ross v. Stone.
Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties
may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk.
R:V~genda\121101
1
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 2001-17
Resolution: No. 2001-103
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Jeff Comerchero
Prelude Music:
The Musician's Workshop Youth Choir
invocation:
Pastor Ron Alsobrooks of New Covenant Fellowship
Flag Salute:
Troop No. 301
ROLL CALL:
Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on
items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on
an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a
pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to
Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item.
There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made
at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the
agenda.
R:~Agenda\121101
2
6
Resolution Approvi.n.q List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
City Treasurer's Report
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 2001.
Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended September
30, 2001.
Annual Professional Services A,qreements for Geotechnical and Material Testing Service,~
for various Capital Improvement Proiects for FY2001-2002
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Rescind the agreement with Petra Geotechnical, Inc. in an amount not to exceed
$60,000 to provide as-needed geotechnical and materials testing services;
5.2 Approve an agreement with Engen Public Works Services, LLC, in an amount not to
exceed $60,000 to provide as-needed geotechnical and material testing services;
5.3 Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.
Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Citywide Routine Maintenance Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Citywide Routine Maintenance Contract
with Walter K. Becker (dba Becker Engineering) for an amount of $100,000.00 and
authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment.
R:~Agenda\121101
3
7
Completion and Acceptance for Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Proiect -
Proiect No. PW00-22
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Accept the project for the Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project -
Project No. PW00-22 as complete;
7.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year
Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract;
7.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of
Completion if no liens have been filed.
8
Reimbursement Agreement with Rancho California Water District for Cost Sharing for
Aerial Imagery and Di,qital Topographic Elevation Data
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Approve a Reimbursement Agreement with Rancho California Water District for the
acquisition of Aerial Imagery and Digital Topographic Elevation Data in the amount
of $157,300.00.
9
10
Contractor Prequalifications for the Community Theater (Mercantile Building Seismic
Retrofit} - Proiect No. PW01-20CSD
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit and prequalify contractors to
perform the work required for the seismic retrofit of the Community Theater
(Mercantile Building) - Project No. PW01-20CSD.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-16 (Amendment of the Official Zoning Map)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP ALONG BOTH SIDES OF A PORTION OF RIDGE
PARK DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0460)
R:~Agenda\121101
4
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT,
THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,
AND
THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
R:~Agenda\121101
5
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. CSD 2001-01
Resolution: No. CSD 2001-16
CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone
ROLLCALL:
DIRECTORS:
Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of
Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar.
Speakers ara limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of
Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to
Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of November 27, 2001.
2 Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended
September 30, 2001.
R:~Agenda\121101
6
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 8, 2002, 7:00 'PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\121101
7
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AG~NC~ M~E~ING
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. RDA 2001-01
Resolution: No. RDA 2001-06
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ron Roberts
ROLLCALL
AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the
Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent
Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the
Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are caIled to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of November 27, 2001.
2 Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended
September 30, 2001.
R:~Agenda\121101
8
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 8, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\121101
9
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. TPFA 2001-01
Resolution: No. TPFA 2001-07
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson JeffComerchero
ROLL CALL
AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Temecula
Public Financing Authority on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent
Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the
Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please
come forward and state your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of November 27, 2001.
AUTHORITY BUSINESS
2 Formation of Community Facilities District
RECOMMENDATION:
2,1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~Agenda\121101
10
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING
ITS INTENTION TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL
TAXES THEREIN
2.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING
ITS INTENTION TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE
PROPOSED TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2 (HARVESTON)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBERS'REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
R:~Agenda\121101
11
PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or
may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s)
at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or
in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing.
11 Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 0t-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC NO. 4
AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF RUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD,
NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA
ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019)
11.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA
01-0102 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE
PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, WEST
OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, AND SOUTH OF PAUBA
ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION
11.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS
FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
NO. 8
R:~Agenda\121101
12
11.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188
AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 293
RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CETNER LOT, 1 PARK
SITE LOT, AND t6 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO
THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, AND PARK
SITES OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS
PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD,
AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS.
955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, AND 955-030-032
12 Development Code Amendment (Plannin,q App cat on No. 01-0566 - Secondary Dwellinq
Units)
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR
SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 01-0566)
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:~Agenda\121101
13
PROCLAMATIONS
AND
PRESENTATIONS
ITEM 1
ITEM 2
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the
Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby
allowed in the amount of $2,371,488.16.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 11th day of December, 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:/Resos2OO1/Resos 01- I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 01- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 11th day of December, 2001 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:/Resos2001/Resos 01- 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
LiST OF DEMANDS
11/29/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
12/11/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
11/21/01 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 17Jl1/01 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
199
192
193
194
210
280
30O
310
320
330
340
GENERAL FUND
RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP
INSURANCE FUND
VEHICLES FUND
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
SUPPORT SERVICES
FACILITIES
001
165
190
192
193
194
28O
300
320
330
340
GENERAL
RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP
INSURANCE FUND
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
SUPPORT SERVICES
FACILITIES
TOTAL BY FUND:
I SHAWN NELSON, CI"~ ~AG~R
$ 318,612.62
1,812.980.38
239,895.16
$ 2,371.488.16
1,716,308.51
7,855.14
99,598.21
42.97
352.49
62,207.95
3,784.68
3,150.89
87,123.70
93,909.67
5,032.54
173,109.63
4,103.59
41,915.97
65.19
4,290.57
539.42
1,821.16
852.37
7,137.65
1,765.93
4,293.78
239,895.16
$ 2,371,488.16~
, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 14
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
330 SUPPORT SERVICES
340 FACILITIES
AMOUNT
178,649.20
7,855.14
50,290.21
42.97
10,578.10
352.49
2,844.88
3,784.68
3,150.89
32,298.70
22,959.67
1,314.15
4,491.54
TOTAL 318,612.62
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
21479
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
309511
CHECK
DATE
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
VENDOR
NUMBER
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
VENDOR
HAME
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RET[RE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RET[RE
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PRES EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS ENPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
0D0283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 IRSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
000283 INSTATAX (IRS)
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PRES RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 PERS-PRE
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOH
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 FEDERAL
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
000283 MEDICARE
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-2390
165-2390
190-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194-2390
280-2390
300-2390
320-2130
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
001-2130
001-2390
165-2390
190-2390
192-2390
193-2390
194-2390
280-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
340-2390
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
001-2070
165-2070
190-2070
192-2070
193-2070
194-2070
280-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
340-2070
ITEM
AMOUNT
28,050.22
669.01
5,083.78
12.06
580.44
100.87
289.21
139.55
26.51
1,126.01
220.15
587.67
182.91
96.03
1.87
20.00
.05
2.75
.36
.92
.46
3,72
1.39
2.65
27,290.19
536.20
5,894.03
19.24
563.81
138.28
227.51
91.19
1,140.57
277.94
589.01
6,586.96
156.26
1,548.16
2.80
151.18
22.90
66.98
32.51
294.78
63.02
153.37
CHECK
AMOUNT
37,198.59
45,846.89
309549 11/29/01 000444 IMSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 001-2070 106.00
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 165-2070 4.73
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 190-2070 117.05
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER HAME
ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 193-2070 2.80
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 280-2070 1.10
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SD[ 320-2070 7.84
309549 11/29/01 000444 [NBTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 330-2070 2.04
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 340-2070 3.73
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 001-2070 7,296.74
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 165-2070 131.25
309549 11/29/01 000444 INBTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 190-2070 1,397.05
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 192-2070 6.21
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX {EDD) 000444 STATE 193-2070 122.35
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 194-2070 43.39
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX {EDD) 000444 STATE 280-2070 50.50
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 300-2070 22.01
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 320-2070 253.29
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 330-2070 77.32
309549 11/29/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 STATE 340-2070 133.83
73492
73493
73494
73494
73495
73495
73496
73496
73497
73497
73498
73498
73498
73499
735O0
73501
735O2
735O3
735O4
735O5
11/29/01 004148
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
AT&T
000745 A T & T WIRELESS SERVIC
004246 ACME SCREEN PRINTING
004246 ACME SCREEN PRINTING
003859 ALL ABOUT SELF STORAGE
003859 ALL ABOUT SELF STORAGE
003706 AMBIENT AVL INC
003706 AMBIENT AVL INC
004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE
004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE
004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGE,
004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGE,
004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGE~
004445 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS A
000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS
004777 ANYTIME ICE COMPANY~ IN
000101 APPLE ONE, INC.
002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV
BERG, YOLANDE
003817 BLUE RIDGE MEDICAL
LONG DISTANCE SVCS:POLICE DEPT 001-170-999-5229
CELLULAR PBONE SVCS:POLICE DPT 001-170-999-5208
SPORTS T-SHIRT AWARDS
SPORTS T-SHIRT AWARDS
190-187-999-5313
190-187-999-5313
DEC STORAGE RENTAL-MUSEUM
NOV STORAGE RENTAL:MUSEUM
190-185'999-5250
190-185-999'5250
OLD TWN WIRELESS MICRO REPAIRS 001-164-603-5212
FREIGHT 001-164-603-5212
CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PD/CBP
CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWB-PD/CBP
Cl15 STORAGE UNIT RENTAL:B&S
8109 STORAGE UNIT RENTAL:B&S
Blll STORAGE UNIT RENTAL
001-170-999-5328
001-170-999-5328
001-162-999-5234
001-162-999-5234
320-199-999-5238
MEMBERSHIP: GREG BUTLER
001-165-999-5226
CASB RAISED FOR GIFT CAMPAIGN 001-2120
DEPOSIT FOR WNTR WNDRLD SNOW 190-183-999-5370
TEMP HELP W/E 11/03 COCKRELL 001-110-999-5118
CONCRETE SIDEWALK CITYWIDE 001-164-601-5402
REFUND:EXERCISE-KUNDALINI YOGA 190-183-4982
PARAMEDIC SQUAD SUPPLIES:FIRE 001-171-999-5311
89.76
364.68
94.72
290.40
190.00
192.00
1,112.29
40.00
84.00
377.00
130.00
130.00
124.00
123.00
92.37
500.00
32.50
4,865.00
35.00
632.35
9,779.23
89.76
364.68
385.12
382.00
1,152.29
461.00
384.00
123.00
92.37
500.00
32.50
4,865.00
35.00
632.35
VOUCHRE2
11/29/01 10:22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 3
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
73506 11/29/01 004176 BROADWING
73507 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
73508 11/29/01
BROWN, PASCALE
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
004081 BUSINESS FURNITURE GROU
73509 11/29/01 001260 C P R S
73510 11/29/01 000154 C S M F 0
73511 11/29/01 004618 CALIF NARCOTIC OFFICERS
73511 11/29/01 004618 CALIF NARCOTIC OFFICERS
73512 11/29/01 003979 CALVARY CHAPEL OF MURRI
~5513 11/29/01
73514 11/29/01
CALVARY CHAPEL OF TEMEC
CARDENAS, SONJA
73515 11/29/01 004093 CARDIO CARE PLUS
73516 11/29/01 002534 CATERERS CAFE
73516 11/29/01 002534 CATERERS CAFE
73517 11/29/01
003047 CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL -
73518 11/29/01 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC
73518 11/29/01 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC
73519 11/29/01 003628 CHUYS RESTAURANT
73520 11/29/01 003021 CIHBULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
~520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 C[NGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
~520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
73520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
~520 11/29/01 003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUMBER
LONG DISTANCE & 1NTERNET SVCS 320'199'999-5208
REIMB CELLULAR PHONE CHRGS 001-140-999-5261
C.H.FURNITURE RECONFIG-PLAN 001-161-999-5601
C.H.FURNITURE RECONFIG-FIRE 001-171-999-5601
C.H.FURMITURE RECONFIG-B&S 001-162-999-5601
C.H.FURNITURE RECONFIG-INF SYS 320-199-999-5250
C.H.FURNITURE RECONFIG-LOW/MOD 165-199-999-5601
C.H.FURNITURE RECONFIG-RDA 280-199-999-5601
MEMBERSHIP: PHYLLIS RUSE 190-180-999-5226
NEW MEMBERSHIP: KAREN JESTER 001-140-999-5226
MEMBERSHIP DUES: TODD PAULING 001-170-999-5226
MEMBERSHIP DUES: JOHN MORIN 001-170-999-5226
REIMB:TRANSPORTATION COST 190-183-999-5370
REFUND:SECURITY DEPT MS01-3141 190-2900
REFUND:EXERCISE-PREGNANCY YOGA 190-183-4982
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
REFRSHMNT:PREVAILING WAGE MTG 001-110-999-5260
REFRESHMENT:INTERVIEW PANEL 001-150-999-5260
REIMB:TRANSPORTATION COST 190-183-999-5370
FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-110-999-5262
FUEL EXPENSE FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-170-999-5262
REFRESHMENTS:AUTO MTG W/VENDOR 001-171-999-5260
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-120-999-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE BVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
001-140-999-5208
001-161-999-5208
001-162-999-5208
190-180-999-5208
280-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
001-163-999-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHOHE SVC 001-164-601-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-164-602-5208
10/09-11/08 EELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-164-604-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVO 001-165-999-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-100-999-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-110-999-5208
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC 001-150-999-5208
ITEM
AMOUNT
1,195.00
62.51
5,766.09
5,279.71
1,765.16
1,409.47
2,412.86
2,412.86
125.00
100.00
60.00
60.00
300.00
100.00
48.00
329.60
54.59
74.56
300.00
96.77
80.48
181.35
113.98
55.60
519.60
658.96
997.75
59.76
231.21
243.33
458.92
108.43
54.21
535.68
541.39
405.32
55.60
CHECK
AMOUNT
1,195.00
62.51
19,046.15
125.00
100.00
120.00
300.00
100.00
48.00
329.60
129.15
300.00
177.25
181.35
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
73520
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER
11/29/01
003021 CINGULAR WIRELESS (CELL
10/09-11/08 CELLULAR PHONE SVC
330-199-999-5208
ITEM
AMOUNT
69.71
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 001-2120 123.50
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 190-2120 5.60
7'5521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 193-2120 .60
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 194-2120 .20
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 330-2120 5.50
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 340-2120 .60
73521 11/29/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT CASH RAISED FOR GIFT CAMPAIGN 001-2120 537.62
73522
73522
73522
73522
73523
73523
73523
73523
73524
73526
73527
73527
73527
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
001193 COMP U S A INC
001193 COMP U S A INC
001193 COMP U S A INC
001193 COMP U S A INC
000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET
000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET
000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET
000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET
COONEY~ TERRENCE
004123 D L PHARES & ASSOCIATES
003681 DAVIDSON & ALLEN, ARCHI
MISC COMPUTER EQUIP:INFO SYS
MISC COMPUTER EQUIP:INFO SYS
MISC COMPUTER EQUIP:INFO SYS
MISC COMPUTER EQUIP:INFO SYS
73528
73528
320-199-999-5242
320-199-999-5242
320-199-999-5242
320-199-999-5242
RADIO LICENSE RENEWAL FROM FCC 320-199-999-5209
INSTALL RADAR UNIT-SQUAD CAR 001-170-999-5214
INSTALL RADAR UNIT: SQUAD CAR 001-170-999-5214
INSTALL RADAR UNIT:SQUAD CAR 001-170-999-5214
SETTLEMENT RELEASE FOR DAMAGES 300-199-999-5207
DEC LEASE-POLICE STOREFRONT 001-170-999-5229
DESIGN SVC-SR CENTER EXPANSION 210-190-163-5802
11/29/01 004382 DEKRA LITE INC BULB STRANDS FOR 2 X-MAS TREES 190-183-999-5370
11/29/01 004382 DEKRA LITE INC FREIGHT 190-183-999-5370
11/29/01 004382 DEKRA LITE INC SALES TAX 190-183-999-5370
001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATIO
001669 DUNH EDWARDS CORPORATIO
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S [ EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC
004427 EDWARDS, SALLY
003665 EMERITUS COMMUNICATIONS
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
73529
7353O
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
ENCINITAS, CITY OF
SUPPLIES FOR GRAFFITI REMOVAL 001-164-601-5218
SUPPLIES FOR GRAFFITI REMOVAL 001-164-601-5218
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 RUSH
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 MONTECINO
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 MONTECINO
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 EBON
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 HANSEN
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 HANSEN
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 HANSEN
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 HANSEN
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 OBMANN
TEMP BELP W/E 11/16 HEER
TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 MCCOY
001-161-999-5118
340-199-701-5118
340-199-702-5118
340-199-701-5118
001-164-604-5118
190-180-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
001-120-999-5118
001-171-999-5118
001-162-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330
OCT LONG DISTANCE PHONE SVCS 320-199-999-5208
COPY OF YOUTH MASTER PLAN 190-180-999-5250
73531
73532
647.00
180.95
338.62
72.55
160.00
360.00
360.00
360.00
500.00
1,661.73
181.13
501.00
57.00
37.58
268.18
199.63
1,590.23
751.80
250.60
1,194.40
46.32
46.32
1,357.76
1~143.52
1,501.79
2,397.28
2,949.40
281.60
1,654.58
15.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
5,109.45
673.62
1,239.12
1,240.00
500.00
1,661.73
181.13
595.58
467.81
13,229.42
281.60
1,654.58
15.00
VOUCNRE2
11/29/01 10:22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 5
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
73533 11/29/01 002060 EUROPEAN DELI & CATERIN
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73534 11/29/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
73535 11/29/01 002037 EXPANETS
73535 11/29/01 002037 EXPANETS
73536 11/29/01 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICE
73536 11/29/01 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICE
73536 11/29/01 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICE
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL BXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS
73537 11/29/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
73538 11/29/01
73539 11/29/01
FELDMAN, APHRODITE
001511 FIELDMAN NOLAPP & ASSOC
73540 11/29/01 001135 FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
BOXED LUNCHES FOR EXCURSION
OCT LDSCP IMPR:RANCHO VISTA
OCT LDSCP IMPR:RANCHO VISTA
OCT LDSCP IMPR:SPORTS PARK
OCT LDSCP IMPR:CBILD MUSEUM
OCT LDSCP IMPR:OLD TWN PRKLOT
OCT LDSCP IMPR:R.CAL SPRT PK
OCT LDSCP IMPR:DESILTING POND
TELEPHONE MNTC AGRMT:4TB QTR
TELEPHONE MNTC AGRMT:4TH QTR
CITY VEHICLE FUEL EXPENSE
CITY VEHICLE FUEL EXPENSE
CiTY VEHICLE FUEL EXPENSE
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES
REFUND: MUSIC-INSTANT PIANO
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-183-999~5350
193-180-999-5212
193-180-999-5212
190-180-999-5212
193-180-999-5212
001-164-603-5212
190-180-999-5212
190-182-999-5415
320-199-999-5215
320-199-999-5215
001-170-999-5262
001-111-999-5262
190-180-999-5263
190-180-999-5230
001-150-999-5230
001-171-999-5230
320-199-999-5230
001-110-999-5230
001-165-999-5230
001-140-999-5230
001-171-999-5230
001-161-999-5230
001-165-999-5230
190-180-999-5230
001-111-999-5230
001-161-999-5230
001-165-999-5230
190-183-4982
FINANCIAL ADVISDR:WOLF CREEK 001-2644
PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS
001-150-999-5250
73541 11/29/01 002982 FRANCBISE TAX BOARU - W 002982 ST DED 190-2140
73542 11/29/01 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
73542 11/29/01 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY
73543 11/29/01 003946 G T ENTERTAINMENT
DAY TIMER SUPPLIES:TCSD
DAY TIMER SUPPLIES:TCSD
ELECT LGHT PARADE ANNOUNCER
190-180-999-5220
190-180-999-5220
190-183-999-5370
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS INC 15 CLIP-ON CELL PHONE CASES 001-163-999-5242
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS INC 15 CLIP-OD CELL PHONE CASES 001-165-999-5242
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS INC 15 CLIP-ON CELL PHONE CASES 001-164-601-5242
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS IRC FREIGHT 001-163-999-5242
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS INC FREIGHT 001-165-999-5242
73544 11/29/01 001937 GALLS INC FREIGNT 001-164-601-5242
ITEM
AMOUNT
37.25
192.00
204.48
278.67
67.51
435.00
300.00
500.00
752.00
1,504.00
164.23
8.28
13.98
43.10
12.79
10.90
14.82
12.92
17.40
14.83
19.08
15.90
12.79
121.74
25.19
25.58
10.90
25.00
1,488.32
310.00
100.47
136.96
33.97
200.00
69.95
69.95
69.95
3.67
3.67
3.66
CHECK
AMOUNT
37.25
1,977.66
2,256.00
186.49
357.94
25.00
1,488.32
310.00
100.47
170.93
200.00
VOUCHRE2
11/29/01 10:22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 6
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK
NUMBER DATE
73544 11/29/01
73544 11/29/01
73544 11/29/01
73545 11/29/01
73545 11/29/01
7-3545 11/29/01
73545 11/29/01
73545 11/29/01
73546 11/29/01
73547 11/29/01
73548 11/29/01
73549 11/29/01
73550 11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73553 11/29/01
73554 11/29/01
73555 11/29/01
73556 11/29/01
73557 11/29/01
73550 11/29/01
73559 11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
73561 11/29/01
73561 11/29/01
001407
003571
001186
003832
003832
003832
002140
002140
VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER NAME
001937 GALLS IRC
001937 GALLS IRC
001937 GALLS IRC
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000177 GLERRIES OFFICE PRODUCT
000175 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFI
001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I
GREER, SHARON
HARLAN, DENISE
NORLOCK, AMY
003624 HOWELL, ANN MARIE
003624 BOWELL, ANN MARIE
HUEBERT, KELLY
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUB
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS
000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS
003977 I D SYSTEMS & SUPPLIES
001123 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION
INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTA
INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL
INTL ASSR OF PLUMBING
IRWIN, JOHN
J T K CONSTRUCTION
J T K CONSTRUCTION
J T K CONSTRUCTION
JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS
JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
SALES TAX
SALES TAX
SALES TAX
OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCSD
OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCSD
OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCG
OFFICE SUPPLIES'CRC
OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCC
NEW MEMBERSHIP:I(AREN JESTER
ALARM SRVCS:POLICE STOREFROHTD
SETTLEMENT RELEASE FOR DAMAGES
RFD:BLOCK PRTY PRMT LDOl'O18SE
REFUND: MUSIC'INSTANT PIANO
REFORMAT 3 TOURISM ADS
SALES TAX
REFD:BALLOON TWISTING FOR KIDS
000194 DEF COMP
000194 DEF COMP
000194 DEF COMP
000194 DEF COMP
000194 DEF COMP
000194 DEF COMP
CAMERA W/MEMORY BOARD:POLICE
LEATHER PALM GLOVES:PW MNTC
MEMBERSHIP: JERRY GONZALEZ
POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS
MEMBERSHIP DUES:ANTHONY ELMO
DJ SVCS:SWING DANCE 11/2/01
NECONFIGURE MAIN DESK @ CRC
CRC-REFURBISH LAMINATED TOP
REMOVE & LAMINATE DOORS @ CRC
NETWORK EQUIP MNTC & REPAIRS
NETWORK EQUIP MNTC & REPAIRS
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-163'999-5242
001'165-999-5242
001-164'601'5242
190'180'999-5220
190-180-999-5220
190'184-999-5220
190'182-999'5220
190-184-999-5220
001-140'999-5226
001-170'999'5229
300-199-999-5207
001-163'4380
190-183'4982
001-111-999'5270
001-111-999-5270
190-183-4982
001-2080
165-2080
190-2080
194'2080
280-2080
300-2080
001-170-999-5215
001-164'601-5218
001-164-602-5226
190-186-999-5250
001-162'999-5226
190-183-999-5371
190-182-999-5250
190-182-999-5416
190-182'999-5416
320-199-999'5250
320'199-999-5250
ITEM
AMOUNT
5.53
5.53
5.51
703.05
397.15
106.24
12.38
168.94
120.00
60.00
2,226.63
25.00
25.00
165.00
12.38
10.00
4,927.94
445.84
493.47
16.50
148.63
50.00
243.07
153.66
198.00
202.96
250.00
7B.O0
580.00
3,500.00
1,200.00
932.27
327.96
CHECK
AMOUNT
237.42
1,387.76
120.00
60.00
2,226.63
25.00
25.00
177.38
10.00
6,084.38
243.07
153.66
198.00
202.96
250.00
75.00
5,280.00
1,260.23
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
73562
73562
73563
73563
73563
73563
~r3563
73563
73564
73565
73566
73566
73566
73567
73568
73569
73569
73570
73571
73571
73572
73573
73573
73574
73575
73576
73576
73577
73577
73577
73577
73577
73577
73577
73578
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
004079 JENKENS & GILCHRIST
004079 JENKENS & GILCNRIST
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS 1NC
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS INC
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS INC
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS INC
004104 KINETIC SYSTEMS INC
000869
004230
004230
004230
004776
003782
004068
004068
001967
003669
003669
004107
000944
000944
LANGFORD, CRYSTAL
LAWRENCE WELK RESORT TH
LINCOLN EQUIPMENT INC
LINCOLN EQUIPMENT INC
LINCOLN EQUIPMENT INC
M P SIGNS
MAIN STREET SIGNS
MANALILI, AILEEN
MANALILI, AILEEN
MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV
MARC FAULKENBURY PAINTI
MARC FAULKENBURY PAINTI
MASSA-LAVITT, SANDRA
MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY I
MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY I
MCCARTY, DEWANA
MCCOY, MIKE
003448 MELODYS AD WORKS
003448 MELODYS AD WORKS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS
004128 MORAMARCO, ANTHONY J.
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
GENERAL HR LEGAL SERVICES
OCT LEGAL SERVICES
NVAC MNTC & REPAIR @ MNTC FAC
HVAC MNTC & REPAIR @ CITY HALL
REMOVE SUCTION LINE DRIER:TCC
NVAC MNTC & REPAIR @ CRC
HVAC MNTC & REPAIR @ CRC
HVAC MNTC & REPAIR @ CRC
RE-ISSUE:REFUND-SHELTER RENTAL
SR EXCURSION FOR XMAS MUSICAL
AQUATICS-I PAIL OF THOROPATCH
FREIGHT
SALES TAX
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-130-999-5247
001-130-999-5247
340-199-702-5212
340-199-701-5212
190-184-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-183-4989
190-183-999-5350
190-186-999-5212
190-186-999-5212
190-186-999-5212
FIRE STRIPING ON FIRE PREV TRK 310-1910
MISC SIGNS/RARDWARE:PW MAINT
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TEMP HELP (2)W/E 11/18 MCCLANA
RES IMPRV PRGM: LANATTE
RES IMPRV PRGM: TNURMOND
11/13-21/01 CONSULTING SERVICE
TRAF SGNL CONTROLLER/CABINETS
SALES TAX
REFUND:TAKING CHARGE
REIMB:CCAPA CONF:10/20-22/01
SUPPLIES - OLD TOWN SPEC EVENT
SUPPLIES-OLD TOWN SPEC EVENTS
BUSINESS CARDS: T. CHU
SALES TAX
BUS. CARDS:O.T. REVIEW BOARD
SALES TAX
BUSINESS CARDS: G. YATES
BUSINESS CARDS: J. O'GRADY
SALES TAX
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
001-164-601-5244
190-183-999-5330
190-183-999-5330
001-161-999-5118
165-199-813-5804
165-199-813-5804
001-161-999-5248
001-164-602-5412
001-164-602-5412
190-183-4982
001-161-999-5261
280-199-999-5250
280-199-999-5250
001-164-602-5222
001-164-602-5222
001-161-999-5222
001-161-999-5222
001-110-999-5222
001-110-999-5222
001-110-999-5222
190-183-999-5330
ITEM
AMOUNT
456.00
192.00
60.00
302.00
531.00
717.00
270.00
160.00
30.00
540.00
88.75
9.86
6.65
980.72
660.05
210.00
630.00
1,061.03
420.00
456.00
1,659.75
14,503.88
1,087.79
20.00
449.50
399.91
10.00
39.75
2.98
238.50
17.89
106.60
213.00
23.97
192.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
648.00
2,040.00
30.00
540.00
105.26
980.72
660.05
840.00
1,061.03
876.00
1,659.75
15,591.67
20.00
449.50
409.91
642.69
192.00
VOU£HRE2
11/29/01 10~22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 8
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
73579 11/29/01 004534 MOTIENT SERVICES IRC
73580 11/29/01 MUELLER, STEPHANIE
}'3581 11/29/01 MURG, CHERYL
73582 11/29/01 003039 MURRiETA VALLEY HIGH SC
73583 11/29/01 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS
73583 11/29/01 002925 RAPA AUTO PARTS
73583 11/29/01 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS
73584 11/29/01 000845 RATIORAL LEAGUE OF CITI
73585 11/29/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWR TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TORN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWR TIRE & SERVICE
73586 11/29/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
73587 11/29/01 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPAR
73588 11/29/01 003589 PACIFIC COAST ENTERPRIS
73589 11/29/01 000472 PARADISE CHEVROLET CADI
73590 11/29/01 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA
73591 11/29/01 003218 PELA
73592 11/29/01 002331 PEP SOYS INC
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTIOR NUMBER
NOV AIRTIME - SATELLITE PHONE 001-110-999-5278
REFUND:BALLOON TWISTING 190-183-4982
REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2599 190-2900
HOL.PARADE TRANSPORTATION COST 190-183-999-5370
PW MAINT CREW MAINT SUPPLIES
PW MAINT CREW MAINT SUPPLIES
PW MAIRT CREW MAIRT SUPPLIES
001-164'601-5215
001-164-601-5215
001'164-601'5215
C.E.D. MTG:R.R./J.C.:12/05/01 001-100-999-5258
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES:POLICE 001-170-999-5220
CITY VENICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VENICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT
CLOTH AMERICAN FLAG
STREET ADDRESSING SVCS
190-180'999-5214
001-164-601-5214
001-164-601-5214
001'164-601'5214
001-164-601-5214
190-180'999-5214
190'180-999-5214
001-164-601-5214
001-164-601-5214
001-164-601'5214
190-183'999-5370
001-162-999-5250
2002 CHEVY TRUCK FOR TCSD 310-1910
SPECIAL EVENT RED SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5370
LDSCP PLN CK SVC:MARG/HWY 79 210-165-706-5804
ROLLER/HYGROMTR/CREEPER:STN 92 210-165-~9-5610
73593 11/29/01 004463 PERFECT FORM SUSINESS S QTY 1000 PAYROLL CBECK
73593 11/29/01 004463 PERFECT FORM BUSINESS S FREIGHT
73593 11/29/01 004463 PERFECT FORM SUSINESS S SALES TAX
73594 11/29/01 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO 001958 PERS L-T
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
~595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
001-140-999-5222
001-140-999-5222
001-140-999-5222
001-2122
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMERT
001-140'999-5260
001-100-999-5260
001-140-999-5262
001-161'610-5260
001-161-999-5260
001-162-999-5261
ITEM
AMOUNT
69.00
10.00
100.00
300.00
36.96
52.14
27.94
104.00
159.65
39.15
84.45
21.45
49.07
19.15
69.14
179.72
61.92
34.14
98.19
14.95
851.63
31,317.98
14.52
2,365.00
213.47
864.68
6.65
64.85
83.99
15.00
30.00
26.29
34.23
17.00
10.94
CHECK
AMOUNT
69.00
10.00
100.00
300.00
117.04
104.00
159.65
656.38
14.95
851.63
31,317.98
14.52
2,365.00
213.47
936.18
83.99
VOUCHRE2
11/29/01 10:22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE 9
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASB
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73595 11/29/01 000249 PETTY CASH
73597 11/29/01 002928 POLICE EXEC RESEARCH FO
73598 11/29/01 004782 POLICE TRAFFIC SRVCS SE
73599 11/29/01 002776 PRIME MATRIX INC
73599 11/29/01 002776 PRIME MATRIX IMC
73600 11/29/01 004425 PUBLIC ENTERPRISE GROUP
73601 11/29/01 004529 QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON
73601 11/29/01 004529 QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON
73602 11/29/01 000981 R H F INC
73602 11/29/01 000981 R H F INC
73602 11/29/01 000981 R R F
73602 11/29/01 000981 R H F INC
73602 11/29/01 000981 R H F INC
73603 11/29/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST
73603 11/29/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASM REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASM REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASR REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASB REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIHBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
POP CONF:50FFICERS:12/5-8/01
TRF SVC SEM:STEGER:12/2-5/01
OCT CELLULAR SVCB:SR VAN
OCT CELLULAR SVCS:CITY VAN
PROF MARKETING SERVICES
PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT
PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
RADAR EQUIP REPAIR & MAINT
VARIOUS WATER METERS
VARIOUS WATER METERS
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-162-999-5261
001-164-601-5260
001-170-999-5214
001-170-999-5214
001-170-999-5220
001-170-999-5220
001-170-999-5230
001-170-999-5230
001-170-999-5242
001-170-999-5220
001-170-999-5243
190-180-999-5260
190-180-999-5301
190-181-999-5301
190-180-999-5260
190-183-999-5370
190-184-999-5301
190-185-999-5301
190-187-999-5220
001-164-601-5218
001-164-604-5230
210-165-739-5801
210-165-739-5801
190-183-999-5370
280-199-999-5362
190-183-999-5370
001-2175
190-180-999-5260
210-190-158-5804
001-170-999-5261
001-170-999-5261
190-180-999-5208
190-180-999-5208
190-180-999-5250
001-170-999-5214
001-170-999-5214
001-170-999-5215
001-170-999-5215
001-170-999-5215
001-170-999-5215
001-170-999-5215
19D-180-999-5240
193-180-999-5240
ITEM
AMOUNT
19.49
15.00
35.80
11.17
4.64
4.29
8.34
4.00
12.88
29.95
15.05
12.90
9.45
35.99
49.21
19.24
45.72
13.98
12.80
26.93
3.90
7.18
45.92
30.08
32.04
45.70
75.55
30.97
32.18
2,195.00
215.00
48.37
27.33
286.98
53.16
221.71
50.00
25.00
107.49
107.49
107.49
7,?75.41
6,722.59
CHECK
AMOUNT
823.78
2,195.00
215.00
75.70
286.98
274.87
397.47
14,498.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 10
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
~3604
7'3605
73605
73605
73606
73607
73608
73609
73609
73610
73611
73611
73611
73611
73612
~3613
73614
73615
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
73616
}~3616
73616
73616
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29101
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
REAM, NATHAN
004584 REGENCY LIGHTING
004584 REGENCY LIGHTING
004584 REGENCY LIGHTING
003591
002110
REID, DONNA
RENEG COMMERCIAL MANAGE
RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT
RICHARD O. HANESS ARCHI
RICHARD O. RANESS ARCHI
001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO TECHN
000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW
000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW
000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW
000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW
001942 S C SIGNS
SAXTON, DENNIS
004562 SCHIRMER ENGINEERING CO
SHIVELA MIDDLE SCHOOL
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO GALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CAEIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO GALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
000537 SO CALIF EDISON
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
REFUND:ROOM RENTAL
VAR PARKS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
CRC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
CRC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
REFUND:TAKING CNARGE
INDUSTRIAL WEED CONTROL SVCS
RENTAL EQUIP FOR PW MAINT CREW
REFUND:FIRE FEES:B01-2567/2568
REFUND:FIRE FEES:BO1-2567/2568
OCT EMERG. RADIO RENTAL:P.D.
SEPT 2001 BAR PATROL SVCS
PATROL SVCS:CITY HALL MTG:9/13
RACE FOR CURE PATROL SVC:10/21
SEP HOT BMR NIGHTS PATROL SVCS
OCT POSTING PUBLIC NTC SIGNS
REFUND:MUSIC-INSTANT PIANO
OCT PLAN CHECK SERVICES
HOL.PARADE TRANSPORATION COSTS
NOV 2-21-518-0340 HWY 79
NOV 2-11-007-0455 6TH ST
NOV 2-22-891-0550 VARIOUS MTRB
NOV 2-22-891-0550 VARIOUS MTRS
NOV 2-10-747-1393 VARIOUS MTRS
NOV 2-14-204-1615 FRNT ST RDIO
NOV 2-18-937-3152 MUSEUM
JUL-NOV 2-23-151-4381 VAR MTRS
NOV 2-21-981-4720 HWY 79
NOV 2-02-351-4946 BR CTR
NOV 2-21-560-5874 MARGARITA
NOV 2-18-049-6416 FRONT ST PED
NOV 2-21-911-7892 2ND ST PED
NOV 2-19-171-8568 WEDDING CHPL
NOV 2-19-999-9442 VARIOUS MTRS
NOV 2'22-934-9634 DIAZ
NOV 2-22-934-9766 DIAZ
NOV 2'20'817-9929 PD SATELLITE
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-184-4990
190-180-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-182-999-5212
190-183-4982
001-164-601-5401
001-164-601-5238
001-171-4036
001-171-4037
001-170-999-5238
001-170-999-5288
001-170-999-5370
001-170-999-5370
001-170-999-5370
001-161-999-5256
190-183-4982
001-171-999-5250
190-183-999-5370
190-180-999-5319
001-164-603-5240
190-180-999-5240
193-180-999-5240
190-180-999-5240
340-199-701-5240
190-185-999-5240
193-180-999-5240
001-165-999-5250
190-181~999-5240
190-180-999-5319
001-164-603-5319
001-164-603-5240
190-185-999-5240
190-180-999-5319
190-180-999-5319
190-180-999-5319
001-170-999-5229
ITEM
AMOUNT
100.00
119.54
239.65
495.56
20.00
2,500.00
355.64
52.56
288.00
282.75
1,053.60
210.72
1,802.24
1,053.60
1,430.00
25.00
3,000.00
200.00
53.20
339.86
100.04
1,561.56
25.82
18.28
587.61
261.95
62.07
681.61
68.93
196.65
140.59
49.25
774.~
61.11
58.48
222.29
CHECK
AMOUNT
100.00
854.75
20.00
2,500.00
355.64
340.56
282.75
4,120.16
1,430.00
25.00
3,000.00
200.00
5,264.03
73617 11/29/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR CHAPEL PEST CONTROL SVCS 190-185-999-5250 S2.00
~617 11/29/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST GONTR MUSEUM PEST CONTROL SVCS 190-185-999-5250 42.00
VOUCHRE2
11/29/01
10:22
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK
NUMBER DATE
73617 11/29/01
73618 11/29/01
}3619 11/29/01
73619 11/29/01
73619 11/29/01
73620 11/29/01
}~621 11/29/01
73622 11/29/01
T~623 11/29/01
}3624 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
73625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
}~625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
7-3625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
}3625 11/29/01
}3626 11/29/01
}3627 11/29/01
}3628 11/29/01
73629 11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
73631 11/29/01
}~632 11/29/01
}3633 11/29/01
}3633 11/29/01
73633 11/29/01
}3633 11/29/01
73634 11/29/01
VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER NAME
000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR
004163 SPORTS CHALET
000293 STADIUM PIZZA
000293 STADIUM PIZZA
000293 STADIUM PIZZA
004306 STENO SOLUTIONS
004247 STERICYCLE INC
001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS INC
SWAIN, JANET
SZABO, GEOFF
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
000305 TARGET STORE
TAYLOR WOODROW HOMES CA
001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P
003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL
004209 TEMECULA SUNRISE ROTARY
TEMECULA VALLEY FLYERS
TEMECULA VALLEY FLYERS
000311 TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SC
004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT
003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWOH
003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWON
003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEKWON
003140 TEMECULA VALLEY TAEK~ON
THOMPSON MIDDLE SCHOOL
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL SVC
POLICE BICYCLE REPAIR & MAINT
REFRESHMENTS:SKATE CHALLENGE
REFRESHMENTS:TEEN TEAM COUNCIL
REFRESHMENTS:FLOAT DECORATING
TRANSCRIPTION REPORT SVCS:P.D.
MEDIC SQUAD MED WASTE DISPOSAL
RES IMPRV PRGM: JOHNSON
REFUND:DANCE-BALLROOM
REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2906
RECREATION SUPPLIES-HIGH HOPES
RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR TCC
SPECIAL EVENT REC SUPPLIES
RECREATION SUPPLIES - SPORTS
SPECIAL EVENT REG SUPPLIES
RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR MPSC
RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR TCC
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PW DEPT
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR P~ DEPT
OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PW DEPT
REISSUE CK#67669:ENG DEPOSIT
SENIOR CENTER PLUMBING SERVICE
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD
RUB BENCH PLACEMENTS & MAINT.
REFUND:BEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-2055
REFUND:ROOM RENTAL
HOL.PARADE TRANSPORATION COSTS
CiTY HALL LOCKSMITH SERVICES
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS
SPOOKTACULAR CARNIVAL PROCEEDS
HOL.PARADE TRANSPORATION COSTS
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
190-181-999-5250
001-170-999-5215
190-183-999-5305
190-180-999-5261
190-183-999-5370
001-170-999-5250
001-171-999-5311
165-199-813-5804
190-183-4982
190-2900
190-183-999-53~
190-184-999-5301
190-183-999-5370
190-187-999-5301
190-183-999-5370
190-181-999-5301
190-184-999-5301
001-163-999-5220
001-165-999-5220
001-164-604-5220
001-2670
190-181-999-5212
001-170-999-5214
001-164-604-5234
190-2900
190-184-4990
190-183-999-5370
340-199-701-5212
190-183-999-5330
190-183-999-5330
190-183-999-5330
190-183-4992
190-183-999-5370
ITEM
AMOUNT
29.00
18.74
67.02
28.11
57.57
402.40
47.20
1,327.99
30.00
100.00
36.89
89.58
34.25
36.25
316.11
59.25
53.00
84.20
84.20
~.21
90.00
55.00
78.05
3,000.00
100.00
142.00
300.00
225.00
80.00
40.00
20.00
115.00
200.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
103.00
18.74
152.70
402.40
47.20
1,327.99
30.00
100.00
877.94
90.00
55.00
78.05
3,000.00
242.00
300.00
225.00
255.00
200.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12
11/29/01 10:22 VOUCBER/CHEEK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
73635
73635
73635
73635
73635
73635
73636
73637
73637
73637
73637
73637
73637
73637
73637
73638
73638
73638
73638
73638
73638
73638
73638
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADS~ THE
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADSI THE
11/29/01 003633 TOLL ROADS, THE
11/29/01 003858 TOM RONEY ROOFING
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
TRANSPNDR USAGE:6000004992123
RES IMPRV PRGM: GOMZALES
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMp
11/29/01 001065 U B C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M NEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M NEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
11/29/01 000389 U S C M WEST {OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73639 11/29/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT
73640
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
73641
11/29/01
001-171-999-5214
001-162-999-5214
001'120-999-5250
320'199-999-5250
190-180'999'5214
001-161-999-5214
UNITED STATES MARINE CO
165-199-813-5804
001-2080
190-2080
192-2080
193-2080
194-2080
300-2080
320-2080
340-2080
001-2160
165-2160
190-2160
193-2160
280-2160
320-2160
330-2160
340-2160
001-110-999-5230
001-111-999-5230
001-120-999-5230
001-140-999-5230
001-150-999-5230
001-161-999-5230
001-162-999-5230
001-164-604-5230
190-185-999-5230
190-180-999-5230
280-199-999-5230
HOL.PARADE TRANSPORATION COSTS 190-183-999-5370
ITEM
AMOUNT
35.80
7.05
4.00
3.10
7.13
4.00
1,185.00
9,524.97
1,881.37
2.50
118.50
29.49
88.54
1,416.68
145.17
933.42
99.38
1,055.38
23.38
29.16
65.30
17.00
31.06
43.98
21.51
123.01
428.94
89.07
920.39
66.92
600.76
353.94
285.50
53.60
70.00
11/29/01 000325 UNITED NAY 000325 UN 001-2120 127.05
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 165-2120 8.75
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 190-2120 22.59
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 192-2120 .11
11/29/01 000325 UNITED NAY 000325 UN 193-2120 2.20
11/29/01 000325 UNITED NAY 000325 UN 194-2120 .50
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 280-2120 2.50
11/29/01 000325 UNITED NAY 000325 UN 320-2120 5.00
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 330-2120 5.00
11/29/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 340-2120 .60
CHECK
AMOUNT
61.08
1,185.00
13,207.22
2,254.08
2,987.62
70.00
174.30
VOUCBRE2
11/29/01 10:22
VOUCHER/
CNECK CHECK
NUMBER DATE
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73642 11/29/01
73643 11/29/01
73644 11/29/01
73645 11/29/01
73646 11/29/01
73647 11/29/01
73648 11/29/01
73648 11/29/01
73648 11/29/01
73649 11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
11/29/01
73652 11/29/01
73652 11/29/01
VENDOR VENDOR
NUMBER NAME
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA
004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTI
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK
WEBSTER, EDWINA
004783 WEBTGROUP SAN DIEGO ASS
003756 WHITE HOUSE SANITATION
000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI
003607 XPECT FIRST AID
YOUTH FOCUS, INC.
YOUTB FOCUS, INC.
000348 ZIGLER, GAIL
003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATIO
003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATIO
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
NOV XXX-O073 GENERAL USAGE
NOV XXX-O074 GENERAL USAGE
NOV XXX-2626 PD SATELLITE STN
NOV XXX-2676 GENERAL USAGE
NOV XXX-3526 FIRE ALARM
NOV XXX-3564 ALARM
NOV XXX-5072 GENERAL USAGE
PNONE SVCS/EOC BACKUP @ STN 84
REFUND-SENT CK TO US IN ERROR
REFUND:MUSIC-INSTANT PIANO
HTL:POP CONF:5 POLICE OFFICERS
NOV CLEANING SVC:BTRFLD STAGE
OCT LEASE OF DC 50
OCT INTEREST OF DC 50
OCT BASE CHAHGE OF DC 50
CITY BALL FIRST AID SUPPLIES
REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-1467
REFUND:ROOM RENTAL
REFRESHMENT:TREE LGT CEREMONY
PARAMEDIC MEDICAL SUPPLIES
PARAMEDIC MEDICAL SUPPLIES
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
001-170-999-5229
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
001-161-4255
190-183-4982
001-170-999-5261
190-180-999-5250
330-2800
330-199-999-5391
330-199-999-5217
340-199-701-5250
190-2900
190-182-4990
190-183-999-5370
001-171-999-5311
001-171-999-5311
ITEM
AMOUNT
1,838.06
254.68
216.12
28.52
82.69
55.13
6,537.04
276.32
65.00
25.00
1~684.26
50.00
307.20
214.14
53.74
41.77
110,50
46.00
308.40
1,037.57
102,72
PAGE 13
CHECK
AMOUNT
9,012.24
276.32
65.00
25.00
1,684.26
50.00
575.08
41.77
156.50
308.40
1,140.29
TOTAL CHECKS 318,612.62
VOUCHHE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE
11/29/01 10:47 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PER]OOS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PEOJ FUND
VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS
340 FACILITIES
AMOUNT
1,537,659.31
49,308.00
40,334.00
59,363.07
54,825.00
70,950.00
541.00
TOTAL 1,812,980.38
VOUCRRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1
11/29/01 10:47 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIOOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
73655
73656
73656
73657
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73658
73659
73659
73660
73661
73661
73662
73665
73666
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
7'5667
73667
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
DATE NUMBER NM4E DESCRIPTION NUMBER
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE V ANIMAL CONTROL SVCS FOR OCT 001-172-999o5255
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 11/02 N~LRSEH
001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 11/16 NAASEH
001-161-999-5118
001-161-999-5118
000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC
GOLD UPGRDE INITIAL INSTALL 320-1980
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE
NOV LDSCP SVCS:NEIGHBORHCX~D 190-180-999-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:SPORTS PARK 190-180-999-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:MEDIANS 190-180-999-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:CRC 190-182-999-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:SR CENTER 190-181-999-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:O.HALL/MNTC FAC 340-199-701-5415
NOV LDSCP SVCS:TCC
NOV LDSCP SVCS:FIRE STN 84
NOV LDSCP SVCS:PRKLOT A
NOV LDSCP SVCS:STREETSCAPE
NOV LDSCP SVCS: MUSEUM
NOV LDSCP SVCS:CHILD MUSEUM
NOV LOSCP SVCS:SOUTH SLOPES
NOV LDSCP SVCS:NORTH SLOPES
NOV LDSCP SVCS:PRNLOT B
190-184-999-5415
001-171-999-5212
001-164-603-5415
001-164-603-5415
190-185~999-5415
190-188-999-5415
193-180-999-5415
193-180-999-5415
001-164-603-5415
003986 KEVIN C02AD& ASSOCIATE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SVC:PW01-20 210~190-167-5801
003986 KEVIN COZAD & ASSOCIATE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SVC:PW01-20 210-190-167-5802
004481 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATE SEP SVCS:DIAZ RD EXTENSION 210-165-684-5802
003800 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING PRGS PMT#4:PVMNT MGMT:PWO0-30 210-165-655-5804
003800 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING EET.W/H PMT#4:PVMNT MGMT:O0-30 210-2035
004617 MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING- REL.RET.ESCROW:PVMNT MGMT:O030 210-1035
002654 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN HER 2001 UTILITY TRUCK FOR Pg DEPT 310-1910
000267 RIVERSIDE CO FIRE DEPAR JUL-SEP 2001 FIRE SERVICES 001-171-999-5251
000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW TRACTOR RACE PATROL SVC:10/5-7 001-170-999-5370
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
7/01-7/25/01 LAN ENFORCEMENT
7/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
?/01-7/25/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 7/01-7/25/01 LA~ ENFORCEMENT
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D 7/26-8/22/01 LAN ENFORCEMENT
001~170-999-5288
001-170-999-5299
001-170-999-5294
001-170-999-5297
001-170-999-5291
001-170-999-5281
001-170-999-5262
001-170-999-5279
001-170-999-5288
ITEM
AMOUNT
7,320.11
6,324.89
6,236.00
70,950.00
19,120.00
25,325.00
2,425.00
1,444.00
361.00
541.00
193.00
400.00
250.00
987.00
285.00
155.00
25,556.00
14,778.00
250.00
28.00
6,222.00
17,980.52
14,~72.31
217.76-
217.76
54,825.00
503,918.67
9,707.50
283,145.06
76,116.90
8,712.76
13,652.73
6,840.00
34,185.88
20,811.36
8,675.11
342,293.29
CHECK
AMOUNT
7,320.11
12,560.89
70,950.00
92,070.00
6,250.00
17,980.52
14,554.55
217.76
54,825.00
503,918.67
9,707.50
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2
11/29/01 10:47 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
73667
73668
73668
73668
73668
73669
73669
73669
7'3670
CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
DATE NUMBER NAME
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
12/11/01
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D
003828 TANGRAM INTERIORS
003828 TANGRAM INTERIORS
003828 TANGRAM INTERIORS
003828 TANGRAM INTERIORS
003366 TOP. AN DEVELOP. & CONSTR
003366 TORAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR
003366 TORAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR
003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
7/26-8/22/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT
001-170-999-5299
001-170-999-5294
001-170-999-5297
001-170-~-5291
001-170-999-5281
001-170-999-5262
001-170-999-5279
FURNITURE FOR MAINTENANCE FAC. 210-190-158-5610
DELIVERY FEE FOR FURNITURE 210-190-158-5610
WILL CALL FEE FOR FURNITURE 210-190-158-5610
SALES TAX 210~190-158-5610
REPAINT LIGHT POLES/OLD TOWN
REPAINT LIGHT POLES/OLD TOWN
REPAINT LIGHT POLES/OLD TOWN
001-164-603-5250
001-164-603-5250
001-164-603-5250
CITYWIDE TREE TRIMMING MAINT 001-164-601-5402
ITEM
AMOUNT
83,999.40
5,361.70
16,003.20
9,063.00
36,760.96
23,265.10
8,224.69
18,150.85
760.00
75.00
1,374.39
5,000.00
5,000.00
3,880.00
11,274.00
CHECK
AMOUNT
977,111.14
20,360.24
13,880.00
11,274.00
TOTAL CHECKS 1,812,980.38
ITEM 3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
D RECTOR OF
CZTY AGERL J
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance ~
DATE: December 11, 2001
SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 2001
PREPARED BY: Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant '~
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as
of October 31, 2001.
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio,
receipts, and disbursements are required by Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004
respectively. Attached is the City Treasurer's Report which provides this information.
The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code Sections 53601 and
53635 as of October 31, 2001.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Attachments:
1. City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 2001
City of Temecuia
City TreasureCs RepoH
As of October 31, 2001
Cash Activity for the Month of October:
Cash and Investments as of October 1, 2001
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of October 31, 2001
$ 61,698,322
4,360,076
{6,750,742)
$ 59,307,656
Cash and Investments Portfolio:
Type of Investment
petty Cash
General Checking
Sweep Account
(Money Market Account)
Benefit Demand Deposits
Lecat Agency Investment Fund
Certificate of Deposit
(Retention Escrow)
Various
(Retention Escrow)
Checking Account
(Parking Citations)
Trust Accounts- CFD 88-12
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Account- CFD 88-12
(Investment Agreement)
Delinq. Main. Reserve Account - CFD 88-12
(Investment Agreement)
Trust Accounts- CFD 98-1
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Account- CFD 98-1
(Local Agency Investment Fund)
Trust Accounts-TCSD COPs
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Account-TCSD COPs
(Investment Agreement)
Trust Accounts-RDA Bonds
(Money Market Account)
Reserve Account-RDA Bonds
(Investment Agreement)
Mature/
Termination Par/Book
Institution Yield Date Barance
City Hall n/a $ $ 1,500
Union Bank n/a (737,549) (1)
Union Bank 1.940 % 1,263,524
(Highmark U.S. Treasury)
Union Bank n/a 4,882 (1)
State Treasurer 3.785 % 52,869,612 (2)
Community Bank 3.550 % 280,034
U.S. Bank Various 402,703
Union Bank n/a 7,150
U .S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.640 % 311,328
CDC Funding Corp 5.430 % 9/1/2017 1,531,469
CDC Funding Corp 5.422 % 9/1/2017 500,000
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.640 % 666
State Treasurer 3.785 % 920,545
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.640 % 77
Bayerische Landesbank 6.870 % 10/1/2012 502,690
U.S. Bank (First Am. Treasury) 2.640 % 105
Bayerische Landesbank 7.400 % 2/1/2013 1,448,920
$ 59,307~656
(1)-This amount is net of outstanding checks.
(2)-At October 31, 2001 total market value (including accrued interest) for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIr) was $51,936,778,069.
The Cit'/s proportionate sham of that value is $53,118,404.
investments are liquid and currently available.
The City of Temecula's portfolio is in compliance with the investment policy. Adequate funds will be available to meet
budgeted and actual e~0enditures of the City of Temecula for the next six months.
ITEM 4
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECT~
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Manager/City Council
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
December 11, 2001
Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
PREPARED BY:
Karen Jester, Assistant Finance Directl~:~
Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant~l~
RECOMMENDATION: That the.City Council receive and file the Financial Statements for
the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the City
for the three months ended September 30, 2001. Please see the attached financial statements
for an analytical review of financial activity.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2001
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for
the Three Months Ended September 30,2001 Combining Balance Sheet
(Internal Service Funds) as of September 30,2001
Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings
(Internal Service Funds) for the Three Months Ended September 30,2001
Combining Balance Sheet (Community Facilities Districts) as of September
30, 2001
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
(Community Facilities Districts) for the Three Months Ended September
30, 2001
CITY OF TEMECULA
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30,
2001 and the
Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balance
For The Three Months En'ded
September 30, 2001
and the
Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes
in Retained Earnings
For The Three Months Ended
September 30, 2001
(Unaudited)
Prepared by the Finance Department
City of Temecula
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Assets:
Cash mid investments
Receivables
Due from other funds
Advances to other funds
Deposits
Land held for resale
Total assets
Liabilities and thnd balances:
Liabilities:
Due to other funds
Other current liabilities
Deferred revenue
Total liabilities
General Gas Tax State Trans Dev Impact CDBG
Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund
$ 16,681,971 (110,420) 398,620 $ 8,256,078 70,000
2,399,523 $ 110,420 $ 4,132 141,504
7,987 122,157
2,763,579
13,888
530,401
$ 22,389,362'$ $ 402,752 $ 8,405,569 $ 192,157
18,178
6,052,155
468,402
$ 78,450
122,157
6,538,735 78,450 i 122,157
Fand balances:
Reserved
Designated
Undesignated
Total fund balances
Total liabilities
and fund balances
6,050,268
9,800,359 $ $ 402,752 8,327,119 70,000
15,850,627 402,752 8,327,119 70,000
$ 22,389,362 $ $ 402,752 $ 8,405,569 $ 192,157
Please note that these balances are unaudited
City of Temecula
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Due frmn other fm~ds
Advances to other funds
Deposits
Land held for resale
Total assets
Liabilities and fm~d balances:
Liabilities:
Due to other funds
Other current liabilities
Deferred revenue
Total liabilities
AB 2766 Measure "A" ClIP
Fund Fund Fund
Marg Rd
ReLm Dist
Fund
Total
56,971 $ 1,557,951 $ 17,i04,522
16,251 32,691 2,096,073
295,000
7,987 $
44,023,680
4,800,594
130,144
2,763,579
308,888
530,401
73,222 $ 1,590,64~_~_2 $ 19,495,595
7,987 $ 52,557,286
$ $ 5,081,227
7,987 $
148,322
11,133,382
546,852
5,081,227
7,987 11,828,556
Fund balances:
Reserved
Designated
Undesignated
Total fm~.d balances
Total liabilities
mid fund balances
12,730,892
73,222 1,590,642 1,683,476
73,222 1,590,642 14,414,368
73,222 $ 1,590,642 $ 19,495,595 $
18,781,160
21,947,570
40,728,730
7,987 $ 52,557,286
Please note that these balances are unaudited
2
City of Temecula
Statement &Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
General Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Sales tax $ 17,370,000 $ 2,954,873
Developmental services:
Planning 312,000 65.090
Building & .safety 1,595,000 399,866
Land development 875,000 553,734
Fire 172,000 36,378
Grants 43,000
AB3229 (COPS) 116,000
Motor vehicle in lieu 3,128,000 640,886
Property tax '2,122,000
Properly transfer tax 407,000 111,682
Franchise fees 1,676,000 105,118
Transient occupancy tax 1,507,000 384,704
Reimbursements 280,000 33,460
Reimbursements from TCSD 162,000 40,500
Reimbursemants from RDA 225,000 56,250
Reimbursements from CIP 1,207,000 167,953
Investment inlcrcst 1,115,000 313,026
Business licenses 205,000 16,865
Vehicle code fines 363,000 66,618
Miscellaneous 72,000 11,569
Parking citations/impouod fccs 100,000 21,586
Operating transfers in 1,157,000 207,064
of Budl~et
17%
(1)
21%
25%
63%
21%
0% (2)
0% (3)
20%
0% (4)
27%
6% (5)
26%
12%
25%
25%
14%
28%
8% (6)
18%
16,/o
22%
18%
Total Revenues $ 34,209,000 $ 6,187,222 18%
City of Temecnla
Slatement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
General Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual YTD
Amended YTD Activity Percent
Budget Activity Encumbr. + Encumbr of Budget
Bxpenditures:
Ci~yConncl[ $ 334,060 $ 76,811 $ 1,284 $ 78,095 23%
Community Support 428,414 56,786 156,781 213,567 50°/'o
Ciiy Manager 689,537 141,819 30,017 171,836 25%
Economic Development 844,206 143,957 31,II4 175,071 21%
City Clerk 705,580 144.923 17,621 162,544 23%
City Attorney 410,000 130,579 130,579 32%
Finance 1,235,871 257,317 31,824 289,141 23%
Human Resources 399,932 75,902 35,356 111,258 28%
Planning 3,031,859 533,444 622,795 1,156,239 38%
Building & Safety 1,984,630 385,289 355,198 740,487 37%
Engineering 1,202,197 230,648 41. l 13 271,761 23%
Public Works 4,934,003 923,183 552,643 1,475.826 30%
CIP Admin 1,623,993 310,943 23,068 334,011 21%
Police 8,942,010 1,691,232 67,853 1,759,085 20%
Fire Dcpt 3,101,612 586,795 41,203 627,998 20%
Animal Control 115.700 24,326 24.326 21%
Non-departmental 9,082,600 ' 997,132 997,132 11%
Total Expenditures (Excluding Transfers)
39,065,604 6.711,086 2,007,870 8,718.956 22%
Revenues Ovcr/(Under) Expenditures
(4,856,604) (523,864)
Operating Transfers Out
5,030,000 5,030,000
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
and Operating Transfers
(9.886.604) (5,553.864)
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
21,404,491 21,404,491
Ending Fund Balance, September 30. 2001 $ 11,517,887 $ 15,850.627
(1) The va6ance is due to sales tax received in July for fiscal year 6/30/01 and revenue was accrued to be reflected in the correct
pcrind
(2) State Clccp money was received on 10/25/01.
(3) Funds are expected Io be here by the end oftbe fiscal year.
(4) Properly tax payments are schedule for Dec and Jan.
(5) The variance in Franchise fees is due to several entities that have annual payments due in later part of the fiscal year
(6) Tbe variance in Business License revenue is due to the processing of renewals in December and January each fiscal year.
(7) Thc variance in Community Support is due to increase in funding in the community.
(8) The variance is due increasing legal cost relating to many issues throughout the city.
(9) Thc variance is duc increasing tcmp help, and consulting services needed relating to the city growth and weed abatement
processed duling first quartur.
(10) The variance is due to various emergency maintenance repairs done throughout the city during first quarter and several
[~rojecls encumhered for Ibc remaining oftbe fiscal year.
(7)
(8)
O)
(9)
(lO)
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Gas Tax Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
.Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Revenues:
Section 2105-2107 $ 1,150,500 $ 205,605
Investment interest 6,500 1,458
Total Revenues 1,157,000 207,063
Expenditm-es:
Operating trm~sfers out 1,157,000 207,063
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
$
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budget
$ 205,605
1,458
207,063
207,063
18%
22%
18%
18%
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fand Balance - Budget and Actual
State Transportation Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
invest~nent interest
Traffic congestion relief
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Operating transfers out
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fm~d Balance, July 1,2001
Ending Fm~d Balance, September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
$ $ 4,133
94,600
94,600 4,133
94,600 4,133
398,619 398,619
$ 493,219 $ 402,752
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budget
4,133
4,133
4%
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenuas, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Development Impact Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Revenues:
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Quimby $ 160,000 $ 609
Street improvements 998,000 178,230
Traffic signals 248,000 31,126
Parks 793,000 149,046
Corporate facilities 252,000 70,753
Fire protection 65,000 20,801
Library 197,000 46,564
Public facilities 969
Nvest~nent interest 91,761
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Operating transfers out
Encumbr.
Total
Activity
2,713,000 589,859
$ 609
178,230
31,126
149,046
70,753
20,801
46,564
969
91,761
589,859
6,426,650 810,434
810,434
of Budget
O%
18% (1)
13% (1)
19%
28%
32%
24%
22%
13%
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fm~d Balm~ce, Septamber 30, 2001
(3,713,650) (220,575)
8,547,694 8,547,694
$ 4,834,044 $ 8,327,119
Notes:
(l) The vuriance is partially due development occurring within the City xvith developers who have Development hnpact Fee reduction
agreements with the City.
City of Temecula
State~nent of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Community Develop~nent Block Grm~t
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Grm~t revenue
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Other outside services
Operating tnmsfers out
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fund Balance, July I, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
~manl
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Encumbr.
Total
Activity
936,300 $ 70,000
936,300 70,000
70,000
70,000
936,300
936,300.
70,000
$ $ 70,000
of Budget
(1)
7%
(1) The variance is due to the Semor Center Expansion and Pujol Stxeet Sidewalk Improvements
not being reimbursed for costs incurred until the projects are complete.
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
AB 2766 Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Revenues:
AB 2766
h~vestment interest
Total Reveimes
Expenditures:
Operating transfers out
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
$ 58,000 $ 15,742
5O9
58,000 16,251
Encumbr.
Total Percent
Activity of Budget
$ 15,742 27%
509
16,251 28%
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Eoding Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
58,000 16,251
56,971 56,971
$ 114,971 $ 73~22
Notes:
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Measure "A"
Investment interest
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Debt service - principal
Debt service - interest
Operating transfers out
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1,2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activiiy
Encumbr.
Totul
Acfivi~
1,643,000 $ 341,013
32,691
1,643,000 373,704
396,138 99,035
183,344 42,345
3,236,600 1,668,686
3,816,082 1,810,066
(2,173,082) (l,436,362)
3,027,004 3,027,004
$ 341,013
32,691
373,704
99,035
42,345
1,668,686
1,810,066
853,922 $ 1,590,642
Peme~
of Budget
21%
23%
25%
23%
52%
47%
(i)
(2)
Notes:
(1) The variance is due to september payment received until October.
(2) The variance is due to accelaration of Paveznent Management project.
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Capital Improvement Projects Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Revenues:(l)
Annual
Amended Y'FD
Budget Acti¼ty
Operating transfers in $ 14,186,280 $ 7,279,119
Grants 688,200
Reimbursements 6,258,850
Investment interest 20,322
Article 3 (SB 821) 216,750
Total Revenues
Expenditures: (I)
21,350,080 7,299,441
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budl~et
$ 7,279,119
20,322
7,299,441
51%
34%
Murrieta creek bridge/Overland Ext 165-602
Pala Rd Interim improvements 165q503
Overland overcrossing 165-604
Pauba Rd improvements Il 165-606
Intersection monitoring system 165-607
Winchester Rd Wider~g] 165-608
Rancho Ca Rd Wlde/Ynez Rd 165-611
Emergency Generator 165-612
Traffic signals Butterfield/Rancho Ca 165~27
Pala Rd. bridge 165-631
Diaz realignment 165-632
Pavement management 165-655
Jefferson pavement improvement 165-656
I 15/79S interchange (ultimate) 165-662
Pala Road improvements 165-668
Flashing beacons 2000 165-670
Diaz road extension at CherE~ St 165-684
115F¢/inchester Road ramp improvements 165-697
Date street/Cher~ Overpass 165-704
I 15/Santiago interchange 165 -705
Margarita improvements Pio Pico/79S 165~706
Murrieta Creek Interim/Via Montezuma 165-707
Rancho Ca Bridge~lVlurrieta Creek wide 165-710
Traffic signal equipment Installation 165-712
Traffic signals Margarita/DePortola 165-713
Traffic signals Margarita/Stonewood 165-714
(continued)
211,426 5,792 45,371 51,163 24%
4,554 4,554 4,554 100%
74,328 1,000 74,328 75,328 101%
32,044 9,335 25,915 35,250 110%
868,242 (539) 21,568 21,029
1,960,910
322,866 590 2,435 3,025 1%
195,000 290 116,820 117,110 60%
169,518 89,732 89,732 53%
383,426 (57,529) 335,656 278,127 73%
933,447 8,329 8,329 I%
2,591,868 1,517,137 867,710 2,384,847 92%
466,619 373,088 85,874 458,962 98%
533,203 23,068 23,068
1,710,316 5,560 249,813 255,373 15%
20,000
168,686 21,324 147,362 168,686 100%
69,116 69,116 69,116 100%
1,186,059 4,400 8,508 12,908
8,601 8,60I 8,601 100%
1,104,987 815,539 145,129 960,668 87%
35,180 23,543 15,657 39,200 111%
678,409 88,915 123,242 212,157 3
210,000 10,014
2,238 1,347 891 2,238 100%
149,426 3,444 145,600 149,044 100%
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Capital Improvement Projects Fund
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Amended
Budset
YTD
Activity
Woodside landscaping 165-717 78,292
Fiber optic conduits 165-718 118,800
Date/Cherry Street S.B. offramp 165-719 1,232,064 6,392
I 15 NB Winchester 165-720 960 960
Margarita/Winchester intersection imp. 165-721 33,862 2,799
Bridge Barrier Rail Replacement 165-722 190,000
Butterfield Stage Rd Extension 165-723 130,000
Date/Cherry Ext Diaz-Jefferson 165-724 1,820,000
Date/Cherry MHS Margarita 165-725 5,372,000
Date/Cherry 1-15 Offramp 165-726 1,000,000
John Warner/Santiago Rd 165-727 220,000
Signal Diaz/Winchester 165-728 168,000
Winchester/79S Landscape 165-729 100,000
Ynez Rd Median 165-730 170,000
Tax Defaulted Properties 165-731 I03,100
Maintenance Fac Parking Lot 165-732 245,000
Fire Station Wolf Creek 165-733 229,230 10,650
79S Sidewalk/Landscape 165-734 260,000 2,079
Murrieta Creek Imp 165-735 150,000
Rainbow Canyon Sidewalks 165-736 53,750 337
Pujol st. sidewalk phase I1 165-737 240,000
Pedestrian Bridge/79N 165-738 400,000 72
Vail Ranch Interim Fire Station 165-739 250,000 34,224
Old To,va south parking lot 165-828 41,616
Starlight Ridge sidewalk 190-141 154,892 53,688
Murfieta Creek multi-purpose trail 190-142 200,000
Maintenance facility modification 190-158 854,432 368,331
Senior center expansion 190-163 614,068 141,888
Children's museum 190-165 1,478,497 7,109
Community theater 190-167 445,621 44,165
Chaparral HS swimming pool 190-170 2,876,677 446,960
Desiltatinn pond 190-171 5,040 825
Northwest sports complex 190-173 5,845,028 142
Sports park field lighting 190-174 33,910
Trails master plan 190-176 18,021 13,473
Sports park culvert design 190-178 11,339 10,672
Play Structure Retrofit 190-179 50,000
RC Sports Park ADA access 190-180 50,000
SchooI Site ADA Impro 190-181 30,000
Vail Ranch Amenities 190-182 250,000
Library 199-129 429,011 12,061
City Hall Complex 199-166 75,000
City Hall Improvements 199-808 791
Total Expenditures (Excluding Transfers)
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
Total
Encumbr. Activity
78,292 78,292
118,800 118,800
6,392
960
472 3,271
of Budget
100%
100%
i%
100%
10%
164,800 175,450 77%
2,079 1%
337
1%
72 0%
(2,500) 31,724 13%
41,617 41,617 100%
7,030 60,718 39%
Notes:
344,265 712,596 83%
448,5 I9 590,407 96%
894,920 902,029 61%
390,180 434,345 97%
2,358,824 2,805,784 98%
4,230 5,055 100%
46,277 46,419 1%
33,910 33,910 100%
4,548 18,021 100%
864 11,536 102%
172,821
791
40,119,470 4,068,124 7,635,892
(18,769,390) 3,231,317
11,183,051 11,183,051
(7,586,339) S 14,414,368
184,882
791
11,694,002
(1) The variances in CIP Fund revenues and in project expenditures are due to thc timing of when the various projects
are actually started and costs are incurred.
43%
100%
29%
h~temal Service Funds
Combixfing Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Prepaid assets
Property, plant and equipment (net of
accmnulated depreciation)
Total assets
Liabilities and fm~d equity:
Liabilities:
Current liabilities
Capital leases payable
Total liabilities
Fund equity:
Contributed capital
Retained eanfings
Total land equity
Total liabilities and fund equity
Information Support
Insurance Vehicles Systems Services Facilities
Fm~d Fund Fund Fund Fund
Total
1,464,092 $ 294,531 $ 573,528 $ 217,128 $ 93,707 $ 2,642,986
14,490 388 4,030 1,968 415 21,291
53,856 1,728 55,584
1,532,438 $
480,006 540,625 206,684 1,227,315
776,653 $ 1,118,183 $ 425,780 '$ 94,122 $ 3,947,176
662,057 $ 0 $ 51,157 $ 29,813 $ 25,078 $ 768,105
216,952 216,952
662,057 0 51,157 246,765 25,078 985,057
500,000 214,539 473,065 94,177 1~81,781
370,381 562,114 593,961 84,838 69,044 1,680,338
870,381 776,653 1,067,026 179,015 69,044 2,962,119
1,532,438 $ 776,653 $ 1,118,183 . $ 425,780 $ 94,122 $ 3,947,176
Please note that these balances are unaudited.
13
City of Temecula
Statement of Reveunes, Expenses and Changes m Retained Earnings
[memal Service Funds
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Charges for services $
Investment interest
Miscellaneous
Total Revenues
Expenses:
Salaries & wages 7,997 71,351
Operating expenses 95,900 1,296 97,516
Interest
Depreciation 33,747 88,742
Tolal Expenses 103,897 35,043 257,609
Net Income (Loss) 301 237,009 17,853
Retained Eanfings, July 1, 2001 870,080 539,644 1,049,173
Retained Earnings, September 30,2001 $ 870,381 $ 776,653 $ 1,067,026 $
Information Support
Insurance Vehicles Systems Services Facilities
Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total
89,407 $ 41,664 $ 271,329 $ 52,964 $ 94,046 $ 549,410
14,490 388 4,030 1,968 415 21,291
301 230,000 103 230,404
104,198 272,052 275,462 54,932 94,461 801,105
19,592 45,316 144,256
15,594 55,346 265,652
3,858 3,858
15,888 138,377
54,932 100,662 552,143
(0) (6,201) 248,962
179,015 75,245 2,713,157
179,015 $ 69,044 $ 2,962,119
ommumty Facilities D~stncts
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Cash mid investments
Receivables
Total assets
Liabilities and fund balances:
Liabilities:
Current liabilities
Total liabilities
Fund balances:
Reserved
Designated
Total fund balances
Total liabilities and fund balances
CFD 88-12 CFD 88-12 CFD 98-01 CFD 98-01
Admin Debt Debt Admin
Expense Service Service Expense
Fund Fund Fund Fund Total
$ 25,001 $ 2,518,559 $ 1,027,445 1,122 $ 3,572,127
3,887 72,648 22,640 5; 73 99,248
$ 2S,88~8 $ 2,591,20~7 $ 1,050,085 $ 1,19~5 $ 3,671,375
4,069 $ 2,591,207 $ 1,050,085 $ 1,195 $ 3,646,556
4,069 2,591,207 1,050,085 1,195 3,646,556
24,819
24,819
24,819 24,819
28,888 $ 2,591,20~75 1,050,085 $ 1,195 $ 3,671,375
Please note that thes? balances are unaudited.
City of Temecula
Statement of Revenues. Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
Community Facilities Districts
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
CFD88-12 CFD88-12 CFD98-1 CFD98-1
Admin Debt Debt Admin
Expense Service Service Expense
Fund Fund Fund Fund
Investment interest $ 363 $
Reimbursements
Special assessments
Total Revenues 363
Expenditures:
Legal services $ 945
Other outside services 10.800
Debt service - principal
Debt service - interest
Bond Premium Expense
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance. September 30. 2001
Total
92,426 $ 17.588 $ 73 $ 110.450
0
192 192
92.618 17.588 73 110,642
$ 640.000 $
445,469
$ 945
$ 6,150 16.950
175,000 815.000
376.920 822.389
252,350 252,350
11,745 1,085.469 804,270 6.150 1,907.634
(11.382) $
36.201
(992,851) $ (786,682) $ (6,077) $ (1,796,992)
24.819
ITEM 5
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
/vCity Manager/City Council
illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City En,gineer
DATE:
December 11,2001
SUBJECT: Annual Professional Services Agreements for Geotechnical and Material
Testing Services for Various Capital Improvement Projects for FY 2001-2002
PREPARED BY: _,,~Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - Capital Projects
y(¢~ Laura Bragg, Project Engineer- Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Rescind the agreement with Petra Geotechnical, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $60,000 to
provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing services; and
Approve agreement with Engen Public Works Services, LLC in an amount not to exceed
$60,000 to provide as needed geotechnical and material testing services; and
3. Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.
BACKGROUND: There are various projects described in the approved Capital
Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2002 to 2006 that will require geotechnical and material
testing services. The City Council approved an agreement with Petra Geotechnical, Inc. to provide
as needed services at the July 10, 2001 City Council Meeting; these services were to be utilized on
projects that are approved in the Capital Improvement Program or for special projects that come up
through out the year.
Subsequent to approval of the agreement by City Council, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. elected to
withdraw their proposal rather than securing the minimum necessary insurance required by the City.
The next highest ranked firm was contacted and requested to perform the services. Engen Public
Works Services, LLC, agreed to perform the services and has provided an Insurance Certificate to
verify that they carry the minimum insurance necessary to perform the work. Once the annual
agreement is executed, each service request will be negotiated separately and may contain some or
all of the following services:
· Subsurface exploration and logs summarizing the conditions encountered
· Seismicity
· Geotechnical Evaluation and recommendations
· Discussion of existing pavement or site conditions
· Recommendations for removal of unsuitable material
· Soil Ferrous corrosivity and Portland Cement attack potential
· Environmental concerns/hazards
1
R:'C,G E N DA REPORTS~2001\121 l'v'~N N UAL CONTRACT G EOTECH.AGR,DOC
· Review of available geologic maps and reports for the region
· Discussion of the material encountered in the borings and measured engineering properties
· Preparation of field and final compaction reports
· Review of project plans & specifications with emphasis on geotechnical and laboratory materials
testing services and attend progress meetings
· Observation and Field testing services during all phases of site grading
· Field observation and testing during trench backfilling operations
· Field density testing during subgrade and base compaction
· Field sampling and testing of base and asphalt concrete
· All necessary laboratory tests to support field services and to satisfy Caltrans and other
regulatory agency requirements
· Batch plant inspections
· Structure backfill observation and testing
· Concrete sampling and testing
· Consulting services requiring corrective and/or remedial recommendations
The actual number of projects and costs are not known at this time. Payment will be based on the
actual time spent on tasks as directed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. An
accumulative total not to exceed $60,000 has been set for the Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Consultant will submit a cost proposal for each service request. Once a
scope of service and a schedule of fees are negotiated, funds are allocated from the corresponding
project budget. Only approved CIP projects will utilize the services under this agreement, unless
directed otherwise by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Agreement with Engen Public Works Services, LLC
2
R:'~AG ENIDA REPORTS~2001\121 I~,NNUAL CONTRACT GEOTECH+AGR+DOC
CITY OF TEMECULA
ANNUAL AGREEMENT
FOR
PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL/MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES
FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of December 11,2001, between the
City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and EnGEN Corporation, ("Consultant"). In
consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on December 11,2001, and shall
remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2002, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the
provisions of this Agreement.
2. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for geotechnical/material testing
on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services and tasks described and set
forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
When there is a need for geotechnical/material testing on an as needed services,
the City will identity the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant.
The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the
associated fees are negotiated.
3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to
the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant
shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons
engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its
obligations under this Agreement.
4. PREVAILING WAGES. 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
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. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be
obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. Consultant shall provide a copy of prevailing
wag. e.rates to any staff or sub-contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as
a m~n~mum. Consultant shall complywith 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,
Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion
thereof, 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 violation of the
provisions of the Contract.
5. PAYMENT.
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates
and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates
and Schedule, as modified on the consultant letter of June 27, 2001 attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on
the tasks as directed by the City on an as needed basis. Consultant shall not bill the City for
any travel time and expenses associated with it, nor shall he charge a set minimum number
1
r:/agrmts~masters~annual contzact2001-02\EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
of hours for each site visit. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null and void.
The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents
($60,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided
in this Agreement.
b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in
connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authorized in
advance and in wdting by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts
and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the
time City's wdtten authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. Any
additional work in excess of the amount above shall be appreved by the City Council.
c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.
Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services
previded in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each
invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give wdtten
notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the
invoice.
6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE.
a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or
terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10)
days prior wdtten notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all
work under this Agreement, unless the notice prevides otherwise. If the City suspends or
terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or
invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City
shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination,
provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement
pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4.
7. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT.
a. The Consultant's failure to cemplywith the previsions of this Agreement shall
constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this
Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for anywork
performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately bywdtten notice
to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work
hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of
the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default.
b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in
default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Consultant with wdtten notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (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 pedod of time, the City shall have the
right, notwithstanding any other prevision 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.
2
r:~agrmts~'nasters~annuai contmct2001-O2~nGen annual agrmt/ajp
8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS.
a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to
sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the
performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of
services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be
maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be cleady identi-
fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or
its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine
and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary,
and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this
Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained fora pedod of
three (3) years after receipt of final payment.
b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this
Agreement, all odginal documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing
data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents 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. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant
shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary
computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and pdnting
computer files.
c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not
be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location
other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant.
9. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect
and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any
and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert
witness fees, 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 or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any
way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability
arising out of the negligence of the City.
10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for
the duration of the contract insurance 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, its agents, representatives, or employees.
a. Minimum Scope of insurance,. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form
No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88.
(2)
Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01
06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the
Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to
the General Liability policy described above is acceptable.
3
r:~agrmts~nasters~annual contract2001-02~EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
(3)
Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of
California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has
no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's
compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall
execute a declaration that it has no employees.
(4)
Professional Liability Insurance shall be wdtten on a policy form
providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession.
b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
(1)
General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury,
personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General
Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is
used, either the general aggregate Ii mit shall apply separately to this
project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the
required occurrence limit.
(2)
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and
property damage.
(3)
Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California;
Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident
for bodily injury or disease.
(4)
Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000,000) per claim
and in aggregate.
c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured
retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City
Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as
respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a
bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense
expenses.
d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability
policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1)
The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insureds as respects: liability adsing 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, leased, hired or
borrowed bythe Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special
limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
(2)
For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance
coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-
insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall
not contribute with it.
4
r:~agrmts~mast~rs~annual contmct2001-02',,EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
(3)
Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the
policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage
provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
(4)
The Consultant'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.
(5)
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 by certified mail, return receipt requested,
has been given to the City.
e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self
insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
f. Verification of Coveraqe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original
endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a
person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on
forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before
work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide
complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the
coverage required by these specifications.
11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly
independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of
Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor
any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of
Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this
Agreement. 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. Consultant shall
not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind
City in any manner.
b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the
Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing
services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to
Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of
all local, State and Federal ordinances, 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 ordinances, 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.
5
r:~agrmts~masters~annual contract2001-02~nGen annual agrmtJajp
13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION.
a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall
be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's pdor wdtten
authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without
written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily
provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or
other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or
property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered
"voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.
b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers,
employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of
deposition, request for documents, interregatodes, request for admissions or other discovery
request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed
thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right,
but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, headng or
similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the
opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's
right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or
rewdte said response.
14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other
party under this Agreement must be in wdting and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii)
delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that
provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail,
certified mail, postage prepaid, retum receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as
set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be
effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following
deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above.
To City:
City of Temecula
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attention: City Manager
To Consultant:
EnGEN Corporation
41607 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 1
Temecula, California 92590
Attention: Gina L. LeSueur
15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior wdtten consent of
the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for
actual services ped=ormed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise
agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant.
6
r:~agrmts~rnasters~nnual contract2001-02~EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
16. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall
have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services
described in this Agreement.
17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the
laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties
to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning
this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic
jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the
other to enfome its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's
judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief
granted.
18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding
between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior
or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or wdtten,
are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entedng
into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's
own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.
19. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of
Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the
proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter.
Furthermore, the contractodconsultant covenants and agrees to their
knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest,
whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of
the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the
knowledge of either pady at any time, a full and complete disclosure of ail such information will be
made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a
conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 9commencing with
Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California.
20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons
executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the
authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind
Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
7
r:~agrmts~masters~annual contract2001-02\EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
the day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Jeff Comemhero, Mayor
Attest:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
EnGEN Corporation
41607 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 1
Temecula, CA 92590
(909) 296-2230
By:.
Osbjorn Bratene, President
By:.
H. Wayne Baimbridge, CEO/CFO
(Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations)
8
r:~agrmts~nasters~annual contract2001-02~EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
EXHIBIT A
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
9
r:~agrmts~rnasters~annual contract2001-02~EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
Oun-27-O/ 01:51P P.O!
· ' EnGEN' Corporation
ENVIRONM£NTAI. ~, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER~NO NETWORK
June 27, 2001
City of Temecula
Public Works Department
43200 Business Pan Drive
Temecula, California 92590
(909) 694-6411 I Fax (909) 694-6475
Attn: Laura Bragg
S4Jbject: Proposal for Annual Agreement for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services
In accordance with our conversation this afternoon, please be advised that EnGEN Cog)omtto~
will not charge the City of Temecula for travel time to projects included in the above referenced
egreement. Additionally. there will be no minimum hour charges.
If you have any cluestions, please feel free to contact me,
GLUIhw
RECEIVED
JUN ~ ? 2001
CITY OF TEIVIECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
....... I- ...... .~"~,~;,~{ ~.~ k~i ~.7c;,~,~=,~'.-,=:,~--."-'":~-'*.'-~.~ .................... ~ .............
II ; i ~i . . :".:. : . ·
J . s I ' .''"'{ ...... ~ ....... : ~ k-"..:':' ''."~JT'"' ' *' ' * '' .... "
ii
i
il
Il
il
Il
Il
il
Il
Il
II
Il
IJ
lB
i
I
I
EnGEN Corporation appreciates the opportunity to provide this proposal for
Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services for the City of Temecula for Fiscal Year
2001-2002. This proposal is based on information derived from your Request for
Statement of Qualifications (RFQ) dated May 30, 2001.
INTRODUCTION
EnGEN Corporation has evolved from a small soils and geology company to a
professional organization specializing in geotechnical soils engineering, geologic
evaluation, engineering geology, environmental site assessment, laboratory testing and
analyses, and construction materials testing. Our prefessional staff is comprised of
highly qualified Engineers, Geologists and Engineering Technicians whose combined
experience provide more than 20 years of specialized engineering services in the
Southern California area.
EnGEN Corporation's operating philosophy is "Pride in Professionalism". We incorporate
the "common sense" approach with technical expertis$ to accomplish project tasks with
the client's best interest in mind. This approach, as well as our reputation as a
responsive, well-organized firm has fueled ou[ growth and enabled us to provide excellent
customer service.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is our understanding that this contract will consist of various projects that will require
geotechnical and/or materials testing services until Dece~ 2002. Each
services will be negotiated separately based on the*servi~uested, request for
SCOPE OF SERVICES - COMPACTION SERVICER
The scope of services for subsurface exploration shall include but not be limited to the
following:
In-Place Moisture and Density Tests
Laboratory Maximum Density and Optimum Moisture Tests
Sieve Analysis
R-Value
Direct Shear Tests
Consolidation or Collapse Tests
Ph, Resistivity, Soluble Sulfate, and Chloride Tests
SCOPE OF SERVICES - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION SERVICFR
EnGEN Corporation will provide logs of borings summarizing the subsurface conditions
encountered, results of laboratory testing, and a plan indicating the location of the
explorations. The reports will also provide seismic design criteria based on current
code requirements.
Geotechnical evaluation and recommendations within EnGEN Corporation technical
reports will include but not be limited to the following:
Standard Grading Recommendations
Earthwork Recommendations
Settlement Considerations and Calculations following CDMG report 117.
Surface and Subsurface Drainage Recommendations
[] Foundation, Column and Slab Recommendations
[] Slope Stability
[] Soil Sulfate Content Implications and Impact on F~)undation Design
[] Utility Trench Backfill
Lateral Earth Pressures used for Retaining Wall Design
[] Pavement Design
[] Grading and Foundation Plan Review
[] Construction Monitoring
[] Pile Driving (If necessary)
Lateral Earth Pressures
[] Discussion of the Existing Pavement or Site Conditions
[] Recommendations for Removal of Unsuitable Material
[] Soil Ferrous Corrosivity and the Portland Cement Attack Potential
Environmental Concerns/Hazards
[] Summary of Findings and Recommendations
[] Consulting Services Requiring Corrective and/or Remedial Recommendations, If
Necessary.
Review of Available Geologic Maps and Reports for the Region
[] Discussion of the Material Encountered in the Borings and Measured
Engineering Properties.
Logs of the Exploratory Borings Summarizing the Subsurface Conditions
Encountered, Results of Laboratory Testing, and a Plan Indicating the Location
of the Explorations.
n '97 UBC Near Source Seismic Factors
r~ Dynamic Settlement Calculations
EnGEN's corporate office, located in Temecula, California, houses a state-of-the-art
laboratory facility, as well as-professional and administrative staff. This office and our
office in Santa Ana, California enable us to service both public and private sector clients
in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties.
UNDERSTANDING OF PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT & SCOPE OF WORK
EnGEN Corporation understands that the City of Temecula will require a complete
service package to accommodate day-to-day requirements of the City for geotechnical
consulting and testing services. This office has been providing all of the specialized
engineering services outlined in the RFQ for over 20 years in the Temecula Valley for
public agencies and private development companies. These services have included
geotechnical.investigations, compaction testing, consulting services and laboratory
testing. These services will be provided on an "on-call" basis as project demands
dictate.
Understanding of Soil and Geotechnical Conditions within the Temecula Valley:
Nearly 75% of the geotechnical services provided by EnGEN Corporation are within the
Temecula Valley. The previous work conducted in the City of Temecula by FnC_,F.N
Corporation has shown that soil conditions within the region vary significantly in terms of
stability, soil settlement/consolidation and corrosive potential. Registered professional
engineers and geologists as well as trained technical engineering personnel are
qualified to recognize the potential for these characteristics should they be observed at
each project during the grading/construction operations. Any soils observed that may
have the potential for these characteristics, or that could have an adverse effect on the
foundation, footings and/or pavement areas will be sampled and tested in order to
provide appropriate recommendations.
Understanding of Compaction Control Needs of the City of Temecula:
Clayey sands or slightly plastic and plastic soils will present some difficulty in
compaction. Where these soils are encountered, it will be recommended that efforts be
made to mix with clean sands in order to minimize the difficulty in achieving ~the required
compaction. It will be recommended that compaction operations only utilize mechanical
equipment. Jetting within trenches should be avoided. The technician(s) on site will
provide the Contractor and the City with daily field test results and report any unusual
conditions to the appropriate project professionals immediately. The standard of
compaction frequency varies depending on the size of the work area, volume and
depth, however it is generally understood that one compaction test should be taken for
every two vertical feet (or lift) of backfilled material or compacted fill placed. Each test is
documented on a "daily field report" and plotted on a scaled site plan showing the
number, location and depth of test taken.
Understanding of Unstable Soil Conditions within the Temecula Valley:
Unstable soil conditions exist throughout the valley at varying depths from the surface to
deep beneath the surface and each site should be evaluated in order to determine if
unstable conditions exist. The evaluation process allows the engineer to examine the
characteristics of each soil horizon under controlled laboratory conditions, simulating the
conditions and loads that the soil would experience under varying conditions. The most
damaging soil conditions that have been observed to occur within the Temecula Valley
include hydro-consolidation of supporting soils, expansion potential impacting
foundation stresses and slope stability.
iii
Due to the variety of soil types that may be encountered throughout the City, some soils
encountered could potentially be unstable. It is recommended that all excavations be
configured in accordance with CAL/OSHA requirements and be under technical
observation at all times when work is in progress.
Understanding of Regional Geology:
EnGEN Corporation has conducted many geotechnical investigations within the City
boundaries, and as part of these studies the geology has been evaluated. The City of
Temecula is located in the seismically active region of Southern California. F. nGEN
Corporation will address potential geologic hazards such as landsliding, liquefaction and
faulting that might be considered detrimental to any proposed development during its
lifetime. The scope of work proposed will include a technical review of any previous
reports, site reconnaissance, and presentation of findings, conclusions and
recommendations of the geological analysis of the data collected.
PROJECTAPPROACH
Initial Work Plan Review Meeting: EnGEN Corporation will conduct an initial in-house
review of available maps, project plans, reports, specifications and any other
documentation relevant to the project. We will schedule a meeting with City staff,
contractor and others, on-site, to discuss project specifications and site conditions before
construction begins. EnGEN Corporation will also discuss the construction schedule with
the contractor and City staff to properly plan our manpower requirements in order to meet
the contractor's projected schedule and attend progress meetings, as required. A general
field work and safety plan meeting with field and technical staff will also be conducted. We
will meet with the City Project Engineer and other appropriate engineering staff, if deemed
necessary or required because of project changes or special circumstances uncovered
during the initial document review of technical data.
Site Reconnaissance: Potential subsurface exploration point locations will be planned
by our Geotechnical Engineer and staff. Site reconnaissance will consist of traversing the
site, conducting surface mapping, verifying access to all necessary areas, retrieving soil
samples and/or staking proposed boring locations to assist DIG ALERT. Exploratory
borings will be drilled within the proposed development area ranging in depth to a
maximum of 50 feet below ground surface or refusal, utilizing truck-mounted, hollow-stem
auger drilling equipment. The actual number of borings will be determined during the field
operations. In-situ and bulk samples along with standard penetration testing will be
obtained at 5.0-foot intervals or less to evaluate subsurface geotechnical conditions for
laboratory testing.
PROFESSIONAL STAFF
The following is a list of personnel that will be assigned to the City's projects:
Project Geotechnical Engineer - Osbjorn Bratene, GE 162
As the President of EnGEN Corporation, Mr. Bratene is available locally should any
special conditions be encountered which require senior Geotechnical Engineer
involvement throughout the duration of any project. See attached resume.
Project Engineering Geologist - Thomas Dewey, CEG 1975
As the Project Engineering Geologist, Mr. Dewey is available locally should any
conditions arise throughout the duration of the project that may require professional
judgment or observation of geological conditions. See attached resume.
Field Operations Manager/Day-to-Day Contact - Jason D. Gardner
Mr. Gardner will serve as "Engineer-in-Charge", the liaison between EnGEN
Corporation and the City staff on all matters concerning each project and will coordinate
the day-to-day activities through completion. See attached resume.
Field Supervisor
Field Supervisors oversee the field technician(s) on each project to ensure adequate
documentation of field and testing activities and maintain field scheduling and reporting
coordination with the Contractor and the City throughout each project duration. -
Full-Time Senior Field Technician(s)
Senior Field Technician(s) will be available to observe and test on a full-time or as
needed basis throughout each project construction period. The technician(s) assigned
to each project are experienced in compaction operations, concrete sampling and
testing in accordance with oversight Agency guidelines and the State Board of
Professional Engineers requirements.
The following is a list of subcontractors that may be used on the City's projects:
· ES Babcock
· ABC Liovin
· Cai Pac Drilling
Pro,~ect Organtzatt, onat Chart
A CLEAR LINE OF COMMUNICATION IS ESSENTIAL IN ANY
SUCCESSFUL OPERATION.
13
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE
10
r:'agrmts~mas~rs~annual contract2001-02\EnGen annual agrmt/ajp
EnGEN Corporation
SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES (January 2001)
HOURLY PERSONNEL CHARGES
Principal ............................................................................................................................... $125.00
Registered Environmental Assessor (REA) ......................................................................... $100.00
Geotechnical Engineer, (GE) ................................................................................................. $95.00
Engineering Geologist, (CEG) ............................................................................................... $95.00
Project Engineer (RCE) ......................................................................................................... $85.00
Project Geologist (RG) .......................................................................................................... $85.00
Staff Engineer/Project Manager ............................................................................................ $75.00
Staff Geologist ....................................................................................................................... $75.00
Field Supervisor ..................................................................................................................... $70.00
Senior Technician .................................................................................................................. $65.00
Field Technician .................................................................................................................... $60.00
Field Technician, Prevailing Wage Rate ................................................................................ $75.00
Lab Technician .................................................................................................................... $60.00
Drafting Services .......... : ........................................................................................................ $50.00
Word Processing ......................... : ......................................................................................... $50.00
Clerical Services .................................................................................................................... $45.00
Special Inspector (Concrete, Mason & Welding) ....................... : .............. .. .................... On Request
Court Appearance, Depositions, and/or Governmental Representations
(including Travel Time, houdy rate) ............................................................................ $250.00
ADDITIONAL CHARGES
Vehicle Charge (mileage exceeding 50 miles round trip from office), per mile .............. On Request
Postage or Special Delivery Services ............................................................................ Cost + 15%
Outside Services ........................................................................................................... Cost + 15%
Standard copies of reports, wet signed (each) .............................................................. On Request
Per Diem, (per day per person) .................................... i ................................................ On Request
Overtime'Rate/Holiday Rate .......................................................................................... $25.00/hour
Prevailing Wage O/T Rate ............................................................................................. $15.00/hour
Prevailing Wage D/T Rate ............................................................................................. $25.00/hour
Prevailing Wage Holiday Rate ....................................................................................... $50.00/hour
LABORATORY TESTING FEES
Laboratory testing fees are per test and do not reflect sample pick-up and delivery charges or out
of ordinary sample preparation time. Fees for additional tests available upon request.
SOIL TESTING
Maximum Dry Density / Optimum Moisture Content Relationships
a) ASTM D-1557, (Method A) .......................................................... ~ ........................ $125.00
b) ASTM D-1557, (Method B, C) .................................................... ; ......................... $150.00
c) ASTM D-1557, (Method D) ................................................................................... $150.00
d) Califomia Impact (CALTRANS 216) ..................................................................... $125.00
Expansion Index, UBC 29-2 .................................................................................................. $90.00
Sand Equivalent (average of 3 points) .................................................................................. $90.00
Soluble Sulfate
...................................................................................................................... $35.00
Corrosion Analysis (p.H., Redox, Sat. Res., Sulfates) .......................................................... $45.00
Atterberg Limits (Plasticity Limit): ........................................................................................ $110.00
Consolidation, in-situ sample max. 5 points .......................................................................... $75.00
Consolidation, single point (collapse test) ..................... ........................................................ $55.00
Consolidation, per additional loading point ............................................................................ $20.00
Consolidation, In-situ sample, time rate-ratio data .............................................................. $135.00
/Templates/Masterforms/Schedule of Fees, 1-25~01 Page I of 3 Revised 2/22/2001
EnGEN Corporation
SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES (January 2001)
8OIL TESTING, (Continued)
Direct Shear, in-situ sample, saturated, 3 points ................................................................. $130.00
Direct Shear, remolded sample, saturated, 3 points ........................................................... $160.00
Hydrometer Analysis (minus No. 10 sieve material) .............................................................. $65.00
R-Value:
CALTRANS 301
....................................................................................................... $210.00
C.B.R. (3 points, excluding optimum moisture / max. density curve) ....................... $300.00
· Ring Density .......................................................................................................................... $15.00
Sieve Analysis, washed, 3/4" Max ....................................................................................... $100.00
Specific Gravity (+ No. 4 Sieve Material) ............................................................................... $70.00
Specific Gravity (- No.'4 Sieve Material) ................................................................................ $80.00
Moisture Content/Dry Density ................................................................................................ $15.00
Miscellaneous Aggregate Testing ................................................................................. On Request
Other Specialty Testing (not listed above) ..................................................................... On Request
CONCRETE TESTING
Concrete Mix Design (review calculations only) ........................ ~ ......................................... $150.00
Flexural Strength, 6"x6"x24" beam ........................................................................................ $45.00 .
Beams Cured but not tested (less than 28 days old) ............................ ~ ................................ $25.00
Compression Tests, Hold Samples, 6"x12" cylinder ............................................................. $20.00
Cylinders Canceled, Not Tested (less than 28 days old) ....................................................... $15.00
MASONRY TESTING
Compression Test, Hold Samples, Mortar or Grout Cylinders ................................ (each) $20.00
Compression Test, Masonry Unit, 3 required
(Net area also requires absorption and unit weight tests) ..................... .. ...... (each) $65.00
Absorption Test, Masonry Unit, 3 required
(Net area also requires unit weight test) ....................................................... (each) $45.00
Unit Weight, Masonry Unit, 3 required ..................................................................... (each) $45.00
Moisture Content, Masonry Unit (as received), 3 required ...................................... (each) $45.00
Lineal shrinkage, masonry unit, 3 required .............................................................. (each) $85.00
Tensile Test on Masonry Block ............................................................................... (each) $125.00
Shear Test on Masonry Core .................................................................................. (each) $85.00
Compression Test on Masonry Core ................................... : .................................. (each) $45.00
Compression Test of Masonry Pdsms 8"x16".(other sizes on request) ..................(each) $125.00
Other Specialty Testing (i.e., not listed abdve) .............................................................. On Request
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE TESTING
Specific Gravity (Compacted Sample) ................................................................................... $45.00
Stabilometer Test (Sample Mixing - set of 3) ...................................................................... $270.00
Premixed Sample (set of 3) ...................................................................................... $170.00
Extraction, % Bitumen and Sieve Analysis ...................................................................... '.... $175.00
Marshall Test, per Core Specimen, (stability and flow) ...................................................... $150.00
Marshall Test, Maximum Density Only ................................................................................ $150.00
Marshall Test, (Sample Preparation - set of 3) .................................................................... $275.00
Evaluation of On-Site Failures ....................................................................................... On Request
Other Specialty Testing (i.e., not listed above) .............................................................. On Request
FFemplates/MastedormslSchedule of Fees, 1-25-01 Page 2 of 3 Revised 2/22/2001
EnGEN Corporation
SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES (January 2001)
MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES
Coring Field Samples of Concrete, A.C., Masonry, etc ................................................. On Request
Reinforcing Steel, Structural Steel and High Strength Bolt Testing .............................. On Request
Portland or Asphaltic Cements, Liquid Asphalts, Emulsions and Slurry Seals .............. On Request
Roofing Observations and Tests ................................................................................... On Request
Density of Spr.ayed Fireproofing .............................................................................. (each) $55.00
Asbestos P.L.M. Analysis ........................................................................................ (each) $35.00
/'templates/Masterforms/Schedule of Fees, 1-25-01 Page 3 of 3 Revised 2J27./2001
ITEM 6
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL ~ -~,,~
CiTY ATTORNEY ~11
DIRECTOROF FiNANCE~
CiTY MANAGER '~lr~ ]1
CITY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
,,)~'/[William of Public Works/City Engineer
G.
Hughes,
Director
December 11, 2001
Amendment No. 1 to Annual Citywide Routine Maintenance Contract
PREPARED BY: Bradley A. Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment Number 1 to the Annual
Citywide Routine Maintenance Contract with Walter K. Becker (dba, Becker Engineering) for an
amount of $100,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment.
BACKGROUND: On July 10, 2001 the City Council approved the Annual Citywide Routine
Maintenance Contract with Walter K. Becker (Becker Engineering) to provide citywide routine
maintenance and construction work throughout the City in the amount of $100,000.00. This work
generally ranges in costs from over $1,000 to under $25,000 and involves miscellaneous repairs to
drainage areas, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and storm drains to include excavation.
Amendment No. 1 is necessary for the upcoming winter months to provide for additional storm
clean-up for streets and public drainage facilities, and for the increase in needed routine street
maintenance and public drainage facility repairs throughout the City and the recent annexation of
the Vail Ranch Area. Although we also have other contractors available under contract, some of the
types of services provided by others are limited and Becker Engineering has been the most
consistently available and responsive. The additional contractors on contract are specialized in
different area's of construction and do not perform the same job tasks as Becket Engineering. This
has resulted in their contract being exhausted sooner.
The requested Amendment No. 1 to Becker Engineering and the original contract for a total amount
of $200,000.00.
FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been budgeted in the FY2001-02 Public Works
Maintenance Division, Routine Street Maintenance and Drainage Facility Maintenance for the
original contract amount of $100,000.00 plus Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $100,000.00 for a
total contract amount of $200,000.00.
ATTACHMENT:
1. Amendment No. 1
2. Agenda Report July 10, 2001
I
R:\agdrpt~O01~121 l'tBecker Amend 1
FIRST AMENDMENT TO ANNUAL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND
BECKER ENGINEERING
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of December 11, 2001 by and
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and BECKER ENGINEERING
("Contractor"). In consideration ofthe mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties
agree as follows:
1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes:
A. On July 10, 2001 the City and Contractor entered into that certain agreement
entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Citywide Routine Maintenance" ("Contract").
B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this
Amendment.
2. Section 3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:
a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of
the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of
materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit"A".
The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be Two Hundred
Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($200,000.00) unless a higher amount is
approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement.
3. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of
the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the
day and year first above written,
CITY OF TEMECULA
BY:
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
BY:
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
CONTRACTOR
BECKER ENGINEERING
P.O. Box 890365
Temecula, CA 92589-0365
(909) 731-3991
"Walter K. Becker, Owner
2
EX]HBIT B
LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES
9
R:~naintain\workorders'~nnual~2001-2002Xbeckea' annual 01-02
BECKER
,ENGI[NEER][NG
HI.-.L,;t- IV t" LJ
MAY 2., 9 2001
CITY OF I*EMECULA
~NGiNEERING DEPARTMENT
P.O. Box 890365 · Temecula, CA 92589-0365
CA License # 683396-A (909) 731-3991
GRADING ° PAVING · CONCRETE · DEMOLITION:5
PROPOSAL & CONTRACT
/ CONTRACTOR
PHONE:
JOB LOCATION:
DATE:
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRI~
TATE: CITY:
CITY: TEMECULA CA
Weproposeto ~mi~allequipmentandpefformalllaborneces~utocompl~e~e~llowing:
PLEASE~.REVIEW ATTACHED SHEET AS PER YOUR REQUEST
IN LETTER DATED MAY 15,2001
This contract does not include any damage or repairs to underground facilities not visible from the surface or otherwise
designated by owner / ~ontractor and stated in this agreement. Any extra work or delays will result in contract reverting to Time
&Material.
All of the above work to be completed in a substantial and workmanlike manner according to standard practices for the sum
of DOLLARS ($ -)
Terms of Payment:
BECKER
CA License # 683396-A P.O. Box 890365 · Temecula, CA 92589-0365
(909) 731-3991
GRADING ° PAVING · CONCRETE ' DEMOLITIONS
PROPOSAL & CONTRACT
HOURLY LABOR RATES
S.T. O.T.
SUPERINTENDENT W/TRUCK $60.00 $91.00
FOREMAN W/TRUCK $55.50 $82.00
GENERAL LABOR RATES $46.00 $66.00
ALL PRICES REFLECT 3.3% INCREASE P.W. SCALE.
HOURLY BARE EQUIPMENT RATES
450 DOZER
SKIPLOADER
310 BACKHOE
763 BOBCAT
763 BOBCAT W/BREAKER
863 BOBCAT
863 BOBCAT W/BREAKER
BOBTAIL DUMP
lto3 TON ROLLER
3to5 TON ROLLER
VIBRATORY PLATE
WACKER TAMP
WATER TRUCK
$51.50 P.H.
$39.75 P.H.
$51.50 P.W.
$43.75 P.H.
$67.50 P.H~
$51 .50 P.H.
75.00 P.H.
$51.50 P.H.
$26.75 P.H.
$39.75 P.H.
$21.50 P.H.
$21 .50 P.H.
$56.75 P.H.
APPROVAL
CITY A'I-rORN EY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
July 10, 2001
Public Works Annual Maintenance Agreements
PREPARED BY: Bradley A. Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the minor annual maintenance and
construction contracts with:
1. Monteleone Contractors, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
2. Walter K. Becker (dba Becker Engineering), in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
3. Rene's Commemial Management, in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
4. Toran Development & Construction, in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
5. NPG Corp (Nelson Paving & Sealing), in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
6. Murdeta Development Co., in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
7. Graham Crackers-Demo, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00
BACKGROUND: Each year the City enters into numerous maintenance and consbucrion
agreements with various contractors that perform minor (small job) maintenance and construction jobs.
These jobs usually range in cost from over $1,000 to under $25,000 and involve miscellaneous repairs to
drainage areas, sidewalks, curbs, cutters, and storm drains to include excavation. Nevertheless, each
job requires an agreement between the City and the contractor. In an effort to streamline these
contractual requirements, staff has taken measures to place under agreement seven contractors that are
very capable'of performing these murine jobs with little notice. Essentially, these agreements will give
staff administrative tools needed to efficiently execute minor maintenance and construction work by
having executed agreements which satisfy insurance, prevailing wage requirements, terms and
conditions as well as a general scope of work. This contracting technique is widely used by cities to
employ a higher more responsive maintenance capability. Also, in the event of harsh weather that can
impinge the safety of the City roadways, and other City maintained areas, these agreements can
facilitate an expedient reaction and resolution to advise conditions without jeopardizing administrative
requirements. It is important to understand that the not to exceed $100,000.00 amount does not
necessarily mean it will be spent but rather is a ceiling to operate below on an as needed basis.
1
Although some jobs may be better accomplished by one contractor because of equipment availability,
timing issues and job location, every effort will be made by staff to distribute the work load evenly
between the three contractors. The contractor will be responsible for providing a work proposal for each
job, which must be approved by staff before any work is started.
Staff mailed letters to nine (9) contractors in the local area that could meet the described minor
maintenance and construction needs. The letters requested time and matedal pdcing for both labor and
equipment rates. It also included holiday and overnight rates. Seven (7) out of the nine (9) contractors
responded and provided competitive labor and equipment rates as seen in Exhibit "B' of each
agreement. Review of these rates has determined they are consistent with current prevailing wages and
current hourly equipment rates previously paid by the City. The contractors listed below responded to the
request for time and matedal rates and are recommended for not to exceed $100,000.00 agreements for
a one (1) year term.
Company
Monteleone Contractors, Inc.
Amount not to Exceed
$100,000.00
Term
1 year
Walter K. Becker (dba Becker Engineering)
$100,000.00 1 year
Rene's Commercial Management
$100,000.00 1year
Toran Development & Construction
$100,000.00 1year
NPG Corp. (Nelson Paving & Sealing)
$100,000.00 1 year
Murrieta Development Company
$100,000.00 1year
Graham Crackers-Demo Inc.
$100,000.00 1 year
FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Public Work's,
Maintenance Division operating budget.
A'I'I'ACH MENT:
1. Contractor Mailing List
2. Contracts
2
r~agclfl)t~2001 ~0710V~,nual Malnt/~4F~menm.6,GN/aJp
Contractor Mailin.q List
NPG Corporation (Nelson Paving & Sealing)
P.O. Box 1515
Perris, CA 92572-1515
Del Rio Enterprise
42181 Avenida Alvamdo
Temecula, CA 92590
Walter K. Becker (dba Becker Engineering)
P.O. Box 890365
Temecula, CA 92589-0365
Rene Commercial Management
1002 Luna Way
San Jacinto, CA 92583
Monteleone Contractors, Inc.
39054 Camino Hermosa
Murdeta, CA 92563
Toran Development & Construction
37110 Mesa Rd
Temecuia, CA 92592-8633
Murrieta Development
42540 Rio Nedo
Temecula, CA 92590
Mayer's Blade Rental
P.O. Box 398
Winchester, CA 92596
Graham Crackers-Demo, Inc.
25125 Felswood Lane
Menifee, CA 92584
3
r.~gd~20Ol~0?10VV,~Jal Malnt.~eements. AGN/ajp
ITEM 7
APPROVAL ..~... )II
crr¥ A'rrORNE¥ II
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Manager/City Council
,'V~/..~'lWilliam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
December 11,2001
SUBJECT:
Completion and Acceptance for Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road
Sidewalk Project - Project No. PW00-22
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Amer Attar, Senior Engineer
Bruce Levy, Assistant Engineer
That the City Council:
1. Accept the project for the Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project - Project No.
PW00-22, as complete.
2. File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year
Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract.
3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion,
if no liens have been filed.
BACKGROUND: On July 24, 2001, the City Council awarded the contract to Elite Bobcat
Service, Inc. for an amount of $51,790.00. A decrease in final quantities decreased the contract
amount by $1,735.00, bringing the total cost of the project to $50,055.00. The project provided the
new sidewalks on the north side of Southern Cross Road between Rancho Vista Road and
Margarita Road. The sidewalks will facilitate pedestrian safety and accessibility, especially for
children and residents in the surrounding areas to walk to and from existing parks, schools and retail
shops.
The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications
and within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction
retention for this project will be released on or about 35 days after the Notice of Completion has
been recorded.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total bid amount for this project was $51,790.00. A decrease in final
quantities decreased the contract amount by $1,735.00, bringing the total cost of the project to
$50,055.00. This project is funded through SB821 funds and Capital Project Reserves account no.
210-190-141-5804.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Notice of Completion
2. Maintenance Bond
3. Contractor's Affidavit
R:~AG ENDA REPORTS~2001\1211~W00-22ACCEPT, DOC
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. Box 9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
92590.
The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to Elite Bobcat Service, Inc. to perform the
following work of improvement:
Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project, Project No. PW00-22
4. 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 December 11, 2001. That upon said
contract the American Motorists Insurance Company was surety for the bond given by the 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:
PROJECT NO. PW00-22.
6. The street address of said property is: Southern Cross Road.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 11th day of December, 2001.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk
I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of
perjury, 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 11m day of December, 2001.
Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk
Bond Number:
3SM 989 833 00 - A
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MAINTENANCE BOND
PROJECT NO. PWO0-22
STARLIGHT RIDGE SOUTHERN CROSS ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT:
Elite Bobcat Sea/ice, Inc. , 1320 East 6th Street, Corona, CA 92879
a
NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S
Corporation - , hereinafter called Principal, and
(tiff in whether a Corporation, Partne~hip or ino?vidual)
AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY, 7470 N. Figueroa Street, los Angeles, CA 90041
NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA,
hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of 'Five Thousand' Five ' .. '
DOLLARS and 50/100tbs '" CENTS
($ 5;005~50" ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten
(10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the
Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and
· severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a
certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 24th day of July , 2001, a copy
of which is hereto attached and r,~ade a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW00-
22, STARLIGHT RIDGE SOUTHERN CROSS ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT.
WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee
for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job. by the owNER~
against alt defects'in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period;
and
WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and was the final estimate approved on
October 3rd ,2001.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year
from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done
under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work,
and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were
furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this
instrument shall be void.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and
reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by
the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and
included in any judgment rendered.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition
to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications
accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby
waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the
Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.
Signed and sealed this 5th day of October ,2001.
(Seal)
SURETY
Elite Bobcat Service/Inc.
(Name)
(Title)
APPROVED ASTO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
PRINCIPAL
By:AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY
George M~nn~
(Name) /
Attorne~In-Fa~
/ fi/
(Name)
(TitJe)
MAINTENANCE BOND M-2 R:~p~projec~wOO~aintenancebond*d~
State of California
County of Los Angeles
OCT 0 5 2001
before me,
personally appeared Geo~e Munana
NAME OF SIGNER
· Personally known to me - OR -
KD W/qato, Nora7 Public,
NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in Ms/her/their
authorized capacity(les), and that by Ms/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(SIGNAT~SRE OF NOTARY)
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SURETY
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL BOND(S)
CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
x'rLE(S)
U} PARTNER(S) ~
· ATtORNEY-IN-FACT
TeUSTEE(S)
GUARDL~.N/CONSERVATOR
OTHER:
LIMITED
GENEILkL
NUMBER OR PAGES
OC~ 13 5 2001
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES)
American Motorists Insurance Company
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company
American Manufacturers ~f,,nlM Instzrance Company
SIGNER OTHER THAN NAME ABOVE
I 'emPeR.
Home Office: Long Grove, IL ~0049
POWER OF A'I-FORNEY
Know All Men By These Presents:
That the Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, the Amedcan Motorists Insurance Company, and the American Manufacturers Mutual
Insurance Company, cotporallons organized and existing under the laws of the Slate of Ilinoiso having their principal office in Long Grove,
Illinois, (herainalter collectively referred to as the 'Company*) do hereby appoint
George Munana o! Los Angeles. California
their ~ue and lawful agent(s) and attomey(s)-imfact, to make, execute, seal. and deliver during the period beginning with the date of issuance
of this power and ending o~ the date specified below, unless sooner revoked for and on its behalf as surety, a~d ss their act and deed:
Arty and all bonds and undertakings provided the amount of no one bond or Undertaking exceeds ONE
MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) ......
EXCEPTION: NO AUTHORITY Is granted to make, execute, seal and de~ver any bond or u~:lertaking v/nk~ guemJ'ttess ~e p,~ m'
This euthorltydcaanot permltthe same obllgatk~n tobe split into two or mom bonds Inorder t~ bring eachsuch bend within the dollarIlmit''
of authority as ~et to~h herein. .
This appointment may be revoked at any lime by the C~mpany.
The execution of such bombs and unde~akings In pumuanca of these presents shall be ss binding upon the said Company as fully and amply
to all intents and purposes, ss if the same had bee~ duty executed and ecNnowledged by their regulariy elected officers at their p~ineipei office In
Long Grove. Illinois.
THIS APPOINq'MENT SHALL CEASE AND TERMINATE WITHOUT NOTICE'A~ OF December 31, 2001
This Power of Attorney Is executed by authority of resolutions adopted by the Executive Committees of the Boards. of Directors of I~e Company
on Fedrua~y23, 1988 at Chlcags, illinois, true &nd eccurato copies of v/nlch are hereinafter set forth end are hereby certified to by the
undersigned Seoreto~ as being In ~ fom. e and effect:
'VOTED, That the C~ of the Board, the President, or &ny Vlce President, or their epfx~inteas designated In writing and filed with
the Secretary, or the Secretary shall have the power and authority to appoint agents and attorneys-in-fact, and to'authorize them to execute on
behalf of the Company, and attach the seal of the Company thereto, b<~:ls and undertakings, recognlzancas.'contrects of Indemnity
other writings, obligatory in the nature thereof, and &ny such officers of the Company may appoint agents ~or acceptance of process.'
This Power of Attorney is signed, sealed &nd certified by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolution adopted by the Executive
Committee of the Boards of Dlrectom of the Company at a meeting duly ca/led and held on the 23rd day of February, 1988:
'VOTED, That the signature of the Chairman of the Board, the President, any Vice President, or their appointees designated in writing and fged
with the Secretary, and the signature of the Secretary. the seal o{ the Company, and cartJflce, iform by the Secretary. may be affixed by facsimile
on any power 01' attorney o~ bond executed pursuant to resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors on Fdommy 23,
1988 and any such power so executed, sealed and oertiifed With respect to any ~ or undertaking to which It is attached, shall continue to
be valid and binding upon the Company."
In Taslimony Whereof. the Comp&ny has caused this instrument to be signed and their corporate seals to be affixed by their authorized olflcam.
this November 14, 2000.
Attested and Cenlfled:
Lumbeq~ens Mutual Casualty Company
American Motorists insure~ca Company
American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company
J. $. Kemper, III, Exec. Vlcs President
Robert P. Hames, Secretary by
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE
PROJECT NO. PWO0-22
STARLIGHT RIDGE SOUTHERN CROSS ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT
This is to certify that ~_.,,'/~'/~Z~h'-.~/,"~./~., (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares
to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor,
services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTF~,CTOR or by any of
the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the
execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection,
construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW00-22,
STARLIGHT RIDGE SOUTHERN CROSS ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT, situated in the City of
Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows:
STARLIGHT RIDGE SOUTHERN CROSS ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT
The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said
Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any
unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR.
Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby
disputes the following amounts:
Description
Dollar Amount to Dispute
Pursuant to Public Contracts Code §7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and
acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any
and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the
CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the
CONTRACTOR has not disputed above.
Dated: ///E,/~ !
CONTRA~
By: .
Signature
,,/'
Print Name and Tille
RELEASE R-1 R:~p~a~ojec~22BidDoes.doc
ITEM 8
APPROVAL iT///~1~
CITY ATTORNEY ~ II
DIRECTOR OF FINANC_~, =.,~2~~ II
CITY MANAGER /.~Y- ' -
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
/~J__~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works\City Engineer
FROM:
DATE: December 11, 2001
SUBJECT: Reimbursement Agreement with Rancho California Water District for Cost Sharing
for Aerial Imagery and Digital Topographic Elevation Data
PREPARED BY:
Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
John De Gange, GIS Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Approve a Reimbursement Agreement with Rancho California Water District for the
Acquisition of Aerial Imagery and Digital Elevation Data in the amount of $157,300.00.
BACKGROUND: The Public Works and GIS Departments have been working with Rancho
California Water District in developing a mutual agreement for the purchase of digital aedal imagery
data. Digital aerial imagery (digital ortho-photographic mapping) will provide the Public Works and
GIS Departments with high-resolution aerial photographs with geographic topographic contours.
This data can be used by the Public Works Department for design work, for drainage studies, and
by the GIS Department to enhance its database and increase its mapping and analysis capabilities.
By entering into a mutual agreement with the Water District the cost for the project is significantly
lower for both agencies and the product will be superior. It was determined that since Rancho
Water District's area of interest was considerably larger than the City's that RCWD would be the
lead agency on the project. RCWD has completed their consultant evaluations and interviews and
they have selected "Project Design Consultants" to perform the work.
RCWD will be responsible for 70% of the aerial imagery costs and the City will be responsible for
30%. In addition to the aerial work the City has requested that the aerial mapping work within the
City be completed at a higher level of accuracy to produce contours at two-foot intervals. The City
will be responsible for 100% of the added cost associated with the enhanced accuracy within the
City. The City will see an immediate benefit from the enhanced accuracy because the product will
be used for the design of the City's Murrieta Creek Multi-Purpose Trail Project.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City's contribution for the project is $157,300.00. The FY2001/2002 budget
of $120,000.00 has been allocated within the Public Works and GIS budgets ($60,000 dedicated
from each Department). The additional $37,300 will be charged to the City's Murrieta Creek Multi-
Purpose Trails Project funded in the CIP budget. The total City cost of the project will be
$157,300.00.
ATrACHMENT:
1. Scope of Work
2. Reimbursement Agreement
1
r:~AgendaReports~2001\121 I'~RCWD Reimb AedalDigital
FBLE
November 1, 2001
Bruce D. Ing, Photogrammetric Mapping Manager
Project Design Consultants
43460 Ridge Park Drive
Suite 145
Temecula, CA 92590
SUBJECT: AERIAL IMAGERY AND DIGITAL ELEVATION DATA
[PROJECT NO. DI065]
Dear Mr. Ing:
Rancho Califomia Water District (RCWD) is pleased to accept your proposal
dated October 30, 2001 (copy enclosed) to provide color orthophoto imagery and
digital mapping for the subject project. This letter is your notice to proceed on a
time and material basis, not to exceed $335,800 without prior written approval.
Invoices shall be submitted to RCWD in accordance with the payment schedule
as defined in the project scope of work. Completion of the color orthophoto
imagery and digital mapping for the subject project shall be completed in
accordance with the specified delivery schedule as defined with the project
scope of work. All invoices and project correspondence shall include the project
title and number, as shown in the subject line above. Prior to the start of work,
please provide a certificate of liability insurance indicating RCWD as
additionally insured.
Please coordinate this work with Richard Schulman, the RCWD consultant for
the subject project.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
~ndre-i~/'L. Webster, P.E.
Acting Director of Engineering
0 BAW:at 133~DI065
Pete Muserelli, GIS Coordinator
Millie Oh-Nelson, Accounting Analyst
John DeGange, City of Temecula
Richard Schulman, Resource Strategie~ Incorporated
PROSECTDEStGN CONSULTANTS
File: T01-42
October 30, 2001
Mr. Andy Webster
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
42135 Winchester Road
Temecula, CA 92590
SUBJECT: Ortho Imagery and Contour Mapping
De~ Andy:
ProjectDesign Consultants is pleased to submit the attached proposal for Color Orthophoto
Imagery and 5-Foot Contour Interval Digital Mapping.
This Scope will serve as a quote, and is valid for 90 days from origination. Payment terms
are net 30 days, unless otherwise specified. After your contract has been executed by both
parties, we will begin your project.
We look forward to working with you on this project and any mapping needs you may have
in the future. If you have any questions, or should your project requirements change, please
contact me Bruce Ing at (909) 695-5596, ext. 234.
Sincerely,
Senior Vice President
Sincerely,
Bruce Ing
Manager, Photogrammetry
Attachment
43460 Ridge Park Drive, Suite 170
Temecula, California 92590
909,695-55% Tel
909,695-5597 lax
www. p ro]ectdesig n.com
PROJ£CTDESIGN CONSULTANTS
File: T01-42R2
October 30, 200 !
Page 1 of 4
SCOPE OF WORK - EXHIBIT 'A'
COLOR ORTHOPHOTO IMAGERY AND
FIVE-FOOT CONTOUR INTERVAL DIGITAL MAPPING
ProjectDesign Consultants is pleased to present the following proposal for Color
Orthophoto Imagery and Five-Foot Contour Interval Digital Mapping:
I. CONCEPT
A. This project will be comprised of two areas:
Area "A" being the boundary of the Ranch California Water District Area of
Interest and includes the entire Area "B".
Area "B" being the City limits of the City of Temecula.
All terrain data and aerial imagery will remain the exclusive property of the
Rancho California Water District and is reserved for use by the Rancho
California Water District, PmjectDesign Consultants and only user's so
authorized by the Rancho California Water District.
H. FLIGHT PLANNING
A. The Aerial Photography will be acquired using a calibrated Wild RC-30
aerial camera, equipped with a forward motion compensator and an
Airborne Global Positioning System, (AGPS) and two GPS ground control
stations collecting simultaneous data for precise differential GPS camera
positioning. The altitude for Area "A" will.bo 7200' above average ground
elevation and will result in the photo scale being 1" = 1200'.The altitude for
Area "B" will be 2400' above average ground elevation and will result in the
photo scale being 1" = 400'.
III. ORTHO IMAGERY
We will use photogrammetric methods to collect breakline and mass points
from which contouzs will be generated at a 5-foot contour interval accuracy.
All mapping will meet or exceed National Map Accuracy Standards as per
sample provided, except where ground is obscured by vegetation or
43460 Ridge Park Drive, Suite 170
Temecula, California 92590
909-695.5596 Tel
g09-695-5597 Fax
wv~v.l~rojectdesien.com
File: T0 b42R2
October 30, 2001
Page 2 of 4
shadow. Contours in obscured areas will be dashed and appropriately
labeled. Area "A" will be a total of 320 models and 165 orthophotos,
requiring 10 flight lines, and 15 H/V points and 8 check points. Ama "B"
will be a total of 241 models and 120 orthophotos, requiring 16 flight lines,
and 27 H/V points.
IV.
DELIVERABLES
A. 5' digital contours and DTM data in AutoCAD R2000 DWG format for both
areas "A" and "B".
B. Orthophoto imagery for Area "A" in geo-tiff file format at 1-foot pixel
resolution, a world geo-references file, (.tfw) and a 5' contour overlay file.
C. Orthophoto imagery for Area "B" in geo-tiff file format at .25-foot pixel
resolution, a world geo-references file, (.trw) and a 5' contour overlay file.
D. Raster Digital Elevation Model, (DEM), in Geo-tiff file format.
V. COMPENSATION
Ao
Photogrammetry- Area A
Orthophotos: Area A
Are. aB
Survey: Area A
AreaB
Color Aerial Photography: Area "A"
Area"B"
Aerial Triangulation: Area "A"
Area "B"
Scanning - Area "A"
Area "B"
Total Contract:
$160,000.00
$ 34,000.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 16,250.00
$ 18,000.00
$ 20,000.0o
$ 18,700.00
$ 20,0O0.00
$ 17,100.00
$ 4,750.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 335,800.00
VI. PAYMENT SCt-lg~ULE
File: T01-42R2
October 30, 2001
Page 3 of 4
Each phase will be billed on completion and net less 10% withheld due 30 days
from invoice. The 10% withheld will be due with next phase billing pending
acceptance of quality and completeness of delivered phase.
Phase 1 -Survey: Area "A" $ 16,250.00
Area"B" $ 18,000.00
Color Aerial Photography: Area "A" $ 20,000.00
Area"B" $ 18,700.00
Phase 1 Total
Phase 2 - Aerial Triangulation:
Scanning -
Area "A"
Area "B"
Phase 2 Total
$ 72,950.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 17,100.00
$ 4,750.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 44,850.00
Phase 3 ~ Deliverables (1 of 8 areas) Area "A"
Phase 3 Total
Phase 4 - Deliverables (2 of 8 mas)) Area "A"
Phase 4 Total
Phase 5 - Deliverables (3 of 8 areas) Area "A"
Phase 5 Total
Phase 6 - Deliverables (4 of 8 areas) Area "A"
Phase 6 Total
Phase 7 - Deliverables (5 of 8 areas) Area "A"
Phase 7 Total
Phase 8 - Deliverables (6 of 8 areas) Area "A"
Phase 8 Total
Phase 9 - Deliverables (7 of 8 areas) Area
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250..00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00'
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.O0
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
File: T01-42R2
October 30, 2001
Page 4 of 4
Phase 10 - Deliverables (8 of 8 areas)
Phase 11 - Deliverables
Total Contract:
Phase 9 Total
Area "A"
Phase 10 Total
Area "B"
VII. DELIVERY SCHEDULE
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,250.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 335,800.00
Phase 1 will be completed within 15 working days from contract signing,
(weather permitting).
Phase 2 will be completed within 30 working days from Phase 1 completion.
Phase 3 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 4 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 5 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 6 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 7 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 8 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 9 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase 10 will be completed within 18 working days from Phase 2 completion.
Phase I I will be completed within 45 working days from Phase 2 completion.
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
AND THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
FOR
ACQUISITION OF AERIAL IMAGERY & DIGITAL ELEVATION DATA
[RCWD PROJECT NO. D1065]
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of December '11,200'1, between RANCHO
CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT, a California Water District existing and operating under
Division 13 of the California Water Code, hereinafter referred to as "RCWD" and the CITY OF
TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY". in consideration of the
mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
Section I. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish
the reimbursement to RCWD by the CITY for the cost of acquisition of aerial imagery & digital
elevation data [RCWD PROJECT NO. D1065] hereinafter referred to as the "PROJECT".
RCWD shall provide the [imaging data to the CITY for the CITY's use.
Section Ii. CITY shall reimburse RCWD for cost (hereinafter referred to as
"REIMBURSEMENT"), for the acquisition of aerial imagery & digital elevation data for the
PROJECT as follows:
Items
CITY Reimbursement Costs
100% of the Costs associated with Area B
30% of the Costs associated with Area A
$ 80,800.00
$ 76,500.00
Total $157,300.00
Section III. Costs are based on the signed agreement (copy attached), dated November 1,
2001, between RCWE and Project Design Consultant's (hereinafter referred to as the
"CONSULTANT"). The CITY has reviewed and approved RCWD's signed agreement with the
CONSULTANT prior to the commencement of the work on the PROJECT. Prior to the approval
of any change orders associated with the acquisition of aerial imagery & digital elevation data,
RCWD shall obtain written approval from the CITY before authorizing the CONSULTANT to
proceed. RCWD shall make payment to the CONSULTANT for the work performed. Actual
costs shall be identified and billed to the CITY for payment on the following basis:
RCWD shall invoice the CITY on an as-completed basis for the work completed
by the CONSULTANT. The CITY shall remit payment to RCWD within 25 days
of receipt of invoice.
1
R:~agrm ts\LDAgrmts\ReimburseagreeRCW D aedal
Section IV. It is acknowledged that the CITY has reviewed and approved the scope of work for
the acquisition of aerial imagery & digital elevation data and has approved the cost as
reasonable. Management and administration for the acquisition of aerial imagery & digital
elevation data shall be performed by RCWD for the PROJECT. RCWD agrees to designate
Andrew Webster, Planning & Capital Projects Manager as the contact for RCWD in regards to
this agreement. The CITY agrees to designate Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public
Works or John De Gange, GIS Administrator as a point of contact for the CITY to facilitate the
reimbursements identified herein.
Section V. All aerial imagery & digital elevation data will remain the exclusive property of
RCWD. Authorized use of the aerial imagery & digital elevation data has been reserved by
RCWD for the CONSULTANT. RCWD herby authorizes unlimited use of all aerial imagery &
digital elevation data for the scope of work associated with Area A will remain the exclusive right
RCWD. Re-sale of the aerial imagery & digital elevation data for the scope of work associated
with Area B will remain the exclusive right of the CITY.
Section VI. All notices under this Agreement shall be sent as follows:
CITY:
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attn: Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Directory of Public Works or;
John De Gange, GIS Administrator
RCWD:
Rancho California Water District
42135 Winchester Road
Temecula, CA 92590
Attn: Andrew Webster, Planning & Capital Projects Manager
2
R:\agrmts\LDAgrmts\Reim burseagreeRCWO aerial
Either party may change its address for notices by notifying the other party. This Agreement is
dated as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
John F. Hennigar, General Manager
3
R:~agrmts\LDAgrmts\Reimbu rseagreeRCW D aerial
ITEM 9
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OFTEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY .,y'f ./,'ur2 II
DIRECTOR OF FINAN_~E_~__
CITY MANAGER ~_J/_~') /
/
'"~'~[~/illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
December 11, 2001
Contractor Pre-Qualifications for the Community Theater (Mercantile Building
Seismic Retrofit) Project No. PW01-20CSD
PREPARED BY:
Greg Butler, Senior Engineer- Capital Projects
Ward Maxwell, Associate Engineer- Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the Department of Public Works to
solicit and pre-qualify contractors to perform the work required for the Seismic Retrofit of the
Community Theater (Mercantile Building) Project No. PW01-20CSD.
BACKGROUND: The Mercantile Building was purchased by the City of Temecula in
September, 1998. The Building is a historically significant structure in Old Town Temecula.
Because un-reinforced masonry buildings require contractors that have recent proven experience in
Seismic Retrofit, the Public Works Department has prepared a Request for Qualifications to send to
contractors interested in performing the work.
After the interested contractors have been pre-qualified the Public Works Department will request
that the City Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public
Works to solicit bids from the qualified contractors.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
~genda repo~0111211~pw~120 pre qualify
ITEM 10
ORDINANCE NO. 01-16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP ALONG BOTH SIDES OF A PORTION OF RIDGE
PARK DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0460)
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted General Plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the Zoning Map to accurately reflect private
property and to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on October 17,
2001, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the City
Zoning Map and Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula
Library, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on November 13,
2001 to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Amendments To The City Zonin.q Map The City Council hereby amends the
Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecuia for the following parcels by changing the zoning
designations from Light Industrial to Business Park:
A. 940-310-015;
B. 940-310-016;
C. 940-310-027;
D. 940-310-028;
E. 940-310-029;
F. 940-310-030;
G. 940-310-031;
H. 940-310-032;
I. 940-310-040;
J. 940-310-044;
K. 940-310-045;
L. 940-310-046;
M. 940-310-047; and,
N. 940-310-048.
R:Ords 2001/Ords 01-16 1
Section 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby finds that the
environmental impacts associated with this change of zone were identified, analyzed and
addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan that was certified on
November 9, 1993.
Section 3. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it
would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of
the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or
otherwise invalid.
Section 4. Certification. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the
passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the
manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December, 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 01-16 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of November, 2001 and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 11th
day of December, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
OOUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:Ords 2001 / Ords 01-16 2
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:53
P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President
Stone presiding.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS:
Comerchero, Naggar, Robeds, Stone
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Pratt
Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No input.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes from November 13, 2001;
MOTION: Director Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Director Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of
Director Pratt who was absent.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
Community Services Director Parker invited the community to the following upcoming Holiday
events: the Temecula Tree Lighting Ceremony on Thursday, November 29, 2001, at 6:00 P.M., at
the Duck Pond; the Temecula Electric Light Parade on Friday, November 30, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., on
Jefferson Avenue; and Breakfast with Santa on Saturday, December 15, 2001, at the Community
Recreation Center.
President Stone requested that at the January 8, 2002, meeting, a report with photographs be
provided to the District with regard to the Chaparral High School pool. In light of its first year
success, Mr. Stone as well requested that the Community Services D~ ~artment further expand and
establish the Summer Months Activities and Recreation in Temecula 'S. M.A.R. T.) Program for the
upcoming summer.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
General Manager Nelson as well invited the community to the upcoming Holiday events.
Minutes,csd\112701 1
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
No comments.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:56 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, December 11, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Jeffrey E. Stone, President
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
Minutes.csd\112701 2
ITEM 2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTOR~
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
General Manager/Board of Directors
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
December 11, 2001
Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
PREPARED BY:
Karen Jester, Assistant Finance Directo~
Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and
Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
file the Financial
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the
Community Services District for the three months ended September 30, 2001 Please see the
attached financial statements for an analytical review of financial activity.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2001
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for
the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Combining Balance Sheet as of
September 30, 2001
and the
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balance
For The Three Months Ended
September 30, 2001
(Unaudited)
Prepared by the Finance Department
Temecula Cormnunity Services District
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Due from other funds
Total assets
Parks& Service Service
Recreation Level B Level C
$ 732,689 $ 48 $ 17,349
113,324 7,1M5 169,880
18,178
864,191 $ 7,093 $ 187~29
Liabilities and fund balances:
Liabilities:
Other current liabilities
Fund balmxces:
Reserved
Designated
Total fund balances
Total liabilities
and fund balances
$ 130,743 $ 50 $ 48,980
130,743 50 48,980
692,188 7,043 94~72
41,260 43,777
733,448 7,043 138~49
$ 864,191 $ 7,093 $ 187,229
Please note that these balances are unaudited
Temecula Community Services District
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30,2001
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Due from other funds
Total assets
Service Service Debt
Level D Level R Service Total
142,482 $
50,836
193,318 $
17,765 $ 502,983 $ 1,413,316
654 8,634 350,373
18,178
18,419. $ 511,617 $ 1,781,867
Liabilities mid fund balances:
Liabilities:
Other current liabilities
Fund balances:
Reserved
Designated
Total fund balances
Total liabilities
and fund balances
15,628 $
15,628
0 $ 4,180 $ 199,58I
0 4,180 199,581
177,690
18A19
503,303 1,297,006
4,134 285,280
177,690
193,318
18,419
18,419
507,437 1,582,286
__ $ 511,617 $ 1,781,867
Please note that these balances are unaudited
Temecula Cmmnunity Services District
Citywide Operations
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Encumbr.
Special tax $ 2,626,000
TCSD a&nin fee creditP'REST" 2,117,000 $ 529,250
Recreation programs 604,000 182,957
hwestment interest 40,000 8,525
Miscellaneous 266,000 30,441
Operating transfer in
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
5,653,000 751,173
To~l Peme~
ActiviW of Budget
529,250
182,957
8,525
30,441
751,173
25%
30% (2)
21%
11%
13%
Parks, medians m~d arterial street lighting 3,640,340 727,587 $ 591,009 1,318,596 36% (3)
Seniors 153,531 38,473 6,171 44,644 29%
Cmmnunity Recreation Center (CRC) 406,830 79,490 49,429 128,919 32°/6 (4)
Recreation programs 431,385 145,824 16,773 162,597 38% (4)
Teinecula Commmfity Center (TCC) 141,850 27,399 6,422 33,821 24%
Museum 175,050 30,354 7,996 38,350 22%
Aquatics 339,654 71,828 7,807 79,635 23%
Sports 168,920 36,956 4,594 41,550 25%
Children's Museum 165,540 2,549 1,987 4,536 3%
Operating transfers out 465,000
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beghmthg Fmld Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
6,088,100 1,160,460 692,188 1,852,648
(435,100) (409,287)
1,142,735 1,142,735
$ 707,635 $ 733,448
(1) Special tax is primarily received in January and May each fiscal year.
(2) The variance is due to seasonal activities for recreation programs during July and August.
(3) The variance is due to increase in energy lighting during the summer for all recreatianal parks.
(4) The vafimme is primarily due to seasonal personnel costs for recreation progranm
30%
Temecula CollllllUllity Services District
Service Level B
Residential Street Lights
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance ~ Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Revenues:
Assessments
h~vestment interest
Street lighting fees
Miscellaneous
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Salaries & Wages
Street lighting
Miscellaneous
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begimfing Fund Balance, July 1,2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
$ 420,000 0
2,000 $ 510
31,000 1,620
87,000
540,000 2,130
3,370 614
596,100 100,814
20,000
619,470 101N2g
(99,298)
106,34l 106,341
106,341 $ 7,043
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budget
$ 510
1,620
0
2,130
614
100,814
101,428
(1)
5%
0%
0%
18%
17%
O%
16%
Notes:
(l) Special tax is primarily received in January and May each fiscal >'ear.
Temecula Cormnunity Services District
Service Level C
Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenm~ce
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30,200I
Revenues:
Assessments $ 985,000
Investment interest 20,000 $ 3,172
Plan check and inspections 40,000 600
Miscellaneous 12,000.
Total Revenues 1,057,000 3,772
Expenditures:
Salaries and wages 184,880 26,129
Landscape maintenance 630,000 121,002 $
Utilities 260,000 69,722
Other expenditures 126,500 5,425
Total Expenditures 1,201,380 222,278
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (144,380) (218,506)
Begimfing Fund Balance, July 1,2001 356,755 356,755
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001 $ 212,375 $ 138,249
Annual
Amended YTD Total Percent
Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget
(1)
$ 3.172 16%
600 2%
0 0%
3,772
0%
26,129 I4%
408,006 529,008 84% (2)
69,722 27% (3)
43,221 48,646 38%
451,227 673,505.
56%
Notes:
(1) Assessments are primarily received in Januaxy and May each fiscal year.
(2) The variance is primarily due to encmnbrances that are recorded for landscape maintenance services for the entire year.
(3) The vafim~ce is primarily due to the seasonal utility water usage.
Temecula Canununity Services District
Service Level D
Refuse Collection, Recycling and Street Sweeping
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Chm~ges in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Assessmeuts
Grants
h~vestment interest
Recycling Program
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Salaries and wages
Refuse hauling
Other expenditures
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July l, 2001
Euding Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
~nual
Panended YTD Total
Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity
3,030,000
15,000 $ 0
20,000 1,482
5.000 0
3,070,000 1,482
Percent
of Budget
0
1,482
0
1,482
(l)
7%
0%
0%
26,240 5,335 5,335 20%
3,030,330 (2)
37,740 8,273 4,988 13,261 35%
3,094,310 13,608 4,988 I8,596 1%
(24,310) (12,126)
189,816 189,816
$ 165,50~65 177,69~0
(1) Assessments are primarily received in January and May each fiscal year.
(2) Refuse hauling payments are ~nade semi-annually in Janumy and July.
Temecula Commmfity Services Distr/ct
Service Level R
Streets mid Roads
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures end Changes in Fund Balence - Budget and Actual
For the Tkree Months Ended September 30, 200 l
Assessments
InvesUnent interest
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Emergency street maintenence
Other expenditures
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fund Balence, July 1,2001
Ending Fmid Balance, September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
$ 12,000
1,000 $
13,000
17,080
80
17,160
(4,160)
18,236
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budget
183 $
183
0
183
18,236
$ 14,076 $ 18,419
183
183
(1)
18%
1%
0%
0%
Notes:
(1) Assessments are primarily received in Jenuary end May each fiscal year.
Temecula Coxmnunity Services District
Debt Service Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fm~d Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Operating transfers in
investment interest
Total Revenues
Expeuditures:
Debt service - principal
Debt service - interest
Other expenditures
Total Expenditures
Reve~mes Over/(Under) Expenditures
Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fm~d Balm~ce, September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
$ 465,000
35,000 0
500,000 0
225,000
268,280
6,300 $ 4,178
499,580 4,178
420 (4,178)
511,615 511,615
$ 512,035 $ 507,437
Encumbr.
Total
Activity
0
0
4,500 8,678
4,500 8,678
Percent
of Budget
(1)
(2)
O%
(3)
(3)
138%
2%
Notes:
(1) The variance in operating transfers in is due to timing.
(2) The variance is due interest received in October
(3) Debt service payments are made in October and April each year.
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:56
P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
ROLLCALL
PRESET: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Stone
Roberts
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBER: Pratt
Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No input.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of November 13, 2001.
MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion
was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception
of Agency Member Pratt who was absent.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
No additional comments.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
No comment.
AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS
No comments.
R:\Minutes.rda\112701 1
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:57 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, December 11, 2001, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
Ron Roberts, Chairman
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
R:\Minutes.rda\112701 2
ITEM 2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE DIRECTOR
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
December 11 2001
Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
PREPARED BY:
Karen Jester, Assistant Finance Directer=~
Pascale Brown, Senior Accountant~'~
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members receive and file the Financial Statements
for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the
Redevelopment Agency for the three months ended September 30, 2001 Please see the
attached financial statements for an analytical review of financial activity.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2001
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for
the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2001
and the
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in
Fund Balance For The Three Months Ended
September 30, 2001
(Unaudited)
Prepared by the Finance Department
Temecula Redevelopment Agency
Combining Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2001
Assets:
Cash and investments
Receivables
Lemd held for resale
Total assets
Low/Mod CIP Debt
Fund Fund Service Total
$ 5,690,737 $
1,712,094
$ 7,402,831 $
1,308,088 $ 2,894,924 $ 9,893,749
348,631 210,644 2,271,369
2,103,053 2,103,053
3,759,772 $ 3,105,568 $ 14,268,171
Liabilities mid fund balances:
Liabilities:
Other current liabilities
Deferred revenue
Total liabilities
Fund balances:
Reserved
Designated
Undesignated
Total fund balances
Total liabilities
and fund balances
$ 26,372 $ 407,430
952,167 162,059
811,018 $ 1,244,820
1,114,226
978,539 569,489 811,018
6,424,292
2,359,O46
11,909,125
4,035,913 $ 1,448,920
(845,630) 845,630
6,424,292 3,190,283 2,294,550 11,909,125
$ 7,402,831
$ 3,759,772 $ 3,105,568 $ 14,268,171
Please note that these balances are unaudited
City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency
Stalement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Redevelopment Agency Low/Moderate Income Housing
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Budget Activity
Property tax incren~ent $ 1,867,000 $ 11,277
Investment interest 165,000 60,425
Rental income 30,000 15,706
Miscellm~eous 7,000
Total Revenues
2,069,000 87,408
Total Percent
Encumbr. Activity of Budget
$ 11.277
60,425
15,706
87,408
1o/; (1)
37% (2)
52% (3)
4%
Expenditures: Salaries and ~vages
Operating and administrative expenditures
Homebuyer programs
Residential rehabilitation progrmns
Housing development & acquisition
Afthrdable housing / future obligatien
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fuad Balance, July 1,2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
196,310 38,870 38,870
297,953 51,118 $ 41,175 92,293
200,000
846,664 64,144 19,570 83,714
5,065J51
305,000 305,000 305,000
6,911.378 459,132 60,745 519,877
(4,842,378) (371,724)
6,796,016 6,796,016
$ 1,953,638 $ 6,424,29~2
20%
31%
(4)
10%
(4)
100% (5)
8%
Notes:
(1) Property tax increment is received in January and May each fiscal year.
(2) The variance is due primarily to greater thm~ anticipated cash balance at the beginning of the fiscal year.
(3) The variance is due to annual lease payment received from Mission Village (Allkm Housing) in Sept.
(4) The variance is due to housing programs not yet started.
(5) The variance is due to the aunual payment to Temecula Gardens L.P. being issued in the first quarter.
City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Redevelopment Agency-CIP
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended YTD
Revenues: Budget Activity
h~vestment interest $ 30,000 $ 8,941
Rental income 180,000 45,000
Loan interest 14,000 3,442
Reimbursements
Operating transfers in 2,645,680 202,000
Total Revenues 2,869,680 259,383
Capital Projects (4):
First Street bridge
Public Restrooms Adjacent to O.T.
Gateway Landscape OT
280-807 269,347 78,635
280-821 1,223 127
280-833 50,000
Encmnbr.
195,693
1,096
Total
Activity
8,941
45,000
3,442
202,000
259,383
274,328
1,223
Percent
of Budget
30% (l)
25%
25%
8%
9%
102%
100%
Salaries and wages
Operating and administrative expenditures
Ovaier participation agreements
Old Town plan implemantation
Old Town development incentives
Old Tovm building facades
Banner program
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begimfing Fund Balance, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
80,040 17,451 17,451
288,807 46,450 24,820 71,270
300,000
98,980 27,250 38,067 65,317
200,000
140,545 38,572 28,070 66,642
2,000
1,430,942 208,485 287,746 496,231
1,438,738 50,898
3,139,385 3,139,385
$ 4,578,123 $ 3,190,283
22%
25%
(2)
66% (3)
47% (4)
35%
Notes;
(l) The variance is due to greater than anticipated cash balance at the beginning of the fiscal year.
(2) The Costco ov~er participation agreement is not paid until April of each fiscal year.
(3) The variance is due increasing activities in Old Town during summer
(4) The variance is due to increasing fagade improvement projects th Old Town
City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Redevelopment Agency - Debt Service
For the Three Months Ended September 30, 2001
Annual
Amended xFiT)
Budget Activity
Percent
of Budget
Revenues:
Property tax increment $ 7,471,000 36,764
h~vestment interest 150,000 $ 42,835
Advauces from other funds 18,937
Deferred passthrough 2,157,000
Total Revenues 9,778,000 98,536
Expenditures:
Passthrough agreements
Debt service - principal
Debt service - interest
Trustees ad~nin fees
Operating transfers out
Total Expenditures
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures
Begi~ming Fuad Balaa~ce, July 1, 2001
Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 2001
5,616,000 14,667
1,810,000
1,075,140 360,007
7,500 4,554
2,645,680 202,000
11,154,320 581,228
(1,376,320) (482,692)
2,777,242 2,777,242
1,400,922 $ 2,294,55~0
0% (1)
29%
(2)
1%
0% (2)
(3)
33% (3)
61%
8%
5%
Notes:
(1) Property tax increment is received in January and May each fiscal year.
(2) Passthroughs are recognized when the property tax increment is received (see note I).
(3) Debt service payments on the tax allocation bonds are made in August and Febrtmty each year.
TEMECULA PUBLIC
FINANCING AUTHORITY
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public Financing Authority was called to order at
7:57 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4
BOARD MEMBERS:
Naggar, Roberts, Stone, and
Comerchero.
ABSENT:
0 BOARD MEMBER:
Pratt.
Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No input.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of June 26, 2001.
MOTION: Board Member Roberts moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The
motion was seconded by Board Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval
with the exception of Board Member Pratt who was absent.
At this time the City Council, the Temecula Community Services
Temecuia Public Financing Authority convened in a joint meeting.
AUTHORITY BUSINESS
District, and the
2 Certificates of Participation to Refund the Temecula Public Facilities Financing
Corporation Certificates of Participation (Community Recreation Project), Series 1992,
and to finance new recreational facilities
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
R:minutes.tpfa\112701 1
RESOLUTION NO. 01-'103
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF
CERTAIN INSTALLMENT SALE FINANCING DOCUMENTS,
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING DISTRIBUTION OF A
PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH
THE OFFERING AND SALE OF CERTIFICATES OF
PARTICIPATION RELATING THERETO, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING EXECUTION OF A PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND
DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO
2.2 That the Public Financing Authority adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN INSTALLMENT
SALE FINANCING DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO
2.3 That the Community Services District adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS, IN
CONNECTION WITH THE REFUNDING OF THE
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (COMMUNITY
RECREATION PROJECT), SERIES 1992, AND DIRECTING
CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO
For Board Member Naggar, City Attorney Thorson clarified that the proximity of his residence
would not be a conflict of interest with respect to Agenda Item No. 2 since this issue would not
affect the value of any of the surrounding property, and there would be no changes in the
physical plant, or the operations of this use.
Director of Finance Roberts provided the staff repod (of record), noting the intent to take
advantage the historically Iow interest rates, relaying that by extending the amortization for an
additional ten years, the City would generate between $2.6-$2.8 million.
City Attorney Thorson noted that each resolution should be acted on individually.
MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to approve the staff's recommendation regarding Item
2.1. The motion was seconded by Board Member Naggar and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Board Member Pratt who was absent..
MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to approve the staff's recommendationregarding Item
No. 2.2. The motion was seconded by Board Member Naggar and voice vote reflected approval
w/th the exception of Board Member Pratt who was absent.
R:minutes.tpfa\112701 2
MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to approve the staff's recommendation regarding Item
No. 2.3. The motion was seconded by Board Member Roberts and voice vote reflected
approval with the exception of Board Member Pratt who was absent.
At 8:01 P.M. the City Council and the Community Services District meeting recessed.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Executive Director Nelson advised that the proceeds generated from the action taken on Item No.
2 would be considered by the City Council during the upcoming Capitol Improvement Program
process.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS
Board Member Naggar, echoed by Board Member Stone, commended staff for their excellent
work regarding Item No. 2, additionally commending the residents for passing Measure C.
In response to Board Member Stone, Executive Director Nelson relayed that Director of Finance
Roberts was the staff member who was responsible for the refinancing concept (at a
significantly lower interest rate) regarding Item No. 2, commending Director of Finance Robeds
for her diligent efforts.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:03 P.M., the Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned.
Jeff Comerchero, Chairman
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
R:minutes.tpfa\112701 3
ITEM 2
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANC~
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Temecula Public Financing Authority
Executive Director Shawn Nelson
December 11, 2001
Formation of Community Facilities District
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the Authority adopt the resolutions entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO
ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO AUTHORIZE
THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO
INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE PROPOSED TEMECULA
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
NO. 0t-2 (HARVESTON)
BACKGROUND: Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Lennar") and Winchester Hills I LLC, a
California limited liability company (collectively, the "Landowners") have requested that the
Authority form a community facilities district to assist in the defeasance of the Winchester Hills
Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) Special Tax
Bonds, 1998 Series A (the "Prior Bonds"), as well as the funding of various public
improvements and the provision of lake and park maintenance services in the Winchester Hills
area of the City of Temecula. The City and the Redevelopment Agency created the Authority
earlier this year, by execution of a joint exercise of powers agreement, to provide an
independent governmental entity that could consider the formation of community facilities
districts and act as the issuer of any community facilities district bonds.
The Authority will consider the adoption of two resolutions related to the formation of a
community facilities district. The CFD will only include land owned by the petitioning
Landowners. The Landowners have requested that the CFD issue bonds to refinance the
outstanding Prior Bonds which are secured by liens on the property proposed to be included in
the CFD, as well as to fund various roadway, storm drain and park improvements required by a
development agreement between the City of Temecula and Lennar, and to provide funds to pay
certain lake and park maintenance costs for a lake and park that are to have public access and
are located within the area of the proposed CFD. City Staff is studying the propriety of
including the funding of lake and park maintenance services in the CFD and may, prior to the
expected formation of the CFD in January, recommend that lake and park maintenance
services not be included as eligible purposes of the proposed CFD.
Lennar has agreed to pay all City and Authority costs related to the proposed CFD formation
and bond issue, and has submitted a deposit/reimbursement agreement with respect thereto.
The bonds would be payable solely from special taxes levied on land in the CFD and collected
by the Authority.
SPECIFIC ACTIONS: In order to be in a position to consider the formation of the community
facilities district in January of 2002, the Authority will consider adoption of two resolutions of
intention relative to the proposed community facilities district. These resolutions call for public
hearings on January 22, 2002 on the formation of the community facilities district and the
issuance of bonds, and otherwise specify the boundaries of the CFD (by reference to a map on
file with the City Clerk, as Secretary of the Authority) the rate and method of apportionment of
special taxes to be levied solely on land in the CFD to repay the bonds and to fund any lake and
park maintenance service, and describe in general terms the liens proposed to be refinanced.
FISCAL IMPACT: Lennar has agreed to pay all out of pocket expenses incurred relative to the
proposed financing. Costs of issuance of the proposed bond issue will be paid from the
proceeds of the bonds to be issued by the Authority. All annual costs of administering the
bonds issued and any annual lake and park maintenance services to be funded by the CFD will
be paid by special taxes levied on the properties in the community facilities district.
The bonds will not be obligations of the City or the Redevelopment Agency, but will be limited
obligations of the Authority, payable solely from special taxes levied on land in the community
facilities district.
Attachments: Resolutions (2)
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE
PROPOSED TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2 (HARVESTON)
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors has this date adopted its Resolution entitled "A
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority Declaring Its
Intention to Establish a Community Facilities District and To Authorize the Levy of Special
Taxes Therein," stating its intention to form a community facilities district pursuant to the Mello-
Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the "Law"), for the purpose of financing $5,150,000 of
the costs of certain public improvements (the "Facilities"), funding certain annual maintenance
services costs and to defease the Winchester Hills Financing Authority Community Facilities
District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) Special Tax Bonds, 1998 Series A (the "Prior Bonds") which
Prior Bonds are secured by a special tax lien on parcels in the proposed community facilities
district, as further provided in said Resolution; and
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors estimates the amount required for the financing of
$5,150,000 of the costs of the Facilities and the financing of the costs of defeasing the Prior
Bonds to be the sum of $11,200,000; and
WHEREAS, in order to finance said Facilities and defease said Prior Bonds it is
necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in the amount of not to exceed $25,000,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Public Financing Authority as follows:
Section 1. It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness within the boundaries of the
proposed Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-2
(Harveston) (the "District") in the amount of not to exceed $25,000,000 to finance the costs of
the Facilities and the costs of defeasing the Prior Bonds.
Section 2. The bonded indebtedness is proposed to be incurred for the purpose of
financing $5,150,000 of the costs of the Facilities and the financing of the costs of defeasing
the Prior Bonds, including costs incidental to or connected with the accomplishment of said
purposes and of the financing thereof.
Section 3. This Board of Directors, acting as legislative body for the District, intends to
authorize the issuance and sale of bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of
$25,000,000, bearing interest payable semi-annually or in such other manner as this Board of
Directors shall determine, at a rate not to exceed the maximum rate of interest as may be
authorized by applicable law at the time of sale of such bonds, and maturing not to exceed
forty (40) years from the date of the issuance of said bonds.
Section 4. Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, in the regular meeting place of this Board of Directors, City Council
Chambers, Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, be, and the
same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place when and where this Board of
Directors, as legislative body for the District, will conduct a public hearing on the proposed debt
issue and consider and finally determine whether the public interest, convenience and
necessity require the issuance of bonds of the Authority for the District.
Section 5. The Secretary is hereby directed to cause notice of said public hearing to
be given by publication one time in a newspaper of general circulation circulated within the
District. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven (7) days before the
date herein set for said public hearing. The notice shall substantially in the form of Exhibit A
hereto.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Public Financing Authority at a meeting held on the 11th day of December, 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Chairperson
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Authority Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan Jones, Secretary of the Temecula Public Financing Authority, HEREBY DO
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. TPFA 01- was duly adopted at a s[ecial
meeting of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority on the 11 day
of December, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
BOARDMEMBERS:
BOARDMEMBERS:
BOARDMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City ClerWAuthority Secretary
-2-
EXHIBIT A
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2
(HARVESTON)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that on December 11, 2001, the Board of Directors of the
Temecula Public Financing Authority adopted a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the Board
of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority Declaring Its Intention To Incur Bonded
Indebtedness of the Proposed Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities
District No. 01-2 (Harveston)." Pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982,
the Board of Directors of the Authority hereby gives notice as follows:
A. The text of said Resolution is as follows:
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors has this date adopted its Resolution entitled
"A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority
Declaring Its Intention to Establish a Community Facilities District and To Authorize the
Levy of Special Taxes Therein," stating its intention to form a community facilities
district pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the "LAW'), for the
purpose of financing $5,150,000 of the costs of certain public improvements (the
"Facilities"), funding certain annual maintenance services costs and to defease the
Winchester Hills Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester
Hills) Special Tax Bonds, 1998 Series A (the "Prior Bonds") which Prior Bonds are
secured by a special tax lien on parcels in the proposed community facilities district, as
further provided in said Resolution; and
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors estimates the amount required for the
financing of $5,150,000 of the costs of the Facilities and the financing of the costs of
defeasing the Prior Bonds to be the sum of $11,200,000; and
WHEREAS, in order to finance said Facilities and defease said Prior Bonds it is
necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in the amount of not to exceed $25,000,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the
Temecula Public Financing Authority as follows:
Section 1. It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness within the boundaries
of the proposed Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No.
01-2 (Harveston) (the "District") in the amount of not to exceed $25,000,000 to finance
the costs of the Facilities and the costs of defeasing the Prior Bonds.
Section 2. The bonded indebtedness is proposed to be incurred for the purpose
of financing $5,150,000 of the costs of the Facilities and the financing of the costs of
defeasing the Prior Bonds, including costs incidental to or connected with the
accomplishment of said purposes and of the financing thereof.
A-I
Section 3. This Board of Directors, acting as legislative body for the District,
intends to authorize the issuance and sale of bonds in the maximum aggregate
principal amount of $25,000,000, bearing interest payable semi-annually or in such
other manner as this Board of Directors shall determine, at a rate not to exceed the
maximum rate of interest as may be authorized by applicable law at the time of sale of
such bonds, and maturing not to exceed forty (40) years from the date of the issuance
of said bonds.
Section 4. Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard, in the regular meeting place of this Board of Directors, City
Council Chambers, Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California, be, and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place
when and where this Board of Directors, as legislative body for the District, will conduct
a public hearing on the proposed debt issue and consider and finally determine
whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require the issuance of bonds
of the Authority for the District.
Section 5. The Secretary is hereby directed to cause notice of said public
hearing to be given by publication one time in a newspaper of general circulation
circulated within the District. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least
seven (7) days before the date herein set for said public hearing. The notice shall
substantially in the form of Exhibit A hereto.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
B. The hearing referred to in the aforesaid Resolution shall be at the time and
place specified in the Resolution.
C. At that time and place any person interested, including persons owning
property in the area of the proposed community facilities district, will be heard upon the
proposed debt issue.
Dated: January __, 2002
/s/ Susan W. Jones, CMC
Secretary,
Temecula Public Financing Authority
A-2
RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT '
AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN
WHEREAS, under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, constituting
Section 53311 et seq. of the California Government Code (the "LAW'), this Board of Directors
may commence proceedings for the establishment of a community facilities district; and
WHEREAS, there have been submitted to this Board of Directors a Petition (Including
Waiver) of Lennar Homes of California, Inc. and a Petition (Including Waiver) of Winchester
Hills I LLC (collectively, the "Petitions"), requesting the formation by this Board of Directors of a
community facilities district under the Law to be known as the Temecula Public Financing
Authority Community Facilities Distdct No. 01-2 (Harveston) (the "District"); and
WHEREAS, under the Law, this Board of Directors is the legislative body for the
proposed District and is empowered with the authority to establish the District and levy special
taxes within the District; and
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors now desires to proceed with the actions necessary
to consider the establishment of the District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Public Financing Authority as follows:
Section 1. This Board of Directors proposes to begin the proceedings necessary to
establish the District pursuant to the Law. Receipt of the Petitions to form the District is hereby
acknowledged.
Section 2. The name proposed for the District is Temecula Public Financing Authority
Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston).
Section 3. The proposed boundaries of the District are as shown on the map of the
District on file with the Secretary, which boundaries are hereby preliminarily approved. The
Secretary is hereby directed to record, or cause to be recorded, the map of the boundaries of
the District in the office of the County Recorder as soon as practicable after the adoption of
this Resolution.
Section 4. The type of public facilities (the "Facilities") and maintenance services (the
"(Services") proposed to be eligible for funding by the District and pursuant to the Law shall
consist of those items listed on Exhibit A hereto under the heading "Facilities" and "Services,"
respectively, which Exhibit is by this reference incorporated herein. It is also proposed that the
District provide the funds necessary to defease the outstanding Winchester Hills Financing
Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) Special Tax Bonds, 1998
Series A (the "Prior Bonds"), which Prior Bonds are secured by a special tax lien imposed on
the pamels proposed to be included in the District.
The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to enter into a joint community
facilities agreement with the City of Temecula and any other public entity that will own and/or
operate any of the Facilities, such agreements to be in a form provided by Bond Counsel.
Section 5. Except to the extent that funds are otherwise available to the District to pay
for the Facilities, the Services and the defeasance of the Prior Bonds and/or pay the principal
and interest as it becomes due on bonds of the District issued to finance the Facilities and to
defease the Prior Bonds, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs thereof, secured by
recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the District, will be
levied within the District and collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property
taxes or in such other manner as this Board of Directors or its designee shall determine,
including direct billing of the affected property owners. The proposed rate and method of
apportionment of the special tax among the parcels of real property within the District, in
sufficient detail to allow each landowner within the proposed District to estimate the maximum
amount such owner will have to pay, and which specifies the tax year after which no further
special tax will be levied on land used for private residential purposes and which otherwise
complies with applicable provisions of the Act is described in Exhibit B attached hereto which
Exhibit is by this reference incorporated herein.
This Board of Directors finds that the provisions of Section 53313.6, 53313.7 and
53313.9 of the California Government Code (relating to adjustments to ad valorem property
taxes and schools financed by a community facilities district) are inapplicable to the District.
Section 6. It is the intention of this Board of Directors, acting as the legislative body for
the District, to cause bonds of the Authority to be issued for the Distdct pursuant to the Law to
finance a portion of the costs of the Facilities and to finance the defeasance of the Prior
Bonds. If so issued, the bonds shall be in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed
$25,000,000, shall bear interest payable semi-annually or in such other manner as this Board
of Directors shall determine, at a rate not to exceed the maximum rate of interest as may be
authorized by applicable law at the time of sale of such bonds, and shall mature not to exceed
40 years from the date of the issuance thereof.
Section 7. This Board of Directors reserves to itself the right and authority to allow any
interested owner of property in the District, subject to the provisions of Section 53344.1 of the
California Government Code and such requirements as it may otherwise impose, and any
applicable prepayment penalties as prescribed in the indenture or fiscal agent agreement for
any bonds of the Authority for the District, to tender to the Treasurer of the Authority in full
payment or part payment of any installment of special taxes or the interest or penalties thereon
which may be due or delinquent, but for which a bill has been received, any bond or other
obligation secured thereby, in the manner described in Section 53344.1 of the California
Government Code.
Section 8. The levy of said proposed special tax shall be subject to the approval of the
qualified electors of the Distdct at a special election. The proposed voting procedure shall be
by mailed or hand-delivered ballot among the landowners in the proposed District, with each
owner having one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land such owner owns in the
District.
Section 9. Except as may otherwise be provided by law or the rate and method of
apportionment of the special tax for the District, all lands owned by any public entity, including
the United States, the State of California and/or the City of Temecula, or any departments or
-2-
political subdivisions of any thereof, shall be omitted from the levy of the special tax to be
made to cover the costs and expenses of the Facilities, the Services, the defeasance of the
Prior Bonds, the issuance of bonds by the Authority for the District and any expenses of the
District.
Section 10. The Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula is hereby directed to
study said proposed Facilities and proposed defeasance of the Prior Bonds and to make, or
cause to be made, and file with the Secretary a report in writing, presenting the following:
(a) A bdef description of the Facilities, the Services and the Prior Bonds.
(b) An estimate of the fair and reasonable cost of providing the Facilities and the
Services, and of defeasing the Prior Bonds, including the incidental expenses in connection
therewith, including the costs of the proposed bond financing, any Authority or City of
Temecula administrative costs and all other related costs.
Said report shall be made a part of the record of the public hearing provided for below.
Section 11. Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, in the regular meeting place of this Board of Directors, City Council
Chambers, Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, be, and the
same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place when and where this Board of
Directors, as legislative body for the District, will conduct a public hearing on the establishment
of the District and consider and finally determine whether the public interest, convenience and
necessity require the formation of the District and the levy of said special tax.
Section 12. The Secretary is hereby directed to cause notice of said public hearing to
be given by publication one time in a newspaper published in the area of the District. The
publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days before the date herein set for
said hearing. Said notice shall be substantially in the form of Exhibit C hereto.
Section 13. The firms of Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates, Albert A. Webb Associates,
Quint & Thimmig LLP and McFarlin & Anderson are hereby designated as financial advisor,
special tax consultant, bond counsel and disclosure counsel, respectively, to the Authority for
the District. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to execute agreements with said firms
for their services related to the District provided that all fees and expenses of such firms are
payable solely from deposits by the landowners in the District or the proceeds of the bonds, if
any, issued by the Authority for the District.
Section 14. _The Board of Directors hereby determines that the contemplated
formation of a community facilities district and issuance of community facilities district special
tax bonds involving the Authority and the District, in accordance with Section 15061(b) of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines is not a "Project," as defined in
Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, and is therefore exempt from the requirements of
CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(d) and 15062, the Secretary is hereby
directed to cause a Notice of Exemption to be prepared, executed and filed in regard to the
foregoing determination.
-3-
Section 15. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Public Financing Authority at a meeting held on the 11th day of December, 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Chairperson
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Authority Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan Jones, Secretary of the Temecula Public Financing Authority, HEREBY DO
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. TPFA 01- was duly adopted at a special
meeting of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority on the 11th day
of December, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
BOARDMEMBERS:
BOARDMEMBERS:
BOARDMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk/Authority Secretary
-4-
EXHIBIT A
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2
(HARVESTON)
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES AND SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY THE DISTRICT AND
PRIOR BONDS TO BE DEFEASED BY THE DISTRICT
FACILITIES
It is intended that the District will finance $5,150,000 of the costs of any of the
following:
Offsite Street and Signal Improvements, including design/engineering, right-of-way and
construction management related to the following:
V.
W.
X.
Rustic Glen Drive at Margarita Road
Margarita Road at South Project Residential
South Project Residential Access Road-Inbound at Internal Loop Access Road
South Project Residential Access Road-Outbound at Internal Loop Access Road
No Signal Controls Needed
East Project Residential Access Road at Internal Loop Access Road
No Signal Control Needed
Winchester Road at Ynez Road
Winchester Road at Margarita Road
Winchester Road at Jefferson Ave.
Winchester Road at 1-15 Southbound Ramp
Margarita Road, Complete East One Half Widening
Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Jefferson Avenue - City of Murrieta
Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Alta Murata Drive - City of Murrieta
Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Margarita Road - County of Riverside
Overland Drive at Jefferson Ave.
Overland Drive at Ynez Road
Overland Drive at Margarita Road
Date Street at Ynez Road
Date St at Service Commercial Access I, No Signal Control Needed
Date St at North Project Residential Access Road
North Project Residential Access Rd Internal Loop Access Road, No Signal
Control Needed
Ynez Road at Service Commercial Access II, No Signal Control Needed
Ynez Road at Service Commercial Access III, No Signal Control Needed
Ynez Road at Service Commercial Access IV
Date Street at Margarita Road
Harveston Backbone Street and Storm Drain Improvements, including design/
engineering and construction management related to the following:
a. Margarita Road, complete improvements from Date Street to Santa Gertrudis
Creek.
b. Date Street, median and southerly one-half between Margarita Road and
A-1
Northerly Entrance Road.
Date Street, full width, Northerly Entrance to Ynez Road
Date Street, full width, Ynez Road to 1-15.
Ynez Road, full width, existing Ynez Road to Date Street
Ynez Road, full width, Date Street to northerly city limits.
Easterly Residential Access Road, full width (Harveston School Road)
Northerly Residential Access Road, full width (Date Street Entry)
Southerly Residential Access Road, full width (Main Entry)
Loop Road, full width, lying adjacent to elementary school.
Loop Road, full width, elementary school to Date Street Entry.
Loop Road, full width Village Center Drive to Main Entry.
Loop Road, full width, Main Entry to Date Street Entry.
Between Planning Area 4 & 6 - 24" storm drain line, from Harveston Drive to
Margarita Road.
Temecula Community Service District - City of Temecula Public Facilities, including
design/engineering and construction management related to the following:
a. Lake Park
Community Park
c. Paseo Park
d. Arroyo Park
SERVICES
Maintenance of an approximately 8.5 acre lake within or in the vicinity of the District,
including but no limited to water supply, chemical treatment, workboat, boat house, boat
operator, spray fountain, skimming, fish replenishment, repair and replacement of lights,
pumps, motors, planting and replacement of reparian plant materials, etc.
Maintenance of approximately 7.5 acres of landscaped parkland located within or in the
vicinity of the District, including an amphitheater, gazebo, tot lot, restroom, trails, benches,
picnic tables and lighting. Maintenance services include, but are not limited to, park
landscaping and irrigation, fertilizing, and maintenance of amphitheater, gazebo, restroom and
tot lot structures.
PRIOR BONDS
It is intended that the District will provide funds necessary to defease the outstanding
Winchester Hills Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills)
Special Tax Bonds, 1998 Series A, which are secured by a special tax lien on property in the
District.
OTHER
The District may also finance any of the following:
1. Bond related expenses, including underwriters discount, reserve fund, capitalized
interest, letter of credit fees and expenses, bond and disclosure counsel fees and expenses,
bond remarketing costs, and all other incidental expenses.
A-2
2. Administrative fees of the Authority, the City of Temecula and the Bond trustee or
fiscal agent related to the District and the Bonds.
3. Reimbursement of costs related to the formation of the District advanced by the
Authority, the City of Temecula, any landowner in the District, or any party related to any of the
foregoing, as well as reimbursement of any costs advanced by the Authority, the City of
Temecula, any landowner in the District or any party related to any of the foregoing, for
facilities, fees or other purposes or costs of the District.
A-3
EXHIBIT B
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2
(HARVESTON)
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
A Special Tax shall be levied and collected on all Taxable Property in the Temecula Public
Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston) ("CFD No. 01-2") each
Fiscal Year in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the
appropriate Special Tax based on the procedures described below. All of the real property
within CFD No. 01-2, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for
the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
"Acre or Acreage" means the land area of an Assessor's Parcel as shown on an Assessor's
Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown
on the applicable final map, parcel map, condominium plan, or other similar recorded County
instrument.
"Act" means the Mello~Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter
2.5, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California.
"Administrative Expenses" means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to
the administration of CFD No. 01-2, including but not limited to: the costs of computing the
Special Taxes and of preparing the annual Special Tax collection schedules (whether by the
CFD Administrator or designee thereof or both); the costs of collecting the Special TaxeS
(whether by the Authority, County, City, or otherwise); the costs of remitting the Special Taxes
to the Trustee for any Bonds; the costs of commencing and pursuing to completion any
foreclosure action arising from delinquent Special Taxes; the costs of the Trustee (including its
legal counsel) in the discharge of the duties required of it under any Indenture; the costs of the
Authority, City or designee in complying with arbitrage rebate and disclosure requirements of
applicable federal and State securities laws, the Act and the California Government Code,
including property owner inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs associated with the
release of funds from any escrow account; the costs of the Authority, City or designee related
to an appeal of the Special Tax; and an allocable share of the salaries of the City staff and City
overhead expense directly relating to the foregoing. Administrative Expenses shall also include
amounts advanced by the City or the Authority for any administrative purposes of CFD No. 01-
2.
"Apartment Property" means any Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which building
permits have been issued for attached residential units which are made available for rental, but
not purchase, by the general public.
B-1
"Assessor's Parcel" means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned
Assessor's Parcel number.
"Assessor's Parcel Map" means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating
parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
"Assigned Special Tax A" means the Special Tax A for each Land Use Class of Developed
Property, as determined in accordance with Section C below.
"Authority" means the Temecula Public Financing Authority.
"Average Interest Rate" means the quotient resulting from the division of (a) the sum of the
interest rates borne by the Variable Rate Bonds on each Wednesday of the previous Fiscal
Year divided by (b) the number of weeks for which the Variable Rate Bonds were outstanding
in such Fiscal Year, as such quotient is calculated by the CFD Administrator. This rate shall be
calculated without regard to the number of Variable Rate Bonds that were outstanding during
the previous Fiscal Year or at the time of calculation.
"Board of Directors" means the Board of Directors of the Authority, acting as the legislative
body of CFD No. 01-2.
"Backup Special Tax A" means the Special Tax A applicable to each Assessor's Parcel of
Developed Property, as determined in accordance with Section C below.
"Bonds" means any bonds or other debt (as defined in Section 53317(d) of the Act), whether in
one or more series, issued or incurred by CFD No. 01-2 under the Act.
"CFD Administrator" means the Finance Director of the City, or designee thereof, responsible
for determining the Special Tax Requirement, the Average Interest Rate, and various other
amounts described herein for providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
"CFD No. 01-2" means Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston) of the Temecula
Public Financing Authority.
"City" means the City of Temecula.
"Conversion Amount" means the costs of converting Variable Rate Bonds to Fixed Rate Bonds
on a Conversion Date, including but not limited to underwriters or purchasers discount, legal
fees and expenses, printing costs, Trustee's fees and costs, a charge for City staff related to
such conversion, special tax consultant fees and expenses, appraisal fees, and other similar
expenses.
"Conversion Date" means any date on which any Variable Rate Bonds may be converted to
Fixed Rate Bonds pursuant to the applicable Indenture for such Bonds.
"County" means the County of Riverside.
"Developed Property" means all Taxable Property, exclusive of Property Owner Association
Property and Public Property, for which (i) a Final Subdivision was recorded prior to the
January 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied and (2) a
B-2
building permit was issued after January 1, 2001, but prior to the April 1st preceding the Fiscal
Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
"Extraordinary Special Tax A" means a Special Tax A levied on Other Undeveloped Property
as described in Section E.
"Final Conversion" means the date on which the last of any Variable Rate Bonds are
redeemed or converted to Fixed Rate Bonds, which date shall not be later than the 10th
anniversary of the issuance of the Variable Rate Bonds subject to conversion.
"Final Subdivision" means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map,
or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code
Section 66410 et seq.), or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code
1352, that creates individual lots for which building permits may be issued without further
subdivision.
"Fiscal Year" means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
"Fixed Rate Bond" means any Outstanding Bond that pays interest at a fixed rate until its
principal has been fully amortized.
"Indenture" means the indenture, trust agreement, fiscal agent agreement, resolution or other
instrument pursuant to which Bonds are issued, as modified, amended and/or supplemented
from time to time, and any instrument replacing or supplementing the same.
"Land Use Class" means any of the classes listed in Table 1.
"Maximum Special Tax A" means the maximum Special Tax A, determined in accordance with
Section C below, that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel prior to the full
prepayment or partial prepayment of Special Tax A.
"Non-Residential Floor Area" means the total floor area of a non-residential building(s) located
on an Assessor's Parcel, measured from outside wall to outside wall, exclusive of overhangs,
porches, patios, carports, or similar spaces attached to the building but generally open on at
least two sides, as determined by reference to the building permit(s) issued for that Assessor's
Parcel, or if these are not available, as otherwise determined by the CFD Administrator.
"One-Time Special Tax A" means a Special Tax A that may be levied on Undeveloped
Property as described in Section F, below.
"Other Non-Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for
which a building permit(s) has been issued for a non-residential use, except for Service
Commercial Property.
"Other Undeveloped Property" means all Undeveloped Property that is not Service Commercial
Property.
"Outstanding Bonds" means, as of any date, all Bonds previously issued that are outstanding
under the applicable Indenture.
"Park" means approximately 7.5 acres of landscaped parkland and an 8.5~acre lake located in
Planning Area 3 of the Harveston Specific Plan approved on August 28, 2001.
"Park Maintenance Costs" means the estimated costs of providing services, including the
salaries of City staff related to and a proportionate share of City overhead costs, for the
maintenance of the Park in an amount not to exceed $180,000 for Fiscal Year 2002-2003,
increasing by 1% each Fiscal Year there after.
"Property Owner Association Property" means any property within the boundaries of CFD No.
01-2 that is owned by, or irrevocably dedicated as indicated in an instrument recorded with the
County Recorder, to a property owner association, including any master or sub-association.
"Proportionately" means for Developed Property that the ratio of the actual Special Tax A levy
to the Assigned Special Tax A is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property within
CFD No. 01-2. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means (i) under the second step
of the Method of Apportionment in Section D, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax A levy per
Acre of Undeveloped Property that is Service Commercial Property to $1,960 and the ratio of
the actual Special Tax A levy per Acre of all Other Undeveloped Property to $3,212 is equal for
all Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped Property, and (ii) under the third step of the Method of
Apportionment in Section D, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax A levy per Acre to the
Maximum Special Tax A is equal for all Assessor's Parcels of Other Undeveloped Property.
"Public Property" means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 01-2 that is used for
rights-of-way or any other purpose and is owned by or irrevocably offered for dedication to the
federal government, the State, the County, the City or any other public agency. Once a Parcel
has been designated as Public Property, it shall retain such status permanently.
"Residential Floor Area" means all of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential
structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, or
similar area. The determination of Residential Floor Area shall be made by the CFD
Administrator with reference to the building permit(s) issued for such Assessor's Parcel or
other appropriate means selected by the CFD Administrator. Once such determination has
been made for a Parcel, it shall remain fixed in all future Fiscal Years.
"Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building
permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more residential dwelling units.
"Service Commercial Property" means all property located within the area defined in Exhibit 1
except for Assessor's Parcels developed as Residential Property.
"Single Family Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Residential Property, other than
Apartment Property, for which building permits have been issued for detached or attached
residential units.
"Special Tax" means Special Tax A or Special Tax B.
"Special Tax A" means the Special Tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year or from time to time
prior to prepayment of Special Tax A on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property,
Undeveloped Property, Taxable Property Owner Association Property and Taxable Public
Property to fund the Special Tax Requirement, and shall include Special Taxes levied or to be
levied under Sections D, E or F, below.
B-4
"Special Tax B" means a Special Tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on certain Assessods
Parcels of Developed Property, Update Property, or Undeveloped Property that is Service
Commercial Property for which the Special Tax A levies have been fully or partially prepaid,
starting with the Fiscal Year after the Special Tax A levies have been fully or partially prepaid,
to cover each Assessor's Parcel's allocable share of Park Maintenance Costs. The amount of
Special Tax B to be levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall be determined by the CFD
Administrator at the time the prepayment is made.
"Special Tax Requirement" means that amount required in any Fiscal Year for CFD No. 01-2
to: (a) (i) pay debt service on all Fixed Rate Bonds for the calendar year that commences in
such Fiscal Year, (ii) pay debt service on all Variable Rate Bonds for the calendar year that
commences in such Fiscal Year, assuming a constant interest rate of 3.5% for all Vadable
Rate Bonds for the 2002-03 Fiscal Year levy, and assuming a constant interest rate for each
Fiscal Year thereafter equal to the Average Interest Rate for the Fiscal Year immediately
preceding that for which the Special Tax Requirement is being determined; (iii) pay periodic
costs on the Bonds, including but not limited to, credit enhancement, liquidity support and
rebate payments on the Bonds; (iv) pay Administrative Expenses; (v) pay any amounts
required to establish or replenish any bond or interest rate reserve funds for any Outstanding
Bonds; and (vi) to pay Park Maintenance Costs; less (b) a credit for funds available to reduce
the annual Special Tax levy under the Indenture, as determined by the CFD Administrator.
"State" means the State of California.
"Taxable Property" means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 01-2
that are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section G below.
"Taxable Property Owner Association Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Property
Owner Association Property that are not exempt pursuant to Section G below.
"Taxable Public Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Public Property that are not exempt
pursuant to Section G below.
"Total Floor Area" means for an Assessor's Parcel, the sum of the Residential Floor Area plus
the Non-Residential Floor Area.
"Trustee" means the trustee or fiscal agent under the Indenture.
"Undeveloped Property" means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as
Developed Property, Taxable Property Owner Association Property or Taxable Public Property.
"Update Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property for which a building
permit has been issued, but which has not yet been classified as Developed Property, Taxable
Property Owner Association Property or Taxable Public Property.
"Variable Rate Bond" means any Outstanding Bond that is not a Fixed Rate Bond.
B-5
B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORIES
Each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property within CFD No. 01-2 shall be classified as Developed
Property, Taxable Public Property, Taxable Property Owner Association Property or
Undeveloped Property, and shall be subject to Special Taxes pursuant to Sections C and D
below. Developed Property shall be assigned to a Land Use Class as specified in Table 1.
The Assigned Special Tax A for Residential Property shall be based on the Residential Floor
Area located on the Assessor's Parcel, unless it qualifies as Apartment Property, for which the
Assigned Special Tax A shall be based on the number of dwelling units. The Assigned Special
Tax A for Service Commercial Property and Other Non-Residential Property shall be based on
the Acreage of the Assessor's Parcel, except that any Assessor's Parcel of Service
Commercial Property that has become Residential Property shall be assigned to Land Use
Classes 1 through 6, and shall no longer be considered Service Commercial Property for
Assigned Special Tax A or Backup Special Tax A purposes.
C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE
1. Developed Property
a. Maximum Special Tax A
The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor's Parcel classified as Developed
Property shall be the greater of (i) the amount derived by application of the Assigned
Special Tax A, or (ii) the amount derived by application of the Backup Special Tax A.
b. Assigned Special Tax A
The Assigned Special Tax A for Developed Property in each Fiscal Year for each Land
Use Class, starting with Fiscal Year 2002-03 and for each Fiscal Year thereafter, is shown
below in Table 1.
B-6
TABLE 1
Assigned Special Tax A Amounts for Developed Property
For Fiscal Year 2002-03
Community Facilities District No, 01-2
Land
Use Assigned Special Tax A
Class Description Residential Floor Area Per Unit/Acre
I Single Family Property 3,050 or more square feet $1,574 per unit
2 Single Family Property 2,650 or more, but less than $1,280 per unit
3,050 square feet
3 Single Family Property 2,250 or more, but less than $1,146 per unit
2,650 square feet
4 Single Family Property 1,850 or more, but less than $892 per unit
2,250 square feet
5 Single Family Property <1,850 square feet $483 per unit
6 Apartment Property Not Applicable $200 per unit
7 Service Commercial Not Applicable $1,960 per Acre
Property*
8 Other Non-Residential Not Applicable $6,126 per Acre
Property
*Notwithstanding Table 1, any residential development occurring on Service Commercial
Property shall be taxed at the rates listed under Land Use Classes 1-6, as applicable.
c. Backup Special Tax A
The Backup Special Tax A for Developed Property in each Fiscal Year, starting with
Fiscal Year 2002-2003 and for each Fiscal Year thereafter, shall be $6,126 per Acre for
Residential Property and Other Non-Residential Property, and $1,960 per Acre for Service
Commercial Property.
d. Multiple Land Use Classes
In some instances an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than
one Land Use Class. The Assigned Special Tax A levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall
be the sum of the Assigned Special Tax A levies for all Land Use Classes located on
that Assessor's Parcel. The Backup Special Tax A levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall
be the sum of the Backup Special Tax A levies that can be imposed on all Land Use
Classes located on that Assessor's Parcel. The Maximum Special Tax A levied on an
Assessor's Parcel shall be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax A levies that can be
imposed on all Land Use Classes located on that Assessor's Parcel.
For purposes of calculating the Backup Special Tax A (but not the Assigned Special
Tax A) for each Land Use Class under such circumstances, the Acreage assigned to each
Land Use Class shall be based on the proportion of Residential Floor Area or Non-Residential
Floor Area that is built for each Land Use Class as compared with the Total Floor Area built on
the Assessor's Parcel. All allocations made under this section shall be determined by the CFD
Administrator, and all such allocations shall be final.
B-7
2. Undeveloped Property, Taxable Property Owner Association Property and Taxable
Public Property
a. Maximum Special Tax A
The Maximum Special Tax A for Fiscal Year 2002-03 and future Fiscal Years for
Undeveloped Property that is Service Commercial Property shall be $1,960 per Acre. The
Maximum Special Tax A for Fiscal Year 2002-03 and future Fiscal Years for Other
Undeveloped Property shall be $6,126 per Acre plus any Extraordinary Special Tax A or One-
Time Special Tax A that may be applicable. The Maximum Special Tax A for Fiscal Year
2002-03 and future Fiscal Years for Taxable Property Owner Association Property and
Taxable Public Property shall be $6,126 per Acre.
b. Extraordinary Special Tax A and One-Time Special Tax A
The Extraordinary Special Tax A and the One-Time Special Tax A, as described in
Sections E and F below, are not limited by specific maximum levels, but instead may be levied
at whatever levels are required to meet the objectives of Sections E & F.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
Commencing with Fiscal Year 2002-03, and for each following Fiscal Year, the CFD
Administrator shall levy the Special Tax A as follows:
First: Special Tax A shall be levied on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property at 100%
of the applicable Assigned Special Tax A for each Fiscal Year to and including the Fiscal Year
in which Final Conversion occurs, irrespective of the Special Tax Requirement, in order to pay
amounts described in the definition of the "Special Tax Requirement," as well as to accumulate
funds to maintain an interest rate reserve account with respect to Variable Rate Bonds
established under the Indenture at a level specified in the Indenture, to pay Conversion
Amounts and for the redemption of Variable Rate Bonds under the Indenture. For each
subsequent Fiscal Year, Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's
Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Special Tax A as
needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement;
Second: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
step has been completed, Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's
Parcel of Undeveloped Property that is Service Commercial Property at up to $1,960 per Acre
and Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Other Undeveloped Property at up to $3,212
per Acre;
Third: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
two steps have been completed, Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each
Assessor's Parcel of Other Undeveloped Property at up to $6,961 per Acre;
Fourth: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
three steps have been completed, then the levy of Special Tax A on each Assessor's Parcel of
Developed Property whose Maximum Special Tax A is determined through the application of
the Backup Special Tax A shall be increased Proportionately from the Assigned Special Tax A
up to the Maximum Special Tax A for each such Assessor's Parcel. However, under no
B-8
circumstances shall Special Taxes be levied under this fourth step to pay for Park
Maintenance Costs;
Fifth: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first
four steps have been completed, then the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on
each Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property Owner Association Property up to the Maximum
Special Tax A for Taxable Property Owner Association Property. However, under no
circumstances shall Special Taxes be levied under this fifth step to pay for Park Maintenance
Costs; and
Sixth: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first five
steps have been completed, then the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each
Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Public Property up to the Maximum Special Tax A for Taxable
Public Property. However, under no circumstances shall Special Taxes be levied under this
sixth step to pay for Park Maintenance Costs.
In cases where the Special Tax A for an Assessor's Parcel has been fully or partially prepaid, a
Special Tax B shall be levied annually on such Assessor's Parcel, when appropriate, as
described in Section J, below.
Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Special Tax A levied against any
Assessor's Parcel of Residential Property used for private residential purposes be increased
by more than ten percent as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any
other Assessor's Parcel within CFD No. 01-2.
E. EXTRAORDINARY SPECIAL TAX A
If at any time during a Fiscal Year the interest rate on Variable Rate Bonds exceeds the rate
described in clause (a)(ii) of the definition of Special Tax Requirement that was utilized to
determine that Fiscal Year's Special Tax Requirement, it may be necessary to levy an
Extraordinary Special Tax A on all Other Undeveloped Property to cover any shortfall in funds
available to pay interest due on Variable Rate Bonds in such Fiscal Year.
Three business days prior to any interest payment date for Variable Rate Bonds, if sufficient
funds are not available in a debt service or interest rate reserve account for the payment of
Variable Rate Bonds under the Indenture, the CFD Administrator shall levy Special Taxes
Proportionately on Assessor's Parcels classified for such Fiscal Year as Other Undeveloped
Property in an aggregated amount equal to the amount of the insufficiency, and the payment
of Special Taxes so levied shall be due and payable on (and will be delinquent if not paid by)
the day prior to such interest payment date. Special Taxes levied under Section E shall be
levied by means of direct billing to the affected property owners.
F. ONE-TIME SPECIAL TAX A
In any Fiscal Year up to and including the Fiscal Year in which the Final Conversion occurs,
there shall be levied on each Assessor's Parcel classified in such Fiscal Year as Other
Undeveloped Property a One-Time Special Tax A in an amount determined by the CFD
Administrator as follows:
B-9
(i)
three business days prior to Final Conversion, in an amount equal to the cost of
redemption of any Variable Rate Bonds that are not expected to be converted to Fixed
Rate Bonds on the Final Conversion, and
three business days prior to any Conversion Date in an amount equal to (a) the
Conversion Amount, less (b) any amounts then available for payment of the costs of
conversion of Variable Rate Bonds to Fixed Rate Bonds or such Conversion Rate in an
account established for such purpose under the Indenture.
Special Taxes levied under this Section F shall be levied by means of direct billing to the
affected property owners. Payment of Special Taxes so levied shall be due no later than the
date of Final Conversion or the Conversion Date to which the levy pertains.
G. EXEMPTIONS
No Special Tax A shall be levied on up to 16.5 Acres of Property Owner Association Property
and on up to 93.3 Acres of Public Property. The CFD Administrator will assign tax-exempt
status to Assessor's Parcels in the chronological order in which such Parcels are known to the
CFD Administrator to become Property Owner Association Property or Public Property. Once
an Assessor's Parcel has been classified as Public Property, its tax-exempt status will be
permanent, independent of its future uses.
All Assessors' Parcels that have fully prepaid their Special Tax A lien pursuant to Section J are
exempt from future Special Tax A levies, but shall be subject to Special Tax B levies when
appropriate. Property Owner Association Property or Public Property that is not exempt from
Special Tax A levies under this section shall be subject to the levy of Special Tax A and shall
be taxed Proportionately as part of the fifth and sixth steps, respectively, in Section D above,
at up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax A for Taxable Property Owner
Association Property or Taxable Public Property.
H. REVIEW AND APPEAL
Any taxpayer may file a written appeal of the Special Tax A or Special Tax B levied on his/her
property with the CFD Administrator, provided that the appellant is current in his/her payments
of Special Taxes. During the pendency of an appeal, all Special Taxes previously levied must
be paid on or before the payment date established when the levy was made. The appeal must
specify the reasons why the appellant claims the Special Tax is in error. The CFD
Administrator shall review the appeal, meet with the appellant if the CFD Administrator deems
necessary, and advise the appellant of its determination. If the CFD Administrator agrees with
the appellant, the CFD Administrator shall grant a credit to eliminate or reduce future Special
Taxes on the appellant's property. No refunds of previously paid Special Taxes shall be made.
MANNER OF COLLECTION
Special Tax A and Special Tax B as levied pursuant to Section D above shall be collected in
the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes; provided,
however, that the CFD Administrator may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect Special
Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations
B-10
of CFD No. 01-2 or as otherwise determined appropriate by the CFD Administrator. For
purposes of Sections E & F, the CFD Administrator shall directly bill the affected property
owners for the Extraordinary Special Tax A levies and One-Time Special Tax A levies, unless
an alternative mechanism has been determined by the CFD Administrator.
J. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The following definition applies to Section J.
"Outstanding Prepayment Bonds" means, as of any date, all Bonds previously issued that are
anticipated by the CFD Administrator to be outstanding under the applicable Indenture
immediately after the first principal payment date for such Bonds following the then current
Fiscal Year.
1. Prepayment in Full
The Special Tax A obligation described in Section D above with respect to any
Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, Update Property, or Undeveloped Property that is
Service Commercial Property may be fully prepaid, except that a Special Tax B shall be levied
on such Assessor's Parcel after the prepayment has occurred. In addition, the Special Tax A
obligation of any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Public Property may be prepaid, without a
Special Tax B being levied thereafter. A prepayment may be made on an Assessor's Parcel
only if there are no delinquent Special Tax A levies with respect to such Assessor's Parcel at
the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor's Parcel intending to prepay the Special
Tax A obligation shall provide the CFD Administrator with written notice of intent to prepay.
Within 30 days of receipt of such written notice, the CFD Administrator shall notify such owner
of the prepayment amount of such Assessor's Parcel, and the amount of the Special Tax B
that shall continue to be levied on the Assessor's Parcel after prepayment has been made.
The CFD Administrator may charge the Assessor's Parcel's owner a reasonable fee for
providing these figures, which must be paid by the owner of the Assessor's Parcel pdor to the
calculation of the prepayment amount. Prepayment must be made not less than 15 days pdor
to the next occurring date that notice of redemption of Bonds from the proceeds of such
prepayment may be given to the Trustee pursuant to the Indenture.
The Prepayment Amount (defined below) for any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Public
Property may be determined by the CFD Administrator as authorized under Sections 53317.3
and 53317.5 of the Act. However, no Special Tax A prepayment for any Assessor's Parcel of
Taxable Public Property shall be allowed unless the amount of Assigned Special Tax A levies
that may be imposed on Taxable Property within CFD No. 01-2 after the proposed prepayment
is at least 1.1 times the maximum annual debt service on all Outstanding Bonds.
The Prepayment Amount (defined below) shall be calculated as summarized below
(capitalized terms as defined below):
B-11
Total:
Bond Redemption Amount
plus Redemption Premium
plus Defeasance Amount
plus Administrative Fees and Expenses
less Reserve Fund Credit
equals Prepayment Amount
As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount shall be calculated as
follows:
Paraqraph No.:
1. Confirm that no Special Tax A delinquencies apply to such Assessor's Parcel.
For Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property and Service Commercial Property that is
Developed Property, compute the Assigned Special Tax and Backup Special Tax
applicable for the Assessor's Parcel to be prepaid. For Assessor's Parcels of Service
Commercial Property that are Undeveloped Property, compute the Maximum Special
Tax A for the Assessor's Parcel to be repaid. For Assessor's Parcels of Undeveloped
Property which are also classified as Update Property, compute the Assigned Special
Tax and Backup Special Tax for that Assessor's Parcel as though it was already
designated as Developed Property, based upon the building permit which has already
been issued for that Assessor's Parcel.
(a) Divide the Assigned Special Tax A or Maximum Special Tax A computed pursuant
to paragraph 2 by the estimated Assigned Special Tax A levies for all of CFD No. 01-2
based on the Developed Property Special Tax A levies which could be imposed in the
current Fiscal Year on all expected development in CFD No. 01-2, excluding any
Assessor's Parcels which have been prepaid; and
(b) Divide the Backup Special Tax A computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the
estimated Backup Special Tax A levies at buildout for CFD No. 01-2 using the Backup
Special Tax A amounts for the current Fiscal Year, excluding any Assessor's Parcels
which have been prepaid.
Multiply the larger quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 3(a) or 3(b) by the
Outstanding Prepayment Bonds, and (if determined necessary by the CFD
Administrator to effect the redemption of Bonds with such prepayment) round up to the
nearest integral multiple of $5,000 to compute the amount of Outstanding Prepayment
Bonds to be retired and prepaid (the "Bond Redemption Amount").
Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to paragraph 4 by the
applicable redemption premium, if any, on the Outstanding Prepayment Bonds to be
redeemed (the "Redemption Premium").
Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount from the
first bond interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year until
the eadiest redemption date for the Outstanding Prepayment Bonds. Under a variable-
rate bond scenario, the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption
Amount shall be determined by the CFD Administrator.
B-12
Determine the amount of the Special Tax A levied on the Assessor's Parcel in the
current Fiscal Year which has not yet been paid.
Compute the minimum amount the CFD Administrator reasonably expects to derive
from the reinvestment of the Prepayment Amount less the Administrative Fees and
Expenses from the date of prepayment until the redemption date for the Outstanding
Prepayment Bonds to be redeemed with the prepayment.
Add the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 6 and 7 and subtract the amount
computed pursuant to paragraph 8 (the "Defeasance Amount").
10.
Vedfy the administrative fees and expenses of No. 01-2, including the costs of
computation of the prepayment, the costs to invest the prepayment proceeds, the costs
of redeeming Bonds, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the
prepayment and the redemption (the "Administrative Fees and Expenses").
11.
If bond reserve funds for the Outstanding Prepayment Bonds, if any, are anticipated to
be at or above 100% of the bond reserve requirement (as specified in the Indenture)
immediately after the first principal payment date in the next Fiscal Year, the reserve
fund credit shall equal the expected reduction in the bond reserve requirement, if any,
associated with the redemption of Outstanding Prepayment Bonds as a result of the
prepayment (the "Reserve Fund Credit"). No Reserve Fund Credit shall be granted if
bond reserve funds are anticipated to be below 100% of the bond reserve requirement
immediately after the first principal payment date in the next Fiscal Year.
12.
The Special Tax A prepayment is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant
to paragraphs 4, 5, 9 and 10, less the amounts computed pursuant to paragraph 11
(the "Prepayment Amount").
13.
From the Prepayment Amount, the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 4, 5,
and 9 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the Indenture
and be used to retire Outstanding Prepayment Bonds or make debt service payments.
The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 10 shall be retained by CFD No. 01-2.
The Prepayment Amount may be insufficient to redeem an integral multiple of $5,000 of
Bonds. In such cases, the increment above $5,000 or integral multiple thereof will be retained
in the appropriate fund established under the Indenture to be used with the next prepayment of
bonds.
As a result of the payment of the current Fiscal Year's Special Tax A levy as determined under
paragraph 7 (above), the CFD Administrator shall remove the current Fiscal Year's Special Tax
A levy for such Assessor's Parcel from the County tax rolls. With respect to any Assessor's
Parcel that is prepaid, the Board of Directors shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in
compliance with the Act, to indicate the prepayment of Special Tax A and the release of the
Special Tax A lien on such Assessor's Parcel, and the obligation of such Assessor's Parcel to
pay the Special Tax A shall cease. However, Special Tax B shall still be levied on such
Assessor's Parcels when appropriate.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax A prepayment shall be allowed unless the
amount of Maximum Special Taxes that may be levied on Taxable Property within CFD No. 01-
B-13
2 after the proposed prepayment is at least 1.1 times the maximum annual debt service on all
Outstanding Bonds.
2. Prepayment in Part
The Maximum Special Tax A on an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, Update
Property or Service Commercial Property may also be partially prepaid. The amount of the
prepayment shall be calculated as in Section H.1; except that a partial prepayment shall be
calculated according to the following formula (provided that the partial prepayment must in any
event be sufficient to, in addition to payment of all other components of the Prepayment
Amount, redeem Bonds in increments of $5,000):
PP=PE xF
These terms have the following meaning:
PP =
PE =
F =
the partial prepayment
the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section H.1
the percent by which the owner of the Assessor's Parcel(s) is partially
prepaying the Maximum Annual Special Tax A.
The owner of an Assessor's Parcel who desires to partially prepay the Maximum
Special Tax A shall notify the CFD Administrator of (i) such owner's intent to partially prepay
the Maximum Special Tax A, (ii) the percentage by which the Maximum Special Tax A shall be
prepaid, and (iii) the company or agency that will be acting as the escrow agent, if applicable.
The CFD Administrator shall provide the owner with a statement of the amount required for the
partial prepayment of the Maximum Special Tax A for an Assessor's Parcel within 30 days of
the request and may charge a reasonable fee for providing this service. Such fee must be
paid prior to the calculation of the Prepayment Amount.
With respect to any Assessor's Parcel that is partially prepaid, the CFD Administrator
shall (i) distribute the funds remitted to it according to Paragraph 13 of Section J.1. and (ii)
indicate in the records of CFD No. 01-2 that there has been a partial prepayment of the
Maximum Special Tax A and that a portion of the Maximum Special Tax A equal to the
outstanding percentage (1.00 - F) of the remaining Maximum Special Tax A shall continue to
be authorized to be levied on such Assessor's Parcel pursuant to Section D. An Special Tax B
shall also be levied on such Assessor's Parcel when appropriate.
K. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX
Special Tax A and Special Tax B shall be levied for a period not to exceed 50 Fiscal Years,
commencing with Fiscal Year 2002-03.
B-14
EXHIBIT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SERVICE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of
California, being those portions of Lots 109, 110, 120 and 121 (together with those portions of
vacated Date Street, Monroe Avenue and Jackson Avenue adjoining said lots), all as shown
on a Map of the Temecula Land and Water Company filed in Book 8, Page 359 of Maps,
Records of San Diego County, California, together with a portion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No.
19677 (together with that portion of Ynez Road adjoining said Parcel 4), all as shown on a map
filed in Book 135, Pages 85 and 86 of Parcel Maps, Records of Riverside County, California,
described as a whole as follows:
BEGINNING at the most northerly corner of said Lot 121, said corner being a point on the
centerline of said Jackson Avenue;
thence along said centerline South 41,o38'09" East 1290.73 feet to the most northerly corner
of said Lot 120;
thence continuing along said centerline South 42.o14'33'' East 1290.79 feet to the most
easterly corner of said Lot 120;
thence continuing along said centerline South 41~o52'47" East 794.56 feet to the centerline of
said Ynez Road;
thence along said centerline of Ynez Road South 30"'07'20" West 432.14 feet to the
beginning of a tangent curve concave southeasterly and having a radius of 1675.00 feet;
thence along said curve southwesterly 699.71 feet through a central angle of 23,~56'04' to the
easterly prolongation of a course in the southeasterly line of said Parcel 4 shown as "North
83,~48'37" West" on said Parcel Map;
thence radially from said curve, along said course and prolongation North 83-48'44" West
142.82 feet to an angle point in said southeasterly line;
thence along said southeasterly line South 63,~31'52" West 962.68 feet to the most southerly
corner of said Parcel 4 and a point in the northeasterly line of Interstate 215;
thence along said northeasterly line through the following courses: North 29,~26'02" West
376.97 feet;
thence North 30~35'46' West 450.40 feet;
thence North 28"'41'12" West 758.78 feet;
thence North 18-,40'57" West 346.24 feet;
thence North 28,~39'30" West 199.91 feet;
B-15
thence North 37-45'11" West 253.17 feet;
thence North 29-,58'20" West 449.97 feet;
thence North 21-49'02" West 251.95 feet;
thence North 28.024'39" West 519.02 feet to the northwesterly line of said Lot 121;
thence along said northwesterly line North 48-10'42" East 1190.56 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 135.24 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT To all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record.
B-16
EXHIBIT C
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2
(HARVESTON)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that on December 11, 2001, the Board of Directors of the
Temecula Public Financing Authority adopted a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the Board
of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority Declaring Its Intention To Establish A
Community Facilities District And To Authorize The Levy Of Special Taxes Therein." Pursuant
to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, the Board of Directors of the Authority
hereby gives notice as follows:
A. The text of said Resolution of Intention is as follows:
WHEREAS, under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982,
constituting Section 53311 et seq. of the California Government Code (the "Law"), this
Board of Directors may commence proceedings for the establishment of a community
facilities district; and
WHEREAS, there have been submitted to this Board of Directors a Petition
(Including Waiver) of Lennar Homes of California, Inc. and a Petition (Including Waiver)
of Winchester Hills I LLC (collectively, the "Petitions"), requesting the formation by this
Board of Directors of a community facilities district under the Law to be known as the
Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston)
(the "District"); and
WHEREAS, under the Law, this Board of Directors is the legislative body for the
proposed District and is empowered with the authority to establish the District and levy
special taxes within the District; and
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors now desires to proceed with the actions
necessary to consider the establishment of the District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the
Temecula Public Financing Authority as follows:
Section 1. This Board of Directors proposes to begin the proceedings
necessary to establish the District pursuant to the Law. Receipt of the Petitions to form
the District is hereby acknowledged.
Section 2. The name proposed for the District is Temecula Public Financing
Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston).
Section 3. The proposed boundaries of the District are as shown on the map of
the District on file with the Secretary, which boundaries are hereby preliminarily
approved. The Secretary is hereby directed to record, or cause to be recorded, the
C-1
map of the boundaries of the District in the office of the County Recorder as soon as
practicable after the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 4. The type of public facilities (the "Facilities") and maintenance
services (the "Services") proposed to be eligible for funding by the District and I~ursuant
to the Law shall consist of those items listed on Exhibit A hereto under the heading
"Facilities" and "Services," respectively, which Exhibit is by this reference incorporated
herein. It is also proposed that the Distdct provide the funds necessary to defease the
outstanding Winchester Hills Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1
(Winchester Hills) Special Tax Bonds, 1998 Series A (the "Prior Bonds"), which Prior
Bonds are secured by a special tax lien imposed on the parcels I~roposed to be
included in the District.
The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to enter into a joint
community facilities agreement with the City of Temecula and any other public entity
that will own and/or operate any of the Facilities, such agreements to be in a form
provided by Bond Counsel.
Section 5. Except to the extent that funds are otherwise available to the District
to pay for the Facilities, the Services and the defeasance of the Prior Bonds and/or pay
the principal and interest as it becomes due on bonds of the District issued to finance
the Facilities and to defease the Prior Bonds, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs
thereof, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property
in the District, will be levied within the District and collected in the same manner as
ordinary ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this Board of Directors
or its designee shall determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners.
The proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax among the parcels
of real property within the District, in sufficient detail to allow each landowner within the
proposed District to estimate the maximum amount such owner will have to pay, and
which specifies the tax year after which no further special tax will be levied on land
used for private residentiaJ purposes and which otherwise complies with applicable
provisions of the Act is described in Exhibit B attached hereto which Exhibit is by this
reference incorporated herein.
This Board of Directors finds that the provisions of Section 53313.6, 53313.7
and 53313.9 of the California Government Code (relating to adjustments to ad valorem
property taxes and schools financed by a community facilities district) are inapplicable
to the District.
Section 6. It is the intention of this Board of Directors, acting as the legislative
body for the District, to cause bonds of the Authority to be issued for the District
pursuant to the Law to finance a portion of the costs of the Facilities and to finance the
defeasance of the Prior Bonds. If so issued, the bonds shall be in the aggregate
principal amount of not to exceed $25,000,000, shall bear interest payable semi-
annually or in such other manner as this Board of Directors shall determine, at a rate
not to exceed the maximum rate of interest as may be authorized by applicable law at
the time of sale of such bonds, and shall mature not to exceed 40 years from the date
of the issuance thereof.
Section 7. This Board of Directors reserves to itself the right and authority to
allow any interested owner of property in the District, subject to the provisions of
C-2
Section 53344.1 of the California Government Code and such requirements as it may
otherwise impose, and any applicable prepayment penalties as prescribed in the
indenture or fiscal agent agreement for any bonds of the Authority for the District, to
tender to the Treasurer of the Authority in full payment or part payment of any
installment of special taxes or the interest or penalties thereon which may be due or
delinquent, but for which a bill has been received, any bond or other obligation secured
thereby, in the manner described in Section 53344.1 of the California Government
Code.
Section 8. The levy of said proposed special tax shall be subject to the
approval of the qualified electors of the Distdct at a special election. The proposed
voting procedure shall be by mailed or hand-delivered ballot among the landowners in
the proposed District, with each owner having one vote for each acre or portion of an
acre of tand such owner owns in the District.
Section 9. Except as may otherwise be provided by law or the rate and method
of apportionment of the special tax for the District, all lands owned by any public entity,
including the United States, the State of California and/or the City of Temecula, or any
departments or political subdivisions of any thereof, shall be omitted from the levy of
the special tax to be made to cover the costs and expenses of the Facilities, the
Services, the defeasance of the Prior Bonds, the issuance of bonds by the Authority for
the District and any expenses of the District.
Section 10. The Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula is hereby
directed to study said proposed Facilities and proposed defeasance of the Prior Bonds
and to make, or cause to be made, and file with the Secretary a report in writing,
presenting the following:
(a)
Bonds.
A brief description of the Facilities, the Services and the Pdor
(b) An estimate of the fair and reasonable cost of providing the
Facilities and the Services, and of defeasing the Prior Bonds, including the
incidental expenses in connection therewith, including the costs of the proposed
bond financing, any Authority or City of Temecula administrative costs and all
other related costs.
Said report shall be made a part of the record of the public hearing provided for
below.
Section 11. Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard, in the regular meeting place of this Board of Directors, City
Council Chambers, Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California, be, and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place
when and where this Board of Directors, as legislative body for the District, will conduct
a public hearing on the establishment of the District and consider and finally determine
whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require the formation of the
District and the levy of said special tax.
Section 12. The Secretary is hereby directed to cause notice of said public
hearing to be given by publication one time in a newspaper published in the area of the
C~3
District. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days before
the date herein set for said hearing. Said notice shall be substantially in the form of
Exhibit C hereto.
Section 13. The firms of Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates, Albert A. Webb
Associates, Quint & Thimmig LLP and McFarlin & Anderson are hereby designated as
financial advisor, special tax consultant, bond counsel and disclosure counsel,
respectively, to the Authority for the District. The Executive Director is hereby
authorized to execute agreements with said firms for their services related to the District
provided that all fees and expenses of such firms are payable solely from deposits by
the landowners in the District or the proceeds of the bonds, if any, issued by the
Authority for the District.
Section 14. _The Board of Directors hereby determines that the contemplated
formation of a community facilities district and issuance of community facilities district
specia~ tax bonds involving the Authority and the District, in accordance with Section
15061(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines is not a
"Project," as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, and is therefore exempt
from the requirements of CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(d) and
15062, the Secretary is hereby directed to cause a Notice of Exemption to be prepared,
executed and filed in regard to the foregoing determination.
Section 15. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
B. The exhibits to the Resolution which describe the facilities and services to be
funded, the bonds to be defeased and the rate and method of apportionment of the special
taxes for the district are on file in the office of the Secretary of the Authority.
C. The time and place established under said Resolution for the public hearing
required under the Act are Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors,
City Council Chambers, Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
D. At said hearing, the testimony of all interested persons or taxpayers for or against
the establishment of the district, the extent of the district or the furnishing of the specified types
of facilities, services or other specific purposes of the district will be heard. Any person
interested may file a protest in writing with the Secretary. If fifty percent or more of the
registered voters, or six registered voters, whichever is more, residing in the territory proposed
to be included in the district, or the owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the
territory proposed to be included in the district and not exempt from the special tax file written
protests against the establishment of the district and the protests are not withdrawn to reduce
the value of the protests to less than a majority, the Board of Directors shall take no further
action to establish the district or levy the special taxes for a period of one year from the date of
the decision of the Board of Directors, and if the majority protests of the registered voters or
the landowners are only against the furnishing of a type or types of facilities or services within
the district or a specific purpose of the district, or against levying a specified special tax, those
types of facilities or services, or those specific purposes or the specified special tax will be
eliminated from the proceedings to form the district.
E. The proposed voting procedure shall be by special mail or hand-delivered ballot to
the property owners within the territory proposed to be included in the district.
C-4
Dated: January__, 2002
/s/ Susan W. Jones, CMC
Secretary,
Temecula Public Financing Authority
C-5
ITEM 11
A P P R O~V~.9~'
CITY ATTORNEY
D,RECTOR Or
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manage ,~'~'~
December 11,2001
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
Prepared by:
Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
1. ADOPT a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR SP-4 AND APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0109 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE
PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED
EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD,
NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD.
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019)
ADOPT a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0102 (SPECIFIC
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC
PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79
SOUTH, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF
PAUBA ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION.
R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01 .doc
3. READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR
THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8
4. ADOPT a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4, FOR THE
SUBDIVISION OF 293 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CENTER
LOT, 1 PARK SITE LOT AND 16 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM
TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS AND PARK SITES OF
THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED
EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD,
WEST OF BUTI'ERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD,
AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-003,
955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955 030-032
BACKGROUND
Specific Plan No. 4 (Paloma del Sol) was approved bythe Riverside County Board of Supervisors
on September 6, 1988 as County SP-219. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Council
approved various amendments to the Specific Plan, in the period of time from 1994 through 1999.
A formal submittal for these new amendments was received on February 28, 2001. Staff held a
Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant on April 5, 2001. From June to the
present, staff has conducted additional meetings with the applicant on various revisions to the text
and figures in the Specific Plan Amendment and the vesting tentative tract map.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
The 15 acres associated with existing Planning Area 27 will be merged into proposed
Planning 28 and designated for Medium Density single-family residential uses. The
commercial uses are being located to the southwestern corner of the project site. A new
Planning Area 27 has been re-located to the south and will be established as 9 acres of
open space. The reconfigured Planning Area 28 has been expanded from 25.0 acres to 49.4
acres. Based on a density of 2-5 density units per acre, the number of dwelling units will
increase from 113 to 190 units.
The Temecula Valley Unified School District has determined the 10.0 acre elementary
school site planned for Planning Area 29B will instead be located in the Crown Hill
development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, the area has been
eliminated and incorporated into Planning Areas 27, 28, and 29.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.dcc
2
The 2.9 acre Park and Recreation area designated for existing Planning Area 24 will be
incorporated into the existing Greenbelt/Paseo system. A new Planning Area 24 will be
designated as a 1.0 acre private Park/Recreation area adjacent to Planning Area 27.
· Planning Area 29 remains as a 5.0 acre Park/Recreation area. but, will be relocated north of
the open space area adjacent to Planning Area 27.
· The commercial uses from Planning Area 27 will replace the Medium High residential uses
in Planning Area 38.
The residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been lowered from
Medium High (5-8 DU/AC) to Medium (2-5 DU/AC). These changes will result in a reduction
of 3 residential units in Planning Area 5 and a reduction of 107 residential units in Planning
Area 23.
Amendment of General Plan Land Use Map
· The City's General Plan Land Use Map must be amended to reflect the changed land use
designations affected by the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment.
Vestin,q Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 modifies the previously approved
Amendment No 3 by creating 293 single-family residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park
site lot and 16 open space lots within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29.
ANALYSIS
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes to relocate the existing Neighborhood Commercial area
from the southwest corner of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Roads to the southwest corner of De
Portola Road and Campanula Way. With regard to residential uses, the amendment would result in
an overall 2%-3% reduction in residential dwelling units within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
boundary. The previously planned elementary school facility proposed for Planning Area 29B has
been eliminated and public and private parks will be reconfigured and relocated.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
The applicant is requesting to relocate the 15 acre Neighborhood Commercial area at the southwest
corner of Pauba Road and Butterfield Stage Road (existing Planning Area 27) to the 8 acre Planning
Area 38 located within the village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road.
The reason given by the applicant for the proposed relocation includes concern over land use
compatibility issues and their doubts about being able to attract a major commercial tenant. The
Commission concurs that a high potential exists for land use conflicts between the currently allowed
commercial development and the existing and proposed residential development that surround the
area. Moreover, Commission believes it is appropriate to concentrate commercial development
within the existing village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road.
The applicant is proposing to amend the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance to provide
for Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial uses and development standards for Planning
Area 38. The Commission believes it is important to establish both vehicular and pedestrian access
points between Planning Area 38 and adjacent Planning Areas. To ensure that these connections
are achieved, the Commission recommends that a vehicular access point be established between
R:XS P Ak2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2- l 1 ~0l.doc
3
Planning Area 38 and Planning Area 36 and be identified on Figures 15A and 15KK. This has been
made a recommended condition of approval of the Specific Plan Amendment.
The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed uses and development standards within
Planning Area 38 and believes they are consistent with the Specific Plan and the long term vision in
the General Plan. In addition, the Commission believes the expanded commercial area will enhance
the village center and be compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses.
The existing Planning Area 29B, which was located within the boundary of tract 24188, was
intended to accommodate a 10-acre elementary school facility. However, the Temecula Valley
Unified School District has since indicated that the school will actually be located in the Crown Hill
development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, Planning Area 29B will be
eliminated and the 10 acres will be re-allocated for parks, open space, and some medium density
residential development.
Two neighborhood park/recreation areas will be provided within Tract 24188. Planning Area 29,
which has been reconfigured and relocated slightly, will accommodate a 5.0 acre public
park/recreation area. In addition, Planning Area 24 will accommodate a private 1.0 acre
park/recreation area.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 reduces the total number of residential dwelling units
within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan from the currently allowed 5,246 units to a maximum
of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units. This dwelling unit decrease represents a
2% to 3% reduction in residential dwelling units. The gross project density also decreases similarly
from 3.8 density units per acre to 3.6 density units per acre. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling
units adopted in the original Specific Plan, the total decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at
5,137 density units) to 10% (at 5,072 density units).
General Plan Map Amendment
The General Plan Land Use Map Amendment is necessary to conform to the current General Plan
land uses and development criteria set forth in the proposed Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8. The Planning Commission has determined that the map amendments are
consistent with the City's General Plan and both the amended and un-amended portions of the
Specific Plan. The proposed General Plan Land Use Map is located in Exhibit B of Attachment No.
1.
Vestin.q Tentative Parcel Map Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 is located within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28
and 29 of Specific Plan No. 4. The amendment serves to modify Amendment No. 3 by reducing the
number of single-family residential lots from 351 to 293. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map
is included as Exhibit A of Attachment 4.
Pedestrian Connections
The previously approved map for 24188 had various pedestrian connections incorporated into the
design so as to enhance a pedestrian's ability to access adjacent streets and areas. The Planning
Commission is recommending that three separate connections be incorporated into the latest map
amendment to maintain these connections. One connection would occur between Street "D" and
Butterfield Stage Road. A second access would connect Street "O" with Butterfield Stage Road. And
a third connection, located within the interior of the tract, will provide pedestrian access between
Streets "G" and "K" see Attachment 9 for pedestrian connection locations.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12- l l -Ol.doc
4
The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachment 10) indicating that
they agree with the "G" Street/"K" Street connection. However, they do not believe that the "D" Street
and "O" Street connections are appropriate. The applicant has expressed a concern regarding
security of residences and the potential for young children to wander unattended through the
connections out onto Butterfield Stage Road. The Commission debated these concerns, and
concluded that pedestrian connection points have been utilized safely in other locations in the City.
Therefore, the Commission determined that the concerns did not warrant deleting these
connections. It should also be noted that various exhibits within the amended Specific Plan denote
that pedestrian connections be provided to Butterfield Stage Road in the vicinity of both "D" and "O"
Streets. Should the Council determine that these connections are not appropriate, the Specific Plan
document would also require a future modification prior to its approval.
Adjacent Property Owner Correspondence
On November 7, 2001 staff received correspondence from Darren Streud, attorney with the Law
Firm of Jackson DeMarco & Peckenpaugh (see Attachment 11 ). Mr. Stroud represents James &
Mary Corona. The Coronas own land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Butterfield Stage
Road and Highway 79 South. Their correspondence contends that the project applicants have failed
to construct necessary flood control facilities in accordance with a previously required condition of
approval and mitigation measures associated with the original approval of the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan. The correspondence indicates that the failure to construct these facilities has resulted
in a flood hazard on the Corona's property. Mr. Stroud is requesting that the City enforce the
previously required drainage related condition of approval and associated mitigation measures by
requiring construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits. Moreover, in
the absence of such a condition, Mr. Streud is requesting that a Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report be prepared to evaluate current hydrology of the area and to mitigated increased flood
hazards to the Corena's property.
On November 20, 2001 correspondence was received from the applicant's attorney, Sam Alhadeff
of Alhadeff & Solar, LLP responding to Mr. Stroud's November 7th letter (See Attachment 12). Mr.
Alhadeff contends that the four planning actions being proposed at this time by the applicant within
the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan have no affect on or relationship to the flood control facilities.
Moreover, Mr. Alhadeff believes the timing and construction of these facilities is dictated by an
existing Assessment District 159 and thus believes the Council should take no action regarding the
flood control facilities. Mr. Alhadeff has also requested that the variety of previous correspondence
be incorporated into the record.
On November 29, 2001 Mr. Stroud provided a second letter (see Attachment 13) in which Mr. Stroud
th
reiterates the positions previously outlined in his November 7 letter. In addition, he contends that
the City failed to properly notice his clients, the Coronas, 10 days prior to the Planning Commission
public hearing in violation of both the Government Code and City Development Code.
On November 29, 2001 a second letter was also received from Mr. Alhadeff requesting that a variety
of previous correspondence, which has a bearing on this issue, be incorporated into the record. All
this correspondence has been attached to this staff report as requested.
With regard to the issue of noticing the Coronas about the Planning Commission Public Hearing, the
applicants provided mailing labels which were certified by a Title Company. The labels represented
all property owners on the latest tax assessment role owning property within the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan boundary as well as a 600-foot radius outside the boundary. Upon staff research and
discussion, the Commission determined that notice was indeed mailed to the owners of the
Corona's property as identified on the latest County assessment role over 10 days prior to the
R:XS P Ak2001\0I-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT 12-11-01.doc
5
Planning Commission public hearing. It should also be noted that the Coronas and their attorney
were both provided a copy of the Planning Commission staff report prior to the hearing and were
both in attendance at the hearing. Following the Commission meeting, staff has provided an
additional notice to the Coronas about the scheduled Council meeting.
Upon considering all testimony, the Planning Commission concluded that the issue of timing and
construction of the flood control facilities cannot be addressed as part of the currently proposed
planning actions but instead can only be resolved in association with Assessment District 159
actions. Moreover, the Commission believes the current planning actions being proposed have no
physical affect on or relationship to drainage/flooding issues in the southeast corner of the Paloma
del Sol Specific Plan Boundary. Furthermore, the Commission believes the existing interim flood
control facilities that were already required in the vicinity are adequate to address potential flood
impacts until such time that permanent facilities are constructed. Subsequently, the Commission
concluded that the prohibition on additional building permit activity within the Paloma de Sol Specific
Plan boundary should not be required as requested by Mr. Stroud and the Coronas.
With regard to environmental analysis, the Commission does not believe that the planning actions
as proposed have any significant environmental affect on flood hazard issues. Moreover, the
Commission believes the proposed Addendum to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR adequately
addresses potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, it is
recommending that additional environmental analysis not be undertaken in association with the
proposed planning actions.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and
certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was
certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development
Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on Mamh 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula
in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No.
3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City in conjunction with an overall reduction of dwelling
units and realignment of Campanula Way.
Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts
associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1
Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures that changes in project impacts as a
result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation
measures are required. The Commission acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to
air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original
certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Moreover, the Commission concluded that
environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed and is
recommending that the City Council certify the Addendum.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council Certify Addendum No. 4 to
Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the General Plan Amendment and Amendment
No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
R:XS P AX2001\014)I02 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
6
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Attachments:
City Council Resolution No. 01-~ Certifying Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental
Impact Report for SP-4 and Approving a General Plan Amendment (Planning Application
No. 01-0109) - Page 8
Exhibit A - Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR for SP-4
Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Designation Map
City Council Resolution No. 01 Approving Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 for the
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (Planning Application 01-0102)--Page 9 Exhibit A - Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan (SP-4)
Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan Amendment
City Council Ordinance No. 01 - __ Approving Amended Zoning Standards for the Paloma
del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8--Page 12
Exhibit A - Amended Zoning Standards
City Council Resolution No. 01- Approving Vesting Tentative Tract Amendment No. 4
(Planning Application 01-0117) --Page 13
Exhibit A - Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval for VTTM 24188 (Amendment No. 4)
5. Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 28, 2001- Page 16
PC Resolution recommending certification of Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact
Report No. 235, and approval of General Plan Land Use Map and Specific Plan Amendment
- Page 17
PC Resolution recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Map No. 24188 Amendment
No. 4 - Page 18
8. Reduced Specific Plan Land Use Map Change - Page 19
9. Pedestrian Connections Location Map - Page 20
10. T& B Planning Consultants Pedestrian Connection letter dated November 1,2001 - Page 21
11. Darrel Stroud Letter dated November 7, 2001- Page 22
12. Sam Alhadeff Letter dated November 20, 2001 - Page 23
13. Darrel Stroud Letter dated November 28, 2001 - Page 24
14. Sam Alhadeff Letter dated November 29, 2001 - Page 25
R:\S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc
?
ATFACHMENT NO 1
DRAFT RESOLUTION CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FEIR
AND APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
8
ATI'ACHMENT NO. I
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
CERTIFYING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR SP-4 AND APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0109 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) FOR THE
PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED
EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD,
NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD.
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-019)
WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0109 (the
"Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code,
CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on November 7, 2001 at a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons
had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on ,2001, at a duly
noticed public hearing as proscribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had
an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, and made all required findings
and determinations relative thereto after finding that the project proposed in the Application
conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
certifies Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific
Plan, as contained in Exhibit A, and makes all required findings and determinations relative thereto
and finds that the Addendum was prepared consistent with the applicable CEQA provisions and that
the Addendum was considered in association with the approval of the Specific Plan Amendment.
Section 3. General Plan Amendment. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
approves the Application changing the General Plan Land Use Designations on property located
east of Margarita Road, west of Butterfield Stage Road, north of Highway 79 South and south of
Pauba Road as contained in Exhibit B to this Resolution.
R:~S P AX200 I\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~cc gpa rcs..doc
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this day of 2001.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No.
2001 - was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
R:\S P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc gpa res..doc
2
EXHIBIT A
ADDENDUM NO 4 TO THE FINAL EIR
FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4)
R:\S P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~cc gpa res..doc
3
PALOMA DEL SOL
ADDENDUM N0.4 TO EIR 235
Prepared:
October 24, 2001
PALOMA DEL SOL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.
B.
C.
INTRODUCTION .......... ~ .................................................................................................. 2
BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 2
PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................. 3
SUMMARY ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 7
II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 9
A. SEISMIC SAFETY ................................................................................................................. 9
B. SLOPES AND EROSION ...................................................................................................... 10
C. W.IND EROSION AND BLOWSAND ..................................................................................... ! 0
D. FLOODING ......................................................................................................................... 11
E. NOISE ................................................................................................................................ 11
F. CLIMATE AND A~R QUALITY ............................................................................................ 11
G. WATER AND SEWER....~ .................................................................................................... 11
I-I. TOXIC SUBSTANCES .......................................................................................................... 13
I. AGRICULTURE .................................................................................................................. 13
J. OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ................................................................................... 14
K. WILDLIFE/VEGETATION ................................................................................................. 14
L. MINERAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................................... 17
M. ENERGY RESOURCES ........................................................................................................ 17
N. SCENIC FIIamVAYS ........................................................................................................... 18
O. CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES ........................................................................ 19
P. CIRCULATION AND TRAFFIC ............................................................................................ 19
P. WATER AND SEWER ......................................................................................................... 23
R. FIRE SERVICES ................................................................................................................. 95
S. SHERIFF SERVICES ....................................... ~ ................................................................... 26
T. SC~tOOLS ........................................................................................................................... 27
U. P~,~Y,s AND RECREATION ................................................................................................. 28
V. UTILITIES .......................................................................................................................... 30
W. SOLID WASTE ................................................................................................................... 34
X. LIBRARIES ......................................................................................................................... 34
Y. HEALTH SERVICES ........................................................................................................... 35
Z. AIRPORTS .......................................................................................................................... 36
AA. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS ................................................................................................ 36
III. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 36
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
I. INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND
The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (E1R No. 235) was approved and
certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Addendum No. 1 was prepared in
conjunction with Amendment No. 4 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified
by the Temecula City Council in 1992. Addendum No. 1 added a Development Agreement which
did not change the physical impacts identified in the EIR since it only dealt with collection of fees,
improvements to parks and dedication of parks to the City for maintenance. When Amendments No.
5 and 6 were approved in January of 1997 and January of 1998 respectively, the City Council
determined that the project was consistent with a project for Which an EIR had already been
prepared. Therefore, the Council concluded that no further environmental analysis was required for
these amendments. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula.
Addendum No. 2 evaluated institutions such as facilities for the aged, congregate care residential
facilities, information center and nursery schools and found that no additional environmental impact
evaluation would be required. Addendum No. 3 evaluated the potential impacts resulting from
Specific Plan Amendment No. 7, which is referred to herein as the "Approved Project.". This
Addendum (Addendum No. 4) evaluates the current project, which is discussedin full in Specific
Plan Amendment No. 219 and is referred to herein as the "Proposed Project." The original Paloma
del Sol EIR No. 235 and Addendum Numbers 1, 2 and 3 are hereby incorporated by reference into
this document. Copies of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and subsequent Amendments, as
well as the original Paloma del Sol EIR No. 235 and all four addendums (i.e., Addendurns Nos. 1, 2,
3 and 4), are available at the City of Temecula Planning Department, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590.
According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or
supplement environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the
following events occur: (1) substantial changes are proposed in the project that will require major
revisions of the EIR; (2) substantial changes occur with respect to circumstances under which the
project is being undertaken that require major revisions in the FIR; or (3) new information which
was not known at the time that the EIR was certified and completed becomes available. None of the
situations have occurred as a result of Amendment No. 8.
By statute, the environmental analysis need not examine those significant effects of the subsequent
projects that: (1) have already have been mitigated or avoided as part of the prior project approval,
as evidenced in the findings adopted for the prior project, or (2) that were "examined at a sufficient
level of detail" in the prior EIR that they can "be mitigated or avoided by site specific revisions, the
impositions of conditions, or by other means in connection with the approval of the latter project."
(Public Resources Code {}21094, subd. (a).) Thus, this Addendum ~Addendum No. 4) only addresses
those project-related effects that have changed since the original EIR and subsequent Addendums
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 2 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
(Addendum No. 3 in particular) were certified and which might feasibly result in potentially
significant impacts.
When the current project (Amendment No. 8 to Paloma del Sol Specific Plan 219) is compared to the
original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 project, there is a decrease of 474 dwelling units and
8.5 acres of commercial uses.
This document constitutes Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235, which
was certified on September 6, 1988 (SCH#8707003). EIR No. 235 analyzed the potential
environmental impacts associated with implementation of the approved Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an addendum to an existing
EIR is appropriate where, in order to comply with CEQA, the EIR requires only "minor technical
changes or additions" that do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the
environment" (CEQA Guidelines § 15164). A variety of land use changes were incorporated into
Amendments No. 4 through No. 7 of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219. For the
purposes of this Addendum a comparison will be made between the original approved Paloma del
Sol Specific Plan and the proposed land use changes for Paloma del Sol Amendment No. 8.
Approved land uses changes for Amendments No. 4 through No. 7 and the proposed land use
changes for Amendment No. 8 are described below:
Amendments 1, 2, and 3 were prepared under County jurisdiction and there are no records to
be referenced for them.
The following Amendments were prepared under City of Temecula jurisdiction and are described
below:
O
Amendment No. 4 added 6.5 acres of Very High density residential to Planning Area 6. It
also added 1.5 acres of park to Planning Area 37, reduced community/neighborhood
commercial area in Planning Area 1 by 4.9 acres, and reduced major roads by 3.1 acres.
Amendment No. 5 resulted in several Land Use Plan modifications, including:
An increase in the number of Medium density dwelling units from 2,338 to 2,487;
A reduction in the number of Medium-High density dwelling units from 2,356 to
2,251;
A reduction in the number of multi-family dwelling units from 910 to 590;
A 4.0-acre park/recreation area site;
An increase in the community/neighborhood commercial acreage from 31.5 acres to
32.3 acres; and
A reduction in the roadway landscape requirements adjacent to commercial uses.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 3 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Amendment No. 6 encompassed several minor changes to the Specific Plan, including plan
revisions in Planning Areas 2, 28 and 29A. The park in Planning Area 29A was increased
from 4.0 acres to 5.0 acres. Planning Area 28 was reduced in size by one acre, resulting in a
reduction of dwelling units from 117 to 113. The dwelling units were transferred to Planning
Area 2, bringing the total number of units in Planning Area 2 up to 120. Roadway cross-
sections and standards were updated to conform to the City's General Plan. Access points
and neighborhood entries on certain planning areas were relocated to conform to the
approved Tentative Tract Maps. Streets "G" and "IT' were renamed as Campanula Way.
The phasing plan was revised to reflect current expectations. Overall, Specific Plan
Amendment No. 6 did not result in any total acreage or dwelling unit changes.
Amendment No. 7 involved land use changes in Planning Areas 1, 6, and 8 and the alteration
of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway. Planning Area 8,
designated in Amendment No. 6 as Medium Density Residential, was revised to allow a
Medium Density Senior Community. The size and number of dwelling units remained the
same°
Planning Area 6, already designated as Very High density residential, was reconfigured to
include both High and Very High density residential and reduced in size to accommodate the
expansion of Planning Area 1. Due to this density division and size reduction, Planning Area
6 was divided into Planning Area 6A (High Residential) and Planning Area 6B (Very High
Residential). Combined, Planning Areas 6A and 6B were proposed to contain 508 dwelling
units; which was a reduction of 82 dwelling units from the approved number of dwelling
units (590 dwelling units).
Planning Area 1 was increased in size from 32.3 to 35.0 acres. As part of the proposed
changes to Planning Area 1 an application was submitted to the City of Temecula to process
Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan in conjunction with a Development Plan and a
Development Agreement, both pertaining only to a portion of Planning Area i. The
Development Plan permits the construction of a 276,243 square foot community commercial
center of focused retail villages on 24 acres. In addition, Campanula Way was realigned and
reconfigured between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway from a 100-foot right-of-way
to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles and a four-way stop or signalized
intersection.
The proposed Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan involves a reduction of
the total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
from the currently entitled 5,246 dwelling units to no more than 5,137 units and as few as
5,072 units. This represents a reduction of residential dwelling units between 2.1% and
3.3%. The High and Very High Residential categories remain unchanged. The decrease in
overall net residential density from 5.1 du/ac to 4.9 du/ac results in the allocation of more
land to each single-family detached residential unit. Similarly, the gross project density has
decreased from 3.8 du/ac to 3.6 du/ac. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 4 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
in the original Specific Plan, the total decrease in residential units lies between 8.3% (at
5,137 alu) and 9.5% (at 5,072 du).
The commercial uses planned for Planning Area 27 at the comer of Pauba and Butterfield
Stage Roads have been relocated to Planning Area 38, adjacent to the south side of De
Portola Road. The deletion of the commercial center in Planning Area 27 resulted in land
use changes for Planning Areas 24, 28, and 29 as well. Planning Area 27 in Amendment No.
8 has been designated as a 9.0-acre natural open space area designed to preserve some
existing on-site wetland vegetation. Planning Ama 28 has expanded from 25.0 acres of
Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 7 to 49.4 acres of Medium density
residential uses in Amendment No. 8. The number of dwellings proposed in Planning 28
increased from 113 to 190 units as a result of removal of the commercial development.
However, there was a corresponding decrease in the amount of residential development as a
result of P.A. 38 converting from Medium-High Residential to Commercial.
Planning Ama 29 remains as a Park/Recreation Ama, but the location and configuration of
the parcel are somewhat altered. However, the acreage of this Park/Recreation Ama remains
unchanged at 5.0 acres. In addition, the elementary school proposed for Planning Area 29B
in previous Amendments has been deleted since the Temecula Valley Unified School District
(TVUSD) has indicated that the site is no longer needed. Another change involves the
creation of a new Park/Recreation Area in Planning Ama 24, which is located adjacent to the
Planning Ama 27 Open Space. The former Planning Ama 24 (formerly designated in
Amendment No. 7 as a Park/Recreation Area situated between Planning Areas 13 and 23)
has been merged into the greenbelt system and is no longer identified as a Park/Recreation
Ama or a separate planning area.
Due to remaining high demand for commercial uses in the village center ama near the
supermarket and the Home Depot, Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes
that the residential uses allocated for Planning Area 38 be converted to
Community/Neighborhood Commercial. Planning Area 38 will incorporate the same
develop-ment standards that now apply to Planning Area 1.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes several minor residential dwelling unit
adjustments to reflect the approved and constructed implementing tracts.
Acreage and dwelling unit comparisons between the original Specific Plan for Paloma del
Sol and Amendment No. 8 are illustrated below in Table 1, Summary of Land Use Changes:
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 5 of 36 October 26, 2001
AnDEND M NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Table 1
Summary of Land Use Changes
SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219 SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219 SPECIFIC PLAN No. 219
(original) Amendment No. 7 Amendment No. 8
Land Use Acres D.Us Land Use Acres D.Us Land Use Acres D.Us
536.0 2,366 Medium 491.0 2,083 Medium 610.7 2,551
Medium Medium (Senior) 89.0 400 Medium (Senior) 89.0 335 (400)*
Medium High 437.5 2,406 Medium High 416.5 2,255 Medium High 303.8 1,678
High 22.3 268 High 22.3 268
Very High 56 840 Very High 12.0 240 Very High 12.0 240
Community/ 39.0 ~ Community/ 35.0 Community/ 43.0
Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood
Commercial Commercial COmm~ial
Neighborhood 15.0 Neighborhood 17,5 Neighborhood 2.5
Commercial Commercial Commexcial
Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0
Junior High 20.0 Junior High 20.0 Junior High 20.0
School School School
Elementary 41.0 Elementary 41.0 Elementary 31.0
School School School
Parks or 15.4 Parks or 32.5 Parks or 30.6
Recreation Recreation Areas Recreation Areas
Areas
Orcenbelt 28.0 Grcunbelt Poseos 28.0 Greenbelt Poseos 31.9
Paseos
Roadway 87.6 Roadway Posoos 82.0 Roadway P0seos 81.5
Poseos
...... ,,,-~ ................ , ~ : ' ;,~: ~'~:, ~ ~ , - ?,,;~ ~ : ~ ~ , .- s :. /, .~ :~-.,~ Open Space 9.0
Major Supers 114.0 Major $1~eats 103.4 Major $~'ccts 102.2
P~o~-r 1,391.5 5,611 1,391.5 5,246 1,391.5 5,072
TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL
(5,137)*
Implementation of the adult retirement option for Planning Area 8 in creases the total dwelling unit allocation for Plannln g
Area 8 to 400 du, raises the total medium density dwelling unit allocation to 2 951 du, and would raise the total dwelling
units allowed in the Specific Plan to 5,137.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 6 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADnENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
C. SUMMARYANALYS~
Section II contains a brief summary of the environmental impacts resulting from the approved
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 as analyzed in EIR No. 235. After each summary is a brief
statement describing the changes in project impacts that are anticipated to result with implementation
of Amendment No. 8. As shown on Table 2, Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation
Measures, the impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 are substantially the same or less than the
impacts analyzed in the certified EIR. Therefore, no new mitigation measures are required.
Table 2
Comparative Anab sis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures .
Additional
Environmental Issue Changes in Project Impacts Mitigation Measures
Seismic Safety Unchanged No
Slopes and Erosion Unchanged No
Wind Erosion & Blowsand Unchanged No
Flooding Unchanged No
Noise Decreased No
Climate and Air Quality Decreased No
Water Quality Unchanged No
Toxic Substances Unchanged No
Agriculture Unchanged No
Open Space and Conservation Decreased No
Wildlife/Vegetation Decreased No
Energy Resources Electricity - Unchanged No
Natural Gas - Decreased
Scenic Highways Unchanged No
Cultural and Scientific Resources Unchanged No
Circulation and Traffic Approximately Unchanged No
(Somewhat Decreased)
Public Facilities and Services Decreased No
Light and Glare Unchanged No
Disaster Preparedness Unchanged No
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 7 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Table 3, below, provides an overview off all public utilities and serves and compares the Approved
Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7) with the Proposed Project (i.e.,
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8):
Table 3
Public Utilities and Services Comparison
Approved Project ] Proposed Project
Public (Amendment No. 7)I (Amendment No. 8)
Utilities and
Service Estimated Usage/ Impact after Estimated Usage/ Impact after
Service Level Mitigation Service Level Mitigation
Water~ 4,026,400 gallons Insignificant 3,765,000 gallons Insignificant
Sewer2 1,845,300 gallons Insignificant 1,453,771 gallons Insignificant
Fire 15,879 residents Significant Decrease of 1,342 Significant
residents
Sheriff3 8.4 deputies (original SP)
10.6 deputies (adjusted) Significant 9.7 deputies Significant
Schools4 4,264 students Significant 3,855 students Significant
Parks/Recreation 131.0 acres Insignificant 144.0 acres Insignificant
39,133,910 cubic
feet/month (35,574,829 Insignificant 35,749,212 cubic Insignificant
Natural Gas5 based on new usage feet/month
rates)
42,030,975 kWh per year 37,958,936 kWh per
Electricity6 (63,388,761 based on Insignificant Insignificant
new usage rates) year
Solid Waste7 57 tons per day Insignificant 57.4 tons per day Insignificant
Health Servicess 15,879 residents Insignificant Decrease of 1,342 Insignificant
residents
600 gallons/day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial, 3,800 gallons/acre/day for parks
300 gallons per day per residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial
1 deputy/I,500 people
.55 K-8 students per du, and .21 high school students per du
80 kcf/du/yr for single family residential, 0.0348 kcf/sf/yr for retail commercial
5,621 kWh/du/yr for residential, and 13.54 kWlgsf/yr for commercial
7.9 pounds per person per day
Demands for health services are based on population, but are not quantified in this EIR.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 8 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
For the purposes of this environmental analysis, the existing or "basehne" condition is assumed to be
the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219.
A. SEISMIC SAFETY
Previously Identified Impacts
Several geotechnical investigations~ were conducted on the project site, which concluded that
the site does not have any active faults within its boundaries. The site is expected to
experience ground motion from earthquakes on regional and/or local causative faults. The
dominant seismic feature in the project vicinity is the northwest striking Elsinore Fault Zone.
The site is subject to liquefaction in the southwestern portion of the site where the flat
alluviated flood plain of Temecula Creek is located. When mitigation measures are
implemented, the impacts regarding seismic hazards are considered non-significant.
Mitigation measures contained in the EIR include: (1) Conformance with the latest Uniform
Building Code and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effect of
seismic groundshaking; (2) Mitigation of the liquefaction potential within the southern
portion of the site will occur as a result of project development, which will lower artificially
high ground water levels by removal of recharge ponds, as well as increased overburden as a
result of site grading; (3) During site development, additional geological evaluation should
be continued in order to verify the extent and relative age of fault activity, according to
Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc.
Analysis of Changed Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes 5,072 dwelling units without
a senior community option and 5,137 units if the senior community option and the dwelling
unit option for the proposed office designation are implemented. For the purposes of this
Addendum, the EIR has assumed a worst case scenario and evaluated the impacts associated
with a 5,137 unit project. As such, the current project proposes 474 units fewer than
proposed in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, which proposed 5,611 units. The 474
dwelling unit reduction would result in 1,342 fewer project residents (based upon City of
Temecula General Plan's generation factor of 2.83 persons per dwelling unit). Consequently,
fewer residents will be exposed to seismic safety hazards, including ground shaking. The
extent of project impacts upon existing seismic conditions will be the same since no increase
~ Geotechrd. cal Retxm for Environmental Impact Purposes, Bu~terfield Hillz, Rancho California, Couray
Riverside, CA. (May 1987), Fault Study, 1400.acre The Mea&nvs at Rancho Cali/omia Project, Rancho California
(August 1987), and Evaluauon o/c L/quelCact/on Potent/a/, pomon of Va//Meadows (September 1987).
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 9 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Be
in the overall developable area is proposed. No additional or revised mitigation measures are
proposed.
SLOPES AND EROSION
Previously Identified Impacts
According to the original Geotechnical Report2, there are no severely limiting or unamenable
geotechnical constraints associated with the project. However, some of the existing
landforms will be altered by grading, moderate to severe erosion may exist if graded slopes
are unprotected, and three potential landslide areas may be present on-site.
Mitigation measures required to alleviate impacts from the Paloma del Sol project are as
follows: 1) alluvial and colluvial soils removal should be developed during Tentative Map
studies and be incorporated into grading; 2) temporary ground cover will be provided to
prevent erosion during the construction phase; 3) grading shall be done in stages to lessen
erosion; and 4) final Slopes will be contour-graded and will blend with existing natural
contours.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan will require the same physical
alteration of the property resulting in similar impacts to slopes and erosion. Amendment No.
8 maintains the same amount of area being disrupted by grading. The proposed grading plan
identifies approximately the same quantities of earthwork. Impacts to slopes on-site will be
similar and the potential for erosion will remain high. These impacts, however, can be
reduced to an insignificant level through implementation of the mitigation measures
contained in EIR No. 235. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
WIND EROSION AND BLOWSAND
Previously Identified Impacts:
The project is not located within the wind/erosion or blowsand area designated within the
City of Temecula's General Plan and is not considered an area of concern. This issue was not
addressed in the adopted EIR.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
This issue was not addressed in the adopted FIR, and does not need to be discussed in this
addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8).
2 GeotecImical Repo~ for Enviroraneraal Impact Purpose, But~field Hills, Rancho Ca//forma, Cow~ of
Riverside, CA. (May 1987), Fauk Study, 1400.acre The Meadows at Rancho ~al~fomia Project, Rancho Cahforma
(August 1987), and Evaluation of Liquefaction Potemial, pm of Vail Meadows (September t987).
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 10 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Previously Identified Impacts
The hydrology report prepared for the project concluded that implementation of the Paloma
del Sol Land Use Plan would result in the alteration of existing on-site drainage pattems.
The project would result in the creation of impermeable surfaces on-site resulting in an
increase to the existing 100-year storm runoff. The project site also lies within the Dam
Inundation Area for a 100-year event for Vail Lake dam. The Assessment District 159 has
been created to mitigate potential flooding impacts to Temecula Creek. All standards of the
Riverside County Flood Control District will be met, and erosion control devices will be
installed in development areas to mitigate the effect of increased runoff at points of
discharge.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, which reconfigures land uses and
roadways described in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, would not effect existing or
proposed flooding conditions any differently than previously approved Specific Plan
Amendments. Also, the proposed project would not significantly increase or reduce the
amount of land to be graded in excess of the grading already approved by the City. The
amended land use plan would still result in shoxt term downstream impacts related to erosion
and sedimentation during grading and the creation of impermeable surfaces. Since the
proposed project would not result in any new flood-related impacts that have not already
been evaluated and approved for previous Specific Plan Amendments, then no new
mitigation measures would be required. The mitigation measures identified in EIR No. 235
and previous Addenda will adequately ensure that the degree of existing mitigation measures
is sufficient and that no additional mitigation measures will be required.
NOISE
Previously Identified Impacts
In the adopted EIR No. 235, noise-related impacts would be generated from both short-term
and long-term sources. The short-term sources are construction-related activities at the time
of project implementation; the long-term sources are vehicular traffic produced by the
project. There is minor existing noise associated with traffic on Highway 79 South, which is
mitigated by expanded setbacks that reduce traffic noise levels to below a level of
significance. This amendment does not change the situation in any way, so new mitigation
measures are not required.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan results in approximately the same
amount of grading as previously identified, therefore, short-term noise impacts related to
grading activities are expected to remain unchanged. The reduction of 474 residences from
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 11 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
the residential component of the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan will also shorten the
duration of short-term noise impacts associated with home building activities.
Amendment No. 8 proposes fewer dwelling units and fewer acres of commemial
development than the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan; therefore, no additional or
revised mitigation measures are necessary.
F. CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY
Previously Identified Impacts
Air quality impacts associated with Paloma del Sol include both short-term and long-term
impacts. Short-term impacts (at the time of the original ErR) result from pwject grading and
long-term impacts are associated with project build out. Short-term ak quality impacts will
result from pollutant emissions from construction equipment and the dust generated during
grading and site preparation. Short-term impacts resulting from construction activities are
considered insignificant because they do not reach significant impact thresholds established
by Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Construction-related
significance thresholds, according to SCAQMD, are. based on exceeding any of the
following: 550 pounds per day of Carbon Monoxide, 75 pounds per day of Reactive Organic
-Gases, 100 pounds per day of Oxides of Nitrogen, 150 pounds per day of Oxides of Sulphur,
or 150 pounds per day of Particulate Matter. The primary source of long-term impacts to ak
quality is automobile emissions. Other emissions will be generated from residential and
commercial natural gas and electricity consumption. Long-term air quality impacts are
considered significant with respect to carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, particulates, and
reactive organic gas emissions. Mitigation at the grading and construction phase of the
project included watering graded surfaces and planting ground cover to reduce short-term
impacts to a level of insignificance. The project will integrate design elements such as transit
facilities, energy efficient buildings, and solar access orientation of structures to reduce long-
term impacts. Despite these measures, long-term impacts to air quality represent a
significant adverse impact which required a statement of overriding considerations.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any additional
grading of the property outside of the area, which was previously evaluated in ErR No. 235.
The proposed land use plan decreases dwelling unit density on-site and does not increase the
overall amount of developable area. Additionally, Paloma del Sol currently will not exceed
SCAQMD significant impact thresholds because the site only requires minimal grading since
mass grading has already occurred in conjunction with adjacent residential and commemial
projects. NO additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed in conjunction with
Amendment No. 8. EIR No. 235 concluded that air quality impacts would remain a
significant adverse impact, which required a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Amendment No. 8 will not substantially change the conclusions reached previously.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 12 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
O
He
WATER QuA~rrY
Previously Identified Impacts
Construction of the Paloma del Sol project will alter the composition of surface runoff.
Build out of Paloma del Sol will result in impervious surfaces and irrigated landscaped areas.
Runoff entering the storm drain system will contain urban pollutants such as pesticides,
fertilizers, and automobile related residues which will contribute to the incremental
degradation of water downstream in Temecula and Murrieta creeks. Erosion control
techniques will be implemented to reduce the amounts of sedimentation entering both
Creeks. Additionally, the project will comply with requirements of the California State
Water Quality Control Board with respect to urban runoff control. By implementing the
following mitigation measures, the level of impacts related to water quality are not
considered significant.
In order to mitigate for water quality impacts, the project will comply with the Riverside
County Flood Control District requirements regarding erosion control devices during grading
(e.g., berms, culverts, sand-bagging and desilting basins), and the employment of the "Water
Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants" program published by the U.S..
Environmental Protection Agency.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any development
outside of the area that was previously evaluated in EIR No. 235. The proposed land use
plan reduces the number of dwelling units and slightly increases acreage of commercial land
use; however, it does not increase the overall developable area. Mitigation measures
contained in EIR No. 235 would be implemented to ensure that water quality impacts remain
at a level of insignificance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
ToxIc SUBSTANCES
Previously Identified Impacts/Mitigation
The project is not anticipated to produce toxic substances. This issue was not addressed in
the adopted EIR; therefore, no mitigation is necessary.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
This issue was not addressed in the adopted EIR, and does not need to be discussed in this
addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8).
AGRICULTURE
Previously Identified Impacts
The Paloma del Sol project site was used for dryland farming and grazing by sheep and
cattle, however, it was not designated as prime, statewide important, unique or locally
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 13 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
important farmland within the Environmental Hazards and Resources Element of the
Comprehensive General Plan (Riverside County). In addition, the site has minor Class I and
Class II agricultural soils. Due to these two factors, the discontinuation of farming on this
site is not considered significant and, therefore, does not require mitigation. A portion of the
site has already been mass graded as well.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Although Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan mconfigures land uses and
slightly alters roadways, it does not substantially increase/reduce the amount of land being
graded. The same amount of impacts to agriculture will occur with the proposed changes in
Amendment No. 8 as with the adopted Specific Plan No. 219 and EIR No. 235. As such, no
mitigation is required.
J. OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION
Previously Identified Impacts
Amendment No. 7 includes 32.5 acres of parks/recreation areas, 28.0 acres of greenbelts, and
82.0 acres of roadway paseos for a park and recreation total acreage of combined 142.5
acres.. The approved Development Agreement allows for parks, greenbelts, and roadway
paseos to count toward park and recreation credit. The land use changes included in the
adopted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (i.e., Amendment No. 7) did not involve any increase
in project open space and conservation impacts; therefore, no additional or revised mitigation
was required.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan No. 219 includes land use changes that include the new
provision of 9.0 acres of Open Space (i.e., Planning Area 27) for drainage and wetland
vegetation preservation purposes. This Open Space category did not exist in the original
Specific Plan No. 219 or in the adopted Specific Plan No. 219 (i.e., Amendment No. 7). The
land use changes associated with the Proposed Project (i.e., Amendment No. 8) would not
involve any increase in project Open Space and Conservation impacts. Therefore, no
additional or revised mitigation are warranted.
K. WILDLIFE]VEGETATION
Previously Identified Impacts
A Biological Assessment3 for Paloma del Sol was prepared in 1987 to determine project
impacts to existing biological resources on-site, and the following represent the findings at
that time. When this assessment was completed, introduced grassland covered the majority
of the site, which was due, at least partly, to past agricultural and grazing practices on the
3 Biological Assessment for Vail Meadows (May 1987)
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 14 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
site. In the extreme southern, western, central, and eastern portions of the site, coastal sage
scrub was found. The site potentially provided habitat for the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat and
several "Blue-line" avian species and was considered an important raptor wintering area.
At that time, direct impacts would have resulted from construction-related activities
including cut, fill and other grading activities necessary for roads, building pads, utilities,
fuel modification and flood control. There may be some indirect impacts such as noise, light
and glare and the introduction of domesticated animals (dogs and cats).
Three updates to the original biological assessment have been prepared as follows: A Quino
Checkerspot butterfly (QCB) Survey4 completed in 1999, a Final Paloma del Sol Stephens'
Kangaroo Rat Update Survey on May 30, 1996 (done by Biodiversity Associates), and a
Focused Survey for California gnatcateher completed on December 28, 1995 (done by
Pacific Southwest Biological Services). These studies found that virtually no native
vegetation now exists on the site as a result of:
· Diking associated with past dry farming, weed abatement and cattle grazing;
Grading associated with construction of the roadways (De Portola .Road, Meadows
Parkway, Margarita Road, Plo Pico Road, Muntelegro Way, and Leena Way), and a haul
road used to transport dirt used for construction of the supermarket/shopping center and
sports park northeast of the intersection of State Highway 79 South and Margarita Road;
and
· Grading for construction of the future extension of Meadows Parkway along the eastern
tract boundary between Leena Way and De Portola Road.
No Quino Checkerspot butterfly adults were observed during any flight surveys and no
potentially suitable habitat components occur within the site. Although two small areas of
dwarf plantain (the prima~ host plan0 were encountered, they represent too small of an area
to provide an adequate amount of host plant or nectary plants to support QCB. Also, there
were no observations made of California gnateatchers on the site. Because there are no
existing sensitive species on site, there will be no impacts by construction.
Although the site is located within a potential habitat area for Stephens' Kangaroo Rat, it is
also within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan. The Paloma del Sol
project has complied with all applicable requirement of this program. Therefore, no further
mitigation is required.
4 Resuks of.Adult O. uino Checkerspor Bu£rerfly Flight Season Surveys (1999)
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 15 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
At the time of the original analysis, the site contained four blueline streams as depicted on
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps. The jurisdictional boundaries for these
streams were mapped in December 1995 and January 1996 by Glenn Lukos Associates, a
biological msoumes firm, using the most up-m-date regulations and written policies in
conjunction with guidance from the regulatory agencies.
Three of the four jurisdictional areas were graded and removed in conformance with permits
issued by the ACOE.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan would result in approximately the same amount of
area disrupted by grading activity as the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the
Adopted Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7). It should be noted that mass grading on the site
has already occurred. Three of the four jurisdictional areas on-site would be permanently
impacted by the proposed project, except for the jurisdictional area and wetland that would
be preserved within permanent natural open space in Planning Area 27.
The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has jurisdiction over approximately 7.13 acres of the
project site, of which 1.32 acres consists of jurisdictional wetlands. 'The proposed Specific
Plan Amendment No. 8 project would avoid impacts to an existing drainage area (2.18 acres
that is under the ACOE jurisdiction, including 0.84-acre, which has been identified as an
ACOE jurisdictional wetland) by preserving the area within a 7.1-acre natural open space
area (Planning Area 27).
As mentioned above, the ACOE, in addition to the CDFG, also has jurisdiction over this
same area. With incorporation of the open space feature (Planning Area 27), any potential
impacts to this jurisdictional wetlands would be mitigated to below a level of significance. It
should be noted, that the portions of the project have already been constructed or are in the
process of being constructed. Mitigation of the impacts associated with on-site biological
resoumes has already been approved by the City and is currently underway. Preservation of
Planning Area 27 for drainage corridor purposes, responds to previous mitigation measures.
All other mitigation for the other jurisdictional areas on-site will remain the same as that
identified in the original EIR and previous Addendums.
In summary, the direct impacts associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan would
be similar to or less than the impacts associated with the original Specific Plan. Because a
significant loss of native plants is not expected, and sensitive wildlife species are not
expected to be significantly impacted, no additional mitigation is required by Amendment
No. 8 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 16 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
L. IVIR~P. AL I~SOU~CES
Previously Identified Impacts/Mitigation
The State Division of Mines and Geology has prepared mineral msoume reports designating
mineral deposits of statewide or regional significance. The State Geologist has classified
areas into Mineral Resources Zones (MRZ) and Scientific Resource Zones (SZ). The zones
identify the statewide or regional significance of mineral deposits based on the economic
value of the deposits and accessibility. As discussed in the Open Space/Conservation
Element of the City of Temecula General Plan, the zoning classification of MRZ-3a has been
applied to the City and its Sphere of Influence by the State. "The/VIRZ-3 areas contain
sedimentary deposits which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and
crushed stone for aggregate, however, these areas are determined as not containing deposits
of significance economic value based on the available data.''5 Therefore, potential impacts to
mineral resources resulting from implementation of the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma del
Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7) would be below a level of significance, and as such, no
mitigation is required.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The area and extent of impact for the Proposed Project (i.e., Amendment No. 8) would be the
same as the area and extent of impact for the Approved Project (ge., Amendment No. 7).
Therefore, there would be no change in the level of anticipated impacts to mineral resources,
and no mitigation measures would be required:
M. ENERGY RESOURCES
Previously Identified Impacts
Development within Paloma del Sol will increase energy consumption for motor vehicle
movement, space and water heating, lighting, home appliance use, and construction
equipment manufacturing and operation. Natural gas demand for the approved Paloma del
Sol Specific Plan was calculated at 39,133,910 cubic feet per month. On-site electricity
demand was estimated to be 42,030,975 kilowatts per year.
In order to reduce impacts to a level below significance, the following measures shall be
employed: ( ! ) Passive solar heating techniques such as double-pane windows, adequate roof
overhangs and proper building insulation; (2) Space and water heating should be provided
via gas instead of electricity; and (3) compliance with Title 24 of the California
Administrative Code.
5 City of Temecula General Plan, Open Space/Conservation Element, page 5-20.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 17 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling units and 54 acres of
commercial land uses. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a
maximum of 5,137 dwelling units (assumes senior housing option) and 45.5 acres of
commercial land uses, resulting in a reduction of 474 dwelling units and a decrease of 8.5
acres of commemial uses. Project impacts to energy resources will therefore decrease energy
consumption by 2,882,394 kwh/unit/year for residential dwellings and by 1,189,645 kwh per
square foot per year for commercial uses (assumes an average floor area ratio of 0.21 for
commercial uses). The net result is a decrease in electricity demand of approximately
4,072,039 kwh/unit/year (a 9.7% overall reduction in energy usage) when compared with the
estimated electricity demand in the original Paloma del Sol EIR. Therefore, potential impacts
to electricity would decrease slightly.
In comparison to the project impacts for the original Specific Plan, Amendment No 8 impacts
to natural gas conserves would result in a decrease in nalural consumption by 3,159,210
kwh/unit/year for residential dwellings and by 225,488 kwh per square foot per year for
commercial uses (assumes an average floor area ratio of 0.21). This would result in an
overall net decrease in natural gas demand of approximately 8.6% when compared with the
estimated natural gas consumption for the original Specific Plan as assessed in the original
Paloma del Sol I~':IR.
SCENIC HIGHWAYS
Previously Identified Impacts
The project site is directly bordered by a designated scenic highway (Highway 79 South).
Mitigation measures to protect this area along the project frontage will include special
setback and landscaping concepts to buffer the site from traffic and enhance the project's
visual image for drivers and persons viewing the site from adjoining properties.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan does not propose any significant
changes to the design guidelines of the Specific Plan. Therefore, impacts to the County-
designated eligible scenic highway (Highway 79 South) will continue to be mitigated to
below a level of significance. No additional or revised mitigation measures are proposed.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 1.8 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
O. CULTURAL AND $CI~N't'~'IC RESOURCES
Previously Identified Impacts
The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan was surveyed for cultural resources in 1979 and was
incorporated into a report6. Cultural resources are classified as both archaeological and
paleontological resources. One prehistoric and one historic resource were identified on-site.
The historic site no longer exists on-site. The prehistoric site consisted of two unifacial
manos and a 40m X 20m area of sporadic occupation.
In order to mitigate this prehistoric site, it is recommended that the ground cover be reduced
by removal of vegetation and trash to provide better surface visibility and all artifacts and
features mapped and collected. Subsudace testing shall be conducted consisting minimally
of two lm x lm excavation units.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
A report, Cultural Resource Management Investigations of the Paloma del SolDevelopment
Temecula, California, was completed September 24, 1996 by Chris E. Drover, Ph.D. The
report indicated that none of the cultural resource sites to be impacted are likely to yield any
further significant information and that grading could proceed, but should be monitored in
the vicinity of the cultural deposits. Since preparation of that report, mass grading of the
project site has occuned. Native American representatives from the Pechanga Band of the
Luisefio tribe were present during all test excavations, and a qualified monitor has been
present during project grading operations for archaeological monitoring purposes. No
additional mitigation measures will be needed.
P. CIRCULATION AND TRAIq~iC
Previously Identified Impacts
The Riverside County Master Plan of Highways was used in preparing the original laiR. The
Paloma del Sol project site has since been incorporated as a pan of the City of Temecula and
is subject to the criteria and standards set forth in the City's Circulation Element. The Vail
Meadows Development, Traffic Impact Study was prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates for
the Vail Meadows project (now the "Paloma del Sol" project) in November 1987. In
September 1999, Wilbur Smith Associates prepared an update to the traffic report entitled,
Traffic Impact Study for Plaza Del Sol Commercial Center (now called the "Villages at
Paseo Del So1'). This update related specifically to Planning Areas l(a) and 1Co), which
border the north side of Highway 79 South. Wilbur Smith Associates prepared a partial
traffic update in February 2001, which evaluated the traffic generation impacts associated
6Cultural Resource Inventory aM Impact Assessmem for the KACOR/Rancho Calt~omia Property 0uly 30 and
August 10, 1979).
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 19 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDtlM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
with the land use changes proposed in Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan.
A multi-step methodology was used to estimate the projected traffic forecasts in these
studies. The first step was to determine project trip generation, which estimates the total
arriving and departing traffic at the project site on a peak hour and daily basis. The second
step of the forecasting process was project traffic distribution, which involves the
development of a geographic trip distribution pattern that identifies the origins/destinations
of project traffic. The third step was project traffic assignment, by which project-generated
trips are allocated to the street system.
Project generated traffic was calculated at approximately 42,055 vehicle trips per day based
on the land use mix proposed in the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 as
analyzed in the certified EIR No. 235. Based upon project generated traffic and associated
impacts to roadway segment and intersections within the project vicinity, mitigation
measures were identified consisting of roadway and intersection improvements.
Recommended long range roadway improvement needs in the project vicinity (which
resulted from the specific plan build-out and cumulative area development traffic impact
analysis) were identified as follows: (1) extension of Meadows Parkway from De Portola
Road, south to State Route 79, (2) signalization at State Route 79 and Margarita Road
Intersection, State Route 79 and Meadows Parkway Intersection, and at Margarita Road and
designated "gateway" street (south of Panba Road), (3) provision of 4-lanes on: Meadows
Parkway between State Route 79 and De Portola Road, designated secondary road
connecting Meadows Parkway to De Portola Road, which provides access to the proposed
community shopping center; and, designated "gateway" streets, (4) inclusion of separate left
and right turn lanes at certain intersections, and (5) the widening and signalization of various
off-site.roads and intersections.
O
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The following conclusions are based on the findings of the original 1987 Wilbur-Smihh
Associates (WSA) traffic impact study, the subsequent Traffic Impact Study for Plaza Del
Sol Commercial Center (now referred to as the "Villages at Paseo Del Sol") update, and the
most recent traffic update letter, which was prepared in February 2001 for Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8:
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 would result in a combined net reduction in residential
units, commercial acreage, and school acreage. Residential units would be reduced by
either 109 (Adult Retirement Option) or 174 dwellings (Proposed Land Use Plan),
depending on the development option implemented for Planning Area 8. Within the
community and neighborhood commercial land use categories, the proposed changes
would result in an overall net reduction of seven (7) commercial acres. In addition, the
proposed land use plan changes would result in the elimination of ten (10) acres from
the elementary school category. For the purposes of Wilbur Smith's latest traffic
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 20 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
analysis, one elementary school has been eliminated from the land use plan. A typical
attendance of 700 students per school was used for the remaining elementary schools.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes minor changes in greenbelt paseos,
roadway paseos and major streets. However, these changes would not result in
significant differences in the vehicle trip generation for the Specific Plan.
Traffic signals have been installed at the Margarita Road/De Portola Road, Highway 79
South/Meadows Parkway, and Highway 79/Butterfield Stage Road intersections and on
Campanula Way at the rear of the Home Depot to ensure that the intersections operate
at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS D or better). Installation of these four traffic
signals has mitigated the potential traffic impacts at these intersections to below a level
of significance.
In summary, the proposed changes in Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 will result in a
total reduction of 7,963 daily vehicle Irips from the number of daily vehicle trips
associated with Amendment No. 7 (see Table 4, Land Use and Trip Generation
Comparison, for detail). This reduction is determined as follows:
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 21 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Qe
The trip reduction (as shown in Table 4, Land Use and Trip Generation Comparison)
is determined as follows:
Amendment No. 8 results in a decrease of 174 medium density residential
dwelling units from the number of units proposed in Amendment No.7. This
change results in a reduction of 1,163 daily vehicle trips.
Amendment No. 8 also proposes changes to commemial property densities.
Community commercial uses will be increased by eight acres, resulting in an
addition of 4,400 dally trips. However, neighborhood commercial uses will be
reduced by 15 acres, resulting in a net reduction of 10,500 daily trips. Taken
together, trips associated with all types of commemial uses will be reduced by
6,100.
Daily trips associated with the elementary schools will be reduced by 700, and
changes to greenbelt paseos, roadway paseos and major streets were found to be
negligible.
The proposed land use changes (from Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7 to
Amendment No. 8) would result in an overall reduction traffic impacts associated with the
Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7). While substantial, this reduction would not be
great enough to eliminate the need for the traffic improvements identified elsewhere in this
section. The developer will continue to be responsible for payment of development impact
fees in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City. However, with the
reduction in traffic volumes associated with Amendment No. 8, the developer's fair share
contribution of development impact fees shall be concomitantly reduced.
WATER AND SEWER
Previously Identified Impacts
A preliminary water and sewer report6 was prepared for the Paloma del Sol project in 1987.
The site lies within the Rancho Villages Assessment District (providing for major
infrastructure improvements), Rancho California Water District (water service), and Eastern
Municipal Water District (sewer services). The site lies within the 1305, 1380, and 1485
pressure zone systems, with the majority of the site lying within 1380 pressure zone system.
Sewage from Paloma del Sol would be treated at the EMW'D's Rancho California Regional
Water Reclamation Facility. The EMWD site is (was) proposed to expand its capacity in
time to adequately serve the needs of Paloma del Sol residents.
6Preliminary Investigation on Water and Sewer Service for Vail Meadows (August 1987)
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 23 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Approximately four million gallons of water reservoir storage would be required for the
previously approved Paloma del Sol project. This storage would be provided by existing
reservoirs in the local area. It is unknown whether additional reservoir storage would be
constructed for future use.
In addition, approximately 100 gallons of sewage per person per day (the Eastern Municipal
Waste District's sewage generation factor) would be generated by the project, which is
approximately 1,453,771 million gallons per day for the Paloma del Sol project. The
proposed infrastructure wastewater collection facilities to ultimately serve the project was
based on ElVlWD's overall system master planning for the Rancho Villages Assessment
District. See V.D.2 for further discussion and exhibits.
In order to mitigate for potential impacts associated with the original Paloma del Sol Specific
plan, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) Health and Safety Code
Section 17921.3 requires low-flush toilets and urinals in all buildings; 2) Tide 20, California
Administrative Code Section 1606 (b) establishes efficiency standards that set the maximum
flow rate of all new showerheads, lavatory faucets, etc.; 3) Title 20 of the CAD Sections
prohibits the sale of fixtures that do not comply with regulations; 4) Title 24 CAD 2-5307 (b)
prohibits the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the CEC
compliance with flow rate standards; 5) Tide 24 CAD Sections 2-5352 (i) and 0) address
pipe insulation requirements, which can reduce water used before hot water reaches
equipment or fixtures; 6) Health and Safety Code Section 4047 prohibffs installation of
residential water softening or conditioning appliances unless certain conditions are satisfied;
7) Government Code Section 7800 specifies that lavatories in all public facilities be equipped
with self-closing faucets that limit the flow of hot water.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposed 5,611 dwellihg units and 54 acres of
commercial development. In December 1995, the Eastern Municipal Water District
(EMWD) adopted an Urban Water Management Plan using Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. I as the basis for the project. The Urban Water Management Plan assumes
a total of 5,604 dwelling units in Paloma del Sol at project build out, in addition to 51 acres
of commercial uses, 63 acres of public uses, and 129 acres of park. These uses were factored
into the long term non-potable water needs of the EMWD. The current proposal
(Amendment No. 8) would provide a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units, 45.5 acres of
commercial development, 53 acres of public uses (including the schools and the day care
center), and 145.9 acres of park/recreation areas, greenbelt paseos and roadway paseos.
Although demand for non-potable water for use in the park/recreation areas, greenbelt paseos
and roadway paseos within the proposed project would increase somewhat from that
anticipated in the Urban Water Management Plan. Non-potable water usage for all of the
other uses would incrementally decrease when compared with the assumptions made in the
original Paloma del Sol EIR and EMWD's adopted Urban Water Management Plan.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 24 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Therefore, the net change in non-potable water usage would be insignificant.
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137
dwelling units and 45.5 acres of commemial land uses, a reduction of 474 dwelling units and
a decrease of 8.5 acres of commercial uses from the original Specific Plan. Consequently,
the decrease in residential development would result in a reduction in water usage of
approximately 284,400 gallons per day for residential uses (assumes 600 gpd/du) and a
reduction of 17,000 gpd for the 8.5 acres of commercial uses. The addition of the 20.0-acre
junior high school (not included in the original Specific Plan) would increase water usage by
another 40,000 gallons per day (assumes 2,000 gpd/ac). Furthermore, if it is assumed that
the water requirements for the elementary schools and the open space and park/recreation
areas remain essentially unchanged, then the new project would result in a reduction in water
demand of 261,400 gallons per day when compared with the original Specific Plan.
Table 5, below, identifies the estimated usage and impacts after mitigation for both the
Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7) and the Proposed Project (i.e., Amendment No.
8).
Table 5
Pubflc Utilities and Services Comparison
Approved Project I Proposed Project
Public (Amendment No. 7)] (Amendment No. 8)
Utilities and
Service Estimated Usage Impact after Estimated Usage Impact after
Mitigation Mitigation
Water? 4,026,400 gallons Insignificant 3,765,000 gallons Insignificant
Sewers 1,845,300 gallons Insignificant 1,453,771 gallons Insignificant
7600 gallons/day for residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial, 3,800 gallons/acre/day for parks
s 300 gallons per day per residences, 3,000 gallons/acre/day for commercial
The Proposed Project would result in reduced impacts to water and sewer when compared to
the Approved Project. Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation measures specified
in Section V.D of the certified EIR for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, potentially
significant impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance.
R. Svavic .s
O
Previously Identffied Impacts
The project site is presently provided with fire protection services by the Riverside County
Fire Department in cooperation under contract with the City of Temecula. The Pauba Fire
Station on Panba Road services the site.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 25 of 36 October 26, 2001
AnDENDUM NO. 4 TO 235
The original EIR found that the existing tim station, which is located within three miles of
the project site, would only provide Category Ill level of protection. However, that station
was determined not to be adequate to serve the project site. Consequentiy, the original
Paloma del Sol Specific plan would be subject to Development Impact Fees to offset the cost
of providing a new fire station within a five-minute response time to the project site. This
would mitigate the project's impacts to fire-related services to a level below significance.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling units and 54 acres of
commercial land uses. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan proposes a
maximum of 5,137 dwelling units and 45.5 acres of commercial land uses, a reduction of 474
dwelling units and a decrease of 8.5 acres of commercial uses. The change in land uses
between Amendments No. 7 and 8 is even smaller: When compared to Amendment No. 7,
the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would decreased by 174 dwelling units
(Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would
result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented.
The acreage of proposed commercial development in Amendment No. 8 remains the same as
the commercial acreage associated with Amendment No. 7. The net effect of these land use
changes would not significantly change the response times from the existing fire station to
the project site. Accordingly, the significant impacts associated with the previous assessment
for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, would require similar mitigation to reduce the
impacts to a level below significant.
SHERII,'F SERVICES
Previously Identified Impacts
Police services are provided to the site by Riverside County Sheriffs Department, which
operates from the Lake Elsinore Sheriff's Station. The County and City recognize the need
for additional sheriff services with the increase in population. The EIR states that the
Sheriff's department attempts to maintain a ratio of one deputy for every 4,000 persons,
while a letter from the Sheriffs Department reflects the need for one deputy per 1,500
people. According to the City of Temecula's General Plan, one deputy per 1,000 people is
the desired ratio.
In order to mitigate the project's impacts associated with police services, the applicant of the
original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would be required to coordinate with the Riverside
County Sheriff s Department to assure that proper protection facilities and personnel would
be available. To ensure safety to the residents of the original Paloma del Sol project, safety
measures would be incorporated in the design of the project's circulation components (for
pedestrians, vehicles, and police), street lighting, residential door and window visibility from
street and buildings, and fencing.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 26 of 36 October 26, 2001
AI)DENDUM NO. 4 TO EIB 235'
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The original Paloma del Sol Specific plan proposed 5,611 dwelling un/ts, which would
equate to a population Of 15,879 persons, assuming a generation factor of 2.83 persons per
unit as indicated in the City of Temecula General Plan. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del
Sol Specific Plan proposes a maximum of 5,137 dwelling units, which represents a reduction
of 474 dwelling units or 1,342 project residents from that proposed in the original Specific
Plan. Assuming a County standard of one deputy per 1,500 persons, then Specific Plan
Amendment No 8 would generate a need for 9.7 deputies. This is a reduction from the 10.6
deputies required under the original Specific Plan (as recalculated using the Sheriff
Deparunent's current ratio of one deputy per 1,'500 persons). It should be noted that the
original EIR was prepared using a different deputy/population ratio. Updating the original
EIR to use the current Sheriff's Department current deputy/population milo, would increase
the deputies need to adequately serve the original Specific Plan from 8.4 to 10.6 deputies.
Impacts to sheriff services would be reduced by 0.9 deputy.
When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8
would decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units
(Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents,
depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with
Amendment No. 8 would result in a slight reduction in impacts to sheriff services of 0.4
deputy for the Proposed Land Use Plan and 0.2 deputy for the Adult Retirement Option.
Consequently, Impacts to utilities would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required.
SCHOOLS
Previously Identified Impacts
The Paloma del Sol project lies within the Temecula Valley Unified School District
(TVUSD) for grades K-12. The entire project will be served by three existing elementary.
schools:
Abby Reinke Elementary School (K-5), 43799 Sunny Meadows Drive, Temecula
(Planning Area 11 on-site);
Paloma Elementary School (K-5), 42940 Via Rami, Temecula (located off-site); and
Joan F. Sparkman Elementary School (K-5), 32225 Pin Pico Road, Temeeula
(Planning Area 7 on-site).
Abby Reinke Elementary School is partially built and is being built in phases, although it is
presently serving students. Estimated completion date for the school is approximately 2002.
Although the Specific Plan designates an additional site for another elementary school within
the project (Planning Area 32 in the Approved Project), the TVUSD has indicated that this
site is no longer needed (see dated February 4, 1999 letter in the Appendix), since most of the
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 27 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
dwelling units within the Paloma Del Sol project have already been built and are not
generating as many students as originally predicted. Planning Area 32 will develop with
Medium density (2-5 du/ac) residential uses instead of an elementary school.
The project includes a middle school in Planning Area 30, adjacent to Meadows Parkway.
This school (Temecula Middle School) is open and serves students in grades 6-8. Temecula
Middle School is located at 42075 Meadows Parkway. Existing high school students in
Paloma Del Sol attend (and new students will also attend) Temecula Valley High School,
which serves grades 9-12. The high school is located at 31555 Rancho Vista Road adjacent
to Margarita Road.
According to the certified EIR for the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, the project
would generate an estimated 3,086 students in Grades K-8 (based upon
TVUSD's generation factor of 0.55 students per dwelling unit). In addition, 1,178 high
school students would be generated from the previously approved project (based upon
Elsinore Union High School District's generation factor of 0.21 students per dwelling unit).
The certified EIR determined that the proposed 61 acres of school sites would provide
adequate school services for TVUSD students. Since certification of the EIR, the project is
building out at a lower density than originally envisioned. Therefore, the number of students
generated by the proposed project will be reduced accordingly. The Temecula Valley
Unified School District has already determined that the Junior High School site in Planning
Area 30 is no longer required.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The original EIR assumed that the original Specific Plan project would generate 3,086 K-8
students and 1,178 high school students. Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan would result in a reduction of 539 single-family dwelling units (assuming that Planning
Area 8 would built out with 335 single family homes) from that anticipated in the original
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Using generation factors of 0.55 students per unit for Grades
K-8 and 0.21 students per unit for high school, there would be a decrease of 296 K-8 students
and 113 high school students from those generated by the Original Specific Plan project.
Amendment No. 8 will reduce impacts to schools, and no further mifigaton is required.
U. PARKS AND RECREATION
Previously Identified Impacts
Implementation of the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment
No. 7) would create a demand for parks and recreation facilities in the project area. To meet
this demand, the Specific Plan includes an extensive Open Space and Recreation Program.
This program will provide 142.5 acres of land for park, recreational open space, parkway and
pasco uses, which is equivalent to 9.53 acres of park and recreation land per 1,000 residents.
The provision of this acreage will adequately mitigate the increased recreational demands
generated by the Approved Project.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 28 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Implementation of Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a
reduction of 474 dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan. The reduction Would cause 1,351 fewer project residents (based on the City of
Temecula's generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit). When compared to
Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 has decreased by 174
dwelling units and 109 dwelling units under the adult retirement option, while the total park
and recreation acreage has increased slightly from 142.5 to 144.0 acres.
Amendment No. 8 includes 30.6 acres of parks/recreation areas, 31.9 acres of greenbelts, and
81.5 acres of roadway paseos for a combined park and recreation total acreage of 144.0 acres.
The approved Development Agreement allows for parks, greenbelts, and roadway paseos to
count toward park and recreation credit. A comparison of park and recreation open space for
both Amendment No. 7 and Amendment No. 8 is contained in Table 6, Park/Recreation
Acreage Comparison Analysis.
Table 6
Park/Recreation Acreage Comparison Analysis
Ameodmont / Plan No. of Population Amount of Amount of Acreage
Dwelling Multiplier Park/Rec Park/Rec That
Units Acreage Required Acreage Exceeds
(5 AC/I,000) Provided 5 AC/l,000
Amendment No. 7: 5,246 2.85 74.8 142.5 +67.7
Adopted Land Use Plan
Amendment Proposed LUP 5,072 2.85 72.3 144.0 +71.7
No. 8:
Proposed Adult 5,137 2.85 73.2 144.0 +70.8
Land Use Retirement .
Plan Option
As depicted in Table 6, above, Amendment No. 8 would result in a net increase of 1.5 acres
of land devoted to park and recreation uses over that provided in Amendment No. 7.
Therefore, Amendment No. 8 would not result in any increase in potentially significant
impacts associated with parks and recreation. No additional mitigation measures are
warranted.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 29 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDIDA NO. 4 TO EIR 235
V. UTILITIES
Special Background Information
Beginning in January 2001, California began to experience a shortage in the supply of
electricity. That situation was a result of three fundamental changes within the organization
of the power industry: (1) a halt in power plant construction during the 1990's, (2)
deregulation in 1996, and (3) an increase in the price of natural gas.
According to the Califomia Department of Water Resources (DWR), the majority of the
energy crisis stems from the lack of new plant construction during the 1990's, which
corresponded directly to the decline in the availability of electrical energy early in 2001.
Because of the decreasing supply and a high demand for energy, the wholesale price of
electricity began to rise. This situation was further exacerbated by deregulation. The
deregulation agreement of 1996 placed a price cap on thc dollar amount the California
utilities, like SCE, could charge their customers. Because of the price cap, SCE was forced
to charge consumers less for energy than the price they had to pay. This price discrepancy
eventually forced SCE into debt, and because of waning credit the company was no longer
able to buy enough power to satisfy demand. SCE, however, was able to buy power on a
daily basis with cash reserves, but this was not a reliable means by which to supply all of
their customers on a continual basis.
As a direct result of SCE's financial difficulties, on January 17, 2001, the DWR was given
authority to purchase power on behalf of SCE. The power purchased by DWR was used to
supply those customers who were beyond the daily capacity of SCE. The DWR paid for the
electricity with funds from the State of California General Fund and this money would be
reimbursed to the State by a three cent 0¢) increase per Kilowatt hour (KW) charge. This
charge was added to consumers' bills starting on June 3, 2001. Additionally, on August 21,
2001, the Califomia Senate passed a bill allowed SCE to issue bonds for up to $2.9 billion.
The money generated from the bonds will allow SCE to reimburse the companies they owe;
approximately 70 percent of their debt. Most notably, these measures are a first step to
providing SCE with the ability to regain its credit status, thus, enabling SCE to begin
providing all of its customers with electricity.
In addition to the steps taken by SCE and the state, within the last year the California Energy
Commission (CEC) has approved a total of 16 power plant projects. Of these approved
projects three have been completed and are currently producing 1,415 Megawatts 0VlW) of
electricity per year (one MegaWatt supplies 750 homes). An additional plant, an out-of-
service unit in Huntington Beach, is being upgraded and retrofitted, and completion is
expected in November 2001. This plant will add an additional 450 MW per year to the
energy grid. The remaining 12 plants are either being constructed or are in the process of
obtaining financing. These 12 plants are expected to be online between 2001 and 2004 (see
Table 7, California Power Plant Project Status). In addition, the CEC is reviewing
proposals for 20 new power plants, and has announced plans for 31 additional power plants.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 30 of 36 October 26. 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Combined, these 79 projects, which will be located throughout California, will result in an
additional 30,482 MW produced per year. These projects are expected to be completed
between September 2001 and August 2005. Most notably, eight of these power plants will
be located in Riverside County and seven will be located in San Bemardino County.
It is important to note that some aging facilities will require special pollution permits and
expensive maintenance, which may render them too costly to operate. Therefore, some
power plants presently producing energy may be taken off-line. Additionally, approximately
22 executive orders were issued by Governor Gray Davis in the first six months of 2001.
The intent of these executive orders was to promote conservation and to temporarily ease
restrictions found within the California Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQG) that
pertain to power generation. More specifically, the executive order'eased regulations
pertaining to power plant construction, shortened new plant approval time, eased power
generation restrictions, and eased overall plant production and management guidelines. Most
of these executive orders will expire December 31, 2001, which will cause the approval time
for new power plants, existing plant emission standards, and overall plant management
requirements to revert to the standards set forth in the (CEQG).
Table 7
California Power Plant Project Status
Projects approved Over 300 Capadty (MW) Location Status On.line Date
Mega Watt (MW) (By County)
Sunrise~ 320 Kern Co. Operational June 2001
Sutter~ 540 Sutter Co. Operational July 2001
Los Mendanoa~ 555 Contra Costa Operational July 2001
Operational Total 1,415
Huntington BeachI 450 Orange Co. Construction Nov. 2001
La Paloma 1,048 - Kern Co. Construction - April-June
2002
Delta2 880 Contra Costa Construction April 2002
Moss Landing2 1,060 Monterey Co. Construction June 2002
High Desert 720 San Benardino3 Construction July 2003
Elk Hills 500 Kern Co. Construction March 2003
Blythe 520 Riverside Co? Construction March 2003
Pastoria 750 Kern Co. Construction January 2003
Operational and Under 7,343
Construction Subtotal
1,056 San Bernardino3 ] Financing ] June 2003
Mountain
View
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 31 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Projects approved Over 300 Capacity (MW) Location Status On-line Date
Mega Watt (MW) (By County)
Otay Mesa S 10 San Diego Co. Financing July 2003
Three Mountain 500 Shasta Co. Financing December 2003
Comra Costa 530 Conga Mesa Financing July 2003
Midway-Sunset 500 Kern Co. Financing June 2004
Financing Subtotal 10,439
Wildflowcr Larkspur 90 San Diego Co. Construction July 2001
Wildflower Indigo 135 Riverside Co.3 ConsU'uetion July 2001
Alliance Century 40 San Berusrdino 3 Construction September
2001
Alliance Drews 40 San Bemardino~ Construction September
2001
GWF Hanf°rd 95 Kings Co. Construction September
2001
C. alpine Gilroy Phase I 135 San~a Clara Co. Construction September
2001
Calpeak Escondido 49.5 San Diego Co. Construction September
2001
Under Construction Subtotal 584.5
Pegasus 180 San Bernardino Financing April 2002
Co?
Calpine King City 50 Monterey Co. Financing December2001
Calpine Gilroy · 49.5 San Diego Co. Financing - Septemb~'--
2001
Financing Subtotal 864
APPROVED TOTAL 11,303
~2 Denotes power plants that became operational in the sununer of 2001
Denotes power plants that are expected to be operational in the summer of 2002
Denotes power plants that will eventually be operational in the region of thc proposed project.
*Source: California Energy Commission (CEC), Website: htto://www.ener~,v.ca.~ov/sitinecases
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 32 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
Previously Identified Impacts
The residential, commercial and office uses in the Approved Project (i.e., Specific Plan
Amendment No. 7) will create a demand for energy estimated at 63,388,761 kWH per year
for electricity and 35,574,929 cubic feet/month (4,115,715 therms per year per dwelling unit
based on new ussage rates) for natural gas. The Southern California Edison Company and
the Southern California Gas Company provide electricity to the project site and have
indicated that they would be able to meet these estimated demands.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
When compared to Amendment No. 7, the number of dwelling units in Amendment'No. 8
would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units
(Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents,
depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population associated with
Amendment No. 8 would result in a corresponding reduction in utility demand (see Table 8,
Estimated Natural Gas and Electricity Demand Comparison). Consequently, impacts to
utilities would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required.
Table 8
Estimated Natural Gas and Electricity Demand Corn ~arison
Public Approved Project [ Proposed Project
Utilities and (Amendment No. 7)I (Amendment No. 8)
Impact after Impact after
Service Estimated Usage Mitigation Estimated Usage Mitl,o~,finn
4,115,715 therms per 3,976,688 therms per
year per dwelling unit year per dwelling unit
Natural Gas~ (based on new usage Insignificant (based on new usage Insignificant
rates) rates)
42,030,975 kWh per year
Elec~city6 (63,388,761 based on Insignificant 37,958,936 kWh per Insignificant
~ new usage rates) year .
~ New generation rates provided by Southern California Gas Co. (SCG) provide for 799 therms/yesr/dwelling
unit for single-family residences and 483 therms/year/dwelling unit for multi-family dwellings of five or more units.. Due
to the fact that construction varies so widely (e.g., a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and that there is such
a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for commercial
conslruction from SCG.
65,621 kWh/du/yr for residential, and 13.54 kWh/sf/yr for commercial
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 33 of 36 October 26, 2001
AnDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
O
SOLm WASTE
Previously Identified Impacts
The project site is located within the El Sobrante service area. The Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan will result in an increase in the amount of solid waste generated on the project site when
compared to e~(isting conditions. There will also be a corresponding increase in the service
needs for waste haulers. The population of 14,546 estimated to be generated by Proposed
Project will result in approximately 57.5 tons of waste a day assuming that 7.9 pounds of
waste is generated per person per day. This will incrementally shorten the life span of the E1
Sobrante Landfill; however, the landfill has received County approvals for a major multi-year
expansion that would dramatically extend the life expectancy of the landfill. The expansion
project is already under construction. In addition, California law currently requires all
municipalities to recycle or divert 50% of their solid waste streams from landfills. This
practice is expected to continue and will also contribute to the life expectancy of the landfill.
Analysis of Change in Project ImPacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474
dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction
would result in 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula General Plan's
generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit).
When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling
units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use
Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311
fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in
population associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in the generation of less amounts
of solid waste, which would reduce the demand for landfill space. Consequently, impacts
associated with solid waste would be reduced, and no further mitigation is required.
Lml~P.I~S
Previously Identified Impacts
The project is currently served by library facilities located near the intersection of Ynez Road
and Rancho California Road in Rancho California. Due to the increase in population that
Paloma del Sol will generate, mitigation fees will be required by the project to increase the
facility size, book collection and library staff.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474
dwelling units when compared to the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction
would result in 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula General Plan's
generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit).
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 34 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDESDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
ge
When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling
units in Amendment No. 8 would decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use Plan)
or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311 fewer
project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in population
associated with Amendment No. 8 would result in less demand for books, library space, and
library facilities. Since impacts to libraries would be reduced, and no further mitigation is
required.
HEALTH SERVICES
Previously Identified Impacts
The following medical facilities serve the project area: (1) Inland Valley Regional Medical
Center (80 beds); '(2) Menifee Valley Medical Center (84 beds); and (3) Rancho Springs
Medical Center (99 beds). Other facilities for specialized medical cases are also located
throughout the area. No mitigation measures are required, as it is believed that medical
facilities respond to "market" demand.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474
dwelling units when compared with the original Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. The reduction
would mean a decrease of 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon City of Temecula's new
generation factor of 2.85 persons per dwelling unit).
When compared to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No. 7), the number of dwelling
units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling units (Proposed Land Use
Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which would result in 496 or 311
fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets implemented. The reduction in
population that would occur if Amendment No. 8 is implemented would result in a reduced
demand for health services. Consequently, impacts to health services would be reduced,and
no further mitigation is required.
AIRPORTS
Previously Identified Impacts
Paloma del Sol is not affected by any "Airport Influence Areas," and therefore was not
discussed in the adopted EIR, nor were mitigation measures require~l.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
The project is not within an Airport Influence area, and does not require mitigation measures.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 35 of 36 October 26, 2001
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
AA. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
Previously Identified Impacts
Earthquakes, floods, and wildfires are natural occun-ences that cannot be prevented. The
County Office of Disaster Preparedness is responsible for coordinating the various agencies
to assure preparedness and recovery from a natural disaster. Seismic safety, slopes and
erosion, wind erosion and blowsand, flooding, and fire services impacts and accompanying
mitigation are discussed in separate sections of the EIR.
Analysis of Change in Project Impacts
Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan would result in a reduction of 474
dw~lling units, or 1,351 fewer project residents (based upon the City of Temecula's new
generation factor of 2.85 persohs per dwelling unit), from that envisioned in the original
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. In comparison to the Approved Project (i.e., Amendment No.
7), the number of dwelling units in Amendment No. 8 would be decreased by 174 dwelling
units (Proposed Land Use Plan) or 109 dwelling units (Adult Retirement Option), which
would result in 496 or 311 fewer project residents, depending upon which plan gets
implemented. Implementation of either the Proposed Land Use Plan or the Adult Retirement
Option would result in a reduction in population that would be exposed to seismic safety
hazards, including ground shaking. As such, no further mitigation is necessary.
III. CONCLUSION
In all cases, impacts associated with implementation of the Proposed Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 8) would be the same as or less than those analyzed in the
certified FEIR and Addendum No. 3 for the Approved Project (i.e., Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 7). The Proposed Project will be required to comply with all mitigation
measures identified in the certified FEIR and the subsequent EIR addendums,including this gTR
addendum (i.e., Addendum No. 4). No additional mitigation measures are necessary to reduce
potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance.
PALOMA DEL SOL Page 36 of 36 October 26, 2001
APPENDIX
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO EIR 235
PO ]~x 43~00
Tcn~..,~. CA.
mm~er OO$~F~O12-U48 (~1S~c ~n ~ ?~eo ~ Scl Project), will mt ra~im ~ wig not
mq'mst say ~tkm~ sctu~ ,~tc or s/t= w~t~ th~ Project ~ say ~m~ in ~ ~ ~ ~
Tcau:cu~ V~ U~ Scts~ ~ ca Oc~b~ 20.
EXHIBIT B
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION MAP
R:\S P AE2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc gpa res_doc
4
b_l
Z
Eo
ATrACHMENT NO 2
DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4)
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc
9
ATrACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0102 (SPECIFIC
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8) FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC
PLAN LOCATED EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 79
SOUTH, WEST OF BU'I-rERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF
PAUBA ROAD BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION.
WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0102 (the
"Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code,
CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on November 7, 2001 at a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons
had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on ,2001, at a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had
an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, made all required findings and
determinations relative thereto and after finding that the project proposed in the Application
conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the
following findings as required in Chapter 17.16 of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposed specific plan amendment is consistent with the General Plan, as it is
proposed to be amended, and Development Code. The proposed Specific Plan amendment is
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Development Code. The Specific
Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of existing Land Use Designations and serves as an
implementation tool for the General Plan. Therefore, as proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent
with the Genera~ Plan, as it is proposed to be amended.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc spa res_doc
B. The Specific Plan Amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the
City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program
Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare
of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a master planned community with specific design
guidelines and standards that ensure compatibility and interface with the surrounding community in
terms of density, design and circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and designed, the
Specific Plan is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested land use designations
and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints of the site which
would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or anticipated developments.
Moreover, the proposed Specific Plan land uses are consistent with the land uses of the General
Plan and will serves as the tool to regulate and implement the goals and policies of the General
Plan. The applicant has submitted an application for Tentative Tract Map which indicates that the
site is physically suitable for the land uses and development proposed in the Specific Plan.
D. The proposed project will ensure development of desirable character which will be
compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project
proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding neighborhoods, with
extensive landscape buffers and interfaces. The commercial office/neighborhood commercial
development is proposed within a Village Center and is designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve
the needs of the Paloma Del Sol community. The proposed commercial office/neighborhood
commercial land is north of Highway 79 South where similar commercial and retail uses currently
exist along the Highway corridor.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula has
certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for Paloma Del Sol Specific
Plan, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and finds that the Addendum
was prepared consistent with applicable CEQA provisions. The Council also finds that the
Addendum was considered in association with the approval of this Specific Plan Amendment.
Section 4. Specific Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the
specific plan amendment known as the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, on
property located east of Margarita Road, north of Highway 79 South, west of Butterfield Stage Road
and south of Pauba Road, as contained in Exhibit A and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval contained in Exhibit B.
R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc spa res..doc
2
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Department this 7th day of November 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No.
2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
R:LS P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~cc spa res..doc
3
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO SPECIFIC PLAN
R:\S P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doe
10
~l~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO PALOMA DEL SOL 0VIEADOWS) SPECIFIC PLAN
The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 was filed pursuant to City Council approval of
the "Agreement Regarding Paloma del Sol" on January 11, 1994. Amendment No. 4 added 6.5 acres of
Very High density residential to Planning Area 6 and 1.5 acres of Park to Planning Area 37, reduced the
Community/Neighborhood Commercial area in Planning Area 1 by 4.9 acres, and reduced major roads
acreage by 3.1 acres.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 5 increased the number of Medium density dwelling units from 2,338 to
2,487, reduced the number of Medium-High density dwelling units from 2,356 to 2,251, reduced the
number of Multi-family dwelling units from 910 to 590, added a 4.0-acre Park/Recreation area site,
increased the Community/Neighborhood Commemial acreage from 31.5 acres to 32.3 acres, and reduced
the roadway landscape requirements adjacent to commercial uses.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 ei~compassed several minor changes to the Specific Plan. The Park in
Planning Area 29A was increased from 4.0 acres to 5.0 acres. Planning Area 28 was reduced in size by
one acre resulting in a reduction of dwelling units from 117 to 113. The dwelling units were transferred
to Planning Area 2 bringing the total number of units in Planning Area 2 up to 120. Roadway cross-
sections and standards ha¥,~ b~c. ,vere updated to conformwith the City's General Plan. Access points
and neighborhood entries on certain planning areas l,,~v,~ bce,ia, ere relocated to conform with approved
Tentative Tract Maps. Streets "G" and "H" have bccnwere renamed as Campanula Way. The phasing
plan has been revised to reflect current expectations, and wording has been added that gives the Director
of Community Development the authority to allow minor variations from Specific Plan standards
without a Specific Plan amendment. Overall, Specific Plan Amendment No. 6 did not result in any total
acreage or dwelling unit changes.
Th,~ v,,,v,~ocd Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 involvesgl_ land use changes in Planning Areas 1, 6, and
8, the creation of Planning Areas l(a), "Village Core," and l(b), "Villages," and the realignment and
reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road to Meadows Parkway. As part of the
v,'c,~,o~cd changes to Planning Area 1, an application tras-bevn was submitted to the City of Temecula
to process Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan in conjunction with a Development Plan and a 10-year
Development Agreement (which contains an additional 15 year covenant allowing rebuilding and uses
in accordance with the Development Agreement for a total of 25 years), both pertaining only to a portion
of what i~ c,,~,,~i~l.~ was designated by adcrpted Amendment No. 6 as Planning Area 1. The Amendment
will included a division of Planning Area 1 into a series of subgroups identified as Planning Areas 1, 1 (a)
and 1 (b) for planning purposes with the existing Lucky dc¥cl,.,tJia~,~[ super market center and remaining
undeveloped community/neighborhood commercial property north of Lucky the super market center
along Margarita Road frontage ;o bc known as Planning Area 1. The Development Plan application will
focused on the newly created Planning Areas la and lb. The Development Plan ;~ill permitted the
construction of a 276,243 square foot community commercial center with a centralized village core and
a series of supporting focused retail villages on 24-acres with.locations for community gathering places
and pedestrian linkages to join the surrounding uses in support of the village concept.
PALOI~A DEL SOL I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AmeNDmENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-1
~1 SUMMARY OF CHANGES
The village core -,~ill bccc~.q~.isc, d of was designed to provide interactive peopleqnviting spaces h'~a; will
~in conjunction with sit-down restaurants, small scale food establishments, offices, and retail uses
surrounding and connected to a large active courtyard plaza ~l,a~ .ill include containing both passive
and active water features. In the village core common area, a friendly atmosphere will bc was created
to promote the use for live performances, interactive demonstra6ons and community events. To support
the village core, a series of retail villages will be established to enhance the synergy of the community
shopping center. The four sub-villages will include a "Home Village," a "Sports Village," a "Music and
Media Village," and a "Food and Healthy Village." A baal dcoviiv~ic, a of cacL ,illagc ia as fc, ll~'a.
............ :- - ' pd ig
,~.,., ............... ~ cc, nh,..iii~y. In addition, Amendment No. 7 added u ated v nettes ....
ad&d to the Design Guidelines (see Figures 16A, 16B; and 16C) to provide varying perspectives of the
proposed 35-acre Planning Area.
PALOMA DEL SOL I. SLrIvlMA. RY OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-2
~l~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES
As part of Amendment No. 7, Planning Area 6 will be was reduced from 36.3 acres to 34.3 acres to
account for the increased size of Planning Area 1. In addition, Planning Area 6 will bc was divided into
two planning areas 6A and 6B. Planning Area 6A ,~ill now includes 22.3 acres a,,d ~ill bc dcvclo~d
as High density (9-12 du/ac) residential with a maximum of 268 dwelling units. Planning Area 6B i~
plash,Cd fy, includes 12 acres of Very High density (13-20 alu/ac) residential with a maximum of 240
dwelling units. The reduction and division of Planning Area 6 will resulted in a decrease of 82 dwelling
units from 590 to 508 units. All affected base maps and land use tables have bce, were updated to
reflect these proposed changes to Planning Area 6 and a descriptive summary of Planning Areas 6A and
6B have bce, was added to Section III. SPECIFIC PLAN.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 also proposes_d the development of an active senior community within
Planning Area 8. A Tentative Tract Map for the active senior project |ia,¢ ~ .... was submitted along
ithAme dm 7 P1 i gar 8 ..........................................
...................... ign pi
........ ~ .................now includes feature des standards that will enable this arming area
to be developed as a private gated active senior community. If developed as an active senior community,
· Planning Area 8 will include a private recreation area for senior community residents and contain
street/sidewalk landscaping and housing architecture targeted for active adult living. As pan of
Amendment No. 7, eExamples of the planned unique senior streeffsidewalk landscaping and housing
architecture ha~c l~c;ii were incorporated into Section IV. DESIGN GUIDELINES (See Figures 51A-E).
As a result of the changes proposed for Planning Area 1, a rcallg,-,~ical of Campanula Way io gl .....
......................................... was altered from a through ay at
a 100-foot right-of-way to a 78-foot right-of-way with two traffic circles (which will require a-122-foot
right.5-of-way at their widest points_) and limited on-street parallel parking. The northerly segment
intersects with De Portola Road and provide_s access to Planning Area 6A, Planning Area 38 and
Planning Area 37. The southeasterly segment ,,,>,,Id intersects with Meadows Parkway and woald
services the commercial center and Planning Area 6B. The roadway segment woald allows for the
provision of on-street parking to promote the village center concept. The alteration will resulted in a
total reduction of 0.7-acre in major streets aorta. All affected base maps ,5a~c bce. were changed to
reflect the realigned design with traffic circles including bicycle routing and utility services.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, which is fully described in this document, reduces the
total number of residential dwelling units within the overall Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan from the
currently entitled 5,246 units to a maximum of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units.
This dwelling unit decrease represents a 2% to 3% reduction in residential units. The High and Very
High categories would remain unchanged by approval of Amendment No .8. The decrease in overall
net residential density from 5.1 du/ac to 4.9 du/ac results in the allocation of more land to each single
family detached residential unit. The gross project density decreases similarly from 3.8 du/ac to 3.6
du/ac. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted in the original Specific Plan, the total
decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at 5,137 du) to 10% (at 5,072 du).
PALOMADELSO~ I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-3
~1~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES
.... 2 483
C ...... aky)
,,,~ ......... 22.3 26~
Vc,~ .... 36 ............... 0
.... ~ .......... .32.3 35.0
"~'~ .......... ITS .... ~ ......... 17.$
.......... ~ ......... 20.0 .......... ~ ......... 20.0
.......... ~ ...... ~ 41.0
32.5
..... 28 0 .....
...... M.j ~' ' 102
· ,,,j ....... I03.4 ~ ....... 7
The commemial uses planned for Planning Area 27 at the comer of Pauba and Butterfield Sta~e Road
have been eliminated. Planning Area 27 has been reconfigured and relocated to an area south of the
Planning Area 28 and 29 and includes 9.0 acres from Meadows Parkway to Butteffield Stage Road. This
area will be preserved as natural open space, and contains existing wetland vegetation. This change is
accompanied by the reconfiguration of Planning Areas 24, 28 and 29 and elimination of Planning Area
29B.
Planning Area 24 in Amendment No. 7 is desi~ated for 2.9 acres of Park/Recreation uses on the border
between Planning Areas 13 and 23. In Amendment No. 8, Planning Area 24 will be reduced by 1.9 acres
and shifted north to be located adjacent to the southern border of Planning Area 27 and adjacent to the
northern right-of-way of Sunny Meadows Drive.
A new Park/Recreation Area (Planning Area 24) has been located adjacent to the Planning Area 27 Open
Space. The former Planning Area 24 (designated in Amendment No. 7 as a Park/Recreation Area
situated between Planning Areas 13 and 23) has been merged into the greenbelt system and is no longer
identified as a separate Planning Area, although the area still exists. Overall, the acreage devoted to
PALOMA DEL SOL I. SUMIVLkRY OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDM~I~T NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-4
~ SUMMARY OF CHANGES
Greenbelt Paseos within Paloma del Sol has increased since the former location of the Planning Area
24 Park/Recreation site has been incorporated into the paseo greenbelt system.
Planning Area 28 has expanded from 25.0 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No.
7 to 49.4 acres of Medium density residential uses in Amendment No. 8. The number of dwellings
proposed in Planning 28 correspondingly increased from 113 to 190 units.
Planning Area 29 remains as a Park/Recreation Area, but the location and configuration of the parcel
are somewhat altered. However, the acreage of this Park/Recreation Area remains unchanged at 5.0
acres. In addition, the elementary school proposed for Planning Area 29B in Amendment No. 7 has been
deleted from the land use plan since the Temecula Valley Unified School District has indicated that the
site is no longer needed.
Due to the high demand for office and commercial uses in the village center area near the super market
center and the planned Home Depot, Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes that the
8.0-acm medium high residential uses allocated for Planning Area 38 be converted to
Community[Neighborhood Commercial. Planning area specific development standards have been
established for Planning Area 38. (See Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No.
In addition, the residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been changed from
Medium High to Medium.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 also proposes several minor residential dwelling unit and acreage
adiustments in Planning Areas 3, 4, 9, 13, 14, and 26 to reflect the approved and constructed
implementing tracts.
An acreage and dwelling unit comparison between Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8 is delineated on the next page.
PALOM~ DEL SOL I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page 1-5
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SUMMARY OF CHANGES TABLE
(Comparison of Specific Plan Amendments No. 7 and 8)
S.P. No. 219 Amendment No. 7 S.P. No. 219 Amendment No. 8
Land Use Density Acres Dwelling Land Use Density Acres Dwelling
DU/AC Units DU/AC Units
Medium 4.24 491.0 2,083 Medium 4.2 610,7 2,551
Medium (Senior 4.49 89.0 400 Medium (Senior ; 3.8/4.5* 89.0 335'/400
Community) Community)
Medium High 5.41 416.5 2,255 Medium High 5.5 303.8 1,678
High 12.0 22.3 268 High 12.0 22.3 268
Very High 20,0 12.0 240 Very High 20.0 12.0 240
Community/ Community/
Neighborhood 35.0 Neighborhood 43.0
Commercial !Commercial
Neighborhood 17.5 Neighborhood 2.5
Commercial Commercial
Day Care 2.0 Day Care 2.0
Junior High School 20.0 Junior High School 20.0
Elementary School 41.0 Elementary School 31.0
Parks or Parks or
32.5 30.6
Recreation Areas Recreation Areas
Greenbelt Paseos 28.0 Greenbelt Paseos 31.9
Natural Open -.. Natural Open 9.0
Space Space
Roadway Paseos 82.0 Roadway Paseos 81.5
Major Streets 102.7 Major Streets 102.2
PROJECT 3.8 1,391.5 5,246 PROJECT 5,072/
TOTAL TOTAL 3.6 1,391.5 5,137
Implementation of the adult retirement option for Planning Area 8 would increase the total dwelling unit allocation for
Planning Area 8 to 400 du, raises the total medium density dwelling unit allocation to 2,951 du and would raise the total
dwelling units allowed in the Specific Plan to 5,137 du.
PALOMA DEL SOL I. SLrlV~Y OF CHANGES
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMEND~NT NO. 8 (S.P. NO. SP-4) Page I-6
SUMMARY
A. PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Location and Local Land Uses
The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan project site is comprised of 1391.5 acres in the City of Temecula
in southwestern Riverside County (See Figure 1, Regional Map and Figure 2A, Vicinity Map). The
site is bounded by Pauba Road on the north, State Highway 79 South on the south, Butterfield Stage
Road to the east, and Margarita Road to the west. Existing land uses in the project area include
residential, commercial, open space, agricultural and public/quasi-public.
a. Existing On-site Land Uses and Zoning Designations
The project site is characterized by rolling terrain. Several washes, beginning on-site, are evident in
the north-central portion of the site. Those washes meander through the site, draining the site to the
southwest and south. The existing zoning of the site is SP (Specific Plan).
Significant portions of the site had historically been used for dry farming agricultural purposes.
Those areas include the north-central/northwest, and southeast and southwest portions of the site.
The southern portion of the site, adjacent to State Highway 79 South was temporarily developed with
effluent .holding/percolation ponds of the Eastern Municipal Water District. The overall site has
been or is currently being mass graded for development.
b. Surrounding Land Uses
As shown on Figures 2A and 2B, the site is surrounded predominantly by existing and proposed
single family land uses, agricultural land uses, the Temecula Valley High School and the Linfield
Christian High School. Land north of the eastern portion of the site is "Vintage Hills" residential
development. Properties northeast of the site are developed with several single family residences on
large lots. Land to the east of all but the extreme southern portion of the site is vacant, however, a
single family subdivision (Crowne Hill) is proposed to be developed on that land. Property east of
the extreme southern portion of the site is being dry farmed. Immediately to the south of Highway
79 South is being developed with commercial uses. Land to the west of the site is being developed
with "estate lot" single family homes (Los Ranchitos). Property northwest of the site is being
developed with the Temecula Sports Park.
2. Project Description
The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan project combines residential, commercial, schools, a
neighborhood park/recreation areas, a_daycare center, greenbelt/paseos, open space and an extensive
circulation network, within a comprehensive plan. The land use designation and residential densities
for the PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan have been blended to reflect a mixed use concept responding
to the changing urbanizing character of the R,~,chc, Callf,~,i,la Temecula area. The Specific Plan is
designed to consider access links, compatible land use transitions with neighboring properties,
views, and landform relationships.
PALOMADEL SOL II. SUMMARY
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page II-1
Lake
BsJnore
TEMECULA
IFORNIA
'""1,
_ PROJECT
::~~--~:3CATION
Vail Lake
f~averSide Co.
San Diego Co.
REGIONAL MAP
_~P A L O M A
AMENDMENT ¢/:8
DEL SOL
o _7:
A total of 5,2465,072* dwelling units m'ei_s proposed on 1,030.,?,1,037.8 acres throughout the site. As
indicated on Figure 3, Specific Land Use Plan (including Table I, Detailed Land Use Summary),
2,4g.~2,886 d.u. of Medium density uses on 5g0699.7 acres; 2,2551,678 d.u. of Medium-High density
uses on 416,.5303.8 acres; 268 d.u. of High density uses on 22.3 acres; and Very-High density units
totaling 240 units on 12 acres are proposed.
In addition, the following land uses are proposed: Community/Neighborhood Commemial (35.043.0
AC); Neighborhood Commercial (17.52.5 AC); Fo~rthree Elementary Schools (44-31.0 AC); one
Junior High School (20 AC); ~four N~ir, li~orhood Park/Recreation Areas (13.021.1 AC); T~__~ne
Neighborhood Parks (14.59.5 AC); Open Space (9.0 AC): anti a Daycare Center (2.0 AC), greenbelt
paseos (31.9 acres), roadway paseos (81.5 acres), and maior streets (102.2 acres).
Implementation of the adult retirement option for Planning Area 8 increases tho total dwelling unit allocation for
planning Area 8 to 400 du, raises the total medium density dwelling unit allocation to 2,355 du and would raise
the total dwelling units allowed in the Specific Plan to 5,137 du.
3. Market Objectives
This project is proposed for development based on extensive buyer profile studies that were
conducted for the project. The studies provide data regarding: location features which influence
people in their choice of where to live; housing features considered important; features keeping
people from buying a home; and groupings of features. A number of housing products are being
designed at this time with features desired by home purchasers who would be identified as the target
market for the project. Examples may be viewed in the Design Guidelines Section of this report
(Section IV). It is thought that this research will permit the close targeting of homebuyers likely to
move to PALOMA DEL SOL and ~,~ po.;~o, of P.~vc,31dc Coiinzy the Temeeula area. In addition, a
number of house sizes, and neighborhood types (i.e. cluster, courtyard, conventional single family)
will be offered to provide maximum variety and price range.
It is the intent of the PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan to be unified in overall theme but varied in
individual character to provide complimentm~ land uses. Additional specific market objectives are:
To provide affordable, moderately priced single family detached homes. A market forecast
states that it is expected that the supply of expensive single family homes will begin to grow
faster than demand, and that homes in moderate price ranges should be more marketable.
To provide a housing product with larger and fewer rooms with all else being equal. Market
study shows that general product features associated with faster sales rates are a preference for
larger and fewer rooms all else being equal. More bathroom facilities also appear to be
associated with better sales.
To provide land uses that extend and are consistent with ongoing development along Highway
79 South and in the urban core developing in Temecula.
PALOMA DEL SOL II. SUMMARy
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. $ (S.P. No. SP-4) Page II-5
To reinforce the community identity of the project vicinity through control of project design
elements such as architecture, landscaping, color, paving, walls, fencing, signage and entry
treaUnents and through an extensive, viable circulation network.
To reflect anticipated marketing needs and public demand by providing a diversity of housing
types and locations which will be marketable within the region.
To provide detached and attached, high-quality housing to serve a spectrum of buyers.
To provide "move-up" opportunities for present residents in the vicinity and in the
surrounding areas,of Riverside and San Diego Counties.
To attract commercial uses that will be oriented to serve community needs, those of persons
employed on-site, and off-site users accessing the site from Highway 79 South.
To provide appropriate adequate flood control measures designed to .contain flows in the two
major on-site streambeds.
To provide an aesthetic and functional open space system that responds to site conditions in
its configuration and provides an extensive scenic amenity for future residents.
To provide school sites on the project site which will permit elementary and middle school
students to travel a short distance to attend school.
To provide trail systems which will encourage and provide for the on-site use of alternate
modes of transportation (bicycle, pedesu/an).
To provide a functional roadway system on-site which fosters the safe and efficient movement
of local on-site traffic, while discouraging use by through traffic and slowing traffic speeds in
the immediate area of the ballfields, High density residential and community commercial by
incorporating the use of traffic circles.
To provide varied recreational opportunities and facilities for the use and enjoyment of on-site
residents.
To provide unique and aesthetically pleasing landscaping palettes which will provide for an
am'active and visually cohesive project.
To provide housing opportunities for employees of the rapidly growing industrial areas of
Temecula.
PALOMA DIgL SOL II. SUMMARY
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page 11-6
SPECIFIC PL~.N
A. DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND STANDARDS
[] PLANNING OBJEx;ri v'ES
This Specific Land Use Plan is being prepared within the framework of a detailed and
comprehensive multi-disciplinary planning program. Issues such as engineering feasibility, market
acceptance, economic viability, County Comprehensive General Plan goals and objectives,
development phasing and local community goals have been fully examined and considered. To
further ensure the environmental compatibility, aesthetic satisfaction and functional integrity of the
plan, specific planning goals and objectives were identified. These were defined and identified in
part through a careful analysis by an Oppommities and Constraints Study. With this analysis and the
site goals and objectives in mind, the PALOMA D~L SOL Specific Plan:
Considers topographic, geologic, hydrologic, and environmental opportunities and constraints
to create a design that generally conforms to the character of the land by retaining and
utilizing basic existing landforms as much as possible.
Reflects anticipated marketing needs and public demand by providing a range of housing
types which will be marketable within the developing economic profile of Temecula area as
well as the County of Riverside generally.
Provides residential development and adequate support facilities (commercial use, community
uses, schools, open space and recreation) and circulation in a convenient and efficient manner.
Provides direct and convenient access to individual residential neighborhoods, recreational
areas, and schools via a safe and efficient circulation system composed of a network of
Arterial, Major, Secondary, Collector and Local roadways, each designed for appropriate
traffic and user needs.
Provides for alternative modes of ~ransportation within and adjacent to the site including
pedestrian, bicycles, and equestrian ~'ails, which will foster the conservation of valuable
energy resources as well as lessen air pollution in the immediate area.
Establishes a unique open space/environment utilizing a greenbelt pasco system and expanded
parkway greenbelts to link project parks, recreation areas, and schools.
Establishes design guidelines for the development of the Paloma del Sol Village Center
PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLA-~
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-1
1. Soecific Land Use Plan
a. Project Description
PALOMA DEL SOL is envisioned to be a high quality, mixed-use, master-planned community.
Through a strong cohesive community design, The PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan, when
implemented, will offer a diverse, convenient living environment for future residents. The PALOMA
DEL SOL ~roiect will be a highly amenitized community offering certain elements not often found
along many standard master-planned communities such as an expansive lushly landscaped parkway
system located within all Collector, Secondary, Major, and Arterial roadways, and also along
Highway 79 South. Also, a lengthy and expansive Pasco System will serve to provide land use
definition; to provide recreational opportunities; and in the major function of providing for the use of
alternative modes of transportation (pedestrian) through the site. Recreation centers (areas) are also
planned which will support and provide facilities for organized forms of recreation.
Th~ PALOMA DEL SOL property ~vill be identified and unified through design elements 'such as
architectare~ signage, landscaping, color, walls, fencing, and entry treatments consistent with themes
identified in the marketing studies. Some variability of design will be allowed so that individual
development enclaves will be identifiable and compatible with the overall community, and will be
able to estaNish their own individual design character. For a description of specific design elements
within this Specific Plan please see Section IV, Design Guidelines.
:Fhe-Hmtre 3A deNcts all of the on-site areas that have changed on the Amendment No. 7 (Planning
Areas 3. 4. 5. 8. 9 12. 13. 14. 23. 24. 26.' 27. 28. 29. 29B. and 38)site plan for to reflect the most
recent Snecific Plan amendment (S~ecific Plan Amendment No. 8 .........................
t:amt-l~Wan. Soecific Plan Amendment No. 8 is depicted in Figure 3B, Specific Plan Land Use
Plan - Amendment No. 8. and is summarized on Table I. Detailed Land Use Summary. For specific
information regarding Planning Areas, please' refer to Sections HI.B. and C., Planning Area
Development Standards and Zoning Regulations.
The proposed land uses within the Specific Plan include:
RESIDENTIAL - Development within the project will generate a density of a~tu~ 43.6
units per acre overall, and housing types will be spread over four density categories
varying from Medium to Very High Density. The acreage shown for each planning
area represents gross acreage, which ~ subject to minor fluctuations when detailed
engineering and roadway alignment studies are completed.
MEDIUM DENSI~ (2-5 t>U/AC) residential areas include 2,4932.886 dwelling
units on 530699.7 acres of land located throughout (predominately on the
periphery) the site. Medium Density use is proposed for Planning Areas 4,5. 8
(senior option), 9, 10, 14, 17, 18, 23, 25, 26, 28, 31 and 33. It is anticipated that
these homes will be located on 5,000 to 7,200 square foot lots and will be
targeted for move-up, first-time buyers and some retirees. Planning Area 8 is
planned as an active seniors community, but may be developed as Medium
density family housing if the plans for the senior community are not
implemented.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-2
W
I--
W
~J
0 W
1.1.1
ir rr
,5,0>-
._1
Ld
U.I
0
TABLE 1: DETAILED L~ USE SUM]VL&RY
l)e~llafion ~lannin~ l)e~sity Ts'get
(d~ac) (d~ac) (du)
28 ~9~4 2-5 ~3:8 ~1~
~1 67.0 2-5 ~.2 214
15 17.0 S-8 5.5 93
M~ ~ 16 49.2 5-8 53 271
20 ~.0 5-8 5.5 ~0
21 36.8 5-8 5.5 ~2
~ ~.0 5-8 5.5 352
V~ ~ [ 6B 12.0 13-20 20.0
COrRaL ~ OI'~R US~
~ S~ 27 9:0 -
R~d~y ~ ~8h5 - -
ln~Jementat/on of the adult ret/remeat opt/on for Ptanning A~ea 8 inczzases the total dwelling unit allocation fc~ PA 8 to 400 du, ra/se~
the total medium density du allocation to 2,951 and would raise the total dweOing units'allOwed in the Specific Plan to 5,137 d~
PALOMA DEL SOL IH. SPECIFIC PLaN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-5
1VIEDFt~M (SEmOR COMMUNrrY) is proposed for Planning Area 8 which
contains 89.0 acres. If the Senior Community is implemented, ~_ total of
400 units will be constructed within the planning area at a density of 2-5
dwelling per acre. The Senior Community will target active retired'
individuals that wish to live within a private gated comrmlnity. If the Senior
Community is not implemented, Planning Area g will be developed as _a
family oriented Medium Density Residential neighborhood and will s~I| have
a maximum of 40,0335 units and a density of 2-5 dwelling units per acre.
MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY (5-8 DU/AC) will be located in Planning Areas 2, 3, $
13, 15, 16, 20, 21, and 22; -23--and--38. A total of 2,2551,678 homes are to be
constructed within this category of land use on a total of 41~'.5303.8 acres,
which is generally targeted to first-time buyers. The minimum lot size is
4,000 square feet. The Medium High density residential land use is "as a
role" located in the central portion of the site. This use also touches the
southern boundary of the site adjacent to Highway 79 South.
HIGH DENSITY housing is proposed for Planning Area 6A which contains
22.3 acres. A total of 268 homes will t~ be constructed at a density of 9-12
dwellings per acre. This planning area may include High density detached
homes or townhomes, targeting first-time home buyers or the rental market.
VERY HIGH DENSITY housing is proposed for Planning Area 6B which
contains 12 acres. A total of 240 dwellings will be constructed at a density of
13-20 dwellings per acre. This Planning Area may include condominiums
and apasttnents, which will be targeted for first-time home buyers and
possibly the rental market.
Where Medium, Medium High, HIgh, and Very High density housing types are planned,
private recreation facilities and common open space will be provided to supplement
community open space uses. Private recreational areas may include facilities such as a pool;
spa, and/or barbecue areas. Exact design and layout of these facilities will be accomplished in
conjunction with detailed future tract layouts.
COMMERCIAL - The community will be served by ;l,,,,.five commercial sites
totaling 52.543.0 acres. The commercial uses proposed will be Neighborhood and
Community/Neighborhood uses primarily for residents and persons employed on-
site. The commercial sites are located in Planning Areas 1, l(a), 1Co), 36, and -2-738.
All sixfive sites will have a community orientation while Planning Areas 1, l(a) and
1Co) also will be easily visible and accessible from'Highway 79 South and will
therefore contain some highway-related commercial uses. For a list of permitted
uses, see Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance.
VII I.AGE CENTER - The so,,;L,;a~t.;outhwest comer of PALOMA DEL SOL Coounded
by Highway 79 South, Margarita Road, de Portola Road and Meadows Parkway) is
part of a Village Center as defined by the Temecula General Plan. Although
PALOMA DEL SOL was originally designed and has been partially constructed as a
suburban master planned community, many of the design concepts and performance
PALOM~ DEL SOL III. SpEcn~c PLA~
Specffic Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page HI-6
standards pertaining to the village core can still apply to the Paloma del Sol Village
Center. The PALOMA DEL SOL Village Center encompasses Planning areas 1, l(a),
1Co), 6A, 6B, 36, 37 and 38 which are planned for commercial, single family
residential, multi-family residential and neighborhood park uses. Specific design
guidelines and standards that apply to future implementation of the village center are
found in Section IVD, Village Center Design Guidelines. Standards pertaining to
backbone pedestrian and bicycle systems are found in Section IVC, Landscape
Design Guidelines and Community Elements of this Specific Plan. The SP Zone for
these planning areas contains standards that support the village center design
concepts.
SENIOR COMMUNITY - Planning Area 8 may become a private gated active
seniors community restricted to residents who meet appropriate age restrictions.
Zoning will allow' age restriction upon approval of CC&R covenants which provide
that the project will be marketed as age restricted in conformance with applicable
State or Federal law. Such a commRnity will offer unique stree.tJsidewalk
landscaping and housing architecture. All park and recreational areas within the
community gates will be private, designated for use only by Senior Commkmity
residents. Guidelines and standards pertaining to the implementation of the Senior
Community are found in Section IV, Design Guidelines, of this specific plan.
GREENBELT/PASEOS, ROADWAY/PASEOS, SLOPES - A significant portion
(I I,?,.~113.4 acres) of the project site is being designed as greenbelt/paseos, roadway
paseos and slopes. These paseos serve several functions and act to "tie" the
community's neighborhoods to each other while providing alternative modes of travel
(pedestrian, bicycle, etc.) to major destination points (schools, ami commercial
facilities, and recreation facilities) within the community. The paseos generally
follow drainage courses and that will in most cases continue to function in a drainage
capacity; however, the majority of off-site and on-site water now carried in the
central east/west drainage channel will be carried through an underground system of
pipes. Additionally, at broader locations within the paseos, recreational facilities
may be planned. All roadways shown on the Specific Plan Land Use Plan also will
have greenbelt/paseos (parkways) expanded from the standard right-of-way. The
greenbelt/paseo system is expected to provide a major aesthetic and unifying amenity
for the entire project.
SCHOOLS - A total of 6-1-51.0 acres will be allocated for school sites. Fou~ Three
elementary school sites are planned, containing a total of 4431.0 acres. One
elementary school site is located in the southwestern quadrant of the site adjacent to
Margarita Road. An additional school site is located within cac,h
................u~,.~ ,~,,,,~,,~,,., ,,,~ .L_~,~ o~-~'-- the northwest quadrant adjacent to Pauba Road and
another is located within the center of the southeast quadrant. A 20-acre Junior High
School site is located in the northe~'rmortheastem portion of the site, adjacent to
Meadows Parkway. Elementary schools arc proposed in Planning Areas 7, 11, 29,
and 32. The Junior High School is proposed in Planning Area 30.
RECREATION AREAS/PARKS - ~..~Four nci~l,b,,d,,~,~d park/recreation areas
(Planning Areas 12. 19, &.d 24 and 29) totaling 21.1 acres, are planned to serve
P2.LOMA DEL SOL III. SPECn~C PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-7
residents of the community. An existing 9.5 acre neighborhood park has been
consmicted and dedicated to the City of Temecula ( on Planning Area 37). ~
........................ ' ......... In addition further
recreational opportunities will occur in the Medium, Mex:lium-High, High and Very
High density residential mas. For a full discussion of proposed recreational
opportunities please see Sec. III.A.7 and Section IV, Design Guidelines, of this
Specific Plan.
ROADS - Major roadways totaling 103.4102.2 acres will be implemented in
conjunction with the proposed project. The City of Temecula's Circulation Plan will
adequately serve future traffic volumes for the region. On-site traffic will be handled
by a hierarchical roadway system consisting of Arterial, Major, Secondary, Collector
and Local roadways. Looping Collector roadways will generally carry interior traffic
to higher traffic carrying Major and Arterial roadways (See Figure 4). In addition,
,.,~,o I o,w~,,. ,,~,o Class II bicycle lanes will be striped along most roadways
throughout the site (Figure 6).
b. Land Use Development Standards
Three levels of development standards and guidelines have been established that, when combined,
ensure an orderly, sensitive methodology for implementation and development of the permitted uses
established for the PALOMA DEL SOL. by the Zoning Standards set forth in Sec. III.C.
At one level, special techniques and mitigations have been designed for application, as appropriate,
to each Planning Area. These specific standards are discussed at length in Sec. III.B of this Specific
Plan and will be employed to insure a high &weklma~.-m-quality development, consistent with.
cv,,oio;~,,cy and oroviding v,,,,idc pi-o¥1al(,ii;, for, the proper transition between the varying land uses
and product intensity within the PALOMA DIaL SOl. nroiect.
A second level encompasses design techniques relative to architectural, landscape and community-
wide development guidelines. These measures are discussed extensively in the Design Guidelines,
Sec. IV of this Specific Plan.
At a third, broader level, general project-wide provisions have been established. These standards,
which will work in coordination wiih the Planning Area Standards and Defign Guidelines to insure
overall project sensitivity are:
1)
This Specific Plan shall be developed with a maximum of 5,2465.072 dwelling units within a
total 1,391.5 acre area in the manner illustrated on the Specific Land Use Plan (Figure 3).
Generally, the uses permitted shall include residential, neighborhood and
community/neighborhood commercial, park, recreation, schools, open space, and circulation.
These uses are more appropriately delineated in the Planning Area Concepts (Figures 15A-
15KK).
2)
Uses and development standards will be in accordance with the zoning regulations established
by this Specific Plan and detailed in the Planning Area Development Standards, Sec. III.B,
and will be defined by Specific Plan objectives, future detailed development plans and
potential conditional use permits as appropriate.
PALOIVlA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page III-8
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
11)
12)
Standards relating to signage, landscaping, parking and other related design elements will
conform to the zoning regulations also as set forth in Sec. III.B and the Design Guidslinas in
Section IV. When appropriate and necessary to meet the goals of this Specific Plan, the
standards will exceed the zoning requirements provided herein.
The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of
all City of Temecula Ordinances or as amended by this Ordinance and State laws. It also shall
conform substantially with this approved Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 5t8 (S.P. No.
SP-4), as filed in the Office of the City of Temecula Planning Department, unless otherwise'
amended.
Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this
approval, the applicant shall first obtain clearance from the City of Temecula Planning
Department verifying that all pertinent conditions of Specific Plan approval have been
satisfied for the phase of development in question.
Any potential public open space/recreation areas on the site will be developed per appropriate
zoning requirements and operated to maintain public access to recreation facilities.
Design features such as special architectural tream~ent, perimeter and interior landscaping and
buffering of parking lot/loading zone areas will be incorporated into project design to
minimize any potential conflict between higher intensity commemial uses and any abutting
residential enclaves (Please sec ;he Section IV, Design Guidelines, Sec. P~.)
An environmental assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, development
plan, specific plan amendment or any other discretionary permit required to implement the
specific plan. At a minimum, the environmental assessment shall utilize the evaluation of
impacts addressed in the EIR prepared for this Specific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. ~_8
(S.P. No. SP-4).
A change of zone application, which would constitute a Specific Han Amendment, may be
required, as determined by the Planning Depa~tuient, with a subsequent development
application if the proposed use varies substantially from the use(s) provided for by the zoning
standards established by this Specific Plan.
Lots created pursuant to this Specific Plan and any subsequent tentative maps shall be in
conformance with the development standards of the zones applied to the property by this
Specific Plan.
If necessary, roadways, infrastructure, open space and any other public facilities will be
coordinated by and paid for through an assessment or community services district or area to
facilitate consUucfion, maintenance and management.
Final development densities for each Harming Area shall be determined through the
appropriate development application up to the maximum density identified based upon, but
not limited to, the following:
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLA.N
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page Ill-9
a) Adequate availability of services.
b) Adequate access and circulation.
c) Innovation in housing types, design, conservation or opportunities.
d) Sensitivity to neighborhood design through appropriate lot and street layouts.
13) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for each phase~ improvement plans for
developed common open space areas, including irrigation plans~ shall be submitted for
Planning Deparunent approval for the stage of development in question. Irrigation plans shall
be certified by a landscape architect.
14) For the security and safety of future residents the applicant and/or developer shall incorporate
the following design concepts within each individual tract:
a) Circulation for pedestrians, vehicles and police patrols.
b) City-requh-ecl lighting of streets, wallcways, bikeways and commercial area.
c) Visibility of doors and windows from the street and between buildings.
d) Fencing heights and materials.
15) Any common areas identified in the specific plan shall be maintained by a permanent master
maintenance organization. The organization may be public or private. The maintenance
organization shall be established prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the first land
division or issuance of any building permits for any approved development permit.
16) It is anticipated that maintenance associations, if formed, will be established as follows: The
master property owners association shall be charged with the un qualified right to assess their
own individual owners who own individual units for reasonable maintenance and
management costs which shall be established and continuously maintained. The property
owners association shall be responsible for private roads, parking, open space areas, signing,'
landscaping, irrigation, common areas and other facilities as necessary.
17) Specific Plan 219 is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. Light
and glare may adversely impact operations at the Observatory. Outdoor lighting shall be from
low pressure sodium lamps that are oriented and shielded to prevent direct illumination above
the horizontal plane passing through the luminare.
18) The Director of Community Development may approve minor variations in standards and
design guidelines without requiting an amendment to the Specific Plan as follows:
Site Design - Changes in the location of pedestrian pathways and linkages, parking
lots, building orientation and lot configuration from the typical examples shown in
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECI]TIC PLAN
Spec~c Plan No. ~lg/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-10
19)
Figures 14A, 14B, 14(2, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50A and 50E. The required elements may not
be deleted.
Sighage: Changes in copy, size, materials and color as long as the proposed signage
is compatible with the existing signage in Paloma del Sol and the typical signage
shown on Figure 50D.
Landscaping - Reductions in the required landscape development zone up to 15% and
plant material substitutions.
Monumentation - Reductions in comer cut-off area not to exceed 15%, changes in
monumantation signage, materials and color as long as the propose changes are
compatible with existing monumantation in PALOMA DEL SOL and the typical plans in
the Specific Plan.
Walls and Fencing - Changes in materials and color that are compatible with existing
walls and fencing in PALOMA DEL SOL and typical wall and fencing details shown in
the Specific Plan. Increases in height not to exceed 10% of the maximum allowed
by the Specific Plan.
Architecture - Additional styles and detailing that are compatible with the eclectic
Mediterranean styles prescribed for the Specific Plan
Setbacks - Reductions fi-om required setbacks not to exceed 15%.
Parking - Reductions in the required parking and parking area landscaping not to
exceed 15%..
Phasing - Phasing that differs fi-om the Conceptual Phasing Plan and the Public
Facilities Phasing Plan of the Specific Plan as long as infrastructore and community
facilities needs of the community are met.
Changes in major design criteria such as land use, minimum lot size, park dedication
requirements and roadway standards will require an amendment to the Specific Plan.
Transfer of Dwelling Units -- The proposed number of dwelling units contained in a
residential application may exceed the maximum expressed in that Planning Area by up to
twenty pement (20%) without an amendment to the Specific Plan, provided that an equal or
greater number of units was unused in a previously approved or concurrently submitted
application within another Planning Area or combination of Planning Areas, or the owner of
another Planning Area files a written relinquishment of an equal number of dwelling units in
another Planning Area. All transfers are to be approved by the Planning Department.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC l:',~a,N
Spec/fie Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-11
2. Circulation Plan
a. Circulation Plan Description
The project roadway concept depicted in the Circulation Hah (Figure 4) was developed as a result of
a thorough traffic analysis conducted by Wilbur Smith Associates conducted for the original EIR
(See Technical Appendices). The circulation plan has been revised based on. a more recent ~raffc
study ?.:.~cd (September % 1999);, also prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates;:.-to address the traffic
impacts associated with the Villages @ Pasco del Sol commercial center proposed for Planning
Areas l(a) and 100). The 1999 analysis evaluated not only the proposed Plaza del Sol commercial
area development, but also: 1) background traffic growth, 2) proposed adjusunents to the sizes,
configuration and uses allowed in residential Planning Areas 6 (now 6A and 6B) and 8 and 3) other
known area development projects that would affect traffic flow and disU'ibution. The 1999 analysis
also contains a "City Build-Out Assessment" which considers full build-out of the City of Temecula,
City of Murrieta and surrounding unincorporated County of Riverside areas.
Because the study also considers off-site circulation impacts not directly related to the Specific Plan.
Area, the discussion that follows attempts to distinguish clearly between those improvements to be
provided by the applicant and/or any subsequent developers as part of the development of PALOMA
DEL SOL and those improvements delineated in the traffic analysis but not included within the scope
of this Specific Plan. Those improvements contemplated to be constructed in conjunction with
development of PALOMA DEL SOL Specific Plan are specifically delineated in the Circulation Plan
Development Standards.
Principal east-west roadway access to the site is provided by Highway 79 South. Highway 79 South
is a paved two-lane road between Interstate 15 (I-15), and proposed Butterfield Stage Road which
will be improved to a 4-lane roadway in 1999/2000. Additional east-west access to the site is
provided by De Portola Road, Rancho Vista Road, Panba Road and Rancho California Road, all
paved two or four-lane roads. The only north-south road currently servicing the project study area is '
Margarita Road, a paved two and four-lane Arterial roadway between Highway 79 South and
Rancho California Road. Meadows Parkway, a planned 4-lane roadway which already has been
constructed south from Rancho California and Pauba Roads into the nortbem and central areas of
Paloma del Sol, will be completed to Highway 79 South with full width improvements prior to the
opening of the commercial uses in Planning Areas l(a) and 1Co).
On-site circulation is accommodated efficiently by a network of roadways. Each ~oadway's location
and size (Figure 4) are designed to facilitate the efficient movement of traffic throughout the site.
The main objective of the circulation plan is to provide direct and convenient access to individual
residential clusters, schools, recreation areas, and commercial facilities through a safe and efficient
system Of arterial, major, secondary, collector, and local roadways, and a pedesa'ian trail sidewalk
system. Roadway cross-sections are shown on Figures 5A-C. In addition, a Class II striped bicycle
trail system will be provided as depicted on Figure 6.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECWIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-12
·
I
,<
0
Primary north-south on-site traffic will be handled by a Major roadway, Meadows Parkway, which
will have a 100-foot right-of-way between Pauba Road on the north and Highway 79 South on the
south.
From Campanula Way to Highway 79 South, Meadows Parkway will consist of a.' ,..,"'":,;,10(gfoot w~de: ~ ":" ~
divided ~four-lane road. De Portola Road will be a Major roadway with a 100-foot rigi~t~of-way.
That road will provide a route for off-site traffic to move through the site, consistent with the City's
Master Plan of Highways. A significant portion of on-site traffic will be handled by a collector loop
road system consisting of two lanes of uavel in a 66-foot right-of-way. One loop road (Roadway"B",
Figure 4) forms a full circle which will provide access to ail Planning Areas to the west of Meadows
Parkway and north of De Portola Road, with the exception that the Daycare Center (Planning Area
34) will receive access fi.om Pauba Road. All Planning Areas to the east of Meadows Parkway and
north Of De Por~ola Road will take access fi.om Loop Road D, with the exception that the
Neighborhood Commerciai facility will receive access fi.om Pauba Road. Planning Areas between
De Portola Road and High. way 79 South will receive access from Margarita Road, Highway 79
South, De Portola Road or Campanula Way as designated on Figure 4, Circulation Plan. Turning
lanes will be provided at various locations throughout the project as specified in the Traffic Impact
'Analysis (See Technicai Appendices).
As noted, in addition to the vehicular circulation system, bicycle use will be encouraged by the
provision of a bicycle trail system as depicted by Figure 6. Class 11 bicycle trails will be located on
Collector, Secondary, and Gateway roadways as depicted on Figure 6. Panba Road at the northern
boundary of the site will also contain a bicycle trail. A Class I bicycle trail will be provided adjacent
to Meadows Parkway and De Portola Road. This system will connect neighborhoods and points of
destination throughout the site.
b. Circulation Plan Development Standards
1)
The proposed Circulation Plan provides an efficient traffic design that meets or exceeds the
public safety, security and transportation needs of the project. The on-site system depicted on
the Circulation Plan (Figure 4) has been derived from the Master Circulation Plan outlined in
the project Traffic Study and will serve as the composite circulation plan for the Specific Plan.
(See Techulcai Appendices.) The illustrated, on-site roadway improvements will be phased in
accordance with this plan.
2)
Heavy through traffic should be eliminated from residentiai neighborhoods and
commemiai/high density interface areas. Major roadways should be implemented as non-
access roadways, with residentiai neighborhoods served by smailer residentiai collectors.
3)
The subdivision shail comply with the street improvement recommendations/mitigations
measures outlined in the project Ixaffic study (Please see Sec. V.D.1.)
PALOMA DI~L SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No, SP4) Page 111-18
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
On-site roads will be constructed as:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Highway 79 South (142' R.O.W.)
Arterials (110' R.O.W.)
Majors (100' R.O.W.)
Secondaries (88' R.O.W.)
Collectors (66' R.O.W.)
Commercial Collector with on-street parking and traffic circles (78' R.O.W.)
Local Streets (60' R.O.W.)
· Note:
Median islands, traffic circles and bus tomouts are proposed on certain project enWies (collector and
local streets). In this case, the R.O.W. provided shall be increased to allow construction of thc
medians, traffic circles and bus turnouts according to City standards.
Landscaping requirements will be based on street width in accordance with the Roadway
Landscape Treatments depicted on Figures 23 through 31 in the Design Guidelines (Sec.
IV.B).
Some Major roadway improvements may be implemented through an assessment district or
similar financing mechanisms.
All roads shall be constructed to ultimate City standards in accordance with Ordinance No.
460 and 461 as a requirement of the implementing subdivisions for the Specific Plan.
The project proponent shall participate in the .Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as approved
by the City of Temecula subject to certain reimbursements under Development Impact Fee
Reduction Agreement.
The project shall comply with the conditions and requirements set forth by the City.
A bike path system as described in the Design Guidelines (Sec. IV) shall be constructed in
accordance with City standards for such facilities.
Bus shelters shall be conslxmcted upon approval of routes and locations by the City and the
Riverside Transit Authority (RTA).
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Spec/ftc Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-19
3. Drainaoe Plan
a. Drainage Plan Description
The majority of the project site is located within the Temecula Creek watershed, close to the
confluence of Temecuta Creek and Murrieta Creek. The site generally drains in an east to west
direction, and is an eventually tributary to Temecula Creek through a number of existing culvert
crossings of Flighway 79 South: Total off-site tributary area is composed of approximately 192 acres
from Butterfleld Stage Ranch to the east of the site.
· .,~,v,,~,j .... Development of the s~te will alter the natural on-site drainage courses will Lc al;trod
;,~ a ,~,~,, cx~,aZ. After development, new drainage courses will consist of streets, channels and
swales, underground storm drains and/or a combination of the above. A significant amount of off-
site as well as on-site flows will be piped under the greenbelt/paseo system (Figure 7). The majority
of water will exit the site to the west and south in pipes varying in size up to 120 inches in diameter.
The actual size and location of the drainage system will be determined at the tract map stage of
development.
A small portion of the northern part of the site may be within the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan
under the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Flood Control District.
b. Drainage Plan Development Standards
1)
Drainage and flood control facilities and improvements shall be provided in accordance with
the City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
requirements.
2) It is anticipated that drainage/flood control facilities will be maintained by the Riverside · County Flood Control and Water Conservation Dis~ct.
3)
Please see Sec. V.C.4, Flooding, for mitigations viewed as further development standards for
drainage.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECWIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-20
5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
a. Public Facility Phasing Description
In order to insure timely development of public facilities, a phasing plan has been prepar~ed for the
~l,,~four Neighborhood Park/Recreation Areas (Planning Areas 12, 19; aad 24 anci~'~9), for the
Neighborhood Parks (Planning Areaz-zagA--and 37); for the Pasco/Greenbelt System, for the
Equestrian Trail along Panba and de Purtola Roads, for each Elementary School (Planning Areas 7,
11, 29, and 32), and for the Junior High School (Planning Area 30) (See Figure 10~).
b. Public Facility Phasing Schedule
Public facility construction shall be phased as provided by the Public Facilities Phasing Table (Table
2) and Figure 10.
6. Gradiw, Plan
a. Grading Plan Description
Grading for pALoMA DEL SOL site is tailored to the existing topography of the site. It is intended that
the proposed plan be sensitive to and reflect original natural land forms, where possible, so that
different land uses and residential enclaves are distinguished and separated by topographic features
(See Figure 11, Grading Concept.).
Portions of the site that are fiat or gently sloping will require minimal cut and fill operations.
Earthwork quantities will be balanced in logical areas on-site. The Grading Plan also establishes a
basis for appropriate treatment of drainage requirements and accommodates a street system that
meets City of Temecula standards for acceptable grades.
b. Grading Plan Development Standards
1)
All grading activities shall be in substantial conformance with the overall Conceptual Grading
Plan (Figure 1 I), and shall implement any grading-related mitigation measures outlined in:
Seismic Safety (Sec. v.C. 1.) Slopes and Erosion (Sec. V.C.2.) Preliminary Geotechnical
Investigations (Sec. VI£.&F.).
2)
Prior to any development within any area of the Specific Plan, an overall Conceptual Grading
Plan for the portion in process shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The
Grading Plan for each such area shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading
plans for individual stages of development within that area,
3) All streets shall have a gradient not exceeding City standards.
4)
Prior to initial grading activities, a soils report; and geotechnical study shall be performed that
further analyze on-site soil conditions and include appropriate measures to control erosion and
dust (See Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations).
P~LOI~ DP~L SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-25
~o~
Table 2
PUBLIC FACILITIES PHASING
Planning Public Facility Size Milestone and Requirements
Area of Site
12 Neighborhood Park/Recreation 7.4 AC To bo completed during Phase IV, prior to the
Area issuancc of tho 4,576th buildin$ permit.
19 Neighborhood Park/Racreation 7.7 AC ........... ~ ........... is, ,,,,~ ,, ~
tmltdi~gl~'rmi'e.I'o be completed during Phase 11,
prior to ,the issuance of,the 21376th buildin~ permit.
24 Neighborhood ParW ~,~.9-^c To be completed daring Phase IV~ prior to the
Recreation Area 1.0AC issuance of the 4,576th building permit and in
conjunction with developmant of Planning Areas-~-
........ :26.
29Pr Ne!g~borhood Park~ 5.0 AC ..................... ,,,,,,,,is
........................ Th~s £az~hty shall be
constructed and fully operable prior to the issuance
of the 200* buildinR permit in Tract 24l
excluding tho 67 dwelligg units in Tract 241 ge-1.
37 Neighborhood Park 9.5 AC }-las been completed and dedicated to the City of
Temecu]a.
35 Greenbelt/Pasco System To be completed concurrently with adjacent
development.
N/A Equestrian Trail To be completed concurrently with development of
Plannio~ Areas g, 9, 101 ~ 28, 31, 32, 33 and 34.
7 Elementary School 11.0 AC To be constm~ed by the School District in
accordan~ to their pupil demand and funding
capabilities.
11 Elemanta~ School 10.0 AC To be constructed by the School District in
accordance to their pupil demand and funding
capabilities.
32 Elementary School 10.0 AC To bc constrnctod by the School District in
accordance to their pupil demand and funding
aapabi[ities.
30 Junior High School 20.0 AC To be constructed by the School District in accord-
ance to their pupil demand and funding capabilities.
Note: Timing of improvements may be modified through a development agreement.
PALOMA DI~L SOt.
Specific Plan No, 'q0/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4)
iii. SPECr~C PLaN
Page III-27
0
Z
0
0
Z
5) Detailed grading plans shall be prepared prior to any on-site grading for each project or group
of projects.
6)
The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all planting and irrigation
systems until those operations are the responsibility of other parties.
7)
The overall shape, height and grade of any cut and fill slope shall be developed in concert
with the existing natural contours and scale of the natural terrain of a particular site.
8)
Potential brow ditches, terrace drains or other minor swales, determined necessary at future
stages of project review, shall be lined with natural erosion control materials or concrete.
9) Grading work shall be balanced on-site wherever POssible.
10) Graded but undeveloped land shall be planted with interim erosion control plant materials.
11 ) All cut and fill slopes shall be constructed at inclinations of no'steeper than two (2) horizontal
feet to one (1) vertical foot unless otherwise approved by the City.
12) Grading shall not be permitted prior to approval of grading permits for the development area
in question.
7. Ooen Snace and Recreation Plan
a. Open Space and Recreation Description
A major unifying element of the PALOM~ D~L SoL community is the Open Space and Recreation
Program. The Program is extensive and provides a vast array of recreational opportunities in which
all members of the Community can participate. Further, the program incorporates many diverse
elements in a coordinated, cohesive plan that interrelates with and links the various neighborhoods of
the community with each other and to certain destination points, such as schools and shopping
facilities. Opportunities vary from passive (i.e. undeveloped open space),, to active (i.e.
neighborhood park), topotentially structured (i.e. recreational programs). Varying types and degrees
of activities will be available which will provide residents the opportunity to take quiet "walks in the
park;" use an on-site equestrian trail; participate in community meetings and social gatherings;
participate in active outdoor informal recreational activities; and participate in potentially structured
professionally organized and instructed courses and sporting events which could occur at one of the
five park/recreation centers. In fact, the proposed program is significant in that 254.9153.0 acres of
land will be devoted to park, recreational, open space, parkway and pasco uses which is equivalent to
approximately 16.0 10.5 acres per 1,000 residents.
The various recreational facilities are linked to each other and the other elements of the community
with an extensive parkway and pasco trail system. The "heart" of the system is the "Backbone
Community Pasco System." That system is augmented by neighborhood open space corridors and a
parkway system adjacent to all collector and higher volume roadways. The parkway and pasco
system will be landscaped as shown in the Design Guidelines (Section IV) and will at a minimum
PALOMA DF.& SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP4) Page III-29
contain one or more sidewalks. Bicycle trails (Class Il) will be provided as shown on Figure 6. The
overall Recreation and Open Space concept is depicted in Figure 12. The elements and acreage of
the Program are provided in Table 3. The various elements of the Program are discussed below.
1)
Community Recreational OpPortunities. Community recreational opportunities are those
opportunities which are available for the use and enjoyment of members of the PALOMA DEL
SO~ community. They are segmented and discussed as follows:
· Neighborhood Parks/Recreational Areas · Schools
· Equesffian Trail ® Activity Nodes
· Rancho California Sports Park
a)
Neighborhood Parks. T~oA neighborhood parks (Planning Amas--29~ and 37)
totaling 14.59..~5 acres a~i_s provided. ~c },,,,k~ ~.c l,,~,~,d in the southwest and
ntnntteas~ortions of the site. The parks will bc is iand~-ap~ developed and ,,,ay
includes: such uses ,~. ball fields, soccer fields, picnic areas, -
........................................... barbecu and
restroom/snack bar. soccci ,~cld~, b,~,.b,,ll ,ficldo ~.id a shad,, -'"-'
..... l'-ublicThe parks
· ~iII M is owned by the City of Temecula and maintained by the TemeCula
Community Sen, ices District crCSD) .........
b)
Neighborhood Park/Recreational Areas.. Tl-c~.Four neighborhood park/recreation
centers totalihg I$.~21.1 acres are provided. Plannin,, Area 12. adiacent to the
elementary school site in Plannin~ Area Il, vrovides oark/recreational opportunities
on 7.4 acres. ~'~lanning Area 19-) is located in the northwestern
pan of the site and contains 7.7 acres. ' .........
~, ~,~,,, ....... , (Planmng Area 24~ .con,ns
· ~ ........ n pan
1.0 acres and is located ' ~ --- ~ 23 in the ortheastem of
the site, adiacent to and south of the oven s~ace use in planning Area 27
'" .... "'- ......... ~lanning Are -1-22_.~ conrai ? ~5 0 and also is
located in the ac, u;l,aonheastem portion of the site. adiacent to and north of the o~en
space use in Planning Area 27. These ~-ntm. sareas could provide facilities for
community meetings, workshops, social events and active participation recreational
activities. They will function in at least the same, if not expanded capacity, as fully
developed public parks and could be constructed as public parks. Each park or
recreation center may contain a community building and may include 'the following
representative facilities:
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Pool complex (swimming pool, pool deck, wading pool and spa)
Tennis courts (2 lighted)
Sand volleyball court
Off-street parking lot
Adventure play
Group barbecue patio
Open play area
Family picnic area
Shade arbor
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4)
III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Page IH-30
Z
Z-I
tUZ
O0
Zn,
On,
Table 3
R~CP. EATIO~/OPEN SPA C~ P~OaP. A~
Acreage
I. COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNffLES
A. Neighborhood Parks 14.$~.~5
'B. Neighborhood Park/Recreational Areas I $.~21.~1
C. School Recreation Facilities
1. Elcmcntary Schools (5 AC each x ~,3 schools) -2015.0 est.
2. Junior High School 12 est.
3. Temecula Vallcy High School 2~ c~l. ~
acrea£e added for
this facility)
D. Rancho California Sports Park ('No acreage
added for this
facility)
E. Equesuian Trail (adjacent ~ Pauba and de Portola Roads) 4.0
F. Activity Nodes within thc Community "Backbone" Peseo System - calcula~l ~ 2.2
at the rate of 1 acre per 6,500 persons
· TOTAL
H. PRIVATE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OPPORTUNITIES
To be provided in each Medium-High, High and Very-High Density Planning Area by thc
developer of that particular planning area - calculated at the rate of one acre per 500 persons.
A. Medium-High Density
B. High Deasity 0:61
C. Very-High Density 0:61._.~4
TOTAL L2.~,12.~4
III. OPEN SPACE, GREENBELT/PASEOS AND PARKWAY PASEOS
A. Open Space Corridors by Residential Density
To be provided in each Medium and Medium-High Density Planning Area
by the developer of that particular plannlr~g area. calculated at a rate of
one acre per 250 persons.
1. Medium (except for Planning Areas 31, 25 and 26 for which no provision for -2-~027.3
open space, greanbelts/paseos or parkway paseos will be made because of the
7,200 square foot minimum lot size )
2. Medium-High 22.6 19.0 minus 10.Il 9.5 acres for private active participation I I.~._~5
opportunities.
B. Community "Backbone" Paseo System (28 minus 2.2 acres for activity nodes) 25.8
C. Natural Open Space (Planning Area 27) 9.0
D. Roadway Paseo$
I. Medium Density Residential ~5.,~$2.8
2. Medium High (Clusters) 28.726.9
3. High / V~ery High (Apartments) -2~1.._~8
TOTAL 147.2153.1
OVERALL RECREATIONAL AND OPE~ SPACE OPPORTUNITIES -~o4~.9278.3,
Private reavafion area of at least one acre shall be provided with.in Planning Area 8 if it is developed as a Senior Community. ff
Planning Area 8 is developed m a family-oriented Medium density neighborhood, no private r~:reation uses are required
consistent with the requirements for Medium density residential uses elsewhere in thc Specific Plan. In either case, planned public
open space in the form of greenbelt and parkway paseos adjacent to the perimeter of Plannino~ Area 8 shall be provided.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-32
c)
d)
e)
l'~or,~ a ,c,i,,, ,~f ;licsc f,,,illa,.o it c,~, l>c scci~ ;l~a; ~ctivities for all age groups can occur at
~ park/recreation center. There are Tot Lot(s) for young children "tots", Adventure Play
Area(s) for older children, and various other listed facilities for teens and adults. Not only
are the park/recreation centers diver~e from a standpoint of age groups catered to, bm also to
activities that can be accommodated. As noted, community meetings can occur at these
centers, but other events will also be accommodated such as social gatherings {sewing
circles, bridge clubs, hobbies), and arts and crafts inslructien may also occur. In addition,
sports instruction clinics may also' be held at these locations.
Schools .... ,~ schools are proposed to be located on the site, and another (Temecula
Valley High School) is existing just north of the site. The Junior High School site is located
in the northeastern portion of the site, and ,%u,~ elementary schools are located
throughout the site. Associated with and on school grounds are recreational equipment and
fields for school children and which also may be used by the community. Typical
recreational equipment and sports fields which.may be provided at these school sites will
include the following: Playground equipment, basketball courts, tennis courts, volleyball
courts, softball field(s), soccer field(s), and football field(s).
Equestrian Trail. Extension of regional equestrian trails will be provided along the south
side of Pauba Road and along the north side of de Portola Road in landscaped parkways.
The trail will be I'0 feet in width.
Activity Nodes. Within the Community Pase0 System a number of activity nodes (minimum
size: 0.5 AC) will occur at a rate of one acre per 6,500 residents, yielding a total of
approximately 2.42 acres. These nodes may include the following facilities/equipment:.
Picnic tables, tot lots, family picnic, horseshoes, and group barbecue facilities. These
Community Activity Nodes will be available for use of all residents, and as such, will be
maintained by the master home owner's associati°n or TCSD.
Rancho California Sports Park. The Rancho California Sports Park, to contain more than 86
recreational acres upon its completion, is located immediately northwest of the site, at the
intersection of Margarita and Pauba Roads. This park will contain sports fields and
recreational facilities for use by all residents in the area.
PALO~ DF~ SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page n1-35
2)
Private Active Participation Opportunities. In Medium-High density single family detached
neighborhoods and in neighborhoods containing attached housing types, private recreation facilities
will be provided at a rate of one acre per 500 persons. It is expected that there will be a number of
these recreational facilities throughout the site in the Medium-High, High and Vevj High density
areas. The pasco and roadway systems have segmented the property into numerous residential
enclaves (neighborhoods). It is envisioned that the majority of those enclaves will have private
· recreational facilities. Private recreational areas may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas,
meeting rooms, barbecues, wetbars, and kitchen facilities. In the Medium density areas these private
recreational facilities will be located within secondary pasco parkways which weave through the
neighborhoods.
Planning Area 8 (Medium density), if implemented as a Senior Community, creates a ¢omrmlnity
geared toward "Active Seniors." Private recreation facilities for its community residents are planned
to provide the following amenities:
a) Competition sized pool
b) Gathering center (no less than 5,000 square feet)
c) 2 tennis courts
d) May also contain: putting green, shuffle board, paddle tenniS, badminton, volleyball
The extent of recreational facilities and private common open space provided will be designed and
programmed based on detailed site planning for the Senior Commrmity. Timing of construction will
be based on development Plan approval. Tract maps in Planning Area 8 (if seniors) shall contain
conditions which state the recreation building and main recreation common area grounds must be
completed on or before 50% of the units have been sold and transferred to home buyers.
It should be emphasized that PALOMA DEL SOL is being planned as a single integrated community and
that the community-wide recreational facilities (paseos/tralls, community recreation centers,
neighborhood parks, and the equestrian trail) will be available to all residents of PALOMA DEL SOL.
Future individual lxact approvals must therefore receive credit for the overall project-wide open space
and recreation systems in assessing open space and recreation requirements for each future individual
lxact.
PALOMA DEL S0L III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-34
3) Open Space, Greenbelt Paseos, Parkway Paseos.
Open Space Corridors will be provided in the Medium and Medium-High density residential
neighborhoods and will be calculated at a rate of one acre per 250 persons. One exception is
that provisions for internal greenbelt/paseos are not required when average lot sizes meet or
exceed a 7,200 square foot minimum. If Planning Area 8 is developed as an active senior
community these open space corridors may be private but shall be connected to the public
pasco system. Such connections may be controlled using pedestrian enuy gates. If Planning
Area 8 is not developed as a private access-controlled residential neighborhood, these open
space corridors shall be public. Greenbelt/paseos will provide several functions. Fa'st, they
will give additional separation between numerous dwellings in the Medium and Medium-
High density residential neighborhoods (essentially, higher density single family
neighborhoods). Second, they will provide an area for a limited amount of passive
recreational opportunities to occur. Third, in many instances, they will provide a link to the
community pasco system (discnssed below)~ Fourth, in the Medium-High density residential
areas, they will provide an area in which neighborhood active participation recreational
facilities can be located. Facilities, other than those just noted, will not be provided within
these corridors with the possible exception of a trail in some locations. However, pasco
areas will be landscaped with turf, trees, etc. so that they will be aesthetically pleasing. The
corridors will be owned and maintained by a neighborhood homeowners association.
b)
Community "Backbone" Greenbelt/Paseo System. The community paseo system containing
a total of-283L9 acres of land, will provide pedesUian and bicycle access links throughout
the PALOMA DEL SOL community. The system will vary in width and will meander
throughout the community. (See Figure 11.) Being fully landscaped, the system not only will
function as a trail system, but it also will be aesthetically pleasing and' will provide dwelling
unit and land use separations. The system will .contain a pedestrian path that is 8 feet in
width, and community activity nodes will provide linkages not only to each neighborhood
within the Community, but also to major destination points including schools, park,
community recreation centers, shopping facilities, and the Rancho California Sports Park jnst
northwest of the site. Since all residents of PALOMA DEL SOl. will be allowed to use' this
system, it will be maintained by the Master Homeowners' Association or the Temecula
Community Services Disu'iet (TCSD).
c)
Parkway Open Space Adjacent to Roadways. An expanded parkway system will be located
adjacent to all collector and higher volume roadways. The parkway system will be
landscaped with tuff, trees, and various additional plant materials. Community "theme"
walls will bo located adjacent to the parkways. Parkways will vary in width with a buffer
located adjacent to Highway 79 South. Some of the parkways will meander, thus mating
changing and interesting viewpoints to those using them. Sidewalks will be provided on
each side of the parkways throughout the development. Also to be included are bicycle lanes
on selected roadways.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-35
be
i)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
Open Space and Recreation Plan Development Standards
One neighborhood park will be provided for the benefit of all residents within the community.
The two neighborhood parks may contain the following facilities/equipment: picnic area(s), tot lot(s),
exercise course(s), playfield(s), rest rooms, parking areas, and a basketball court (half-court), soccer
fields and baseball fields.
Three neighborhood park/recreational areas will be provided for the benefit of all residents within the
community.
The neighborhood park/recreation centers may be developed as public or private passive parks. As an
alternative, the sites may be developed as private or public active parks or recreation centers which
may contain the following representative equipment: Pool Complex (swimming pool, pool deck,
wading pool and spa), tennis courts, volleyball courts, tot lot, adventure play, group picnic/barbecue
facilities, open play turf area, clubhouse building, and parking areas, and may also contain shuffle
board, paddle tennis, or badminton (See Section IV, Design Guidelines for further definition of
included equipment).
Five Four sites will be provided for schools (,,~,, :three elementary schools, and one junior high
school). When constructed, those schools will have playgrounds and areas which may contain the
following facilities: Playground equipment, basketball courts, tennis courts, volleyball courts,
softball-soccer-football fields.
An equestrian trail (10 feet in width) will be provided in the parkway area on the south side of Pauba
Road and on the north side of De Portola Road.
Activity nodes for the use of all residents will be provided in the Community Paseo system at the rate
of one acre per 6,500 residents. The average size of those nodes will be ~A to %;acre.
The Activity Nodes may contain picnic tables, seating and open play areas. Exercise par courses may
also be provided.
The Activity Nodes will be owned and maintained by the Master Homeowners' Association or the
TCSD.
Private active participation recreational areas will be provided in the Medium-High, High, and Very-
High density residential areas at a rate of one acre per 500 persons.
Private active participation recreational areas may include the following facilities: pool(s), spa(s),
cabana(s), meeting room(s), barbecues, wetbar(s), and kitchen facilities.
Open Space Corridors will be provided in the Medium and Medium-High density residential land use
areas at a rate of one acre per 250 persons, unless lot size minimums exceed 7,200 square feet.
· Within the Medium-High density residential areas private active participation recreational uses will
occur within these corridors.
P.~u0MA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (S.P. No. SP-4) Page III-36
13)
~4)
15)
16)
17)
15)
19)
2o)
21)
Open Space Corridors will be owned and maintained either by a homeowners' association or the
TCSD as appropriate.
A Community Pasco System will be provided for the benefit of all residents in the PALOMA DEL SOL
community.
The Community Pasco System will be owned and maintained by a master homeowners' association or
the TCSD.
A Parkway System will be provided on all collector and higher volume roadways adjacent to and
throughout the project site.
The Parkway System will contain sidewalks on each side of the street.
The Parkway System will be maintained by either the Master Homeowners' Association or the TCSD.
All recreational and open space areas will be landscaped, and irrigated.
All recreational facilities will provide parking in accordance to City of Temecula standards.
Landscaping within recreation and open space areas will be further governed by the Development
Standards in the Landscaping Plan section of this Specific Plan (Section IlI.B.8.) and the Design
Guidelines Section (Section IV) of this Specific Plan.
PALOMA DEL SOL HI. SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific Plan No. 219/Amendment No. 8 (8.P. No. SP-4) Page III-37
B. PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ZONING REGULATIONS
Development standards and zoning regulations for PALOMA DEL SOL have been established at three
levels: General Development Provisions, which were addressed in Section. HI.A. 1; Design Guidelines,
which are provided in Section. IV; and Planning Standards to which this section is devoted.
Planning Areas were selected on the basis of logical, separate units of development. Criteria ~onsidered
in this process included uniformity of use as it pertains to zoning and relationship to adjoining product
and surrounding topography.
The Harming Area'graphics for this section (Figures 15A-t~IJ) were derived from the Conceptual
· Landscape Plan (Figure 13A), The site plans depicted herein are only conceptual in nature. Although
development may conform closely to some elements of the illustrative plans provided in Section IV, it
is amicipated that actual lotting will not be determined until the tract map stage.
A Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance was prepared and submitted separately from this Specific Plan
document. The zoning provisions within that Ordinance establish use restrictions for each Planning
Area. The zoning provisions should be used in conjunction with the planning standards for each
respective Planning Area.
Immediately following this page are three examples of single family residential lotting configurations
which may be developed at various locations within the Specific Plan site (See Pignres 14A, 14B, and
14C). The "Typical Traditional" configuration as well as the "Typical Courtyard" configuration may
be developed at various locations in the Medium density category. The "Typical Cluster" configuration
may be developed in the Medium High density category. These figures are provided to give the reader
an example of how some neighborhoods within the specified land use categories may be developed.
They are not intended to be representative of all residential development of the same density. In
addition, three examnles of single family residential lotfine configurations which may be develolPea
within the senior community on Plannino Area 8 are shown on l~imires 14D. 14E, and 14F.
PALOMA DEL SOL II~. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPr~:n~c PL~ NO. 219/AM~NDMI~rr NO..8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page HI-44
1. Planninn Aren 1~ l(a)~ and 1Co)
a. Descriptive Snmmary
Planning Areas_ 1, 1 (a) and 1 (b), as depicted on Figure 15A, provides for the development of 35.0 acres
-,vi~hof Community/Neighborhood Commercial uses. A typical site plan is depicted in the Design
Guidelines, Section IV.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
C. Planning Standards
I)
2)
3)
4)
· 5)
6)
7)
8)
Access to the Planrdng Areas_ will be provided from Margarita Road, State Route 79, and
Campanula Way ;o il,,~ .... il,. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. Access to the
individual planning areas shall be determined when tract maps or development plans are
submitted. Access along Highway 79 is subject to Caltrans approval.
A Minor Community en~-y statement will be provided at the intersection of Highway 79 and
Margarita Road at the southwest boundary of the Planning Area (see Figure 32).
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Campanula Way and
Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area (see Figures 35 and 36).
A Major Community entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Highway 79 and
Meadows Parkway at the seutheastem boundary of the Planning Area (see Figures 32 and 33).
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 25, 23A, 23~.B~ and 27,
respectively, Shall be provided along Highway 79, Margarita Road, Meadows Parkway, and
Campanula Way, except for commercial frontage. The primary character of the commercial
frontage shall consist of extensive turf mounding, grouped frees and shrubs.
A bic.,,.l,, a,dl Class 1I bicycle lane will be located ino~n Meadows Parkwayr and Campanula
Way to the north and east of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6.
Pedestrian access between Planning Areas 36 and 38 and Planning Area 1 shall be provided as
shown on Figures 50A and 50C.
Please refer to Section m.A. 1 through III.A for the following Development Plans and Standards
that apply site-wide:
III.AA. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
llI.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
HI.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
m.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIHC PLAN NO. 219/AMI~DME~T NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page HI-51
9)
~0)
11)
12)
13)
15)
Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV.B.3.c for general criteria pertaining to design of
commercial areas and Section IV.B.3.c.1, for criteria related to siting and orientation of
commercial uses.
The commemial land uses permitted within this Planning Area are designated in the Specific
Plan Zoning Ordinance.
A Development Plan will be required for definition form and uses of each commercial area.
Existing uses in Planning Areas la andlb (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the
respective Development Agreement. The right to rebuild is extended for an additional 15 year
covenant period for rebuilding in the event of damage, desmaefion or remodeling beyond the
term of the development agreement.
Waste disposal containers will be limited to designated, confined areas set aside for solid waste
collection.
A minimum of one Commemial entry statement shall be provided along Campanula Way (see
Figure 37). Details for the Major and Minor Commercial entry statements are depicted on
Figures 42B through-42F.
Pedestrian plazas shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A.
Planning Area 1 lies within the Paloma del Sol Village Center and is therefore, subject to the
Village Center Design Guidelines as contained in Section IV.D of this specific plan. These
guidelines contain standards and examples pertaining to pedestrian oriented design (Section
IV.D.2.b), building scale (Section IV.D.2.e), intensification (Section IV.D.2.d), parking design
(Section IV.D.2.e), signage (Section IV.D.2.f) and transit provisions (Section IV.D.2.g). An
illustrative site plan that depicts an initial design for Planning Area 1 is shown on Figure 50E.
PALOMA DI~L SOL ]II. S P.ECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PL~ NO. 219/AMI~NDMElaT NO. S (Specific Plan SP4) Page 111-52
_o
0
0
o~
3. Planning Area 3
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 3, as depicted on Figure 15C, provides for the development of 4944.8 acres Miho__f
Medium High density residential use. A ,,a,~J,~ ~otal of 255254 dwelling units arei_s planned at a
target density of :5r55.7 du/ac (Density Range 5-8 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Design
Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Access to the Planning Area will be provided from & ai&jor r<,,,d~,,j (Campanula Way) ~o ;li~
............................ Access p i ts;
depicted, are conceptual. Access to the ]iidl¥1d~,,,l planning areas shall be determined when tract
maps or development plans are submitted.
2)
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and
Campanula Way at the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35.)
Roadway landscape Ixeatments, such as those depicted on Figures 25, 23B, and 27, respectively,
shall be provided along Highway 79, De Portola Road and Campanula Way.
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto
Campanula Way along th~ northwestern boundary of the Planning Area.
A Class I bicycle trail will be located in De Portola Road C,,~i~},,,~i..la Way to the northeast and
a Class II bicycle lane will be located along D~ P,);;,~la R,~ad Campanula Way to the northwest
of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6.
A site of archaeological/historical significance is located within this planning area. Prior to
issuance of Development or Grading Permits, an appropriate detailed mitigation program shall
be identified and, if necessary, completed. This program shall be approved by the History
Division of the Riverside County Parks and Recreation Depa~ anent.
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb.
PALOMA DEL SOL I~. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPB21~IC PLAtl NO. 219/~M:MVI NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page 1r[-56
Please refer to Section III.AA. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.Ad. Specific LandUse Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
HI.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA DEL SOL
SPECI~C PLaN NO. 219/Alvll~m~ NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4
I~I. SPECIFIC l:~M'q
Page 1111-57
4. Pi~nin~ Area 4
' a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 4, as depicted on Figure 15D, provides for the development of 4043.2 acres ,,iili of
Medium density residential use. A m'axim-mrrtotal of I,?,7,188 dwelling units arei_s planned at a target
density of 4:54.4 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac).
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance NO. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Vehicular A-access to the Planning Area will be provided from a M,~j,~, ,,,,~d,aj (De Portola
Road) ~,~ il,~ ,,,,~;l,. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual and, as such, shall be determined
when tract maps or development plans are submitted. No vehicular access shall be vermitterl
into Plannin~ Area 4 from Butterfield Stage Roaa
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and
Butterfield Stage Road at the northeast boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and 36.)'
,~3)' A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto De
Purtola Road at the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 25, 23A and 23B,
respectively, shall be provided along Highway 79, Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road.
65)
A Class I bicycle trail will be located in De Portola Road to the north of the Planning Area as
shown on Figure 6.
Please refer to Section III.AA .through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
m.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
IlI.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.AA. Water and Sewer Plans
IlI.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb.
98_) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOM. n OEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC ~ NO. 219/AMt~MENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page 111-59
5. Plannino Area 5
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 5, as depicted on Figure 15E, provides for thee development of 35.5 acres Mihof._Medium
lllr, l, density residential use. A,-,,a,h~a~ total of 155152 dwelling units ~ planned at a target density
of 5:f'.54.~3 alu/ac (Density Range .%82-5 du/ac). A conceptual site plan is depicted in the Design
Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Plsnning Standards
1)
Access to the Planning Area will be provided from ,~ ,,,,.;,,, .,~,~d.,~: (Campanula Wa)-) to tic
o,~,,:'.,, De Ponola Road o, il,~ ,`,,il, ,,,,md Meadows Parkwa) `,,, ;he ,,.o;.. Access points, as
depicted, are conceptual. Access ~`, il,,. L,dLi&,,,l t,la,,li,,g at~ shall be determined when tract
maps or development plans are submitted.
2)
~r-Minor Project entry statement! will be provided at the intersection of De Ponola Road and
Campanula Way at the northeastern bo,mdajcomer of the Planning Area and at the intersection
of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way at the southwestern corner of the Plannine Area:
( _S_S_S_S_S_S_S_S_S~ Figure 350.
3)
A Community Intersection ena-y statement will be provided at the intersection of Meadows
Parkway and De Ponola Road at the northwestern corner of the Planning Area. (See Figure 34.)
4)
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statements will be provided at egress points onto
Campanula Way at the southern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
5)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 23B, 23B, and 27 ;~bcc~ivcl.y
shall be provided along De Portola Road, Meadows Parkway;, and Campanula Way.
6)
Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools, spas,
cabanas, meeting rooms~ barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities.
7)
A Class I bicycle Walls will be located alon~ Camnanula Way to the south and Class II bicycle
lanes will be located along in De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway to the north and west,
respectively, ,~,,, ,..~,,,},,~,,,,,, ' .......... _ A ...
.... · "~ o'","'",'"-s- .... ,,,..,,,~ .~,~,. as shown on Figure 6.
8) Balconies may encroach into building setback lines.
PALOMA DEL SOL I~. SPF. CIFIC PLAN
SPECgqC PLAN NO. ;219/A/VlI~'DMI~rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan $P-4) Page 1II-61
9)
Please refer to Section I]I.A.1. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
HI.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
111.32.3. Drainage Plan
HI.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
IH.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
m.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
10) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA D~ SOL III. SPEcn*[c PLAN
SPF. C~C PLAN NO. 219/AMENDM~rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan 5P-4) Page ~I-62
J
J
9~ Planning Area 8
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 8, as depicted on F~gure 15H, provides for ~ development of 89~ acres for either a
Medium density private gated active senior community or for family oriented Medium density residential
use. A ,,,a~i,.~. total of -,v,~ dwelhng units ~ planned at a target density of -~.~ du/ac
(Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan for family oriented development is deoicted on Figure
14A. If~lans for the Semor Commumty are unplemented, Planning Area 8 ~
~~ and shall conform w~th the typical s,te plans depicted on F,gures 14D, 14E
and 14P.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Access tO the Plannin~ Area will be provided from ~,Alcc;o, ,oad,a:s ("B" and "D" Streets) ko
...... ~. ~., ~~i: ~ ~... P~o P~co ~, De Po~ola Road ~
~ic ~u~i ~d Meadows p~ay on ~ic ca~. Access poin~ as depic~d ~ conceptual. Access
..........~ .~ ,.u~ ~,~ pl~hihig ~c~ shall be detemined when met maps or development pl~s m
submined.
2)
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of"D" o .... ~
and Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and
· 360
3)
A Project Intersection entm~ statement and pase9 cross!ng will be provided at the intersection of
~ ..... ~,, ~ o, ~ ~~5~W~ at me no,em oom~ oxme m~]ng
~a. (See Fi~s 38 md 39).
4)
A Community Intersection Entry Statement will be provided at the intersection of Meadows
Parkway and De Portola Road (See Figure 34).
5)
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto
..... ~;LW:~3' at the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
6)
A Pasco entry statement will be provided at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area.
(See Figure 39.)
7)
A landscaped transition area as depicted ~ Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the
Planning Area and Planni~n~ Area 7 to provide a buffer between residential and adjacent
elementary school land use~.
8)
^ community raseo ~ystem segment ~nn~}~>a~.~tW:~~a~.of~~
shall be provided at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area: (S~ee Figure~ ~!i~
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIlClC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AIdI~qD/vlENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page Ill-71
8)
10)
11)
12)
13)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted ~ Figures -29;-,27, 24 and 23B
ic~,cc,;c,yshallbeprowdedalong ,~ ohcc~, ,~ o;~¢c DePortola
Road; and Meadows Parkway. If implemented, the Senior Community will include S unique
street/sidewalk landscape treatments. A cross section of these treatments and tlich~_' planned
location within the Senior Community conceptual site plan is depicted on Figures SlA,
SIC, SlD and SlE.
Class I bicycle trails will be located alom, Meadows Parkway and De Portola ROad to the east
and south, respectively. Class II bicycle lanes will be located along Amarita and Leena Wayto
the north and east, respective Bike trails and bike lanes are ~,.., bc
au.,oa.di,,~ ~ic ?la,,,,h,~ A~ca aa shown on Figure ~.
An equestrian trail will be located in the northern parkway of De Portola Road on the south edge
of the Planning Area (see Figure 24).
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20'(twenty) feet from back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb.
Please refer to Section III.AA. through IILA.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
Eff.A.8. Landscaping Plan
14) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA DI~L SOL III. SPECIHC PLAN
SPr~CIFIC Plan NO. 219/~ht~N'r NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-72
Planning Area 9
a. Descriptive Summar3r
Planning Area 9, as depicted on Figure 151, provides for ~ develooment of 44~ acres ~i~I/~Medium
density residential use. Arc, ax~iiiaii; ,omi of 135~ dwelling units ~ planned at a target density of
3.1 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted.on Figure 14A.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Access to the Planning Area w~ll be provided fi.om ,~ ,~,~,,~,o, · ~, .... j ~ ....... ~
~ and fi.om De Portola Road~. Access points, as depicted, are conceptual.
Access ;.,~ ~I,¢ iiidlvldaal plaiii[,ig &'cas shall be determined when tract maps or development
plans are submitted.
2)
A M~nor Project entry statement w~ll be prowded at the ~ntersect~on of "D" S:.-cc~ ~ and
Meadows Parkway at the northwest boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35 and 36.)
3)
A Major Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola Road and
Campanula Way at the eastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 35.)
4)
Project Intersection entry statements will be provided at the intersection of "D" o,~ ~ ~ ~
and Campanula Way. (See Figure 38.)
5)
A Community Intersection entry statement will be provided at the intersection of De Portola
Road and Meadows Parkway. (See Figure 34.)
6)
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D"
~~y along the northern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
7)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 24, 23B, 27~. an~..26
respect~velyshallbeprowdedalongDePortolaRoad, Meadows Parkway, ,., o,~¢c~
and Campanula Way.
g)
A Class I Bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the west and alOng De Portola
Road to the south. A Class II bicycle 'aa~l~ lane will be located along Leena Way to the north
and along the Gateway access to the east i, all ,,)adso~,~,,,,~,.~ ............ ,,~ l'l~.hihig A, ca as shown
on Figure 6.
9)
An equestrian trail will be located in the parkway to the south of the Planning Area along De
Portola Road. (See Figure 24.)
lO)
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of curb.
PnLOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SW. Cl}UC PL&'q NO. 219/AMENDME~rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III-74
11)
12)
Please refer to Section III.AA. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.AA. Specific Land Use Plan
IH.A.2. Circulation Plan
IH.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
m.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Please see Design Guidelines, Sections WA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape
architecture.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PI.AN NO. 219/AMI~NDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page IH-75
Z
Z
,-I
Q.
Planning Area 13
a. Descriptive Summary
Planmng Area 13, as depicted on F~gnre 1SM, provides for ~ ~pvelopment of 32~ acres ,,,~
Medmm H~gh dens~.~res~danual use. A i,,~.ii~ ~otal of -1-7~.~6 dwelhng umts are~ planned at a
target density of~ du/ac (Density Range 5-8 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Design
Guidelines, Section. IV.C.3.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone OrdinanCe No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Access to th~P[~aJ33~ing~.~ea will be provided fi.om a collector roadway ("D" ?,hccZ) 'ia hhc
ca~ . Access points, as depicted, are conceptual. ' ' '
~,l~,~i~g -.c~d~' s'haii~ determed finalized when tract maps or development plans are
submitted.
2) A minimum o~ one nei~laborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D"
o,~ at the eastern bounda~ of the Planning Area. (See F~gure 37.)
3)
A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the
Planning Area and the Elementary School (Planning Area t 1 ) to assist in the distinction between
different land uses.
4)
5)
Community Pasco System segment shall be provided at the northern and western boundaries
of the Planning Area. (See Figure 30.)
~oadw.ayJandscaoe treatment, $iicli as depicted on Figure 27, shall be provided along "D"
6)
Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools, spas,
cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities.
7) IIb' I tra/41 'llb~l d' C' .
A Class icy¢ e ane va ocate ~n ,,11
~~y~ ~.~~E~ to the west as shown on Fl .
8)
Please refer to Section III.A.1. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
m.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
m.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
9)
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of curb.
10) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA DE~ SOL III. SPECIFIC Pt,aN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-85
~. Planning Area 14
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 14, as depicted on F~gure 15N, provides for ~ development of~ acres
Medium density residential use. A iii~iii~ii ~otal of 230~1j dwelling units ~ planned at a target
density of 4.7 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure 14A.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1) Access to the Planning Area will be provided fi.om a ;,611~cta~ ~oadway ("D" St,~ct) t6 tlc
~ and Meadows Parkway ,6 ,,~ --,~cst. Access points, as depicted are conceptual.
Access '-~,, "--,~-, ......... v ....... s .... hall be determined when tract maps or development
plans are submitted.
intersecuon of ..... ~ and
2) A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the ............ ~';~'~'
Meadows Parkway at the southwastem boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figures 35 and 36)
3) A minimum of o~e neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto "D"
St,-cc~~t the southern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
4) A Pasco entry statement with pedestrian crossing will be provided at the northwestern boundary
of the Planning Area as depicted by Figure 49.
5) Community Pasco System segments shall be provided at the northern and eastern boundaries of
the Planning Area. (See Figure 30.)
6) Roadway landscape trealments, such as those depicted on Figures 23B and 27 respectively shall
be provided along Meadows Parkway and ,, o,,~~.
7) A Class I bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the east hl Cc, llcct,~;
"D" St`-cct and a Class ii bicycle lane will be located alone ~ ~ to the north sot~h-'and
wc~t of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6.
8) Please refer to Section III.A.1. through IH.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
9)
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.11 Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3: Drainage Plan
III.AA. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. landscaping Plan
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet from back of curb.
PALOMA DEL SOL IH. SPECIFIC PLttlq
SPr~C~mc Pt.A~ No. 219/Ag'n~M~rr NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page IH-87
10) Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape
architecture.
PALOI~ DEL SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4
III. SPECIFIC PLAN
Page III-87A
23. Planninn Area 23
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 23, as depicted on Figure 15W, provides for the development of 6656.6 acres wkho__f
Medium High density residential use. A i,~,,h ...... total of 363256 dwelling units arcis planned at a
target density of~4.5 du/ac (Density Range 5-82-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted in the Design
Guidelines, Section IV.C.3.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)'
Access to the Planning Area will be provided fi.om a~,~.~,,,, ..........~va..a~ ~ ~ o.~,jSunny
Meadows Driv~ and fi.en~Meadows Parkway t,> ....... Access points
as depicted, are conceptual. Access ~,, ;l,c i.dMd~al pla~hihig arca~ shall be determined when
tract maps or development plans are submitted.
2)
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the intersection of "D" ShccZSunn¥
Meadows Drive and Meadows Parkway at the northeastern boundary of the Planning Area. (See
Figures 35 and 36)
3)
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statements will be provided at egress points onto "D"
o°h ¢czSunny Meadows Drive and Meadows Parkway at the northern; and eastern, and western
boundaries of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
4)
A Community Paseo entry statement ~,.. v,.,~,.~..~, ,.,,~oo,.~ will be provided at the
southwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 49.) A pedestrian crossing Mil be
provided at or near the Community Paseo entry statement. The pedestrian crossing shall be
located to maximize pedestrian safety when crossing Meadows Parkway.
5)
A Community Paseo System segment shall be provided at the southern boundary of the Planning
Area. (See Figure 30.)
6)
Roadway landscape treatments, ~uch as ~h6sc depicted on Figures 23B and 27 shall be provided
along Meadows Parkway and "D" Sh¢c~Sunny Meadows Drive.
7)
A Class I bicycle trail will be located along Meadows Parkway to the east, and a Class Il bicycle
lane wall be located ,..~,. ,..,,.,.,.,,~ .... }, ~,.,~,~,, t ,..., .... .~ along Sunny Meadows Drive to the
Planmng Area ............,.,,~.o ~ ,~,..,~: ,,, .,,~ .,~o,,.~ .,~ ~ ,o~ ..... ~
Area as depicted in Figure 6.
8)
Private recreation facilities are planned which may include facilities such as pools, spas,
cabanas, meeting rooms, barbecues, wet bars, and kitchen facilities.
9)
Garages shall have a front yard setback as follows: Minimum of 20 (twenty) feet from back of
sidewalk, or if no sidewalk is provided, 20 (twenty) feet fi.om back of curb.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-112
Please refer to Section III.A.1 through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and
. Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Cimulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
11) Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA DEL SO~ III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPI~ClFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 113
LU
24. Planning Area 24
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 24, as depicted on Figure 15X, provides for the development of 2.9 a 1.0-acres ~;h\,%__gr
a,,~,~, ........ park/recreation area. A _typical nel~;hborhood conceptual landscape/sac plan is provided
in the Design Guidelines, Sec;La iVD. Figure 47.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
prop ded fi'om ,~ ~,.~,.,~,, a ........... ,~. .,. _ ,, .....
Access to the Planning Area will be ' r .... _
local street internal tO Planning Area 26.
2)
Pedestrian access to the Planning Area will also be provided from C. om~nan2y Pasco o .....
,,,,,,~ ...... ,. .... ,,, ,~es[ the pedestrian linkage between residential and park land uses (se.q
Figure 50B3.
landscape transition area/open space landscape buffer, as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C, will
be provided along the eastern, western and northern boundaries of the planning ar~a to buffer
adiacent land uses.
4)
A Class Il bicycle ttai-} lane will be located in "D" o,,,.,Sunny Meadows Dtve to the
of the Planning Area as shown on Figure 6.
5)
For park concept design plans, see Figure 47 in the Design Guidelines section of this Specific
Plan. Th;o £,~,,i|ky shall bc con~tru~,,d ,,~d f, gly ov,,,~bl~ }>rio, ;,, ~1,~ ;~saaa,,c ,,fg,~ oc¢upaii,,j
i0el allr. fo, ;h~ 4,576th,c~idc,th~l ,nit,~:.hh, tlc Spc,,i~ l'lo~i. This facility shall be constraeted
and fully operable prior to the issuance of the 200"' building permit in Tract 24188, excluding
the 67 dwelling units in Tract 24188-1.
6)
Please refer to Section III.A. 1 through III.A $ for the [bllowing Development Plans and Standards
that apply site-wide:
III.AA. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
lli.A.8. Landscaping Plan
7) Please also see Section IV, Design Guidelines, for related criteria.
P,u.o~ vet. sot IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
SI'£CIPIC Pl.aN NO. 219/A~,I~m>MENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page i11-1 ] 5
26. Planning Area 26
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 26, as depicted on Figure 15Z, provides for the development of 3029.5 acres
Medium density residential use. A ii~x[iii~iii total of 149130 dwelling units aici__s planned at a target
density of4~4A du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure 14A.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
Access to the Plannin rea will be provided from a
.............. y M ' pi pm
,~,,~ ,~ o~,~, ,o t,,~ ,,~, ~,Su~ eadows D Access point, as de cted, ~e conce al
rive. .
Access ~o ~ic ' -~' '~--' -'-----'
-,-, *,~--, ~ ......... s -,~-* shall be detemined when tract maps or development
plans ~e submiued.
A local street within Planning Area 26 shall provide vehicular access to the park/rec.reation area
(Planning Area 24).
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at egress points onto 'D"
Strcc;Sunny Meadows Drive at the western boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
A Paseo entry statement will be provided at the southeast and southwest boundaries of the
property. (See Figure 39.)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 23C, 27, and 27 ,~ow~;Ncb,
shall be provided along Butterfield Stage Road, ~I,¢ Cvlk~.tor L~,,v R,,,d ("D" Suc~t) aid "C"
S;,ccland Sunny Meadows Drive. If the LDZ falls below 32', only single story residential units
shall be allowed on the lots immediately adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road.
A Community Paseo System segment shall be provided at the southern boundary of the property.
(See Figure 30.)
A blt jolt ;,all Class II bicycle lane will be located in "D" Shoe;Sunny Meadows Drive to the
estofthe Planning Area d ............ ,
PALOMADELSOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIHC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 120
Please refer to Section III.A.I through III.A.8 for the following Deyelopment Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV, for related criteria.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC ?I~N NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 121
27. Plan~
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 27, as depicted on Figure 15AA, provides for preservation d¢,,Aov.ic.[ of-1-59.0 acres
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
l)
2)
3)
4)
No vehicular access to this Planning Area is planned, although maintenance crews may access
this area from Meadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive as necessary. A~,~o:
A Minor C6nhi.~,,ky pro~ect entry statement will be provided at the intersection ofPauba aiid
and Sunny Meadows Drive (See Figures 3-235 and 36.)
Roadway landscape treatments, such as tli63c depicted on Figures -24-mad-2-3-P~ 3B, 23C and 27,
shall be provided along Pa~b~ R6adMeadows Parkway, Sunny Meadows Drive and Butterfield
Stage Road.
The Plannlng Area ma also be accessed b ab,, ,.L[l.,l
' Y y - ' ~ .....' Class II bicycle lane which is located
along Pa.b~ RaadMeadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Driw (See Figure 6.)
PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III- 123
5)
A residential/open space landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted byin Figures 13B or 13C
shall be created between the Planning Area and Planning Areas 26 and 28 to provide a buffer
between adjacent residential and adj,~cc.t cc,;...ci'c;al land uses. This buffer area should contain
a pedestrian connection to the residential neighborhood in Planning Area -2-826 as shown in
Figure 50OB.
Please refer to Section III.AA. through III.A.8. for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPI~CIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-124
uJ
0
UJ
LLI
<
0
28. Planninp Area 28
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 28, as depicted on Figure 15BB, provides for th_.ge development of~549.4 acres wltho._f
Medium density residential use. A n;a×~iiiaiii total of 113190 dwelling units are planned at a target
density of 4-:53.._.~8 du/ac (Density Range 2-5 du/ac). A typical site plan is depicted on Figure 14A.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
])
Access to the Planning Area will be provided from
...... ~o, a ..... ,~,, Meadows Parkway to ,s~ ,~ and Butterfield Stage Road. Access points,
as depicted, are conceptual. Access to tl,~ i.d~[d~,~l vlaiiifing a~ca~ shall be dete~ined when
~act maps or development pl~s are submMed.
A Major Community entry statement will be provided at the intersection of Pauba Road and
Meadows Parkway at the northwestern boundary of the Planning Area. (See Figures 32 and 33.)
3)
A minimum of one neighborhood entry statement will be provided at the egress poin~ onto "C"
St,,~tMeadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road at the zouthca~t¢,,western and eastern
boundaryie_~s of the Planning Area. (See Figure 37.)
4)
A Minor Project entry statement will be provided at the ~,,athnortheastem boundary of the
Planning Area at the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and 'C" ~ticctPauba Road. (See
Figures 35 and 36.)
5)
A pedestrian linkage shall be provided between the residential neighborhood in Planning Area
28 and the open space area in Planning Area 27 and the park/recreation area in Planning Area
29A as shown on Figure 50B. Often, this is accomplished by providing an open space linkage
with a trail from the end of a residential cul-de-sac, but other site planning options are possible.
A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the
Planning Area and Planning Area 29 to assist in the distinction between residential and
...... ~,~: ~.,,,~,park/recreatlon area land uses.
Roadway landscape treatments, such as thc,3c depicted on Figures 24, 23AC, 23B, and 28
respectively, shall be provided along Pauba Road, Butterfield Stage Road; and Meadows
Parkway ..........
PALOMA DF.L SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC P/AN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. g (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-126
An equestrian trail will be located in the parkway to the north of the Planning Area. Vehicular
access across this trail will require the use of special site planning criteria (such as "double stop
signs") at the development plan stage to ensure the safety of equestrians using this trail.
A residential/open space landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C
shall be created between Planning Area 28 and Plannin~ Area 27 to provide a buffer between
adiacent open space. This buffer area should contain a pedestrian connection to the residential
10)
IB
12)
neighborhood in Planning Area 28 as shown in Figure 50B.
A Class I bicycle trail will be located along mu,, ............. ,~ ,,~,,,,,, ..... , ....... ,~ ....
P{amfi~Meadows Parkway and Pauba Road to the east and a Class II bicycle lane Pauba
Road to the east. (See Figure 6.)
Please refer to Section III.A.I through III.A.8 for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
m.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape
architecture.
PALOMA DEL SOL III, SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC Pt~.N NO. 219/AMI'2NDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III-127
29. Planning_Area 29~
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 29-~, as depicted on Figure 15CC, provides for the development of 5.0 acres '~thfor a
neighborhood park/recreational facility. A typical site plan i-~-depicted in the Design Guidelin'-~s,
Section. IVB.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
2)
3)
4)
Access to the Planmng Area wdl be provided from .,~ .~,,,.~ ......... .,. ..... ,,~ aoatl,via
a local street within Planning Area 28 and from Meadows Parkway.
A~_oadway landscape treatment, as depicted on Figures 23B ar, d 2G, shall be provided along
M dow Pa kw ytothewe d
For park facility conceptual design plans, see the Design Manual Section of this Specific Plan
(Section IV.B.). This Planning Area will be constructed, fully operational and dedicated to the
City prior to the issuance of the 174th building permit in Planning Area 23 or the issuance of the
first building permit in Planning Areas 26 or 28, whichever occurs first.
A Class I bicycle trail will be located In ..................................~ ....Meadows
Parkway, to the east as shown on Figure 6.
A park/open space landscaped buffer/transition area as depicted in Figures 13B or 13C shall be
created between Planning Area 27 and Planning Area 29 to provide a buffer between adjacent
open space.
A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B or 13C, shall be created between the
Planning Area and Planning Area 28 to assist in the distinction between residential and
park/recreation ama land uses. This buffer area should contain a pedestrian connection to the
residential neighborhood in Planning Area 28 as shown in Figure 50B.
A pedestrian linkage shall be provided between the residentia neighborhood in Planning Area
28 and the park/recreation area in Planning Area 299r as shown in Figure 50B.
PALOMa DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page IlI- 129
Please refer to Section III.A.1 through III.A.$ for the following Development Plans and
Standards that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.AB. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Please see Design Guidelines, Sections IVA-C, for criteria related to architecture and landscape
architecture.
PALOMA DEL SOL III. SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PI~N NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP4) Page III-130
· .,~. r|;.iiiihig Ai .:a ~gB
L,..d U~,; ,.,d
PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 132
~938. Plann~
a. Descriptive Summary
Planning Area 38, as depicted on Figure 15A, provides for the development of S.0 acres ,,,,of
· .-._,_ J _,L '~-"" .... t3'/N 'ghb
· ~,~. ,~,..o,,~ ..... ~...,.~ommunl el orhood Commercial use. '
-,,,~-*,~ ,,, ,,,~ ~, ....... ~ ~a. A concep~al site pl~ is depicted in ~e Desi~ Guidelines, Section
IV.C.3.
b. Land Use and Development Standards
Please refer to Zone Ordinance No. 97-01 (See S.P. Zone Ordinance Tab).
c. Planning Standards
1)
2)
3)
4)
Primary 9r vehicular access into the Planning Area will be provided from Campanula Way ;.o ;lic
........ ' .............. Access points depicted conceptual Access to
,,,,~,, ,,~.., v,o~,,,,.~ ,~, ~.o shall be determined when development plans are submitted.
A project intersection entry statement, as depicted on Figure 38, will be provided at the
intersection of De Portola Road and Campanula Way.
one Commercial entry statement shall be provided along Campanula Way (see Figure 37).
Details for the Maior and Minor Commercial entry statements are depicted in Figures 42B
through-42F.
Roadway landscape treatments, such as those depicted on Figures 23B and 27; respectively; shall
be provided along De Portola Road and Campanula Way. The primary character of the
commercial frontage shall consist of extensive tuffmounding, ~rouped trees and shrubs.
A Class I bicycle trails will be located in along De Portola Road and a Class I bicycle trail and
a Class II bicycle lane will be located along the east side of Campanula Way adjacent to the
Planning Area as shown on Figure 6.
Pedestrian access between Planning Area 38 and Planning Areas 1, 1 (b) and 36 shall be provided
as shown on Figures 50A and 50C. A landscaped transition area, as typified by Figures 13B and
13C, shall be created between Planning Area 38 and Planning Areas I, l(b) and 36 ;o ~,,;~-idc a
~, ..... o,..,,.,.. ,,.0,,~,~,,~ ...... ,., .,.,j,:,.,~.~ ,~,-,,,,,,,,.i-,~,,,, ,,..,., ,~o,... A secondary pedestrian linkage
to Planning Area ~3-73_.66 shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A.
PALOMA DEL SOL IlL SPECIFIC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page III- 152
1 .ex'.
11)
13)
Please refer to Section II1.A. 1 through III.A.$ for the following Development Plans and Standards
that apply site-wide:
III.A.1. Specific Land Use Plan
III.A.2. Circulation Plan
III.A.3. Drainage Plan
III.A.4. Water and Sewer Plans
III.A.5. Public Facility Sites Phasing Plan
III.A.6. Grading Plan
III.A.7. Open Space and Recreation Plan
III.A.8. Landscaping Plan
Planning Area 38 lies within the Paloma del Sol Village Center and is therefore subject to the
Village Center Design Guidelines as contained in Section IVD of this specific plan. These
guidelines contain standards and examples pertaining to pedestrian oriented design (Section
IV.D.2.b), building scale (Section IV.D.2.c), intensification (Section IV.D.2.d) and signage
(Section IV.D.2.f).
Please see Design Guidelines, Section IV.B.3.c for general criteria pertaining to design of
commercial areas and Section IV.B.3.c.1, for criteria related to siting and orientation of
commercial uses.
The commercial land uses permitted within this Planning Area are designated in the Specific Plan
Zoning Ordinance.
A Development Plan will be required for definition form and uses of each commercial area.
Existing uses in Planning Areas la andl b (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the
respective Development Agreement. The right to rebuild is extended for an additional 15 year
covenant period for rebuilding in the event of damage, destruction or remodeling beyond the term
of the development agreement.
Waste disposal containers will be limited to designated, confined areas set aside for solid waste
collection.
Pedestrian plazas shall be provided as shown on Figure 50A.
PALOM~ DEL Sot III. SPECIHC PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219/AMENDMENT NO. 8 (Specific Plan SP-4) Page lll=153
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2- I 1-01 doc
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. 01-0109 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
PLANNING DIVISION
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards,
judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary
judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary
damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval
of the City, or any agency of instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or
legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the
Planning Application. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any
claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate
fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the
City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
2. The applicant shall comply with all underlying conditions of approval for Specific Plan No.
SP-4, and its previous amendments, unless superseded by these conditions of approval.
3. The text of Amendment No. 8 to Specific Plan No. SP-4 shall conform with Exhibit A
"Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 8" or as amended by these conditions.
4. Figures 15A and 15KK shall be modified to show a vehicular access point between Planning
Areas 36 and 38.
Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the
Amendment
5. The applicant shall submit the amended Specific Plan text to the Community Development
Department - Planning Division.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understood and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Signature
R:\S P A\2001\014)102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc spa res..doc
ATTACHMENT NO 3
DRAFT ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA
DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8
R:\S P AX2001\01-0102 Patoma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc
12
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDED
ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE PALOMA del SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural History. The City Council of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
Newland Communities LLC ("Owner") filed Planning Application No. PA01-01-
0109 (General Plan Amendment), PA01-0102 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 to
Specific Plan Amendment No. 219 & Amendment of Planning Ama No. 38
Zoning Standards), PA 01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188,
Amendment No. 4) ("the application") in accordance with the City of Temecula
General Plan and Development Code.
On November 7, 2001 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a
duly noticed public hearing on the project at which time all persons interested in
the project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these
matters.
Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public
heating and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. recommending to the City Council that the
Project be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions.
On 2001, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly
noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the
Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters.
At the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No.
4 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan,
made all required findings and determinations relative thereto and after finding
that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula
General Plan as amended.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
further defines and declares that:
R:~S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8Xcc zon. ord.doc
a. Specific Plan No.8 implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan
and provides balanced and diversified land uses, and impose appropriate standards and
requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall
quality of life and the environment within the City.
b. Specific Plan No. 8 is consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element
thereof, the City's Growth Management Program Action Plan and constitutes a present
valid exercise of the City's police power.
c. Specific Plan No. 8 is compatible with surrounding land uses. It proposes similar
residential neighborhood adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods. In addition, it
proposes commercial uses adjacent to existing commercial development.
d. Specific Plan No. 8 will not have an adverse effect on the community because it
remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan.
e. The City Council finds the City of Temecula has certified Addendum No. 4 to the
Final Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 8, made all required findings
and determinations relative thereto and finds that the Addendum was prepared consistent
with applicable CEQA provisions. The Council also finds that the Addendum was
considered in association with the approval of this Specific Plan Amendment.
Section 3. Adoption of Amended Zoning Standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby adopts revised zoning standards
for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, as set forth in the attached
Exhibit A.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this __ day of November 2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
[SEAt_]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CiTY OF TEMECULA )
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc zon. ord,doc
2
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 01- was duly introduced and placed upon
its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the ninth day of January,
2001, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of ,2001
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
R:XS P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc zon. ord.doc
3
EXHIBIT A
AMENDED ZONING STANDARDS
R:~S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\cc zon. ord,doc
4
Medium Density Residential
Planning Area 4, g'i 8 (if not seniors), 10, 14, 17, 18, ~3~'~ 25, 26, 28 & 33
Medium Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1
USES PERMITTED.
a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
One family dwellings.
Two-family dwellings.
Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and
country clubs.
Home occupations.
Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to
the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development
standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991 ):
(1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
in any event.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments
shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40').
Lot area shall be not less than 5,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family
dwellings shall be not less than 4,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area shall
be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion
ora lot used as a building site.
rev. 10/24/01 ' -1-
do
'e.
The minimum average width oft_hat portion ora lot to be used as a building site shall be 45
feet with a minimum average depth of 85 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the
minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimumaverage depth of 85 feet.
That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
The minimum frontage of a tot shall be 45 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-
de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows:
(1) The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right-
of-way slreet line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on
comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street
line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways,
whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides,
except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of
the width of the lot.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall
also apply:
(a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or
structures.
(4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval ora setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -2-
Medium Density_ Residential (Senior)
Planning Area 8 (if seniors)
Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone:
SECTION 6.1 · USES PERMITTED.
a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
One family dwellings.
Public parks and public playgrounds.
Home occupations as permitted otherwise by City of Temeeula Development Code.
Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to
the provisions 0fRiverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development
standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
area.
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for
· and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
unless such offices are combined with a community or recreation center in which
case not to exceed 5 years.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Medium Density Residential (Senior) Zone, except that planned residential
developments shall Comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40').
Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined
by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as
a building site.
The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 40
feet with a minimum average depth of 70 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -3-
The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 40 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-
de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 3 5 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows fall setbacks are measured from the back of
sidewalk or, if there is no sidewalk, from the back of curb):
(1) The front yard shall be not less than: l0 feet to the living area ofthe building, 8feet
to a porch, 18 feet to a front entry garage, 8 feet from back of curb to a side entry
garage or 5 feet from back of sidewalk to a side entry garage.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on
comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet to the living area of a
building, 5. feet to a porch or 18 feet to a front entry garage on the street side of a
house. Side yard encroachments up to 2 feet are allowed for a chimney and/or media
niche. Where such projections are proposed on facing sides of adjacent dwelling
units, encroachments shall be off-set to allow adequate site drainage.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 10 feet, except on comer lots where the rear yard
shall not be less than 5 feet provided the stxeet side yard shall not be less than 10 feet.
Where courtyards are included on the interior side of the structure then the rear yard
shall not be less than 8 feet.
(4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side Or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjusmaent pursuant to City Ordinance.
(5) Patio covers are allowed in rear yard areas only, except for end units which are
allowed patio covers only in courtyard areas. Patio covers shall be set back from rear
or side property lines as follows: 5 feet minimum to a support post, 3 feet minimum
to the edge of the shade smacture (canopy).
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -4-
Medium Density Residential
Planning Areas 9 & 31
Medium Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1
USES PERMITTED.
a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone:
(I)
(2)
(3)
(4)
One family dwellings.
Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and
countr~ clubs.
Home occupations.
Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to
the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development
standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated fi.om a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
area.
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located witlfin a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
in any event.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments
shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40').
Lot area shall be not less than 7,200 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined
by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion ora lot used as
a building site.
The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 60
feet with a minimum average depth of 100 feet. That portion of a lot used for access on
"flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -5-
The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 60 feet, except that lots fl:onting on knuckles or cul-
de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows:
(1) The ~ont yard shall be not less than 15 feet, measured fxom the existing public right-
of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 10% of the width of the
lot, but not less than 3 feet in width in any event, and need not exceed a width of 5
feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from
the existing street line or from any future stzeet line as shown on any Specific Plan
of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main
building sides, except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not
exceed 20% of the width of the lot.
The rear yard shall be not less than 10 feet.
No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjuslment pursuant to City Ordinance.
r3)
(4)
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev; 10/24/01 -6-
Medium High Density. Residential
Planning Areas 2, 3,-5, 13, 15, 16; 20, 21, ~,~,
Medium High Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium High Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1
USESPERMITTED.
a. The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium High Density Residential Zone:
( 1 ) One family dwellings.
(2) Two family dwellings.
(2) Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and
counWy clubs.
(3) Home occupations.
(4) Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to
· the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development
standards in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated f~om a home by its inhabitants where no assistants.are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
area~
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices loca*~l within a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
in any event.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Medium High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential
developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed 3 stories, with a maximum height of 40 feet.
Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family
dwellings shall be not less than 3,500 square feet per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area
shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the
portion of a lot used as a building site.
rev. 10/24/01 -7-
do
The minimum average width of that portion ora lot to be used as a building site shall be 40
feet with a rain/mum average depth of 80 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lotS, the
minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 75 feet.
That portion ora lot used for access on "flag" lotS shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 40 feet, except that lotS fronting on knuckles or cui-
de-~acs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streetS may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirementS are as follows:
(1) .The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right-
of-way street line or from any future public fight-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on
comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street
line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways,
whichever is nearer the proposed slmcmre, upon which the main building sides,
except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of
the width of the lot.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall
also apply:
(a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or
Sl~"UCtUreS.
(4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -8-
High Density. Residential
Planning Area 6A
High Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this High Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 8.1
USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been
obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991):
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Any use permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone..
Apa~4nent houses or condominiums.
Nursery schools for preschool day care.
Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Depaxm~ent of Social
Welfare or the County Deparunent of Public Welfare.
Accessory.buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is
established as an incident to a principal use and does not change the character of that use.
On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use or institution,
not to exceed five percem (5%) of the surface area of the exteIior face of the wall upon which
the sign is located.
The follgwing uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant
to this ordinance:
(1) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more
unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State
Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Depam'nent of Public Welfare
during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m.
(2) Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County
and State Codes and Ordinances.
Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved pursuant to the
provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (1991) and the development standards
in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
SECTION 8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments shall
comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County Ordinance
No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -9-
The minimum lot area shall be 7,200 square, feet for a multifamily or condominium project
with a minimum average width of 60 feet and a minimum average depth of 100 feet. The
minimum lot area for small lot single family detached shall be 3,000 square feet with a
minimum average width of 30 feet and a minimum average depth of 100 feet.
For a single family detached product, the minimum front and rear yards setback to the main
structure (livable portion of the building) or a side loaded garage shall be 5 feet. The
minimum front setback for a from-loaded garage shall be 16 feet fi:om the back of sidewalk
and a roll up garage door shall be required. If the garage is located in the rear of the lot and
is accessed from the fi'ont, the rear setback shall be 5 feet and the garage shall be a single
story structure. If the garage is located in the rear and accessed by an alley, the minimum
rear setback as measured, fi'om the centerline of the alley shall be 10 feet. The alley width
shall be a minimum of 20 feet. The front setback shall be measured'from any existing or
future public or private fight-of-way street line as shown on any specific street plan of the
City. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or fi:om the centerline
of any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback
requirement shall be the same as required for a from setback.
The minimum side yard shall be 5 feet, if the side yard adjoins a s~eet, the side setback
requirement shall be the same as required for a fi:ont setback. No structural encroachments
shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard except as allowed by City Ordinance.
d. The maximum density shall be twelve (12) units per acre.
e. All buildings and.structures shall not exceed 35 feet in height.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (199.1).
rev. 10/24/01 -10-
Very. High Density_ Residential
Planning Area 6B
Very High Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Very High Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 8.1
USES PERMITTED.
ao
The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been
obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991):
(1) Any use permitted in the Medium High Density Residential Zone.
(2) Apamnent houses.
(3) Nursery schools for preschool day care.
(4) Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Department of Social
Welfare or the County Deparhnent of Public Welfare.
Accessory buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is
established as an incident to a principal use and does not change the character of that use.
On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use or institution,
not to exceed five percent (5%) oftbe surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which
the sign is located.
d°
The following uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant
to this ordinance:
(1) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more
unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State
Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare
during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m.
(2) Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County
and State Codes and Ordinances.
Planned residential developments, provided a land division is approved purs~mnt to the
provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 ( 1991) and the development standards
in Section 18.5 or 18.6 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
SECTION8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Very High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments
shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -11-
ao
bo
f.
g.
h.
The minimum lot area shall be 7,200 square feet with a minimum average width of 60 feet
and a minimum average depth of 100 feet, unless different minimums are specifically
required in a particular area.
The minimum from and rear yards shall be 10 feet for buildings that do not exceed 35 feet
in height. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be set back from
the front and rear lot lines no less than 10 feet plus 2 feet for each foot by which the height
exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from any existing or future public
right-of-way street line as shown on any specific street plan of the City. The rear setback
shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if
the rear line adjoins a street, thc rear setback requirement shall be the same a s required for
a front setback.
The minimum side yard shall be 5 feet for buildings that do not exceed 35 feet in height.
Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall be set back from each side
lot line 5 feet plus 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet; if the side yard
adjoins a street, the side setback requirement shall be the same as required for a from
setback. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard
without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
High density multi-family dwelling units shall be set back a minimum of 18 feet fiom any
existing or future public right-of-way street line as shown on any specific street plan of the
City. Said setback shall be applicable for front, rear and side yards should they adjoin a
street.
No lot shall have more than 50 percent of its net area covered with buildings or structures.
The maximum density shall be twenty (20) units per acre.
All buildings and structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991)2
rev. 10/24/01 -12-
Community/Neighborhood Commercial
Planning Areas 1,
For Planning Areas l(a) & l(b), see Pages
Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zone
The following regulations shall apply in all Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones:
SECTION 9.1
usEs PERMITTED.
The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings with not more than 200 square
feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use, provided a
'Development Plan is approved.
(1) Antique Shops.
(2) Appliance Store, household, not to exceed 10,000 square feet
· (3) Art supply shops and studios.
(4) Art and fine art sales.
. (5) Automobile parts and supply stores, not to exceed 7,500 square feet.
(6) Bakery goods disu/butors, not to exceed 7,500 square feet.
(7) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises.
(8) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or drive-up teller or ATM.
(9) Barber and beauty shops.
(10) Barbecue Stores.
(1 l) Baseball ticket, card and logo merchandise stores.
(12) Beauty aid/supply and/or health stores.
(13) Bed and bath stores.
(14) Blind and window cover stores.
(15) Blueprint and duplicating services, copy shops or 24-hour Copyand Business Service
Stores.
(16) Book stores and binders.
(17) Building materials with more than 75% indoor including the outdoor sale of garden
supplies.
(1 $) Card and gift stores.
(19) Car washes.
(20) Carpet or floor covering stores.
(21) Catering services.
(22) Ceramic painting stores.
(23) Check cashing centers..
(24) Child learning centers.
(25) Children's store including educational toys and gifts.
(26) Civic and government uses including post office and library uses.
(27) Cleaning and dying shops.
(28) Clothing stores, not to exceed 25,000 square feet.
(29) Coffee houses.
(30) Confectionery or candy stores.
rev. 10/24/01 -13-
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)
(48)
(49)
(50)
(51)
(52)
(53)
(54)
(55)
(56)
(57)
(58)
(59)
(60)
(61)
(62)
(63)
(64)
(65)
(66)
(67)
(68)
(69)
(70)
(71)
(72)
(73)
Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel.
Day care centers.
Delicatessens.
Deparmxent stores not to exceed 50,000 square feet.
Dollar stores.
Donut shops.
Drag stores with drive-thru, not to exceed 20,000 square feet.
Dry goods or general merchandise stores.
Employment agencies.
Express deliveE~ collection points.
Fabric stores.
Feed and grain sales only as an incidental accessory use to a pet shop.
Fitness club (including 24-hour operation).
Florist shops.
Food markets and fi:ozen food lockers.
Frame, lens or eyeglass stores.-
Furniture Stores.
Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrem sale of beer and wine for off-
premises consumption.
Gift shops.
Golf equipment stores.
Hardware stores.
Health centers, or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 7,500 square
feet.
Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances,
furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repuir
thereof.
Hobby shops.
Honey baked ham stores.
Ice cream, yogurt, fxozen yogurt or juice shops.
Ice sales, not including ice plants.
Interior decorating shops.
Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs.
Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing.
Laundries and laundromats.
Leather goods stores.
Linen stores.
Loan stores.
Locksmith shops.
Mail Order or interact businesses.
Mattress or bed stores.
Meat markets, not including slaughtering.
Music, media, or video rental stores.
Musical instruments stores.
Nail and manicure stores.
Newsstands.
Notions, novelty or tabletop stores.
rev. 10/24/01 -14-
(74)
(75)
(76)
(77)
(78)
(79)
(8o)
(81)
(82)
(83)
(84)
(85)
(86)
(87)
(88)
(89)
(90)
(91)
(92)
(93)
(94)
(95)
(96)
(97)
(98)
(99)
(100)
(101)
(102)
(103)
(104)
(105)
(106)
(1o7)
(lO8)
(109)
(110)
(Ill)
(112)
(113)
(114)
·(115)
(116)
(!17)
Nursery schools for preschool day care.
Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural,
engineering, community planning and real estate.
Office supplies including home office sen, ice stores.
Outlet stores.
Paint and wallpaper stores, not including paint contractors, not to exceed 10,000
square feet.
Party supply stores.
Patio furniture stores.
Pet shops and pet supply shops.
Photography shops and studios and photo engraving.
Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery stores.
Plumbing shops, not including plumbing conlmctors, not to exceed 10,000 square
feet.
Postal annex stores.
Printer or publishers.
Produce markets.
Radio and television broadcasting studios.
Recording studios.
Recycling collection facilities with no outdoor storage allowed.
Refreshments stands.
Restaurants and other eating establishments, including those serving beer, wine or
· alcohol and with omdoor seeting.
Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama,
karate, martial arts, music and swimming.
Shoe stores and repair shops.
Shoeshine stands.
Shopping center management and leasing offices.
Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship.
Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 40,000 square feet.
Speaker stores, including small appliances.
Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting stores.
Stationery stores.
Suntanning stores.
Supplemental, diet or weight loss stores.
Tabletop and gift stores.
Taxidermist.
Tailor shops.
Theater, not including drive-ins.
Tire sales and service, not including recapping.
Tobacco shops.
Tourist information centers.
Toy shops.
Travel agencies.
Typewriter sales and rental, including incidental repairs.
Vitamin shops.
Watch repair shops.
Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage.
Wine tasting rooms and sales.
rev. 10/24/01 -15-
The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted
pursuant to City Ordinance.
(1) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel.
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Gasoline service stations with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption.
Liquid petroleum service station with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-
premises consumption, provided the total capacity o fall tanks shall no exceed 10,000
gallons.
Bars and cocktail lounges.
Billiard and pool halls.
Dance halls.
Fast food restaurants with drive-thru.
Multifamily or mixed use multifamily/commercial uses provided a Development Plan is
approved in accordance with the City of Temecula Development Code.
Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a., b. and c. may be considered a
permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Planning Director finds that the
proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the
designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the
category in which it falls.
SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial
Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City
or Temecula Ordinance No. 460 (1991).
SECTION 9.3 (DELETED)
SECTION 9.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
are required in the Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones:
There is no minimum lot area requiremem, unless specifically required by zone classification
for a particular area.
There are no yard requiremems for buildings which do no exceed 35 feet in height except as
required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall
be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which
the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing public
right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be
measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the
existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street,
the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side
setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of-
way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured
from the specific plan street line.
rev. 10/24/01 -16-
Co
All buildings and slructure shall'no exceed 50 feet in height.
Automobile storage space shall be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula
Development Code. as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991).
All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view
to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -1%
CommunityfNeighborhood Commercial
Planning Area l(a) - Village Core as crosshatched on Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and made a part hereof
The following regulations shall apply in the Village Core Commercial Planning Area 1 (a) Zone of
the Villages ~ Pasco del Sol.
SECTION 9.1
USES PERMITTED.
The following uses are permitted only in enclosed buildings.
(1) Art and fine art sales.
(2) Art supply and studios not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
(3) Bake~ shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises.
(4) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or ATM in Building J except for 1,600
square foot space on southeast cemer on Plaza.
(5) Barber and beauty shops.
(6) Baseball ticket, card and/or logo merchandise store.
(7) Beauty aide/supply store and/or health store.
(8) Blueprint and duplicating services or 24 hour Copy and Business Service Store in
Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer
on Plaza.
(9) Book stores and binders not to exceed 2,000 square feet.
(10) Card and gift store which may include antiques as incidental sales.
(11) Check cashing center in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot
space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(12) Child learning center in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast
comer on Plaza.
(13) Children's store including educational toys and gifts.
(14) Civic and government uses including post office and library uses.
(15) Cleaning, dying or tailor shops.
(16) Clothing stores, not to exceed 5,000 square feet.
(17) Coffee house.
(18) Confectionery or candy stores.
(19) Copy shop in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza.
(20) Day care centers in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer
on Plaz~
(21) Delicatessens.
(22) Dental or medical offices in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza.
(23) Donut shop.
(24) D~ goods or general merchandise stores not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -18-
(25) Employment agencies in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot
space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(26) Express delivery collection point in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600
square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(27) Fabric store not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
(28) Florist shops including caxt or kiosk.
(29) Frame, lens or eye glass store in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
~outheast comer on Plaza.
(30) Health centers or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 10,000
square feet in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on
Plaza.
(31) Health and beauty aids store.
(32) Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances,
furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repair thereof
not to exceed 1,000 square feet.
(33) Hobby shops and toy store not to exceed 5,000 square feet.
(34) Honey baked ham store.
(35) Ice cream, yogurt, flrozen yogurt or juice shops.
(36) Information center.
(37) Interior decorating shops in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza.
(38) Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs.
(39) Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing in Building J except for 1,600
square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(40) Leather goods stores.
(41) Linen store not to exceed 2,000 square feet.
(42) Loan store in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on
Plaza.
(43) Locksmith shops.
(44) Luggage stores.
(45) Mail order or intemet businesses in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza or any retailer as incidental to its operating retail store.
(46) Medical or dental offices in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza.
(47) Meat markets, not including slaughtering.
(48) Music, media, or video rental stores not to exceed 2,000 square feet.
(49) Musical instrument store.
(50) Nail and manicure store.
(51) Newsstands.
(52) Notions, novelty or tabletop stores.
(53) Nursery schools for preschool day care in Building J except for 1,600 square foot
space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(54) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural,
engineering, community planning and real estate in Building J except for 1,600
square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(55) Party supply store.
(56) Pet shops and pet supply shops not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -19-
(57) Photography shops and studios and photo engraving.
(58) Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery store.
(59) Postal annex store.
(60) Post Office.
(61) Printer or publishers in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast
comer on Plaza.
(62) Produce markets, carts or kiosk.
(63) Radio and Ielevision broadcasting studios or remote broadcasting.
(64) Real Estate office in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space
on southeast comer on Plaza.
(65) Recording studios.
(66) Recycling collection facilities incidental to a retail store operation, but not including
outdoor storage.
(67) Refreshment stands.
(68) Restaurants and other eating establishments, including those serving beer, wine or
alcohol and with outdoor seating and including bakery goods baked on premises for
distribution and allowing catering services as an integral use. Also, music and
dancing is allowed as part ora restaurant and lounge operation.
(69) Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama,
karate, martial arts, music and swimming in Building J except for 1,600 square foot
space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(70) Shoe stores and repair shops.
(71) Shoeshine stands.
(72) Shopping center management and lea~ing office in Building J except for 1,600 square
foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(73) Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship in
Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(74) Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
(75) Speaker stores, including small appliances not to exceed 3,000 square feet.
(76) Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting store.
(77) Stationery stores.
(78) Suntan store.
(79) Supplement, diet or weight loss store in Building B or in Building J except for 1,600
square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
(80) Tabletop & git~s.
(81) Tailor shops.
(82) Tobacco shops.
(83) Tourist information centers.
(84) Toy shops not to exceed 2,500 square feet.
(85) Travel agencies.
(86) Typewriter or computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs and training in
Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Pla?a.
(87) Vitamin shop.
(88) Watch repair shops.
(89) Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage or
distribution from the premises in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on
southeast comer on Plaza.
(90) Wine Tasting Room and sales.
rev. 10/24/01 -20-
The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted
pursuant to City Ordinance.
(1) Bars and cocktail lounges.
(2) Billiard and pool halls.
(3) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more
unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State
Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare
during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. in Building J except for 1,600 square
foot space on southeast comer on Plaza.
Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a and b. may be considered a permitted
or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director or
Planning Manager finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and
intensity as those listed in the designated subsections and the Village Concept overlay. Such
a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls.
SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial
Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City
or Temecula Subdivision Ordinance.
SECTION 9.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The followhag standards of development
are required in the Village Core:
(1)
There are no minimum lot area requirements, unless specifically required by zone
classification for a particular area.
(2)
There are no yard requiremems for buildings which do not exceed 35 feet in height except
as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height
shall be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by
which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing
public right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will
be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the
existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street,
the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a from setback. Each side
setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of-
way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured
from the specific plan street line.
(3) All buildings and structure shall not exceed 50 feet in height.
(4)
Calculation of required parking spaces required shall be provided as required by City of
Temecula Development Code. Landscaping of parking area shall be consistent with the
Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 as approved.
(5)
All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view
to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet at same grade as finished floor.
rev. 10/24/01 -21-
rev. lO/24/O1
Community/Neighborhood Commercial
Planning Area l(b) - Retail Villages shown on Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof, excluding the Village Core.
The following regulations shall apply in the Retail Villages Planning Area 1 (b) of the Retail Villages
the Villages ~ Paseo del Sol.
SECTION 9.1
USES PERMITTED.
The following uses are permitted only in enclosed buildings.
(1) Antique Shops.
(2) Appliance Store or Electronic Store household, not to exceed 20,000 square feet.
(3) Art supply shops and studios.
(4) Art and fine art sales.
(5) Automobile parts and supply stores, not to exceed 7,500 square feet.
(6) Bakery goods distributors, not to exceed 7,500 square feet.
(7) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises.
(8) Banks and financial institutions with walk-up or drive-up teller or ATM.
(9) Barber and beauty shops.
(10) Barbecue store.
(11) Baseball ticket, card and/or logo merchandise store.
(12) Beauty supply store.
(13) Bed and bath store.
(14) Blind or window cover store.
(15) Blueprint and duplicating services or 24 hour Copy and Business Service Store.
(16) Book stores and binders.
(17) Card and Gift store.
(18) Car washes.
(19) Carpet or floor covering store.
(20) Catering services.
(21) Ceramic painting store.
(22) Cheek cashing center.
(23) Child learning center.
(24) Children's store including educational toys and gifts.
(25) Civic and government uses including post office and library uses.
(26) Cleaning, dying or tailor shops.
(27) Clothing stores, not to exceed 25,000 square feet:
(28) Coffee house.
(29) Confectionery or candy stores.
(30) Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel.
(31) Day care centers.
(32) Delicatessens.
(33) Dental or medical offices.
(34) Department stores not to exceed 50,000 square feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -23-
(35) Donut shop.
(36) Drug stores with drive-thru, not to exceed 20,000 square feet.
(37) Dry goods or general merchandise stores.
(38) Employment agencies.
(39) Express delivery collection point.
(40) Fabric store.
(41) Feed and grain sales only.as an incidental accessory use to a pet shop.
(42) Fitness club (including 24 hour operation).
(43) Florist shops.
(44) Food markets and frozen food lockers.
(45) Frame, lens or eye glass store.
(46) Furniture Store.
(47) Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-
premises consumption.
(48) Golf equipment store.
(49) Hardware store.
(50) Health centers or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 10,000
square feet.
(5 I) Health and beauty aids store.
(52) Home Improvement Store with the outdoor sale of gardening supplies and plants in
enclosed area with no roof, seasonal sales in a designated area of the parking lot and
merchandise for sale or rent along storefront in designated striped areas as approved
on the site plan.
(53) Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances,
furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios and television sets, including repair
thereof.
(54) Hobby shops and toy store.
(55) Honey baked ham store.
(56) Ice cream, yogurt, frozen yogurt or juice shops.
(57) Ice sales, not including ice plants incidental to a food, convenience or liquor store.
(58) Information center.
(59) Interior decorating shops.
(60) Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs.
(61) Laundries and laundromats.
(62) Leather goods stores.
(63) Linen store.
(64) Loan store.
(65) Locksmith shops.
(66) Mail order or internet businesses.
(67) Mattress or bed store.
(68) Meat markets, not including slaughtering.
(69) Music, media, or video rental stores.
(70) Musical iustmment store.
(71) Nail and manicure store.
(72) Newsstands.
(73) Notions, novelty or tabletop stores.
(74) Nursery schools for preschool day care.
rev. 10/24/01 -24-
(75) Office supplies including home Office service stores.
(76) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural,
engineering, community planning and real estate.
(77) Paint and wallpaper, not including paint contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square
feet.
(78) Party supply store.
(79) Patio furniture store.
(80) Pet shops and pet supply shops.
(81) Photography shops and studios and photo engraving.
(82) Pizza eat-in, take-om or delivery store.
(83) Plumbing shops, not including plumbing contractors, not to exceed 10,000 square
feet.
(84) Postal annex store.
(85) Post Office.
(86) Printer or publishers.
(87) Produce markets.
(88) Radio and television broadcasting studios or remote broadcasting.
(89) Real Estate Office.
(90) Recording studios.
(91) Recycling collection facilities incidental to a retail store operation, but not including
outdoor storage.
(92) Refreshment stands.
(93) Restaurants and other eating establishments including catering, and including those
serving beer, wine or alcohol and with outdoor seating, including dancing.
(94) Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama,
karate, martial arts, music and swimming.
(95) Shoe stores and repair shops.
(96) Shoeshine stands.
(97) Shopping Center Management and Leasing Office.
(98) Sign shop including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship.
(99) Sporting goods stores, not to exceed 40,000 square feet.
(100) Speaker store, including small appliances.
(101) Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting store.
(102) Stationery stores.
(103) Suntan store.
(104) Supplement, diet or weight loss store.
(105) Tabletop & gifit stores.
(106) Tailor shops.
(107) Theater, not including drive-ins.
(108) Tire sales and service, not including recapping.
(109) Tobacco shops.
(110) Tourist information centers.
(111) Toy shops.
(112) Travel agencies.
(113) Typewriter or computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs and training.
(114) Vitamin shop.
(115) Watch repair shops.
(116) Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage.
(117) Wine Tasting Room and sales.
The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted
pursuant to City Ordinance.
(1) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel.
(2) Gasoline service stations, including liquid petroleum ("LPG")(provided the total
capacity of the LPG tanks shall not exceed 10,000 gallons) with the concurrent sale
of beer and wine for off-premises consumption.
(3) Bars and cocktail lounges.
(4) Billiard and pool halls.
(5) Dance halls.
(6) Fast food restaurants with drive-through.
(7) Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more
unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State
Deparg'n. ent of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare
during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m.
Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a and b. may be considered a permitted
or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director or
Planning Manager finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and
intensity as those listed in the designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit
process which governs the category in which it falls.
SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial
Developments are pen'nitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of City
or Temecula Subdivision Ordinance.
SECTION 9.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
are required in the Community/Neighborhood Commercial Zones:
There are no minimum lot area requirements, unless specifically required by zone
classification for a particular area.
There are no yard requirements for buildings which do not exceed 35 feet in height except
as required for specific plans. Any portion of a building which exceeds 35 feet in height
shall be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by
which the height exceeds 35 feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing
public right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will
be measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the
existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street,
the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each side
setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of-
way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured
from the specific plan street line.
c. All buildings and structure shall not exceed 50 feet in height.
rev. 10/24/01 -26-
Calculation of required parking spaces shall be calculated and provided as required by City
of Temecula Development Code. Landscaping of parking area shall be consistent with
Specific Plan 219 Amendment No. 7.
All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view
to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet at same grade as finished floor.
rev. 10/24/01 -27- '
rev. 10/24/01 -28-
Day Care Center/Information Center
Planning Area 34
Day Care Center/Information Center Zone
The following regulations shall apply in the Day Care Center/Information Center Zone:
SECTION 8.1
USESPERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been
obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991):
(1) Nursery schools for preschool day care.
(2) Institutions for the aged licensed by the California State Departmem of Social
Welfare or the County Depmtment of Public Welfare.
(3) Architectural, engineering and community planning offices; provided there is no
outdoor storage of material, equipment or vehicles, other than passenger cars.
(4) Congregate care residential facilities.
(5) Information center.
Accessory buildings, to a specific permitted use, provided that the accessory building is
established as an incident to a principal use and does not change the character of that use.
On-site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the structure, use or institution,
not to exceed five percent (5%) of the surface area of the exterior face of the wall upon which
the sign is located.
The following uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is obtained pursuant
to this ordinance:
(1)
(2)
Evening nursery school, child care and babysitting facilities, where 13 or more
unrelated children are kept under supervision by a person licensed by the State
Department of Social Welfare or Riverside County Department of Public Welfare
during any hours between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m.
Congregate care residential facilities, developed pursuant to City Ordinance, County
and State Codes and Ordinances.
SECTION 8.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
are required in the Day Care Center/Information Center Zone.
There is no minimum lot area requirement, unless specifically required by zone classification
for a particular area.
rev. 10/24/01 -29-
There are no yard requirements for buildings which do no exceed 35 feet in height except as
required for specific plans. Any portion ora building which exceeds 35 feet in height shall
be setback from the front, rear and side lot lines not less than 2 feet for each foot by which
the height exceeds 35 feet. The from setback shall be measured from the existing public
right-of-way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted in which case it will be
measured from the specific plan street line. The rear setback shall be measured from the
existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street,
the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a from setback. Each side
setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or from an existing adjacent public right-of-
way street line unless a specific plan has been adopted, in which case it will be measured
from the specific plan street line.
All buildings and structure shall not exceed 50 feet in height.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
· County Ordinance No. 348 (1991.).
All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view
to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -30-
Elementary_ School
Planning Area 7
School/Medium Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1 USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
One family dwellings.
Two-family dwellings.
Public schools.
Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard leng[h fairways and
country clubs.
Home occupations.
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
area.
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
in any event.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the School/Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential
developments shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stones, w~th a maximum height of forty feet (0).
Lot area shall be not less than 7,200 square feet. The minimum lot area shall be determined
by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as
a building site.
The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 60
feet with a minimum average depth of 100 feet. That portion ora lot used for access on
"flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -31-
The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 60 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-
de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows:
(1) The front yard shall be not less than 20 feet, measured from the existing public right'
of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 10% of the width of the
lot, but not less than 3 feet in width in any event, and need not exceed a width of 5
feet. Side yards on comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from
the existing public right-of way street line or from any future public right-of-way
street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the
proposed structure, upon which the main building sides, except that where the lot is
less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of the width of the lot.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 10 feet.
(4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -32-
Elementary School
Planning Area 11
School/Medium High Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium High Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1
USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted in the School/Medium High Density Residential Zone:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
One family dwellings.
Two-family dwellings.
Public schools.
Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and
countrj clubs.
Home occupations.
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 15.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a period of 2 years
in any event.
Nurseries, horticultural.
(3)
SECTION 6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the School/Medium High Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential
developments shall comply with the developmem standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40').
Lot area shall be not less than 4,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family
dwellings shall be not less than 3,500 sq. t~. per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area shall
be determined by excluding that portion ora lot that is used solely for access to the portion
of a lot used as a building site.
The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 40
feet with a minimum average depth orS0 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the
minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth of 75 feet.
That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -33-
The minimum frontage ora lot shall be 40 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-
de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows:
(1) The fi-ont yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public fight-
of-way street line or from any future public right-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on
comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing street
line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways,
whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides,
except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of
the width of the lot.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall
also apply:
(a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or
structures.
(4) No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjush-nent pursuant to City Ordinance.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991)..
rev. 10/24/01 -}14-
E|eiiieiitai - School aad Junior Hioh
Planning Areal -29BT, 30 and 32
SchoolfMedium Density Residential Zone
The following regulations shall apply in this Medium Density Residential Zone:
SECTION 6.1
USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted in the Medium Density Residential Zone:
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
One family dwellings.
Two-family dwellings.
Public schools.
Public parks and public playgrounds, golf courses with standard length fairways and
coun~ clubs.
Home occupations.
The following uses are permitted provided a plot plan has been approved pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 ( 1991):
(1) Beauty shops operated from a home by its inhabitants where no assistants are
employed and the on-site sign is unlighted and does not exceed two square feet in
al'ea.
(2) Temporary real estate tract offices located within a subdivision, to be used only for
and during the original sale of the subdivision, but not to exceed a p~riod of 2 years
in any event.
(3) Nurseries, horticultural.
SECTION6.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards of development
shall apply in the Medium Density Residential Zone, except that planned residential developments
shall comply with the development standards contained in Section 18.5 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
a. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height of forty feet (40).
Lot area shall be not less than 5,000 square feet. However, the lot area for two-family
dwellings shall be not less than 4,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. The minimura lot area shall
be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is used solely for access to the portion
of a lot used as a building site.
The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 45
feet with a minimum average depth of 85 feet. However, for two-family dwelling lots, the
minimum average width shall be 40 feet with the same minimum average depth orS0 feet.
That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of 20 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -35-
The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 45 feet, except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-
de-~acs may have a minimum frontage of 35 feet. Lot frontage along curvilinear streets may
be measured at the building setback in accordance with zone development standards.
Minimum yard requirements are as follows:
(1) The front yard shall be not less than 10 feet, measured from the existing public right-
of-way street line or from any future public fight-of-way street line as shown on any
Specific Plan of Highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure.
(2) Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than 5 feet. Side yards on
comer and reversed comer lots shall be not less than 10 feet from the existing s~-eet
line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific Plan of Highways,
whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main building sides,
except that where the lot is less than 50 feet wide, the yard need not exceed 20% of
the width of the lot.
(3) The rear yard shall be not less than 15 feet. In addition, the following standard shall
also apply:
(a) No lot shall have more than 55% of its net area covered with buildings or
structures.
(4) No slructural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard without
approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
Automobile storage'space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
rev. 10/24/01 -36-
Nei ,hborhood Park/Recreation Areas
Planning Areas 12, 19, 24, 29-~ and 37
ParkZone
The following regulations shall apply in all Park Zones:
SECTION 8.100. USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been
obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991):
(1) Public parks and private recreation facilities.
(2) Golf courses and appurtenant facilities, including clubhouses. A clubhouse is
permitted to have customary retail shop and restaurant facilities.
(3) Noncommercial community association recreation and assembly buildings and
facilities.
(4) Lakes, including noncommercial fishing therefrom.
(5) Pieuic grounds.
(6) Parking lots, only for above-listed permitted uses, pursuant to the provisions of
Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991), except that not less
than five percent of the interior of such parking lots shall have distributed landscap-
ing in addition to the landscaping requirements of Section 18.12 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
(7) Water wells an appurtenant facilities.
(8) On-site identification signs, maximum size - l0 square feet.
The following uses axe permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted:
(1) Riding academies and stables.
SECTION 8.101. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
ao
Lot Area. This zone is to be applied to those areas within subdivisions and other residential
developments that provide open space and recreational area and facilities for the project.
Therefore, no minimum lot size is established for the zone.
b°
Yards. Whenever a building is to be constructed on a lot in this zone, it shall have a front
yard, side yard and rear yard, each of which shall be not less than 25 feet. If more than one
building is constructed on one lot, there shall be not less than a 20-foot separation between
the buildings. No slxuctural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard
without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
rev. 10/24/01 -37-
c. Trash Areas. All trash collection areas shall be enclosed with a solid fence or wall no less
than 6 feet high.
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
All buildings or structures shall not exceed 40 feet in height.
rev. 10/24/01 -38-
Communi
Planning
Community Open Space Zone
The following regulations shall apply in all Community Open Space Zones:
SECTION 8.100. USES PERMITTED.
The following uses shall be permitted provided approval of a plot plan shall first have been
obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991):
(1) Undeveloped and manufactured open space.
(2) Golf courses and appurtenant facilities, including clubhouses. A clubhouse is
permitted to have customary retail shop and restaurant facilities.
(3) Noncommercial community association recreation and assembly buildings and
facilities.
(4) Lakes, including noncommercial fishing therefrom.
(5) Picnic grounds.
(6) Parking lots, only for above-listed permitted uses, pursuant to the provisions of
Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (1991), except that not less
than five percent of the interior of such parking lots shall have distributed landscap-
ing in addition to the landscaping requirements of Section 18.12 of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
(7) Water wells an appurtenant facilities.
(8) On-site identification signs, maximum size - 10 square feet.
The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted:
(1) Riding academies and stables.
SECTION 8.101. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
ao
Lot Area. This zone is to be applied to those areas within subdivisions and other residential
developments that provide open space and recreational area and facilities for the project.
Therefore, no minimum lot size is established for the zone.
Yards. Whenever a building is to be constructed on a lot in this zone, it shall have a front
yard, side yard and rear yard, each of which shall be not less 'than 50 feet. If more than one
building is constructed on one lot, there shall be not less than a 20-foot separation between
the buildings. No structural encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or rear yard'
except without approval of a setback adjustment pursuant to City Ordinance.
rev. 10/24/01 -39-
Trash Areas. All trash collection areas shall be enclosed with a solid fence or wall no less
than 6 feet high..
Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside
County Ordinance No. 348 (1991).
All buildings or structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height.
rev. 10/24/01 -40-
Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial
Planning Area 38
Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial Zone
The following regulations shall apply in all Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commemial.
Zones:
SECTION 9.1
USESPERMITTED.
The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings with not more than 2,000
square feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use and other
than as delineated below and outdoor seating for restaurants, employee eating and casual
dining, provided a Development Plan is approved.
Antique shops.
Art supply shops and studios.
Art and fine art sales.
Banks and financial institutions with walk-UP ,), &:vc-,.v teller or ATM.
Barber and beauty shops..
Baseball ticket, card and logo memhandise stores.
Beauty aid/supply and/or health stores.
Bio-medical buildings.
Blind and window cover stores.
. Blueprint and duplicating sen, ices, copy shops or 24-hour copy and business
service stores.
(1.7)(11) Book stores and binders.
(23)(12) Carpet or floor covering stores.
(22)(13)
(23)(14)
(24)(15)
(26)(16)
¢7)(17)
· Cellular phone stores-wilh-eett-s~.
, . Check cashing centers.
. Child learning centers or day care centers with outdoor play yard.
. Civic and government uses including post office and library uses.
. . Cleaning and dying shops.
Coffee houses will &id without drive through facilities.
· . Congregate care facility.
rev. 10/24/01 -4 l-
(32)(20)
(33)(21~
(35)(22)
(36)(23)
(37)(24)
(42)~27~
(43)(28)
(45)(29)
(47)(30)
(4g)(31)
(50)(32)
(51)(33)
(52)(34)
(53)(35)
(55)(36)
(56)(37)
(57)
(63)(40)
(6g)(42)
~(43)
(70(45)
Delicatessens.
Dental offices.
Donut shops.
Emergency care medical facilities.
Employment agencies.
Express delivery collection points and shipping facilities.
Family fun center.
Fitness club (including 24-hour operation) with outdoor recreation facilities
such as basketball, volleyball, tennis or swimming.
. Frame, lens or eye glass stores.
Garden office.
. Golf equipment stores.
. Health centers, or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed I
35.000 square feet.
. Household goods sales, including but not limited to, new and used appliances,
furniture, carpets, draperies~ lamps, radios and television sets, including repair
thereof.
· Hotel lodging facilities.
· Ice cream, yogurt, frozen yogurt or j~ice shops.
· Ice sales, not including ice plants.
· Interior decorating shops and offices.
. Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing.
. Lighting Stores.
Loan stores.
Mail order or interact businesses.
. Medical and chiropractic offices.
Musical instruments stores.
Nail and manicure stores.
Newsstands.
. Notions, novelty or tabletop stores.
rev. 10/24/01 -42-
kt-~J
(?4)(46)
(76)(47)
(77)(48)
(7?,)(49)
(7~)(5o)
(:~)(5i)
(?,:)(52)
(?,2)(53)
(?,4)(54)
(?,$)(55)
(?,7)(57)
(~)(59)
(92)(61)
(93)(62)
(94-)(63)
(9~)(64)
(96)(65)
(97)(66)
(9~f67)
Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural,
engineering, community planning and real estate.
. Office park management and leasing offices. ·
. Office supplies including home office service stores.
. Paint and wallpaper stores, not to exceed 20,000 square feet.
. Party supply stores.
Patio furniture stores.
. Photography shops and studios and photo engraving.
. Pizza eat-in, take-out or delivery stores.
· Postal annex stores.
· Printer or publishers.
. Radio and television broadcasting studios.
. Recording studios.
. Refreshments stands with outdoor seating.
Restaurants and other eating establishments, including those serving beer, wine
or alcohol and with outdoor seating.
Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama,
karate, martial am, music and swimming.
Shoe repair shops including incidental sale of shoes.
Shoeshine stands.
. Shopping center management and leasing offices.
. Sign shops including instant signs and on-site advertising and sponsorship.
. Speaker stores, including small appliances.
. Stained glass assembly or ceramic painting stores.
Stationery stor~s.
(99-)(68) Suntanaing stores.
(i 0O)(69)Supplemental, diet or weight loss stores.
(I O2)(70)Tailor shops.
(I ?,3)(71)Telemarketing offices.
(I ?,6)(72)Tobacco shops.
(i $0)(73)Tmvel agencies
(I 10)(74)Typewriter and computer sales and rental, including incidental repairs.
( 112)(75)Vending machines
( I 13)(76)Vitamin shops.
rev. 10/24/01 --43-
(I 14)(77)Watch repair shops.
The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted
pursuant to City Ordinance.
(1)
Assisted living facility.
Nursery schools for preschool day care.
Nursin~ homes.
Church and church-school facilities.
University extension schools.
Co
Mulfifamily or mixed use multifamily/commemial uses provided a Development Plan is
approved in accordance with the City of Temecula Development Code.
do
Any use that is not specifically listed in Subsections a., b. and c. may be considered a
permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Planning Director finds that the
proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the
designated subsections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the
category in which it falls.
SECTION 9.2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Planned Commercial
Developments are permitted provided a land division is approved pursuant to the provisions of
City or Temecula Ordinance No. 460 (1991).
SECTION 9.3 (DELETED)
SECTION 9.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following standards o{ developmem
are required in the Commercial/Neighborhood Commercial Zones:
There is no minimum lot area requirement, udcss ~,cciT~cally rcqukcd by Z~ii6
bo
There are no yard requirements fOr buildings ,~hLh do no ~xc¢cd 50, f,,ct h, l,,,ir~ht within
this zone, except as required for by the adovted Paloma del Sol Specific Plan speci~
~,~,~o .,,, ~,. The fi:om setback shall be measured from the existing public right-of-
way s~'eet linc ' - '~'/ .......... ' ........ '¶1 1 ......
~ ...... '" ..... " The rear setback shall be measured from the existing
rev. 10/24/01
-C.
rear lot line or fi:om any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the
rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a fi:oat setback. Each side
setback shall be measured from the side lot line, or fi:om an existing adjacent public right-
f-way str .......... '---' ....... ~ .... ~ , ,, ...... :,,,.
All buildings and structures shall not exceed 70 fort~-five (45) feet in height.
Automobile storage space shall be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula
Development Code. as required by Section 18.12 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348
(1991).
All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened fi:om the ground elevation
view at finish floor elevation to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet.
rev. 10/24/01 -45-
ATFACHMENT NO 4
DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING V'I-FM 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4)
R:~S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01 .doc
13
A'I-I'ACHMENT NO. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4, FOR THE
SUBDIVISION OF 293 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, I RECREATION CENTER
LOT, 1 PARK SITE LOT AND 16 OPEN SPACE LOTS WHICH CONFORM
TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS AND PARK SITES OF
THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8 LOCATED
EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD,
WEST OF BU'I-I'ERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD,
AND FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-003,
955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955 030-032
WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (the
"Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code
and Subdivision Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
November 7, 2001 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , at a duly noticed
public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an
opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified Addendum No. 4 to the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan after finding that the project
proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
by reference.
That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes
the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the General Plan, Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan, as amended, Development Code
and the City of Temecula Municipal Code;
B. The proposed subdivision map ~s consistent with the subject Specific Plan
Amendment and related General Plan Amendment.
C. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract
entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too
small to sustain their agricultural use;
D. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development
proposed by the tentative map;
E. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of
approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the project
boundaries;
F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems;
G. The design of the subdivisions provides for future passive or natural heating or
cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
H. The design of the subdivisions and the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those
previously acquired by the public will be provided.
(Quimby).
The subdivisions are consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements
Section 3. The Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235)
was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date
Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which
added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on Mamh 17, 1999
by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the
Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City of Temecula in
conjunction with an overall reduction of in dwelling units and the reconfiguration and realignment of
Campanula Way.
The analysis associated with the Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235
concludes that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or
decreased from the original project, and that no additional mitigation measures are required. The
City Council acknowledges the overriding consideration with regard to air quality impacts made by
the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact
Report No. 235. Staff concludes that the environmental concerns regarding the project have been
adequately addressed.
R:\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
2
Section 4. Approval and Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves
Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4), the
subdivision of 293 residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park lot and 16 open space lots which
conform to the Planning Areas and park sites of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan and contained in
Exhibit A, subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit B, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other necessary conditions that may
be deemed necessary.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,2001.
ATTEST:
Jeff Comerchere, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No.
2001 - was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular
meeting thereof held on the of August, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNClLMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
3
EXHIBIT A
AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
14
I ._' . TENTATIVE TP~_C.T_ N.O,
/' -~-/,~1 ......
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR V'I-FM 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4)
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11 *01.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.:
Project Description:
PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188,
Amendment No. 4)
The subdivision of approximately 127 acres into 293
residential lots, I recreation center lot, 1 park lot and 16 open
space lots which conform to the Planning Areas, Open Space
Areas and Park sites of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8.
Assessor's Parcel Nos.: 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-006, 955-030-032.
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning
Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount
of Nine Hundred Twenty-Eight DolJars ($928.00) which includes the Eight Hundred and Fifty
Dollar ($850.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Seventy-
Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination for the Environmental Impact Report required under Public Resources Code
Section 21151 and California Code of Regulations Section 15904. If within said forty-eight
(48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development
Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project
granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c)).
General Requirements
2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and
to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified bythe conditions listed below.
A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City
Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
3. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
6
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnity,
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentalitythereof, or any of its
officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director may terminate the lands use approval without further notice to the applicant.
4. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan
No, 4.
5. The project and ail subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to the Amendment
and Restatement of Development Agreement Between the City of Temecula and Mesa
Homes (Paloma Del Sol).
6. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation
measures identified within EIR No 235.
7. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved ~
Monitoring Program.
8. Subdivision phasing shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
9. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual
grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval The plan shall be used
as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and
shall include the following:
a, Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after
the grading process.
b. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded
during the higher probability rain months of January through March.
c. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
d. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
10. The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent
off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance
responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
11. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
12. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be
prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and
shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be
transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety. The following notes shall be placed on the ECS:
a. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All
proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy."
R:\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
7
b. "EIR No. 235 and an Addendum to this EIR was prepared for this project and is on file
at the City of Temecula Planning Department."
13. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
14. The development impact fees associated with the project must be paid to the City of
Temecula.
15. With the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety a copy of the
acoustical study prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and
subsequent study dated October 3, 1992, or as updated by subsequent reports, shall be
submitted to ensure the implementation of the study to reduce ambient interior noise levels
to 45 Ldn and exterior noise levels to 65 Ldn.
16. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision,
however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with
Director of Planning approval.
17. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved bythe
Planning Department prior to final map recordation of the tract maps. The CC&R's shall
include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas,
parking areas, private reads, exterior of all buildings and parkways.
18. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association,
property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties
individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common
areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to
meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of
said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded
CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units
and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services.
Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as
Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making anysuch sale. This condition
shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
19. A performance bond and a one year maintenance bond shall be required for all landscaping
installed except for landscaping within individual lots. The amount of this landscaping shall be
subject to the approval of the Planning Department. This bond shall be secured after
completion of said landscaping and prior to release of the dwelling units tied to the timing of the
landscaped area
20. Erosion control planting shall commence as soon as slopes are completed on any portion of
the site during and after the grading operations. A performance bond shall be secured with the
Planning Department prior to issuance of any grading permits to insure the installation of this
landscaping. Cut slopes equal to or greater than five (5) feet in vertical height and fill slopes
equal to or greater than three (3) feet in vertical height shall be planted with a ground cover to
protect the slope from erosion and instability. Slopes exceeding fifteen (15) feet in vertical
height shall be planted with shrubs, spaces not more than ten (10) feet on center or trees
spaced not to exceed twenty (20) feet on center or a combination of shrubs and trees at
equivalent spacings, in addition to the ground cover. Other standards of eresJon control shall
be consistent with Ordinance No. 457.57.
21. Community Theme Walls may be substituted for Project Theme Walls at the developers
discretion.
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
8
22. Wood fencing shall only be allowed along the side yards and the rear yards of single family
dwellings, Project Theme Walls shall be used along the side yards facing the street for corner
lots.
23. The residential lot street tree requirements and front yard requirements shall be consistent with
Section IV.C.3.a.1 .,2., and 3. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
24. Maintenance and timing for completion of all open space areas shall be as identified in
Planning Application No. 92-0013 (Development Agreement) or shall be consistent with
Specific Plan No. 219, as amended, if the Development Agreement is null and void.
25. A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved bythe Planning Department
prior to recordation of the Final Map.
26. A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the
issuance of building permits for review and approval. The following needs to be included in
these plans:
a, Typical front yard landscaping for interior, corner and cul-de-sac lots.
b. Typical slope landscaping.
c. Private and public park improvements and landscaping.
d. All open space area landscaping including, private and public common areas, private
recreational areas, paseos, equestrian trails, monuments and Landscape
Development Zones.
e, All landscape plans shall identify the number and size of all plants, the type of irrigation
to be used, all hardscaping, fences and walls.
f. The timing for installation of all landscaping wails and trails shall be identified prior to
approval of these plans.
g. The responsibility for installation of all landscaping and walls shall be identified.
h. All private open space areas that will not be dedicated to the City as identified in the
Development Agreement shall be developed as an integrated part of the open space
lot that they are a part of and shall be consistent with the previsions of the Specific
Plan,
i. Fifty (50) pement of all trees planted within the project shall be a minimum of twenty
four (24) inch box. The landscape plans proposed for each phase shaJl incorporate
the fifty (50) percent mix of twenty four (24) inch box trees into the design. The
provisions of Chapter 7.06 of the Development Code shall be applied to all landscaped
areas with 2:1 slopes or greater.
j. A note shall be placed on the conceptual landscape plans that all trees shall be double
staked and automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaping. These provisions
shall be incorporated into the construction plans.
k. A note shall be added to all conceptual landscape plans that all utility service areas
and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping. This equipment shall
be identified on the construction landscape plans and shall be screened as specified
on this condition.
I. The plant heights at sensitive locations for traffic safety shall be subject to the approval
of the Public Works Department.
m. The timing for submittal and approval of the construction landscape plans shall be
identified for all improvements within this condition.
R:\S P A~2001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 9
27. The development of this project and all subsequent developments within this project shall be
consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, as amended and Planning Application No. 92-0013
(Development Agreement) or any subsequent amendments.
28. Double-pane window treatment shall be required for second floor elevation windows in any
two-story homes constructed on the lots identified in the Acoustical Study prepared by Wilber
Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and its supplement dated October 3, 1992 and
any other supplemental reports.
29. All Parcels in Planning Areas 26 and 28 that abut a portion of Butterfield Stage Road that are
designed with a Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) of less than 32 feet shall be developed
with single story single family dwellings.
Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
30. If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, the applicant shall provide additional
landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project.
31. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall 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.
32. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection.
33. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of
one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan,
shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one
year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation
system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the
bond shall be released.
34. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use
allowed by this permit.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
35. The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for
this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer
at no cost to any Government Agency.
General Requirements
36. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses,
and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and
revision.
37. All underlying Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188,
Amendment No. 3 approved December 8, 1992 shall govern. If conflicting conditions of
approval prevail, the most stringent shall apply.
38. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the
Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the
City-maintained road right-of-way.
39. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
R;\S P A~O01 ~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
10
All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be
coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous
to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall
complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted:
40. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Rancho California Water District
c. Eastern Municipal Water District
d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
f. Planning Department
g. Department of Public Works
h. Riverside County Health Department
i. Cable TV Franchise
j. Community Services District
k. Verizon
I. Southern California Edison Company
m. Southern California Gas Company
n. Fish & Game
o. Army Corps of Engineers
41. If phasing of the map for construction is proposed, legal all-weathered accesses as
required by City Ordinances shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a paved
City maintained road.
42. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Department of Public Works:
a. Improve Butterfield Stage Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' RNV) to
include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities,
signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 14'
wide raised landscaped median. The developer is eligible to a reduction in the
Street System Improvements Component of the Public Facilities Development
Impact Fee for residential construction as allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "A") dated July 14, 1998.
b. The raised landscape median on Butterfield Stage Road shalt include 250' of left
turn storage capacity with 120' of approach transition or as determined by the
Director of Public Works during design, for the intersection with Street "G".
c. Improve Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' RAN) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities,
R:\S P A~2001~1-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~oaloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 11
43.
signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), 12'
wide raised landscaped median. The developer is eligible to a reduction in the
Street System Improvements Component of the Public Facilities Development
Impact Fee for residential construction as allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "A") dated July 14, 1998.
d. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities,
signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer).
e. Improve Sunny Meadows Drive (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/VV) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of half-
width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk,
street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not
limited to water and sewer).
f. Improve Streets "A," "G," "N," and "V" (Entryway Standards - 70' R/W) to include
dedication of full-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of full-width
street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights,
drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water
and sewer).
g. Improve Streets "B," "C," "D," "F," "G," "H," "1," "J," "K," "L," "M," "N" north of "P,"
"O," "P," "Q," "R," "S," 'q'," and "U" (Local Road Standards - 60' R/VV) to include
dedication of full-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of full-width
street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street
lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to
water and sewer).
h. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement
transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections.
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the
design of the street improvement plans:
a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum
over A.C. paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207,207A and/or
208.
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with City Standard Nos. 800, 801,802 and 803.
d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos.
400,401 and 402.
e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the
project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining
properties.
Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113.
All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section.
All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door
openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk.
R:\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~alorna cc vttm res.2,DOC
12
j. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
k. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and/or 303.
I. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV
shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where
adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities
shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider.
m. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33ky or greater, shall be installed
underground
44. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or
other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works.
45. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Pauba Road, Meadows Parkway,
Sunny Meadows Drive and Butter[ield Stage Road on the Final Map with the exception of
one (1) opening on both Meadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road only and two (2)
openings on Sunny Meadows Drive, as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map.
48. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian
facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County
Standard No. 805.
47. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public
or other appropriate agency and shall continue in fome until the City accepts or
abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved
by the Department of Public Works.
48. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of
an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior
to City Council approvat of the Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for
reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency.
49. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
50. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the
Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the
map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and
approval. The following information shall be on the ECS:
a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain.
b. Special Study Zones.
c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report.
d. Archeological resources found on the site.
51. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject
property.
52. Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be constructed per the appropriate City Standards and
as shown on the approved Tentative Map.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\paloma cc vttm res.2.DOC
13
53. Left turn lanes shall be provided at all intersections on Sunny Meadows Drive, Pauba
Road, Butter[ield Stage Road and Meadows Parkway, as directed by the Department of
Public Works.
54. Traffic signal interconnection shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2"
rigid conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along the property
fronting Butterfield Stage Road and Pauba Road. This design shall be shown on the
street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works.
55. Prior to designing any of the above plans (i.e., left turn lanes, traffic signal
interconnection, etc.), contact the Transportation Engineering for the design
requirements.
56. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of
the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements
pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such
agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to
acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision.
Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount
given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal.
57. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for Butterfield Stage Road, Pauba Road,
Meadows Parkway and Sunny Meadows Drive and shall be included in the street
improvement plans.
58. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and
hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the Final Map or the
issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way.
59. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be
provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV,
and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence.
60. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop.
Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
61. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Department of Public Works and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA).
62. This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip Reduction Plan"
in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
63. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be
delineated and noted on the final map.
64. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through private property.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vllm res.2.OOC
14
65. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and
recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities .
located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and
shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage
easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions."
66. Pedestrian access with sidewalk shall be provided from the cul-de-sac terminus of
Streets "D" and "O" to Butterfield Stage Road and between the cul-de-sac terminus of
Streets "K" and "G."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
67. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
e. Riverside County Health Department
f. Community Services District
g. Verizon
h. Southern California Edison Company
i. Southern California Gas Company
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City
of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall
address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction
of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections.
A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering
geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan
check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical
hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report
shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction.
A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify
storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of
the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private,
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an
adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or
private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all
facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm
water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for
analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
68.
69.
70.
71.
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~paloma cc vtlm res.2.DOC
15
72. The Developer must 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 (NOI) has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt.
73. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
74. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's
check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area
drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already
been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
75. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work
performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as
directed by the Department of Public Works.
76. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales
independent of any other lot.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
77. Final Map shall be approved and recorded.
78. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for
location and elevation; and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
79. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code,
the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards
and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
80. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. The developer is eligible to receive credits
as allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement
(Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
81. The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial
streets and collector streets as directed by the Department of Public Works.
82. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to
driveways to provide for minimum sight distance.
83. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
84. All traffic signals shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the
approved traffic signal plan as specified under Condition 54 but not later than issuance of
occupancy for the final phase.
85. All traffic signal interconnect conduit and cable along Butterfield Stage Road from Pauba
Road to the southerly tract boundary shall be installed per the approved plan at the time
of street improvements.
86. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road at
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2.DOC 16
Street "G." A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 150th occupancy,
unless additional traffic studies support delaying the installation or whenever Street "G" is
constructed to Butterfield Stage Road, whichever comes first. The developer is eligible to
receive reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems for the actual
cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public Facilities Development
Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998.
87. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Pauba Road and Meadows
Parkway. A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 100th occupancy,
unless the Department of Public Works approves delaying the installation. The
Developer is eligible to reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems
for the actual cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14, 1998.
88. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Pauba Road and Butterfield
Stage Road. A traffic signal shall be installed prior to issuance of the 150th occupancy,
unless the Department of Public Works approves delaying the installation. The
Developer is eligible to receive reimbursement for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control
Systems for the actual cost for the design and installation as allowed in the Public
Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement (Exhibit "B") dated July 14,
1998.
89. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
90. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
91. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
92. 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 Director of Public Works.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
General Conditions
93.
If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the text of the Specific Plan or
exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedent.
94.
All park and landscape plans submitted for consideration for TSCD maintenance shall be
in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape and Irrigation Specifications and
Installation Details and the Park Land and Landscape Dedication Process.
95. Construction of the 5-acre public park site (Lot No. 295) and the median landscaping
shall commence pursuant to a pre-construction meeting with the developer and the
TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and
inspection process may preclude acceptance to these areas into the TCSD maintenance
programs.
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~oaloma cc vttrn res.2.DOC 17
96.
The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for all
maintenance of the park site and the landscaped medians until such time as those
responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD.
97.
The park site (Lot No. 295) shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of
any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the
property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance for the amount of the
improvements and a soils assessment report shall also be provided with the conveyance
of the property.
98.
Class II bike lanes shall be constructed in concurrence with street improvements along
Butterfield Stage Road and Meadows Parkway. The multi-use trail along Pauba Road
shall also be constructed in concurrence with the street improvements.
99.
All perimeter walls, fences, entry monumentation, signage, parkway landscaping,
pedestrian portals, trails, private recreational areas and open space shall be maintained
by the Homeowner's Association (HCA), private maintenance association or the property
owner.
100. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of
construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris.
Prior to Final Map
101.
Construction drawings for the park site (Lot No. 295) and the landscaped medians
proposed for dedication to the City shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Services.
102. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve the park site
(Lot No. 295) and the landscaped medians.
Prior to Issuance of Buildinq Permits
103.
Prior to the installation of street lights or the issuance of building permits, whichever
comes first, the developer shall file an application and pay the appropriate fees to the
TCSD for the dedication of arterial and residential street lighting into the appropriate
TCSD maintenance program.
104.
The 5-acre park site (Lot No. 295) shall be improved, including the completion of the 90-
day maintenance period and the conveyance accepted by the City Council prior to the
issuance of the first building permit in Tract 24188, excluding the 67 dwelling units in
Tract 24188-1 and excluding models.
105. The private recreation center (Lot No. 294) shall be completed prior to the issuance of
the 200th building permit in Tract 24188, excluding the 67 dwelling units in Tracts 24188-1.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
106.
It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of
the Temecula Community Services District and its service level rates and charges to all
prospective purchasers. This disclosure shall be in the format acceptable to the City and
filed with the TCSD.
R:\S P A~2001't01-0102 Paloma Del So[ #8~oaloma cc vltm res.2.DOC
18
107.
Prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy within each phase, the developer shall
submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel
Numbers assigned to the final project.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in
conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the
project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Signature
R:\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~aloma cc vttm res.2,DOC
19
EXHIBIT A
AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
R:\S P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
15
VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
AMENDED NO. 4
City
ATFACHMENT NO 5
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2001
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
16
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 28, 2001
Planning Application No. PA01-0109 (General Plan Amendment)
Planning Application No. PA01-0102
(Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8)
Planning Application No. PA01-0117 (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188
Amendment. No. 4)
Prepared By: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT Resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DO THE
FOLLOWING: (1) CERTIFY ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8; (2) APPROVE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109); and
APPROVE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102) AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
ZONING STANDARDS FOR PLANNING AREA 38 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0102
2. ADOPT Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION
OF A PORTION OF THE PALOMA del SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
LOCATED EAST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE
PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND
SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL
NOS. 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955-030-004, 955-030-006, 955-030-
032.
R:XS P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PCStaffRpt..2.doc
APPLICATION INFORMATION:
APPLICANT:
Newland Communities, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE: Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants
PROPOSAL:
Planning Application No. PA 01-0109 proposes to amend the General Plan
Map to reflect the proposed Specific Plan amendments.
Planning Application No. PA01-0102 proposes to amend Specific Plan No.
SP-4 (Paloma del Sol), Planning Areas 5, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 38; and
eliminating Planning Area 29B.
Planning Application No. PA01-0117 proposes Amendment No. 4 of
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 to create 293 single-family residential
lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1 park site lot and 16 open space lots located
within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29.
LOCATION:
North of State Highway 79 South, south of Pauba Road, west of Butterfield
Stage Road and east of Margarita Road.
EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan Overlay District, Paloma del Sol, (SP-4)
PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan Overlay District, Paloma del Sol, (SP-4)
BACKGROUND
Specific Plan No. 4 (Paloma del Sol) was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
on September 6, 1988 as County SP-219. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Council
approved various amendments to the Specific Plan, in the period of time from 1994 through 1999.
A formal submittal for these new amendments was received on February 28, 2001. Staff held a
Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant on April 5, 2001. From June to the
present, staff has conducted additional meetings with the Applicant on various revisions to the text
and figures in the Specific Plan Amendment and the vesting tentative tract map.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
The 15 acres associated with existing Planning Area 27 will be merged into proposed
Planning 28 and designated for Medium Density single-family residential uses. The
commercial uses are being located to the southwestern corner of the project site. A new
Planning Area 27 has been re-located to the south and will be established as 9 acres of
open space. The reconfigured Planning Area 28 has been expanded from 25.0 acres to
49.4 acres. Based on a density of 2-5 density units per acre, the number of dwelling units
will increase from 113 to 190 units.
· The Temecula Valley Unified School District has determined the 10.0 acre elementary
school site planned for Planning Area 29B will instead be located in the Crown Hill
R:XS P Ak2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #SXPCStaffRpt..2.doc
2
development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, the area has been
eliminated and incorporated into Planning Areas 27, 28, and 29.
The 2.9 acre Park and Recreation area designated for existing Planning Area 24 will be
incorporated into the existing Greenbelt,'Paseo system. A new Planning Area 24 will be
designated as a 1.0 acre private Park/Recreation area adjacent to Planning Area 27.
· Planning Area 29 remains as a 5.0 acre Park/Recreation area. but, will be relocated north
of the open space area adjacent to Planning Area 27.
· The commercial uses from Planning Area 27 will replace the Medium High residential uses
in Planning Area 38.
The residential land use designations for Planning Areas 5 and 23 have been lowered from
Medium High (5-8 DU/AC) to Medium (2-5 DU/AC). These changes will result in a reduction
of 3 residential units in Planning Area 5 and a reduction of 107 residential units in Planning
Area 23.
Amendment of General Plan Land Use Map
· The City's General Plan Land Use Map must be amended to reflect the changed land use
designations affected by the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Amendment.
Vestin.q Tentative Tract Map 24188 Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 modifies the previously approved
Amendment No 3 by creating 293 single-family residential lots, 1 recreation center lot, 1
park site lot and 16 open space lots within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28 and 29.
ANALYSIS
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 proposes to relocate the existing Neighborhood Commercial area
from the southwest corner of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Roads to the southwest corner of De
Portola Road and Campanula Way. With regard to residential uses, the amendment would result in
an overall 2%-3% reduction in residential dwelling units within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
boundary. The previously planned elementary school facility proposed for Planning Area 29B has
been eliminated and public and private parks will be reconfigured and relocated.
Specific Plan Amendment No. 8
Relocation of Commercial Area
The applicant is requesting to relocate the 15 acre Neighborhood Commercial area at the
southwest corner of Pauba Road and Butterfield Stage Road (existing Planning Area 27) to the 8
acre Planning Area 38 located within the village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula
Road.
The reason given by the applicant for the proposed relocation includes concern over land use
compatibility issues and their doubts about being able to attract a major commercial tenant. Staff
concurs that a high potential exists for land use conflicts between the currently allowed commercial
R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8huCStaffRpt..2.doc
3
development and the existing and proposed residential development that surround the area.
Moreover, staff believes it is appropriate to concentrate commercial development within the
existing village center area at De Portola Road and Campanula Road. It should be noted that a
portion of existing Planning Area 27 contains slope constraints. Subsequently, the relocation of the
commercial designation results in a relatively even trade of level developable acreage.
The applicant is proposing to amend the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance to provide
for Commercial Office/Neighborhood Commercial uses and development standards for Planning
Area 38. Staff has reviewed the proposed uses and development standards within Planning Area
38 and believes they are consistent with the Specific Plan and the long term vision in the General
Plan. In addition, staff believes the expanded commercial area will enhance the village center and
be compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses.
Reduction in Residential Units
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 8 reduces the total number of residential dwelling
units within the overall Paloma del Sol Specific Plan from the currently allowed 5,246 units to a
maximum of 5,137 units, with a potential for as few as 5,072 units. This dwelling unit decrease
represents a 2% to 3% reduction in residential dwelling units. The High and Very High categories
will remain unchanged. The decrease in overall net residential density from 5.1 density units per
acre to 4.9 density units per acre results in the allocation of more land to each single family
detached residential unit.
The gross project density also decreases similarly from 3.8 density units per acre to 3.6 density
units per acre. When compared to the 5,604 dwelling units adopted in the original Specific Plan,
the total decrease in residential units ranges from 8% (at 5,137 density units) to 10% (at 5,072
density units).
Elimination of School Site
The existing Planning Area 29B, which was located within the boundary of tract 24188, was
intended to accommodate a 10-acre elementary school facility. However, the Temecula Valley
Unified School District has since indicated that the school will actually be located in the Crown Hill
development east of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, Planning Area 29B will be
eliminated and the 10 acres will be re-allocated for parks, open space, and some medium density
residential development.
Parks & Open Space Areas
Two neighborhood park/recreation areas will be provided within Tract 24188. Planning Area 29,
which has been reconfigured and relocated slightly, will accommodate a 5.0 acre public
park/recreation area. The facility will be constructed, fully operational and dedicated to the City
prior to the issuance of the first building permit in Tract 24188 excluding the 67 dwelling units in
Tract 24188-1.
Planning Area 24 will accommodate a private 1.0 acre park/recreation area. The facility will be
constructed and fully operable as a private facility to be operated and maintained by the
homeowners association prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for the 4,576~h residential unit
within the specific plan.
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~2Stafi"RpL2.doc
4
Specific Plan/EIR Addendum Typographical Corrections
Staff has identified several typographical and numerical errors within the applicant's latest
submittal of the Specific Plan and EIR Addendum text. Staff recommends that the corrections
identified in Attachment 7 be incorporated into the proposed amended Specific Plan and EIR
Addendum documents prior to consideration by the City Council.
General Plan Map Amendment
The General Plan Land Use Map Amendment is necessary to conform to the current General Plan
land uses and development criteria set forth in the proposed Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8. The map amendments have been determined to be consistent with the City's
General Plan and both the amended and un-amended portions of the Specific Plan. The proposed
General Plan Land Use Map is located in Exhibit A of Attachment 3.
Vestin,q Tentative Parcel Map Amendment No. 4
Amendment No. 4 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24188 is located within Planning Areas 26, 27, 28
and 29 of Specific Plan No. 4. The amendment serves to modify Amendment No. 3 by reducing the
number of single-family residential lots from 351 to 293.
Pedestrian Connections
The previously approved map associated with Tract 24188 had various pedestrian connections
incorporated into the design so as to enhance a pedestrian's ability to access adjacent streets and
areas. Staff is recommending that three separate connections be incorporated into the latest map
amendment. One connection would occur between Street "D" and Butterfield Stage Road. A
second access would connect Street "O" with Butterfield Stage Road. And a third connection,
located within the interior of the tract, will provide pedestrian access between Streets "G" and "K".
The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is located in Exhibit B of Attachment No. 6.
The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachment 8) indicating their
agreement to incorporate the "G" Street/"K" Street connection. However, they do not believe that
the "D" Street and "O" Street connections are appropriate. It should be noted that the "Q" Street
connection requirement referenced in the correspondence was a misunderstanding and was only
recommended as an option by staff and not as a specific requirement. Staff continues to believe
that the three separate pedestrian connections are necessary and requests that the Planning
Commission provide direction on this issue.
Environmental Issues
Lots "F", "G", and "H" of Tract 24188 have been designed in conformance with Planning Area No.
27 which is designated as a 9.0 acre natural open space area. The layout of these lots serves to
ensure that impacts to an existing drainage and wetland within the planning area will be fully
avoided.
Conditions of Approval
The applicant's representative has submitted correspondence (see Attachments 9 & 10) requesting
that various Planning and Public Works conditions associated with Amendment 4 to Tract Map
24188 be modified and or deleted. Since that time, both Planning and Public Works staff have
R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #SXPCStaffRpt.2.doc
5
reviewed the proposed amendments. Public Works staff concurs with all proposed amendments
and has incorporated the amendments into the applicable recommended conditions of approval.
Moreover, Planning staff concurs with all but two of the requested amendments and has
incorporated the other amendments into the applicable conditions.
The first outstanding amendment is associated with Condition of Approval No. 26 which requires
that the applicant provide a conceptual landscape plan for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. Correspondence submitted by the applicant's representative requests
that the above condition be deleted given that the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan includes a
Conceptual Landscape Plan exhibit. Moreover, the applicant believes that the Specific Plan
provides the level of detail necessary to address landscaping issues at this point in the planning
process.
Condition of Approval No. 26 has been a standard condition applied to all previous tract maps
within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Therefore, staff recommends this condition be required.
The second outstanding amendment is associated with Condition of Approval No. 29 which
requires that single-story dwellings be developed on all parcels in Planning Areas 26 and 28 which
front on Buttedield Stage Road and have a Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) of less than 32
feet in width. The applicant's representative is requesting that Condition No. 29 be deleted given
that none of the parcels within Planning Areas 26 and 28 fronting on Butterfield Stage Road have
Landscape Development Zones (LDZ's) of less than 32 feet in width. Upon reviewing the proposed
tract map, planning staff believes some of the parcels may indeed have LDZ's of less than 32 feet
in width. Therefore, staff recommends that this condition be required.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and
certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was
certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development
Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of
Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan.
Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City in conjunction with an overall
reduction of dwelling units and realignment of Campanula Way.
Addendum No. 4 to the Final EIR has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts
associated with Amendment No. 8 to the Specific Plan. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table
1 Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures that changes in project impacts as a
result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation
measures are required. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality
impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of
Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the
project have been adequately addressed.
Adiacent Property Owner Correspondence
On November 7, 2001 staff received correspondence from Darren Stroud, attorney with the Law
Firm of Jackson DeMarco & Peckenpaugh (see Exhibit 11). Mr. Stroud represents James & Mary
Corona. The Coronas own land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Butterfield Stage
Road and Highway 79 South. The correspondence contends that the project applicants have failed
to construct necessary flood control facilities in accordance with a previously required condition of
R:~S P Ak2.001\01-0102 PaIoma Del Sol #8'uric S ta ffR pt ..2.doc
6
approval and mitigation measures associated with the original approval of the Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan. The correspondence indicates that the failure to construct these facilities has
resulted in a flood hazard on the Corona's property. Mr. Stroud is requesting that the City enforce
the previously required drainage related condition of approval and associated mitigation measures
by requiring construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits.
Moreover, in the absence of such a condition, Mr. Stroud is requesting that a subsequent
environmental impact report be prepared to evaluate current hydrology of the area and to mitigated
increased flood hazards to the Corona's property. (See Attachment 12 for response from
Applicant's Attorney).
Public Works Department staff believes the issue of timing and construction of the flood control
facilities has already been addressed. Moreover, staff believes the current planning actions being
proposed have no affect on the timing and construction of the flood control improvements.
With regard to environmental analysis, Planning staff does not believe that the planning actions as
proposed have any significant environmental affect on flood hazard issues. Moreover, staff
believes the proposed Addendum to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan EIR adequately addresses
potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Therefore, staff does not
believe that additional environmental analysis is necessary.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission Certify Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact
Report No. 235, and approve the General Plan Amendment and amendment No. 8 to the Paloma
del Sol Specific Plan.
FINDINGS
Specific Plan
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and
Development Code. The Specific Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of the majority of
the existing Land Use Designations and serves as an implementation tool for the General
Plan. Therefore, as proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, as it is
proposed to be amended, and Development Code.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed by
agencies and staff, and is determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan (as
it is proposed to be amended), Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth
Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that
protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a
master planned community with specific design guidelines and standards that ensure
compatibility and interface with the surrounding community in terms of density, design and
circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and designed, the Specific Plan is
compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
The subject property is physically suitable for the requested amended land use
designations and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints
of the site which would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or
anticipated developments.
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PCStaffRpt_2.doc
7
The proposed project shall ensure development of desirable character that will be
compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The
project proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding
neighborhoods. The Community/Neighborhood Commercial development is proposed
within a Village Center and is designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve the needs of the
Paloma del Sol community and is adjacent to Highway 79 South where similar commercial
and retail uses currently exist along the Highway corridor.
Vestinq Tentative Tract Amendment
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent
with the General Plan, the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan as amended and the City of
Temecula Development Code;
The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered
into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will
not be too small to sustain their agricultural use;
=
The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed
by the tentative map;
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the
project boundaries;
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
10.
The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
11.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided.
12. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby).
R:XS P AX2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol # 8'u~CS ta fir pt ..2.doc
8
ATFACHMENT NO 6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF
ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO FEIR NO. 235 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN LAND
USE MAP AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
R:\S P Ak2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
17
DRAFT
ATrACHMENT NO. 6
RESOLUTION NO. 2001
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DO THE
FOLLOWING: (1) CERTIFY ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8; (2) APPROVE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 8 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0109); and
APPROVE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0102) AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING
STANDARDS FOR PLANNING AREA 38 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
01-0102)
WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application Nos. PA01-0109 (General
Plan Amendment), and PA01-0102 (Specific Plan Amendment, & Zoning Standards Amendment),
(the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development
Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered these Applications on November 7, 2001
at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested
persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to the recommended
conditions, together with the concurrent recommendation on the certification of Paloma del Sol EIR
Addendum No. 4 after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of
Temecula General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. In all respects as set forth in the recitals hereinabove, which are hereby
incorporated by reference.
Section 2. Findings. That the Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the
Application, hereby makes the following findings:
General Plan Amendment: The General Plan Amendment is necessary to conform to the
current General Plan land uses and development criteria set forth in the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan Amendment No. 8. Further, the General Plan Amendment serves to designate the Land Use
for the parcels in a manner more conducive to future development. The City finds it necessary to
change the Land Use Designation of parcels on the General Plan Land Use Map to ensure the
public health, safety and welfare of the City and to facilitate future development of the parcels.
R:~S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~PC cir gpa spa res.doc
DRAFT
Specific Plan Findinqs
A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and
Development Code. The Specific Plan is a reallocation and redistribution of some of the existing
Land Use Designations and serves as an implementation tool for the General Plan. Therefore, as
proposed, the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended,
and Development Code.
B. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public
interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The project has been reviewed by
agencies and staff, and is determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan (as it is
proposed to be amended), Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management
Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety
and welfare of the community. In addition, the Specific Plan is a master planned community with
specific design guidelines and standards that ensure compatibility and interface with the surrounding
community in terms of density, design and circulation. Therefore, as proposed, conditioned and
designed, the Specific Plan is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested amended land use
designations and the anticipated land use developments. There are no physical constraints of the
site which would preclude or prohibit the requested land use designations or anticipated
developments.
D. The proposed project shall ensure development of desirable character that will be
compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project
proposes similar residential land uses adjacent to the existing surrounding neighborhoods. The
Community/Neighborhood Commercial development is proposed within a Village Center and is
designed to be pedestrian oriented to serve the needs of the Paloma del Sol community and is
adjacent to Highway 79 South where similar commercial and retail uses currently exist along the
Highway corridor.
Section 3. Recommendation to the City Council. The City of Temecula Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council do the following:
1. Approve a Resolution certifying Addendum No. 4 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
EIR, and approving General Plan Amendment (PA-01-0109), located in Exhibit A and substantially
in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference;
2. Approve a Resolution approving Amendment No. 8 to the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan (PA-01-0102), located in Exhibit B and substantially in the form attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference; and
3. Adopt an Ordinance amending the zoning standards for the Paloma del Sol Specific
Plan (PA-01-0102), and contained in Exhibit C, and substantially in the form attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
R:\S P Ak2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\PC eir gpa spa res.doc
2
DRAFT
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 7th day of November 2001.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01 - was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
th
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7 day of November, 2001, by the following
vote:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
RASP A~001\01-0102 P~on'm Del Sol #8~PC eh- gpa spa res.doc
3
ATrACHMENT NO 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24188 (AMENDMENT NO. 4)
R:~S P A~2001\01 ~)102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPT12-11-01.doc
18
DRAFT
ATFACHMENT NO. 7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-z/--/
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0117 - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 24188 AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A
PORTION OF THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED EAST
OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, NORTH OF DE PORTOLA ROAD, WEST OF
BU'I-rERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD, AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 955-030-002, 955-030-003, 955-
030-004, 955-030-006, 955-030-032.
WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA01-0117, (the
"Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code
and Subdivision Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
November 7, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to the conditions after
finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed with the City of Temecula General
Plan, as amended, the proposed Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Amendment No. 8, Development
Code and Subdivision Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
by reference.
That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
Section 2. Findinqs. That the Planning Commission, in recommending that the City
Council approve the Application, hereby make the following findings as required in Chapter 16 of the
City of Temecula Subdivision Ordinance.
A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is
consistent with the General Plan, the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan as amended and the City of
Temecula Development Code;
B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract
entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too
small to sustain their agricultural use;
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~pc tract res..doc
1
DRAFT
C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development
proposed by the tentative map;
D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of
approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as no sensitive species or habitant exist within the project
boundaries;
F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems;
G. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
H. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those
previously acquired by the public will be provided.
(Quimby).
The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan Environmental
Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September
6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the
Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted
on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities
and uses to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 was adopted on October 19, 1999 by the City of
Temecula in conjunction with an overall reduction of in dwelling units and the reconfiguration and
realignment of Campanula Way.
The analysis associated with the Addendum No. 4 to Environmental Impact Report Ne. 235
concludes that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or
decreased from the original project and that no additional mitigation measures are required. The
Planning Commission acknowledges the overriding consideration with regard to air quality impacts
made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental
Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that the environmental concerns regarding the project have
been adequately addressed.
Section 4. Recommendation to the City Council. The City of Temecula Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve a resolution approving of Planning
Application No. PA01-0117 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24188), for the
subdivision of a portion of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan as shown on Exhibit A, and substantially
in the form contained herein and incorporated herein by this reference.
R:\S P A~001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~c tract res..doc
2
DRAFT
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 7~h day of November 2001.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01 - was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of November, 2001, by the following
vote:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R;\S P A~001~01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8~c tract res,.doc
3
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO 8
SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP CHANGES
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc
19
LIJ
~0
ATTACHMENT NO 9
PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS LOCATION MAP
R:\S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-114)l.doc
20
I .__ TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
.1' ~-"" .~ I '-- ~?~D~o. 4
ATFACHMENT NO 10
T & B PLANNING CONSULTANTS PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS LETrER
R:LS P AL2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc
21
T & B Planning Consultants
Santa Aha · San Diego · Sacramento
.tN 100-172
· 3242 HALLADAY, SUITE 100 SANTAANA, CA 92705 (714) 662-2774 FAX # [714) 662-2708 ema[l@tbplannm$.corn
November 1,2001
Mr. Matthew C. Harris, Associate Planner
Planning Department
CITY OF TEMECULA
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
RE: VestingTentative Tract 24188 Amendment N°' 4 (PA01'0117) and Pal°ma del s°l Specific
Plan Amendment No. 8 (PA01-0102)
Dear Matt:
In response your comment letter dated October 10, 2001, the Paloma del Sol consultant team was directed by
the applicant, NEWLAND ASSOCIATES, INC., to incorporate several additional access points into the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map (Tract No. 24188) for Paloma del Sol. Specifically, staff requested the following:
Pedestrian access with sidewalk shall be provided at the following points:
a. Between the cul-de-sacs at the end of Streets "G" & "K".
b. From the cul-de-sac terminus of Street "D" to Butterfield Stage Road
c. From the cul-de-sac terminus of Street "0" to Butterfield Stage Rood
City staffhas also requested a pedestrian access point from Street "Q" directly to Butterfield Stage Road.
In response to staffs request, the project civil engineer (The Keith Companies) has provided accommodations
for all of these access points on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. The revised map was recently resubmitted to .
the City for staff review and distribution to the Planning Commission. Where appropriate, we also included
references to several of these access points in the Specific Plan Amendment document.
Pedestrian Access Between Streets "G"and "K"
We believe that pedestrian access between Streets "G" and "K" can be accommodated relatively easily. This
access point would occur in Lot "0" on the Tract Map. However, we still have concerns regarding the other
requested access points.
Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "D' to Butterfield Stage Road
A pedestrian access point at this location is feasible. However, opening a cul-de-sac to pedestrians on such a
busy street poses potential risks to little children wandering out onto Bunerfield Stage Road. Plus, from a
security standpoint, it is much more difficult to provide "defensible space" with an open cul-de-sac than with a
closed cul-de-sac. For these reasons, we feel that this proposed pedestrian access point should be eliminated from
the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 24188-2~. I":~' ~
· I ~ Matthew C. Harris
Paloma Del Sol
November 1, 2001
Payee 2
Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "O" to Butterfield Stage Road
This access point is difficult to provide from a purely logistical standpoint. The grade change between the Street
"O" cul-de-sac and the parkway adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road is approximately 8.3%, which exceeds ADA
requirements. Current ADA requirements for outdoor ramps is 6% maximum. In addition, a pedestrian walkway
is proposed along through the middle of the 2:1 slope that abuts Planning Area 26. The Lot "G" drainage, which
borders Planning Area 26, will contain sensitive wetland habitat. Proximity to children and domesticated animals
would likely have a negative impact on this vegetation. In addition, providing an access from Butterfield Stage
Road directly to Street "O" would raise potential security concerns as well. We request that this access point be
eliminated from the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
Pedestrian Access from the Cul-de-sac Terminus of Street "Q" to Butterfield Stage Road:
The grade change between the Street "Q" cul-de-sac and the parkway adjacent to Butteffield Stage Road makes
it almost a certainty that stairs would be required at this location in lieu ora ramp. This would conflict with ADA
access requirements. In addition, opening a cul-de-sac on such a busy street poses potential risks to little children
wandering out onto Butterfield Stage Road. Plus, from a security standpoint, it is much more difficult to provide
"defensible space" with an open cul-de-sac than with a closed cul-de-sac. For these reasons, we feel that this
proposed pedestrian access point should be eliminated from the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 24188-2).
Conclusion
It is our intent to request the Planning Commission direct City staff to remove the Street "D", Street "O" and
Street "Q" access points at the upcoming November 7~' public hearing.
We hope that this letter clarifies the position of NEWLAND ASSOCIATES, 1NC. regarding the proposed access
points. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
T&B PLANNING CONSULTANTS, INC.
Mark T. Hickner
Senior Project Manager
Gary Thomhill / City of Temecula
Debbie lYonoske / City of Temecula
Dave Hogan / City of Temecula
Jim Delhamer / Newland
Dean Meyer / Newland
Sam Alhadeff/Adhadeff& Solar
Craig Ryan / The Keith Companies
Barry Bumell / T&B
ATFACHMENT NO 11
DARREL STROUD LETrER - NOVEMBER 7, 2001
R:\S P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc
22
11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~002/067
JACK.~OI~ DEi~RCO ~ PECK~:~PAUGH
28878
November 7, 2001
Dst~oud(~jdplaw.com
(949) 851-7404
VIA FACSIMILE AND HAND DELIVER y
Planning Commission
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attn: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
Re:
Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5
Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment
Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8
Planning Application No. 01-0117- Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
24188 Amendment No.4
Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners:
We represent James and Mary Corona and the Corona family (collectively the
"Coronas"). The Coronas own land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Butterfield
Stage Road and Highway 79. The Coronas' land straddles the boundary between Riverside
County ("County") and the City of Temecula ("City"), and is directly impacted by the on-going
development activities associated with the Paloma del Sol project ("Project"). The Coronas
request that the following comments be included in the administrative record regarding the above
referenced planning applications. Additionally, the Coronas request that the Planning
Commission enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed
on the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan ("Specific Plan 219") by conditioning its approval of the
above-referenced planning applications on the construction of the flood control facilities prior to
issuance of building permits.
11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~003/067
JACKSON DEltI-ARCO & PECKEN'PAUGH
Planning Commission
November 7, 2001
Page 2
I. INTRODUCTION
Prior to the development of Specific Plan 219 and construction of Butterfield
Stage Road improvements, storm water flowed to the north of the Coronas' land, across
Butterfield Stage Road, and through the Specific Plan 219 property. As a result, when the
County first approved Specific Plan 219, it imposed a condition on the Project requiring the
developer to construct a flood control channel either on-site or off-site to intemept those flows.
The County likewise imposed mitigation measures on the Project to prohibit increased flood
hazards to adjacent or downstream properties and require that all flood-related hazards must be
adequately mitigated. (Reference EIR235, pp. 315-321, incorporated by reference.)
Subsequently, the City adopted the County's condition of approval for Specific
Plan 219 that the developer construct the flood control facilities either on-site or off-site. The
City first adopted the condition in 1991. However, the flood control facilities have never been
built. Accordingly, development of Specific Plan 219 by its predecessor and Newland
Communities' ("Newland") has resulted in tilling the natural drainage course that formerly
flowed to the north of the Corona Ranch property, across Butterfield Stage Road, through
Specific Plan 219, to Temecula Creek. This has resulted in a flood hazard on the Coronas' land
where none previously existed. The flood control facilities are necessary to mitigate the
hazardous condition created on the Coronas' land by Newland's development of Specific Plan
219 and the Butterfield Stage Road improvements. Yet, Newland continues to develop the
property without complying with the condition and mitigation measures that require it to
construct the flood control facilities, further increasing the likelihood of flood-related hazards to
the Coronas' property.
Once again, Newland is requesting amendments to the Project's entitlements
without having constructed, or even committing to construct, the flood control facilities. On
November 2, 2001, the Coronas, for the first time, became aware of the Planning staff's
recommendation to approve the above referenced planning applications (e.g., amendments to the
City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, and Vesting Tentative Map No. 24188) for the Project.
However, the Coronas respectfully request that the City enforce the drainage-related condition of
approval and mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219 by conditioning any approval of
the above-referenced applications on construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance
of building permits. In the absence of such a condition, a subsequent environmental impact
report ("EIR") will need to be prepared prior to consideration of the above-referenced
applications to evaluate the current hydrology of the area and to mitigate the increased flood
hazards to the Coronas' land resulting from the Project. Furthermore, without such a condition,
the Planning Commission must suspend all action on the Project, including the above-referenced
planning applications, until after construction of the flood control facility necessary to mitigate
Project-related flooding hazards to the public roads and private property adjacent to the'
development.
11/07/2001 16:28 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~004/067
~'AC~ISON DEi~L~CO & PECI~i~N'PAUGH
Planning Commission
November 7, 2001
Page 3
CONSTRUCTION OF THE FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED
BY A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSEI~
ON SPECIFIC PLAN 219
As mentioned previously, the conditions of approval for Specific Plan 219 require
compliance with the terms set forth in correspondence dated May 26, 1988, by the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The May 26, 1988, letter requires the
construction of a drainage facility to intercept offsite storm runoff that approaches the Project
from the east. The letter states that the facility should be constructed as a permanent facility -
not as a temporaxY facility pending development of the next upstream property as had been
proposed by Project engineers in correspondence dated May 16, 1988. The letter also states that
the facility is to be constructed "before development of the downstream area it is meant to
protect." Finally, the letter states that the location, design, and design flow rates and sizes
proposed by the developer in Figure 57 of Specific Plan 219 should be considered '.'conceptual."
A copy of the May 26, 1988, Flood Control letter is attached as Exhibit "A,"
together with the prior correspondence dated April 6, 1988, and May 16, 1988, leading up to the
May 26, 1988, letter. The correspondence in Exhibit "A" indicates that the developer of Specific
Plan 219 attempted to limit the location and size of the necessary flood control facilities and to
shift the responsibility for constructing portions of the permanent flood control facilities to the
next upstream property. However, in its May 26, 1988, response letter, the County rejected that
attempt and instead required that the necessary permanent facility be constructed as part of
Specific Plan 219.
The City adopted the May 26, 1998, letter as one of the conditions of approval of
Specific Plan 219 in 1991. (Reference attached Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 1, at Exhibit "B".)
Specific Plan 219, as amended by the terms of the May 26, 1988, Flood Control
letter, was the "Project" analyzed by EIR 235. EIR 235 imposed mitigation measures on Specific
Plan 219 prohibiting increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties, requiring that
all flood-related hazaxds'must be adequately mitigated and requiring preparation of an in-depth
study of the Temecula Creek flood plain.. (Reference EIR 235, pp. 315-321.)
More importantly, the condition of approval and mitigation measures requiring the
NeMand to construct the flood control facilities as part of Specific Plan 219 still apply to the
Project. There has been no subsequent action by the City eliminating or changing the condition
of approval or mitigation measures imposed on Specific Plan 219. In fact, to date, each time the
City has approved amendments to Specific Plan 219, most recently in 1999, it has conditioned its
approval on the pre-existing conditions, and has never released Newland of the responsibility to
construct the flood control facilities. (Reference attached Conditions of Approval NOS. 50, 95,
96, 110, 120, 140, and 148 for Vesting Tentative Map No. 24182 (Amendment No. 3 - December
11/07/2001 16:29 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~005/067
JACKSOI~ DE~I~CO ~: PECKI/IlqPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 7, 2001
Page 4
8, 1992), Conditions of Approval Nos. 5, 20(g) & (la), 60, and 79 for Planning Application No.
PA96-0258 (Vesting Tentative Map No. 24182 Revised - February 8, 1998), and Condition of
Approval No. 7 for Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 -
November 16, 1999) at Exhibit "C".)) Therefore, the legal responsibility for constructing the
flood control facilities remains with the developers (Newland) of Specific Plan 219.
III. THE DRAINAGE-RELATED CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION
MEASURES IMPOSED ON SPECIFIC PLAN 219 HAVE NOT BEEN SATISFIED
By falling and constructing in the natural drainage channel, the Project has created
flood hazards to Corona Ranch that did not previously exist. The Project's alteration of the
natural drainage also results in flood hazards to Butterfield Stager Road and Highway 79.
(Reference 1996 Hydrology and Hydraulics Report for Paloma del Sol dated November 1996 by
Keith International, Inc.; and Flood Control letter dated September 23, 1996.)
The temporary detention basin and drainage facilities in Butterfield Stage Road do
not satisfy all drainage and flood control conditions imposed on Specific Plan 219. The
drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures require the development of
permanent facilities as part of Specific Plan 219 to intercept all offsite storm runoff that
approaches the Project from the east, and prohibits increased flood hazards to adjacent, properties.
The record is uncontradicted that the facilities in Butterfield Stage Road are
inadequate to intercept all of the west-flowing storm waters. (Reference Flood Control letter
dated September 23, 1996, and attached Minutes 0fthe November 8, 1989, Assessment District
meeting confirming additional drainage onto the Specific Plan 219 Project from the east, at
Exhibit "D".) Also note that the City has accepted Butterfield Stage Road into the City-
maintained street system. (Reference City Council Resolution No. 95-30, at Exhibit "E".) The
detention basin is only a temporary facility that is only required to remain in place until the
permanent flood control facilities are constructed. It is not a "permanent" facility itself, as
required by the conditions of approval stated in the May 26, 1988, letter. (Reference Exhibit
IV*
FAILURE TO MITIGATE THE INCREASED FLOOD HAZARDS RESULTINC
FROM DIVERTING THE NATURAL DRAINAGE COURSE IS A SIGNIFICANT
CHANGE REOUIRING PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR
Planning staff is recommending that an Addendum is an appropriate
.environmental document for the planning applications explaining that "changes in project
unpacts as a result of Amendment No. 8 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional
mitigation measures are required. (Reference StaffReport p. 5; See also Addendum p. 7). In
particular for flooding impacts, the Addendum concludes that "the proposed project would not
result in any new flood-related impacts the have not already been evaluated and approved for
previous Specific Plan Amendments .... "(Reference Addendum p. 11). However, this
11/07/2001 16:29 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~006/067
JACKSON DEMARCO & PECI~EiVPAUOH
Planning Commission
November 7, 2001
Page 5
conclusion hms counter to the actual events that have transpired since EIR 235 was originally
certified by the County on September 6, 1988. In fact, to date, the Newland has failed to come
into compliance with the development criteria and conditions placed on the Project. Instead, as
proposed here, the City has allowed the Project to proceed on grounds that new appro~,als would
not cause any.a, dditional flood hazards to Corona Ranch and other adjoining properties. In
essence, the City is illegally permitting the Project to proceed without enforcing the mitigation
measures adopted for the Project.
As mentioned earlier, Project grading has altered the drainage course that
previously existed in the pre-Project condition. Since 1988, there have been significant changes
in the tepogmphy of the area adjacent to the Project, including Butterfield Stage Road. The City
has yet to analyze these significant changes in the circumstances trader which the Project is to be
carded out and mitigate the significant increased flood hazards. However, the record before the
City shows that the Newland is responsible to mitigate flood hazards resulting from the Project.
The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code
sections 21000 etscq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. sections 15000 etseq.)
require preparation of a subsequent EIR for a project when substantial changes occur to the
circumstances under which a project is to be undertaken, or new information shows that project
impacts will be substantially more severe. (Public Resources Code section 21166; 14 Cal. Code
Regs. section 15162). Project grading and improvements to Butterfield Stage Road have
effectively blocked drainage through the area, creating significantly increased flood hazards to
adjacent properties than was previously identified in EIR 235. Accordingly, it is illegal for the
Planning Commission to approve the current planning applications based on an Addendum to an
outdated EIR. Particularly, where the Addendum incorrectly focuses on the impacts associated
with the plarming applications and fails to take into consideration the significant changes
associated with the whole of the ProjectI since its original certification.
Over 13 years after the Project EIR was approved, no flood control facilities have
been constructed to alleviate the flood hazards, contrary to assumptions made in Project design
and the prior environmental impact analysis. To date, New/and has failed to come into
compliance with the development criteria and conditions placed on the Project. Accordingly, if
the Planning Commission chooses not to require the construction of the flood control facilities
prior to issuance of building permits as a condition of approval for the above referenced planning
applications, then a subsequent EIR will need to be prepared first to analyze the increased
~A '"Project' means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a
direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in
the environment ...."14 Cal. Code of Regs. section 15378(a); See also 14 Cal. Code of Regs.
section 15378(c) ("'project' does not mean each separate governmental approval"); 14 Cal. Code
of Regs. section 15063(a)(1) (the lead agency must consider "[a]ll phases of project planning,
implementation, and operation.")
11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~007/067
JACKSON DE~'L~RcO ~ PECI~]N'PAUGH
Planning Commission
November 7, 2001
Page 6
Project-related flood risks. The reliance on an Addendum as proposed by Planning staffwould
violate CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
V. CONCLUSION
On behalf of the Coronas, I urge the Planning Commission to Planning
Commission enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed
on Specific Plan 219 by conditioning its approval of the above-referenced planning applications
on the construction of the flood control facilities prior to issuance of building permits.
Otherwise,' a subsequent EIR is required to analyze the Project's significant flood hazards and all
action on the Project must be suspended until the flood control facilities are constructed.
DWS/tms
Enclosures
4~0903.3
Very t~ly yours,
en W. Stroud
CC:
Stephen Corona (facsimile w/out encls., ovemite express w/encls.)
Peter Thorson, City Attorney (facsimile w/out encls., ovemite express w/encls.)
11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~008/067
EXHIBIT A
11/07/2001 16:30 FAX 949 752 0597
Hirer.ida County
~t~en~imn: Specific Plan 5ectlo~
Rea Coldmon
Ladies and Centle~en:
I~ our April 6, 1958 l~tter wc cxpresae~ concern over defiCit.-
clem in'the Specific Plan d0cumcn~_ lhc6e problemm have b:en
largely qorrectcd by the eppllo~nt through the ra¥1~lon of a por-
tion o£ the t~t that deal~ with drain.ge slon5 Pauba goad and
through the,.~revialon, of Elgure 5T-
Thc chanEms on figure 57 ino-ludc thc e~tcnslon of two proposed
storm drain, southerly to TemecQlm Creck~ the addition of a large
mtorm drain along Paub~ Road and a newly proposed faclllt~ alone
Butt~r£1,1d Sta~o Ro=d at the ,outhe~at oorner of th~ proJcot.
Thia lbst dF~[~sge m'i~O'c~'~rc hss'bc~n proposed am a result o£ our
comments on the earlier draft. It ls n~edcd to intercept ~ large
umount of offaitc 3term runoff that approaohe3 tho project fro~
thc east, Its representation sa Figure 57 should be considered
conceptual with re~ard to loc~lon sad design ~nd the de.lEa flow
rat=s and aizas should be re'warded a~ eatio=ta~.
This £scillty should be COllStruc~ed aa a pcr~nnent facility
either on,itc or offsit~ before doYelopment o£ the downstream
,res it ia meant to protect.
made ~ pa~t oF thc final document wc do not object to th~ appro¥-
Very truly your=,
KENNETH L. EDWARDS..
Chief EnGineer
co: Robert gel., William Frost
Jll~zbJp
San£or Civil Enginee~
gt~J~J:TT 68, ~ 1:)0
11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
909 $84 t985
RIvr'"I~SIIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
April 6, 1988
Riverside County
Planning Depar~men=
County Adm/n/$tra~iveCenter
Riverside, California
A=tent£~ Specific Plan Sectic~
~on ~oldman
Ladies and Gentlemenl P~I Sl~cifie Plml No. 219
$~ls ~ ~y sores of ~,i~cial ~es. ~ site is ~ ~ ~g~y 79,
A ~j~ ~ter~se ~aZlelm ~ =osses ~ ~d ~ .~a! plaoea ~9 ~e
CCI
The alta/nags basin mentioned in the last para~a~h of Page 306 ,hould be re-
examined, We believe that this -ar~a a~tUally is naturally tributary ~o the vicinity.
of the ~'~s~d BUtterfield Stage ~oad/De Portola P~d /ntarseotion and should be
dealt wi~h. ~is ia b~eed upon review of a~rial l~alahs da~d~ bac~ 39 years
and u~x~raphio m~ppin~ 49 year,.
These matters s~ould be settled ~ef~re this specific ~lan
Our con=act ~erscn is john Fa~huba,. telephone
Very truly l~urs, ,
1) ruzrL~i and
Attn: Barry Burneli
2) Robert Bei~, William Frost
r Civil Engin~r
11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
10/27~ 15:5~ ~0~ 584 5S8G
~011/067
PACS, 2/2e
bcYt C' cbz. Cl /illiam C-F ost c ssociatcs
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS& SURVEYOR~
Nay 16, 198B
fin 24084
Hr. dohn H. Keshube
Senior Civil Engineer
Riverside County Flood Control end
Water Conservation District
1995 Harket Street
Riverside, CA g2502
Subject: Response to. Comments on Specific Plan No. 219, Development
Agreement No. 4, VM1 Meadows
D~ar aohn:
We have reviewed your letter dated April 6, 1988, regarding the Vail
Meadows Specific Plan and the associated drainage plan. Based on your
comments, we have addressed these specific items in the text and
exhibits. The following is a summary of your ;hree major comments and
the appropriate response/modification:
1. Comment- "No drainage area will be diverted from its natural
~ry drainage Course." This would not be the case along the
south portion of the project where three major d'
werstons to the
south are proposed. It appears that these diversions would be
proper if flows were carried all the way to Temecule Creek.
~- As · part of the mssterplan of drainage for the Vail'
these drainage facilities will be extended from the
northstde of Highway 79 to the flow-line of the proposed
improvements for Temecula Creak, The plans for the proposed
improvements to Temecula C~eek are being prepaned by Rancho
Pacific Engineering. The drainage areas under discussion
currently enter Temecula Creek, but slightly further downstream
than the ultimate proposed location. The precise location is
rather relative since the floodplain in the creek is rather wide..
In addition, Figure 57 has been modified on Page 310 of the
Specific Plan to indicate these modifications. A copy of the
proposed modified master has been included for your rmview. (See
colored Exhibit Cl.
P,O SOx 1973g · 14725 ALTON PARKWAY. IRV1NE. CALIFORNIA 92710 · (714) 472-3505 · FAX (714) 472-8373
11/07/2001 16:31 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
OCT, 27 ' 99 (WED) 1~:43 Ka~EGER & STEWART
Mr. Oohn H. Kashuba
May 16, 1988
Page 2
909 684 6986
~012/067
PACE, 3/28
JN ~4084
Comment- A major watercourse parallels and crosses Pauba Road in
several places along the north project boundary. This stream was
not mentioned in the specific plan and should be.
~es~onse- The catchment area under discussion is the Pauba Ro~d
watershed which begins near Butterfteld Stage Road and flows in a
westerly direction towards Margarita Road. The watershed
tributary to Pauba Road has been masterpl&nned previously in our
studies for the preparation of construction plans for Pauba Road
as a part of Assessment District No. ~59. The plans for the road
and the associated drainage facilities are currently being
checked by the Riverside Flood Control Otstrfct staff. The
stream course which parallels and even crosses the Pauba Road
alignment has been relocated as a large diameter storm drain
within the roadway and varies in size from a 84" ReP to a 1~0"
RCP. Exhibit No. 57 indicating the masterplanned drainage
facil~ties has been updated to reflect the construction of this
storm drain. A detailed hydrology map indicating the location of
these facilities has also been included for your review. The
text of the specific plan will be revised as follows:
"The portion of the ~roJect which ts not tributary to Temecula
Creek, drains to the Murrieta Creek watershed. This represents
the drainage area adjacent to Pauba Road, along the northerly
boundary of the project. The existing watercourse parallels the
proposed Pauba Road alignment and a storm drain is masterplanned
to be located in Pauba Road. The storm drain ranges from a $4"
diameter to a ~gO" diameter concrete pipe and will be constructed
as part of Assessment Otstrtct No. 57. The proposed local storm
drain facilities from the Vail Meadows area which are tributary
to this watershed will be intercepted by this major storm drain
within Paubs Road."
Comments- The drainage basin mentioned in the last paragraph of
Page $0~ should be reexamined. We believe that this area
actually is naturally tributary to the vicinity of the proposed
Butterfield Stage Road/De Portola Road intersection and should
be dealt with.
~- Review of the natural topography of the area indicates
existing channel thalweg does follow an alignment very
close to the future intersection of De Portola and Butterfield
Stage Road. To prevent flooding at this location from the
tributary offsite area, will require the construction of
facilities offsite to intercept this drainage. It is assumed
that the ultimate offstte flood control facilities will parallel
De Portola to the weDt and extend northerly into the offsite
watershed. This offsite watershed drains an area of almost 1190
acres and the extension of these ultimate drainage, facilities
will be extended upstream fram the current project by the next
upetream development. However, portions of the ultimate system
will be constructed with the Vail Meadows development.
11/07/2001 16:32 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
10/27/~ 15:55 909 584 6~85
OCT. 27 '99 (WED) 15:43 KRI£G£R & STEWART
~013/067
Nr. John H. Kashuba
May 16, lg88
Page 3
24084
Adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road an earthen trapezoidal channel
will be constructed .to intercept the offstte flows since a
majority of the runoff will be in a overflow condition. Since
the channel in this area is a wide flood plain, the trapezoidal
channel will intercept any overflow prior to flooding Butterfteld
Stage Road, This channel will extend to Temecula Creak and will
require the construction of an ultimate box culvert at the
Highway 79 crossing. The culvert required has been preliminarily
sized aa a double 14' x 8' RCB. The adjacent development to Vail
Meadows may elect in the future to construct a concrete channel
facility to replace the earthen trapezoidal channel depending on
the proposed landuse plan. In addition, at this time, the
overflow condition will be improved by the upstream watershed
development. The improvements required with the Vail Meadows
development are indicated on Exhibit C, attached, and Flgbre 57
of the Specific Plan will be updated to reflect these changes.
An exhibit has been included which delineates this offsite
drainage area tributary to this location.
We feel these responses adequately address the comments which you had
concerning the drainage plan for Vail Meadows. We would appreciate
your timely approval of the drainage concept and indicate this with e
written response to the Riverside County Planning Department. If
possible, we would appreciate your response by May 2! because of the
pending Planning Commission meeting. Should you have any questions
regarding the drainage plan, please feel free to contact me at our
office. Thank you again for working together to resolve these issues.
· Sincerely,
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST & ASSOCIATES
3t4~B)' u?~_h ! 11 t ~ s, P.E.
~an~or Director
Civil Engineering
amg
Enclosures
11/07/2001 16:32 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
~ 1~27/S9 I~:5~ 909 68~ 6~86
OCT. 27 ' 99 [WED) 1~:4] KRIEGER & STEWART
~014/067
~AGE, 5/28
{'~ Inl~JOufl~t ~ Storm Drain
Z] 81orm Drain Une
Trap
Z,,,4
Vail Meadows
Storm Drain Infrastructure
JN 24449
11/07/2001 16:33 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
l~/27/DS 15:56
OCT. 27 '99 (WED) IS:44 K~IEGE~ & STEWART
909 684 6986
~015/067
11/07/2001 16:34 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
: 10/27/99 15:5// 909 65,~ 6986
909 684 6955
~016/067
PAGE.
11/07/2001 16:35 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~017/067
EXHIBIT B
11/07(,2001 16:~5 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
CITY OF TEMEGULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
[~018/067
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219. AMENDMENT NO. 1
Planninq Department
1. Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 shall consist of the'Following:
a. Exhibit "A".: Specific Plan Text:
Exhibit "B": Specific Plan Conditions of Approval
Exhil~it"C": Specific Plan Development Standards
If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the specific plan text
or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall tak~precedence.
The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory
requirements of all City of Temecula ordinances including Ordinance Nos. 348
and ~460 and state laws; and shall conform substantially with adopted Specific
Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 as filed in the office of the Planning
Department, unless otherwise amended.
N~o portion of the specif[c_~n which Duroortj_of oroposes to chancj,e, waive
or modify any ordinance or other leqal requirement for the development shall
'be considered to be part of the adopted specific pla__~.
The project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the following agency
letters and/or the requirements set forth by these agencies at the development
stage:
Road Department
Flood Control -
Fire Oepart:ment
g.
h.
i.
Parks
County Administrative Offices
Water Agency
Sewer Agency
Temecula School District
Department of Health
June 2, 1988
May 7fi lqRR ~
January 8, 1988 an~l
February 25, 1991
May 25. 1~88
April c;, 1988 .
May 23, 1988
May 20o 1988
January 25, 1988
July 20, 1990
Impacts to the Temecula Union School District shall be mitigated at the
development application stage in accordance with the District policies In effect
at th;, time of tract submittal: ..... ~: r :..':t.'. .,.::i t,on~'.ol[ a~;~royai.. ,-x~,u'tL be.~.,:; ....
STAFFRPT\SPT19
13
11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~019/067
EXHIBIT C
11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~020/067
C~TY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No: 24182,
Amendment No. 3, First Extension of Time
Project Description: To subdivide 136.2 acres into
443 Single Family Residential, 21 Open Space and
4 Multi-Family Residential lots.
Assessor's Parcel No,:
926-130-036
926-130-037
.926-130-038
926-130-039
926-130-040
Approval Date: December 8, 1992
.Expiration Date:
December 8, 1994
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, u~less modified by the conditions listed
below.' A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and
City Ordinance, upon written request, jf made 30 days prior to the expiration date. '
2. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map.
3. Subdivision phasing shall be subject to Planning Departme6t Approval.
4. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet IECS) shall
be prepared in ~oniuriction with the final map to delineate identified environmental
concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy
of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the
Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. The following notes
shall be placed on the ECS:
'This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory.
All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the Cali[ornia Institute
of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy."
"EIR No. 235 and an Addendum to this EIR was prepared for this project and
is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department."
11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~021/067
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied:
A. If the project is t~ be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an
overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for
approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading
plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation
during and after the grading process.
. (2)
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which
may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January
through March.
(3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
(4) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that
all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and
that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. ,663 by paying
the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be
superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan p~ior to the
payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the
fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County
ordinance or resolution.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within
the p[oject boundary until the developer or its successor's-i~-interest provides
evidence of compliance with public facility financi0g measures.. A cash sum of
one-hundred dollars (~100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as
mitigation for public library development.
With the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety
a copy of the acoustical study prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated
September 22, 1992 and revised October 3, 1992 shall be submitted to ensure
the implementation of the study to reduce ambient'interior noise levels to 45
Ldn and exterior noise levels to 65 Ldn.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall
be permitted with Planning Department approval.
11/07/2001 16:36 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~022/087
10.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its
agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding aBainst the City
of Temecula or its agents, officer, 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 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182, Amendment No. 3, which
action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code
Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider 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 subdivider of any such claim,
action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
!hereafter/be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Department prior to final map recordation of the tract maps. The
CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space,
recreation areas, parking areas,, private roads, and exterior of all buildings and
parkways. (Amended by Planning Commission on NOvember 16, 1992}.
No lot or dwelling unit in the devel'opment shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, propen'y Owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right
to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or
interest Jn the use of the COmmon areas and common facilities in the development,
such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with
authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of Said mutually available features of
the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include
compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of
assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded
CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as
Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This
condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
~ (Amended by Plannlng Commission on November 16, 1992}.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling
unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2.) as
share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the Common
areas and facilities.
12,
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of this project, the applicant/developer
shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to
the County Clerk in the amount of Eight Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($876.00)
which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar (9850.00] fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and .Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the'Twenty-Five
.Dollar 1~25.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cai. Code
off Regurations 15094. If within such, forty-eight (48) hour period the
apPlicant/developer has not delivered to the Plann!ng Department the check required
11/07/2001 16:37 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~023/067
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
25.
26.
above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of
condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711
A Neighborhood Entry Statement shall be constructed per Figure 37 of Specific Plan
No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Streets G, H, S and thetwo future entrances to the
20.0 acre Very' High Density Residential parcels.
Bicycle trails shall be constructed per Figure 6 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment
No. 3 along Street A, Class II and DePortola Road, Class I.
A Majqr Project Entry Statement shall be constructed per Figure 35 of Specific Plan
No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Lot 446.
Minor Project Entry Statements shall be constructed per Figures 35 and 36 of Specific
Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for lots 452 and 460.
MJnor'CommunJty Entry Statemen;~s shall be constructed per Figures 32 of Specific
Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 for Jots 458 and 454. '
A Landscaped Transition Area shall be constructed per Figure 13C of Specific Plan No.
. 219, Amendment No. 3 for lot 450. This Landscaped Transition Area shall be
incorporated into a 25 to 40 foot minimum building setback for the development af
structures on lots 465,466,467 and 46S at the Plot Plan stage.
Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure'23B of Specific Plan No.
219, Arflend. ment No. 3 for Meadows Parkway.
Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 25 of Specific Plan
219, Amendment No. 3 for State Highway 79.
Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 23A of Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 3 for Butterfield Stage Road,
Roadway ~andscape treatment'shall be constructed per Figure 23B of Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 3 for DePortola Road.
Roadway landscape treatment shall be constructed per Figure 23B of Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 3 for Street A.
The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) along Major Community Street Scenes
including Meadows Parkway, DePortola Road and Butterfield Stage Road and State
Highway 79 shall use Deciduous Accent Grove Trees, Evergreen Back. ground Grove
Trees and Informal Street Tree Groupings identified on the plant palette per Section
IV.C.l.b.2.a., b. and c. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
The LDZs along the Project Street Scene, Street A, shall use the plant palette per
Section IV.C.I.c.1. of Specific Plan No. 219,·Amendment No. 3.
The landscaping for lots 458, 446 and 45,4 shall use the Accent Trees on the plant
palette in Section IV.C.'l.d.1. and 2. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
11/07/2001 16:37 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~024/067
27.
The plant palette for Evergreen Background Grove Trees per Section IV.C.1 .d.4.a of
Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 and the plant palette for Deciduous Accent
Grove Trees per Section lv.C.1 .b.2.a. shall be used for the landscape buffer zones in
lot 450.
28.
The Very High Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with
Section IV.C.3.c.1 through 14 of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
29.
Community Theme Solid Walls or Community Theme Tubular Steel Open Fence or a
combination of the two shall be constructed per Figure 40 of Specific Plan No. 219,
AmenSment No. 3; the finish and color of these walls shall be consistent with Section
IV.C.2.b:2.e. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3. These walls shall be
constructed along Butterfield Stage Road, State. Highway 79, Meadows Parkway,
Street A and DePortola Road.
30.
Project Masonry Walls and Project View Walls shall be constructed per Figure 41 of
Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3; these walls shall be constructed along
Streets G, H and S.
31.
The Medium High Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with
Section IV.C.3.c.1. through 14. of Specific plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
32. The Medium Density Residential landscape requirements shall be consistent with
Section IV.C.3.d.1. through 7. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
33.
The accent trees identified in Section IV.C.I.d.3. of Specific Plan No. 219,
Amendment No. 3 shall be used for the landscaping for Streets G, H and S.
34.
The plant material palette identified in Section IV.C.I.e. of Specific Pla~ No. 219,
Amendment No. 3 may be used in conjunction with all other specified plant palettes.'
35.
The seed mix for Turf Grass identified in Section IV.C.I.e of Specific Plan No. 219,
Amendment No. $ shall be used throughout the project. Comparable sod may be used
instead of the seed mix.
36.
...................... ~ ............................................ ~..arm ..... bond
(Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992.).
37.
A performance bond and a one year maintenance bond shall be required for all
landscaping installed except for landscaping within individual lots. The amount of this
landscaping shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. This bond
shall be secured after completion of the landscaping and prior to release of the dwelling
units tied to the timing of the landscaped area. (Amended by Planning Commission on
November 16, 199Z}.
11/07/2001 16:38 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~025/067
38.
Erosion control planting shal Commence as soon as slopes are completed on any
portion of the site during and following grading operations. A performance bond shall .
be secured with the Pl'annlng Department prior to issuance of any grading permits to
insure the installation of this landscaping. Cut slopes equal to or greater than five
feet in vertical height and fill slopes equal to or greater than three ($) feet Jn vertical
height shall be planted with a ground Cover to protect the slope from erosion and
instability. Slopes exceeding fifteen ll 5) feet in vertical height shall be planted with
shrubs, spaced not more than ten I10) feet on center or trees spaced not to exceed
twenty (20) feet on center or a combination of shrubs and trees at equivalent
spacings, in addition to the ground cover. Other standards of erosion control shall be
consistent with Ordinance No. 457.57. (Amended by Planning Commission on
NovemJser 16, 1992).
39.
Irrigation for the project site shall be consistent with Section IV.C, 1 .j. of Specific Plan
No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
40.
Community Theme Walls may be substituted for Project Theme Walls at'the developers
discretion.
Wood fencing shall only .be allowed along the side yards and the rear yards of single
family dwelJings; Proiect Theme Walls shall be used along the side yards facing the
street for Corner lots.
42.
The residential lot street tree requirements and front yard reqLJirements shall be
consistent.with Section IV.C.3.e,1 .,2.. and 3. of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment
No. 3.
43.
All lighting within the project shall be consistent with Section IV.C,5 of Specific Plan'
No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
44. All future development on this site will require further review and approval by the City
of Temecula. These developments shall be consistent with the Purpose and Intent of
the Architecture and Landscape Guidelines set forth in the Design Guidelines of
Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3 (Section IV).
45. All future development within this project shall comply with applicable Zoning
Ordinance Standards adopted for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
46. The amenities and standards identified in Section IlI.A.7.a. and b. of Specific Plan No.
219, Amendment No. 3 for parks, recreation areas, activity nodes, private active
participation opportunities, open space, greenbelt paseos and parkway paseos shall be
used for developing these areas or as modified by the Development Agreement 92-
0013.
47.
48.
Maintenance'and timing for completion of all open space areas shall be as identified
in Development Agreement 92-0013 or shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219,
Amendment No. 3, if the Development Agreement is null and void.
'A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Department prior to recordation of the Final Ma?.
11/07/2001 16:38 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~026/067
49.
A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to
recordation of the Final Map for review and approval. The following needs to be
included in these plans:
50.
A, Typical front yard landscaping for interior, Corner and cul-de-sac lots.
B. Typical slope iandscaping. "
C. Private and public park improvements and landscaping.
D. . All open 'space area landscaping including, private and pub(ic common areas,
· private recreatior~al areas, paseos, equestrian trails, monuments and the
Landscape Development Zones.
E. All landscape plans shall identify the number and size of all plants, the type of
i?r/gatJon to be used, alt hardscaping, fences and walls.
F. ,The timing for installation of all landscaping, walls and trails shall be identified
prior to approval of these plans.
G. The plant heights at sensitive locations for traffic safety shall be subject to the
approval of the Public Works Department.
H. ' The timing for submittal and approval of the construction landscape plans shall
· be identified for all improvements withi~ this condition.
I, A note shall be added to al/conceptual landscape plans that all utility service
areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping. This
equipment shall be identified on the construction landscape plans and shall be
screened as specified on this condition.
J. The responsibility for installation of all landscaping and walls shall be identified.
K. All private open space areas that will not be dedicated to the City as identified
in the Developmen~ Agreement shall be developed as an integrated part of the
open space lot that they are a part of and shall be consistent with the
provisions of the Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 3.
Fifty 150) percent of all trees planted within the project shall be a minimum of
twenty four (24) inch box. The landscape plans proposed for each phase shall
incorporate the fifty (50) percent mix of twenty four (24) inch box trees into
the design.
$1STAFFRPT~4182ALL, COA
A note shall be placed on the conceptual landscape plans that all trees shall be
double staked and automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaping.
These provisions shall be incorporated into the construction plans.
The development of this project and all subsequent developments within this project
shall be consistent with Specific Plan Np. 219, Amendment No. 3 and Planning
Application No. 92-0013 (Development Agreement), or any subsequent amendments.
11/07/2001 16:38 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~027/067
51, If the Gnatcatcher is listed as an endangered species, proper studies and mitigation
measures shall be necessary prior to issuance of grading permits. These studies and
mitigation measures shall be acceptable to Fish and Game and/or Fish and Wildlife.
52. .Double-pane window treatment shall be required for second floor elevation windows
~n any two-story homes constructed on the lots /dent[fled in the Acoustical Study
prepared by Wilber Smith Associates dated September 22, 1992 and its supplement
dated October 3, 1992.
' 53. A Private Active Participation Opportunity Area Shall be constructed for lots 465,466,
467 and 468. This area may include facilities such as pools, spas, cabanas, meeting
rooms, barbecues, wet-bars and kitchen facilities. This area shall be a minimum of
1.05 acres.
54. A Plot Plan shall be filed for the development of lots 465, 466, 467 and 468. :l'he
individual developments within these lots shall be consistent with this plot plan.
' 55. AtJ two-story residentlal structures shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the State
Route 79 right-of-way (this condition applies to single family dwelling~ only).
56. ~-ots $0, 81, 239, 240, 275 and 276 Iwhich have Side structure exposurel shall be
limited to one-story residential dwellings unless the 40-foot setback requirement
(identified in Condition No. 55] can be met during final site design.
57. The following conditions shall apply to lots 465,466, 467 and' 468:
A. Future' multi-family structures located on the site sheu~, shall maintain a
minimum 40-foot setbadk from the property·line along State Route 79 and a
minimum 30-foot setback from the property lines adjacent to Meadows
Parkway and "A" Street. (Amended by Planning Commission on November
1992). 16,
B. . Any future multi-family structures located within the '
65 dBA noise level contour '
shall be constructed ~ to maintain interior noise
levels at 45 dBA or less (refer to Wilber Smith Associates Noise Study dated
· September 22, 1992 'and subsequent Study dated October 3, 1992L
(Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992).
' C. Any outdoor activity/recreation areas developed as part of the multi-family
residential project shall be located in the center portion of the site Where
exterior noise levels would be below 65 dBA (refer to WiJber Smith Associates
Noise Study dated September 22, 1992 and subsequent Study dated October
3, 1'992).
OTHER AGENCIES
58.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental h~alth recommendations outlined
in the County Health Department's transmittal dated October 6, 1992, a copy of which
ls attached.
11/07/2001 16:39 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~028/067
59. The applicant shall Comply with the flood Control recommendations outlined in the
Riverside County Flood"Control District's letter dated October 22, 1992, a copy of
which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control drainage area
pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division Ordinance ¢60,
appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the
City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
60. The applicant shall Comply with the fire imr
County Fire Department's le d~r~-, ,~ ?!ove.rn_ent recommendations o t
tter ....u ~CW~er 15 1992 ~ ........ ~u?
' ~ ~HY UI WDIC~ IS a~ached.
61. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Depa~ment of
Transportation transmittal dated '}anuary 23, 1992, a copy of which is attached.
62. The applicant shall Comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water
District transmi~ai data January 21, 1992, a copy of which is a~ached.
63. ~e applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit
Agency transmittal dated January 21, 1992, a copy of which is a~ached.
64. The applicant shall comply with '
the recommendation outlined in the Temecula Valley
Unified Schoo[ District transmJ~ai dated May 7, 1992, a copy of which is a~ached.
BUILDING AND SAF~y DEPARTMENT
65. All proposed Construction sha~/ comply with the C~lJfornia Institute of Technology.
PaJomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ·
The following items are the Cty of Temec . ·
Conditions of Approval for this -r-; ..... u[~ Community Services DeDa ent TC
' ' ~ .vj~[ a~o s~ ~m ( SD
y~velopment Agreement ~ ..... , . ~H ~S Se[ ro~h below, or as m~=~ ~
referred to th- ~-- , .... Huu~[lons regarding the true .... ' . _,..~,.~u uy separate
; ~velopment Service Division of TcSD ,,,~a.mg or t~e Conditions shall be
~~rdation of Rnal Ma s
66, Proposed COmmunity park sites of less than three (3) acres are to be maintained by an
established Home Owners Association IHOA). until Offered and accepted by the TCSD
for maintenance purposes. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16.
1992).
67.
68.
~ {Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992J,
Ali proposed siopes, open space, and park land intended fo~ dedication to the TCSD
for maintenance purposes shalI bb identified o~ the final map by numbered lots and
indexed to identify said Jot numbers as a proposed, TCSD maintenance area,
11/07/2001 16:39 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~029/067
69. E~erior slopes (as defined as: those slopes Contiguous to public streets that have a
width of 66' or wider), shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance
purposes following compliance to existing City standards and completion of an
application process. All other slopes shall be maintained by an established Home
Owners Association (HOAL .
70. Proposed open space areas shall be maintained by an established Home Owners
Association (HOAL Open space areas of three (3) acres or greater ~ may be
offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance purposes and possible further
recreational development, follOWing Compliance to existing City standards and'
compJetipn of an application process. (Amended by Planning Commission on
NOvember 16, 1992).
71. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant or his assignee, shall offer for dedication
parkland as identified in the Development Agreement.
72. All necessary documents to convey to the TCSD any required easements for pa'rkway
and/or slope maintenance as specified on the tentative map or in these Conditions of
Approval shall be SUbmitted by the developer or his assignee prior to the recordation
of final map.
73. Landscape conceptual drawings for project areas (project areas may consist' of slopes,
streetscape, medians, turf areas, recreational trails, parks, and etc. that are to be
maintained by the TCSD} identified as TCSD maintenance areas shell be reviewed and
approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of final map.
74. All areas identified for inclusion into the TCSD shall be reviewed by TCSD staff.
Failure to submit said areas for staff review prior to recordation of final map w~ ma~,
preclude their inclusion into the TCSD. (Amended by Planning Commission on
November 16, 1992.).
75. t4--~,. ,C "' . . ,
.... ' rc~2c-c . - · '
me~e~~~'~'"t~ (Amended by Planning Commission on
November 16, 1992). '
Pri..~or to IssL~ance of Certificate of Occu anc s
76. It shall be the developer's, the developer's successors or assignee re.sponsibility to
disclose the existence of the TCSD, its Z6nes and Zone fees to all prospective
purchasers at the same time they are given the parcel's Final Public Repot% Said
disclosure shall be mede in a form acceptable to the TCSD. Proof of such disclosure,
by means of a signed receipt for same, shall be retained by the developer or his
successors/assignee and made available to TCSD staff for their inspection in the same
manner as set forth in Sect/on 2795.1 of the Regulations Of The Real Estate
%Ommissioner. Failure to comply shall preclude acceptance of proposed areas into
TCSD.
11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 7§2 0597 JD&P IRVI~E ~030/067
81.
82.
77. Prior to issuance of .any certificates of OCcupancy, the developer or his assignee shall
submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's
Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project.
General
78.
All landscape plans submitted for consideration shall be in conformance with
CITY OF TEMECULA LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PLAN GUIDELINES AND
SPECIFiCATiONS.
79. The de~eloper, the developer's successors or assignee, shall be responsible for all
landscaping maintenance until such time as maintenance duties are accepted by
the TCSD.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project: and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency; All previous conditions of approval
shatl remain in force except as Superseded or amended by the following requirements. Al/
questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate
staff person of the Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer Correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all
existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage
COUrses, and their 6mission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and
revision.
GENERAL REQUIREMEN~TS ·
80. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and
Jm. provementsl construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works
prior to Commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-
of-way.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior
to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City
right-of-way.
A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with Supporting hydrologic and
hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control District
for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permits.
All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation Pians shall be
Coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements
contiguous to the site.
$~TAFFRPT~41 S2ALL COA
11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINI~ ~031/057
84. Pursuant to SecTion 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any s~bdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment D/strict must Comply with the requirements of said sect/on.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
85. The final grading' plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be
reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works.
86. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by. side yard drainage SWales
independent of any other lot, or other devices as otherwise approved by the'
Department of Public Works. [Amended by Planning Commission on NOvember 16,
1992}.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, developer must 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 the iSSuance of a grading permit, the developer shall receive written clearance
from the following agencies:
· San Diego Regional Water Quality;
· Riverside County Flood Control District;
· Planning Department;
· Department of Public Works;
· CaJTrans;.
· General Telephone;
· Southern California Edison Company; and
· Southern California Gas Company.
A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall '
address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
An erosion control plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted
to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. '
Graded but undeveloped I~nd 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.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Charg~ shall equal the p~evaiJing Area
Drainage Plan fee' rate multiplied by the area
~ay. able to the Flood Control r~;-*r;¢, ~.~ .... of new development. The .
IJralna~8 Plan f~. .... ~-.~r-._c ~J~ur Io Issuanc~ ~ ...... charge l$
new cl~ --~ u, mitigation charge has been air ~ ,~- pu. rm~s. If the fuji Area
argo needs to be paid eaoy credited to this property, no
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
11/07/2001 16:40 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVII~ ~032/067
93.
The developer shall obtain any necessary ~etters of approval or easements for any
offsite work performed on
Works. adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public
A drainage study Shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and
approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria:
a. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect ail structures by
diverting site runoff to streets or approved Storm drain facilities as directed by
the Department of Public Works.
b. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any onsite or offsite drainage
COurse,
10i,
,'.;; c. The location of existing and ·post development 100-year floodplain and
floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan.
;~',. - 95.The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of'all off-site drainage flowing onto
or through the sit'e. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of
streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 4-60 will
apply. Should the quantities exceed the street Capacity, or use of streets be prohibited
for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by
the Department of Public Works.
The subdivider shall protect downstream prope~ies from dam'ages caused by alteration
of the drainage patterns; i.e., COncentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be
provided by Constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing
facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property OWners for the
release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent' property. A copy
of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for
review prior to recordation. The location of
on the grading plan. the recorded easement shall be delineated
98. An Encroachment Permit shall be required from Caltrans for an~ Work within their right-
of-way.
99. A pa, trait from Riverside County Flood Control District is required for work within their
right-of-way.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
100. AFl necessary grading permit requirements shall have been submit-ted/accomplished
to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
improvement plans, including but not limited to, Streets, parkway trees, street'lights,
driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be
l~repared by a Registered Civil Engineer on ,~4' x 36' mylar sheets and approved by
the Department of Public Works. Final plans (a~d profiles on streets) shall show the
11/07/2001 10:41 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~033/067
location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of
Public Works.
102.
The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be
submitted to the Department of Public Works:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1 ,O0% minimum over
A,C, paving.
103.
104.
105.
B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards
207/207A and 401 (curb and sidewalk),
C, Street lights shall be installed along the i~ublic streets adjoining the site in
accordance with O~dinance 461 and shall be sJ~own on the improvement p aris
as directed by the Department of Public Works.
D. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along public street frontages Jn
accordance with City standard 400 and 401.
E, Improvement plans'shall extend 300 feet bayol~d the project boundaries or as
otherwise approved by the Department of Pubiic Works,
Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City standard 113 or as
otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works,
G. All reverse curves shall include a 100 foot minimum tangent section or as
otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works,
H. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as
approved by the Department of Public Works,
Landscaping shall be limited in th'e corner cut-oif area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility,
i, All concentrated drainage directed towards the ipublic street-from the multi-
family residential site shall be conveyed through:undersidewalk drains,
The minimum centerline grade for streets shall be 0,50 percent or as otherwise
approved by the Department of Public Works.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives within the multi-
family residential development shall be required for review and approval by the
Department of Public Works,
All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Tembcula standards and sh~ll be
shown on the street improvement plans in accordance With City Standard 207 and
208.
106. 'All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the side property line,
11/07/2001 16:41 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~034/057
107.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, Water, Sewer, and cable 'iV shall
be provided for underground, with easements provide~ as required, and des gned and
constructed in aCCOrdance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable
TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence.
108. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33ky or greater,ishal/be installed underground.
10g. A construction area traffic control plan shall be desJgne~/by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption
to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. '
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP:
110. The developer shall construct or post securi·
guaranteeing the construction-,-~ ..... ty an~/ enter Into an a ream
with applicable City ut ~,u TOIX0Wlng. public Improvements in confg~rma~ecnet
WorkS. Standards ,and subject to approval iby the Department of Public
Street improvements, which may include, but ar~ not limited to: pavement,
c.urb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, ~treet lights, signing, traffic
s~gnals and other traffic control devices as approj)riate.
Storm drain facilities :
C. Landscaping {slopes and parkways).
D. Erosion control and slope' protection.
E. Sewer and domestic Water systems.
F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution Jine~.
111.
AS deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written cIearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California, Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of PubIic Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CaITrans;
Parks and Recreation Department;
General Telephone;
Southern California Edison Company; and
Southern California Gas Company
~' 15 '
..- .~
11/07/2001 16:41 FAX 949 752 O597 JD&P IRVINE ~035/067
112.
113.
114,
115.
117.
120
121.
122.
If phasing of the map for Construction is proposed, legal all-weather access as
required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a paved
City maintained road.
Pedestrian access with sidewalks shall be provided ~:from the cul-de-sac terminus of
streets."D", "F', "M", "N" and "W" to the adjacentpublc street.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall ~e offered for dedication to the
public and shall continue in force until the City accel~ts or abandons such offers. All
dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of
Public Works.'
Streets "G", "H" and "S" shall be improved with 50 feet of asphalt concrete pavement
with a raised 10-foot wide median, or bonds for th~ street improvements may be
posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordar~ce with modified City Standard
No. 104, Section A f70'/503.
116. All. remaining interior local streets shall be improved v~ith 40 feet of asphalt concrete.
pavement,' or bonds for the stregt improvements may l~e posted, within the dedicated
right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40').
De Portola Road and Street "A" shall be improved with 38 feet of half street
improvement plus one 12-foot lane outside the median, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated ri~ht-of-way in accordance with
City Standard No. 101, (100'/76').
Meadows Parkway end. Butterfield Stage Road shall belimproved with 43 feet of h~lf
street improvement with a raised median, plus one 12;foot lane outside the median
turn lane, or bonds for the street improvements, m~y be posted, within a 110'
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 100, (110'/86').
State Highway 79 shall be improved with concrete cur~J and gutter, asphalt concrete
pavement, and any reconstruction or resurfacing of existing paving as determined by
Caltrans Within a 71-foot half,width dedicated right-of-way per Caltrans letter, dated
January 23, 1992. .
In the event that the required improvements for this development are not constructed
by Assessment District No. 159 prior to recordation of the final map, the developer
shal{ construct or bond for all required improvements ' per applicable City Standards.
All Assessment District No. 159 improvements immediately adjacent to
development shall be constructed prior to occupancy. The Developer shall enter the
· into
a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula for constructio/~ of all offsite
improvements necessary to serve the development,
Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be constructed per the apl~ropriate City Standards and
as shown on the approved Tentative Map.
.Left turn lanes shall be provided at all intersections on StrE~et "A" and De Portola Road,
11/07/2001 16:42 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~036/067
1 23.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall, prior to submittal
of the final map for recordation, enter· into an agreement to complete the
improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section
66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs
incurred by 'the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection
with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash
deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the
developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to
Commencement of the appraisal.
Vehicular'access shall be restricted on State Highway 79, ButterfieJd Stage Road, De
Portola Road, Street "A" and Meadows Parkwayand so noted on the final map with
the exception of street intersections and two (2) entry points to Street "A" for the
multi-family residential lots as shown on the approved Tentative Map and as approved
by the Department of Public Works.
A signing and striping plan shah be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department o.f P.ublic Works for State H~ghway 79, Butterfield Stage
Road, De Portola Road, Street A and Meadows Parkway and shall be included in the
street improvement plans.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Meadows Parkway at
Street "A" and De Portola Road at Street "A" and shall be included in the street
improvement plans with the second plan check submittal.
Traffic signal interconnection shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer to show
1-1/2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #3 pull boxes on 200 foot centers along the
property fronting State Highway 79 and Butterfield Stage Road. This design shall be
shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of
Public Works and Caltrans.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the
design requirements.
Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Department of Public Works.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. $05.
Easements for sidewalks for pubiJc uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through private property.
124.
125.
.126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131,
11/07/2001 16:42 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~037/067
132. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, joint-use driveways, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are
located within the land division boundary. All Offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public
Works. On-she drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be
Contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of b,ui/dings and
obstructions."
133. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall
be prepared Jn co~junctJon with the final map to delineate identified environmental
conderns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A COpy
of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
134. The developer shall Comply with ail constraints which' may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
135. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
~f Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as.mitigation towards traffic signal
~mpacts. Should the develope~ choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the C~ty deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit:
136. Prior to. reqording the final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises
of the intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of
street improvements. .
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
137~ A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for
location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
COmpaction and site conditions.
138.
139.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,
the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading
Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall
be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. All grading shall
also be in conformance with the recommendations of the County Geologist, dated May
15, 1989.
.... t~..~ct,~cc . . . .
' ' ~'.'cJ .... ~ . . F-"
c' 18 "
11/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
~' ~038/067
~e~..~'!moarm~ +~._' ..... ~ :to .:ght te ~'.rctcst tlc
. on November 16, 1992) ..... ~ IAmended by Planning Commission
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
140. All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved· plans, including but
not limited to. curb and gutter, A.C.P.Ovement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage
facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior.public streets.
All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
All 'traffic signals shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the
approved traffic signal plan.
141.
142.
143. All traffic signal interconnection shall be installed per the approved plan.
144. The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls a~ the intersection of local streets with
arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works.
145. All landscaping shall be installed in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
146.
147.
· '' 148
A 32 w'de paved secondary access road for phased development shall be constructed
within a recorded private road easement as approved by the Department of Public
Works per City of Temecula Standard 106 (60'/32'L
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of
Public Works for pavement joins and transition coatings. Asphalt emulsion shall
conform to Section Nos..37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications.
Jn the event that the required improvements for this development are not completed
by Assessment District 159 prior to certification for occupancy, the Developer shall
construct all required improvements. The Developer shall also provide an updated
traffic analysis as directed by the Department of Public Works to determine the
construction timing and the Developer's percent of contribution toward any facilities
not completed per the schedules of improvement, tables ×V and XVl, for the Rancho
Villages Assessment. The Developer Shall also enter into a reimbursement agreement
with the City of TemecuJa for the construction of any necessary improvements not
completed by Assessment District 159 as determined by the approved traffic analysis.
The following traffic signals shall be constructed as warranted as pa~ of the
reimbursement agreement at the following locations
19.,
11/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~039/067
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
State Highway 79 at the Interstate 15 ramps.
State Highway 79 at Pala Road,
State Highway 79 at Margarita Road,
State Highway 79 at Meadows Parkway.
State Highway 79 at ButterfieJd Stage Road.
Butterfield Stage Road at De Portola Road,
11/07/2001 16:43 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~040/067
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA96-0258 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182-
RevisedJ
Project Description:
Assessor's Perc~,J No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
The project COnSists of o revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Mep No. 24182. [the subdivision of 124.35 acres
within creating 562 single family residential lots and 31
open space Iots)- Paloma. del Sol
Various
February 2, 1999
To be determined by the Development Agreement
The tentative subdlvJslon shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map
Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. ¢60, unless modified by the
conditions Jlsted below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the
State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to
the expiration date. '
The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and. hold harmless, the City
and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and
agents from any and ~ll claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any
agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to
attack, set aside, void, annul, or ~eek monetary damages resulting from an approval
of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board
or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
Planning APPlication No. PA96-0258 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24182-
Revisec~) which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period
and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000' et see., including
but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167}. City shall promptly
notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this
time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action, Should
the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall
not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the
City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or
agents.
If subdivlsJon phasing is proposed, the applicant shall submit a phasing plan to the
Planning Manager for approval.
11/07/2001 16:44 FA~ 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~041/067
The tentative subdivision shall comply with all requirements of SpecJflc Plan No. 219
and its amendments unless superseded by these conditions of approval.
The tentative subdivision shall comply with all conditions of approval of the
underlying Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 24182 {approved by the R~versJde
County Board of Supervisors), unless s~ mod fled or deleted by these
condJt~ions of approval - . ~
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
6. The appJlcan~[ Shall comply with the provisions Of Chapt'er 8.24 of the Temecula
Municipal Code.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
7. The applicant shall submit the following to the Planning Director for approval:
a. A copy of the Final Map
, b. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans
c. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes:
"This property is located within thirty (30} miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
CaJlfornla Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations,
Ordinance No. 655."
d. The applicant shall ;ubmlt a copy of Covenants, Conditions, and Restdction~
(CC&R's) for review and approval by the Planning Department, Public Works
Department and the City AtTorney.
Prior to Issuance of BulJdJng Permlts
The applicant shall submit a receipt or clearance letter from the TemecuJa Valley .
. 'School DJstr~ct to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from
School Mitigation fees.
The applicant shall submit the foJJowlng to the Planning Director for approval:
a. Precise grading plans consistent With the approved rough grading plans
_ including all structural setback measurements.
b. The Temporary Use Permit application for a Model Home Complex {if
applicable) which includes the following:
i. Site Plan with off-street parking
2
11/07/2001 16:44 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
.~ ~042/067
ii. Construction Landscape Plans ;
iii. Fencing Plans I
iv. Building Elevations
v. Floor Plans
vi. Materials and Colors Board
c, A Development Plan shall be subm}tted and approved by the Planning Director
for the housing product.
10. The applicant shall submit an acoustical analysis to the Planning Department for
approval. :The ana/ysls shall be submitted r' · . . .
for any residential Construction adjacent toP;l~rer~n°lth~e ,?Suanca ora building permit
The analysis shall contain recommendations tro ..... major or secondary roadways.
ensure that noise levels do not eXCeed
65dBA for eXterior and 45dBA for interior noise levels.
11. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision,
however solar equipment ~r any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with
Planning Director approval.
PHor to IsSUance of Occupancy Permits
12. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for
inspection.
13. All the Conditions of App'roval shall be compiled, with to the Satisfaction of the
Directors of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety.
PUBLIC WORKs DEPARTMENT
The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this
project. L/nines stated otherwise, ail conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no
cost to any GOVernment Agency.
General Requirements
15.
16.
It is understood that the Developer Correctly shows on the tentative map ali existing
and proposed easements, traveled ways, imp,~ovement constraints and drainage
courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further
review and revision.
A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the
Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of
the City-maintained road right-of-way.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Wor~s prior
to comr~encement of any construction within an existing or proposed City
right-of-way. .
, 3
11/07/2001 16:44 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
~043/067
17. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
lB. All improvement plans, grading Plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be
Coordinated for consistency wh:h adjacent projects and existing improvements.
contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36' City of
' Temecu/a my/ars.
Prior to Approval .of the Final Map, unless other dining is Ind/cated, the Developer shall
complete the folio'wing or have plans submit-ted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted: .
19. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Wo.rks, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
· San Diego Regional Water Quality CoRtroJ Board
· Rancho California Water District
· Eastern Municipal Water District
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
· City of Temecula Fire Bureau
· · Planning Department
Department of Public Works
· Riverside County Health Department
· Cable TV Franch/s,e
· Caltrans
· Community Services District
General Telephone
· Southern California'Edison Company
· Southern California Gas Company
· Fish & Game
Army Corps of Engineers
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works:
a. Improve Campanula Way (Major Highway St~anderds. 100' R/W) to include
dedication of half-width street right,of-way, installation of half-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to Water and
sewed, 12' painted median.
b. Improve De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards -
100' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation
of half-width Street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street
I~ghts, drainage facilities, Signing and striping, utilities {'including but not
20.
11/07/2001 16:45 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINg I~]044/067
21.
limited to water and sewerl, 12' raised landscaped median.
c. Improve "E", "X" and "C-C" (Collector Y~oad Standards. 70' R/W) to include
dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter;, sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and
sewer), 10' {alsed landscaped median..
· ,(Local Road Standards, 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street
'right-of-way, 'installation of fuji-width street improvements, paving, curb and
gutter, sidewalk, street ~ights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities
(including but not timited to water and sewer).
e. Plans for a traffic signal at the intersection of Meadows Parkway/Campanula
Way_and De Portola Road/Campanula Way to include signal interconnect with
the signal at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way.
f. .All rtreet improVement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and
pavement transitions per Cai-Trane Standards for transition to existing street
sections.
In the event, that Highway 79 Sou~h is not constructed by Assessment District
No. 159 prior to the final map recordation, the Developer shall construct or
bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street improvements,
sldewaik, street lights, drainage facilities, ~ignJng and striping, utilities
(incl,,ding but not limited to Water and sewer), 14' raised landscaped median,
.Plus One 12 foot lane per modified City Standard No. IOOA (14-2' R/W). The
improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy.
in the event that Rutterfield Stage Road is not constrUCted by Assessment
District No. 159 prior to the'final map recordation, the Developer shall
construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street
improvements, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping,
utilities (including but not limited to Water and Sewer), 14' raised landscaped
median, plus one 12 foot lane per modified City Standard/'40. 100 (110/86J.
The improvements shall be Constructed prior to occupancy.
J- In the event that De Portola Road, Campanula Way and Meadows Parkway
are not constructed by Assessment District No. 159 prior to *~he final map
recordation, the Developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to
provide for one~half street improvements plus one 12 foot Jane per modified
City Standard No. 101 (100/76). The improvements shall be constructed
prior zo occupancy.
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be obse~-ved in the
design of the street improvement plans:
JD&P IRVINE
~045/067
22.
23.
24.
Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C,C. and 1.00%
minimum over,A.C, paving.
Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 20~, 207A
and/or 208. '
Co
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461..
Conc~:ete sldewal.ks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard
Nos. 400 and 401.
Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be c~nstructed per the appropriate C{tV
Standards ans a shown on the approved tentative map.
Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond
the project boundaries to ensure adequate conti~uity of design with adjoining
propect es.
-g.
h.
i.
j.
Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance w th City Standard No. 113,
All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section.
All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Landscaping shall b~ limited ~n the corner cut-of~ area of a'ti intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for ~ninimum sight distance and visibility.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
'i~v shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required
where adequate right-of-way does not.exist for installation of the facilities.
All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes .
and the utility provider. '
A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street c}osure and
detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by £he Department of
Public Works.
- Relinquish and waive right of access to and fro'~ State Highway 79 South, Meadows
. Parkway, Campanula Way, De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road on the Final
Map with the exception of street intersect one as delineated on the approved
Tentative Tract Map,
Corner property line Cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian '
facilities shall be provided at all street'intars~ctions in accordance with Riverside
11/07/2001 16:45 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~046/067
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31,
County Standard No. 805,
All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the
publlc or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts
or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as
approved by the Department of Public Works.
Pursuant t~ ,Sect/on 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an ex/stin'g Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said
section. Prior to City Council approval of the final map, the Developer shall make an
application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory
agency.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid,
Ah Environmental Constraints Sheet {ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the
final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with
the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for
review and approval The following information shell be on the ECS:
a. The delineation o~ the area within the 100-year floodplain,
b. Special Study Zone's.
c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report.
d. Archeological resources found on the site.
The.Developer shall coq~ply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
in.terests, a.nd if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal.
of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the
improvements pursuant to thc Subdivision Map Act, Section 68482 and Section
66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs
incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection
with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a
cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at
· the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to
commencement of the appraisal.
A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and
hydrauJic calculat{ons shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Cont?ol and
Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the
issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water
7
16:46 F~ 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
~047/067
32.
33.
34.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way.
All utility systems including gas, electric, t'elephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
· be provided for underground, With easements provided aa required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and.the utility provider. Telephone, cable
TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence.
The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop.
Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
-,
RUS bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Riverside Transit Authority and a~s approved by th~ Department of Public Works.
Pedestrian access with sidewalks shall he prow'dad from the cul-de-sac terminus of
street 'G - G" to the adjacent pubJic street.
This development must enter into an agreement with the Cit~; for a "Trip Reduction
Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where
sidewalks meander through private property.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilitiesl etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the
[and division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted
for review and recorded aa directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site
drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way ~hall be contained within
drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final
map stating "drainage easements shah be kept free of buildings and obstructions."
If phasing of the map for construction is proposed, legal all-weather access as
required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract boundary to a paved City
maintained road.
40.
An interim detention basin has been constructed on the southern portion of Phase 5
and the Final Phase of Tentative Tract 24182. The existing detention basin or an
equivalent faci[hy shal~ remain in place until such time that Upstream drainage
facilities are constructed to convey offsite storm flows to an adequate outlet. Any
revisions to the exlstJng detention basin and appurtenant drainage facilities shall be
· approved by the City.
Prior to IsSuance of Grading Permits
41.
As deemed necessary by the DepartmeNt of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from.the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
11/07/2001 16:46 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~048/067
42.
43.
Riverside Counfy Flood Control and Water Conservation DiStrict
· Planning Department
· Department of Public Works
° Riverside County Health Department
Caltrans
· Community Services District
· General Telephone
· Southern California Edison COmpany
· Southern California Gas Company
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with
City of Temecul~ standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or So'ts Engineer and submitted
to the Department of Public works with the initial grading Plan check. The report
shall address ail soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and prelim/nary pavement sections.
A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared'by a registered engineer or engineering
geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading
plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any
geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for
liquefaction. The report shall ~nclude recommendatJ0ns to mitigate the impact of
ground shaking and/~quefaction.
45. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. ,The study shall
;dentify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site
and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site,
public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be
conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without
damag'e to.public or private property. 'The study shall include a capacity analysis
verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or ups~zing of drainage
facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of
development of this project. The basis for'analysis and design shall be a storm with
a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
46. The Developer must comply with the requirements Of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System {NPDESJ permit from the State Water Resources
Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of ~ntent
has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt.
47. The Developer shall Post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the
grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City
Standards and subject to approval by the Department of PubJlc Works·
11/07/2001 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
~049/067
48. All lot drainage shaJ! be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales
independent of any other lot.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
49.
50.
Final Map shall be approved and recorded.
A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for
review arid approval. The buitding pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer
for Iocatior{ and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report
' addressing compaction and site conditions.
51. Grading of the subject, property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building
Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading
Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall
be in.substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
52. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code
and ali Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
PHor to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
53. As deemed necessary by 'the Department of t~ublic Works, the Developer shall receivi~
written c[e'arance from the following agencies:
· Ran~;ho California Water District
* 'Eastern Municipal ~Vater.DistrJct
Department of Public Works
54. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and
public agencies shall be submitted as.required by the Depa~ment of Public Works.
55. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved ~laris and
City standards to the satisfactio~ of the Director of Public Works.
56. The existing impr0vement~ shall be 'reviewed. Any a. pp[~rtenance damaged or broken
due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and
replaced to the satisfacticn of the Director of Public Works.
' BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
57.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building,
Plumbing and Mechanlcal Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and D~sabled Access Regulations and the
' Temecula Municipal Code.
· 10
11/07/2001 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~050/067
58. Obtain street addressing for all proposec~ buildings prior to submit-raj for plan review.
59. Provide electrical plan including load ca'lcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review. .
B0. Prior to building permit issuance, approval must be obtained from the Water District,
Sanitation District, Public Worlds Department, Fire Department, Planning Department
and Building Department. '
61. Based on s'ubmitted documents, the OCcupancy classification of the proposed use
shall be Fi-3, U-l.
62, Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record, the truss
manufacturers engineer, are required for plan review submittal.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
COmmunity Services has reviewed the revised tentative map application and has the
following conditions of approval:
General Requlrements:
63. The City's park dedication requirement (Quimby) shall be satisfied with the
development and dedication of a 5.0 acre neighborhood park in future Tract No.
24188, as identified within the Paloma Del Sol Development Agreement, Addendum
No. 1, and Planning Area 29A in SpBcific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 6.
64. All other private park facilities, perimeter slopes and parkway landscaping, pasecs,
and open space areas shall be maintained by an established homeowners'
association.
65. The developer shall complete the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate
fees prior to the acceptance of street lighting and landscaped medians into the
respective TCSD maintenance programs.
66. Jt shall be the developer's responsibility to provide writ'ten disclosure of the existence
of the TCSD and its serVice level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers,
FiRE DEPARTMENT
The Fire Prevention Bureau requires the following fire protection measures to be provided in
aCcordadce with the Uniform Fire Code and the City of Temecula Ordinances.
67. Final fire and life safety conditions WiJ~ be addressed when building plans are
reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on
11/07/2001, 16:47 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~051/067
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73,
74.
75.
occupancy, use, Uniform Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code {UFC), and related
codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all residential buildings per UFC Appendix tH.A, Table A-JIi-A.1. The
minimum fire flow for one and two family dwellings less than 3,600 square feet shah
be 1000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSi residual operating.pressure. Dwellings
{n excess of 3,600 square feet shall not be less than that specified in Table A-I}I-A-1
of the UFC. (UFC 903.2, UFC Appendix IH-A)
Prior to construction, approved standard fire'hydrants i6'~ x 4" x 2 ~" outlets)'shal{
be located at each street intersection and be spaced n6t more than 500 feet apart.
with no portion of any lot frontage further than 250 feet from a fire hydrant. (UFC
903.2, 903,4.2 and Appendix {{I-B)
The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 1,000 GPM for
a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available
prior to any combustible building material .being placed on an iodiv dual lot.
if construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire
protection prior to any building construction. (UFC 8704,2 & 902.2.2)
Prior to construction, dead end road ways ~nd streets which have not been
completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC
902.2.2.4)
· Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the
water system plans to thc. Fire Prevention Bureau for review. Plans shall be' signed
by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow
standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall
be presented to the Fire Prevention Burea.', for signatures. The required water
system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate
water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an
individual lot. (UFC 8704.3,901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24
sec. 1-4.1)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of, Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective
Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations in accordance with City
specifications. (UFC 901.4.3)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all residential
dwellings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of
the residence in such a position that the numbers are easily visible to approaching
emergency vehicles. The numbers shall be located consistently on each dweUing
throughout the development. The numerals shall be no less than four (4) inches in
height and shall be contrasting in color to the background. (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-
15)
12
11/07/2001 16:48 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~052/067
OTHER AGENCIES
76'.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
California Water District's transmittal dated Ju~¥ 9, 1997, a copy of which Js
attached.
77. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside
Transit Agency transmittal d~ted July 17, 1997, a copy of which is attached.
78. The applicant shell comply with the recommendations outlined i~ the California
Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) transmittal dated July 17, 1997, a copy
of which is attached.
79.
The applicant shall comply with the r~commendations outlined in the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's transmittal dated July 22,
1997, a copy o~ which is attached.
80.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside
County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 24, 1997, a cop)/
of which is attached.
have read, understand and accept the above Conditions of Approval.
Applicant Name
13
11/07/2001 16:48 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
053/067
Ci .ty of Temecula.
43200 Business Park Drive - PO Box 9033 - Temecula- Cahfornia - 92589-9033
(909) 694-6400 - FAX (909) 694-6477
December 2, 1999
Ms. MichelleA, Staples
Law Offices ofSusanM. Trager
2100 S.E. Main Street, Suite 104
Irvin~CA92614
SUBJECT:
Dear Ms. Staples:
City Council Denial of the Appeal by the Corona Ranch of Planning
Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application
No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431)
On November 9, 1999 the City of Temecula City Council denied the appeal of the above-
referenced applications and upheld the Planning Commission approval of Planning Application
No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application ;No. PA-99-0286 (Tentative Parcel
Map No. 29431). However, in their consideration of the appeal, the City Council also approved
Planning Application No. pA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del
Sol) with an addkion to the Conditions of Approval that addressed the Cornna's concern
regarding drainage facilities. A copy of the final Conditions of Approval am included herein for
your reference.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (909) 694-6400.
Sincerely,
Carole K. Donahoe, AICP
Associate Planner
Attachment: Final Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No. PA99-0285
(Amendment No. 7 to Specific ]?lan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol)
Cc: Del Sol Investment Co., LLC Newland Communities
Attn: Allan L. Davis Attn: Dean Meyer
5051 Avenida Encinas 27393 Ynez Road
Caflsbad, CA 92008 Temecula, CA 92591-4608
Ron Parks, Department of Public Works
Jerry Alegfia, Department of?ublic Works
Ann/e Bostre-Le, Department 0fPublic Works
Anthony Elmo, Building Department
Herman Parker, Temecula Community Services District
11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~054/057
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Revised by the City Council, November 16, 1999
Planning Applicat on No. PA99-0285 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 7
'Project Description: ' -~ ~mencJ~pecific plan'N~. 2'~9 (~'i~nia cJ~l S0l)'as folJ'~,~: land '
uses Within Planning Areas ;I,6 and 8; the realignment and
reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and
Meadows Parkway;, the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area
from 32.3 acres to 35.0 acres; the reallocation of acreage within
Planning Area 6 from 36.3 to 34.3 acres; the division of Planning
Area 6 into Planning Area 6A (22.3 acres, high density residential,
9-12 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 268 dwelling units)
and Planning Area 6B ('12 acres, very high density residential 13-
20 du/ac, with a maximum of 240 dwelling units), resulting in an
overall reduction of units from 590 to 508 dwellings; the provision
to develop an active, private, gated senior community within
Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an
update of Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the
village vignettes and the senior amenities.
Approval Date:
PLANNING DIVISION
November 16, 1999
General Requirements
1,
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree
to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency
or {~strumeniaJity thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
.consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and aJJ claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul,
seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirect{y, from any action in furtherance of
and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency,
appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City,
concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and
landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and
shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to
take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens
in regards to such defense.
The applicant sh'all comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No.
219 and its amendments unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval
The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall conform with Exhibit No. lB,
"Paloma de{ So{ Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7" dated October 11, 1999, or as
amended by these conditions.
11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~055/067
4. The text of Amendment No, 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 Zoning Standards shall conform
with Exhibit No. 2A, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No. 7"
dated October 11, 1999, or as amended by these conditions.
W/thin Thlr~y (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the'.
Amendment
The ap~_C, ant shall submit the amend_ed Spe_c_ifi~_?!an ~ext (0_th~ Corem_ ur~ity ..........
~)~'e~opm~t De~-~-2~-Ia~'Di~,~s~n~ i~ a~co~-dan~ with Conditions of Approval
and with requirements by the City Council
The applicant shall correct or modify the following:
a. Page IV-85 b.2) a): The last sentence shall read:
"A minimum of 10% of the net acreage at the Home Depot site shall be
landscaped."
b. Remove all references to the Major and Minor Commercial Entry and Shopping
Center Identification signs, which shall be included in the Villages Design Manual,
submitted for review and approval by the Planning Manager prior to the issuance
of permits.
Priorto issuance of building permits for Parcel Map No. 29431, Parcels 6 and 7 (Planning
Areas 6A and
The Butt~rfield Stage Interceptor ultimate improvements shall be built, or the City Council,
following a public hea~ng, determines that significant improvements have occurred in the
negotiations for a reasonable compromise, at which time the Council has abtho~ty to
issue building permits for Parcel Map No. 29431, Parcel~ $ and 7 (Planning Areas 6A and
6B), consisting of 508 mu/fi-family units. The City shall process the request for a public
hean'ng , if needed, as a "no fee"application.
(Amended by the City Council, November 9, 1999 and modified by the City C~uncil
November 16, 1999). .
By.placing my sighature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I fudher understand that the property sha/I be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
'subject to Community Development Department approval
Applicant Signature
17
11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~056/067
EXHIBIT D
11/07/2001 16:49 FAX 949 752 0597
14:d~
JD&P IRVINE
RIVERSIDE COl_,rNTy' FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
~057/067
'~9'r7~6'9965 ~"AX
I
I
I
!
I
!
I
!
I
I
Hr. Joseph Kicak
Director of Public Works/
City Engineer
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecu]a, CA 92590
Dear Hr. Kiosk: Re: Paseo del So] - Haas or
Rough Greolng
The Flood Control District has been asked to authorize the.
mass/rough grading of all ~he tracts within the developmen['known
as Paseo del Sol, within the City of Temecula; specifica)]y Tracts
2¢182. 2~183, 24184, 24185, 24'186 and a portion of 24188.
At this time, Our District. ia wrestling with the disposition'of'
approximately 3000 cfs, tributary to the northeasterly Corner of
the'intersection of State Highway'79 and Butterfield Stage Road.
This is the result of an omission from the infrastructure
constructed with Asses~ent District 159. This flow was Dlarmed to
be intercebted upstream from BUtterfie]d stage Road ~nd routed to
Temecula Creek, across Nighway 79, in an
channel facility, open, concrete lined
As the City Is likely aware, both State Highway 79 and Butterfie]d
Stage Road are destined to be (or are already) mlevated with
respect to the adjacent ground. If our unOerstanding of this
elevation differential ia correct, this is going to result in 2 to
4 feet of ponding in the area northeasterly from the intersection,
with excess flows topping both roadways and traveling westerly and
southwesterly toward Temecu]a Creek. ·
Consideration must be given to ~he conditioning of Tract 24182, eno
whether these County Conditions.would reouire that.tract to solve
the problem. ~rovide~ the necessary ' facilit~ ha~ not been
constructed by Assessment District 159. The engineer on
project is currently ~orking on alternatives to be Considered in
our search for r~So]ution of 'this problem, and has i ndicats~ we may
have something to ~ork with Outing the week of Seouemoer 23, 1996.
Providing the applicant is willing to confine all graOin9 activity
Co the area northwesterly from ' '
adjacent State Hi~hw-- ~- _ a minimum 300-foot w~oe s
(th~s must ~ -~ ~. ~ ,~. or Yrom the FEHA mac-~ -, - ~ ....
.~ . -~ ~e ~l~v'c ~.~ ~ .~ · - . ~=u r~ooo.~lain
=~3e C3ty a]]Owin~ -r ~ ' ~'' ~ unl$ UlStrlct has no ODJect3n~
O?~nS submi~--u ~ ~ aping, in accordance wir~ ~ ....
---~u rot the h~. ...... - . _ _ - ~/rough
' ' ' ' - .... -
11/07/2001 16:50 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE ~055/067
Re: Paseo ~e~ Sol Has8 Or
Rough Gradtn9
:ha: :he developer COnsider less :ban full improvemen: of
Parkway ~hin the abOve menCionecl 3OO-foo: w~de (or larger)
or, Sufficient- culvert capacity be orov~ed Penea~h the Oarkway =o
a~low flood f]o~s ~o continue in a southwesterly d~recc~on;
adjacent Highway 79. Prov~de~ the City chooses an epproxima~ 300-
foo~ w~de s~rip rather [hen the entire FEHA mapped flood Plain,
~ou]~ have no Object,on t0 [he '9~adeable'' Port,on of Trec~ 24182
being used as s~ockp~le area for ~he .fill ma:er~a~ necessary
complete al~ the Proposed grading,, once conditions
· Additionally, ~f =he 'strip" ~s chosen by the City, we woul~
recommend you ensure yourselves them all a~roDria[e permits are ~n
hand, prior ~ grading. The C~[y mus~ note ~ha[ our revtew
~he grading ~roDosa~s has yet ~o be completed; however, we are
comfortable tha~ =hose changes we wou~ consider essential are of
a nature =ha= could be sccom~]~shed during the approximate 4-month
]ong grsd~ng operation. '
there are any questions regarding ~h~s matter', please contac~
e~ther Dele Anderson at ~09/275-1268 or me a~ 909/275-1265.
Very t. ru]y yours, ,
HOWARD L. DICKERSON
Senior Civil Engineer
C:
Keith International, Inc.
Attn: Mr. David Shen
Newland Associates
Attn: Hr. James De,hamer
HLD:slj
11/97/2001 16:50 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IRVINE
Minutes of AD
Move.~i.~r 8, 1989
page ::hree
159 Meeting dated November 8, 1989
(excerpts)
pat
· - .~ffl~r Ran ac'Public Works
~o df.':ussion.
Pleas.. see attached Right of Way Status update.
~.. ~em IV - Status~of~Plans ~ Construction
-- fi"-'~o. ~anDac~ublzc W~
Tke S.,: .... Force Main is
Schef ']~ the crit'iGal path item for'RVAD. 'Pat
.... reported tha.t he. has verbal agreements with Owners
for ,-'-: sewer force main easements.
Pic ~.. .. sewer is complete and paving now.
'.:a Bridge piles'to be placed in one Week.
:~I.' Stage Road:'- 600 acres east of Butterfield Stage
· ~'ere thou~ht, to drain in a southerl d' '
- ~ea needs to be u~ .... ~ flOW
~=uause Flood Control did
..a direction of'flow earlier on. An ~en channel will
:l~d for that area Which will be mor~-'economlc~lly
.~ :~or the Assessmen~ District.
, ca was raised regarding the 4 W~ek ~ime Period
1.:.'o_.. . between the times the bids are recalved to the start
co: .'cc~ion (refer to "Project Status,, attaC~ent). IVan
......... ¢ ~,,=~ the process as follows:
?he bids are opened.
; - Unit prices are checked.
. ~pread sheet 9repared showing lowest bidder.
- Form 11 (by 'Ivan Tennant} sent to the Board of
Supervisors awarding contract to lowest bidder.
~Developer funds have to be received by the County
kefore Fo~ 1.1 can be sent
of contract.){
~ Bond & insurance re~irements must be received from
c~ntractor.
Iv~::: .. u-. that i{ is not possibls to shorten, this time
Pe:.'iod
~X~ k"arqa.
BU~e
fcr t?
be
~ .=tached "Project Status,, for details.
.... ~]059/067
Exhibit C
11/~7/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~060/067
EXHIBIT E
11/07/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~061/067
RESOLUTION NO. 95-30
A RF_~OLUTION OF '.H~tE CITY COUNCH. OF ~ CIT~
OF TERESA, CALIlqDRNIA, ACCEPII~G CERTAIN
S~ ~0 'rH~ C~ ~~~
SYS~ ~'~'~.~ STAGE RO~ ~OM DE
~R~ RO~ ~ ~HWAY ~ (S) ~ DE ~RTO~
RO~ ~OM ~[~ STAGE RO~ ~ ~T~Y
C~ ~5)
THE CiTY COUNC~. OF THE CITY OF TE_MECULA DOF. S RESOLVE, DEI'ERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS: ·
~HP:~, The Riverside County Board of Supervisors by Resolution No. 89-251 on
Sune 13, 1989, accepted ccrlaln of:furs of dedic~ah'ons for public roads as recorded Dec__ember 5,
1975, as Instrument No. 151727 for pe~OnS.O~De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road.
Said portions are shown on Parcel Map N0. 64_2.8, recorded in Book 20, Pages 70 through 73 of
Parcel Maps. Acceptance of offers was f.o.~r..v.~g purposes only and not into the County Road-
Maintained System..,,...,~:~,.
WRk'~_.AS, Bedford Development Company, a California Corporation, dedicated Lot
"Q" (Buttcrfield Stage Road) in Parcel Map No. 23432, filed in Book 159, at Pages 38-61
Inclusive of Parcel Maps, to publin use for stree~ and public utility purposes. The County Road
Said Lot "Q' was accepted by the Riverside.CLounty Surveyor and Road Commissioner on behalf
of thc Board of Supervisors for vesting l~u~ses only and not into the County l~,intained-Road
System. "" :'-:: ;; '
W~ ~:uF_AS, 'I~ Toman Company,~!~f.0rnla Corporation, offered for dedication Lot
"D", (De Portol~ Road), in Tract No, 23.i~.5.;,1~.ed in Book 246, at Pages 81-85 Inclusive, of
Maps, for public use for 5trec! and peblie ~ipurposes. The City Council accepted said
offer for pubic road and public utility p~.~ ·
~S, gaufinan and Broad'.q~ sandiego, Inc., a California Corporation, offered
for dedication Lot 'A", ('Dc Portola Road),iin:~ract No. 23125-3, filed in Book 252, at Pages
39-47 Inclusive, for public use for street apd ,publin utility purpose~. The Cit Council accepted
said offer for public road and public utility pin'poses.
.~, The City of Tem.~l.,~.b~xame succossors-in-inter~t to the County of
Riverside upon Incorporation, effecfiVe'~er 1, 1989;
, . ~, :';g,.:: !.
11/97/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~062/067
· WI~,.R~.A$, Th.~ Asses.~s~. ent DiilriCt. No. 159. contlactor has completed tho public
~mprovements m accoraance w~th the plans, specifications, and standards, and tim Rancho
California Water Dislxict has issued the Notice o£ Acceptance for this phase of work;
I~HERF_AS, the Riverside County ~tion Depa.,tment has rcquestnd that the City
of Temccula accept the completed work for maintenance purposes;
V¢~ ~:~AS, the City concurs in ' ·
sa tory compleuon of the work and recommends
the ~rc~tanc~ of these Street~ into ~e City Maintained-Sffcet Sy3tem:
NOW, Trrk'tn.EFORE, BE IT RESOL'vi2o by the City Council of the City of Temecula
as follows:
Section 1. That the City of Te~,accePt into the City Maintained-Street System
those streets offered and accepted by the C.9..u~gty Of Riverside, and offered and accep~d by the
City Council, de.,scti~ in Exhibits "A" an.d...~B,' attached hereto.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall~ ~d~..the adoption of this resolution and accept the
streets and portions thereof, offered to .m!..d:..s~pted by the County of Riverside for vesting
purposes only, and the City Council, into the City-maintained street system as described in
Exhibits "A" and 'B' attached h-'reto. ·
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPYED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeling held on the 28th day of March, 1995.
R~o~$-~O
11/07/2001 16:51 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~063/067
STATE OF C.AT.I~'OP,.NIA)
COUNTY OF RIVF_.RSIDE) ss
Cr~'Y OF TEMECULA)
I, lun¢ S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Cal~forn/a, do hereby certify that
Rezolufion No. 95-30 wa~ duly and regularly adopted by the C/ty Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting thereof ~id on the 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vo~e:
AYe: 4 COUNCILM]~fl/P_~: Lindemans, P~rks, Robertm, Stone
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:: None
ABSEINIT: 0 COUNC~.~.~RS: None
AB.~T~: 1 COUNCILMP_2~ERS: · Mu~oz
11/07/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~064/067
EXHIBIT "A' TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-30
Accepting those parcels dedicated to the
public for public roads and/or streets and
public utility purposes accepted for vesting
purposes but not for road-maintained
purposes by the County of Riverside, and
those parcels dedicated to public use for
street end public utility purposes and
accepted by the City Council, all es indicated
on Exhibit 'B", into the City Maintained-Street
System as described below:
A. Those portions of Po~tola,Road and Butterfield Stage Road
lying within the City Limits of the.City of Temecula, as described
in Instrument No, 1517~2~,~r~e~orded December 5, 1975, and
shown on Parcel Map NO: _6~28, recorded in Book 20, Pages 70
through 73, of Parcel Ma~pS_~nd as accepted for vesting purposes
only by Riverside County. Resolution No. 89-25i, all recorded in
the office of the County Re,corder, Riverside County, California.
B. Lot 'Q" in Parcel Map.,No..:23432, filed in Book 159, at Pages
38-61 Inclusive, of Parce. I. Maps, said Lot "Q' being accepted by
the County of Riverside .fq~,yesting purposes only.
C. Being Lot "D" in Tract No. 23125-1, filed in Book 246, at
Pages 81-85 inclusive, o~f~...M, aps, in the office of the County
Recorder, Riverside County, California.
D. Being Lot A in ~a~c.t_..~N0, 23125-3, filed in Book 252, at
Pages 39-47 Inclusive, ..~=~'Maps, Jn the office of the County
Recorder, Riverside County; ..california.
4
11/07/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE ~065/067
EXHIBIT 'B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-._~
SUBJECT ACCEPTANCE- PUBlIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED
STREET SYSTEM AS INDICATED BELOW.'
(
11/~7/2001 16:52 FAX 949 752 0597
JD&P IR¥INE ~066/067
Rancho C~li~ornia Water D/strict
Post Office Box 9017
Tcmecula, CA g2~89-9017
NOTICE OF ACCEFrANC~
NOTICE {S HERI~Ry GIVEN BY RANCHO CALIFORNIA WA'FR~ DISTRICT, A
PUBLIC CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO SECTION 119~.1 OF TFL~ CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDUI~ THAT:
1. · Thc proj¢cL Ass~lSment Distr/ci'l~o. 159 But~ene/d.~ e .........
Dc Portola Road-F;~st, Phase 'i"~i.~c, ~ r~,,,o'J~ o,al/= ,~Oau, t/ignway 79 and
California Water ' , --~ ...... ~u'*o,9, was accepted by the Rancho
District on January 10, 1995;
2. The name of the contractor is Utah Pacific;
3. TI~ name of lhe surety is Safeco InsUrance Company of America;
4. The description of the property .o.r:.~.u.b!ic work or structur~/s: Street improv,'mcnt,
storm drain, ~adin§, water and sewer.
STATI~ OF CALIFORNIA
RANCHO CAI2~oRNIA WATER DI~'r~,ICT
· John F. Hcnm~ar ~ ~ --
General Manager
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE}
I am the Ocnersi Manager "':':
of the Rancho~. California Water District, a public c~rpor~fion,
and as such m,_% ,.h/~ verificaiion for and on behalf of .~aid Rancho Califo,-~/a Water
I have read thc forego/og Notice of Acceptance and know thc contents ther~f, and
the fac~s there/n stated are true.
I dcclar¢ under penalty of perjury that ~h.e foregoing i~ tru~ and correct.
Ex~cutcd ou Januaz-F 3 0 ~.,19.95 '.~.a~ Temecula, Californ/a.
.... .~olm P. Hennigs_r
~ '.' . General Manager
11/~0.7/2001 16:53 FAX 949 752 0597 JD&P IRVINE
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE .ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~067/067
-- OPTION4L
Description of Affached Document ":::~'- :'"'" '
Number of Pagea: /
Slgne~s) Oltmr Than Niut~d Above: ,
Ca p ac Ity(i"L~l Claim ed~..by $lgne~[~),~
Slgne~s Ne.: .~ - ~'~..:: I. S~.k~a: __
O Pa~r--~Mm~ ~Gen~ / ~ P~e~~eneml --
~ A~omay-in-Fa~ ":,'[' 0 ~o~4n-Fa~
~ Guat~an of ~n~a~r ~:"J
~'~ ~ ~ ~ :--.'J/ L xt,.
ATrACHMENT NO 12
SAM ALHADEFF LETTER - NOVEMBER 20, 2001
R:\S P Ak2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-11-01.doc
23
ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP
A LIMITED LIASILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
43460 F~IDGE PARK DPJVE. SUITE 270
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590
MAIN TELEPHONE: (909) 699-7556
FACSIMILE: (909) 699-6191
Offices in San Diego and Temecula, Cafifornia
November 20, 2001
Ms. Debbie Ubnoske
Planning Director
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
S/0.~JEL C. Alfl~DE FF
SAIJ~N~FF~SLAwl .COM
9103.0001
Re-'
Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment
Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8
Planning Application No. 01-0117 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188,
Amendment No. 4 (collectively, the "Action")
Dear Ms. Ubnoske:
On November 7, 2001, Mr. Darren Stroud representing James and Mary Corona and the
Corona Family (collectively, the "Coronas") submitted a letter in opposition to the above-
referenced Action.
While Mr. Stroud has spent a great deal of time of going through history, he has basically
restated objections that were made to a prior application that was submitted by Newland for
various changes to their Specific Plan. That application was submitted in 1999 and involved the
following:
Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No.
219 - Paloma del Sol);
Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement for the Villages
~ Pasco del Sol, Community Shopping Center);
Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan - Appeal); and
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 -Appeal)
(collectively, "Original Application").
C:~'Data\ClicntsXNcwland\UBNOSKE LTR I 1-20-0l.doc
Ms. Debbie Ubnoske
November 20, 2001
Page 2
ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP
As you can tell the Original Application dealt with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan
together with certain other applications with regard to the development plan and a tentative
parcel map. At that time, a person with Mr. Stroud's legal firm, Ms. Michele Staples, had filed
extensive opposition to the Original Application suggesting the exact same arguments made by
Mr. Stroud with regard to the Butterfield Interceptor Channel.
A great deal of time was taken by the staffto review those issues and as a result on that
application staff concluded "Wh/le staff agrees that the issue needs to be resolved, we do not feel
that there is a nexus between the Butterfield Stage Interceptor Channel and the four cases before
the Council. The Channel is proposed to be built through AD 159, and Newland Communities
has no control over the timing of that process." The staffreport goes on to indicate that the
process is within the consideration of AD 159 and that "Newland had obligated their property
through bonded indebtedness for the work but has no control over the construction." It also
pointed out that there was an interim detention basin constructed on property owned by
Newland. That basin was to intercept any sheet flow across Butterfield Stage Road and to
protect any downstream properties f~om flooding.
Accordingly, we believe these issues to be the same as previously discussed and we
believe that the staff analysis of November 9, 1999 is as operative with regard to the Original
Application as it would be concerning this application. Should you need any further additional
information, please do not hesitate to give us a call.
Sincerely,
Samuel C. Alhadeffof
Alhadeff and Solar, LLP
SCA:dll
CC;
William Curley, Esq.
Mr. Matthew Harris
ATI'ACHMENT NO 13
DARREL STROUD LETI'ER - NOVEMBER 28, 2001
R:~S P A\2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI2-11-01.doc
24
JACKSON DEMARco & PECK~:~PAUGH
FAX 949.752.0597
w~vddplaw.com
28878
November 28, 2001
Dstroud@jdplaw.com
(949) 85 1-7404
VIA FA CSIMILE A ND 0 VERNITE EXPRES,g
Planning Commission
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attn: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
Re:
Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5
Planning Application No. 01-0109 ~ General Plan Amendment
Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8
Planning Application No. 01-0117- Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
24188, Amendment No. 4
Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners:
We represent James and Mary Corona and the Corona family (collectively the
"Coronas"). The Coronas own land at the northeast comer of the intersection of Butterfield
Stage Road and Highway 79. The Coronas' land straddles the boundary between Riverside
County ("County") and the City of Temecula ("City"), and is directly impacted by the on-going
development activities associated with the Paloma Del Sol project ("Project"). The Coronas
request that the following comments be included in the administrative record regarding the above
referenced planning applications. The Coronas' November 7, 2001, letter to the Planning
Commission regarding the above referenced amendments is incorporated herein.
The Coronas request that the Planning Commission enforce the drainage-related
condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan
("Specific Plan 219"), which is also part of the Project's design. Otherwise the Planning
Commission will be in violation of both the Subdivision Map Act ("Map Act") (Government
JACKSON DEMARCO & PECKENPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 2
Code section 66410, et seq.) and the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public
Resources Code sections 21000, et seq.). Furthermore, the City's failure to properly notice the
Coronas of the November 28,2001 Planning Commission Hearing violates the Coronas' due
process rights.
I. BACKGROUND
Prior to the development of Specific Plan 219 and construction of Butterfield
Stage Road improvements, storm water flowed to the north of the Coronas' land that is now
included within Cotmty Assessment District No. 159 ("AD #159"), across Butterfield Stage
Road, and through the Specific Plan 219 property. As a result, when the County first approved
Specific Plan 219, it imposed a condition on the Project requiring the developer to construct a
flood control channel either on-site or off-site to intercept those flows. The County likewise
imposed mitigation measures on the Project to prohibit increased flood hazards to adjacent or
downstream properties and require that all flood-related hazards must be adequately mitigated.
(Reference EIR 235, pp. 315-321, incorporated by reference.)
Subsequently, the City adopted the County's condition of approval for Specific
Plan 219 that the developer construct the flood control facilities either on-site or off-site. The
City first adopted the condition in 1991. However, instead of constructing the flood control
facilities, the record indicates that the Newland Communities' ("Newland") predecessor included
the facility on the "wish list" for facilities to be constructed with funding from the AD #159
supplemental assessment. Development of Specific Plan 219 has resulted in filling the natural
drainage course that formerly flowed to the north of the Corona Ranch property within AD 159,
across Butterfield Stage Road, through Specific Plan 219, to Temecula Creek. Butterfield Stage
Road improvements were constructed by AD # 159 to accommodate the development's alteration
of the natural drainage pattern. Newland proceeded to fill and construct homes on land that once
served as the drainage area for the upstream properties, including Corona Ranch.
Those improvements now act as a dam blocking storm water that once flowed
across Butterfield Stage Road and Specific Plan 219. A flood hazard has been created on that
portion of the Coronas' land within AD #159 where none previously existed. The flood control
facilities are necessary to mitigate the hazardous condition created on the Coronas' land by
Newland's development of Specific Plan 219 and by the Butterfield Stage Road improvements.
Importantly, Specific Plan 219 has never been amended to delete the facility from its master
planned drainage facilities, nor have the conditions of approval or mitigation measures been
amended to remove their requirements that the facility be constructed by Newland. Yet,
Newland continues to develop the property without complying *vith the condition and mitigation
measures that require it to construct the flood control facilities, further increasing the likelihood
of flood-related hazards to the Coronas' property.
Once again, Newland is requesting amendments to the Project without having
constructed, or even committing to construct, the flood control facilities. Once again in violation
JACKSON DE~IARCO & PECKENPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 3
of the Specific Plan 219's Project design, the existing conditions of approval, and mitigation
measures, the Planning staff is recommending approval of the above referenced planning
applications (e.g., amendments to the City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, and Vesting
Tentative Map No. 24188) for the Project. However, the Coronas respectfully request that the
City enforce the drainage-related condition of approval and mitigation measures imposed on
Specific Plan 219. Otherwise, to avoid violating statutory and constitutional law, the Planning
Commission must suspend all approvals for the Project, including the above-referenced planning
applications, until after construction of the flood control facility necessary to mitigate project-
related flooding hazards to the public roads and private property adjacent to the development,
including the Coronas' property.
II. FAILURE TO ENFORCE THE SPECIFIC PLAN 219'S DRAINAGE-RELATED
FACILITIES AND DRAINAGE-RELATED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND
MITIGATION MEASURES VIOLATES THE MAP ACT, CEQA AND THE
CONSTITUTION
A. Newland's Applications Must be Denied
Local agencies are prohibited from issuing any permit or granting any approval
necessary to develop property which is in violation of the provisions of the Map Act or
implementing local ordinances, if the local agency finds that the development of such real
property is contrary to public health or the public safety. Government Code section 66499.34;
See also Pratt v. Adams, 229 Cal. App.2d 602 (1964); Topanga Ass'n for Scenic Community v.
County of Los Angeles, ~ 1 Cal.3rd 506 (1974).
The longer that Newland fails to install the required flood control facilities after
filling the natural drainage course, the greater the risk of public health and welfare impacts due to
flooding. Accordingly, the City of Temecula must deny the requested amendments due to
Newland's failure to comply with the drainage-related conditions of approval and mitigation
measures.
Additionally, under 14 Cal. Code of Regs. ("CEQA Guidelines") section
15126.4(a)(2), mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions,
agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption ora plan, policy,
regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy,
regulation, or project design. Here, the drainage-related mitigation measures have been
incorporated into both the project design and conditions of approval. Yet, to date, Newland has
failed to mitigate flooding hazards to adjacent private property created by its development
activities, had to date mitigated flooding hazards created by its development activities by
construction the flood control facilities. Therefore, Newland is in violation of its adopted
mitigation measures for the Project.
JACKSON DEMARCO & PECKENPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 4
As provided in CEQA § 21168.9, a range of remedies is available for an agency's
noncompliance with CEQA, including ordering the agency to bring its decision into compliance
with CEQA, voiding the agency's approval, and suspending development of the project.
Accordingly, as a result of Newland's failure to implement drainage-related mitigation measures,
the City must deny the proposed amendments.
The City Is in Violation of Map Act for Failure to Require Newland to
Enter into an Agreement to Construct Flood Control Facilities
Government Code section 66462(a) provides:
"(a) If, at the time of approval of the final map by the legislative body, any public
improvements required by the local agency pursuant to this division or local
ordinance have not been completed and accepted in accordance with standards
established by the local agency by ordinance applicable at the time of the approval
or conditional approval of the tentative map, the legislative body, as a condition
precedent to the approval of the final map, shall require the subdivider to enter
into one of the following agreements specified by the local agency:
(1) An agreement with the local agency upon mutually agreeable terms to
thereafter complete the improvements at the subdivider's expense.
(2) An agreement with the local agency to thereafter do either of the
following:
(A) Initiate and consummate proceedings under an appropriate
special assessment act or the Mello-Roos Community Facilities
Act... for the financing and completion of all of the
improvements.
(B) If the improvements are not completed under a special
assessment act or the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act... to
complete the improvements at the subdivider's expense."
(Emphasis added.)
To date, the City has failed to require such an agreement for the construction of
the flood control facilities, although the flood control facilities are part of the Specific Plan 219
design and is required pursuant to drainage-related conditions of approval and mitigation
measures. According, the City must require such an agreement immediately or be in further
violation of Government Code section 66462(a).
JACKSON DEi~IARCO & PECKE~NrPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 5
C. Newland Does Not Have Vested Rights to Proceed with the Project
Newland only gains vested rights to proceed with the development under the
ordinances, policies, and standards in effect on the date that the tentative map application was
approved or conditionally approved. Government Code section 66498.1(b); See also City's
Ordinance section 16.18.160. Because the drainage-related conditions of approval and
mitigation measures were part of the tentative map approval process, Newland's vested rights in
the development of the Project are contingent upon the construction of the flood control
facilities.
The City Cannot Adopt an Addendum under CEQA and Should
Prepare an Subsequent EIR for these Amendments
The Planning staffhas recommended the approval of an Addendum as the
appropriate environmental review for the proposed amendments. However, an agency may only
prepare an addendum to a previously prepared EIR to make minor technical changes or additions
to the EIR. CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a). Furthermore, an addendum to a previously
certified EIR can only be prepared, provided that none of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines
section 15162 have occurred (CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a)), which are: (1) there are no
new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts; (2) there are not any substantial changes which have occurred with respect to the
circumstances surrounding the New Project; and (3) there is no new information of substantial
importance. See also CEQA section 21166. If one of three conditions occur, the City must
prepare a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR. CEQA Guidelines sections 15162, 15163.
Here there is overwhelming evidence before the Planning Commission the a
Subsequent EIR must be prepared for the proposed amendments. Newland's failure to comply
with the drainage-related project facilities, conditions of approval and mitigation measures
constitutes substantial changes or major modifications to the Project. This non-compliance has
resulted in unmitigated flooding hazards, which is a substantial increase in the severity of the
Project's flood impacts than those analyzed in the original EIR. Additionally, Project-related
flooding hazards have been made significantly more severe since the certification of the original
EIR by the Project's filling and construction in the natural drainage, and by improvements to
Butterfield Stage Road to accommodate the Project. These subsequent changes associated with
the Project constitute significant changes and major modifications. Accordingly, pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15162, these changes must be analyzed in a subsequent EIR before any
further permits or other discretionary approvals are issued.
Additionally, the proposed amendment to Specific Plan 219 would result in the
relocation of Neighborhood/Commercial uses at the southwest comer of Pauba and Butter field
Stage Roads to the southwest comer of DePortola Road and Campanula Way. Accordingly, the
8~acres of medium high density residential uses in Planning Area 38, which is near the highly
congested Home Depot, would be converted to Neighborhood/Commercial uses. This would
JACKSON DE.~IARCO & PECKENPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 6
result in an increase of commercial uses with associated potentially significant impacts (e.g.,
traffic, air quality, water quality, etc.) that must be analyzed in a Subsequent EIR.
The City Failure to Properly Notice the Corona's Violates the
Corona's Due Process Rights
Neighboring owners must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard on a tentative
map application, both as a matter of statutory right (Government Code section 66451.3) and as a
matter of constitutional due process (Horn v. County of Ventura, 24 Cal. 3d 605,615 (1979)).
In the processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval and filing of
tentative, final and parcel maps and the modification thereof, local agencies are required to give
notice of a public hearing pursuant to Government Code sections 65090 and 65091. Government
Code sections 66451, 66451.3; See also City's Ordinance section 16.18.160. In particular,
"[n]otice of the heating shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to all
owners of real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the
real property that is the subject of the hearing." Government Code section 65091 (a)(3).
The proposed amendment to Specific Plan 219 includes increasing the number of
medium density residential acres in Planning Area 4 from 40 to 43.2 acres. This would increase
the amount of development in Planning Area 4 of Specific Plan 219, which is directly adjacent to
the Coronas' property. Yet, the Coronas and other adjacent property owner were never mailed a
public notice as required pursuant to Government Code section 65091(a)(3).
Moreover, the City has violated its own ordinance regarding notification of the
November 28, 2001 Planning Commission hearing. The City's Ordinance section
t7.03.040(B)(2) provides that "[t]he notice shall be mailed first class and postage pre-paid.., to
all persons whose names and addresses appear on the latest available assessment roll of the
County of Riverside as owners of property within a distance of six hundred feet from the exterior
boundaries of the site for which the application is filed." Additionally, City's Ordinance section
17.03.040(C)(1) provides that "[t]he property, which is the subject of the proposed development,
shall be posted with infoImational signs that are four feet by four feet in size, located along each
side of the property not more than three hundred feet apart, that fronts upon an improved public
street, providing a description of the development request, the date, time, and location of the
public hearing, and the location where further information can be obtained."
None of these ordinances have been complied with by the City. The Coronas, and
other property owners, have not received proper notice by mail even though their property is
directly adjacent to and impacted by the proposed amendments. Furthermore, a notice was not
posted on the comer of Highway 79 and Butterfield Stage Road, even though this area is affected
by the proposed amendments.
JACKSON DE~VIARCO & PECKENPAUGH
Planning Commission
November 28, 2001
Page 7
Case law is clear that ~vhere a land use decision will "exceptionally affect" a
property owner or business user, the County must provide that person with notice and the
opportunity to be heard. Horn, supra, 24 Cal. 3d at 615; Harris v. County of Riverside, 904 F. 2d
497 (9th Cir. 1990). Accordingly, the City has violated the Coronas' procedural due process
rights by not providing the Coronas proper notice of the November 28, 2001 Planning
Commission hearing.
IlL CONCLUSION
On behalf of the Coronas, I urge the Planning Commission to deny the proposed
amendments and suspend further development activity until the required flood control facilities
are constructed. Otherwise, the Planning Commission will be in violation of both the Map Act
and CEQA. At a minimum, the Hearing must be properly renoticed to avoid violating the
Coronas due process rights and a subsequent EIR must be prepared.
Very truly yours,
/~D~arren W. Stroud
DWS/tms
432929,1
CCi
Corona Family (facsimile, ovemite express)
Dennis Chiniaeff, Planning Commission Chairman (facsimile, overnite express)
John Telesio, Planning Commission Co-Chairman (facsimile, overnite express)
Ron Guerriero, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, overnite express)
David Mathewson, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, ovemite express)
Mary Jane Olhasso, Planning Commissioner (facsimile, overnite express)
Peter Thorson, City Attorney (facsimile, overnite express)
ATTACHMENT NO 14
SAM ALHADEFF LETTER - NOVEMBER 29, 2001
R:XS P A~2001\01-0102 Paloma Del Sol #8\CCSTAFFRPTI 2-114)l.doc
25
ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
43460 RIDGE PARK DRIVE, SUITE 270
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590
MAIN TELEPHONE: (909) 699-7556
FACSIMILE: (909) 699-6191
Offices in San Diego and Temecula, California
November 29, 2001
VIA HAND DELIVERY
SAMUEL C. ALHADEFF
SALHADEFF(~.ASLAWI .COM
Ms. Debbie Ubnoske
Planning Director
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Re:
.~ NOV ~ 9 2001
Planning Application No. 01-0109 - General Plan Amendment
Planning Application No. 01-0102 - Paloma del Sol Specific Plan
Amendment No. 8
Planning Application No. 01-0117 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24188,
Amendment No. 4 (collectively, "Action")
Dear Ms. Ubnoske:
We want to thank you and your staff for working with us in the above-referenced
applications. We appreciate the professional cooperation, patience and courtesy extended by
every staff member, specifically Matthew Harris and Ron Parks in working through certain
difficult issues.
Last night I made reference to certain letters which I asked to be included within the
record for the proceedings. First, I read from a letter dated February 17, 2000 from the County
of Riverside to the Corona Ranch. A copy of that letter is attached. Please include this letter to
be incorporated in the record. Second, I mentioned a series of letters that were referenced in the
hearings that were held related to the Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 in Planning Applications
as follows:
PA99-0284 (Development Plan)
PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431)
PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment); and
PA99-0283 (Development Agreement)
There were a series of letters that I asked to be incorporated in the record last night from
those particular planning actions and the proceedings that took place. The letters that I
referenced were as follows:
C:kData\ClientskNewland\UBNOSKE LTR 11-29-01 .doc
Ms. Debbie Ubnoske
November 29, 2001
Page 2
ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP
1. November 3, 1999 letter from Newland Communities to Carol K. Donahoe;
2. November 1, 1999 letter from Dennis O'Neil to Peter Thorson;
3. November 4, 1999 letter from Paul Thompson of Albert A. Webb & Associates
assessment engineers for Assessment District 159 to Shawn Nelson;
4. November 4, 1999 letter from Richard T. Robotta of the Keith Companies to Dean
Meyer; and
5. A compilation of reports and analyzes that were submitted to Carol Donahoe dated
October 26, 1999.
The above-referenced documents were the ones that I referred to and asked me made a
part of the official record of these proceedings. For your convenience, I have attached the above-
referenced letters with the exception of item no. 5, which was listed as attachment number 7 to
the November 9, 1999 staffreport.
Samuel C~ of
Alhadeff and Solar, LLP
SCA:dll
Enclosures
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
TRANSPORTATION
I.,A.ND Mg.N'A GEMENT AGENCY
Transportation Department
February 17, 2000
Core,la Ranch
33320 State Highway 79
TemecuJa, CA 92592
Attention: Steve Corona '
RE: Etutterfield East Interceptor Storm Drain
Dear Mr. Corona:
I am wrfb:ng this letter ~s a follow up to the December 10, 1999 meeting we h'ad at the
Flood Control D/strict offices. The purpose of that meeting was to d~scuss the various
al'tamer/yes we studied for the Butterffetd East II'dercepter Storm Dm[ri Facility, J
appreciated the opportunity.to hear your cmncerns, and as a result, ! gained a better
understandin9 of the histo~ surrounding th~s project and the vadous a[ternatiYeS'
Attached Js a table that summarizes the three options we discussed.
~re we_~ll aware, the Butterfield Interceptor w~s inc/uded as,an Assessment
~cilK"y,'to be I~tecl at lrh~ast'~m ASsessment District boundary, to
in__.t~r, ceF[' the b'ibuta~ dm/nage flows and provide flood protecti'or$ to Butta~eld Sta~q.e- '
Road. State Route 79 South, and downstream proper~es. The original AD 159 c~nceFt
' was ~~pen channel at the ea~oundary. Because YOu own
property upstream of the AD Interceptor alJ[/nment east of the'AD boundarT, you
requested we study other alternmJves. You are currently farming all of your property
and. advised the Interceptor would disrupt your farming operation. With your Jnpuk we
agra., d to analyze several other a/terrier[yes. Let me summarize the two other options
we d~scussed, which seemed potent/ally feasible:
Alternative No. 1 examined [he possibility ofconstruct/ng the Inlerceptor an the same
alignment as the original option (the eastern AD 159 boundary), but lowering the
channel and Constructing a box under your property. You expressed an openness to
this opt/on aS long as 1) you could continue your f'arming operations uninter~pted, and
2.) the Flood Control District would accept this option as a solution: The intent w~s to
provide four feet et cover over the box, so you could cor~b'nue your farming over the top
of the facility. During our meeting. Flood Control D;-strict representatives questioned the
feasibility of this option. First of ali, they doubt the tributary flows can actually be'
properly collected by the underground box. Secondly, by towering the ~cility to pi:gee it
r, J2724/2~,J~J~;J L6:~;J2 r-J 77~3'35E
~'~H-74-UU 'F}IU U',c'_:bb YrI RI"I L,'U ./,i:UUIIVh
Mr, Sieve COrona
February 17, 2000
Page 2
unden:jround makes the slope of the box culvert too fiat and creates ongoing
maintenance problems. Therefore, this oFtion doesn't seem practical
The other option we discussed was Alternative No. 5, a dual system with an open
channel located along >'our eastedy property boundary to interc8~ a majodb/of the
drainage from the east, along with a smaller unden:jround system at [he east'em AD
boundary to coiled the smailer flows from the north and east, above De Portola Road
and east to Calle Contento. You e~pressed your preference for thi,~ alternative.
Under Alternative No, 5, ail of yourproperty w~i be flood protected. The properb/you
own outsfde the AD boundary would benefit under this a~ternaUve and would therefore
be required to pay its prOportionate share of the costs.
You discussed your desire to defer any assessments on your property un.tJl your farming
operation develops into some other use. This would require some other part~ to
· advance your costs. While I understand your desire, the Counb7 doesn't have the
?nanciaJ capacity or abiiJ~ to advance fund your share. One way to reduce your costs
rs to dedica~ the right-of~way needed to construct the facfJ~y. Other [har~ that, I have
not been asia to come up wj[h .any other cost.saving solm~ons.
If¥ou are wi~l[n~ tr~ ~I~-o ~o - · .
propert,~out~i~e b5~,,~..~[~~den on the remainder of your
~ to recommend AJte~tJve'l~~~ Transportation geparLme'n_Lt js
concun'ence - - . o. ~owever, to proceeo we wJJl ne_~wrj~_,en
¥OUF C430pel-~[io,q iS needed fo make ~he lnteroepfor a reality,
I look Forward to receiWng your positive response so we c~n proceed [na cooperative
manner. Please feel free [o con[act me if you Have any questions or require any
additional information.
Sincerely.
George A. Johnson
Deputy Director of TransportaUan
GAd:sa
Supervisor Bob Bus[er
8ob Krleger
Tony Carstens
Oav~ Barnhart
Kelley Donov3n
Frank Pe~irs
November 3, 1999
Carol K. Donohoe, AICP
Associate Planner
CITY OF TEMECULA
planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Subject:
Paseo del Sol - Planning Application: PA99-0284 (Development
Plan), PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431), PA99-0285
(Specific Plan Amendment) and P)k99-0283 (Development
Agreement)
Dear Carol:
As a follow up to the information forwarded to you.9n October 26, 1999 and
subsequent meetings ,with City Staff and City Attorney, we hereby submit the
following correspondence in response tO the appehl filed by Corona Ranch:
Letter f · , .
rom Denms O Neil to Peter Thorson dated November 1, 1999
stating our positions.
i)
The development of the Paseo del Sol commercial site and Specific
Plan No. 7 will have no impact on upstream properties or their
exposure to flood control hazards.
ii)
Newland has provided evidence of compliance with all drainage
and flood control conditions.
iii)
There is no need to conduct any further environmental review or
prepare any subsequent reports.
Letter from Paul Thompson of Albert A. Webb Associates, Assessment
Engineers for Assessment District 159 to Shawn Nelson dated Novemb-~r 1,
1999.
This letter indicates there is an authorized "$2.2 million for design
and construction of the Interceptor Channel or a substitute facility'
through AD 159.
ii)
In addition there is authorized but unissued bond capacity on the
Paseo del Sol property.
Carol Donohoe
November 3, 1999
Page two
Letter from Richard T. Robotta of The Keith Companies dated October 29,
1999 which summarizes the technical history of Specific Plan 219 (Vail
Meadows) and EIR 235 as it relates to drainage issues.
In surmnary:
1. The Paseo del Sol project has met al/the conditions p/aced on the project
throughout the entitlement process and more specifically as it relates to
drainage.
The Paseo del Sol project has constructed, an interim detention basin and
has been conditioned that the basin or equivaient facility shall remain in
place until such time that upstream drainage facilities are constructed.
There exists $2.2 million of authorized bonds through AD 159 for the
design and construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel.
Newland Communities supports the use of authorized but unissued bond
capacity on the Paseo del Sol property.
There is no evidence to support the appeal of the pending applications nor
need for any new conditions or the preparation of further environmental
documentation.
We thank the City Staff for their efforts and time spent on these matters. We are
respectfully requesting that this correspondence, along with the compilation of
reports and analyses as submitted to you under cover letter dated October 26,
1999, be filed with the City Clerk and made a part of the official record of the City
Council relating to the subject planning applications and appeal. --
Very truly yours,
NEWLAND COMMUNITIES, LLC
Dean R. Meyer
Director of Engineering & Development
cc: Jim Delhamer
DEAN DU~-RANKIN
CHARLES S. EXON
WILLIAM E. HALLE
ANDREW K, HARTZELL
HUGH H EWI'Fr
JOHN D. HUDSON
HEWITT & McGUIRE, LLP
A'FFORNEYS AT LAW
19900 M^cARTHUR BOULEVARD, SUITE ] 050
[RVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612
(949) 798-0500 · (949) 798-051 I (FAX)
EMAIL: counsel~hcwit tmcguire.com
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: (949) 798-0734
EMAIL: do neil~,h ¢ wit t m c guir ¢.com
MARK R. MCGUIRE
DENNIS D. O'NEIL
JAY F. PALCNIKOFF
PAUL A. ROWE
WILLIAM L. TWOMEY
JOHN P. YEAGER
November 1, 1999
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re:
Planning Application PA99-0284 (Development Plan),
PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431), Planning
Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment)
and Plannine: Application No. PA99-0823 (Development A~reement)
Dear Peter:
Our law firm represents Newland Communities, the developer of the Paseo del Sol
Master Planned Community. Newland has received notice that the owners of the Corona Ranch
have appealed some or all of the applications referenced in this letter. The stated grounds for the
appeal am: (i) "the applicant has failed to come into compliance with the development criteria and
conditions placed on the project"; (ii) "the project itself is out of compliance with conditions of its
approval"; and (iii)" . . . the California Environmental Quality Act requires preparation of a
subsequent EIR for a project, and precludes reliance on an addendum, when substantial changes
occur to the circumstances under which a project is to be undertaken, or new information shows that
project impacts will be substantially more severe."
As they have in the past with prior Pasco del Sol Specific Plan Amendments, the
Coronas contend that the construction of Butterfield Stage Road has effectively blocked drainage
through this area, creating significantly increased flood hazards to upstream properties than was
previously identified in the EIR for (Paloma) Pasco del Sol. Furthermore, they point out, a planned
upstream storm water interceptor facility ("B utterfield Interceptor Channel") to mitigate this problem
has not yet been constructed. However, even assuming the Coronas' contentions are correct, they
have no bearing on compliance with pr/or land use entitlement conditions or whether a Supplemental
EIR ("SEIR") should be prepared in connection with the pending planning applications. This is
I 1 4) 1-99 100194)0002
. - S:\152\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd
Peter M. Thorson
November 1, 1999
Page 2
because the development of the Paseo del Sol commemial site and the Specific Plan No. 7
Development Plan will have no impact on upstream properties or their exposure to flood control
hazards. This follows from the fact that no storm water from the Paseo del Sol project is directed
upstream. The approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and related development applications
will have no physical consequences at all on the property owned by the Coronas and there are
absolutely no new significant adverse environmental effects to analyze in a SEIR. Simply stated,
there is no nexus or relationship to the pending planning applications and drainage issues on Corona
Ranch.
AD 159 has provided many public improvements o fregional significance in the South
Temecula area. Thus, the construction ofB utterfield Stage Road and Highway 79 South in 1993 was
not intended to benefit solely one property owner, but rather to improve the overall traffic circulation
of the region to the benefit of all people living in this end of town. The Corona Ranch is included
within AD 159 and along with Paseo del Sol and other propertieshave been assessed to pay for these
regional '
public improvements.
Butter field Stage Road, which is already completed, and the Butterfield Interceptor
Channel facility, which has not yet been constructed, are improvements under the control of the
County of Riverside and/or Assessment District No. 159, not Newland Communities. EIR No. 241
was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisor when AD 159 ',vas formed in 1988. Any
issues the Coronas have regarding flood concerns should be directed to Assessment District No. 159
and the County.
The Butterfield Interceptor Channel is to be built to the east and upstream from the
Paseo del Sol community and its purpose is to collect waters flowing from these undeveloped areas
and divert them into Temecula Creek. Ne~vland has been working diligently with both AD 159 and
the County o fRiverside for over three years in an attempt to facilitate and accelerate the construction
of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. The Coronas play a key role in the Butterfield Interceptor
because they must agree on its location and the cost AD 159 will pay for their land. Newland will
continue to cooperate with the County and the Coronas to insure this flood control channel is
constructed.
In the meantime, in satisfaction of the development conditions required by both
Riverside County Flood Control and the City of Temecula's Public Works Department, Newland
has constructed an approximately twenty acre interim detention basin at the northwest coroer of
Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79 South. This basin was designed and constructed pursuant
to Riverside County Flood Control and'City of Temecula review and approval. Further, the basin
fully protects the Paseo del Sol community during rare storm events in which water may enter from
areas to the east. To give you a sense of the rarity of the storm event that might cause water to enter
the basin, you should know that during El Nifio of recent years this twenty acre facility remained dry.
11-01-99 10019-00002
.. - S:M52\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd
Peter M. Thorson
November 1, 1999
Page 3
On February 2, 1998, the Planning Commission approved revisions to Newland's
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24182 ("VTM 24812") and, based upon staff analysis, found the
project to be in conformity with the previously certified Environmental Impact Report. The
continued presence of the detention basin was assured in the conditions of approval for VTM 24182
to remain in place until upstream drainage facilities are installed to mitigate off-site flows.
In general, CEQA limits later environmental review for subsequent land use
approvals to issues or impacts which were not addressed in prior environmental documentation. The
intent of CEQA is to allow public agencies to rely on prior en'Cimnmental documentation, unless the
project itself or other circumstances have changed significantly since its adoption and these changes
have a negative impact on the environment which cannot be mitigated. Under Public Resources
Code Section 21166 (CEQA Section 21166) and Cal. Code of Regs. 15162 (CEQA Guideline
Section 15162), a supplemental EIR is not necessary unless major revisions are required to the
original EIR as a result off
(a)
substantial changes in the project which have an increased negative
impact on the environment;
(b)
substantial changes in the circumstances of the project which have an
increased negative impact on the environment; or
(c)
new information which was not available when the original EIR was
prepared which indicates that the project has a substantial adverse
impact which cannot be mitigated.
The CEQA statutes and guidelines are very clear on what the test is for requiring a supplemental
EIR. Once an EIR has been prepared for a project, no further environmental review may be required
unless one of these specified triggering events occur.
A public a ....
gency s dmcret~on to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR is very
limited once an EIR has been prepared for a project. The statute is phrased in prohibitory la,'Tguage;
An agency shall not require a supplemental EIR unless one of the statutory exceptions exist. The
policy behind the statute is to avoid repeating the CEQA process when environmental review has
been completed and the time for challenging that process has expired (Fund for Environmental
Defense v. County of Orange (1988) 204 Cal. App. 3d 1538, Long Beach Savings and Loan
Association v. Long Beach Redevelopment Agency (I 986) 188 Cal. App. 3d 249, Bowman v. City
of Petaluma (1986) 185 Cal. App. 3d 1065). CEQA Section 21166 is designed to provide a degree
of certainty and finality once environmental review has been completed for a project. Even a
substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact does not require the preparation of
a subsequent EIR if mitigation measures are adopted which reduce the impact to a level of
11-01~99 100194)0002
· - S:k152\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd
Peter M. Thorson
November 1, 1999
Page 4
insignificance. (Laurel I~Ieights improvement Association of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of the
University of California ("Laurel Heights II") (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112.) Court cases uphold the
presumption against the preparation of subsequent EIR. (Snarled Traffic Obstructs Progress v. City
and County of San Francisco, 1999 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9211 .) If impacts resulting from changes
to the project do not differ significantly from those described in the project EIR, a further EIR is not
required (Bowman).
A city may not, therefore, require a further EIR unless it finds, on the basis of
substantial evidence, that one of the three exceptions to the'mle against requiring a further EIR
exists. In this case there is no evidence to support such findings. All reasonable doubt will be
decided in favor of the city (Laurel Heights).
A city may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a
subsequent EIR is not required. CEQA Guideline Section 15164(b)(e). This Guideline reflects case
law approving' use of an EIR addendum to determine whether a~subsequent or supplemental EIR
might be required. In the Bowman case, the court upheld the City's use of an EIR addendum to
evaluate changes to the project. The court held that using an addendum as a mechanism for
determining whether a further EIR should be required was an appropriate way to fill in a procedural
gap in CEQA and the Guidelines. Nothing in CEQA or the Guidelines requires that the city conduct
an investigation to ferret out changes in circumstances or new information. CEQA and the
Guidelines do not mandate any specific procedure for cities to follow in determining whether a
supplemental EIR is required. The Guidelines simply provide that a brief explanation of the decision
not to prepare a supplemental EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15162 should be included
in an addendum to an EIR, the city's required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record.
Newland has provided you with legally supportable evidence of compliance with all
drainage and flood control conditions. The appellants have offered no evidence of noncompliance
with the conditions of the project approval, any significant changed circumstances, or new
information which was not considered in the original project EIR as further reviewed in prior and
the current Addendum. Finally, there is absolutely no connection between the planning
114)I-99 10019-00002
Peter M. Thorson
November 1, 1999
Page 5
applications currently pending before the City Council and storm drain issues impacting the Corona
Ranch. Therefore, we submit there is no need in the case of the pending planning applications to
consider adding new conditions or conduct further environmental documentation.
Very truly yours,
Dennis D. O'Neil
DDO/mer
CC'
James M. Delhamer
Mayor and Members of the City Council
I 1'4)1-99 10019-00002
-S:\ 152\CORR\99100008.LTR.wpd
ASSOCIATES
Nuvembcr 4, ! 999
W.O. 89-4308
File No. 3851.08
Mr. ghuwn Nelson
City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 B~s Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: As-~-'smeat Di~rict No. 159 - Bu_qerfield ~*et Interceptor
I am tl~ Assessment Division Manager wJtl~ Alb~t A. Webb Assoe. iate~
Assessmmt Bngin~-rs for Assessment Dis~No. 1:59 (A. D. 159"). I am providing ~he
following information ~o ~5*ist ~ City of Tcn:ccula in unde~ thc background of
the Butmrfield East Interc~tor Chmmel (thc "Zutcrcclnor Gbanncl") and to help to
idemi~ potential ftmding for its romt:uction.
A. D. 159 was originally formed in 1938 ro fund certain regions! public
improvemems and OTh~ infrastructure within the Dis~ct Bo~dafie$. In 1991, a
supplemental diet, ct was form~ to incrr, a~ the funds available for thc cost of thc
OI~gfnal A.D. 159 improvcmaus, ami to add new District improvements such es the--
lmercel~or Channel. Al~roxin~ely $2.2 million wes speeifimlly identified b~ the
supI~lemcmal district us n~ce~sery t'or the d~qgn and comtn~ction of thc Inmrccptor
Cha,.-e! This $2! mill[ol~ Was assessed to four of tha property owners w~th;n ~
Distri~ and ~ to tbe~e owners 'ba~ecI on b~it received and alloca~d on acreage.
Cmaseq.~dy, Pasco d~l gol received abou~ g2% of th~ ~.~,.,,~at wi~h th~ remaining
tlmm owam re~viag almm 1 g%.
rqv~L ~I3~EER~4~3 · PLA~IN~. · AS~P_~_ ME~T I SPEC/AL TAX COHSULTII~G
At this detc, there is authorized but'unissued bond capacity on th~ Pasco del Sol
property ton~tiag a~roxir~ly ~4,9 million. Under Assessment Diatrict law, authorized
bonds can only be r~lensed by thc agency '~nist~ring the District and any acrmtl
ass~.ssmen! debt issued against a propcrty rcm.i.~ an obligation of tbo property tmtil paid.
Further, aa Assessmeat District may build improvementa outside of its boundari~ if
those improvements am to th-' be.n~t ofprop~ties within the District.
In on going meelin§s w/th Rive. rsid~ County uffi~als, Ne,viand .Communities
indi~aed lhat they would support usfng a portion ut' th- authorized but unissued bond
capacity on its property to provide funds in excess of thc authorized SZ2 million for th~
d~ign and construction of th~ lnt~v, eptor Channel or a substitute facility such as a
detention basin.
I trust this informa%n has bc~n ~pful to you and I am available to answer aay
questions you may have. Plitco f~ to call me at (909) 7111-5190.
PT/js
$inccre2y,
.ALBERT A. WI~BB ASSOCIATER
Paul Thompson
November 4, 1999
Mr. Dean Meyer
NEWLAND COMMUNITIES
27393 Ynez Road, Suite 253
Temecula CA 92591
Re'
Paseo del Sol: Appeal of P.A. 99-0283, 99-0284, 99-0285, 99-0286
Butterfield Stage Road at Highway 79 Drainage Issues
Dear Mr. Meyer.
The Keith Companies has been informed that the aforementioned planning applications for
the commercial development within Paseo del Sol nea~: Highway 79 and Margarita Road
have been appealed by the Corona Ranch owners. Further, it is our understanding that the
appeal is based on issues involving compliance with development criteria and conditions as
they relate to flooding concerns at the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and
Highway 79 approximately 1 mile to the east upstream of the referenced applications. It is
the intent of this correspondence to define the development cdteda and conditions as they
relate to drainage for Paseo del Sol (formerly Vail Meadows) by relating the history of the
drainage approvals and thereby show compliance with said development criteria and
conditions.
In 1988, the Engineer of Work for Vail Meadows, Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates,
and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct engaged in
correspondence dated April 6, 1988; May 16, 1988; and May 26, 1988 which discuss and
developed the master plan of drainage for the Vail Meadows project. As a part of the
approved master plan of drainage a large offsite basin immediately to the east (approx. 1190
acres) was identified as a part of the Vail Meadows approval (refer to attachment 1,2 and
3). The offsite basin's drainage was mitigated by the construction of twin 120-inch culverts,
which exist today in Buttedield Stage Road and easterly in DePortola Road.
Also in 1988, Assessment District 159, which constructed many substantial regional
facilities in the south Temecula area, was approved and its E.I.R. No. 241 was certified.
This E.I.R. and the associated A.D. 159 documents identified a large basin (approx. 2239
acres) further to the east which would require the construction of a channel. This
channel known as the Butterfield Interceptor Channel diverts flows upstream of
Butterfieid Stage Road to the south towards Temecula Creek. As you know, A.D. 159
has provided many public improvements of regional significance in the south Temecula
area including Butte~eld Stage Road, Highway 79 and Temecula Creek. However, the
/n/and Empire Division
22690 Cactus Avenue.
Suite 300
Moreno Valley
California 92553*9024
t: 909.653.0234
f: 909.653.5308
wWW. keithco.com
· Page~2
November 4,
construction of the Butterfieid interceptor channel was never accomplished by the A.D. In
1996, when Newland Communities purchased the Pasee del sol project, The Keith
Companies discovered that the Butterfield interceptor channel had not been constructed.
With Newland wanting to move forward with the development of Paseo del Sol and
evidence that the construction of the interceptor channel improvements were subject to
delay, interim flood mitigation altematives were identified and approved on the Newland
property to protect it and potentially other downstream properties from flooding.
Ultimately an intedm detention facility was designed and constructed pursuant to
Riverside County Flood Control and City of Temecula reviev¢ and approval. (see
attachments 4, 5, 6, and 7).
On February 2, 1998 the City of Temecula Planning Commission approv~,d revisions to
Newland's Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24182 (VTM 24182) and confirmed the continued
presence of the intedm detention facility with Condition 27 stating that "... the basin or an
equivalent facility shall remain in place until such time that upstream drainage facilities are
constructed..." ( see attachment 8).
In conclusion, 'and in our opiniofl evidenced by the aforementioned approvals, Newland is in
compliance with all development criteria and conditions particularly as they relate to flooding
or drainage issues at Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79.
Should you have any questions regarding this subject, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
THE KEITH COMPANIES,'INC.
President-Inland Empire Division
RTR:ml
Enclosures
cc: Mr. James Delhamer
ITEM 12
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVA~j.~...__
CITY ATTORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City ManagedCity Council
Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning,~'?/~
December 11, 2001
Development Code Amendment (Planning Application 01-0566 - Secondary
Dwelling Units
PREPARED BY:
David Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCENO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR
SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING
APPLICATION 01-0566)
BACKGROUND: The Development Code was adopted by the City Council in 1995. Since
its adoption, the Code has been periodically amended to improve its clarity and to modify
various provisions as problems are identified. Recently, residents who own homes on large
lots that want to build second units in excess of 1,200 square feet have approached staff.
Analysis of this request indicates that to allow a larger unit on larger lots would be appropriate
and is unlikely to create significant adverse impacts.
State Law currently states that, unless a jurisdiction provides its own Second Unit standards, the
provisions of Section 65852 shall apply for all second units applications. The Legislature has
further indicated that second units are an important source of additional housing opportunities in
California. Section 65852.150 of the Government Code states that:
'~The Legislature finds and declares that second units are a valuable form of
housing in California. Second units provide housing for family members,
students, the elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others, at
below market prices within existing neighborhoods. Homeowners who create
second units benefit from added income, and an increased sense of security. It
is the intent of the Legislature that any second-unit ordinances adopted by local
agencies have the effect of providing for the creation of second units and that
provisions in these ordinances relating to matters including unit size, parking,
fees and other requirements, are not so arbitrary, excessive, or burdensome so
as to unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners to create second units in
zones in which they are authorized by local ordinance."
The City of Temecula currently regulates Second dwelling units through the provision of Section
17.06.060.M of the Temecula Municipal Code. However, the current City requirements do not
differentiate between small suburban lots and the larger lots. The requirements of the current
ordinance provisions and the proposed amendment are shown in the following table.
CURRENT ORDINANCE STAFF'S PROPOSAL
Allows Detached Units Yes Yes
Allows Attached Units Yes Yes
Maximum Unit Site 75% of primary unit and not to exceed:
On lots smaller than one .~ ---
~ 1,200 square feet
acre in size ~
..... 6r~"1-~-~-~"$~-'~(~-~"- 1,200 square feet ! .........................................................
or larger in size ~ 2,000 square feet
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this issues as part of PA01-0120. The analysis
determined that the proposed amendments, including those contained in PA01-0566, would not
result in any environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the General Plan. The Checklist indicated that the proposed amendments
would not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City's General Plan and
the supplemental analysis prepared for the original Development Code. As a result, the
Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make a determination that the potential
impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental Impact
Report for the General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
GENERAL PLAN CONCLUSIONS
The proposed amendments are determined to be consistent with the City's General Plan, the
General Plan Environmental Impact Report and State Planning and Zoning Law.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact is anticipated.
A'I-rACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
Proposed Ordinance -Page 3
Planning Commission Resolution -Page 7
Planning Commission Staff Report-Page 10
Information from the City Attorney - Page 11
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 01-
ORDINANCE NO. 01-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR
SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING APPLICATION
01-0566)
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such
general plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted General Plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearing on August 15,
2001, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the City
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law
and local ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula
Library, Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on __, 2001 to
consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map and the Temecula Municipal Code.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 17.06.050.M is hereby amended as follows:
A. Amend Subparagraph 3 to read as follows, "A secondary dwelling unit on
a residential lot may be either attached to or detached from the primary dwelling unit."
B. Amend Subparagraph 4 to read as follows: "A secondary dwelling unit on
a lot less than 1 acre shall not exceed 75 percent of the floor area of the primary dwelling unit
and shall not exceed 1,200 square feet."
C. Add a new Subparagraph 5 to read as follows, "A secondary dwelling unit
on a lot of 1 acre or greater shall not exceed not exceed 75 percent of the floor area of the
primary dwelling unit and shall not exceed 2,000 square feet."
D. Renumber Subparagraphs 5, 6 and 7 to 6, 7 and 8, respectively.
Section 2. The following definition in Chapter Section 17.34 are hereby amended to
read as follows: .... Secondary dwelling unit" means an additional dwelling unit to a primary
residence on a parcel zoned for single-family residence which may be rented and provides
complete independent living facilities for one or more persons."
Section 3. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 4. Environmental Compliance An Environmental Checklist was prepared for
this project to determine if the proposed amendments would result in any environmental impacts
beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan
and the supplemental analysis prepared for the original Development Code. The Checklist
indicated that the proposed amendments would not result in impacts beyond those originally
anticipated for the City General Plan and the supplemental analysis prepared for the original
Development Code. As a result, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
make a determination that the potential impacts of these changes were adequately addressed
by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and that no further
environmental analysis is required.
Section 5. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days
after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage; and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City
Council members voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated
in said City.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ._th day of ,2001.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 01- was dully introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the __th day of ,2001 and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
th day of __., 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNOIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR
SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING APPLICATION
01-0566)"
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 1995, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
City's Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City has identified a need to amend the adopted Development Code to
better address second dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment on
2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to, an did testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Approval. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
recommends that the City Council approve an ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Temecula amending Chapter 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code to modify the provisions
regulating the sizes of secondary dwelling units, that is substantially in the form attached to this
resolution as Exhibit A.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Environmental Checklist was prepared for
this project to determine if the proposed amendments would result in any environmental impacts
beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan.
The Checklist indicated that the proposed amendments would not result in impacts beyond
those originally anticipated for the City General Plan and the supplemental analysis prepared for
the original Development Code. As a result, the Planning Commission recommends that the
City Council make a determination that the potential impacts of these changes were adequately
addressed by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and that no further
environmental analysis is required.
Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 5th day of December, 2001.
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 5th day of
December, 2001, by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
December 5, 2001
Planning Application No. 01-0566 (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT)
Prepared by: Dave Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING
CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY
THE STANDARDS FOR SECOND DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING
APPLICATION 01-0566)"
BACKGROUND
Residents who own homes on large lots that want to build second units in excess of 1,200 square
feet have approached staff. Analysis of this request indicates that to allow a larger unit on larger lots
would be appropriate and is unlikely to create significant adverse impacts. As a result, the Planning
Commission is recommending that the Council consider modifying the current secondary dwelling
unit standards to allow larger units on larger lots.
State Law currently states that, unless a jurisdiction provides its own Second Unit standards, the
provisions of Section 65852 shall apply for all second units applications. A copy of the relevant
portions of State Law is included in Attachment No. 3. The State Legislature has further indicated
that second units are an important source of additional housing opportunities in California. Section
65852.150 of the Government Code states that:
"The Legislature finds and declares that second units are a valuable form of housing
in California. Second units provide housing for family members, students, the elderly,
in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others, at below market prices
within existing neighborhoods. Homeowners who create second units benefit from
added income, and an increased sense of security. It is the intent of the Legislature
that any second-unit ordinances adopted by local agencies have the effect of
providing for the creation of second units and that provisions in these ordinances
relating to matters including unit size, parking, fees and other requirements, are not
so arbitrary, excessive, or burdensome so as to unreasonably restrict the ability of
homeowners to create second units in zones in which they are authorized by local
ordinance.'
R:\Ordinances\Second Unit~staff report pc.doc
ANALYSIS
The City of Temecula currently regulates second dwelling units through the provision of Section
17.06.060.M of the Temecula Municipal Code. However, the current City requirements do not
differentiate between small suburban lots and the larger lots. Over the past year, staff has identified
a number of situations where the City's standards appear to unnecessarily restrict second units on
larger lots. As a result, staff believes that these provisions need to be modified to more reasonable
address second units on larger lots within the City.
Various proposed changes to the Development Code were presented to the Commission for
consideration on August 15, 2001. At that meeting, the Commission requested additional
information from the City Attorney on the legal requirements for second dwelling units and continued
to this item to allow for additional staff analysis. The City Attorney's written response is contained in
Attachment No. 4.
Staff has reviewed this request and believes that allowing larger secondary units on larger lots is
appropriate. As a result, staff is recommending that the City adopt a variable standard based upon
the size of the parcel. Staff's initial suggestion is to differentiate the two size categories at the one-
acre point, with larger units being allowed on parcels one acre and larger. The required yard and
setback provisions will still need to be met. The requirements of the current ordinance provisions
and the proposed amendment are shown in the following table.
CURRENT ORDINANCE STAFF'S PROPOSAL
Allows Detached Units Yes Yes
Allows Attached Units Yes Yes
Maximum Unit Site 75% of primary unit and not to exceed:
..... ................................................................ i ...................................... 7 ..................
acre in size." 1,200 square feet
On lots that are one acre 1,200 square feet .~
~ 2,000 square feet
or larger in size ~
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this issues as part of PA01-0120. The analysis
determined that the proposed amendments, including those contained in PA01-0566, would not
result in any environmental impacts beyond those impacts identified in the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the General Plan. The Checklist indicated that the proposed amendments would
not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City's General Plan and the
supplemental analysis prepared for the original Development Code.
GENERAL PLAN CONCLUSIONS
The proposed amendment to the regulation controlling Secondary Dwelling Units are consistent with
the City's General Plan, the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, and State Planning and
Zoning Law.
R:\Ordinances\Second Unit'staff report pc.doc
2
FINDINGS
The proposed Development Code Amendment are compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
The proposed Development Code Amendment will not have an adverse effect on the
community because they remain consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted
General Plan.
Attachments:
PC Resolution - Blue Page 4
Exhibit A - Proposed Ordinance - Blue Page 7
Information from the City Attorney- Blue Page 10
Excerpts from the Government Code - Blue Page 11
R:\Ordinances\Second Unit~staff report pc.doc
3
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
INFORMATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
Nov-14-ZO01 OZ:O?pm From-RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 714 ggO 6Z30 T-3§~ P.OgZ ~-~U~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
MEMORANDUM
William P. Curley Fa
November 2, 2001
Temecula: Res~dental Second Units
file ~0: 11086.0006
Pursuant to your request, I have reviewed and analyzed California's statutory scheme and
case law per*alning to residential second units. I bare also reviewed and evaluated the
provisions of the City's Municipal Code regarding secondary dwelling uniB, and cm~clude that
the City's provisions are in compliance with the statutory scheme set tbrth in the Government
Code. Further, I recommend that the City require applicants for second units to record a
covenant regarding owner-occupancy as a condition of approval of their devetopment plan-
The Legislature has set forth regulations regarding residential second units in
Government Code §§ 65852.1 et seq. Oovemment Code § 65852.1, which pertains to dwelling
units for senior citizen occupancy, provides, in pertinent part:
"No~rithstanding Section 65906, any city.., may issue a zoning variance, special use
permit, or conditional use permit for a dwelling uffitto be consU-Uctod, or which is
attached to or detached fxom, a primary residence on a parcel zoned for a singlc-f~mny
residence, if the dwelling unit is intended 1bt the sole occupancy of one adult or two adult
persons who are 62 years of age or over, and the area of floor space of the attached
dwelling unit does not exceed 30 percent of the existing living area or the area of the
floor space of the detached dwelling unit does not exceed 1,200 square feet."
In effect, Section 65852.1 allows cities to do what they would otherwise not be able to do, by
making it easier for cities to grant zoning variances for dwelling units intended to be occupied by
senior citizens. (Wilson v. City of Laguna Beach (1992) 6 Cal. App. 4th 543,546 fla.4.)
Oovemmeat Code § 65852.2 encourages local governments to enact thek own ordinances
allowing and regulating second units in single-family and multifamily residential zones, where
they would otherwise be prohibited. (Id. at 545-46.) Section 65852.2 establishes a three-option
approach that local governments may take regarding the regulation of second units: (1) adoption
of an ordinance pro~rllng for the creation of second units and establishing various criteria for
approving them (subdivision (a)); (2) a ban on all second units after making specific findings,
including findings regarding the adverse impacts that such units would have on the public health,
safety and welfare (subdivision (c)); or (3) in the event that no ordinance has been adopted in
accordance with subdivisions (a) or (c), a special use or conditional use permit for a second unit
must be granted if the unit meets the requirements enumerated in subdivision (b). In contrast to
Section 65852.1, Section 65852.2 effectively requixes a city to do what it would not want to do,
by requiring a city to allow second units and process such applications under ira own ordinance,
Nov-14-ZO01 02:0?pm From-RiCHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 714 gOO 6ZSO T-359
William P. Curley
November 2, 2001
Page 2
or pursuant to the enumerated provisions of subdivision Co) (assuming the city has not banned all
second units pursuant to subdivision (c)). (See id. at 546 fn.4.) The Legislature has declared the
policies regarding residential second units in Section 65852.150:
"[S]econd units are a valuable form of homing in California- Second units
provide housing for family members, students, the elderly, in-home health care providers,
the disabled, and others, at below market prices within existing neighborhoods.
Homeowners who create second un.its benefit from added income, and an increased sense
of security.
It is the intent of the Legislature that.., provisions in these ordinances relating to
matters including unit size, parking, fees and other requirements, are not so arbitrary,
excessive, or burdensome so as to unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners to
create second units in zones in wtfich they are authorized by local ordinance."
Temeeula's Municipal Code ("T.M.C.") provisions regarding dwelling units for senior
citizen occupancy are consistent with Government Code § 65852.1. The definition of"~mnny
flat housing" set forth in T.M.C. § 17.34.010 is identical to the definition set forth in
Government Code § 65852.1. Although the Municipal Code does not set forth comprehensive
provisions regarding granny fiats, the Code includes granny fiats within a number of broader
provisions, including setbacks (Section 17.06.050), parking (Section 17.24.040), and permitted
uses within residential districts (Section 17.06.030).
The City has also adopted provisions regarding residential second u~ts, codified at
T.M.C. § 17.06.0500v0, entitled "Secondary Dwelling Units." Accordingly, the City is not
obligated to process second unit applications as set forth in subdivision Co) of Oovemment Code
§ 65852.2, but can apply the provisions ofT.M.C. § 17.06.050(M). Section 17.06.050(M)
requires that a development plan be submitted for a secondary dwelling unit, and sets forth the
following criteria regarding secondary dwelling units: (1) second units are permitted in all
residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached
dwelling, and the property owner of the existing dwelling must occupy either the primary
residence or the second unit (subdivision (M)(1)); (2) second units may be rented, but may not be
sold (subdivision (M)(2)); (3) the floor area of attached and detached units shall be between four
hundred and one thousand two hundred square feet (subdivisions 0V0(3) and (4)); (4) the
application for the second unit must be signed by the owner of the parcel and the primary
dwelling (subdivision (M)(5)); ($) the second unit shall be compatible with the design of the
primary dwelling and surrounding neighborhood in terms of height, bulk and mass, landscaping,
and architectural materials (subdivision (IV0(6)); and (6) the unit shall be provided with off-street
parking in accorchnce with Chapter 17.24t of the Municipal Code (subdivision (M)(7)).
~ According to Section 17.24.040 of Chapter 17.24, second units require 1 covered parking space for 2
bedroom unitS or less, and 2 covered parking spaces for 3 bedroom units or more.
Nov-14-ZO01 O2:08pm ;rom-RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 714 ;go ;230 T-35; P.OO4/OlO
William P. Curley
November 2, 2001
Page 3
Pursuant to Govermnent Code § 65852.2(a),2 cities have broad discretion in the specific
criteria they may adopt for the approval of second un~ts. (Desmond v. County of Contra Costa
(1993) 21 Cal. App. 4th 330, 340-41 .) The criteria set foxth in T.M.C. § 17.06.050(M') are
consistent with and authorized under Section 65852.2(a). T.M.C. § 17.06.050(M)(3) and (4)
regarding the permissible floor area of attached and detached units also comply with subdivision
(d) of Section 65852.2, which requires that the minimum size of second ,nits be at least an
efficiency unit, which is defined in Health and Safety Code § 17958.1 as having a minimum
floor area of 150 square feet- Lastly, the parking requirements set forth in T.M.C. § 17.24.040
appear to comply with the parking requirements of Section 65852.2(e)?
One issue for the City to consider is the requirement of T.M.C. § 17.06.050(M)(I) that
the properV/owner and applicant for the second unit mu~ occupy either the primary residence or
the second unit. Case law has upheld'an owner-occupancy condition r~nning with the land as
eonsistem with the legislative intent and history behind Government Code § 65852.2, which is to
create more affordable housing with a minimal disruption of neighborhood stability and the
character of f~mily neighborhoods, and to discourage speculation and absentee ownership.
(Sounhein v. City of San Dimas (1996) 47 Cal. App. 4th 1181, 1190-92.) While Section
17.06.050(M)(1) does inclade an owner-ocoupancy condition, nothing in that provision requires
that such condition nm with the land. Accordingly, I recommend that, as a condition of approval
of the development plan for the second unit, the City require that the property owner record a
covenant that either the primary residence or second unit will bc occupied by the owner.
Although owner-occupancy requirements have been upheld, ~ities may not limit the
occupancy of second units to only relatives or caregivers. Jn Coalition Advocating £ega]
Housing Options v. City of Santa Monica (2001) 88 Cal. App. 4th 451, the California Court of
Appeal invalidated Santa Monica's zoning ordinance, which allowed the creation of second units
in single-family residential zones, but limited occupancy to the property owner or his or her
dependent, or a caregiver for the property owner or dependent. The court found the ordinance
anconstitutional on both right of privacy and equal protection grounds. Specifically, the court
explained that the right to privacy includes the right to be left alone in our homes and to choose
with whom to live. (/d. at 460-61.) In addition, the court found that the occupancy restrictions
2 Government Code § 65852.2(a) provides, in pertinent part:
"Any local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units in single-family
and multifamily residential zoneS. The ordinance:
(1) May designate areas within.the jurisdiction of the local agency where second units may be
permitted ....
(2) May impose ~andards on second units which include, but are not ~imited to, parking, height,
setback, lot coverage, architectural review, and maximum size ora unit.
(3) May provide that second units do not exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which the
second unit is located.-.
(4) May establish a process for the issuance of a conditional use permit for second units."
a Sectioo 65g$2.2(e) provides that parking requirements shall not exceed one parking space per unit or
bedroom, and that off-street parking shall be permitted in setback areas or through tandem parking.
Nov-14-ZO01 02:08pm From-RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 714 ggO 6Z30
William P. Curley II~
November 2, 2001
Page 4
were not rationally related to the interests of preservation of neighborhood character or the
prevention of undue concentration o£populafion mad traffic. (Id. at 461-63.) Thus, while the
City's requirement that the owner occupy either the primarg residence or second unit is
permissible, the Cit~ may not validly impose any other occupaacy l~rnltations.
Enclosures
67006B.1
EXCERPT OF STATE PLANNING AND ZONING LAW
65852.150. Local second unit ordinances
The Legislature finds and declares that second units are a valuable form of housing
in California. Second units provide housing for family members, students, the
elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others, at below market
prices within existing neighborhoods. Homeowners who create second units benefit
from added income, and an increased sense of security.
It is the intent of the Legislature that any second-unit ordinances adopted by local
agencies have the effect of providing for the creation of second units and that
provisions in these ordinances relating to matters including unit size, parking, fees
and other requirements, are not so arbitrary, excessive, or burdensome so as to
unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners to create second units in zones in
which they are authorized by local ordinance.
65852.2. Standards to evaluate proposed second residential units
(a)
Any local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units
in single-family and multifamily residential zones. The ordinance:
(1)
May designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency where
second units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be
based on criteria, which may include, but are not limited to, the
adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of second units
on traffic flow.
(2)
May impose standards on second units which include, but are not
limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review,
and maximum size of a unit.
(3)
May provide that second units do not exceed the allowable density for
the lot upon which the second unit is located, and that second units are
a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and
zoning designation for the lot.
(4)
May establish a process for the issuance of a conditional use permit for
second units.
(5)
Shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance,
policy, or program to limit residential growth.
(b)
(1) When a local agency which has not adopted an ordinance governing
second units in accordance with subdivision (a) or (c), receives its first
application on or after July 1, 1983, for a conditional use permit pursuant to
this subdivision, the local agency shall accept the application and approve or
disapprove the application pursuant to this subdivision unless it adopts an
ordinance in accordance with subdivision (a) or (c) within 120 days after
receiving the application. Notwithstanding Section 65901, every local agency
shall grant a special use or a conditional use permit for the creation of a
second unit if the second unit complies with all of the following:
(A) The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented.
(B) The lot is zoned for single-family or multifamily use.
(C) The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling.
(D) The second unit is either attached to the existing dwelling and
located within the living area of the existing dwelling or detached
from the existing dwelling and located on the same lot as the
existing dwelling.
(E) The increased floor area of an attached second unit shall not
exceed 30 percent of the existing living area.
(F) The total area of floor space for a detached second unit shall
not exceed 1,200 square feet.
(G) Requirements relating to height, setback, lot coverage,
architectural review, site plan review, fees, charges, and other
zoning requirements generally applicable to residential
construction in the zone in which the property is located.
(H) Local building code requirements which apply to detached
dwellings, as appropriate.
(I) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage
disposal system is being used, if required.
(2)
No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the
denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision.
(3)
This subdivision establishes the maximum standards that local
agencies shall use to evaluate proposed second units on lots zoned for
residential use which contain an existing single-family dwelling. No
additional standards, other than those provided in this subdivision or
subdivision (a), shall be utilized or imposed, except that a local agency
may require an applicant for a permit issued pursuant to this
subdivision to be an owner-occupant.
(4)
No changes in zoning ordinances or other ordinances or any changes
in the general plan shall be required to implement this subdivision. Any
local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or general plan to
incorporate the policies, procedures, or other provisions applicable to
the creation of second units if these provisions are consistent with the
limitations of this subdivision.
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(5)
A second unit which conforms to the requirements of this subdivision
shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon
which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use which
is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for
the lot. The second units shall not be considered in the application of
any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth.
No local agency shall adopt an ordinance which totally precludes second
units within single-family and multifamily zoned areas unless the ordinance
contains findings acknowledging that the ordinance may limit housing
opportunities of the region and further contains findings that specific adverse
impacts on the public health, safety, and welfare that would result from
allowing second units within single-family and multifamily zoned areas justify
adopting the ordinance.
A local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements
for both attached and detached second units. No minimum size for a second
unit, or size based upon a percentage of the existing dwelling, shall be
established by ordinance for either attached or detached dwellings which
does not permit at least an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance
with local development standards.
Parking requirements for second units shall not exceed one parking space
per unit or per bedroom. Additional parking may be required provided that a
finding is made that the additional parking requirements are directly related to
the use of the second unit and are consistent with existing neighborhood
standards applicable to existing dwellings. Off-street parking shall be
permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or
through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in
setback area or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or
regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions, or that it is not
permitted anywhere else in the jurisdiction.
Fees charged for the construction of second units shall be determined in
accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000).
This section does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less
restrictive requirements for the creation of second units.
Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinances adopted pursuant to
subdivision (a) or (c) to the Department of Housing and Community
Development within 60 days after adoption.
(i)
As used in this section, the following terms mean:
(1) "Living area," means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit
including basements and attics but does not include a garage or any
accessory structure.
(2) "Local agency" means a city, county, or city and county, whether
general law or chartered.
(3) For purposes of this section, "neighborhood" has the same meaning as
set forth in Section 65589.5.
(4)
Section 65589.5(4) "Neighborhood" means a planning area commonly
identified as such in a community's planning documents, and
identified as a neighborhood by the individuals residing and working
wth n the ne ghborhood ....
"Second unit" means an attached or a detached residential dwelling
unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or
more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping,
eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family
dwelling is situated. A second unit also includes the following:
(A)
An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of Health and
Safety Code.
Section 17958.1. Notwithstanding Sections 17922, 17958, and
17958.5, a city or county may, by ordinance, permit efficiency units for
occupancy by no more than two persons which have a minimum floor
area of 150 square feet and which may also have partial kitchen or
bathroom facilities, as specified by the ordinance. In all other
respects, these efficiency units shall conform to minimum standards
for those occupancies otherwise made applicable pursuant to this
part ....
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the
Health and Safety Code.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
DIRECTOR OF FINAI~C~.
CITY MANAGER ~.
oF TEMECULA
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/Ci~ ~G,~ncil
Debbie Ubnoske'~Director of Planning
December 11,2001
Development Code Amendment (Planning Application 01-0566 - Secondary
Dwelling Units)
At the December 5, 2001 meeting the Planning Commission considered this item, and is
recommending that the City Council not modify the Municipal Code to allow larger secondary
dwelling units on larger lots. In making their decision, the Commission stated that allowing
larger Secondary Dwelling Units would result in the following:
· A situation that would be inconsistent with the intent of State law;
· Additional traffic, parking, noise, and public safety impacts;
· A level of development inconsistent with the surrounding area; and
· Additional opportunities renting and create additional overcrowding problems.
Some members of the Planning Commission also that the need for the amendment had not be
sufficiently justified and expressed an additional concern that Secondary Dwelling Units are
even allowed within the City. A copy of the revised Planning Commission Resolution is
attached to this memorandum.
DRAFT
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-042
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL NOT APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR
SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING
APPLICATION 01-0566)"
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 1995, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
the City's Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City has identified a need to amend the adopted Development Code
to better address second dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment on
December 5, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the
City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, an did testify either in support or
opposition to this matter;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recommendation. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission
hereby recommends that the City Council not approve an ordinance amending Chapter 17
of the Temecula Municipal Code to modify the provisions regulating the size of Secondary
Dwelling Units within the City of Temecula.
Section 2. Reasons for the Recommendation of Denial. In making this
recommendation for denial to the City Council, the Planning Commission stated the
following reasons.
A. Allowing larger secondary dwelling units on large lots would create a
situation that is not consistent with the intent of State law. The Commission felt that the
creation of a rental income possibility for the property owner was not intended by the State
Legislature.
B. The larger secondary dwelling units would result in significant
negative impacts to existing neighborhoods. Specifically, that these larger units would result
in significant additional traffic, parking, noise, and public safety impacts.
C. That larger secondary dwelling units would result in an intensity of use
and development that would be inconsistent with the character of large lot areas within the
City.
D. That larger secondary dwelling units would result in additional
opportunities for rental housing and the potential for increases in overcrowding.
E. That the need for the proposed amendment to allow larger Secondary
Dwelling Units had not been demonstrated and that insufficient justification for this
ordinance changes had been provided.
Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 5~h day of December, 2001.
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 5th day of
December, 2001, by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 4
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 1
ABSTAIN: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Chiniaeff, Matthewson, Ohlasso,
Telesio
Guerriero
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
DRAFT