The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About101999 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 II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE OCTOBER 19, 1999 - 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 10:00 P.M. :6:30'.P.M. '.Clos'ed'.SeSsion of the City Council andthe Redevelopment Agency, in the Main Conferenc~;:Room, pursuant to GovernmentCode Sections: Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 42230 Sixth Street (APN 922-053-004). The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula/Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Wedeking. Under :negotiation are .the price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed t0be acquired. The City/Agency negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James '.O'Grady, and John Meyer. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 41735 Main Street (APN 922-034-031 ). The negotiating parties are the City of TemeculalRedevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Futcher. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The City/Agency negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer CALLTO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 99-27 Resolution: No. 99-100 Jordan Bellino Pastor Sofia Sadler of Harvester Church of Temecula Councilmember Lindemans R N~genda\101999 ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Ford 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, then (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 Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Resolution Approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:~Agenda\l 01999 2 4 6 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the minutes of August 24, 1999; 3.2 Approve the minutes of September 14, 1999; 3.3 Approve the minutes of September 28, 1999. Establishment of Interim Fees for Massa.qe Establishments and Massa.qe Practitioners RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING INTERIM APPLICATION FEES FOR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS AND MASSAGE PRACTITIONER LICENSES Tract Map No. 23101-6 (located south of La Serena Way, east of Meadows Parkway, west of Butterfield Stage Road, and north of Rancho California Road in the Margarita Villa.qe Specific Plan No. 199 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve Tract Map No. 23101-6 in conformance with Conditions of Approval; 5.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 5.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Security for In-Tract Public Improvements in Tract No. 24131-3 (located northwesterly of Meadows Parkway at Leena Way) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials securities for In-Tract public improvements in Tract No. 24131-3; 6.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the developer and surety. R:%Agenda\101999 3 Authorization to solicit Construction Bids for the Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements Project - Project No. PW98-17 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Depadment of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Project No. PW98-17. 8 9 Grant of Easement to Southern California Edison - Paloma Del Sol Park RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve and execute the easement document in favor of Southern California Edison for the operations and maintenance of an underground electrical service to the wireless communications system located within Paloma Del Sol Park; 8.2 Authorize the City Clerk to record the document. Joint Use Agreement - Chaparral Hi.qh School Pool RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve in its substantial form the Joint Use Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Unified School District for the lease and joint use of the proposed swimming pool facility at Chaparral High School. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:~,genda\101999 4 TEMEC"ULA C:O'MMUNIT,~;:SERVICES.DISTRICT .;MEETING '~i:!!;.;'.';::.' '. '.:;!."~iH;:::.'.: '. *******~~******~**~**********************************************************~********************* " ' · ':i; '.;~,;.~" .' "'~ "' ':"~ ' :!:!:i'l~i!~ii;; .... ; .: : ' ..... "' ' Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 99-01 Resolution: No. CSD 99-14 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberrs, Stone, Comerhcero 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 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 called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOM M E N DATI ON: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 14, 1999; 1.2 Approve the minutes of September 28, 1999. Award of Construction Contract for Bike Lane Si.qnin.q and Striping - Project No. PW 99-02 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Award a construction contract for Bike Lane Signing and Striping - Project No. PW 99-02CSD - to JP Striping in the amount of $20,807.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract; R :~Agenda\101999 5 2.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,080.70 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. DISTRICT BUSINESS 3 Naming of City Park RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve a recommendation from the Community Services Commission to name the 10-acre park site located on Meadows Parkway - Temeku Hills Park. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next adjourned regular meeting: November 9, 1999, scheduled to follow the City Council Consent Calendar, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\l 01999 6 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 99-01 Resolution: No. RDA 99-17 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Karel Lindemans presiding ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans 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 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 September 14, 1999; 1.2 Approve the minutes of September 28, 1999. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next adjourned regular meeting: November 9, 1999, scheduled to follow the Community Services District Meeting, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~genda\101999 7 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 10 Plannin,q Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol) and Plannin,cl Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement for the Villages @ Paseo del Sol - Community Shoppin.q Center) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified and find that a subsequent EIR is not required; 10.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219) BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK R:~Agenda\101999 8 10.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219) AMENDING LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1, 6, 8, 27, AND 36; AMENDING THE ALIGNMENT AND CONFIGURATION OF CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; AMENDING THE ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 1 FROM 32.3 ACRES TO 35.0 ACRES; AMENDING ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 FROM 36.3 ACRES TO 34.3 ACRES; DIVIDING PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 UNITS) AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DU/AC, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 UNITS) RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 590 TO 508; AMENDING THE TEXT TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8 AND AMENDING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO INCORPORATE THE VILLAGE VIGNETTES AND SENIOR AMENITIES 10.4 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED VILLAGES @ PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, PLANNING AREA I(A) & I(B) OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 AMENDMENT NO. 7 11 Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0274 11.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance: R:~,genda\101999 9 12 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF YNEZ ROAD WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND SOUTH OF OVERLAND DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274) Development A.qreement with Pala Rainbow LLC RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0273; 12.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) COUNCIL BUSINESS 13 Temecula Valley Playhouse Community Service Fundin.q Pro.qram Request RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Award a Community Service Funding grant in the amount of $15,000 to the Temecula Valley Playhouse for their community service programs. 14 Community Services Commission Appointment RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Appoint one applicant to serve on the Community Services Commission for a full three-year term through October 10, 2002. 15 Woodside Homes Reimbursement Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Oral Report. R:'C, genda\l 01999 10 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next adjourned regular meeting: November 9, 1999, 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\101999 11 ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 24, 1999 Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC The Open Session of the City Council meeting convened at 7:00 P.M. Councilmembers: Comerchero, Roberrs, Stone, and Ford. Councilmember: Lindemans. The prelude music was provided by Kurt Jordan. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mitzvah Williams of Congregation Hauvurim. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Councilman Roberrs. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS National Transit Appreciation Day Proclamation Mayor Ford presented the proclamation to Councilman Lindemans. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Comerchero advised that he has been appointed to the Small Business Advisory Committee to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), noting that future discussions will include the impacts AQMD regulations are having on small business and that potential mitigation measure to these impacts will be discussed as well. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. R:\Minutes\082499 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of June 22, 1999. Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-85 A RESOL--~ITION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Employment A.qreement for City Manager RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the Employment Agreement for the City Manager and authorize the Mayor to execute the Employment Agreement on behalf of the City. Substitute Faithful Performance Warranty Security for Public Improvements in Tract No. 21818 (located westerly of the intersection of Via Notre at Kahwea Road) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept Substitute Faithful Performance Warranty security for the Public Improvements in Tract No. 21818; 5.2 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty security on file for the Public Improvements; 5.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-1 (located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-1. 6.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. R:\M i n utes\082499 Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-F ('located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities for street and drainage, and water and sewer system improvements in Tract No. 27827-F. 7.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Parcel Map No. 29175 ('located east of Mar.qarita Road between Winchester Road and Verdes Lane) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 29175 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 8.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 8.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Tract Map No. 28510 (located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Mar.qarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 9.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 9.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. 10 Tract Map No. 28510-1 ('located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Margarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-1 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 10.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 10.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. R :\M in utes\082499 11 Tract Map No. 28510-2 (located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Margarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-2 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 11.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 11.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. 12 Tract Map No. 28510-3 (located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Mar~larita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-3 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 12.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 12.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. 13 Professional Services Agreement - GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. - Margarita Road Improvements, Pauba Road to Highway 79 South - Project No. PW99-01 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the agreement with GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. to provide professional engineering and design services for the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates to construct Margarita Road Improvements, Pauba Road to Highway 79 South --Project No. PW99-01 - for an amount not to exceed $199,700.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of 10% of the contract or $19,970.00. 14 Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter Research Contract RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the contract between the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, and the American Vineyard Foundation (AVF). (Pulled for separate discussion; see page 5.) R :\M in utes\082499 4 15 Second Readin.q of Ordinance No. 99-22 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 8.12.020 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCES, AMENDING SECTION 8.12.160 RELATING TO EMERGENCY ABATEMENT AND ALTERNATE ABATEMENT ACTIONS, AND ADDING SECTION 10.08.075 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE DEPOSIT OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DEBRIS, ROCKS OR DIRT UPON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY OR PROPERTY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE OWNER 16 Second Readin.q of Ordinance No. 99-23 RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-23 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY TITLE 16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLED SUBDIVISIONS, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 94-08, ORDINANCE NO. 92-14 AND SECTION NO. 32 OF ORDINANCE NO. 90-04 AND ADOPTING NEW TITLE 16 TITLED SUBDIVISIONS FOR INCLUSION INTO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (Mayor Ford abstained with regard to Section 16.09.240 of this Ordinance.) MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-13, 15 and 16. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Ford who abstained with regard to Section 16.09.240 of Ordinance No. 99-23 - Item No. 16 (Item No. 14 was pulled for separate discussion; see below.) Consent Calendar Item considered under separate discussion 14 Glassv-Win.qed Sharpshooter Research Contract RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the contract between the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, and the American Vineyard Foundation (AVF). Councilman Roberts abstained with regard to this Item. R :\M in utes\082499 Assistant City Manager O'Grady presented the staff report (of record), noting that all City/County funds will be dispersed toward research efforts; that no funding will be utilized for overhead; and that the County Board of Supervisors approved a like agreement with AVF. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who abstained. At 7:12 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:21 P.M., the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council business. Reconvened to re,clular agenda order COUNCIL BUSINESS 17 Award of Construction Contract for I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Winchester Road - Project No. PW98-07 RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Award a construction contract for the I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Winchester Road - Project No. PW98-07 - to E.L. Yeager Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of $544,329.40 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 17.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $54,432.94 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material, including the supplemental material), advising that this contract has a 25-day working period to assure the improvements are complete prior to the mall opening and, therefore, this contract includes night work and prohibits closures of through lanes during the improvements. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 18 Award of Construction Contract for 1-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Rancho California Road - Project No. PW98-08 RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Award a construction contract for the I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Rancho California Road - Project No. PW98-08 - to Riverside Construction Company in the amount of $50,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 18.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $45,000.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Public Works Director Hughes presented the staff report (as per agenda material, including the supplemental material). R:\Minutes\082499 MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 19 Appeal of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Denial to Install Stop Si.qns on Via Cordoba for Speed Control RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Deny a request for multi-way stop controls along Via Cordoba at Corte Zorita, Loma Linda Road, and Corte BravoNia Saltio intersections; 19.2 Provide direction to the Public Works Traffic Division to establish a standard policy for addressing speeding problems in residential areas to be approved by the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and City Council, respectively. Mayor Ford abstained with regard to this item. By way of PowerPoint and video, Public Works Director Hughes presented and clarified the staff report (of record), referencing speed violations on Via Cordoba, speed survey, and use of stop signs and noting that the use of stop signs, at this particular location, would not solve the speeding concern but would create an additional problem of individuals violating the stop signs. Mr. Hughes briefly commented on various devices/methods which will be considered and potentially recommended in a City-wide policy for all residential areas throughout the City. In an effort to address the Via Cordoba concerns, Mr. Hughes recommended the use of striping in order to create the appearance of narrower lanes as well as additional law enforcement. As done in Sister City Voorburg, Councilman Lindemans suggested striping the bike lane red which as well would create the appearance of narrower lanes. In light of the length of this street, Councilman Roberts expressed concern with Via Cordoba being utilized as a bypass road. Mr. Roberts, echoed by Councilman Comerchero, also commented on the potential traffic impacts the upcoming Wolf Creek Development may have on Via Cordoba and requested that staff address that issue. The following residents spoke in support of multi-way stop controls at intersections along Via Cordoba: Mr. Robert Purmort 45099 Corte Valle Mr. Charles Hankley 31745 Via Cordoba Ms. Sheri Hancock 31520 Via Cordoba Ms. Christina Hill 31950 Via Cordoba Ms. Janet Dixon 31860 Via Cordoba Mr. Frank Romero no address given Mr. Mitchell Brasga 31586 Loma Linda Road Mr. Tom McGuire 31535 Via Cordoba R:\M in utes\082499 The above-mentioned individuals spoke in support of the stop signs for the following reasons and as well offered the following resolutions to mitigate the speeding concern along Via Cordoba: - Via Cordoba a curved street creating a safety issue - Speeding concern primarily at the bottom of the street - Driveways along Via Cordoba are sloped Future impact from the Wolf Creek Development Offered resolutions - install stop signs - additional law enforcement - speed bumps - make the east end of Via Cordoba a cul-de-sac - barriers - install traffic circles Because the warrant analysis determined the multi-way stop controls on Via Cordoba as unwarranted, Mr. Mario Carvajal, 31645 Via Cordoba, spoke in opposition to the installation of such signs. With regard to the previous installation of speed bumps on Pina Colada, Councilman Roberrs noted that the use of speed bumps has had a nominal impact on speed reduction but that it has had a significant impact on lowering those residents' property values. Mr. Roberts noted that the installation of stop signs at Starlight Ridge had a positive impact on speed reduction. With regard to Via Cordoba, he suggested that the use of traffic circles be explored by staff and if such use were not feasible in this particular location, stop signs should be installed. Councilman Lindemans reiterated his suggestion to paint the bicycle path red and as well spoke in support of staff exploring the use traffic circles at this particular location and that if such use would not be feasible, stop signs should be installed. Echoing his fellow Councilmembers' comments, Councilman Comerchero suggested that staff review the use of traffic circles and that the matter be readdressed by the City Council within two weeks. With regard to the use of stop signs, Mr. Comerchero relayed his opposition to such installation if it has been determined that such signs are not warranted. While staff is exploring the use of traffic circles on Via Cordoba, Public Works Director Hughes recommended the use of clearly marked, temporary traffic circle devices. Councilman Roberts suggested that the Public Works City Council Subcommittee (comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilman Roberts) address this issue and receive an update from staff within a month and that an update as well be provided to the Homeowners Association. R :\M in utes\082499 Mayor Pro Tem Stone commended staff on the informative staff report and presentation with regard to this item and reiterated the need to formulate a resolution to the concern, viewing the use of traffic circles as a positive method. Mr. Stone as well introduced the acronym STERN (Speed Termination Entering Residential Neighborhoods) and requested that additional law enforcement be visible throughout residential neighborhoods and that for the next 30 days a weekly toll be provided as to speeding tickets issued at Via Cordoba. MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved that while staff is formulating a City-wide policy with regard to multi-way stop controls, staff install two to three temporary traffic circles on Via Cordoba with the exact location to be determined by the Public Works Department. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Ford who abstained. Although having abstained with regard to this particular issue, Mayor Ford commended the City Council on its decision and encouraged staff to review how collector roadways influence residential neighborhoods. At 8:49 P.M., Mayor Ford called a recess and reconvened the meeting at 9:02 P.M. 20 Consideration of Sponsorship Requests RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve funding for the Rod Run in the amount up to $25,000 for actual City- support costs; 20.2 Approve funding for the Frontier Days Rodeo in the amount of $10,000 plus actual City-support costs up to the amount of $6,500; 20.3 Approve funding for the Great Temecula Tractor Race in the amount of $10,000 plus actual City-support costs up to the amount of $14,100; 20.4 Appropriate an amount not to exceed $10,000 to provide an audit of the Temecula Town Association's Financial Statements. Assistant City Manager O'Grady presented the staff report (as per agenda material), advising that if staff recommendation were approved, the Council would have to appropriate additional funds from the unallocated General Fund Reserves and that any funding approved in excess of the recommendation would as well require additional allocation to the General Fund Reserves. Councilman Lindemans spoke in opposition to the City funding audits for these organizations. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone, Councilman Comerchero clarified the Council Subcommittee's (comprised of Councilmembers Comerchero and Roberts) rationale to the above-mentioned recommendation and noted that it would be financially responsible of the City to conduct periodic review, by way of an audit, of those organizations receiving City funding. Viewing these events such as the Rod Run as major sources of tourism to the City, Mayor Ford relayed his concern with expecting these non-profit organizations to pay for unanticipated City support expenses for Police and Fire. Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested that specific language such as unless mitigated by a City Council majority vote be incorporated for these non-profit organization agreements. R:\M in utes\082499 Finance Director Roberts noted that the scope and detail of the audit for these non-profit organizations would depend size as well as dollars funded. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation as amended by Mayor Pro Tem Stone; see page 9. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 21 Appointment of an Ad hoc Subcommittee to evaluate the Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Proposal and report to the City Council with recommendations RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Appoint an Ad hoc Subcommittee to evaluate the proposed annexation of the Roripaugh Ranch area to the City of Temecula and determine if the City should commit to being the lead agency in an assessment district for the construction of improvements for Butterfield Stage Road. It is further recommended that after this committee meets and analyzes the issues associated with this project, that the committee report its findings back to the City Council with recommendations. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to appoint Councilmembers Comerchero and Roberts. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 22 Community Service Funding Pro.clram Ad hoc Committee Selection RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the Community Service Funding Program Ad hoc Committee to review and approve applications received for that program. MOTION: Mayor Ford moved to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilman Comerchero. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 23 Award of Contract for P.C. Workstations RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Award a contract for Pentium based computer workstations to Custom Built Solutions of Walnut, California, in the amount of $149,095.00. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 24 City Council Meetin¢l Schedule - October 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Direct the City Clerk to reschedule the regular City Council Meeting of October 12, 1999 to October 5, 1999, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. R:\Minutes\082499 10 MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson advised that the additional improvements to the Rancho California Road Interchange, adding two northbound and two southbound on-ramps, are in the process and should be completed within the next 45 to 60 days. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT No additional comments. ADJOURNMENT At 9:30 P.M., Mayor Ford formally adjourned the City Council meeting to Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula California. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\082499 11 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER '14, '1999 CLOSED SESSION A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 6:30 P.M., in the Main Conference Room. It was duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Session 54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 42291 Sixth Street (APN 922-051-011). The negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Mr. Ciais. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The Agency negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to this matter, the City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City based on existing facts and circumstances. The Open Session of the City Council meeting convened at 7:00 P.M. Present: Councilmembers: Comerchero, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, and Ford. Absent: Councilmember: None. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Inland Valley Youth Symphony directed by Dr. Seymour Rubenstein. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Rabbi Yitzchok Hurwitz of Chabad of Temecula Valley. ALLEGIANCE The audience was-led-in the Flag salute by Mayor Pro Tem Stone. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Introduction of the Voorburg Banker Delegation Mayor Ford introduced the Voorburg Banker delegates who, in turn, expressed their appreciation to the City and the host families for having had the opportunity to visit the City of Temecula. R:\Minutes\091499 Recognition of Officer Pino As the City's first motorcycle officer, Mayor Ford presented to Senior Officer Pino a Certificate of Appreciation for his contributions to traffic safety, public education, and dedicated service. Presentation of the Good Samaritan Award Commending Mr. and Mrs. Summers on their good deed act, Mayor Ford presented to them a Certificate of Appreciation. Certificate of Achievement for Eagle Scout Mayor Ford presented to Jay Skeeter Bowman's father the Certificate of Achievement. F.A.S.T. Presentation County Fire Chief Wright reviewed the City's newest public safety program, a program created to enhance the City's emergency medical service delivery to the community, noting that the City's innovative approach has created a pilot program which is being explored by another fire service agency as well as another contract City within the County. Fire Chief Wright acknowledged and thanked Mayor Ford and Mayor Pro Tern Stone, who served on the Subcommittee that explored this program, County staff, and City staff for their support and devotion to ensuring the fruition of this very effective public safety program. In closing, Mr. Wright introduced to the City its newest Paramedics Medic Squad No. 84. On behalf of the Subcommittee and the City Council, Mayor Pro Tem Stone thanked Fire Chief Wright for his professional assistance in creating this program for the City and welcomed the City's new Fire personnel to the City of Temecula. In an effort to stay on the cutting edge of technology with regard to public safety, Mayor Ford commented on current discussions as to the installation of a transmitter in each ambulance unit and, thereby, dispatching the unit which is located closest to the call of emergency. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. On behalf of the Musicians Workshop and the Board of Directors, Mr. Jon Laskin, representing the Musicians Workshop, thanked the City Council for its continued support. B. With regard to a traffic concern on Via Cordoba (previously discussed at the August 24, 1999, City Council meeting), Mr. Sam Pratt, 40470 Brixton Cove, relayed his support of the installation of traffic circles. C. Commending the City onseveral City infrastructure improvements, Mr. John Dedovesh, 39450 Long Ridge, continued to express a concern at the intersection of Winchester and Margarita Roads and suggested that staff explore the changing of signalization movements as well as turn movements. R:\Minutes\091499 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Councilman Roberts advised that he had attended the California League of Cities Public Safety Policy Committee meeting, noting that a topic of discussion included continuing State-wide concerns with AMR. B. Councilman Roberrs noted that he has been appointed as Chairman of the Operations Committee of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). C. Having attended the California League of Cities meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Stone commented on a presentation with regard to the Domenigoni Reservoir, advising that filling of the reservoir will begin the end of this year and that the reservoir should be fully filled by 2003- 04. Mr. Stone as well commented on the Study Center which is being constructed at the Reservoir. D. Having attended a Higher Education Meeting, Mayor Ford relayed this committee's ultimate goal to provide a permanent campus in the City and advised that other alternatives such as a satellite campus tied into San Marcos, extension classes, and the Internet are being explored. CONSENTCALENDAR Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of June 29, 1999; 2.2 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1999; 2.3 Approve the minutes of July 27, 1999. 3 Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:\Minutes\091499 4 City Treasurer's Report as of July 31, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of July 31, 1999. 5 Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 1999. 6 Purchase of Three (3) City Vehicles (TCSD, Buildin.q and Safety, and Fire) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the purchase of three (3) Ford model year 2000 vehicles from Villa Ford for the total amount of $63,578.25. Finance Director Roberts, for Mayor Pro Tem Stone, noted that the contract was awarded to a Ford dealership outside of the City and that staff had confirmed to ensure that Rancho Ford had received the invite to bid. 7 Support for Senate Bill 3 (Raineyl - Library Construction Bond RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 3 (RAINEY) ADDRESSING THE ISSUANCE OF LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION BONDS FOR CALIFORNIA LIBRARIES Pulled for separate discussion; see page 8. 8 Approval of Funds for Landscape Review Services RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve an expenditure in an amount not to exceed $105,000 for landscape review services with PELA. 9 Development Impact Fee Agreement with Woodside Homes - Lon.q Canyon Creek Park/Tract 28510-1 (Campos Verdes Specific Plan) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the Development Impact Fee Agreement between the City of Temecula and Woodside Homes to establish preliminary fee credits in the amount of $358,530 for the construction of Long Canyon Creek Park, Lot 81 of Tract No. 28510-1. R:\Minutes\091499 4 10 Completion and Acceptance for the Median Islands on Winchester Road west of Jefferson Avenue - Project No. PW97-21 RECOMMENDATION: 10. 1 Accept the project Median Islands on Winchester Road west of Jefferson Avenue - Project No. PW97-21 as complete; 10.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a six- months (6) Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 10.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 11 Completion and Acceptance for the I-15 Southbound Off-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road - Project No. PW97-03 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept the project for the I-15 Southbound Off-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road - Project No. PW97-03 as complete; 11.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year (1) Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 11.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 12 Acceptance of Park Landscape Bonds and A.qreement for Tract No. 28510-1 - Woodside Chantemar, Inc. - Nodh General Kearney Road at Mar.qarita Road) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Woodside Chantemar, Inc. to improve the park site within Tract No. 28510-1. 13 Tract Map No. 24183-1 ('located north of Campanula Way, east of Meadows Parkway, west of Butterfield Sta.qe Road, and south of DePortola Road and within Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan No. 219) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve Tract Map No. 24183-1 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 13.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 13.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. R:\Minutes\091499 14 15 16 17 Tract Map No. 24183 (located north of Campanula Way, east of Meadows Parkway, west of Butterfield Sta.qe Road, and south of De Portola Road and within Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan No. 219) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve Tract Map No. 24183 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 14.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 14.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Release Faithful Performance Warranty Security for Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 24085-3 (located northwesterly of the intersection of Diaz Road and Zevo Drive - Avenida de Ventas) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty security for Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 24085-3; 15.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Release Faithful Performance Warranty Security for Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 24085-F (located northwesterly of the intersection of Diaz Road and Zevo Drive (formerly Avenida de Ventas) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty Security for the public improvements in Parcel Map No. 24085-F; 16.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Release Faithful Performance Warranty Security in Parcel Map 27714 (located at the east side of Ynez Road between Solana Way and Rancho California Road) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty Security in Parcel Map No. 27714; 17.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the developer and surety. R:\Minutes\091499 18 Release Securities for Faithful Performance Warranty for Public Improvements and Traffic Si.qnalization Mitigation fees in Tract No. 21818 (located westerly of the intersection of Via Norte at Kahwea Road) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Authorize release of the Securities for the Faithful Performance Warranty for the Public Improvements in Tract No. 21818; 18.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. 19 Approval of an Additional Expenditure for FY98-99 Street Stripin.q Contract - Pacific Stripin.q, Inc. RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Approve the additional expenditure to FY98-99 contract with Pacific Striping, Inc. increasing the contract amount by $17,815.00. 20 Award of Construction Contract for the Traffic Si.qnal and Median Modification at Rancho California Road and Town Center Drive- Proiect No. PW99-09 RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Award a contract for the Traffic Signal and Median Modification at Rancho California Road and Town Center Drive - Project No. PW99-09 - to DBX, Inc. for $47,740.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 20.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,774.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 21 Supersedin.q Freeway A.clreement for State Hi.qhway Route 15 within the City of Temecula RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A SUPERSEDING FREEWAY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (STATE) AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING THAT CERTAIN SECTION OF STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE 15 BETWEEN THE SOUTH TEMECULA CITY LIMIT AND THE NORTH TEMECULA CITY LIMIT TO BE A FREEWAY 21.2 Approve an Agreement declaring that certain section of State Highway Route 15 between the Southern and Northern Temecula City limits to be a freeway with the State of California Department of Transportation (State) and authorize the Mayor to execute the Amendment. R:\Minutes\091499 MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-6 and 8-21 (Item No. 7 was pulled for separate discussion). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Consent Calendar Item considered under separate discussion 7 Support for Senate Bill 3 (Rainey) - Libran/Construction Bond RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 3 (RAINEY) ADDRESSING THE ISSUANCE OF LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION BONDS FOR CALIFORNIA LIBRARIES Assistant City Manager O'Grady provided the staff report (as per agenda material), noting that this resolution, if approved, would be directed to the Governor urging his signature. Advising that both the Senate and the Assembly have passed SB 3, Mr. O'Grady noted that the overall funding of this measure was reduced from a $1 billion bond issue to a $350 million bond issue and that the date of voter consideration on this issue has been advanced from November 2000 to March 2000. In light of the date change, Mr. O'Grady requested that, if the City Council were to approve this resolution, it be amended to accurately reflect this change. MOTION: Councilman Roberts moved to adopt the resolution as amended. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:43 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 8:21 P.M., the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council business. Reconvened to regular agenda order PUBLIC HEARING 22 Development Code Amendment ('Planninq Application No. PA99-0197) RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Approve the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0197; 22.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: R:\Minutes\091499 ORDINANCE NO. 99-24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF TITLE 17 TO RE-CATEGORIZE TEMPORARY USES, AMEND YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, CLARIFY FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS PROVISIONS, AND MAKE NUMEROUS MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0197) Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record), reviewing the proposed changes, clarifying allowable density bonus as per the State (30 units per acre), and advising that the densities for affordable housing listed in the Code accurately reflect the maximum allowable densities. Mayor Ford opened the public hearing. With there being no public input, the public hearing was closed. City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 99-24 by reading its title into the record. Mr. Thorson also provided clarification with regard to Section 17.16.070 of the Ordinance and noted that Mayor Ford would not have to abstain with regard to this item, advising the introduction of this Ordinance would only place Redhawk and Vail Ranch on this list in the event annexation were approved and because official approval occurred at a previous City Council meeting. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 23 General Plan Land Use Amendment No. 3 (Planning Application No. PA99-0291) RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Approve the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0291; 23.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-660-026, 921- 660-027, 921-660-041, AND 921-660-042 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0291 ) R:\Minutes\091499 23.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-25 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR THE AREAS KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-660-026, 921-660-027, 921-660-041, 921- 660-042, AND 950-120-004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0291 ) Councilman Comerchero abstained with regard to this item. By way of maps, Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record) and noted the Councilman Roberts' request for a trail dedication with permanent access would be acceptable and that the project could be conditioned as such. Councilman Roberts further elaborated on his request for a trail dedication along the riverbank with permanent access. Concurring with Deputy City Manager Thornhill's suggestion, City Attorney Thorson suggested that a portion of the Open Space-Conservation be retained as such and not converted to the Professional Office Zone with access and that a particular portion could then be retained for future trail dedication. Mayor Ford suggested a 40' strip along the southerly edge of the area of discussion. At this time, Mayor Ford opened the public hearing. Mr. Larry Markham, 41750 Winchester Road, noted that there currently is an existing access road with a turn around at the top of the channel. At this time, Mayor Ford closed the public hearing. City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 99-25 by reading its title into the record. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve staff recommendation with the amendment of adding a 40' open space, improveable area at the southerly end of the property. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Comerchero who abstained. 24 An Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny Planning Application No. PA99- 0236, Development Plan Revision to reconfigure a part of the Winchester Meadows ShOpping Center, and Plannin.q Application No. PA99-0012, a Conditional Use Permit to build and operate a 5,310 square foot Winston Tire Store (located at the northwest corner of Mar.qarita Road and Winchester Road RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:\Minutes\091499 10 RESOLUTION NO. 99-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0236 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVISION PROPOSAL TO RECONFIGURE A PORTION OF THE WINCHESTER MEADOWS SHOPPING CENTER BY INCORPORATING AN ABANDON WELL SITE AND RELOCATING AND ENLARGING TWO UNDEVELOPED PAD SITES ON .7 OF AN ACRE; LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCELS NO. 911-170-091 AND 911-170-098 AND AS PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 28934 24.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0012 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,310 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON L7 OF AN ACRE AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF AN AUTOMOTIVE TIRE AND SERVICE STORE LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCELS NO. 911-170-091 AND 911-170-098 AND AS PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 28934 Advising that the applicant had to amend the underlying Development Plan in order to move this project forward, Deputy City Manager Thornhill presented staff report (as per agenda material). For Councilman Roberrs, Mr. Mathewson (Planning Commissioner) clarified the Planning Commission's primary concern with regard to this item as it relates to compatibility of the proposed use with the adjacent land uses in the shopping center. Discussion ensued with regard to size of the parcel of discussion, visibility and location of the bays, and compatibility. By way of plans, Mr. John Hausler, representing Winston Tire, clarified the reasoning for relocating to this location and relayed no opposition to constructing a L-shaped building and, thereby, limiting the visibility of the bays from Winchester Road, as long as such reconfiguration of the building woutd .be possible. Mr. Bob Caham, owner and developer of the shopping center, voiced no objection to constructing a L-shaped building as long as such reconfiguration is feasible and necessary parking requirements are still met. Mr. Caham as well voiced no opposition to installing enhanced landscaping to further screen the bays. R:\Minutes\091499 11 Mr. Tom Davis, architect for the project, commented on parking requirements and noted that a L-shaped building on this particular site may not be feasible. Mayor Pro Tem Stone noted that a L-shaped building may limit the number of bays and, therefore, would decrease the viability of this business. At this time, Mayor Ford closed the public .hearing. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-91 and Resolution No. 99-92 with the addition of providing additional screening. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. COUNCIL BUSINESS 25 Consideration of the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival Slaonsorshila Request RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Review and approve the funding for the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival in the amount of $30,000; 25.2 Approve the sponsorship agreement with the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival organization and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. Mayor Ford abstained with regard to this item. Assistant City Manager ©'Grady presented the staff report (as per agenda material). MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Ford who abstained. 26 Murrieta Creek -Arundo and Tamarisk Eradication RECOMMENDATION: 26.1 Provide direction to staff to work with the appropriate public agencies to develop a plan to eradicate Arundo and Tamarisk growth in Murrieta Creek from Cherry Street at the northern City limit to Temecula Creek at the southern City limit in exchange for habitat mitigation credits; 26.2 Approve a general eradication program to include an initial eradication effort and 3 to 5 years of follow-up maintenance to start in fiscal year 2000. Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (of record). MOTION: Councilman Roberrs moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\Minutes\091499 12 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson advised of upcoming infrastructure improvements on I-15 Freeway in anticipation of completing all necessary work prior to the opening of the Mall. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With regard to acquisition of real property, City Attorney Thorson noted that direction was given to staff and that final approval of be taken in open session at a future date. With regard to potential litigation, Mr. Thorson advised that directing was provided by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT At 9:09 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 28, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\091499 13 ITEM 2 RESOLUTION NO. 99- 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 $ 4,046,870.80. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 19th day of October 1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] Resos 99- STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 19th day of October 1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk Resos 99- CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 09/30/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 10/07/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 10/19/99 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 07/22/99 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 10119/99 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND 261 CFD 88.12 ADMIN EXPENSE FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLES FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 390 RDA - DEBT SERVICE 001 GENERAL 165 RDA-LOW/MOD 190 TCS D 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 19-, TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 2~? RDA-CIP 300 INSURANCE 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL BYFUND: PREPARED BY RETA WESTON. ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST ~I~~~ECT ORO~FFiNC~E GE~EICT~ SHAWN NELSON, CITY MANAGER 304,159.48 65,102.70 77,836.90 3,483.15 28,195.34 259.56 2,903,442.91 1,003.60 3,219.11 12,394.19 58,831.50 40,620.91 5,776.47 12,158.24 332,222.12 147, 140.45 3,715.39 32,115.62 67.85 2,684.06 610.05 1,592.83 711.17 4,326.97 1,413.18 3,787.05 , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. 809,653.54 627,222.82 2,411,829.82 198,164,62 4,046,870.80 3,848,705.18 198,164.62 4,046,870.80 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 13:12 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 11 FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 261 CFD 88-12 ADM[N EXPENSE FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 390 TCSD DEBT SERVZCE AMOUNT 150,784.38 59,108.20 32,199.89 2,156.76 3,544.76 117.43 196,760.38 1,003.60 1,962.09 12,259.62 7,374.96 451.56 9,707.79 332,222.12 TOTAL 809,653.54 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 13:12 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE VENDOR NUMBER VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58080 09/28/99 SUSAN KOMEN BREAST CANC (6)CELLULAR PHONES:PROMOTIONAL 320-199-999-5242 120.00 120.00 58081 09/28/99 001159 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE 58081 09/28/99 001159 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE PROCESSING FEE:EMPLEE PRINTS PROCESSING FEE:EMPLEE PRINTS 001-150-999-5250 190-180-999-5250 42.00 84.00 126.00 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH 58082 09/28/99 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES AUG 99 LEGAL SERVICES 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 190-180-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 261-199-999..5246 300-199-999-5246 210-165-604-5801 210-165-604-5801 210-165-631-5801 300-199-999-5246 300-199-999-5246 300-199-999-5246 300-199-999-5246 300-199-999-5246 280-199-999-5246 165-199-999-5246 280-199-999-5246 165-199-999-5246 9,591.88 1,031.00 7,865.25 170.86 396.00 129.50 1~247.00 1,003.60 23.15 150.00 550.90 194.93 2,909.60 5,546.37 108.00 2,601.00 2,147.00 851.80 1,106.00 321.90 692.40 38,638.14 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 95038 09/30/99 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 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 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 25,345.58 737.56 4,137.00 8.64 348.86 80.78 251.10 49.48 780.68 111.88 507.98 5,366.66 138.66 1,111.84 2.42 93.21 21.26 57.24 22.84 156.44 46.56 132.31 39,508.98 95173 09/30/99 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 001-2070 65.86 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 13:12 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 95173 990929 990930 990931 58085 58085 58085 58085 58085 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58086 58087 CHECK DATE 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/29/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 VENDOR NUMBER 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 003614 003228 000166 003216 003216 003216 003216 003216 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 000724 001700 VENDOR NAME INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) [NSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) [NSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) CRESTA VERDE ESCROW INC U S BANK TRUST NATIONAL FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 1ST MECHANICAL, INC 1ST MECHANICAL, INC 1ST MECHAN]CALo INC 1ST MECHANICAL, INC 1ST MECHANICAL, INC A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PR] A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A PLUS TEACHING MATER[A ITEM DESCRIPTION 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SD! 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 1ST HOMEBUYER PRGM:T & C GOLEM TCSD COPS DEBT SVC PAYMENT 1ST HOMEBUYER PRGM:J&S SUYDAM CO# 1: CRC GYM COOLING SYSTEM COMPLETION OF CRC COOLING SYST RETENTION FOR CRC COOLING SYST CR:FEES INCURRED BY CITY:LITG. REL RETENTION:CRC GYM COOLING SMALL SPECIAL EVENT T-SHIRTS MEDIUM SPECIAL EVENT T-SHIRTS LARGE SPECIAL EVENT T-SHIRTS X-LARGE SPECIAL EVENT T-SHIRTS ARTWORK FEE XX-LARGE SPECIAL EVENT T"SHIRT MED. STAFF T-SHIRTS LARGE T-SHIRTS X-LARGE STAFF T-SHIRTS X-LARGE STAFF T-SHIRT XXX LARGE STAFF T-SHIRT ARTWORK SALES TAX SOFTBALL AWARDS FOR 1999 SUPPLIES:CHILD PROGRAMS-TCC ACCOUNT NUMBER 165-2070 190-2070 193-2070 280-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 165-199-999-5449 390-1040 165-199-999-5449 210-1990 210-1990 210-2035 300-199-4062 210-2035 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-183-999-5380 190-184-999-5301 iTEM AMOUNT 2.84 60.76 1.58 .63 5.33 3.56 4.23 6,950.29 209.52 851.80 1.46 62.43 15.39 76.24 15.28 187.27 21.61 105.64 20,000.00 332,222.12 22,300.00 2,227.00 2,039.66 203.96' 1,163.35- 14,580.00 144.00 144.00 144.00 144.00 25.00 168.00 21.00 56.00 84.00 8.00 9.00 25.00 15.73 652.97 41.98 CHECK AMOUNT 8,641.72 20,000.00 332,222.12 22,300.00 17,479.35 1,640.70 41.98 58088 09/30/99 000745 A T & T WIRELESS SERV[C 28567998:LT DOMENOE 001-170-999-5208 95.49 58088 09/30/99 000745 A T & T WIRELESS SERVIC 37563723:TEMECULA POLICE 001-170-999-5208 11.20 106.69 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 09/30/99 13:12 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58089 09/30/99 003802 ADOLF KIEFER & ASSOCIAT KICKBOARDS FOR AQUATIC PRGRM 190-183-999-5310 126.00 126.00 58090 09/30/99 003811 AMERICAN ASSN FOR STATE DOCENT TRAINING: OTT, WENDELL 190-185-999-5250 99.75 99.75 58091 09/30/99 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP:MEYER:1/01-12/31/O0 280-199-999-5226 58091 09/30/99 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP:MEYER:l/01-12/31/O0 165-199-999-5226 58091 09/30/99 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP:HOGAN 1/01-12/31/00 001-161-999-5226 78,75 236.25 303,00 618.00 58092 09/30/99 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 08/28 KLOHE/VAN 190-180-999-5118 58092 09/30/99 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 08/28 KLOHE/VAN 190-180-999-5118 58092 09/30/99 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 9/4 MILLIRON 001-110-999-5118 58092 09/30/99 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 9/4 MILLIRON 001-150-999-5118 58092 09/30/99 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP W/E 9/04 ANDERSON 001-120-999-5118 317.79 119.12 130.00 130.00 62.40 759.31 58093 09/30/99 000195 ASCON HASLER MAILING SY POSTAGE DEPOSIT FOR METER 330-199-999-5239 209.57 209.57 58094 09/30/99 AUDIO VISUAL HEADQUARTE TV/VCR RENTAL:LEAG. CITIES CF 001-110-999-5258 563.63 563.63 58095 09/30/99 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER INSTALL OUTLET:DUCK POND 190-180-999-5212 58095 09/30/99 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER INSTALL 2u CONOUIT:DUCK PONO 190-180-999-5212 58096 09/30/99 CAMPBELL, TINA REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 875.00 1,125.00 100.00 2,000.00 100.00 58097 09/30/99 002534 CATERERS CAFE REFRESHMENTS:MEETING PLAN DEPT 001-161-999-5260 146.65 146.65 58098 09/30/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS SEP-DEC ALARM SVCS:WED.CHAPEL 190-185-999-5250 58098 09/30/99 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS OCT-DEC ALARM SVCS:TEM.MUSEUM 190-185-999-5250 100.00 165.00 265.00 58099 09/30/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET ANTENNA REGISTRATION WITH FCC 320-199-999-5209 58099 09/30/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET TK930HD KENWOOD BASE COMPLETE 320-1950 58099 09/30/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET MAXRAD ANTENNA, CABLE & TRIPOD 320-1950 58099 09/30/99 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET LABOR 320-1950 58099 09/30/99 000447 COMTRON[X OF HEMET SALES TAX 320-1950 58100 09/30/99 002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATE PROF FEES:PURSUE FED FUNDING 001-110-999-5248 58101 09/30/99 003681 DAVIDSON & ALLEN, ARCHI MNTC FAC MODIFICATIONS:PHASE 2 210-190-158-5802 58101 09/30/99 003681 DAVIDSON & ALLEN, ARCH[ MNTC FAC MODIFICATIONS:PHASE 3 210-190-158-5802 58101 09/30/99 003681 DAVIDSON & ALLEN, ARCHI CREDIT:AMENDMENT EXCEEDED P.O. 210-190-158-5802 320.00 1,242.00 395.00 600.00 126.87 2,000.00 1,200.00 5,390.00 290.00- 2,683.87 2,000.00 6,300.00 58102 09/30/99 002954 DIAMOND GARAGE DOOR INC RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: CUSUMANO 165-199-813-5804 58102 09/30/99 002954 DIAMOND GARAGE DOOR INC RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: AMOSA 165-199-813-5804 58103 09/30/99 00167'3 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/EO9/19/99:WIGHTMAN 001-111~999-5118 625.00 736.16 455.00 1,361.16 455.00 58104 09/30/99 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 9/10 WILLIAMS 001-162-999-5118 92.22 92.22 58105 09/30/99 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC 58105 09/30/99 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC EDEN USER CF:10/20-22:MCDERMOT 001-140-999-5258 EDEN USER CF:10/20-22:PATTISON 001-140-999-5258 300.00 300.00 600.00 58106 09/30/99 002438 ENGEN CORPORATION PROF GEO SERS:OVERLAND DRIVE 210-165-604-5804 701.25 701.25 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58107 58107 58107 58107 58107 58107 58107 58108 58108 58109 58109 58109 58109 58109 58109 58109 58109 58110 58111 58112 58113 58113 58113 58113 58113 58113 58113 58113 58114 58115 58116 58117 58117 58117 58117 58117 58117 58117 58117 58117 13:12 CHECK DATE 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 VENDOR NUMBER 001056 001056 001056 001056 001056 001056 001056 000165 000165 000165 000165 000165 000165 000165 000165 002832 003747 003612 000166 000166 000166 000166 000166 000166 000166 000166 003347 001135 000540 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 VENDOR NAME EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE FACTS FACTS FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FEDERAL EXPRESS ]NC FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC FEDERAL EXPRESS INC FENCE BUILDERS FINE ARTS NETWORK FIRE PREVENTION SERVICE FIRST AMERICAN T]TLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO FIRST BANKCARD CENTER FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL M G NEIL DIRECT NAIL ]NC GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENN]ES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION JUL LDSCP SVCS: TEM MUSEUM AUG LDSCP SVCS: TEN MUSEUM AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:SPORTS PRK AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:BUTTERFIELD AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:SPORTS PRK AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:SPORTS PRK AUG LDSCP REPAIRS: CRC REFUND: SEC.DEP./FAC.RENTAL REFUND: SEC.DEP./FAC.RENTAL EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS NAIL SERVICES EXPRESS NAIL SERVICES RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: M.SALAS 98-99 COMM SERVICE FUNDING FIRE PREVENTION REVENUE:RVSD LOT BK REPORT:41127 VIA HALCOM LOT BK REPORT:39782 KNOLLRIDGE LOT BK REPORT:40544 CALLE TORC LOT BK REPORT:31150 CAMINO DEL LOT BK REPORT:39372 OAK CLIFF LOT 8K REPORT:30245 PECHANGA LOT BK REPORT:31114 CANINO DEL LOT BK REPORT:31075 MIRA LONA XX-6702 J.MEYER:S~ AIR JM/AS PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS HR LEGAL REQUIRED POSTERS MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-185-999-5415 190-185-999-5415 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-183-4990 190-2900 001-150-999-5230 001-111-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-110-999-5230 001-162-999-5230 001-161-999~5230 165-199-999-5230 001-165-999-5230 165-199-813-5804 001-101-999-5267 001-162-4264 165-199-813-5804 165-199-813-5804 165-199-~i3-5804 165-199-813-5804 165-199-813-5804 165-199-813-5804 165-199-813-5804 165-199-813-5804 28o-199-999-5258 001-150-999-5250 001-i50-999-5250 190-180-999-5220 190-182-999-5220 190-183-999-531o 190-185-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-184-999-5220 190-181-999-5220 o01-171-999-5220 001-171-999-5220 ITEM AMOUNT 285.00 285.00 264.10 176.12 179.21 170.04 129.97 15.00 100.00 12.75 137.24 25.00 16.25 52.75 56.50 16.25 92,25 2,285.00 1,000.00 26,000.23 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 233.00 320.00 49.16 447.78 52.20 126.19 476.73 612.27 236.53 25.69 112.06 95.33 PAGE 4 CHECK AMOUNT 1,489.44 115.00 408.99 2,285.00 1,000.00 26,000.23 1,200.00 233.00 320.00 49.16 2,184.78 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 09/30/99 3.12 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE COMPUTER SUPPLIES 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE (6) COMPUTER SPEAKERS 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE (4) COMPUTER LAN CARDBUS 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 58118 O9/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE FREIGHT 58118 O9/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 58118 09/30/99 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE SALES TAX 320'199-999-5221 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5221 320-199'999-5242 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5242 320-199'999-5221 320-199-999-5242 320-199-999-5221 320'199-999-5242 58119 09/30/99 003676 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION-ES RE-ISSUE CK:RETENTION RELEASE 210-1035 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I ALARM MONITOR:10/1-12/31/99 58120 09/30/99 001609 001-170-999-5250 179.70 870.00 6.84 26.47 16.79 64.95 179.70 631.80 7,00 27.09 13.18 50.96 49,806.62 75.00 2,074.48 49,866.62 75.00 58121 09/30/99 HUNT, LILLIAN REFUND: SUMMER DAY CAMP 190-183-4984 10.00 10.00 58122 09/30/99 001570 INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION 320-199-999-5228 480.00 480.00 58123 09/30/99 INLAND EMPIRE CHORUS PERFORM:SWEET ADELINE CHORUS 190-183-999-5320 150.00 150,00 58124 09/30/99 001351 INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC IEEP ANNUAL INVESTMENT 99-00 001-111-999-5264 58125 09/30/99 000199 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVIC 000199 IRS GARN 00i-2140 11,637.50 306.33 11,637.50 306.33 58126 09/30/99 000388 INTL CONFERENCE BLDG OF UNIFORM BUILDING CODE BOOKS 001-162-999-5228 58126 09/30/99 000388 INTL CONFERENCE BLDG OF SALES TAX 001-162-999-5228 58126 09/30/99 000388 INTL CONFERENCE BLDG OF UNIFORM BUILDING CODE BOOKS 001-162-999-5228 58127 09/30/99 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 58128 09/30/99 003223 K E A ENVIRONMENTAL, IN PROF SERV:PALA ROAD BRIDGE 210-165-631-5801 58129 09/30/99 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC CLEANING & SHIPPING FALL 001-111-999-5271 58129 09/30/99 002424 KELLEY DISPLAY INC SHIPPING - UPS 001-111-999-5271 3,431.65 265.95 .26 660.00 3,001.68 125.00 23.62 3,697.86 660.00 3,001.68 148.62 58130 09/30/99 002789 KIMCO STAFFING SOLUTION TEMP HELP W/E 08/29 MUELLER 001-120-999-5118 58130 09/30/99 002789 KIMCO STAFFING SOLUTION TEMP HELP W/E 8/29 MUELLER 001-161-999-5118 58130 09/30/99 002789 KIMCO STAFFING SOLUTION TEMP HELP W/E 9/5/99:MUELLER S 001-120-999-5118 58130 09/30/99 002789 KIMCO STAFFING SOLUTION TEMP HELP W/E 9/12/99:MUELLER 001-120-999-5118 58131 09/30/99 001694 KNIGHT PRINTING PERMIT JOB CARDS 001-162-999-5222 58132 09/30/99 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS INC CRC POOL MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212 277.88 216.13 419.90 284.05 1,339.85 47.60 1,197.96 1,339.85 47.60 58133 09/30/99 001123 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIE MISC SUPPLIES:PW MAINT CREWS 001-164-601-5218 142.23 142.23 58134 09/30/99 KRUMM~ CYNTHIA REFUND: HATHA YOGA 190-183-4980 42.00 42.00 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58135 58136 58137 58138 58118 58138 58138 58139 58139 58140 58140 58140 58140 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58141 58142 58142 58142 58142 58143 58144 58144 58144 58144 58145 58146 58146 58147 58148 13:12 CHECK DATE 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 VENDOR NUMBER 000380 000482 003787 00]782 00]782 003782 003782 001905 001905 003241 003241 003241 003241 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 001384 000228 000228 000228 000228 001584 001584 001584 001584 002105 002105 002404 VENDOR NAME LAIDLAW TRANSIT INC LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES LOOP MASTERS INC MAIN STREET SIGNS MAIN STREET SIGNS MAIN STREET SIGNS MAIN STREET SIGNS MEYERS, DAVID WILLIAM MEYERS, DAVID WILLIAM MILLAR HEATING & AIR IN MILLAR HEATING & AIR IN MILLAR HEATING & AIR IN MILLAR HEATING & AIR IN MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MINUTEMAN PRESS MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO MURRIETA ROTARY NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM NORWEST FINANCIAL, INC. OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE OMNIDATA CORPORATION OTT, WENDELL CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION DAY CAMP TRANSPORTATION:SKATE AUG PROF SVCS:SANTA GERTRUDIS PROF SER:TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVE MISC.SIGNS & SUPPLIES:PW MISC.SIGNS & SUPPLIES MISC,SIGNS & MATERIALS:PW MISC.SIGNS & MATERIALS:PW TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS AUG MAINTENANCE SVC:TCC AUG MAINTENANCE SVC:CRC AUG MAINTENANCE SVC:MAINT,FAC. AUG MAINTENANCE SVC:SR CTR STATIONARY & PRINTING SVCS:PW STATIONARY & PRINTING SVCS:PW STATIONARY & PRINTING SVCS:PW STATIONARY & PRINTING SVCS:PW SALES TAX SALES TAX SALES TAX SALES TAX BUSINESS CARDS: D.THOMAS SALES TAX FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES SPONSORSHIP TABLE:U.W,CAMPAIGN QTY 2000 PURCHASE ORDER FORMS ARTWORK / SET-UP FEE FOR FREIGHT SALES TAX REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT MISC.REPAIR/MAINT.OF PRINTERS REIMB:MUSEUM TRAINING MATERIAL ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-999-5340 210-190-147-5804 001-164-602-5412 001-164-601-5244 001-164-601-5244 001-164-601-5244 001-164-601-5244 190-183-999-53]0 190-18]-999-5330 190-184-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 340-199-702-5250 190-181-999-5250 001-163-999-5222 001-164-602-5222 001-164-604-5222 001-165-999-5222 001-163-999-5222 001-164-602-5222 001-164-604-5222 001-165-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-164-601-5263 001-163-~99-5263 001-170-999-5262 001-161-99<);5263 001-150-999-5265 001-140-999-5222 001-140-999-5222 001-140-999-5222 001-140-999-5222 190-2900 001-164-601-5214 190-180-999-5214 320-199-999-5215 190-185-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 276.49 1,149.00 3,300.00 2,076.22 459.14 575.19 423.78 192.00 32.00 150.00 500.00 100.00 150.00 79.17 79.17 79.17 79.16 6.13 6.13 6.1] 6.15 38.25 2.96 110.18 34.44 193.77 15.85 200.00 782.06 125.00 17.67 70.30 100.00 198.30 221.02 147.50 62.25 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 276.49 1,149.00 3,300.00 3,534.33 224.00 900.00 382.42 354.24 200.00 995.03 100.00 419.52 147.50 62.25 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58149 58150 58150 58150 58150 58150 58150 58150 58151 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58152 58154 58154 58154 13:12 CHECK DATE 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 0~/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 VENDOR NUMBER 003819 003218 003218 003218 003218 003218 003218 003218 001958 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000254 000254 000254 VENDOR NAME PAVEMENT OPTIONAL INC PELA PELA PELA PELA PELA PELA PELA PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PRESS PRESS PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN ENTERPRISE COMPAN ENTERPRISE COMPAN CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION SIDE STEPS:MED]C SQUAD VEHICLE JUL PLAN CHECK SVCS:PLANNING JUL LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS JUL LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS JUL LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS AUG PLAN CHECK SVCS:PLANNING AUG LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS AUG LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SVCS 001958 PERS L-T 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 REIHBURSEMENT PETTY CASH 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 PETTY CASH REIHBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIHBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT DISPLAY AD:COMM.SVC.FUNDING AUG DISPLAY ADS:VAR.CIP UPDATE DISPLAY ADS:SUMMER CONCERTS ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-171-999-5242 001-161-999-5250 193-180-999-5248 190-180-999-5248 191-180-999-5248 001-161-999-5250 190-180-999-5248 191-180-999-5248 001-2122 320-199-999-5221 001-100-999-5260 190-181-999-5301 001-110-999-5260 001-164-601-5218 001-162-999-5261 001-110-999-5260 190-183-999-5320 190-183-999-5320 190-2920 001-150-999-5265 001-162-999-5220 001-150-999-5265 190-183-999-5320 001-110-999-5222 001-164-604-5222 190-180-999-5222 001-161-999-5260 001-161-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-171-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-161-999-5260 001-170-999-5215 001-2175 001-161-999-5260 190-183-999-5320 001-162-999-5261 001-110-999-5260 001-164-604-5260 001-150-999-5260 190-180-999-5301 001-150-999-5260 001-101-999-5280 190-180-999-5301 001-140-999-5254 001-165-999-5256 190-180-999-5254 ITEM AMOUNT 179.39 7,220.00 3,015.00 1,845.00 450.00 10,015.00 3,015.00 900.00 266.29 30.51 28.41 60.07 21.71 48.49 7.18 5.99 18.20 17.22 13.99 17.98 22.29 30.00 29.93 4.85 29.09 14.55 37.27 9.15 16.16 4.85 21.01 44.35 19.20 57.05 39.31 37.91 7.18 19.50 17.96 20.00 21.78 35.30 4.28 32.22 100.80 445.20 150.00 PAGE 7 CHECK AMOUNT 179.39 26,460.00 266.29 844.94 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 09/30/99 13:12 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58154 09/30/99 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN DISPLAY ADS:SUMMER CONCERTS 190-180-999-5254 58154 09/30/99 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN DISPLAY AD:PUBLIC NOTICE 001-161-999-5256 58154 09/30/99 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC NOTICE: PA99-0286 001-120-999-5256 58155 09/30/99 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT RENTAL:TCC 190-180-999-5238 106.20 176.40 33.50 83.83 1,012.10 83.83 58156 09/30/99 002027 PRINCIPE & ASSOCIATES BIOLOGICAL SVCS:TEM.LIBRARY 210-199-129-5802 58157 09/30/99 003762 PROMEDIX.COM SUPPLIES FOR CiTY MEDIC SQUAD 001-171-999-5242 58158 09/30/99 001364 R C P BLOCK & BRICK INC 30 STEPPING STONES:TCSD MAINT. 190-180-999-5212 2,000.00 294.61 137.38 2,000.00 294.61 137.38 58159 09/30/99 000728 RAMSEY BACKFLOW & PLUMB BACKFLOI4 DEVICE TESTING:MARG. 190-180-999-5212 30.00 30. O0 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUP.BLUEPRiNTS:IST ST BRG:9508 280-199-807-5804 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUP.BLUEPRiNTS:OVERLAND:95-11 210-165-604-5804 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUP.BLUEPRINTS:IST ST BRG:9508 280-199-807-5804 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUP.BLUEPRINTS:WINCH/YNEZ:9706 210-165-683-5804 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUP.BLUEPRINTS:OVRLD/MARG:9707 210-165-681-5804 58160 09/30/99 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C MISC. SUPPLIES:PW 001-164-604-5268 12.09 93.69 59.84 19.34 37.48 31.89 254.33 58161 09/30/99 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK A BUS.PARK ASSOC.DUES:R.C./DIAZ 001-164-604-5226 58161 09/30/99 002176 RANCHO CALIF BUS PARK A BUS.PARK ASSOC.DUES:CITY HALL 340-199-701-5226 58162 09/30/99 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST SEP:O1-99-O2003-O:DUCK POND 190-180-999-5240 58162 09/30/99 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST SEP:O2-79-10100-1:NW SPORTS PK 190-1270 1,263,63 919.00 237,25 291.73 2,182.63 528.98 58163 09/30/99 RANCHO TEMECULA AREA REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 58164 09/30/99 003173 RECREATION SUPPLY COMPA RACING LANE SPRING & LOCK 58164 09/30/99 003173 RECREATION SUPPLY COMPA FREIGHT 190-182-999-5242 190-182-999-5242 91.00 7.~ 98,74 58165 09/30/99 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE WEED SPRAY/ABATE.:CHAPOS/KATH. 001-164-601-5402 58166 09/30/99 RIVERSIDE CO MAP COPIES:PALA RD BRIDGE:9715 210-165-631-5804 3,075.00 20.00 3,075.00 20.00 58167 09/30/99 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE LOT LINE ADJ,:TEMEKU HILLS 58167 09/30/99 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE RELEASE OF LIEN: J. WASEK 001-100'999-5250 001-I00-999-5250 16.00 4.00 20.00 58168 09/30/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION AUG PRGS PMT#6:W[NCH/YNEZ:9706 210-165'683-5804 58168 09/30/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION AUG C/O PMT#6:~iNCH/YNEZ:9706 210-165-683-5804 58168 09/30/99 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RET.W/H PMT#6:WINCH/YNEZ:9706 210'2035 58169 09/30/99 ROBERT JOHN NAPIER SOCC REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 79,236.83 45,066.26 12,430.30- 100.00 111,872.79 100.00 58170 09/30/99 003001 ROSS FENCE COMPANY RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: AMOSA 165-199-813-5804 58171 09/30/99 002743 SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH LOCKSMITH SVCS:MORAGA ~ MARG. 190-180-999-5212 58171 09/30/99 002743 SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH LOCKSMITH SVCS:MORAGA ~ MARG. 190-180-999-5212 58171 09/30/99 002743 SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH LOCKSMITH SVCS:WINCH.CREEK PRK 190-180-999-5212 58171 09/30/99 002743 SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH LOCKSMITH SERVICES:CRC 190-182-999-5212 1,885.00 71.38 127.36 125.00 50.39 1,885.00 374.13 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 09/30/99 13:12 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 58172 09/30/99 SHIPPING DEPOT DEPOSIT FOR U-HAUL RENTAL:TCSD 190-180-999-5238 58173 09/30/99 003500 SIMON & SIMON CONSTRUCT RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: BEARD 165-199-813-5804 58173 09/30/99 003500 SIMON & SIMON CONSTRUCT RES.IMPROVEMENT PRGM: LOPEZ 165-199-813-5804 58174 09/30/99 SINGH GILL, NIRMAL REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 58175 09/30/99 003548 SKY CANYON ENTERPRISES OCT 99 HANGAR RENT:MUS.ARTIFCT 190-185-999-5250 ITEM ANOUNT 150.00 5,000,00 1,880.00 100.00 786.00 CHECK AMOUNT 150.00 6,880.00 100.00 786.00 58176 09/30/99 000645 SMART & FINAL INC RECOGNITION PRGM SUPPLIES:9/22 001-150-999-5265 58176 09/30/99 000645 SMART & FINAL INC RECREATION SUPPLIES:TEEN PRGM 190-183-999-5320 58176 09/30/99 000645 SMART & FINAL INC RECREATION SUPPLIES:DAY CAMP 190-183-999-5340 58176 09/30/99 000645 SMART & FINAL INC RECREATION SUPPLIES:SENIOR CTR 190-181-999-5301 61.44 75.89 75.33 66.46 279.12 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:Z-11-OOT-O455:6TH ST 001-164-603-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-14-204-1615:FRNT ST RDIO 340-199-701-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-19-184-1824:RANCHO CALF. 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-19-525-2143:RNBW CYN TC1 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-19-111-4834:BEDFORD CT 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-O2-351-4946:SR CENTER 190-181-999-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-OO-397-5042:CITY HALL 340-199-701-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-18-348-6315:MARG.RD.TC1 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-18-O49-6416:FRONT ST PED 001-164-603-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-19-321-6512:HWY 79 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-18-555-7006:MORENO RD 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-18-799-7911:MORENO RD 191-180-999-5319 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-O2-502-8077:MAINT.FAC. 340-199-702-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-19-171-8568:WED.CHAPEL 190-185-999-5240 58177 09/30/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:64-77-350-1600-91:MCCABE 190-180-999-5240 58178 09/30/99 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SEP:PEST CONTROL SVCS:WED.CHPL 190-185-999-5250 58178 09/30/99 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SEP PEST CONTROL SVCS:STN #84 001-171-999-5250 58178 09/30/99 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SEP:PEST CONTROL SVCS:MUSEUM 190-185-999-5250 58179 09/30/99 003836 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COU SRCMC 99 EXPO:MEYER:11/04/99 165-199-999-5260 58179 09/30/99 003836 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COU SRCMC 99 EXPO:MEYER:11/04/99 280-199-999-5260 407.58 19.42 158.60 113.42 91.05 1,341.38 6,695.28 110.63 194.94 144.87 112.66 63.01 1~160.59 52.30 3,686.53 32.00 48.00 42.00 7.50 7.50 14,352.26 122.00 15.00 58180 09/30/99 000293 STADIUM PIZZA REFRESHMENTS: DAY CAMP 190-180-999-5261 69.19 69.19 58181 09/30/99 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET C CLEAN CARPET AT THE CRC 190-182-999-5212 58181 09/30/99 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET C CLEAN CRC PARTITION IN THE MR 190-182-999-5212 245.00 225.00 470.00 58182 09/30/99 SUNRIDGE COMMUNITY CHUR REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 58182 09/30/99 SUNRIDGE COMMUNITY CHUR DEDUCT:INDOOR RENTAL FEES 190-183-4990 58183 09/30/99 000574 SUPERTONER SEP LASER PRINTER MAINTENANCE 320-199-999-5215 58184 09/30/99 003770 TAC PROFESSIONAL STAFFI TEMP HELP W/E 9/04 BRAGG 001-165-999-5118 58185 09/30/99 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY PLAQUE:COUNCIL PRESENTATION 001-170-999-5244 58185 09/30/99 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY TROPHIES:SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT 190-183-999-5380 100.00 51.00- 625.00 907.20 65.80 46.71 49.00 625.00 907.20 112.51 VOUCHRE2 09/30/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58186 58186 58187 58188 58188 58188 58188 58188 58188 58188 58188 58189 58189 58189 58189 58189 58189 58189 58190 58191 58191 58191 13:12 CHECK DATE 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/30/99 09/]0/99 VENDOR NUMBER 003149 003149 000389 000389 000389 000]89 000389 000389 000389 000389 000325 000325 000325 000325 000325 000325 000325 003785 002092 002092 002092 VENDOR NAME TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION TERRY, CORINNE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION RET.W/H PMT#10:DUCK POND:9717 AUG PRGS PMT#10:DUCK POND:9717 REFUND: DANCE-BALLROOM U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000]89 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C N/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR U S C M/PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETZR UNITED WAY UNITED WAY UNITED WAY UNITED WAY UNITED WAY UNITED WAY UNITED WAY WESTSIDE CITY I, LLC WINTER GRAPHICS SOUTH WINTER GRAPHICS SOUTH WINTER GRAPHICS SOUTH 000325 UW 000325 UW 000325 UW 000325 UW 000]25 UW 000325 UW 000325 W REL.SECURITIES:TRACT# 24085-F SAN DIEGO BUSINESS JOURNAL AD FEDERAL EXPRESS - SHIPPING SALES TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 210-2035 210-190-143-5804 190-183-4982 001-2160 165-2160 190-2160 193-2160 280-2160 320-2160 330-2160: 340-2160 001-2120 165-2120 190-2120 280-2120 300-2120 320-2120 330-2120 001-2670 001-111-999-5270 001-111-999-5270 001-111-999-5270 ITEM AMOUNT 240.00- 2,400.00 25.00 1,622.82 46.31 996.18 23.68 10.75 79.88 53.38 63.34 221.75 3.75 19.00 1.25 .25 4.00 5.00 5,287.00 150.00 15.00 12.78 PAGE 10 CHECK AMOUNT 2,160.00 25.00 2,896.34 255.00 5,287,00 177.78 TOTAL CHECKS 809,653.54 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 11:37 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LO~//MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVENENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLES FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 86,701.57 5,994.50 12,149.01 76.39 1,897.58 142.13 437,709.21 1o257.02 134.57 58,831.50 15,094.98 5,324.91 1,909.45 TOTAL 627,222.82 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58192 58195 58196 58196 58196 58197 58198 58199 58199 58200 58201 58202 58203 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58204 58205 58206 58207 58208 58209 58209 58209 58209 58209 58209 11:37 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 10/05/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 lu/07/99 001159 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE 003216 1ST MECHANICAL, INC 003360 A 2 Z DESIGN 003360 A 2 Z DESIGN 003360 A 2 Z DESIGN 003607 AMERICAN FIRST AID & SA AMSTERDAM PRINTING & LI 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 003376 ARTS COUNC[L~ THE 003827 AUTO CELLULAR BAY, TRUDI 002099 BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 000128 CAL SURANCE ASSOCIATES 002534 CATERERS CAFE CLAYTONf DINA 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA 001275 COHPUSERVE INC 003813 003813 003813 003813 003813 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION PROCESSING FEE:EMPLEE PRINTS CRC GYM PREVENTATIVE MAINT. 20 ASH FLEECE SHORTS:EXPLORERS SET-UP FEE SALES TAX FIRST AID SUPPLIES: CITY HALL ENGRAVED PENS:FIRE/B&S/CODE EN CRC DRINKING WATER: SEPT CITY HALL DRINKING WATER:SEPT 99-00 COMMUNITY SVCS FUNDING 3 CELLULAR PHONES FOR POLICE REFUND: COOKING-WHAT'S COOKING OCT RESTROOM FACILITY RENTAL WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 WORKERS' COMP FOR SEPT 99 REFRESHMENT FOR STAFF MTGS REFUND: TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG CLEAN FRONT CANOPY:CITY HALL SUBSCRIPTION-COMPUTER MAGAZINE 10 - PC WORKSTATIONS 10 - MS NATURAL KEYBOARDS 10 - MS INTELLIMOUSE PROS 10 - SAMSUNG 750B MONITORS FREIGHT SALES TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-150-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 001-171-999-5235 001-171-999-5235 001-171-999-5235 340-199-701-5250 001-162-999-5220 190-182-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 001-101-999-5286 001-170-999-5242 190-183-4980 280-199-999-5234 001-2370 165-2370 190-2370 191-2370 193-2370 194-2370 280-2370 300-2370 320-2370 330-2370 340-2370 190-181-999-5112 001-162-999-5261 190-183-4982 340-199-701-5250 320-199-999-5221 320-1970 320-1970 320-1970 320-1970 320-1970 320-1970 ITEM AMOUNT 126,00 139.00 240.00 30.00 18.60 80.81 96.44 77.99 209.91 10,000.00 457.94 6.00 826.00 5,158.56 108.00 1,675.37 1.02 74.74 17.77 39.37 9.54 74.45 19.24 293.41 1.23 115.00 180.00 45.00 9.95 8,720.00 230.00 160.00 2,980.00 38.90 936.98 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 126.00 139.00 288.60 80.81 96.44 287.90 10,000.00 457.94 6.00 826.00 7,472.70 115.00 180.00 45.00 9.95 13,065.88 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58210 58211 58212 58213 58213 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58214 58215 58216 58217 58217 58217 58218 58219 58220 58221 58222 58222 58223 58223 58224 58224 58225 58225 58225 11:37 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER MANE 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10t07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 001233 DAMS FEED & SEED INC 002990 DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATE 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S 001714 DREAM ENGINEERING INC 001714 DREAM ENGINEERING INC 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 001380 E S i EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S ] EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S i EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERV]C E S I EMPLOYMENT SERViC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC ESCOLANO, LOPE JR. EUROPEAN CUSTOM CARPET 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 002037 EXPANETS 000478 FAST SIGNS 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 002528 GLASS BLASTERS 002528 GLASS BLASTERS 000192 000192 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION PROPANE GAS FOR PW MAINT CREWS RETAIN PUBLIC ADVOCACY FIRM TEMP HELP ~/E 09/26 ~IGHTHAN FINAL INSPECTION:COURT LIGHTS FINAL INSPECTION:COURT LIGHTS TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 GORMAN TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 ~ILLIAMS TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 MILES TENP HELP g/E 09/24 MILES TEMP HELP ~/E 09/24 MILES TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 THORNSLEY TEMP HELP ~/E 09/24 DEGANGE TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 MENDOZA TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 MENDOZA TEMP HELP W/E 09/24 MENDOZA REFUND: PERMIT B99-2682 REFD:DUPLICATE BUSINESS LICENS AUG LDSCP REPAIRS: RYCREST AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:CALLE MEDUSA AUG LDSCP REPAIRS:LA SERENA TELEPHONE REPAIRS:CITY HALL POLICE EXPLORER BANNER LOT BOOK REPTS:31081CALLE ARA XX-1405 D.UBNOSKE:PROF MTGS DAY PLANNER SUPPLIES -PLANNING DAY PLANNER SUPPLIES -PLANNING 909 506-6506 JEFF STONE 909 676-3526 FIRE ALARM CITY MUGS FOR NEW HIRES CITY MUGS FOR NEW HIRES GAUGE STRETCH ~RAP FREIGHT SALES TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-164-601-5218 001-110-999-5248 001-111-999-5118 210-190-155-5802 210-190-155-5802 001-162-999-5118 001-162-999-5118 001-163-999-5118 001-164-604-5118 001-165-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 330-199-999-5118 340-199-701-5118 340-199-702-5118 001-162-4285 001-199-4056 193-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5212 320-199-999-5215 001-170-999-5235 165-199-813-5804 001-161-999-5260 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-150-999-5265 001-150-999-5265 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 ITEM AMOUNT 13.87 4,000.00 65.00 300,00 20.00 678.58 1,215.81 292.08 292.08 292.08 2,157.43 2,858.40 773.50 309.40 132.60 63.00 35.00 187.50 139.47 161.45 48.00 137.90 150.00 87.97 64.23 120.67 25.07 81.45 32.33 32.33 53.80 25.53 4.65 PAGE 2 CHECK AMOUNT 13.87 4,000.00 65.00 320.00 9,001.96 63.00 35.00 488.42 48.00 137.90 150.00 87.97 184.90 106.52 64.66 83.98 58226 10/07/99 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPAN 25 - NOD ~HITE SPACE BOX 320-199-999-5221 115.75 58226 10/07/99 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPAN 80 - 6W WHITE JACKS 320-199-999-5221 283.20 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 10/07/99 11:37 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58226 10/07/99 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPAN 50 - UNIV CAT 5 JACKS 320-199-999-5221 58226 10/07/99 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CC)MPAN FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221 58226 10/07/99 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPAN SALES TAX 320-199-999-5221 215.00 5.99 47.74 667.68 58227 10/07/99 GRILL ROOM, THE COHMISSION RECOGNITION DINNER 001-100-999-5265 2,037.50 2,037.50 58228 10/07/99 GUIDANT 58228 10/07/99 GUIDANT REFUND: SALE PERMIT PA99-0372 001-161-4125 REFUND: SALE PERMIT PA99-0372 001-163-4388 176.00 14.00 190.00 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - P.W. MAINT 001-164-601-5218 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC HARDWARE SUPPLIES -CITY HALL 340-199-701-5212 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE ]NC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - B&S 001-162-999-5215 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE [NC HARDWARE SUPPLIES -PARKS 190-180-999-5212 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE [NC HARDWARE SUPPLIES -TCC 190-184-999-5212 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - CIP/LAND 001-163-999-5242 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - CIP/LAND 001-165-999-5242 58229 10/07/99 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - INFO SYSTE 320-199-999-5242 27.67 8.28 7.49 689.64 203.95 16.15 16.15 13.94 983.27 58230 10/07/99 HOLMES, CAROL REFUND: KUNDALINI YOGA 190-183-4982 37,00 37.00 58231 10/07/99 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES REPAIR & MAINT OF MOTORCYCLES 001-170-999-5214 264.42 264.42 58232 10/07/99 000193 I C M A PUBLICATION:"MULTIYEAR BUDGET" 001-140-999-5228 18.95 18.95 58233 10/07/99 000193 I C M A BOOKS:TELECOM LOCAL & PLANNING 001-110-999-5228 72.00 72.00 58234 10/07/99 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL CRC POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-182-999-5250 260.76 260.76 58235 10/07/99 002695 J A S PACIFIC CONSULTIN PLAN CK SVCS:B99-2210/2481/237 001-162-999-5248 58235 10/07/99 002695 J A S PACIFIC CONSULTIN PLAN CK SVCS:B99-1856/2617/260 001-162-999-5248 629.98 296.92 926.90 58236 10/07/99 003812 JAMES WADE CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL IMPROV-SHIRLEY LEE 165-199-813-5804 58236 10/07/99 003812 JAMES WADE CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL IMPROV-SHIRLEY LEE 165-199-813-5804 58236 10/07/99 003812 JAMES WADE CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL IMPROV-SHIRLEY LEE 165-199-813-5804 1,300.00 810.00 1,890.00 4,000.00 58237 10/07/99 JARA, MARTHA REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 58238 10/07/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 8/29 BROMMET 58238 10/07/99 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 8/29 SALAZAR 001-150-999-5118 001-162-999-5118 46.44 330.24 376.68 58239 10/07/99 000843 MCDANIEL ENGINEERING AUG PROF SVCS:PALA BRIDGE:9715 210-165-631-5802 1,019.65 1,019.65 58240 10/07/99 002887 MCKINLEY EQUIPMENT CORP SEP MAINT.FAC.LIFT INSP./SVCS 340-199-702-5212 110,78 110.78 58241 10/07/99 MCLAUGHLIN, ERIN REFUND: GYMNASTICS-TUMBL.TOTS 190-183-4982 41.00 41.00 58242 10/07/99 003163 MINOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEM ANN'L MNTC AGRMT:EPI030 COPIER 330-199-999-5217 236.00 236.00 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 3000 CITY LETTERHEAD:PLAN 001-161-999-5222 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 2000 SECOND SHEET:PLANNING 001-161-999-5222 58243 lq/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 3000 ENVELOPES:PLANNING 001-161-999-5222 156.75 60.96 258.76 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 10/07/99 11:37 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 001-161-999-5222 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 5000 WINDOW ENVELOPES:FIN. 001-140-999-5222 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 001-140-9<)9-5222 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS:D.HILLBERG 165-199-999-5222 58243 10/07/99 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS SALES TAX 165-199-999-5222 36.93 257.49 19.96 38.25 2.96 832.06 58244 10/07/99 001986 MUSICAL AUDIO ENVIRONM OCT BROADCAST MUSIC:OLD TOWN 001-164-603-5250 59.50 59.50 58245 10/07/99 003570 NORM REEVES 2000 DODGE RAM TRUCK FOR PW 310-1910 58245 10/07/99 003570 NORM REEVES 2000 DODGE RAM TRUCK FOR PW 310-1910 29,415.75 29,415.75 58,831.50 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 190-180-999-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 190-180-999-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-162-999-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 190-180-999-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN T]RE& SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-165-999-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 340-199-701-5214 58246 10/07/99 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 190-180-999-5214 58247 10/07/99 PACIFIC AMERICAN CULTUR REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 40.00 78.96 399.65 941.67 164.62 164.96 19.19 100.00 1,809.05 100.00 58248 10/07/99 PEAVEY, MARTIN F. REFUND: HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 001-199-4056 20.00 20.00 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 165-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 58249 10/07/9<) 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 194-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 280-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 320-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 330-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 340-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 001-2130 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 190-2130 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 191-2130 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 193-2130 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 194-2130 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 001-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 165-2390" 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 193-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 194-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 280-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 330-2390 58249 10/07/99 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 25,121.53 678.42 4,028.45 12.71 429.10 115.52 293.48 124.57 658.32 135.87 512.26 100.64 11.24 2.81 33.71 8.43 79.75 1.87 15.78 .05 1.81 .41 .92 1.86 .93 2.18 32,373.08 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58250 58250 58250 58250 58250 58250 58250 58251 58251 58251 58252 58253 58253 58253 58254 58255 58256 58257 58258 58259 58260 58260 58260 58261 58261 58262 58263 58263 58263 58263 58263 58263 58264 58265 58265 11:37 CHECK DATE 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 VENDOR NUMBER 003826 003826 003826 003826 003826 003826 003826 000254 000254 000254 003493 003718 003718 003718 003308 002612 000947 000268 002940 002181 002181 002181 000271 000271 002226 002743 002743 002743 002743 002743 002743 000403 002855 002855 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU 8.5 X 11 WHITE COPY PAPER PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU 8.5 X 11 COLORED PAPER PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU 36" X 500t ENGINERING ROLLS PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU INDEX TABS FOR COUNCIL AGENDAS PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU 8.5 X 11LASER PAPER PREM]ERE PACKAGING INDU 11X 17 LASER PAPER PREMIERE PACKAGING INDU SALES TAX PRESS ENTERPRISE CONPAN PRESS ENTERPRISE CONPAN PRESS ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC NOTICE: TITLE 17 PUBLIC NOTICE: 921-660026 PUBLIC NOTICE: ARDEN PRO-CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR RES. IMPROVEMENT PRGM: L. QRT]Z PROBE INC, THE PROBE INC, THE PROBE INC, THE TRANSMITTER FOR TEM POLICE UHF RECEIVER ~ 3 CHANNEL SALES TAX R D 0 RENTAL COMPANY EQUIP.RENTAL:LAS SERENA/KEARNY RADIO SHACK INC MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C DUPL.BLUEPRINTS:PUJOL SIDEWALK RANCHO SAN RAMON LANDSC REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT RIVERSIDE CO HABITAT SEPT 99 K~RAT PAYMENT RIVERSIDE CO OF (GIS SY COUNTY ANNUAL DATA FEE 99-2000 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RET.W/H PMT#6:MARG/OVRLND:9707 AUG C/O PMT#6:MARG/OVRLND:9707 AUG PRGS PMT#6:MARG/OVRLD:9707 ROBERT REIN WM FROST & AUG PROF.ENG.SVCS:S.GERTRUDIS ROBERT REIN ~ FROST & AUG C/0#1PMT:S.GERTRUDIS TRL RUSSO, MARY ANNE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH SAFE & SECURE LOCKSMITH LOCKSMITH SVCS:T.V.MUSEUM LOCKSMITH SVCS:T.V.MUSEUM LOCKSMITH SERVICES:CITY HALL LOCKSMITH SVCS:DUCK POND LOCKSMITH SERVICES:MAINT.FAC. LOCKSMITH SVCS:T.V.MUSEUM SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA SEP POOL MAINTENANCE:T.E.S. SHESHUNOFF INFO SERVICE STATE&LOC GOVT Y2K ANALYSIS UD SHESHUNOFF INFO SERVICE FREIGHT 330-199-999-5220 330-199-999-5220 330-199-999-5220 330-199-9<29-5220 330-199-999-5220 330-199-999-5220 330-199-999-5220 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 165-199-813-5804 001-170-999-5610 001-170-999-5610 001-170-999-5610 001-164-601-5238 320-199-999-5221 210-165-826-5804 190-2900 001-2300 001-161-610-5250 210-2035 210-165-681;5804 210-165-681-5804 210-190-147-5802 210-190-147-5802 190-183-999-5330 190-185-999-5250 210-190-808-5804 340-199-701-5212 190-180-999-5212 340-199-702-5212 190-185-999-5250 190-180-999-5212 320-199-999-5228 320-199-999-5228 ITEM AMOUNT 2,688.00 379.50 221.40 469.50 48,30 53.50 299.17 8.25 6.75 13.25 1,015.00 699.95 599.95 100.74 187.49 34.45 98.91 100.00 14,285,00 3,000.00 47,784.05- 65,935.49 411,904.96 2,100.00 400.00 644.00 200.02 941.00 27.88 132.92 11.98 227.75 581.60 265.00 25.95 PAGE 5 CHECK AMOUNT 4,159.37 28.25 1,015.00 1,400.64 187.49 34.45 98,91 100.00 14,285.00 3,000.00 430,056.40 2,500.00 644.00 1,541.55 581.60 290.95 VOLICHRE2 10/07/99 11:37 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AHOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58266 10/07/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 58266 10/07/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 58266 10/07/99 000537 SO CAL[F EDISON 58266 10/07/99 000537 SO CALIF EDISON SEP:2-OO-397-5067:VARIOUS MTRS SEP:2-OO-397-5067:VARIOUS MTRS SEP:2-18-589-9739:MARG.RD.LS3 CR:LATE PMT CHRG:2-OO-397-5067 193-180-999-5240 191-180-999-5240 191-180-999-5319 193-180-999-5240 879.20 12.96 46.84 9.40- 929.60 58267 10/07/99 STICE, EDDIE REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 58268 10/07/99 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL AUG CONSTR.SUPPORT:OVRLND:9511 210-165-604-5804 58268 10/07/99 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL AUG FOUND.DSGN.SVCS:OVRLD:9511 210-165-604-5801 58268 10/07/99 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL AUG REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES:9511 210-165-604-5804 649.10 2,110.00 14.15 2,773.25 58269 10/07/99 003770 TAC PROFESSIONAL STAFFI TEMP HELP W/E 9/11/99 BRAGG 58269 10/07/99 003770 TAC PROFESSIONAL STAFFI TEMP HELP W/E 9/18/99 BRAGG 001-165-999-5118 001-165-999-5118 873.60 907.20 1,780.80 58270 10/07/99 TAVAGLIONE CONSTRUCTION REFUND: BUSINESS LICENSE 001-199-4056 35.00 35.00 58271 10/07/99 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P PLUMBING SVCS:R.V.SPORTS PARK 190-180-999-5212 368. O0 368.00 58272 10/07/99 000168 TEMECULA FLO4ER CORRAL SUNSHINE FUND 001-2170 99.56 99.56 58273 10/07/99 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY EMP.RECOGNITION AWARD:T,CORDER 001-150-999-5265 61.63 61.63 58274 10/07/99 TEMECULA VALLEY COUNCIL REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 58275 10/07/99 58275 10/07/99 TEMEKU HILLS DEV. PARTN REFUND:REVISED COST:LD99-130CO 001-163-4360 TEMEKU HILLS DEV. PARTN REFUND:REVISED COST:LD99-130CO 001-163-4368 455.00 455.00 910.00 58276 10/07/99 002111 TOGOS RESTAURANT REFRESHMENTS FOR COUNCIL MTG 001-100-999-5260 69.95 69.95 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-100-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERV[CE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-110-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-120-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-162-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 190-180-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERV]CE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 280-199-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-140-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERV[CE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-150-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-161-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-164-604-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-171-999-5230 58277 10/07/99 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 001-1990 4.95 161.96 154.58 46.56 173.49 97.25 556.52 206.42 468.88 287.43 1.76 2,158.55 4,318.35 58278 10/07/99 002899 UNISTRUT 58278 10/07/99 002899 UNISTRUT REPLACEMENT OF PIONJAR & TOOLS 001-164-601-5610 SALES TAX 001-164-601-5610 494.39 38.32 532.71 58279 10/07/99 000524 VAN TECH ENGINEERING SA SAFETY WINTER JACKET FOR LD 58279 10/07/99 000524 VAN TECH ENGINEERING SA SALES TAX 001-163-999-5242 001-163-999-5242 78.92 5.72 84.64 58280 10/07/99 WAXMAN, THE CITY VEHICLE DETAILING 001-164-601-5214 134.95 134.95 58281 10/07/99 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN TREE TRIMMING:AVE DE LA REINA 001-164-601-5402 468.00 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58281 58282 58283 58284 58285 58286 11:37 CHECK DATE 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 10/07/99 VENDOR NUMBER 003730 002109 003756 VENDOR NAME WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN WESTVIEW SERVICES, INC. WHITE CAP WHITE HOUSE SANITATION ZD JOURNALS ZELASKO, KATHLEEN CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION TREE TRIMMING:AVE DE LA REINA REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT MISC.SUPPLIES:PW MAINT.CREW SEP SVCS:BUTTERFIELD STAGE R.R ANN'L SUB:INSIDE MICROSOFT WIN REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-180-999-5415 190-2900 001-164-601-5218 190-180-999-5250 320-199-~99-5228 190-2900 ITEM AMOUNT 624.00 100.00 203.59 50.00 39.00 100.00 PAGE 7 CHECK AMOUNT 1,092.00 100.00 203,59 50.00 39.00 100.00 TOTAL CHECKS 627,222.82 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 13:36 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 66,673.53 33,488.00 1,250.00 22,753.00 2,268,973.32 18o150.97 541.00 TOTAL 2,411,829.82 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 10/07/99 13:36 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 58289 10/19/99 003071 BIDAMERICA ELECTRONIC ARCHIVING FOR FIRE 001-171-999-5250 9,477.92 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC SEPT PRGSS-CO#3-OVRLD OVRCROSS 210-165-604-5804 308~100.50- 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC SEPT PRGSS:OVRLD OVRCROSS/I-15 210-165-604'5804 1,332,984.43 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC CREDIT:EXCEEDS APPROVED AMOUNT 210-165-604-5804 50.00- 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC CREDIT:CONTRACTOR PLN REVISION 210-165-604-5804 14.15- 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC CREDIT: PMT OF INV# 1571/1575 001-1270 2,070.44- 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC RETENTION W/H FOR SEPT PRGSS 210-2035 102,488.39- 58290 10/19/99 003567 C C MYERS INC REVERSE RETENTION FOR CREDIT 210'2035 5.00 9,477.92 920,265.95 58291 10/19/99 002358 CERTIFIED FOLDER DISPLA ANNUAL RENEWAL:TOURIST SYS.PRG 001-111-999-5270 12,101.05 12,101.05 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS 10 - PC WORKSTATIONS 320-1970 8,720.00 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS 10 - NATURAL KEYBOARD 320-1970 230.00 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS 10 - INTELLIMOUSE PRO 320-1970 160.00 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS 10 - SAMSUNG 750B MONITORS 320-1970 2,980.00 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS FREIGHT 320-1970 38.90 58292 10/19/99 003813 CUSTOM BUILT SOLUTIONS SALES TAX 320-1970 936.98 13,065.88 58293 10/19/99 001544 E L YEAGER CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS:I-15/AUXILIARY LANE 210-165-697-5804 58293 10/19/99 001544 E I YEAGER CONSTRUCTION RETENTION W/H FOR SEPT PRGSS 210-2035 335,064.50 33,506.45- 301,558.05 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVC:NEIGHBORHOOD PK 190-180-999-5415 9,374.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: NORTH SLOPE 193-180-999-5415 9,378.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVC: SOUTH SLOPES 193-180-999-5415 13,375.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS:MEDIAN AREAS 191-180-999-5415 1,250.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: SPORT PARKS 190-180-999-5415 21,725.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: CRC 190-182-999-5415 1,444,00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: SR CENTER 190-181-999-5415 361.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: CITY HALL 340-199-701-5415 541.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: TCC 190-184-999-5415 193.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: STATION #84 001-171-999-5212 400.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: 6TH STREET 001-164-603-5415 250.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: STREETSCAPE 001-164-603-5415 987.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: STREETSCAPE 190-180-999-5415 106.00 58294 10/19/99 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE SEPT LDSCP SVCS: TEM MUSEUM 190-185-999-5415 285.00 59,669.00 58295 10/19/99 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA MARC RD-PAUBA RD IMPROV:AUG SV 210-165-706-5802 4,883.26 58295 10/19/99 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA MARC RD-PAUBA RD IMPROV:AUG SV 210-165-713-5802 463.16 5,346.42 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS:GERTRUDIS CRK TRAIL 210-190-147-5804 96,718.80 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS:CO#1-CRK BIKE TRAIL 210-190-147-5804 5,390.00 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS: PALA RD BRIDGE 210-165-631-5804 526,725.60 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS-CO#3:PALA RD BRIDGE 210-165-631-5804 474.60 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION SEPT PRGSS ON CO#4:PALA BRIDGE 210-165-631-5804 111,853.60 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CREDIT:AMOUNT BILLED IN EXCESS 210-165-631-5804 30,201.60- 58296 10/19/99 003592 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION W/H SEPT PRGSS:CK TR 210-2035 10,210.88- 700,750.12 58297 10/19/99 003659 J K WEIGLE ENGINEERING SEPT PRGSS:ROTARY PARK IMPROV 210-190-162-5804 14,283.03 58297 10/19/99 003659 J K ~EIGLE ENGINEERING RETENTION ~/H FOR SEPT PRGSS 210-2035 1,428.30- 12,854.~r3 VOUCHRE2 10/07/99 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 58298 58299 58299 58300 58300 58300 58301 58301 58301 58301 58302 58303 58303 58303 58304 58305 58306 13:36 CHECK DATE 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 10/19/99 VENDOR NUMBER 001091 000944 000944 003800 003800 003800 003641 003641 003641 003641 002256 000793 000793 000793 003228 003847 003730 VENDOR NAME KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY I MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY I MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING MCLAUGHLIN ENGINEERING MEGA ELECTRIC COMPANY MEGA ELECTRIC COMPANY MEGA ELECTRIC COMPANY MEGA ELECTRIC COMPANY P & D CONSULTANTS INC SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO SCANTRON FPC CORPORATIO U S BANK VALUATION RESOURCE MAMA WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION CONF CENTER STUDY RE:PECHANGA TRAF.SGNLS/CNTRLS:MARG/PAUBA SALES TAX SEP PRGS PMT#2:R.C/I-15:95-12 SEP PRGS PMT#2:R.C/I-15:95-12 RET.~/H PMT#2:R.C/I-15:95-12 AUG-SEP PMT:TNS COURT LIGHTING RET.W/H PMT:TNS COURT LIGHTING C/0#1 PMT:TNS COURT LIGHT:9810 RET.W/N PMT:TNS COURT LIGHTING AUG BUILDING INSPECTION SVCS SM2500 SCANMARK 2500 READER FREIGHT SALES TAX JOINT FUND AGRMT:CHP @ I15/795 ASSET INVENTORY SERVICES SEP TREE TRIM MAINT:CITYWIDE ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-161-999-5248 210-165-699-5804 210-165-699-5804 210-165-711-5804 210-165-655-5804 210-2035 210-190-155-5804 210-2035 210-190-155-5804 210-2035 001-162-999-5118 320-1970 320-1970 320-1970 001-2030 001-140-999-5248 001-164-601-5402 ITEM AMOUNT 5,300.00 14,417.92 1,117.39 240,526.00 52,290.00 29,282.00- 44,435.05 4,443.51- 7,851.96 785.20- 11,805.00 4,685.00 37.00 363.09 10,180.00 10,000,00 8,243.00 PAGE 2 CHECK AMOUNT 5,300.00 15,535.31 263,534.00 47,058.30 11,805.00 5,085.09 10,180.00 10,000.00 8,243.00 TOTAL CHECKS 2,411,829.82 ITEM 3 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 24, 1999 Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC The Open Session of the City Council meeting convened at 7:00 P.M. Councilmembers: Comerchero, Roberts, Stone, and Ford. Councilmember: Lindemans. The prelude music was provided by Kurt Jordan. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Mitzvah Williams of Congregation Hauvurim. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Councilman Roberrs. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS National Transit Appreciation Day Proclamation Mayor Ford presented the proclamation to Councilman Lindemans. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Comerchero advised that he has been appointed to the Small Business Advisory Committee to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), noting that future discussions will include the impacts AQMD regulations are having on small business and that potential mitigation measure to these impacts will be discussed as well. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. R:\Minutes\082499 1 2 4 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of June 22, 1999. Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Employment Agreement for City Manager RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the Employment Agreement for the City Manager and authorize the Mayor to execute the Employment Agreement on behalf of the City. Substitute Faithful Performance Warranty Security for Public Improvements in Tract No. 21818 (located westerly of the intersection of Via Norte at Kahwea Road) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept Substitute Faithful Performance Warranty security for the Public Improvements in Tract No. 21818; 5.2 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty security on file for the Public Improvements; 5.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-1 (located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-1. 6.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. R:\Minutes\082499 2 7 10 Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities in Tract No. 27827-F (located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities for street and drainage, and water and sewer system improvements in Tract No. 27827-F. 7.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Parcel Map No. 29175 (located east of Margarita Road between Winchester Road and Verdes Lane) RECOM MEN DATION: 8.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 29175 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 8.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 8.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Tract Map No. 28510 (located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Mar.qarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 9.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 9.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Tract Map No. 28510-1 (located northeast of North General Kearnv Road and Mar.qarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-1 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 10.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 10.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. R:\Minutes\082499 3 11 12 13 Tract Map No. 28510-2 (located northeast of North General Kearny Road and Margarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-2 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 11.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 11.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Tract Map No. 28510-3 (located northeast of North General Kearnv Road and Mar.clarita Road in Campos Verdes Specific Plan No. 1) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve Tract Map No. 28510-3 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 12.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; 12.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. Professional Services A.qreement - GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. - Mar.qarita Road Improvements, Pauba Road to Hi.qhwav 79 South - Project No. PW99-01 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the agreement with GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. to provide professional engineering and design services for the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates to construct Margarita Road Improvements, Pauba Road to Highway 79 South --Project No. PW99-01 - for an amount not to exceed $199,700.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of 10% of the contract or $19,970.00. 14 Glassy-Win.cled Sharpshooter Research Contract RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the contract between the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, and the American Vineyard Foundation (AVF). (Pulled for separate discussion; see page 5.) R:\Min utes\082499 4 15 Second Readin.cl of Ordinance No. 99-22 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 8.12,020 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCES, AMENDING SECTION 8.'12.160 RELATING TO EMERGENCY ABATEMENT AND ALTERNATE ABATEMENT ACTIONS, AND ADDING SECTION 10.08.075 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE DEPOSIT OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DEBRIS, ROCKS OR DIRT UPON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY OR PROPERTY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE OWNER 16 Second Readin.cl of Ordinance No. 99-23 RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-23 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY TITLE 16 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLED SUBDIVISIONS, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 94-08, ORDINANCE NO. 92-14 AND SECTION NO. 32 OF ORDINANCE NO. 90-04 AND ADOPTING NEW TITLE 16 TITLED SUBDIVISIONS FOR INCLUSION INTO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (Mayor Ford abstained with regard to Section 16.09.240 of this Ordinance.) MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-13, 15 and 16. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Ford who abstained with regard to Section 16.09.240 of Ordinance No. 99-23 -Item No. 16 (Item No. 14 was pulled for separate discussion; see below.) Consent Calendar Item considered under separate discussion 14 Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter Research Contract RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the contract between the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, and the American Vineyard Foundation (AVF). Councilman Roberts abstained with regard to this Item. R:\Minutes\082499 5 Assistant City Manager O'Grady presented the staff report (of record), noting that all City/County funds will be dispersed toward research efforts; that no funding will be utilized for overhead; and that the County Board of Supervisors approved a like agreement with AVF. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who abstained. At 7:12 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:21 P.M., the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council business. Reconvened to regular aqenda order COUNCIL BUSINESS 17 Award of Construction Contract for I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Winchester Road - Project No. PW98-07 RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Award a construction contract for the I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Winchester Road - Project No. PW98-07 - to E.L. Yeager Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of $544,329.40 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 17.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $54,432.94 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material, including the supplemental material), advising that this contract has a 25-day working period to assure the improvements are complete prior to the mall opening and, therefore, this contract includes night work and prohibits closures of through lanes during the improvements. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 18 Award of Construction Contract for I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Rancho California Road - Project No. PW98-08 RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Award a construction contract for the I-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Rancho California Road - Project No. PW98-08 -to Riverside Construction Company in the amount of $50,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 18.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $45,000.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Public Works Director Hughes presented the staff report (as per agenda material, including the supplemental material). R :\M in utes\082499 MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 19 Appeal of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Denial to Install Stop Si.qns on Via Cordoba for Speed Control RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Deny a request for multi-way stop controls along Via Cordoba at Corte Zorita, Loma Linda Road, and Corte BravoNia Saltio intersections; 19.2 Provide direction to the Public Works Traffic Division to establish a standard policy for addressing speeding problems in residential areas to be approved by the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and City Council, respectively. Mayor Ford abstained with regard to this item. By way of PowerPoint and video, Public Works Director Hughes presented and clarified the staff report (of record), referencing speed violations on Via Cordoba, speed survey, and use of stop signs and noting that the use of stop signs, at this particular location, would not solve the speeding concern but would create an additional problem of individuals violating the stop signs. Mr. Hughes briefly commented on various devices/methods which will be considered and potentially recommended in a City-wide policy for all residential areas throughout the City. In an effort to address the Via Cordoba concerns, Mr. Hughes recommended the use of striping in order to create the appearance of narrower lanes as well as additional law enforcement. As done in Sister City Voorburg, Councilman Lindemans suggested striping the bike lane red which as well would create the appearance of narrower lanes. In light of the length of this street, Councilman Roberts expressed concern with Via Cordoba being utilized as a bypass road. Mr. Roberts, echoed by Councilman Comerchero, also commented on the potential traffic impacts the upcoming Wolf Creek Development may have on Via Cordoba and requested that staff address that issue. The following residents spoke in support of multi-way stop controls at intersections along Via Cordoba: Mr. Robert Purmort 45099 Code Valle Mr. Charles Hankley 31745 Via Cordoba Ms. Sheri Hancock 31520 Via Cordoba Ms. Christina Hill 31950 Via Cordoba Ms. Janet Dixon 31860 Via Cordoba Mr. Frank Romero no address given Mr. Mitchell Brasga 31586 Loma Linda Road Mr. Tom McGuire 31535 Via Cordoba R:\Minutes\082499 7 The above-mentioned individuals spoke in support of the stop signs for the following reasons and as well offered the following resolutions to mitigate the speeding concern along Via Cordoba: Via Cordoba a curved street creating a safety issue - Speeding concern primarily at the bottom of the street - Driveways along Via Cordoba are sloped - Future impact from the Wolf Creek Development Offered resolutions install stop signs additional law enforcement speed bumps make the east end of Via Cordoba a cul-de-sac barriers install traffic circles Because the warrant analysis determined the multi-way stop controls on Via Cordoba as unwarranted, Mr. Mario Carvajal, 31645 Via Cordoba, spoke in opposition to the installation of such signs. With regard to the previous installation of speed bumps on Pina Colada, Councilman Roberrs noted that the use of speed bumps has had a nominal impact on speed reduction but that it has had a significant impact on lowering those residents' property values. Mr. Roberrs noted that the installation of stop signs at Starlight Ridge had a positive impact on speed reduction. With regard to Via Cordoba, he suggested that the use of traffic circles be explored by staff and if such use were not feasible in this particular location, stop signs should be installed. Councilman Lindemans reiterated his suggestion to paint the bicycle path red and as well spoke in support of staff exploring the use traffic circles at this particular location and that if such use would not be feasible, stop signs should be installed. Echoing his fellow Councilmembers' comments, Councilman Comerchero suggested that staff review the use of traffic circles and that the matter be readdressed by the City Council within two weeks. With regard to the use of stop signs, Mr. Comerchero relayed his opposition to such installation if it has been determined that such signs are not warranted. While staff is exploring the use of traffic circles on Via Cordoba, Public Works Director Hughes recommended the use of clearly marked, temporary traffic circle devices. Councilman Roberts suggested that the Public Works City Council Subcommittee (comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilman Roberts) address this issue and receive an update from staff within a month and that an update as well be provided to the Homeowners Association. R :\M in utes\082499 Mayor Pro Tem Stone commended staff on the informative staff report and presentation with regard to this item and reiterated the need to formulate a resolution to the concern, viewing the use of traffic circles as a positive method. Mr. Stone as well introduced the acronym STERN (Speed Termination Entering Residential Neighborhoods) and requested that additional law enforcement be visible throughout residential neighborhoods and that for the next 30 days a weekly toll be provided as to speeding tickets issued at Via Cordoba. MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved that while staff is formulating a City-wide policy with regard to multi-way stop controls, staff install two to three temporary traffic circles on Via Cordoba with the exact location to be determined by the Public Works Department. The motion was seconded by Councilman Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Ford who abstained. Although having abstained with regard to this particular issue, Mayor Ford commended the City Council on its decision and encouraged staff to review how collector roadways influence residential neighborhoods. At 8:49 P.M., Mayor Ford called a recess and reconvened the meeting at 9:02 P.M. 20 Consideration of Sponsorship Requests RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve funding for the Rod Run in the amount up to $25,000 for actual City- support costs; 20.2 Approve funding for the Frontier Days Rodeo in the amount of $10,000 plus actual City-support costs up to the amount of $6,500; 20.3 Approve funding for the Great Temecula Tractor Race in the amount of $10,000 plus actual City-support costs up to the amount of $14,100; 20.4 Appropriate an amount not to exceed $10,000 to provide an audit of the Temecula Town Association's Financial Statements. Assistant City Manager O'Grady presented the staff report (as per agenda material), advising that if staff recommendation were approved, the Council would have to appropriate additional funds from the unallocated General Fund Reserves and that any funding approved in excess of the recommendation would as well require additional allocation to the General Fund Reserves. Councilman Lindemans spoke in opposition to the City funding audits for these organizations. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone, Councilman Comerchero clarified the Council Subcommittee's (comprised of Councilmembers Comerchero and Roberts) rationale to the above-mentioned recommendation and noted that it would be financially responsible of the City to conduct periodic review, by way of an audit, of those organizations receiving City funding. Viewing these events such as the Rod Run as major sources of tourism to the City, Mayor Ford relayed his concern with expecting these non-profit organizations to pay for unanticipated City support expenses for Police and Fire. Mayor Pro Tem Stone suggested that specific language such as unless mitigated by a City Council majority vote be incorporated for these non-profit organization agreements. R :\M in utes\082499 9 Finance Director Roberts noted that the scope and detail of the audit for these non-profit organizations would depend size as well as dollars funded. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation as amended by Mayor Pro Tem Stone; see page 9. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 21 Appointment of an Ad hoc Subcommittee to evaluate the Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Proposal and report to the City Council with recommendations RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Appoint an Ad hoc Subcommittee to evaluate the proposed annexation of the Roripaugh Ranch area to the City of Temecula and determine if the City should commit to being the lead agency in an assessment district for the construction of improvements for Butterfield Stage Road. It is further recommended that after this committee meets and analyzes the issues associated with this project, that the committee report its findings back to the City Council with recommendations. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to appoint Councilmembers Comerchero and Roberts. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 22 Community Service Fundin.q Program Ad hoc Committee Selection RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the Community Service Funding Program Ad hoc Committee to review and approve applications received for that program. MOTION: Mayor Ford moved to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilman Comerchero. The motion was seconded by Councilman Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 23 Award of Contract for P.C. Workstations RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Award a contract for Pentium based computer workstations to Custom Built Solutions of Walnut, California, in the amount of $149,095.00. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 24 City Council Meeting Schedule - October 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Direct the City Clerk to reschedule the regular City Council Meeting of October 12, 1999 to October 5, 1999, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. R:\Minutes\082499 10 MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson advised that the additional improvements to the Rancho California Road Interchange, adding two northbound and two southbound on-ramps, are in the process and should be completed within the next 45 to 60 days. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT No additional comments. ADJOURNMENT At 9:30 P.M., Mayor Ford formally adjourned the City Council meeting to Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula California. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\082499 11 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 CLOSED SESSION A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 6:00 P.M., in the Main Conference Room. It was duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Closed Session pursuant to Government Sections: 1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 conceming the sale/lease of real property located at 28699 Front Street (APN 922-046-020). The negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Hopkins Real Estate Group. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The Agency negotiators are Shawn Nelson, James O'Grady, and John Meyer. 2. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to each matter, the City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City and/or the Agency based on existing facts and circumstances. The Open Session of the City Council meeting convened at 7:01 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers: Comerchero, Lindemans, Stone, and Ford. Absent: Councilmember: Roberts. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Hayley Lieberg. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Dr. Randy R. Johnson of the Temecula United Methodist Church. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Cub Scout Pack 301, Webelos-Pythons, Brian Baber, Den Leader. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS RTA Video Presentation Providing a brief overview of his recent visit to St. Louis, Councilman Lindemans relayed that various RTA staff members, County Supervisors, and Councilmen went to Missouri to attain additional information regarding the Metrolink Project which was opened in 1993; introduced the video presentation which provided the following data: 1 ) the ten- year construction process, 2) the initial cost of $464 million to build and design the project, $348 million of which was federally funded, 3) the ridership numbers, which was initially 30,000 passengers a day and has continued to increase, and 4) the base fair cost of $1.25; noted that RTA is in the process of conducting a study associated with mass transit; and for Councilman Comerchero, provided additional information regarding the funding of the St. Louis Metrolink Project. Academy of Advance Education to City Clerk Jones Mayor Ford relayed the achievements of City Clerk Jones; noted that solely 14% of the 10,000 members of IMMC have qualified for the Academy status; relayed the prestigious attainment of the qualification; and presented the Certificate to City Clerk Jones. City Manager Nelson conveyed congratulations to City Clerk Jones; and relayed to Mr. Jones, her husband, what an asset she is to the City. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Michael O'Brien, Jr., 42200 Main Street, a four-year old child community member, thanked Mayor Ford for his efforts associated with making the City a great place to live; relayed that he would be praying for him; and presented a letter to the Mayor. Mayor Ford thanked little Michael for the letter; and relayed that he would frame the letter in order to display it in his office. Mr. Sam Pratt, 40470 Brixton Cove, relayed accolades to Councilman Lindemans, for his efforts associated with investigating and supporting traffic solutions; and referencing Chapter 4, of the Government Code, recommended that the City actively pursue the County's cooperation in implementing mitigating measures for the traffic impact in the City of Temecula generated from outside the area. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Relaying his recent ride-along experience with the F.A.S.T. Program's ambulance vehicle, Mayor Pro Tern Stone commended the paramedics for their diligent efforts associated with their effective response to emergencies; and recommended that the City implement placement of address headings on the City's street signs in order to expedite the emergency response time; and recommended that the Public/Traffic Safety Commission evaluate implementation of computerized address finding tools (GPS) in the City's emergency vehicles, initially, in the Fire Department's vehicles, and, subsequently, in the Police Department's vehicles, as well. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone's previous recommendation, Councilman Comerchero relayed that there were inexpensive hand-held computerized address finding tools (GPS) available at this time. C= For informational purposes, Mayor Ford relayed that there will be a Planning meeting held on October 11, 1999 from 5:30 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. at the Temecula Community Center (as part of Riverside County's Integrated Planning Process), noting that Supervisors Buster and Venerable would be in attendance; and encouraged the R:\minutes\092899 community members and available Councilmembers to attend in order to discuss traffic, specifically, the impact of the outside areas on the City of Temecula. D. Mayor Ford commended Councilman Comerchero for his efforts associated with the re-instituted School and City meeting which would be held October 5, 1999. E. Mayor Ford relayed that he was in the process of developing a five-year program for consideration with respect to the Multi-Species Habitat Plan, noting that his term of service would soon end, relaying that the program would be in a position to move forward, inclusive of the acquisition of an additional 20,000 acres of Open Space. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 1999. It was noted that Councilman Lindemans would be abstaining with regard to this issue. 3 Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 Arts Council of Temecula Valley Community Service Fundin.q Request RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Review and consider the Arts Council of Temecula Valley funding request in the amount of $22,000 for their community service programs. R:~ninutes\092899 3 5 Street Name Chan.cte from Shooters Hill Road to Elizabeth Road RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME IN TRACT NO. 23143-2 FROM SHOOTERS HILL ROAD TO ELIZABETH ROAD 6 Consideration of Deferral of Development Impact Fees for Temecula Valley Inn RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve an agreement with the Temecula Valley Inn, which provides for the deferral of Development Impact Fees. 7 Memorandum of Understanding for Marketing Program RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the cities of Muraleta, Lake Elsinore, Temecula and Riverside County for a regional business attraction/marketing program. 8 Authorize Temporary Partial Street Closures for "Race for the Cure" Event November 13, 1999 in the Promenade Mall area (located at Mar.qarita Road, Solana Way, Ynez Road, and Overland Avenue) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-9S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PARTIAL STREET CLOSURES FOR INLAND EMPIRE INAUGURAL RACE FOR THE CURE EVENT ON NOVEMBER 13, 1999, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT Consent Calendar Item No. 8 was pulled for separate consideration, see page 7. R:\minutes\092899 4 10 11 12 Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities for Public Improvements in Tract No. 22148 (located northwesterly and southeasterly of La Serena Way at Calle Medusa) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Authorize release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Securities for the public street and drainage and water and sewer improvements in Tract No. 22148; 9.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the developer and surety. Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24131-F (located at the southwesterly comer of Meadows Parkway at McCabe Ddve) RECOMMENDATION: 10. 1 Accept the public street and sewer and water systems improvements in Tract No. 24131-F; 10.2 Authorize reduction in Faithful Performance security amounts to the ten percent (10%) warranty amount and initiation of the one-year (1) warranty period; 10.3 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the developer and surety. Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System within Tract No. 24131-F ('located at the southwesterly corner of Meadows Parkway at McCabe Drive RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 24131 -F) Award of Construction Contract for the FY99-00 Pavement Management System - Project No. PW99-07 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Award a construction contract for the FY99-00 Pavement Management System - Project No. PW99-07 to All American Asphalt in the amount of $444,265.30 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; R:\minutes\092899 12.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $44,426.53, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 13 Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to solicit Construction Bids for Pavement Mana,clement System - Project No. PW99-16 - Winchester Road Pavement Rehabilitation RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Pavement Management System- Project No. PW99-16 -Winchester Road Pavement Rehabilitation. 14 Professional Services Agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates for the Realignment of Diaz Road to Vincent Mora~a Ddve, Project No. PW95-27 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates to provide professional engineering and design services for the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates to construct the improvements for the Realignment of Diaz Road to Vincent Moraga Drive, Project No. 95-27, for the not to exceed amount of $72,968.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 14.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of 10% of the contract or $7,296.80; 15 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 99-24 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF TITLE 17 TO RE-CATEGORIZE TEMPORARY USES, AMEND YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, CLARIFY FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS PROVISIONS, AND MAKE NUMEROUS MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0197) R:\minutes\092899 16 Second Readin.el of Ordinance No. 99-25 RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-25 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR THE AREAS KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-660-026, 921-660-027, 921-660-041, 921-660-042, AND 950-120-004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0291 ) It was noted that Councilman Comerchero would be abstaining with regard to this issue. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-7 and 9-16. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent and Councilman Lindemans who abstained with regard to Item No. 2, and Councilman Comerchero who abstained with regard to Item No. 16. (Consent Calendar Item No. 8 was pulled; see below.) Consent Calendar Item No. 8 was considered at this time. Authorize Temporan/Partial Street Closures for "Race for the Cure" Event November 13, 1999 in the Promenade Mall area (located at Mar.clarita Road, Solana Way, Ynez Road, and Overland Avenue) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PARTIAL STREET CLOSURES FOR INLAND EMPIRE INAUGURAL RACE FOR THE CURE EVENT ON NOVEMBER 13, 1999, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT Ms. Joan Sparkman, 40213 Colony Drive, introduced the Chairman and the Coordinator of the event, scheduled for the purpose of raising funds for the Breast Cancer Foundation; specified the sponsors for The Race forthe Cure; and in response to Mayor Pro Tem Stone's querying, relayed that 75% of the monies raised at the Temecula event would be for provision of needs in the area, while the remaining 25% of the funds raised would be used for the provision of breast cancer research. R:\minutes\092899 7 Mayor Pro Tern Stone recommended that this particular fundraising affair be publicized in the newspaper in order to promote this commendable event. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Staff Recommendation. Councilman Comerchero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. At 7:40 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:44 P.M. the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council Business. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17 Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan), Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431), Planning Application No. PA99-0285 ('Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol), and Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) (located north of State HiGhway 79 South, south of Montele.qro Way, east of Mar.qarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway- Home Depot) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Continue Public Hearing to the meeting of October 19, 1999 Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided clarification regarding the sole issues that would be recommended to be continued to the October 19, 1999 City Council meeting, specifically, to continue Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific, Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol), and Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) (located north of State highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway - Home Depot), and the associated environmental issues; and advised that the Development Plan and the Tentative Parcel map could be approved by the Planning Commission at the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, noting that the approval would finalize the necessary action with respect to those issues. At this time, Mayor Ford opened the public hearing. Mr. Allan Davis, representing the applicant, was available for questions and comments of the Council; and noted that the applicant would be agreeable to the continuance. Mr. Sam Stall, 43824 Badetta Street, relayed his concern with respect to the potential development of an apartment complex within the multi-family area; and noted that he had a petition encompassing approximately 200 signatures of opponents to the development of apartment dwellings in the area of discussion. For Mr. Stall, Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided clarification with respect to the multi-family zoning area, noting that the zoning had been previously approved by the City Council in the past; advised that this particular project proposed a reduction in densities; and noted that the previously approved multi-family area does not specify the type of allowable high density development (i.e., condominiums, senior facility, or apartment dwellings.) R:\minutes\092899 8 Mr. Stall was directed by the Council to address his concems to the Planning Commission at the September 29,1999 Planning Commission meeting. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve Staff Recommendation, to continue the Development Agreement, the Specific Plan, and the related environmental issues to the October 19, 1999 City Council meeting. Councilman Comerchero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. 18 Ordinance Regulating Massage Establishments and Massa.qe Practitioners (Planning Application PA97-0201 ) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99-26 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 5.22 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR PRACTICE OF MASSAGE WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, REPEALING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 596 AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY, AND AMENDING SECTION 1.08.010 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCES Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided an overview of the staff report (of record); noting the proposed revisions included in the Ordinance, as follows: 1 ) a modification of the definition of the term massage, 2) modification of the definition of specified anatomical areas, and 3) the elimination of separated City massage practitioner licensing process; advised that staff recommended an addition to the Exemptions (denoted as Section 5.22.025) to add additional language, as follows: Chair massage services provided by a licensed massage practitioner in a public location where the massage patron and practitioner remain fully clothed. At this time, Mayor Ford opened the public hearing. Mr. Steve Kuschner, 939 Rainbow Crest Road, relayed his desire that the City maintains reasonable limits with respect to the licensing fee costs. For Mr. Kuschner, Mayor Pro Tem Stone relayed the regulations associated with the cost of licensing fees, noting that there would be no profit for the City regarding the fee that would be set. At this time, Mayor Ford closed the public hearing. City Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 99-26. R:\minutes\092899 MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Staff Recommendation, to introduce and read by title only Ordinance No. 99-26, as modified. Councilman Comerchero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. At 7:56 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 8:06 P.M. COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 Designation of Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities Annual Con.aress RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Designate a voting representative and an alternate. MOTION: Mayor Ford moved to appoint Councilman Roberts as voting representative and Mayor Pro Tem Stone as alternate. Councilman Comerchero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberrs who was absent. 20 City Council Meeting Schedule - November and December 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Direct the City Clerk to cancel and/or re-schedule meetings in November and December, 1999, and to perform the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. City Clerk Jones relayed the additional staff recommendation to reschedule the October 26, 1999 City Council meeting to October 19, 1999. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Staff Recommendation with the additional rescheduling of the 2"d meeting in October to October 19, 1999, and the following November and December meeting dates: November 9th and 16th , and December 7th and 14th 1999. Councilman Comerchero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. 21 City of Temecula Ad Hoc Wall of Honor Subcommittee RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Amend the procedure for the establishment of the City of Temecula Wall of Honor; 21.2 Appoint two City Councilmembers to serve on an Ad Hoc Wall of Honor Subcommittee. Director of Community Services Parker presented the staff report (per agenda material.) Due to the importance of the issue, Councilman Lindemans recommended extending the submittal deadline for nominations, extending the 50-word short statement restriction, R:\minutes\092899 10 and to additionally, restrict the eligibility of nominees to solely those individuals with more than one nomination. Concurring with the importance of the issue, Councilman Comerchero agreed with extending the deadline for submittals; and for Councilman Lindemans, relayed the process of selection which has provision for multiple reviewing processes which would ensure safeguarding the selection process. Director of Community Services Parker relayed that the submittal deadline could be extended to October 15, 1999, noting that staff would be presenting the final nominations to the Commission and the City Council in November; and clarified the rationale for the 50-word limit on submittals, specifically for the purpose of simplifying the process, noting that submittals exceeding the 50-word limit would not be eliminated. After additional discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to extend the submitted short statements to 100 words, to extend the submittal deadline to October 15, 1999, and to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilman Comerchero to serve on the Ad Hoc Wall of Honor Subcommittee. City Manager Nelson appealed to the community to submit their nominations, relaying the importance for community involvement in order for the event to be successful. MOTION: Mayor Ford moved to approve Staff Recommendation, amending the following: extending the submittal deadline to October 15, 1999, and allowing up to a 100-word short statement to be submitted; and to appoint Mayor Pro Tern Stone and Councilmember Comerchero to serve on the Ad Hoc Wall of honor Subcommittee. Councilman Lindemans seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. 22 Reclaimed Water Use Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Approve the agreement with Rancho California Water District to supply reclaimed water for use at Rancho California Sports Park. Director of Community Services Parker provided an overview of the staff report (via agenda material); noted the potential for a substantial savings with respect to the watering costs at the park site; and introduced Mr. Andy Webster, from Rancho Water District, and Maintenance Superintendent Keyin Harrington who would be available for questions and comments from the Council. For Mayor Pro Tem Stone, Mr. Andy Webster, confirmed that the associated mandate was not funded by the State; noted, however, that the Water District would be funding the costs for this particular proposal. MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Staff Recommendation. Mayor Pro Tern Stone seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. R:~ninutes\092899 11 23 Consideration to Fund an Additional Temporary Westbound Lane on State Highway 79 South from Pala Road to I-15 to Reduce Traffic Congestion dudn.Q the County of Riverside's Construction of the "Missing Link" RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Approve funding a Contract Change Order between Riverside County Transportation and Riverside Construction to provide an additional temporary westbound lane on State Highway 79 South between Pala Road and 1-15. 23.2 Appropriate General Fund Unappropriated Reserves sufficient to cover said contract change order (the amount will be provided at the City Council Meeting.) Reviewing the City's efforts to work with the County and Riverside Construction to reduce traffic congestion along Highway 79 South, Director of Public Works Hughes presented the staff report (of record); specified the proposed improvements for provision of temporary traffic relief; noted that the contractor is in the process of modifying the design of the project with the constraints associated with the existing location of the water line; and specified the cost for the project as $67,831. Councilman Comerchero commended Director of Public Works Hughes and City Manager Nelson for their efforts associated with addressing the traffic congestion in the area of discussion in such a timely manner. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Stone moved to approve Staff Recommendation with the contract change order amount of $67, 831, subject to contingency of water line issues being resolved. Councilman Lindemans seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Roberts who was absent. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT Mayor Pro Tem Stone commented on the City's commitment to remove graffiti in an expeditious manner, noting the success of the program; and commended staff for their efforts associated with the matter. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson commended Director of Public Works Hughes and the Public Works Department for their assiduous efforts to bring the temporary traffic relief project for Highway 79 South forward; and relayed the City's desire to work with the Water District to relocate the water line in order to move the project forward. For informational purposes, City Manager Nelson relayed that the City held its first Annexation Workshop on Saturday, September 25, 1999 at Redhawk Elementary School, noting the community attendance, and the informational data provided; and advised that the next workshop would be held on September 30, 1999 at the Vail Ranch Middle School, inviting all the affected property owners to attend the meeting in order to obtain additional information regarding the annexation process. R:\minutes\092899 12 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Advising that the City Council provide direction with respect to both items discussed during Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson noted that with respect to the real property, that if there were an agreement with the developer to sell the property, that the issue would come back to the City Council, and the Redevelopment Board for approval in Open Session. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: Tuesday, October 5, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Steven J. Ford, Mayor A'I'FEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:~ninutes',092899 13 ITEM 4 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVA~ CiTY ATTORNEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager/~' October 19, 1999 Establishment of Interim Fees for Massage Establishments and Massage Practitioners PREPARED BY: David Hogan, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution Entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING INTERIM APPLICATION FEES FOR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS AND MASSAGE PRACTITIONER LICENSES BACKGROUND: The City Council approved the Massage Ordinance at its September 28, 1999 meeting. The second reading occurred at the October 6, 1999 meeting. The Ordinance will be effective on November 6, 1999. The purpose of this Resolution is to set the interim application processing fees that the City will charge. These interim fees will be replaced when the final fees are set by the City Council. The actual costs of processing are currently being developed by DMG as part of an ongoing Fee Study. Staff is recommending that the initial fees be set using the County Ordinance Fee 596 as a guideline. These recommended fees have been set in consultation with the County Sheriff and City Police. Based upon this consultation, the fee will not exceed the cost to the City of processing their application. The Table shown below contains the existing County Fees and staffs recommended Interim Application Fees. SUGGESTED COUNTY FEE CITY FEE MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS PERMIT Initial Year Application $500 $500 Subsequent Year Application $200 $200 MASSAGE PRACTITIONERS LICENSE Initial Year Application $200 ~ $50 Subsequent Year Application $100 $50 \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~Massage Plee cd.doc The process of approving massage establishment permits entails a background check of the owners and operators. Approval of the Permit does not eliminate the need for their compliance with Building and Fire Code requirements. The massage practitioner licenses will rely on the County's practitioner licensing process. Consequently, the costs of this process are expected to be minimal. FISCAL IMPACT: These interim fees are expected to address most of the City's costs associated with processing applications for massage establishment permits and massage practitioner licenses. The exact fiscal impact on the City from the adoption of these interim fees can not be determined at this time since the number of each application type is not known. ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft Resolution No. 99- \\TEMEC_FS101WOLI\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~Massage 19~e cd.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 99--- \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DepLs~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~Massage Bee cd.doc RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING INTERIM APPLICATION FEES FOR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS AND MASSAGE PRACTITIONERS LICENSES WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Temecula determined that the City should develop and adopt their own rules to regulate massage professionals; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an Ordinance to regulate massage establishments and massage practitioners that will take effect on November 6, 1999; and WHEREAS, the fee will not exceed the cost to the City for processing the applications; and WHEREAS, there is a need to adopt an interim application fee to address the estimated costs associated with processing these applications until the final fee is set through the ongoing user fee study; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, the annual application fees for Massage Establishment Permits shall be $500 for the Initial Year and $200 for each Subsequent Year. In the event a massage establishment permit has been revoked by the City or County or has lapsed without renewal, the Initial Year Application Fee shall apply. The cost of the annual application fee for a Massage Practitioner License shall be $50. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~Massage llee cd.doc STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS None COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRP~Massage 15~e ccl.doc ITEM 5 CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: DATE: ..,,~ William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 19, 1999 SUBJECT: Tract Map No. 23101-6, Located South of La Serena Way, East of Meadows Parkway, West of Butterfield Stage Road, and North of Rancho California Road in the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 PREPARED BY:/(/f/Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works C'~Clement M. Jimenez, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve 1) Tract Map No. 23101-6 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval 2) Subdivision Improvement Agreement 3) Subdivision qVlonument Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond and Monument Bond as security for the agreements. BACKGROUND: Tract Map No. 23101-6 is located within Planning Area 5 of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. As part of Specific Plan No. 199, Tract Map No. 23101-6 is subject to all Specific Plan Amendments and Agreements. Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 4 was approved on January 27, 1998. On October 28, 1997 the City Council approved Development Agreement No. 5. Furthermore, this tract is subject to conditions of approval. On November 8, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Standard Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract No. 23101. On September 19, 1994, the City's Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA94-0079, a minor change to the Conditions of Approval pertaining to timing for the installation of park facilities. The Developer has met all of the Conditions of Approval for recordation of the final map. Tentative Tract 23101 expires July 10, 2007. Final Tract Map No. 23101-6 is a thirty-six (36) lot single family residential subdivision with one open space lot, located south of La Serena Way, East of Meadows Parkway, West of Butterfield Stage Road and within Planning Area 5 of the Margarita Village Specific Plan. The site is currently vacant. The following fees have been deferred for Tract Map No. 23101-6: Development Impact Fee due prior to issuance of a building permit. 'FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACH M E N TS: 2. 3. 4. Development Fee Checklist Fees & Securities Report Project Vicinity Map Tract Map No. 23101-6 r:~agdrpt~99~525~tr23101-6,map CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO. TM 23101-6 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. FEE 'Flood Control (ADP) Quimby Fees Development Impact Fee CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Paid Paid To be paid prior to issuance of cedificate of occupancy r:~agdrpt~99~O525~tr23101-6,map CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT TRACT MAP NO. 23101-6 IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SECURITY Streets $ 532,000 Drainage - City $ 100,813 Drainage- RCFC&WCD $ 123,888 Water $ 35,500 Sewer $ 91,000 TOTAL $ 883,201 Monument $ 6,150 DATE: October 19, 1999 MATERIAL SECURITY $ $ $ $ $ $ & LABOR 266,000 50,406 123,888 18,000 45,500 503,794 DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFCD (ADP) Fee Development Impact Fee SERVICE FEES Planning Fee Comprehensive Transportation Plan Plan Check Fee Monument Inspection Fee Fees Paid to Date Balance of Fees Due $ 0.00 $ Paid $129,240.00 $ 137.00 $ 8.00 $ 1,470.00 $ 307.50 $ 1,922.50 $ 0.00 r:~agdrpt~99\1019~tr23101-6.map PROJECT SITE DE ~A\GV~,,t,i,e,,,,( STATE VICINITY MAP NO SCALE. GROSS AREA: 14.868 ACRES NET AREA; iL.,x4.4 ACAES NUMBER OF LOTS: 37 NUMBER OF LETTERED LOTS: 4 TRACT NO. 23101-6 MAY CROUP JUNE, 1998 OWNER'S STATE~T WE HEREBY STATE THAT WE ARE THE OWNERS OF THE LAND INCLUDED 'WlTHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN HEREON; THAT WE ARE THE ONLY PERSONS WHOSE CONSENT IS NECESSARY TO PASS A CLEAR lITLE TO SAID LAND; THAT WE CONSENT TO THE MAKING AND RECORDING OF THIS SUBDrvISION MAP AS SHOWN WITHIN THE DJSTINCI1VE BORDER UNE. WE HEREBY DEDICATE TO PUBLIC USE FOR SilEET AND PUBUC UTILITY PURPOSES V4[ HEREBY RETAIN LOT 37 (COMMON OPEN SPACE AREA) FOR PRIVATE USE FOR THE SOLE BENEFIT OF OURSELV~:S, OUR SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNEES AND LOT OWNERS WITHrN THIS lRACT MAP. WE HEREBY DEDICATE ABUTTERS RIGHTS OF ACCESS ALONG MEADOWS PARKWAY TO THE PUBUC, 1HE OWNERS OF LOT 37 ABUTlING THiS HIGHWAY AND DURING SUCH TiME WiLL HAVE NO RIGHTS OF ACCESS EXCEPT THE GENERAL EASEMENT OF TRAVEL ANY CHANCE OF ALIGNMENT OR WIDTH THAT RESULTS IN THE VACAllON THEREOF SHALL TERMINATE THIS DEDICATION AS TO THE PART VACATED. WE HEREBY DEDICATE A 10.CO' W1DE MULTi-PURPOSE EASEMENT AS SHOWN HEREON. WE ALSO HEREBY DEDICATE TO PUBUC USE THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AS SHOWN HEREON, FOR CONSTRUCTiON AND MAINTENANCE OF DRAINAGE EACiLjTIES. WE ALSO HERE~Y DEDICATE TO PUBLIC USE THE MULll-PURPOSE EASEMENT AS SHOWN HEREON. LENNAR LAND PARTNERS U, A FLORIDA G~NERAL PARTNERSHIP BY: LENNAR HOMES OF CAUFORNEA, INC. A CAUFO RNIA CORPORATION ITS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT VICE PREYDENT NOTARY AGNNOVd..EDGMENT TO BE THE PERSON(S) WNOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWEEDCED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME N HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPAOTY(IES). AND THAT BY HiS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S) OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED MY COMMISSiON EXPIRES: WITHESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE SiGNATURE O~ISSJGN PURSUANT TO SECTION 66436 OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, THE SiGNAltIRES OF THE FOLLOV~NG OWNERS OF EASEMENTS AND/OR OTHER INTERESTS HAVE BEEN OMITTED: METRGROUTAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA, A PUBUC CORPORARGN, OWNER OF A PERMANENT EASEMENT PER )NSltUMENT NO. 110136 RECORDED DECEMBER 30. 1959 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSiDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. SHEET 1 OF 6 SHEETS RECORDER'S STATEMENT FILED TH~S__DAY OF , AT ~.M. IN BOOK OF MAPS, AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY CLERK. CiTY OF TEMECULA. NO DATED: , 19__. PAUL MCDONNELL COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR BY: DEPUTY TAX BOND CERTIRCATE I HEREBY CERTiFY THAT A BOND IN THE SUM OF $~HAS BEEN EXECUTED AND FILED W1TH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CAUFORNIA, CONDITiORED UPON THE PAYMENT OF ALL TAXES, STATE, COUNTY, MUNICiPAL, OR LOCAL, AND ALL SPECiAL SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE THAT I AM A UCENSED LAND SURVEYOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND THAT THIS MAP CONSIDlING OF FIVE (5) SHEETS CORRECTI.Y REPRES{NTS A SURVEY MADE UND{R MY SUPERVISiON DURING MARCH AND APRIL. 1997; THAT ALL MONUMENTS SHOWN HEREC~N ACTUALLY EXIST AND THEIR POSIT1GNS ARE CORRECTLY SHOWN, OR WlLL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE MONUMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE MAP. THE MONUMENTS V~ILL BE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED. THE SURVEY IS IRUE AND COMPLETE A5 SHOWN. DATED: , PETER C. GOLDING LS. 4768 (LICENSE EXPIRES 3-31-2CO0) CiTY ENGiNEER'S STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE THAT THiS MAP CONSiB'iNG OF 6 SHEETS HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND FOUND TD BE SUBSTANllALLY THE SAME AS IT APPEARED ON THE TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 231~ AS RLED, AND ARPROVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON NOVEMBER B, 1988. T'dE EXPIRATION DATE BEJNG JULY 10, 2007, AND THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE S'AIE LAW AND OTY REGULAllONB HAVE BEEN EXPIRAI1GN DATE: 9-30-01 CITY CLERK'S STAlEMINT SUSAN W. JONES, CMC/AAE, HEREBY A?~>ROVES THE TRACT MAP AND ACCEPTS THE OFFERS OF DEDICATiON MADE HEREON FC~ PUBLIC ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENTS CGNSTRUC~ IN ACCORDANCE WITH C~TY STANDARDS. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND MULT~-;~JRPOSE EASEMENT SHOWN HEREON ARE HEREBY NOT ACCEPTED. SUSAN W. JONES, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK, CITY OF TEMECULA SC~LS REPORT A PREUMINARY SOILS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY LDGHTON & ASSOOATES, S3ONED BY RAk~ESH B. PATEL R.C.E. 37553, ON THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 1988, AS REQUIRED BY THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE. IN THE aTY OF TE~ECULA SHEET COUNTY OF RIV[RSIDE, STATE OF CAUFORNIA TRACT NO. 23101-6 MAY CROUP JUNE. 1998 SEE SHEET I rF{AOT 23101-5 ~2 COT "D" ~fi ~ 7 SHEET NO. 5 2t 2C. L~~ "B" C~ NO. 5 fd31r, O-]--2 102 i 22,S// 2 OF 6 SHEETS FOR EASEMENTS ~)(~)AND A PORTION OF (~) SEE DETAIL ON SHEET NO. 6 TF~ACT LCT 32 /~.t~7.00' L-2/~.el" NO. EARING DISTANCE LI N39'52'2~'E(R)66.00' L6 N03'36'51 'E 3LBg' PQRTIDN ,DF PAF, CE~ I PA, FIC',EL MAP 2r=554 -A· / / INDEX MAP 8t LOT 57 ~,, 47 TNAGT 23'JOJ~3 X e~\ "'y' eo \ / / 7r t ,- 78 __ MB IB~ ~ 24 'FRAGT 23']0'j"2 k __ p,,]~ 228/'15-21 f ~Y 23 / ~ Z:v / "-"/' , ~ ~ k .... " TRACT 23i0 ~-'~ t:S 228/~5~21 c7 (~.~') (~'~") TRACT NO. 23101-6 MAY GROUP JUNE, 1998 PROCEDURE OF SURVEY TRACE; F 2,3!00~S MB 281/54-5~ SHEET 3 OF 6 SHEETS ~ Z SCALE: 1'= leG' /// / /~/ / / PARE:EL MAF' 22554 / ,// / / LI (N20~9'30"[) I (21,2T) L2 (N77'45'25'E) (55.72') L4 (NTO'(~'24-'E) (92007 U3 (N77=7'OJ'W) (~aO0') L?4 (HO2~l'Og"E) (31. N9 M5 (N83'~0'51 °E) (30.509 U7 (N45.2'OO'W) I (91.~89 IN THE OTY G~ TEMECULA COUNTY O~ RIVERSlOE, STATE OF CAUFORNIA TRACT NO. 23101-6 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF PARC[L 1 OF PARC[L MAP NO. 22554 AS SHOWN ON FILl IN BOCt( 147 OF PARC[L MAPS. AT PAGES 94 IHROUGH 98 THEREOF, RECORDS OF RIVL'RSI[~[ COUN~f, CALIFO~NIA LOCATED IN RANCHO TEMECULA MAY GROUP JUNE, 1998 0 50100 150 200 I .... SCALE: f - 50' SHEET 4 OF 6 SHEETS SCALE: I' = 50' Z J""i (<22 \ Q4 E \, T,,~o-,"\ ,, 102 10 11 13.84'< 12 27 NO. 5 25 SAN DIEGO ,/ 1 lINE D A FA LI (N77'46'26"E) L2 (N69'27'25'[') (r53. I0'.) L3 N56'48'02"~ 32.50' L6 N75'52'55"W L9 NI2*14'35'W 78.34' CURVE' 0,~ TA CI (470.00') (06"16'00°) (68.09') C2 165.00' 17'07'13" 49.30' C3 lOGO0' f5~0'38" 26.20' C7 530.00' 06'16"22' 58.02' C8 500,00' 08'18'00' 72.43' C9 300.00' 26'30'00" 149.23' CIO 300,00' 22"41'22' 118.80' CII 500.00' 02'01'38" 17.69' C12 630,00' 08'18"00" 76. 76' ': :-. -. Z:'Z PjCL 23101-~ ,~= 2BrD.IBS-Bg 14 LOT 'D" ': 18 22 'l'20' 32.56' 33.40' 2' TRACT NO. 23101-6 MAY GROUP JUNE, 1998 · \~ ! 2 TRACT "~ 27 2e 2310%2 ~ ! lOa ~ ~5 ~ ~. ~ ~ 21 ~, ~ 20 ]"F~ C'F ~ L=78'25' ~ 1C~ 0=00'36'38' LOT 22~,'-j5~2 j SHEET 5 OF 6 SHEETS TRACT 23JC"-5 M,B, 260/8,5-89 18 // 2 SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 23101-6 MAY GROUP JUNE, 199B SHEET 6 OF 6 SHEETS SEE SHEET 5 57 COMMON OPEN SPACE AREA 9 -t F ' ~' -r c -i / J>,~) //-- ' / FOR SURVEYOR'S NOTES, BASIS OF BEARINGS ct EASEMENT NOTES SEE SHEET NO. 2 , ~ ~: / ~' i ~ t~ ~ 5 / / /5 DEDICA~TED HEREO'. .J ~'. ' / '/'~'/ .... ~-;~..o....-::~ , - _ __L,~_ ~ :,%?'~.~:..;:' i/,/~ _.::,:'%'~'.°" "'2_'~_-~, ~ t .,. ~ / / /~, .:&;,.<~ ~ -_ / 9 ,,,.~. C) c> ,/ ITEM 6 CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: /,~/j///William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 19, 1999 SUBJECT: Release Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials Secudty for In-Tract Public Improvements in Tract No. 24131-3 (NW'Iy of Meadows Parkway at Leena Way) PREPARED BY: ~.Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works ,~ Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. AUTHORIZE release of the Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and Materials securities for In-Tract public improvements in Tract No. 24131-3. 2. DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the developer and the surety. BACKGROUND: The City Council approved Tract Map No. 24131-3 on November 28, 1995, and entered into Subdivision Improvement Agreements with the developer, KRDC, Inc. Bonds were posted by the Aetna Casualty & Surety Company as follows: IN-TRACT IMPROVEMENTS-TRACT NO. 24131-3 1. Bond No. 100869980-05-061 in the amount of $649,000 ($389,000, $66,000, and $128,500 for streets, and water and sewer systems, respectively) for Faithful Performance. 2. Bond No. 100869980-05-061 in the amount of $325,000 ($194,500, $33,000, and $64,500 for streets, and water and sewer systems, respectively) for Labor and Materials. 3. Bond No. 100869980-95-060 in the amount of $22,000 for subdivision monumentation. On August 11, 1998, the City Council accepted the in-tract public improvements, initiated the one- year warranty pedod, and authorized reduction in the Faithful Performance secudty to the ten-percent (10%) warranty level as follows: Bond No. 100869980-05-061 in the amount of $64,900 ($38,900, $6,600, and $12,850 for In-Tract streets, and water and sewer system, respectively) for Faithful Performance Warranty. r:~agdrpt~99\101 g~tr241313.fnl The one-year warranty period having run, Public Works Staff has reviewed and inspected the In- Tract public improvements. Any necessary repairs/replacements having been satisfactorily completed, Staff recommends that this In-Tract Faithful Performance warranty security now be released. The developer posts securities to assure payment to suppliers of labor and materials for the public improvements. The securities are maintained for the six-month contractual lien pedod following City Council acceptance of the public improvements. This period having run and no claims posted for either labor or materials for the In-Tract public improvements, Staff recommends release of the following security: Bond No. 100869980-05-061 in the amount of $325,000 ($194,000, $33,000, and $64,500 for streets, and water and sewer systems, respectively) for Labor and Materials. The subdivision monumentation security was released by the City Council on November 10, 1998. The affected public streets were accepted into the City-Maintained Street System by Resolution No. 98-81 on August 11, 1998. The streets within the subdivision are Via Jasso, Calle Mataro, Via Cirillo, Code Astorga, and portions of Calle Avella, and Via Cesario. That podion of Meadows Parkway within the tract boundary will be accepted at such time that a substantial reach of that street is completed and ready for City acceptance and maintenance. FISCAL IMPACT: ATTACHMENT: None Location Map r:'agdrpt~99\l 019~tr241 31 3.fnl VIOlNIT)' M.4P ~' / Tract No. 24131-3 , ~ocation Man ,\ \,' roe NOTE: MAPS NOT TO SCALE ITEM 7 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL ~ ' CITY ATTORNEY City Manage~City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 19, 1999 Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements Project - Project No. PW98-17 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer- Capital Projects Hasib Baha, Assistant Engineer- Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements, Project No. PW98-17. BACKGROUND: In an effort to provide a safe walkway for pedestrians and to provide wider lanes to accommodate adequate on street parking for motorists, the Redevelopment Agency has received approved Community Development Block Grant (C.D.B.G) and AB 2766 funds to improve Pujol Street. The improvements include widening Pujol Street from First Street to Sixth Street, construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks, as shown on the attached "Exhibit A". Pujol Street is identified as a local street with a 60 foot right- of-way and curb to curb width of 40 feet. Since this project is partially funded by Redevelopment Agency Funds, a cooperative agreement between the City and Agency will be brought forward for approval at the time of award of contract. Plans and specifications are available for inspection in the office of the Director of Public Works. The engineer's construction estimate is $220,000. FISCAL IMPACT: The Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvement project is funded by Community Development Block Grant, AB 2766 and Redevelopment Agency funds for Fiscal Year 1999-2000. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Capital Improvement Program Project Description R :'AGDRPT~99\1019',pw98-17BID.doc EXHIBIT "A' I- W W I- I- :Z I- w X W ~ ~' 0 ~' W 5: w W I~ W m 000 0~.~. 0 ~ w~ EXHIBIT "B" ITEM 8 CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council L~Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services October 19, 1999 Grant of Easement to Southern California Edison - Paloma Del Sol Park PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: ~_~eryl Yasinosky, Development Services Analyst That the City Council: Approve and execute the attached easement document in favor of Southern California Edison for the operations and maintenance of an underground electrical service to the wireless communications system located within Paloma Del Sol Park. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to record the document. DISCUSSION: On November 17, 1998, the TCSD Board of Directors approved a ground lease agreement with Cox PCS Assets, L.L.C. (Cox Communications ) for the installation of a wireless Personal Communications Services (PCS) facility located at Paloma Del Sol Park. The communications facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved construction plans and do not create any impacts to the ball fields nor disturb play on the fields· In return, the TCSD receives an annual lease payment of 812,000. However, while the communications facilities are operational, a portable generator currently provides power to the site. In order to provide permanent power service to the communications facilities, it is necessary for the City to grant Southern California Edison an easement and right of way for the operation and maintenance of the electrical supply systems, fixtures, and related equipment. Upon City Council approval of the aforementioned easement document, Southern California Edison has agreed to energize the electrical systems and the generator will be removed. The attached easement deed and legal description have been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Grant of Easement Sceeasement. pds 10 1999 :RECORDING REQUESTED BY ~VHEN RECORDED MAIL TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO1V PANY Real Properties and Administrative Services 14803 Chestnut Street Westminster CA 92683-5240 Attn: Real Estate Operations - Southern SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE G RANT OF DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ NONE fVALUE pasteur. ~ ~om, URO~R ID~>,~ia ~ MAP EASEMENT AND CONSIDERATION LESS THAN $100.00) San Jacinto Valley 6477-2000 9-2198 SCE Company APPRO~D SIG OFDECLARANTORAGENIDETERNIININGT~XFIRMNAME ~PN 950-020-037 & ~.~PROP~R~mS MM/LAC 10/11/99 039 CITY OF TEMECULA, a body corporate and politic (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), hereby grants to SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). an easement and right of way to construct. use, maintain. operate, alter, add to, repair. replace, reconstruct, inspect and remove at any time and from time to time underground electrical supply systems and communication systems (hereinafter referred to as "systems"), consisting of wires. underground conduits. cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above-ground enclosures, markers and concrete pads and other appunenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for distributing electrical energy and for transmitting intelligence by electrical means, in, on, over, under, across and along that certain real property in the County of Riverside. State of California, described as follows: THREE STRIPS OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE PORTIONS OF PARCELS 2 AND 3 OF PARCEL MAP 23432. AS PER MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 159. PAGES 38 THROUGH 61 OF PARCEL MAPS AND THAT PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY VACATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA BY RESOLUTION NO. 94-06 RECORDED JULY 10 , 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 285889 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. BOTH IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. THE CENTERLINE OF SAID STRIPS BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: STRIP #I (6 FEET WIDE) COMMENCING AT A POINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 23432~ WITH THE CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD: SAID POINT BEING NORTH 73°26'04'' EAST 319.95 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,200.00 FEET: THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°44'16.' 706JO FEET: THENCE DEPARTING THE CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD ON A RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50°18'12" EAST 50.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DE PORTOLA ROAD. SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50°18'12" EAST 23.00 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A~'. THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 50°18'12" EAST 7.41 FEET: THENCE NORTH 36°12'1 I" EAST 149.10 FEET: THENCE NORTH 33°01'12'' EAST 162.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADtL'S OF 12.50 FEET: THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 15.71 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 71°59'56": THENCE SOUTH 74°58'52" EAST 116.07 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "B". THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED NORTHERLY SO AS TO TERMINA'FE IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DE PORTOLA ROAD. STRIP #2 (14 FEET WIDE) BEGINNING AT SAID POINT "A": THENCE ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50°1g'12' EAST 14.00 FEET. STRIP #3 ( I I FEET WIDE) BEGINNING AT SAID POINT "B": THENCE SOUTH 51 °41 '43" EAST 30.00 FEET. Legal description was prepared pursuant to Sec. 8730(c) of the Business & Professions Code. Grantor agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to permit the erection, placement or maintenance of any building, planter boxes, earth fill or other structures except walls and fences on the above described real property. The Grantee. and its contractors, agents and employees, shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger or interfere with said systems and shall have free access to said systems and every pan thereof, at all times, for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted; provided. however. that in making any excavation on said property of the Grantor, the Grantee shall make the same in such a manner as will cause the least injury to the surface of the ground around such excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the same condition as it was prior to such excavation as is practicable. EXECUTED this ~ day of , 19 GRANTOR CITY OF TEMECULA, a body corporate and politic Signature Title STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF ) SS. On _ . 19 . before me. a Notary Public in and for said State. personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on lhe basis of satisfactorv evidence) to be the persons xvhose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowtedeed to me that they execuled the same in their authorized capacities. and that bv their signatures on the instrument the persons. or the entity upon behalf of which the persons acled. executed the instrument. WITNESS mv hand and official seal. Signature of Notar,., Page 2 DME990324 0477-200019-2198 CAL VIIDR SURVEYING, INC. LEGAL DESCRIPTION SPRINT P CS SPRINT ?CS CASCADE NO.: RV33XCO60B SITE NAME: MARGARITA REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECLrLA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THREE STRIPS OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE PORTIONS OF PARCELS 2 ND 3 OF PARCEL MAP 23432, AS PER MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 159, PAGES 38 THROUGH 61 OF PARCEL MAPS AND THAT PORTION OF CAMPANULA WAY VACATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECLrLA BY RESOLUTION NO. 94-06 RECORDED JULY 10, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 285889 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, BOTH IN THE OFF1CE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, THE CENTERLINE OF SAID STRIPS BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: STRIP #1 (6 FEET WIDE) COMMENCING AT A POINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 23432, WITH THE CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD; SAD POINT BEING NORTH 73°26'04" EAST 319.95 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°44'16" 706,f~ FEET; THENCE DEPARTING THE CENTERLINE OF DE PORTOLA ROAD ON A RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50°18'12" EAST 50.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID DE PORTOLA ROAD, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50° 18'12" EAST 23.00 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A". THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 50°18'12'' EAST 7.41 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36°12'11,, EAST 149.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33°01'12" EAST 162.53 FEET TO THE BEGINrNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 12.50 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 15.71 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 71°59'56"; THENCE SOUTH 74058'52" EAST 116.07 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "B'. THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED NORTHERLY SO AS TO TERMINATE IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DE PORTOLA ROAD. STRIP #2 (14 FEET WIDE) BEGINNING AT SAID POINT "A"; THENCE ALONG SA1D RADIAL LINE SOUTH 50°18'12" EAST 14.00 FEET BEGINNING AT SAID POINT "B": THENCE SOUTH 51°41 '43" EAST 30.00 FEET. ' -- - EDWARD L. SCHENET P.L.S. 4240 ""--,.~/;;y,tfl" 99.367 ~ 0,q ~/99 108 Buslnt:-s', Uemer [.;ri~'e - CeF~na ~:,~ ~,':7;:. 79.95 East Greenway Koan, Suite 207 · SeeRsdale, AZ 8525E EXHIBIT B /g//,'(/f?,,, - S 424~1~~~ ~ '... .. ~..~. "//////rr ! ' Graphic Scale 0 100 200 CALVADA ( In Feet ) 1 inch = 200 ft. SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS Job No 99,_%67 10-12-99 (909) 28o-974-6 / SURVEYING, INC. 108 Business Center Drive Corona, CA 92880-1782 Phone: (909) 280-9960 Fax: EXHIBIT B BEARING S51'41 '43"E S38'18'17"W N5r41 '4Y'W 538'18'17"W S50'18'12"E N39'41 '48"E S50'18'12"E N50'18'12"W N39'41 '48"E NSO'18'12"W S39'41 '48"W 55CrIB'12"E S38'18'lT'W LINE TABLE LINE LENCIH L1 30.00 L2 11.00 L3 30.00 L4 2.23 L5 3.98 L6 4.00 L7 23.00 L8 23.00 L9 4,00 LIO 14.00 L11 14.00 L12 4.01 L13 2.23 LENGTH 11.94 19.48 6.00 Graphic ,O' 30 ( tu Feet ) 1 inch: CURVE TABLE CUR'VE DELTA RADIUS C3 71'59'56" 9.50 C1 71'59'56" 15.50 C2 0{3' 16'30" 1250.00 Scale 60 ft. CALVADA POINT "B" ,""' /" "" ,1~' ,,""~o~ ,,. ~;.'L~ ,~;,,' '~ , ,:..~' · · " ~ | I I1 I I1 ,,,'..-"" ~ .'- ". ,,r ,.s. ,27 .f , SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS ,Job No 99,567 10-09-99 SURVEYING, INC. 108 Business Center Drive Corona, CA 92880-1782 Phone: (909) 280-9960 Fax: (909) 280-9746 ITEM 9 CITY MANAGER '~~'~ . CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council .-~Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services October 19, 1999 Joint Use Agreement - Chapanal High School Pool RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve in its substantial form the Joint Use Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Unified School District, for the lease and joint use of the proposed swimming pool facility at Chaparral High School. BACKGROUND: Staff has been working with a City Council sub-committee and School Distdct staff to develop this Lease and Joint Use Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Unified School District. The agreement is for the shared use of a swimming pool to be developed at Chaparral High School, The facility would be constructed adjacent to the gymnasium at Chaparral High School, near the area where the existing outdoor basketball courts are currently. It is envisioned that the facility will include a 50 meter Olympic size pool, a diving tank/pool, stands for spectator seating, locker room/restroom facility and check-in gate. The School District would lease the proposed swimming pool improvements from the City for the term of this agreement. For the first five (5) years of this agreement, the annual lease payment shall be 20% of 50% of the total design and construction cost. For the remainder of this agreement, the annual lease payment shall be $1.00. Each annual lease payment is due on the first business day of July each year. The agreement is for a term of 20 years, with the option to renew for two (2) additional 10 year terms, upon written notice to the district. During the school year, from September 2 through April 30, the School District would oversee and supervise competitive High School aquatic programs, such as their swim team and water polo. The 17 week pedod between May 1 and September 1, the Temecula Community Services Department would operate the facility and offer public aquatic programs, such as public swim, swim lessons and lap swim. The School Distdct will be responsible for all ongoing maintenance and repairs of the pool facility on an annual basis. The City will pay 33% of the costs, of maintenance and repairs on an annual basis, after receipt of invoice from the School District, and pay 33% of the total cost to maintain the ~ acre of parking adjacent to the facility. The facility would be constructed using City Capital Improvement funding and is currently included in this year's CIP program. The distdct would reimburse the City 50% of the design and construction costs paid in 20% increments over 5 years. At the October 11, 1999 Community Services Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed and approved the Joint Use Agreement. rR:\ZIGLERG\REPORT\Chaparral PooI.CC.doc October 12, 1999 FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for the design and construction of the pool facility was appropriated in the Capital Improvement Program. The Cities annual financial share of the maintenance and operations of the facility will be approximately $75,000. This includes ongoing maintenance, repairs, utilities and staffing. rR:\ZIGLERG\REPORT\Chaparrai PooI.CC.doc October 12, 1999 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE I,RASE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND TIIE JOINT USE OF A PORTION OF CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of October 19,1999 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City"), and the Temecula Valley Unified School District ("District"). In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This Agreement is entered into with respect to the following facts and for the following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the parties: a. Title I, Division 1, Part 7, Chapter 10, commencing with Section 10900 of the Education Code, authorizes public school districts and cities to cooperate with one another for the purpose of authorizing, promoting and conducting programs of community recreation which will contribute to the attainment of general recreational and educational objectives for children and adults of the State. In this regard, school districts and cities may enter into agreements with each other to aid and cooperate in carrying out these objectives. The governing body of any school district is authorized by these provisions to use the buildings, grounds, and equipment of the district, or any of them, to carry out the recreational and educational objectives, or may grant the use of any building, grounds, or equipment of the district to any other public authority for such purposes, whenever the use of the buildings, grounds, or equipment for community recreational purposes will not interfere with use of the buildings, grounds, and equipment for any other purpose of the public school system. Accordingly, the District and City are authorized to enter into this Agreement. b. District is the owner of certain real property within the City of Temecula, known as Chaparral High School, located at 27215 Nicolas Road, Temecula, California. c. District and City desire to jointly develop and utilize an aquatics facility on a portion of Chaparral High School for recreational and education purposes benefiting the citizens of Temecula; and d. The portion of Chaparral High School to be developed and used for these joint purposes is approximately 1.1 acres located on the Chaparral High School property and is described and depicted on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereafter the "Property"). F:\Depts\CSD\ZIGLERG\XAGREEMN\Chaparral Pool.doc 2. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall begin on November 1, 1999 and shall terminate on October 31, 2019, unless sooner terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The City shall have the option to extend this Agreement for two (2) additional periods of ten (10) years upon written notice served upon the District prior to the expiration of the initial term of this Agreement or the expiration of the first option period, as applicable. 3. Improvement of the Property. In consideration of the benefits the City and its citizens will receive from the use of the Property and the annual lease payment for use of the Improvements by the District, the City shall design and construct a pool and related improvements on the Property as specifically described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Improvements"). a. In designing and constructing such facilities City shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws related to construction of Improvements on school facilities in connection with its construction and installation of the improvements, including the Field Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. b. In designing the Improvements, City shall provide for community involvement and shall consult with the District. c. District shall approve the plans and specifications for the Improvements, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. d. The Improvements shall be designated and constructed in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference. The District Superintendent and the City Manager may amend the Schedule of Performance as needed. e. City shall be the lead agency for the purposes of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act and for construction of the Improvements. f. District shall provide for inspector certified by the Department of State Architect to be on site during construction to provide State required inspections. Costs of the inspector shall be considered costs of construction pursuant to Section 4. Improvements. City shall pay the costs of design and construction of the h. The District hereby grants City and its contractors, agents and employees the right to enter upon the Property for the purposes of designing and constructing the Improvements, subject to approval by the District Superintendent of a construction access and staging plan. -2- 4. Lease of Improvements to Real Property. In consideration of the benefits the District and its students will receive from this Agreement each year, the District agrees to lease the Improvements from the City during the term of this Agreement with the annual lease payment not to exceed the formula set forth below. a. Within thirty (30) days of the completion of the Improvements and final payments to the contractors constructing the Improvements, the City shall determine the actual costs of the design and construction of Improvements and the annual lease payments to be made by the District and shall present such determinations and supporting documentation to the District ("Construction Costs"). Construction Costs shall not include the City' s administrative costs in administering the construction. b. For the first five (5) years of this Agreement, the Annual Lease Payment shall be twenty percent (20%) of fifty percent (50%) of the Construction Costs. For the remainder of the term of this Agreement, the Annual Lease Payment shall be one dollar ($1.00). c. Each annual lease payment shall be due and payable on the first business day of July of each year, commencing in the calendar year following completion of the Improvements and ending in 2019, at which time the District shall have the option to purchase the Improvements for the sum of one dollar ($1.00). The obligation of the District to appropriate the money and make the payments described above shall be abated during any period in which by reason of any damage, destruction or condemnation there is substantial interference with the use of the Improvements by the District. Such abatement shall be in an amount agreed upon by the District and the City such that the annual payment in any year during which such interference continues does not exceed the fair rental value of the useable portion of the Improvements. Such abatement shall continue for the period commencing with the date of such interference and ending with the restoration of the Improvements to useable condition. 5. Apportionment of Use of Property by City and District. The Property shall be used for school purposes and recreational activities in accordance with the following priority schedule: a. The City shall have the exclusive right to use the Property and the improvements thereon from May 1st through September 1st of each year for public recreational swimming, lap swimming, swim lessons, aquatic classes and other recreational purposes. During this period, City shall be responsible for staffing life guards, attendants and other staff necessary for the operation of the Property. b. District shall have the exclusive right to use the Property and the improvements thereon for its educational and recreational purposes for the remainder of the year. During this period, District shall be responsible for staffing teachers, coaches, life guards, attendants and other staff necessary for the operation of the Property. -3- 6. Maintenance Resi~onsibilities. During the term of this Agreement, the District shall perform all maintenance on the Property and the improvements in accordance with maintenance standards and schedules approved by the City' s Director of Community Services, provided, however, that District shall perform maintenance on the pool equipment in accordance with maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Except as provided in Section 6.c. below, maintenance shall include, but not be limited to: (1) the maintenance and repairs of the deck and pool, pump room equipment, filtration and chlorination systems, restrooms and locker rooms, and other structures and facilities on the Property; (2) property damage insurance; and (3) payment of all utility costs for operation of the pool. Maintenance shall not include the District' s administrative costs. a. City shall pay an annual maintenance fee to the District equal to thirty three percent (33%) of the District' s annual cost of maintaining the Property. This is the equivalent to 17 weeks of use from May 1" through September 1't. b. Following the end of each calendar quarter, the District shall submit an invoice to the City setting forth the District's costs of the maintenance of the Property during the previous calendar quarter and attaching thereto the documentation supporting the determination of the maintenance costs. City shall pay the invoice within forty-five days of receipt or provide the District with a written explanation of the portion of the invoice to which it objects. c. City shall pay thirty-three percent (33%) of the District's cost of periodic slurry sealing and striping of 1/2 acres of parking adjacent to the Property, provided the District notifies the City of the work at least six (6) months prior to awarding a contract for the work. City shall also pay thirty-three percent (33%) of the District' s costs of renovating and refurbishing the locker rooms, adjacent bathrooms, pool deck, pump room or pump room equipment, provided that the District notifies the City in writing at least two (2) years prior to the award of a contract for the renovation work so that the costs can be planned for as part of the City's Capital Improvement Plan. 7. Indemnification a. District agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless, City, its officers, agents, and employees, against all actions, claims, or demands for injury, death, loss, or damages, regardless of fault or cause, by anyone whomsoever, whenever such injury, death, loss, or damage is a consequence of, or arises out of, or incidental to, the use or maintenance of the Property by District or any other persons or parties (other than City) authorized to so use the Property by District pursuant to this Agreement, except to the extent said damage is caused by the active negligence of the City, its officers, agents and employees. b. City agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless, District, its officers, agents, and employees, against all actions, claims, or demands for -4- injury, death, loss or. damages, regardless of fault or cause, by anyone whomsoever, whenever such injury, death, loss or damage is a consequence of, or arises out of, or is incidental to, the use or maintenance of the Property by City or any other persons or parties (other than District) authorized to so use or maintain the Property by City pursuant to this Agreement, except to the extent said damage is caused by the active negligence of the District, its officers, agents and employees. 8. Defaults and Remedies a. Subject to the extensions of time approved in writing by a party, failure or delay by either party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement constitutes a default under this Agreement. A party claiming a default (claimant) shall give written notice of default to the other party, specifying the default complained of. b. The claimant shall not institute proceedings against the other party nor be entitled to damages if the other party within fourteen (14) days from receipt of such notice immediately, with due diligence, commences to cure, correct or remedy such failure or delay and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such notice. Such cure, correction and remedy shall include payment of any costs, expenses (including attorney fees) or damages incurred by the non-defaulting party resulting from the default or during the period of default. c. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative, and the exercise by either party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party. d. Any failure or delays by either party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies, or deprive either such party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. e. If a default is not fully cured by the defaulting party as provided in this Paragraph, the defaulting party shall be liable to the other party for any damages caused by such default, and the nondefaulting party may thereafter (but not before) commence an action for damages against the defaulting party with respect to such default. f. If a default under this Agreement is not fully cured by the defaulting party as provided in this Section, the nondefaulting party at its option may thereafter (but not before) commence an action for specific performance of terms of this Agreement. -5- g. In the event litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court' s judgment, shall be enti~ed to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses incurred in pursuing its remedies and prosecuting or defending the litigation. 9. Insurance. Each party to this Agreement shall carry public liability insurance in a reasonable amount satisfactory to the other party to protect itself and the other party, its officers, agents, servants, and employees, against claims for damage to persons and/or property, including death, arising from that party 's use of the Property as provided in this Agreement. The form of the insurance shall be satisfactory to the other party and may include self-insurance at levels reasonably acceptable to the other party. In addition, any contractors hired by the City to construct the Improvements shall be required to provide insurance acceptable to both the City and District and which names both the City and District as additional insureds under the contractor's policies. 10. Force Maj eure. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, if the performance of any act required by this Agreement to be performed by either District or City is prevented or delayed by reason of any act of God, strike, lockout, labor trouble, inability to secure materials, or any other cause (except financial difficulty or inability) not the fault of the party required to perform the act, the time for performance of the act will be extended for a period equivalent to the period of delay and performance of the act during the period of delay will be excused. However, nothing contained in this Section shall excuse the prompt payment by a party as required by this Agreement or the performance of any act rendered difficult or impossible solely because of the financial condition of the party required to perform the act. 11. Notices to Parties. Written notices, demands and communications among the District and City, shall be sufficiently given by 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, return 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: District: Temecula Valley Unified School District 31350 Rancho Vista Road Temecula, California 92592 Attention: Superintendent City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager -6- Such written notices, demands and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail as provided in this Section. 12. Agreement Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and lawful assigns of the parties hereto. 13. Assignment. Neither Party shall assign or transfer this Agreement or any portion thereof without the prior written amendment of this Agreement by City and District. 14. Sole and Only Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement between District and City respecting the joint use of the Property for school and recreational purposes. Any agreements or representations, either oral or written, respecting the matters discussed in this Agreement pertaining to the Property which are not expressly set forth in this Agreement are null and void. Agreement. 15. Time of Essence. Time is expressly declared to be of the essence of this 16. Authority to Execute. Each person executing this agreement expressly warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his or her governmental entity and warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to bind his or her entity to the performance of its obligations hereunder. -7- IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by the authorized representatives of the parties hereto. TEMECULA VALI,EY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT President of School Board Attest: Clerk of the School Board -8- CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Steven J. Ford Mayor Attest: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attomey 9 EXHIBIT A DESCRIFrlON OF PROPERTY [Map showing area of high school where pool will be built and necessary area for locker rooms or parking] - 10- EXHIBIT B DESCRIFFION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON PROPERTY Construction of a competitive aquatic facility that would include: · An Olympic size (50 meter x 25 yards) swimming pool that can accommodate competitive swim, water polo, lap swim and recreational swim. · A diving pool · Male and female locker rooms, shower facilities and restrooms · Audience seating · Public entry gate · Storage facilities · Security lighting · Pool covers -11- EXHIBIT C SCItEDULE OF PERFORMANCE Tentative design and construction schedule for the project. - Joint Use Lease Agreement approved by City Council and Board of Education, October 1999 Award a Professional Services Agreement for design, October 1999 First design subcommittee meeting, November 1999 Community input workshop on design elements, December 1999 Community Services Commission, City Council and Board of Education approval of design Master Plan, January 2000 Complete plan check and obtain DSA approvals, April 2000 Formal bid for project construction, June 2000 Award construction contract, August 2000 Begin construction, September 2000 Completion, March 2001 - 12- EXHIBIT B DESCRIFrION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON PROPERTY Construction of a competitive aquatic facility that would include: · An Olympic size (50 meter x 25 yards) swimming pool that can accommodate competitive swim, water polo, lap swim and recreational swim. · A diving pool · Male and female locker rooms, shower facilities and restrooms · Audience seating · Public entry gate · Storage facilities · Security lighting · Pool covers -11- EXHIBIT C SCHEDUI,E OF PERFORMANCE Tentative design and construction schedule for the project. - Joint Use Lease Agreement approved by City Council and Board of Education, October 1999 - Award a Professional Services Agreement for design, October 1999 - First design subcommittee meeting, November 1999 - Community input workshop on design elements, December 1999 - Community Services Commission, City Council and Board of Education approval of design Master Plan, January 2000 - Complete plan check and obtain DSA approvals, April 2000 - Formal bid for project construction, June 2000 - Award construction contract, August 2000 Begin construction, September 2000 Completion, March 2001 - 12- TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SEPTEMBER '14, '1999 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:43 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Comerchero presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberrs, Stone, and Comerchero. ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1999; 1.2 Approve the minutes of July 27, 1999. 2 Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 1999. 3 Award of Construction Contract for Butterfield Stage Park Improvements - Project No. PW98-01CSD RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award a construction contract for Butterfield Stage Park Improvements - Project No. PW98-01CSD to JDC, Inc. in amount of $35,007.50 and authorize the President to execute the contract; 3.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $3,500.75 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Minutes.csd\091499 1 4 Park and Slope Area Tree Trimming Maintenance Services Contract RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Award the Tree Maintenance Services contract to West Coast Arborists, Inc. for $50,000.00; 4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $5,000 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. MOTION: Director Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I - 4. The motion was seconded by Director Lindemans and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DISTRICT BUSINESS 5 City of Temecula Wall of Honor RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a procedure for the establishment and continuing operation of the City of Temecula Wall of Honor. Development Services Administrator Holmes presented the staff report (as per agenda material); described the methodology used in the Wall of Honor selection process; and reviewed the design considerations. Speaking in support of this item, Director Roberts commended the City Council Subcommittee and City staff on a job well done. MOTION: Director Lindemans moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Director Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 6 Mobile Recreation Pro.clram Update RECOM MEN DATION: 6.1 Receive and file a report on the Mobile Recreation Program known as Rec R.O.C.K.s. By way of video, Recreation Superintendent Pelletier reviewed the R.O.C.K.s Program and addressed the staff report (as per agenda material), commenting on the beneficial impacts this program has had on the community by enabling the youth to participate in organized and supervised recreation programs in neighborhood parks. Director Stone suggested that staff evaluate the storage of program items at neighborhood parks and relayed his support of future funding of this program. MOTION: Director Lindemans moved to receive and file the report. The motion was seconded by Director Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Minutes.csd\091499 2 Director Ford commended staff on this very cost-effective program. In response to President Comerchero, Recreation Superintendent Pelletier apprised the City Council and the viewing public of a new program High Hopes Program, advising that this program will be recreational and social opportunities to adults with disabilities. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT With the commencement of summer activities and programs, Community Services Director Parker thanked the Community Services Department staff on a job well done. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT General Manager Nelson as well commended the Community Services Department staff on their efforts with continuing to provide beneficial programs/activities to the City. Mr. Nelson noted that the first 10 Wall of Honor recipients will be announced at the City's 10th Anniversary Celebration this December. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 8:02 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 28, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\091499 3 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services Distdct was called to order at 7:40 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Ford, Lindemans, Stone, and Comerchero. ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Roberrs. Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENTCALENDAR I Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 1999. MOTION: Director Ford moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Director Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Director Roberts who was absent and Director Lindemans who abstained. DISTRICT BUSINESS Director of Community Services Parker relayed that the lighting project, encompassing installation of lights at eight tennis courts at Temecula Valley High School had been completed; and noted that the lighted courts would be available for public use on Monday, October 4, 1999. Inviting the public to attend the re-opening dedicaton ceremony of the Duck Pond on Thursday, October 7, 1999, at 11:00 A.M., Director of Community Services Parker noted that the Pond Project had been completed. For President Comerchero, Director of Community Services Parker updated the Council with respect to the High Hopes Program (a program designed for provision of recreational activities for developmentally handicapped adults); and noted the successful response of 38 registered adults for participation in the program. Minutes.csd~O92899 I DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No comments. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comments. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:42 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 5, 1999, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, President ATFEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd~092899 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT General Manager/Board of Directors HermanD. Parker, Director of Community Services October 19, 1999 Award of Construction Contract for Bike Lane Signing and Striping - Project No. PW99-02 PREPARED BY: z~//~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - Capital Projects Hasib Baha, Assistant Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Award a construction contract for Bike Lane Signing and Striping, Project No. PW99-02CSD to JP Striping in the amount of $20,807.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract. Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,080.70, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: On July 13, 1999, the Board of Directors approved the plans and specifications, and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. The design presented to the Board of Directors on July 13, 1999 included bike lane striping on: · Rancho California Road - Margarita Road to Riesling Court · Ynez Road - Tower Plaza North to Overland Drive · Margarita Road - Solana Way to Moraga Road · Jefferson Avenue from Rancho California Road to Winchester Road After further review of existing conditions of the locations proposed to be striped, it was determined that striping Jefferson Avenue would be in conflict with two (2) construction projects. These projects are the on going Ovedand Ddve Overcrossing, and the upcoming Pavement Management System on Jefferson Avenue. Therefore, Jefferson Avenue bike lane striping was substituted by bike lane striping on La Serena Way from South General Kearny Road to Via Aguila. All proposed bike lane striping locations are shown on the attached Exhibit "A". Two (2) bids were publicly opened on September 30, 1999, and the results for the bid are as follows: 1. JP Striping. $20,807.00 2. Orange County Striping Services $26,230.80 r:~agdrpt\99\1019~pw99-O2csdawd Staff has reviewed the bids and found JP Striping to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. JP Striping has satisfactorily completed other projects for other public agencies in the past. The specifications allow Twenty Five (25) working days for the completion of this project. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineers office. FISCAL IMPACT: The Bike Path Construction - Citywide, is funded by AB2766. The total project cost is $22,887.70. This includes the contract amount of $20,807.00 and a 10% contingency of $2,080.70. Adequate funds have been appropriated in Account No. 210-190-156-5804. ATTACHMENT: 1. CIP Project Description 2. Contract 3. Exhibit "A" r:~agdrptL99\1019~pw99-02csdawd <<u~ TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW99-O2CSD BIKE LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 19th day of October, 1999, by and between the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT", and JP Striping, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That DISTRICT and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 1.8. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW99-02CSD, BIKE LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW99-02CSD, BIKE LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW99-02CSD, BIKE LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT CA-1 R:\cip~projects~pw99~pw99-02contract The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW99-02CSD, BIKE LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by DISTRICT. DISTRICT APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of DISTRICT or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHDULE. The DISTRICT agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: TWENTY THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED SEVEN DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($20,807.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Twenty Five (25) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by the DISTRICT. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by the DISTRICT. 5. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the District Board of Directors, except that the General Manager is hereby authorized by the District Board of Directors to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the District Board of Directors. PAYMENTS UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the DISTRICT, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the DISTRICT on forms provided by the DISTRICT. CONTRACT CA-2 R:\cip~projects~pw99~pw99-02contract Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the General Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The District hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the DISTRICT shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000 0 $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,00- $5O0,0O0 180 days $2,250 + 2% ofamountin excess of $75,000 Over$500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to DISTRICT the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by DISTRICT. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify DISTRICT of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to DISTRICT, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the DISTRICT related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. CONTRACT CA-3 R:\cip~rojects%pw99%pw99-02contract 10. PREVAILING WAGES. This is a Federal assisted project and Davis-Bacon Fair Labor Standards Act (Wage #CA980036 of wage determination Mod #7 Published 11/27/1998, 10 days prior to bid opening) will be enforced. Whenever there is State funding involved, the highest of the two (State and Federal) wage decision prevails. Federal Labor Standards Provisions 4010 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is incorporated into this contract and attached. All contractors shall be verified for eligibility through the current HUD List of Debarred, Suspended, or Ineligible Participants, and the General Services Administration's Consolidated List of Debarred, Suspended, and Ineligible Contractors prior to being authorized to participate on this project. Any Sub-tier Contract(s) resulting from this contract must contain the same contractual language as the original contract. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the District Board of Directors 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. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the DISTRICT, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 11. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. 12. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend DISTRICT, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the DISTRICT. CONTRACTOR shall hold the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, its officers, agents and employees free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, including wrongful death, based or asserted upon any act or omission of principal, its officers, agents, employees or Sub-contractors relating to or in any way connected with or arising from the accomplishment of the work, whether or not such acts or omissions where in furtherance of the work required by the Contract Documents and agrees to defend at his expense, including attorney fees, the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, employees and Independent Architect in any legal action base on any such alleged acts or omissions. CONTRACT CA-4 R:\cip~projects~pw99~pw99-02contract 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the DISTRICT for any and all costs incurred by the DISTRICT as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The DISTRICT shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the DISTRICT. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to DISTRICT's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward secudng this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any District officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the DISTRICT within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the General Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO DISTRICT OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to DISTRICT. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the DISTRICT. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by DISTRICT and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. CONTRACT CA-5 R:\cip~projects~pw99~w99-02contract 20. 21. 22. GOVERNING LAW. The District and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the Temecula Community Services Distdct of the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the DISTRICT addressed as follows: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-6 R:\cip~projects~pw99~pw99-02contract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above wdtten. DATED: CONTRACTOR JP Striping 39245 Vineland Street Cherry Valley, CA 92223 (909) 845-2799 By: Print Name and Title DATED: TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA By: Jeff Comerchero, President APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-7 R:\cip~projects~pw99~pw99-02contract EXHIBIT "A" , .....SITE SITE ITEM 3 APPROVA_~~ NAN TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services October 19, 1999 Naming of City Park RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve a recommendation from the Community Services Commission to name the 10 acre park site located at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and La Serena Way Temeku Hills Park. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to City policy, it is the responsibility of the Community Services Commission to forward recommendations concerning the naming of City park and recreation facilities to the Board of Directors for a final decision. On October 11, 1999, the Community Services Commission recommended the name listed above be considered by the Board of Directors for a 10 acre park located in the Temeku Hills Development. The park construction has been completed and the park is currently in its maintenance period. It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve a name for the park so that the contractor may order and install the park monument sign prior to the dedication of the park to the community. According to the existing naming policy, the Board of Directors may approve the park name ,as recommended by the Community Services Commission, or may consider any other names desired. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Suggested Park Names Resolution No. CSD 92-08: Site Map Master Plan Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\CSD~ZIGLERG\REPORT\Temeku Hills Park Name BOD.doc LIST OF NAME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE CITY OF TEMECULA PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Palomino Park Cutting Horse Park Wild Horse Park Bronco Park Cattle Drive Park Vaqueros Park Wagon Wheel Park Fort Temecula Park Old West Park Rodeo Ranch Park Indian Park Patricia H. Birdsall Park 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Eagle Park Eagle Ranch Park Vineyard Park Granite Park Wolfe Valley Park Bear Mountain Park Rainbow Canyon Park Ponderosa Park Recreation Park Earle Stanley Gardner Park Vail Ranch Park RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES WltE-REAS, on April 23, 1991, the Board of Directors (the "Board") adopted a policy for naming parks and recreation facilities; and WI:tEREAS, the Community Services District and the Parks and Recreation Commission requests that the aforementioned policy be adopted by resolution; NOW, TItF~REFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMIJNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the policy for naming parks and recreation facilities as set forth on Exhibit "A" is adopted establishing a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria far the naming of parks and recreation facilities. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 1992. Ronald J. Parks, President ATTEST: Resos CSD 92-08 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 92-08 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of September 1992 by the following roll call vote. AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Mufioz Parks, NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Resos CSD 92-08 EXhibit "A" TEIvSECULA CO1VINK3'NITY SERVICES DISTRICT Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities PURPOSE To establish a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities. POLICY The Park and Recreation Commission will be responsible for the selection of names for parks and recreation facilities. Once a name is selected, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors for ratification. Staff will be responsible for encouraging citizens and community organizations to suggest possible names that will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration. k At a minimum, each park and community building will be designated a name. Naming of specific areas within a park (garden, swimming pool, lake, ballfield, etc.) is acceptable but should be kept to a minimum to avoid confusion. No park shall be given a name which might be perceived as controversial by the community. All names selected shall be acceptable and meaningful to a majority of the neighborhood/community where the park or recreation facility is located. Priority in naming sites shall be given to geographical locations, historic significance or geologic features. No park shalljbe named for a person, except where an individual has made a significant financial contribution toward the acquisition and/or development of the park or facility, or has been an outstanding long-time community leader who has supported open space and recreational activities. All park and recreation facilities will be designated a formal name within six months of acquisition or construction. All parks shall have an entrance sign. Buildings will have an entrance sign and a plaque inside the facility for name identification. The name of a park or recreation facility may be changed only after a hearing is held by the Commission to receive community input and- direction. No name shall be changed unless there is significant justification and support by the community. RESPONSIBILITY Department Parks and Recreation Commission Department ACTION Acquires a new park or recreation facility. Solicits possible names from community'. Forwards suggested names to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration. Receives any additional community input. Selects a name for the new park or recreation facility. Forwards name ratification. to City Council for Installs the appropriate naming sign or plaque. ! I I I i ! I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I i TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROV~ CITY ATTORNEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors <-~{.erman D. Parker, Director of Community Services October 19, 1999 Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gail L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary The Community Services Department is pleased to announce that the Temecula Valley Museum is nearing completion. The consultant is in the process of constructing the exhibits. A dedication and grand opening ceremony has been scheduled for Saturday, November 6, 1999. The event will offer visitors a tour of the facility with refreshments and entertainment offered throughout the day at Sam Hicks Monument Park. On January 25, 1999, the Community Services Department released a Request for Qualifications for architectural design services for the expansion of the Mary Phillips Senior Center. The proposed expansion will include kitchen upgrades and a 2,500 to 3,000 square foot enlargement of the building to include additional space for meetings and classes. At the March meeting, the Community Services Commission appointed a Commissioner to work with staff on the design for the expansion for this facility. The first design committee meeting was held in July of 1999 and a senior community workshop was held on August 3, 1999. The architect has applied the comments from the community workshop into the schematic design for the expansion project and staff will be scheduling a follow-up committee meeting to discuss the modified design. The City of Temecula Community Services Department brought forward to the TCSD Board of Directors a Joint Use Agreement with the Temecula Valley Unified School District for use of the Temecula Valley High School Tennis Courts. The agreement was approved by the Board of Education on August 18, 1998. The agreement provides for the lighting and maintenance of eight tennis courts at Temecula Valley High School, by the City of Temecula, in exchange for the use of the tennis courts in the City's overall parks and recreation program. This project is complete and both high school students and the public are currently using the facility. A ribbon cutting is planned for November 18, 1999. F:\DEPTS\CSD\ZIGLERG\XDEPTRPT\9910.doc Ocloher 12, 1999 The City Council awarded a construction contract to Terra Cal Construction for the Phase II improvements to the Temecula Duck Pond Improvements included stabilization of the pond edge, walkways, landscape, irrigation, bandstand, restroom, parking facilities, and road improvements to Ynez Road. A re-dedication ceremony was held on for October 7, 1999. The Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail undercrossing project is currently under construction. This project will provide a safe link to the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail, by undercrossing Winchester Road (State Highway 79 North). It is anticipated this project will be complete by the first of November. A ribbon cutting will be held on November 18, 1999. The Community Services Department has released a Request for Qualifications to do a feasibility study for the construction of a children's museum for the City of Temecula. Seven firms responded to the RFQ. Consultant interviews were held on September 22, 1999. Staff is currently negotiating with the number one rated firm. Staff released a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) for the design of an aquatic facility to be constructed at Chaparral High School. Four firms responded to the SOQ and interviews are scheduled for October 18, 1999. The Community Services Department has released a Request for Qualifications to do a feasibility study for the construction of a sports complex facility for the City of Temecula. The RFQ was sent to approximately 20 firms and the deadline for submitting was Friday August 20, 1999. Seven firms responded to the RFQ. Staff is reviewing the proposals at this time. The Recreation Division is currently preparing for the upcoming holiday events including the Annual Halloween Spooktacular, Santa's Electric Light Parade, Holiday Lights and Festive Sights and Winter Wonderland. Also, the Community Services Department is participating in the planning of the City's 10 year anniversary celebration. The Recreation Division is also putting the final touches on the Winter/Spring 1999-2000 issue of the Guide to Leisure Activities. The Recreation Division is please to announce their newest member to the Temecula Community Services Department "Tern E. Cula Duck" also known as "Temmy". Temmy will the TCSD's mascot and will be making many appearances throughout the year. The Maintenance Division continues to oversee the maintenance of parks and recreation facilities, as well as all other City owned public buildings and facilities. The Maintenance Division has worked diligently for the last 30 days to complete the 90-maintenance period of the Temecula Duck Pond, and played a vital role in the dedication ceremony. On Tuesday, September 7, 1999, the proposed Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act, SB3, was passed by the State Assembly. In addition to City Staff pursuing funding, the County Librarian continues to look for funding for the Temecula Library project, as the Temecula Library is the highest circulating library in the Riverside County Library System and is the County's number one library to be constructed once funding is identified. F:\DEPTS\CSD\Z1GLERG\XDEPTRPT\9910.doc Octol~r 12, 1999 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 8:17 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Ford, Roberrs, Stone, and Lindemans. ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBER: None. Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOM M E N DATI ON: 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1999; 1.2 Approve the minutes of July 27, 1999. 2 Purchase and Sale Agreements for Residential Sites in the Pujol Area RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28735 PUJOL STREET IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA Minutes.rda\091499 1 3 2.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28496 PUJOL STREET IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA 2.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28516 PUJOL STREET IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA 2.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 99-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 28500 BLOCK OF PUJOL STREET (APN 922-053-008) IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA Temecula Redevelopment A.qency Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 1999. Minutes. rda\091499 2 4 Approve the Manufacturing and Purchase of Freeway Si.qna.qe for Old Town Front Street on I-15 - Proiect No. PW99-08 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the manufacturing and purchase of freeway guide sign panels for use on I-15 to Safeway Sign Company of Adelanto, California, in the amount of $35,305.75 (including sales tax); 4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed a contingency amount of $3,194.25 which is equal to the balance of the appropriated funds and 9% of the purchase amount; 4.3 Approve an appropriation of $30,000.00 from Redevelopment Agency Unreserved Fund Balance to the project account. MOTION: Agency Member Roberrs moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 4. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Stone who abstained with regard to Item Nos. 2 and 4. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Executive Director Nelson commended the Redevelopment Department on its efforts with the acquisition of four additional parcels to the City's overall Housing Program. Mr. Nelson as well commended the Public Works Department on the newly placed 1-15 freeway signs indicating the location of Old Town. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS Agency Member Lindemans apprised the viewing public of a new joint effort in Old Town between the Redevelopment Agency and the Stage Stop. Mi n utes. rda\091499 3 ADJOURNMENT At 8:21 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 28, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Karel F. Lindemans, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.rda\091499 4 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:42 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Ddve, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Ford, Stone, and Lindemans. ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBER: Roberts. Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR I Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 1999. MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Roberts who was absent and Chairman Lindemans who abstained. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No comments. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comments. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. Minutes~092899 I ADJOURNMENT At 7:43 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, October 5, 1999, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Karel Lindemans, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] Minutes~092899 2 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT FINANCE DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members John Meyer, Housing & Redevelopment Manager<:::~~ October 19, 1999 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report as of October 19, 1999 for the Redevelopment Department. HOUSING First Time Homebuyers Program Funding in the amount of $300,000 is available for FY 99-00. Three loans have been closed for $66,300 with no loans pending. Residential Improvement Programs For FY 99/00, twenty-five projects have been completed and twenty-eight are in process. The program budget is $200,000 and $106,283 has been funded. The majodty of these projects are roof repairs, repainting and fence replacement. Affordable Rental Housing Projects Agency staff has the responsibility for monitoring all projects obtaining Agency assistance to rehabilitate existing affordable rental housing, as well as new construction. After completion, annual reporting is required to ensure all tenants continue to meet income cdteria outlined in the Project Regulatory Agreement and that all rents charged are within established affordable limits. The audit for the Rancho West Apartments (150 units) has been completed. Mission Village Apartments Rehabilitation of 38 distressed affordable housing units is underway, and construction of 38 new units has begun. All units will be occupied by very low and low-income families. The completion date is November 30, 1999. \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 \DEPTS\REDEV\SYERSK\MONTHLLy\REpORT.october.doc Habitat for Humanity Habitat has completed the family selection process and is preparing plans for submittal to Planning and Public Works. Title to the property will be transferred to Habitat after construction plans are approved. Construction is scheduled to commence within the next 60 days. Pujol Acquisitions for Affordable Housing Staff has opened escrow on four residential sites for the future development of affordable housing. Two closed on October 11. A fifth owner of another site in the same area has accepted the Agency's offer of the appraised value. The environmental assessment is in progress. Facade Improvement/Non-Conforming Sign Program The following facade improvement/sign projects have recently been completed: · Main Street Salon - Signs The following facade improvements are underway: · 28657-63 Front Street (Rocky Mountain House, et.al.) - exterior paint · Second Street Automotive (Second and Mercedes) Complete Facade Renovation · Rancon Building (Front Street) Repaint Trim & Sign · The Temeku Market and Porch (Front Street) Fire Sprinklers Palomar Hotel Plans have been submitted for the rehabilitation of the hotel and its conversion to a Bed and Breakfast. The Agency will provide financial assistance through the FaCade Improvement Program. Circle K Center in Old Town - The Redevelopment Agency has negotiated assistance for the rehabilitation of the center. Western-style architectural enhancements are included. R:\syersk\rnonthly\report. May 2 ITEM 10 APPROV. CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager DATE: October 19, 1999 SUBJECT: Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Paloma del Sol), and Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement for the Villages @ Paseo del Sol, Community Shopping Center) Prepared by: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: MAKE a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified, and find that a subsequent EIR is not required; 2. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 3. READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-O285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), AMENDING LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1, 6, 8, 27 AND 36; AMENDING THE ALIGNMENT AND CONFIGURATION OF CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; AMENDING THE ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA I FROM 32.3 ACRES TO 35.0 ACRES; AMENDING THE \\TEMEC_F$101 \VOLI \DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT. CC .do~ 1 ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 FROM 36.3 ACRES TO 34.3 ACRES; DIVIDING PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 UNITS) AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DUIAC, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 590 TO 508; AMENDING THE TEXT TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8, AND AMENDING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO INCORPORATE THE VILLAGE VIGNETTES AND SENIOR AMENITIES. 4. READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES ~ PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, PLANNING AREAS l(a) & l(b) OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 7" BACKGROUND: The Specific Plan Amendment The applicant proposes Amendment No. 7 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan in order to construct Home Depot's 131,848 square foot building (with garden center) in combination with an additional 144,395 square feet of commercial buildings that form "retail villages" in Planning Area 1 (See Page 111-3, Figure 3A in the Specific Plan Amendment text). This combination of commercial uses provides an opportunity to attract a large number of consumers to the site, and to offer reasons to linger and enjoy a variety of shopping, dining, exercise and social activities. While not employing all the elements of the City's Village Center Design Guidelines, the project has made major efforts to orient the project toward a redesigned and reconfigured Campanula Way that is more inviting to pedestrians and bicycles. Two traffic circles and sections of on-street parallel parking are proposed as traffic calming devices. Transit access is provided by a bus turnout near the plaza area, and a bicycle lane is proposed. These design elements encourage the pedestrian linkage between this commercial development and the multi-family residential proposed directly across Campanula. Amendment No.7 also provides for a senior community component to Paloma del Sol within Planning Area 8. This option includes a private recreation area and street/sidewalk system targeted for active seniors within a gated community. The Development A~reement The Development Agreement for the Villages @ Paseo del Sol Community Shopping Center implements the applicant's proposal. Road improvement credits to Development Impact Fees are detailed, as well as the provision to rebuild any structure and reoccupy with the same use, in the event of casualty damage whether more than 50% or not. Lastly, the Agreement describes the terms under which each parcel owner and the City may execute a Memorandum of Covenant after the termination of the Agreement, in order to preserve the dght to reinstitute uses for an additional fifteen year period. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFl~85pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC .doc 2 Plannina Commission Action The Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) on October 6, 1999, after headng about the Home Depot project at two Commission workshops (June 16 and July 21, 1999) and three Commission headngs (September 15, September 29, and October 6, 1999). The Commission also recommended that the City Council certify and adopt Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, and approve Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan, as well as approve the Development Agreement entitled, "Villages @ Paseo del Sol." RESPONSE TO PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE / PETITION IN OPPOSITION Apartments On September 28, 1999 the City Council received a petition from residents near Planning Area 8 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (See Page 111-3, Figure 3A in the Specific Plan Amendment text). The petition contained 190 signatures (unverified) opposed to apartments. Amendment No. 7 proposes a senior community of 396 single family dwellings within Planning Area 8. Very High Density Residential is currently designated south of DePortola Road within Planning Area 6. Amendment No. 7 proposes to decrease the amount of acreage within Planning Area 6 by two acres and to decrease the density by 82 dwelling units. Furthermore, the Very High Density Residential designation is proposed to be shifted to the south half of Planning Area 6, across from the commercial projects, where apartments would be an appropriate land use. Drainage The Planning Commission heard testimony from Steve Corona, and subsequent documents were received regarding drainage and flooding problems on the Corona property on the northeast side of Butterfield Stage Road and State Highway 79 South. In response to the concerns raised, both Newland Communities and the Public Works Department provided the Commission with information regarding the role of Assessment Distdct 159, the construction of Butterfield Stage Road in 1993, the proposed Butterfield Interceptor Channel, and the construction of a 20-acre interim detention basin by Newland Communities. FISCAL IMPACT: The developer will receive $364,408.20 in allowable Development Impact Fee credits for street system improvements. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Addendum Nos. 1 and 2 were adopted by the City of Temecula City Council in 1992 and 1999 respectively. Addendum No. 3 is under consideration by the City Council on October 19, 1999. This project proposes no change to the maximum number of units for Planning Area 8 as reviewed by Addendum No. 3. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which require major revision in the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred. In addition, the previously certified EIR and Addendures addressed the number of lots for the site as proposed by Tentative Tract Map No. 24136, F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doe 3 Amendment No. 2. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required· Staff is recommending that the Commission make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. FINDINGS: Plannin.e Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) 1. Amendment No. 7 as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. 2. Amendment No. 7 is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted General Plan. 3. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes an overall reduction in the density and intensity of land uses· The proposed senior community option provides a greater diversity of housing products for the residents of the City of Temecula. 4. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses of the site and is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol. 5. Amendment No. 7 does not increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Plannin~ Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Acireement) The development to be carded out pursuant to the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan. The Development Agreement and the development to be carded out hereunder complies with all other applicable requirements of State law, City Ordinances and Specific Plan No. 219· Attachments: City Council Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) - Page 5 a. Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Page 9 b. Exhibit B - Amendment No. 7 text - Distributed under separate cover City Council Ordinance No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) - Page 13 a. Exhibit A - Amendment No. 7 Zoning Standards text - Distributed under separate cover b. Addendure No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol - Distributed under separate cover = 5. 6. 7. City Council Ordinance No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) - Page 19 a. Exhibit A - Development Agreement text - Distributed under separate cover September 15, 1999 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 24 September 29, 1999 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 25 September 29, 1999 Planning Commission Draft Minutes - Page 26 Correspondence - Page 27 a. From Steve Corona, testimony text and documentation b. From Newland Communities, letter dated October 6, 1999 c. Petition in Opposition to Apartments R:\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC .doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 99- AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 \\TEMEC_FS 101WOLI x, DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC .doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99- 0285 (AMENDMENT No. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), AMENDING LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1, 6, 8, 27 AND 36; AMENDING THE ALIGNMENT AND CONFIGURATION OF CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; AMENDING THE ALLOCATIOIN OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA I FROM 32.3 ACRES TO 35.0 ACRES; AMENDING THE ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 FROM 36.3 ACRES TO 34.3 ACRES; DIVIDING PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 UNITS) AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DUIAC, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 590 TO 508; AMENDING THE TEXT TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8, AND AMENDING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO INCORPORATE THE VILLAGE VIGNETTES AND SENIOR AMENITIES; ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0285, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0285 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0285 on September 15, 1999, September 29, 1999, and October 6, 1999, at duly noticed public hearings 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 headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0285; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to Planning Application No. PA99-0285 on October 19, 1999, at which time interested persons had opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to Planning Application No. PA99-0285; WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Report regarding Planning Application No. PA99-0285; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 ~STAFFRPT .CC .doc 6 Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findin.~s. The City Coundl, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) hereby makes the following findings A. Amendment No. 7, as proposed and conditioned, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. B. Amendment No. 7 is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted General Plan. C. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes an overall reduction in the density and intensity of land uses. The proposed senior community option provides a greater diversity of housing products for the residents of the City of Temecula. D. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses of the site and is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol. E. Amendment No. 7 does not increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Addendure Nos. I and 2 were adopted by the City of Temecula City Council in 1992 and 1999 respectively. Addendure No. 3 is under consideration by the City Council on October 19, 1999. This project proposes no change to the maximum number of units for Planning Area 8 as reviewed by Addendum No. 3. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which require major revision in the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred. In addition, the previously certified EIR and Addendures addressed the number of lots for the site as proposed by Tentative Tract Map No. 24136, Amendment No. 2. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Staff is recommending that the Commission make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219), amending the land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area 1 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, pdvate, gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a pdvate recreation area; and an update of Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. \\TEMEC_FS 101 WOL I \DEFTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doc 7 Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this nineteenth day of October, 1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 99- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the nineteenth day of October, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOLI \DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doc 8 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL \\TEMEC_FSI01WOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\285pa99.STAFFRpT.CC.doc 9 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Revised by Planning Commission - October 6, t999 Planning Application No. PA99-0285 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 Project Description: To amend Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) as follows: land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area I 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: October 19, 1999 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, judgements, 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 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. o The applicant shall 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. 1B, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7" dated October 11, 1999, or as amended by these conditions. \\TEMEC_FSI01WOLI\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\285pa99.STAFFRFF.CC.doc 10 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. Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the Amendment The applicant shall submit the amended Specific Plan text to the Community Development Department - Planning Division, in accordance with Conditions of Approval and with requirements by the City Council. 6. The applicant shall correct or modify the following: 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." 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. 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 \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99.STAFFRFF.CC.doc 11 EXHIBIT B AMENDMENT NO. 7 TEXT (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 \DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC.doc 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 \\TEMEC_FSlOI\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\285pa99.STAFFRFF.CC.doc 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), AMENDING LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1, 6, 8, 27 AND 36; AMENDING THE ALIGNMENT AND CONFIGURATION OF CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; AMENDING THE ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 1 FROM 32.3 ACRES TO 35.0 ACRES; AMENDING THE ALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 FROM 36.3 ACRES TO 34.3 ACRES; DIVIDING PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 UNITS) AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DU/AC, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 590 TO 508; AMENDING THE TEXT TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8, AND AMENDING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO INCORPORATE THE VILLAGE VIGNETTES AND SENIOR AMENITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Public headngs have been held before the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the State of Califomia, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. Section 2. Notice of Adoption. within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted in at least three public places in the City. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Addendure Nos. 1 and 2 were adopted by the City of Temecula City Council in 1992 and 1999 respectively. Addendure No. 3 is under consideration by the City Council on October 19, 1999. This project proposes no change to the maximum number of units for Planning Area 8 as reviewed by Addendum No. 3. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which require major revision in the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred. In addition, the previously certified EIR and Addendures addressed the number of lots for the site as proposed by Tentative Tract Map No. 24136, Amendment No. 2. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Staff is recommending that the Commission make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. R:\STAFFP, PT\285pa99 .STAF~ .CC .doc 14 Section 4. Findings. The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) hereby makes the following findings A. Amendment No. 7, as proposed and conditioned, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. B. Amendment No. 7 is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted General Plan. C. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes an overall reduction in the density and intensity of land uses. The proposed senior community option provides a greater diversity of housing products for the residents of the City of Temecula. D. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses of the site and is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol. E. Amendment No. 7 does not increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Section 5. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 as it pertains to changes in the Zoning text referenced by Specific Plan No. 21 g, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, in the SP-4 zone. Section 6. 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 the same to be published as required by law. Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this nineteenth day of October, 1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) R:\STAFFRFr~c285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doe 15 I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 99- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the nineteenth day of October, 1999, 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 ,1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk \\TEMEC_FS 101 ~VOL I\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC .doc 16 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT NO. 7 -ZONING STANDARDS TEXT (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \XTEMEC_FSI01WOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99.STAFFRPT.CC.doc 17 ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 219 (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FS I01\VOLI\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC.doc 18 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 99- DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\285pa99.STAFFRpT.CC.doc 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES ~ PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, PLANNING AREAS I (a) & 1 (b) OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 7" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. del Sol Investments, LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0283 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Temecula, State of Califomia, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning laws of the State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Addendure Nos. I and 2 were adopted by the City of Temecula City Council in 1992 and 1999 respectively. Addendum No. 3 is under consideration by the City Council on October 19, 1999. This project proposes no change to the maximum number of units for Planning Area 8 as reviewed by Addendum No. 3. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which require major revision in the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred. In addition, the previously certified EIR and Addendums addressed the number of lots for the site as proposed by Tentative Tract Map No. 24136, Amendment No. 2. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Staff is recommending that the Commission make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. Section 3. Findings. The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) hereby makes the following findings A. Amendment No. 7, as proposed and conditioned, is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. B. Amendment No. 7 is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted General Plan. C. The Development Agreement approved by this Ordinance has been adopted in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the Development Agreement Statutes, Government Code Sections 65864 et.seq. D. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes an overall reduction in the density and intensity of land uses. The proposed senior community option R:\STAFFRFF~85pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC .doc 20 provides a greater diversity of housing products for the residents of the City of Temecula. E. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses of the site and is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Paloma del Sol. F. Amendment No. 7 does not increase the impacts associated with the development or the overall intensity of the development as analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Section 4. Approval. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain Development Agreement entitled "Villages @ Paseo del Sol Development Agreement, Planning Areas l(a) & l(b) of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7,' dated as of October 19, 1999, and authorizes the Mayor to execute this Development Agreement on behalf of the City in substantially the form submitted to the City Council at the public hearing. The City Clerk shall cause the Development Agreement to be recorded within ten (10) days of the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this nineteenth day of October, 1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) R:\STAFFILffr\285pa99 .STAFFILPT.CC .doc 21 I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 99- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the nineteenth day of October, 1999, 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 ,1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 \DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\285pa99 .STAFFRPT.CC.doc 22 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TEXT (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFr\285pa99.STAFFRPT.CC.doc 23 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT R:\STAFFRFF\285pa99.STAFFRPT.CC .doc 24 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15. 1999 Planning Application No. PA99-O284 (Development Plan) Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specffic Plan Amendment No. 7) Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council certify and adopt the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; e ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; e ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; e ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement entitled uVillages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement") based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.,E~_99.p~.do¢ 1 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Allan L. Davis, del Sol Investment Company, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Larry R. Markham, Markham & Assodates PROPOSAL: The design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space; 2. The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots; Amendment No. 7 to Spedf',: Plan No. 219 (Palome del Sol), amending the following: land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area I 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 pdvate recreation area; and an update of .Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. e The request for approval of a Development Agreement between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a California limited liability company LOCATION: Nodh of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) SURROUNDINGZONING: Nodh: Specific Plan No. 219 South: County- Commercial East: Specific Plan No. 219 West: VL Very Low Density Residential, PO Professional Office, and HT Highway Toudst Commercial PROPOSEDZONING: Spedtic Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: CC Community Commercial, H High Density Residential, LM Low Medium Density Residential, and OS Open Space EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LANDUSES: Nodh: South: East: West: Residential Commerdal (Jack-in-the-Box, Texaco), vacant Vacant and residential Commercial (Lucky's, Siggy's Restaurant) F:~DEPTS~PLANNINGITAFFRP'I'~t4pa99.pc.doc 2 PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) Total Area: 23.65 acres 1,030,411 sq. ft. Building Area: Home Depot Retail Villages Total 131,848 sq.ft. 144,395 sq.ft. (Multi-story) 276,243 sq.ft. (27%) Max. Building Height: 5O feet Landscaped Area: Hardscaped Area: 4.90 acres 213,444 sq.ft. (21%) 16.38 acres 713,513 sq.ft. (69%) Parking Required: Parking Provided: 730 vehicular, 30 handicapped, 37 bicycle, 7 motorcycle 1,094 vehicular, 32 handicapped, 37 bicycle, 7 motorcycle BACKGROUND Spedtic Ran No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Council approved the "Agreement regarding Paloma del Sol' and various amendments to the Specific Plan, from 1994 through 1998. Podions of the subject application were submitted for Pre-Application review on June 16, 1999. On that same date the applicant presented their proposal to the Planning Commission, as a workshop item. Staff held a Pre--Application Meeting with the applicant and his development team on June 30, 1999. A formal submittal was received over a period of days between July 15, 1999 and July 22, 1999. The applicant conducted another workshop with the Planning Commission on July 21, 1999, obtaining comments from the Commissioners as to architectural design, location of land uses, pedestrian access, screening of loading docks, and the location of outdoor seasonal display. Second, third and fourth revised exhibits ware received by staff on August 11, 1999, August 16, 1999 and August 26, 1999 respectively. Staff held a Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant and his development team on August 26, 1999. Subsequent meetings were held with vadous staff members regarding spedtic areas of concern, such as the traffic study, street design, village design, development agreement deal points, list of permitted uses, and bus tumouts. A fiRh set of revised exhibits were received on September 7, September 8, and September 9, 1999. PROJECT DESC~PTION The applicant proposes to develop the east and major podion of Planning Area 1 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. He offers to combine a 131,948 square foot Home Depot (including a garden center) alongside four (4) outlying pads and several 'retail villages,' for a total of 276,243 square feet of retail. The 'retail villages' idea represents a unique interpretation of the Village Center Oveday that is placed on the site by the City's General Plan. However, the applicant has worked with staff to provide a courtyard layout as the focal point, has clustered retail uses, and has used architectural features that encourage pedestrians to move through the "retail villages.' The applicant has submitted a sedes of village vignettes that depict the style, design amenities and coordination of uses that are to be detailed within a design manual submitted at a later time for review and approval by the Planning Manager. The project is conditioned to provide and receive approval from the Planning Manager for the design manual and administrative development plan applications prior to the consideration of any precise grading or building permit beyond the Home Depot building. F:'OEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT',2~.pc.doc 3 The applicant submitte~ the Design Manual for the project on September 9, 1999. Unfortunately staff received this document at such a late clate thai aQequate review and comment was infeasibie. ANALYSIS Site Desion The project will extend commercial uses already established at the northeast comer of Margadta Road and State Highway 79 South. Home Depot is proposed to be adjacent to the existing Lucky's Grocery Store. The 'retail village' buildings continue eastward to the alesilting basin at the comer of Meadows Parkway and State Highway 79 South. A major component of the project is the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from its existing specific plan designation as a major roadway with a 100-foot fight-of-way width. The applicant is proposing two traffic circles on Campanula, one near the courtyard, and the other behind Home Depot. The traffic circles represent a compromise design to decrease the vehicular speeds on Campanula, and encourage pedestrian access. The applicant also proposes parallel parking on some sections of Campanula, as well as a bike route and a combination of stdped and raised landscaped medians. Delivery trucks are encouraged to use Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way to access the rear loading docks. Customer access is through three (3) driveways off State Highway 79 South, and two (2) driveways off Campanula Way. The applicant shall be conditioned to provide a "Bike Rack Location Plan" to place the 37 required bicycle racks throughout the project area. Because the parking fields provided exceed City code requirements, the project fulfills motorcycle space needs by utilizing the excess vehicle spaces. Therefore, motorcycle spaces are not delineated on the plan. The Home Depot site provides for a customer pick up area, as well as an outdoor display area at the front of the store. The project is conditioned for a maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor finished product display. similar to other approved home improvement stores in the City. Home Depot also proposes a seasonal outdoor sales area of 7,650 square feet. Staft had requested that the seasonal sales area be intemalized, however, the Home Depot representative did not concur with this request. Staff has conditioned Home Depot to obtain a Temporary Use Permit from the Planning Department for each and every occasion to setup seasonal sales. Seasonal sales areas shall be properly screened and approved by the Planning Manager. Architecture, Color and Materials The Home Depot elevations represent the fourth revision to these plans. The vinyl coated steel wire mesh originally proposed to screen the garden center has been replaced with decorative wrought iron, and the rear (north) elevation has been broken up with signage. Columns have been enhanced with a stone veneer on all elevations where appropriate. However, staff had requested that the downspouts be intemalized and that trellises be added over the outdoor product display area. Both requests were not implemented. As stated previously, the applicant shall be conditioned to provide a Design Manual that addresses the architecture, color and materials, and signage to be used throughout the balance of the project. The Design Manual shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager if it is consistent with the City's' Design Guidelines and the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan guidelines. Sig3na;ae Home Depot proposes two monument signs, one at the State Highway 79 South entrance and another at the Campanula Way entrance. Both signs incorporate architectural features, colors and F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRP'r~284pa99.pc.doc 4 materials from the main building, and am six feet (6') in height. The Home Depot b.ji!ding is proposed to have a main sign at the front, with two additional spedalty signs for the indoor lumber yard and the nursery. They also propose signage with four foot (4') illuminated channel letters along the nodh and east elevations. The proposal is consistent with the signage program for the existing Lucky canter and the City's Sign Ordinance. Further, the Design Manual for the Village at Paseo del Sol shall determine spedtic sign criteda for the balanca of the project. Landscapina The applicant is proposing that the ten foot (10') wide perimeter planters required within the Paloma del Sol Spedtic Plan be reduced to six foot (6') wide planters. He believes that his project provides more planter area and trees overall by interspersing finger planters to breakup the parking field, rather than implementing the clustering ooncapt required by the specific plan. The applicant has revised the specif'm plan text to allow his design. The project shall be conditioned to add extensive turf mounding, shrubs and grouped trees along State Highway 79 South to screen the vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. The applicant is proposing to screen the loading docks behind the Home Depot and Buildings "G" and "H" with a six foot (6') block wall atop a five to seven foot (5-7') barre. The wall is approximately seven feet (7') from the lumber loading dock, and twelve feet (12') from Building "H.' Staff has conditioned that Construction Landscape Drawings submitted for Home Depot and Buildings "G" and "H" continue the row of evergreen trees already shown for the west half behind Home Depot. All evergreen trees planted in this area shall be a minimum 36-inch box size to provide a quick screen. The planting along the street side of the screen walls shall include wall vines and shrubs. The project shall be conditioned to recon~gure and enlarge the planter area on both sides of the main entry in order to install plantings that make an entry statement. The Design Manual submitted for the project shall include landscaping details required around buildings and within the courtyard. The manual shall also specify the type of furniture and fbxtures in these areas. Tentative Parcel MaD No. 29431 The map proposed for this project was originally submitted as a tentative parcel map. Subsequently, the applicant resubmitted the map as a vesting map without providing the necassary detail to process the map under the vesting format in accordanca with the Subdivision Map Act. Fudhermore, the exhibit submitted on September 8, 1999 remains inadequate. Conditions of approval from the Public Works Depadment require that the applicant resubmit a revised exhibit for Tentative Parcal Map No. 29431 prior to the City Council headng. Should the applicant still desire to pursue a vesting map, he may at a later date, submit a vesting tentative parcel map in accordanca with the Subdivision Map Act, which if approved can ovaday Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431. The Riverside Transit Agency has requested bus stops at this location. The parcel map delineates a bus turnout on the south side of Campanula, and has been conditioned to locate and include a westbound bus turnout prior to the recordation of the final map. The Development Plan submitted for the multi-family project proposed for Parcel 6 may affect the ultimate location of this turnout. SDecific Plan Amendment No. 7 The text for Amendment No. 7 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the Zoning Ordinanca Amendment require additional corrections. However, due to the aggressive schedule that staff and the applicant has maintained in order to bdng this project forward to the Commission and Council, F:%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'D284pa99.pc.doc 5 these corrections are not included in the text distributed to the Commission (dated September 7, 1999). In order to keep the project on track, staff is providing the Com.lission with a Ust of Changes which summarizes each of the amendments to the specific plan proposed by the applicant, and staffs recommendation regarding each amendment. The applicant shall be conditioned to resubmit Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 with the corrections needed to the text, including all recommendations by the Commission, before the text is distributed to the City Council for their consideration. Paloma del Sol Specific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. 7 List of Chanoes~ Amendment No. 6 3 DensiN cateoodes - Medium, Medium-High, and Very High Campanula Way - a 100 ft ROW between De Podola Road and Meadows Parkway. On-site roads include: Highway 79 South (142' ROVV), Artedals (110' ROW), Majors (100' ROW), Secondaries (88 ROW), Collectors (66' ROW), Local Streets (60 ROW), and Gateway Roads (108' ROW) Planninf3 Area 6 - Archaeological site mitigation program is required to be identified and possibly completed Planninc3 Area 6 - private recreation facilities include meeting rooms, wet bars, and kitchen radiities Amendment No. 7 4 DensiN catec~odes - Medium, Medium-High, High (proposed for Planning Area 6A), and Very High Plannine Area I is split into Planning Areas 1 (a) and 1 (b) CamDanula Way- Use of traffic circles and on-street parking on 78 ft ROW between De Podola Road and Meadows Parkway. Addition of: Commercial Collectors with on-street parking and traffic circles (78' ROW), and Am. No. 7 no longer contains Gateway Roads (all other roads remain the same) (Language added) Commercial fronta.ae landscaDina- extensive turf mounding, grouped trees and shrubs to allow excellent visibility of village center and supporting retail villages Planninn Area 6 - No longer required because the mitigation program has already occurred Planninn Area 6 - these three facilities are deleted Recommendation Approval Approval Approval includes a 122 ft. ROW width at traffic circles Approval includes a 122 ft. ROW width at traffic circles Approval UCR requests mitigation if resources are found dudng construction. Approval ~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTSVILANN ING~TAFFRPT~84pa99.pc.do¢ 6 Planning Area 6 - "A minor project entry statement shall be provided at the comer of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way at the southeastem comer of the Planning Area.' Planning Area 6 - Very High Density Residential (590 du max) with a target density of 16.2 du/ac deleted Pedestrian linkage- between Planning Area 6 and park in PA 37 Planning Area 6(a1 - High Density Residential (268 du max) with a target density of 10.5 du/ac Planning Area 6(b} - Very High Density Residential (240 du max)with a target density of 16.5 du/ac Pedestrian linkage - between Planning Areas 6A and 6B Planning Area 8 - medium density residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre) Neighborhood Commercial Services - include general merchandising, cultural and entedainment oppodunities, and general office uses Neighborhood Commercial Open areas - 15 to 50 feet in width Planning Area 8 - proposed as medium density (2-5 dwelling units per acre) pdvate gated active senior community (if not implemented as such, medium density family housing) If implemented as a Senior Community, this PA will contain 5 unique street/sidewalk treatments (which can be viewed on Figures 51A, 51B, 51C, 51D, and 51E in Amendment No. 7. (Language added) Residential Neighborhood Associations in Senior Community - will be formed if Senior community is implemented and will assume maintenance responsibility for all common areas and facilities therein Neighborhood Commercial Services - includes the same as Am. No. 6, but additionally includes home improvement, food and restaurant services Neighborhood Commercial Open areas - 25 to 100 feet in width RecommendaU0n": Deny deletion Approval Approval as an added item. Retain park linkage to PA6. Approval Approval Approval \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'D284plgg.pc.do¢ 7 Amendment No, 6 Architecture - 'Commercial units should vary in size. However, units which are directly adjacent may not differ in horizontal or vertical frontage by more than 50 percent.' Architecture throughout Droiect - will conform to general criteria standards established within the Specific Plan design guidelines Roof Forms and Materials - 'Flat roof area is limited to 50 % of total roof area for any single unit or group of contiguous units .' Landscape ReQuirements- minimum of 15% of the gross commercial site acreage shall be landscaped LandscaDinQ in Darkin~3 areas - Islands at the end of parking stalls have a minimum of 10' width of landscaping to allow planting and mounding, Amendment No. 7 Architecture - 'Commercial units should vary in size with adjacency of scale considered.' Architecture within Senior Community HousinQ - conforms with design guidelines, however, to establish · unique character for seniors, architecture will be distinctive and designed/marketed toward active seniors Roof Forms and Materials -'Flat roof area is limited to 50 % of total roof area for the overell site by planning area except in PA 1 (b) which may be 100%.' Landscalve ReQuirements - same as Am. No. 6, but with the addition of Home Depot site with minimum of 10% net acreage landscaped Landsca~}inQ in oarkinQ areas - Islands at the end of parking stalls have a minimum of 6' width of landscaping to allow planting and mounding, and one tree per every ten (10) parking stalls (minimum) (Language added) Villa;e Center Desi;n Guidelines - inclusion of medical/dental and/or general offices, a home improvement store, and fitness center (Language added) Al~rol~date Sionaoe - 'blade signs which are pedestrian oriented 90 degrees to pedestrian pathways' (Language added) 'Existing uses in Planning Areas I a and I b (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the respective Development Agreement in the event of damage, destruction or remodeling' Recommendatjon Approval Approval as an added item for senior housing. Deny Deny ~,~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRP'I~,I)c.~:)c 8 Ame:ndrr,~nt' No. 6 : E:' Recommendation :: Amendment No. '7 · ": Circulation - "The project proponent shall participate in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as approved by the City of Temecula (Added language follows) subject to certain reimbursements under Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement." ~ For a comparison list of acreage, land use and dwelling unit changes, please reference the Summary of Changes Table in Amendment No. 7. Development Aareement The proposed Development Agreement for this project is being handled in a similar fashion to the Spedtic Plan Amendment. Staff has provided a list of Deal Points which specities those items that are either unresoived or incorrect within the text, and staffs recommendation regarding each item. The applicant shall be conditioned to resubmit the Development Agreement with the corrections and recommendations by the Commission before the text is distributed to the City Coundl for their consideration. Deal Points: 1. Developer is requesting a Development Agreement life of 25 years (Section 4.1 ). Staff does not support a 25 year Development Agreement life. Staff supports a 10 year Development Agreement life. Traffic medians and traffic circles installed by the Owner in the public dght of way of Campanula Way shall be maintained by the TCSD as padial consideration for the annual assessment paid to the TCSD. (Section 12.3b) Staff does not support this. The Developer requests the City use all reasonable eftotis to assist the Owner in amending the MOU between the City and Cal Trans and to assist Owner in obtaining all required encroachment permits from Cal Trans on a timely basis to allow Owner an additional dght turn in and dght turn out access point at a point approximately 660 feet west of the centedine of the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Highway 79S and the Main Access and Highway 79S. (Section 12.5) Staff supports this. 4A. Owner is pumhasing $400,000.00 worth of DIF credits which will be available to either apply to capital or impact fee for road improvements and public facilities or DIF otherwise payable by Owner. (Section 12.2) Staff suppods this not to exceed 100% of the street\traffic signal DIF credit. 4B. Owner shall receive additional credits toward any DIF due related to the Project directly related to all road improvements installed under AD 159 in propodion to the total assessment assessed against the Property in the amount of $364,408.20 in accordance with Exhibit "H" prepared by City attached hereto and made a pad hereof. (Section 12.2) %\TEMEC_FSI 01%VOL1 '~DEPTS~PLAN NING',STAFFR P'r%284pIgg.pc.doc Staff supports this not to exceed i00% of street\traffic signal DIF credit. Any building which suffers casualty damage, whether more than 50% or not, shall be allowed to be re-built and re-occupied by the use to which it was being used immediately pdor to the occurrence of the casualty, providing such re-construction is in compliance with the then current building codes in effect. (Section 13.2) Staff supports this as long as the re-construction uses the currently adopted model codes. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Govemment Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s) (vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan, shall be extended to expire at the end of the term of this Villages Q Paseo del Sol Development Agreement. (Section 13.5) Staff supports a life of 10 years. Development Aareement - List of Permitted Uses (Villac3e Core area1 The following uses are either repetitive or staff is requesting deletion: (22) (23) (26) (35) (36) (45) (46) (49) This is the same use as (12) This is the same use a (9) This is the same use as (61) Golf equipment store not to exceed 3,000 square feet. Delete 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. Delete Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. Delete Laundries and laundromats in Building B. Delete Liquor stores. Delete Develooment Aareement - List of Permitted Uses {Retail Villa¢3esl The following uses are either repetitive or staff is requesting deletion: (31) This is the same use as (21) (39) Dollar store. Delete (83) Outlet stores. Delete 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 Addendure No. I was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Spedtic 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the SpecirH; Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendure document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic ',\TEMEC_FSl 01 ~VOLI %DEPTS%PLAN NING~STAFFR PT~84pa99.pc.doc 10 Study approved by the City Traffio Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document prior to distribution to the City Courtall for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as · result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staft acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original cedification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The applicant proposes a unique interpretation of the Village Center Oveday that is placed on the site by the Citys General Plan. The proposed changes to Specific Plan No. 219 remain consistent with the General Plan underlying designations and densities on the property. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance Amendment as conditioned will bdng the project into consistency with zoning. SUM MARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the project as conditioned. FINDINGS The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Depadment has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. ~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'D284pI99.pc.doc 11 The design of Ihe proposed land division or proposed ir.~provements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Them are no known fish, wildlife or habit,,: on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The s~e is surrounded by development and is an in~ll site. Furthermore, grading has already occurrs_d at the site, which is a podion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. ~TEMEC FS101~VOLI~DEPT$~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc 12 Attachments: PC Resulution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 18 PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) - Blue Page 19 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 23 PC Resolution recommending approval of Pinning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page24 Exhibit A: Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B: Zoning Ordinance Amendment - (Under Separate Cover) PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. 99-0283 approving that certain development agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement" - Blue Page 30 Exhibit A: Villages as Paseo del Sol Development Agreement - (Under Separate Cover) PC Resolution recommending certification and adoption of Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Repod No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page 37 Exhibit A: Addendum No. 3 to EIR No. 235 - (Under Separate Cover) t Exhibits - Blue Page 42 B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. Vicinity Map Zoning Map General Plan Map Site Plan Grading Plan Monument Signage Plan Home Depot Elevations Home Depot Signage Home Depot Floor Plans Home Depot Landscape Plan Color and Material Board (To be displayed at the public hearing) Architectural Site Plan (Blueline only) Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 Informational Exhibit - Retail Village Elevations Informational Exhibit - Colored Village Vignettes (Under Separate Cover) ',\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR P'D284pa99.pc.doc 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP~.pc.doc 14 ATTACHMENT NO. I PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0284, DEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 276,243 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A 131,848 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT STORE, A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY STORE, AND 137,395 SQUARE FEET OF VILLAGE SHOPPING SPACE ON 23.65 ACRES, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-044 and 950-870-006 WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0284, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0284 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0284, on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headrig as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an oppodunity to and did testify either in suppod or in opposition to this matter;, WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0284; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010. F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the Citys General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLAN NI NG%STAFFR P'D284pe~_99.pc,do¢ 15 Landscaping Ordinances. The p.roject is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development. Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Fudhermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I 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. The applicant has submitted for cadification Addendure No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendure document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distribution to the City Council for consideration. 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal ceffification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4, Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) for the design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot %%T_EMEC_FS101 ~VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING',STAFFR PT%284pa99.pc.doc 16 Home Depot Sore, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space on 23.65 acres, locate north of State Highway 79 South. south of Campanula Way, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950- 020-044 and 950-S70-006 subject to the project spedtic conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto. and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September. 1999. Ron Guerriere, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRP~.pc.doc 17 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN %%TEMEC_FSI 01%VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRP'r~,84pa99.pc,doc 18 EXHIBIT A CITf OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning ApplicaUon No. PAgg-02bl - Development Plan Project Description: The design, construcUon and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space. Development Impact Fee Category: Home Depot - Retail Commercial Others -Various, to be determined Development Plans with the submittal of Administrative Assessor's Parcel Nos. Approval Date: Expiration Date: 9504)204)44 and 950-8704)06 September 28, 1999 September 28, 2001 PLANNING DIVISION Ten (10) Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division all revised exhibits and documents conditioned herein for review and approval by the City Council. Ce A revision to Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall be submitted correcting the text as well as incorporating the "List of Changes" as approved by the Planning Commission· A revision to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Specific Plan No. 219 shall be submitted correcting the text and incorporating revisions by the Planning Commission. A revision to the Development Agreement shall be submitted correcting the text as well as incorporating the "Deal Points' approved by the Planning Commission. A revision to the Addendure to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 shall be submitted correcting the text, including the Traffic Study as approved by the City Traffic Engineer, and incorporating any changes requested by the Planning Commission. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project by the City Council 2. The applicant 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 Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, ~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 \DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 1 the approval for the project granted shall be void by rea.-,c~n of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). 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 C. ity'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, judgemerits, 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 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 furlher cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reser~,es its fight to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its dtizens in regards to such defense. , This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; othenNise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year pedod which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for Specific Plan No. 219. The development of the premises shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Landscaping shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "J" (Home Depot Landscape Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the' authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformanca with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. Building elevations shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit 'G" (Home Depot Elevations), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structure. 10. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "K' (Home Depot Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTSWLANNING%STAFFR P'r%284pIgg. COA-DEVPLAN ,cloc 2 Matedal Color Building walls, man doors Towers, entry, canopies, porte cochere Wainscot, Columns, covers Softits Comica Signs, trusses Stone veneer ICI Paint Co. #548 "Beachcomber" ICI Paint Co. #565 'Woodwind' ICI Paint Co. #462 "Weetam Trail" ICI Paint Co. ~685 'Grey Mountain' ICI Paint Co. #583 'Grey Headh' ICI Paint Co. #4208/9200 'Safety Orange' Emser Tile Co. #574 "Autumn Lilac' 11. A Design Manual shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager that is consistent with the City Design Guidelines, the Paloma del Sol specific Plan guidelines, and these Conditions of Approval, and that includes the following: Details of architectural style and design amenatlas as depicted in the "Village Vignettes' on file with the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division. b. Use of colors and materials, with samples of each. c. Comprehensive Sign Program for the entire site. d. Coordination of retail uses. Landscaping details around the buildings and within the courtyard areas, including the use of plant arbors. Fumiture and fixture specifications including but not limited to: planter boxes, seating areas, benches, tables, chairs, shade structures, awnings, plaza lamps, hanging plants, trash receptacles, fountains and other water features, art, sculptures, bollards, enhanced paving areas, archways, gateways, gazebos, outdoor vendor carts, heaters, fans, masters and docks. 12. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager for all buildings at the site excepting the 131,848 square foot Home Depot building. 13. A maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor finished product display shall be allowed at the project site, in accordance with Exhibit "D" - Site Plan. 14. Seasonal sales areas shall be propedy screened. Temporary Use Permits shall include a screening plan that meets this condition, for review and approval by the Planning Manager. 15. Each and every temporary use of extedor area for retail sales, including seasonal sales, shall require a Temporary Use Permit, in accordance with the Citys Development Code. 16. When bus service to the area is activated, the applicant shall install a bus shelter, amenatlas and appropriate landscaping and access, at the bus tumout located on the approved Exhibit "D" - Site Plan. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set fodh in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. \~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING~TAFFR P~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 3 18. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department - fanning Division staff, and retum one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 19. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L', (Site Plan, Grading Plan, Monument Signage, Home Depot Elevations, Home Depot Signage, Home Depot Floor Plan, Home Depot Landscape Plan, Color and Matedal Board, Architectural Site Plan) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division staff, and submit five (5) full size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color pdnts of approved Exhibit "G' (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F", the colored architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Matedls Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic pdnts. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "J", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, spedes, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. a. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. A row of evergreen trees shall be provided along the rear of the Home Depot building and Buildings G and H, which shall be a minimum 36-inch box size, that provide a quick screen for the loading docks in these areas. Plantings along the street side of the loading dock screen wall shall include vines and shrubs. Perimeter landscaped areas along State Highway 79 South shall include extensive turf mounding, grouped trees, and shrubs that screen vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. em Planter areas on both sides of the main entry ddveway shall be recon~gured and enlarged to install plantings that make an entry statement. f. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: 1) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Eftdent Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). %\TE_MEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS',PLAN NING%STAFFRP'D284pagg. COA-DEVPLAN.doc 4 22. The applicant shall submit a 'Bike Rack Plan' that i~,cates a minimum of 37 bike racks throughout the project site in accordance with the City's ~-~velopment Code, and at locations that are convenient for employees and customers. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 24. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shell be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working order. 25. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantinge, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Depadment - 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 Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. 26. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the Intemational Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the intedor end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking fadlity, not less then 17 inches by 22 inches, deady and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 27. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 28. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Govemment Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 29. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLAN NING~STAFFRP'D284pa~.COA-DEVpLAN.doc 5 31. 32. 33. 35. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. All improvement plans, grading pians, and raised landscaped median 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. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the C, alifomia Department of Transpodation pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centedine of the access to the southerly ddveway on Highway 79 South. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a dght in/dght out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/dght out movement. C, Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to right in/dght out movement. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 36. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 37. 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. 38. A Soil Repod shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The repod shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 39. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage radiities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream propedies and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream fadlities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 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. 41. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLI ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~t4pagg, COA-DEVPLAN .doc 6 40. a. San Diego Regional VVater Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 42. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (EC8) recordeel with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 45. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Parcel Map No. 29431 shall be recorded. 46. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteda shall be observed: a. Flowline 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 of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401 and 402. e. All street and ddveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. 47. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Highway 79 South (Urban Artedal Highway Standards - 134' R/W) i) Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South to C, ampanula Way i) Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage radiities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with one opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way. c. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) i) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts \\TEMEC_FSI 01%VOL1 M:)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'%284p199.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 7 ii) Improve roadway to include dedication of half-width street fight-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-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). iii) Construct raised landscaped median on Campanula Way between De Podola Road and Meadows Parkway exclude locations where on-street parking is permitted as shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. d. Install a traffic signal at the following intersections: i) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margarita Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. jv) Margafita Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. ee All street improvement design shall provide adequate fight-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 48. 49. 50. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Depadment of Public Works. a. Street improvements. which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Depadment of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Stdping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following roadways: a. Campanula Way b. Meadows Parkway c. De Podola Road ~\TEMEC_FSI 01 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRP'D284pe99~___.COA-DEVPLAN .doc 8 51. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works. 52. All access rights easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through pdvate property. 53. All building pad shall be ceffified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the appmved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 54. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 55. The Developer shall provide an easement for ingress and egress to the adjacent property. 56. The Developer shell 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. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 57. Pdor to issuance of the FIRST Cedificate of Occupancy: a. The Developer shall install a traffic signal at the following intersections in accordance with City Standards: i) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margarita Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. iv) Margarita Road and De Portola Road with sufficient improvements to suppert impacts from this development. 58. The existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow an access opening with a right in/dght out vehicular movement onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway. 59. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water Distdct b. Eastern Munidpal Water Distdct c. Department of Public Works 60. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 61. The exjsting improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfadion of the Director of the Depadment of Public Works. \%TEMEC_FS 101 ~VOL1 '~DEPTS~PLANNI NG~STAFFRPTI.COA-.DEVPLAN BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 62. 63. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley Schoo! District shall be submitted to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electricel plans submitted to the Depadment of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of City Ordinance No. 655 regarding light pollution. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the Colifomia Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 California Electrical Code; Califomia Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 65. Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Depadment of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 66. A receipt or dearanca letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 67. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 68. The Occupancy classification for the proposed Home Depot buildings will be M/S-1 and the occupancy classification of the Village Center buildings will be AJBIM. The propar classifications and construction types will be addressed at time of plan submittals and plan check by the Department of Building and Safety 69. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings pdor to submittal for plan review. 70. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 71. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 72. Provide van accessible parking located as dose as possible to the main entry. 73. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 74. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 75. Restroom fDdures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C. 76. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 77. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans submitted for plan review. ~\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I~.COA-DEVPLAN ,doc 10 78. 79. 80. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. Provide predse grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 81. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of any building construction. 82. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 83. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Califomia Building Code (CBC), Califomia Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 84. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3850 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 85. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 feet apart and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 86. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 87. Maximum cul-de-ssc length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Ord 460) 88. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 'd:)EPTS~LANNING'.,STAFFRPT~284p~_99.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 11 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. Prior to building construction, ell locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,0C./0 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2,2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. 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 Bureau 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. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 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. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shell install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT%284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN.do¢ 12 99. 100. 101. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by the alarm system. (CFC 902.4) All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. (CFC Article 81 ) 102. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Soecial Conditions 103. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau addressing all items on the hazardous materials list. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Submitted Under Separate Cover. OTHER AGENCIES 105. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control Distdct's transmittal dated August 6, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water Distdct by either a cashier's check or money order, pdor to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia Water Districts transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information Centers transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFRPT;'84pIit. COA-DEVPLAN ,doc 13 By placing my signaturo below, I confirm that I have road, u,,,.lerstand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property, E, hall 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 Name \%.TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP~.COA-DEVPLAN .dec 14 DAVID P. ZAPPE G~neral Manager-Chief Engineer ""'~i 1995 MARKET STKEET ~ < ~ '~ 909/955-1200 [: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' e' 909~88-9965 FAX By ~ 5l Is0. I RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Plannin De artment Posto , i :xs033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 Attention: ('~./'~tq, n I-~ ,~'7)Q/~AH0~'- ~e Dis~ does not no~ally r~mmend ~ndifions for land di~sions or o~er land use ~ses in in~omted cities. The Distd~ also does not lan ~e~ d~ land use ~ses, or provide Site Division of Real Estate le~ers or o~er flood hazard repo~ for su~ ~ses. Dis~ ~mmen~re~mmendafions for su~ ~ses are no~ally limited to items of specific ~ntemst to ~e Dis~ including Dis~ Master Dmina e Plan fadlifies, offer re ional flood control and dmina e fa~lifies ~i~ could be ~nsidered a I~i~l ~m~nenPor e~ension of a master ~%n s stem, and Distdct Area ~minage Plan fees (development mffigafion fees). In addition, info~afion of a general n~re is provided. The Dis~ has not m~ewed ~e pm~sed proje~ in devil and ~e falling ~ecked ~mments do not in any ~y constit~e or imply Dis~ appm~l or endomement of ~e pm~s~ pmj~ ~ffi mspe~ to flood h~ard, public health and s~e~ or any offer su~ issue: ~ This prqje~ would not ~ impa~ by Dis~ Master Drainage Plan fa~lifi~ nor are other facilities of regional snter~t propose. ~is proje~ involves Disffi~ Master Plan fa~iifies. ~e Dis~ ~11 a~ t o~emhip of such fa~lities on ~en r~uest of ~e C~. Facilifi~ must be cons~cted to Dis~ ~n~ffis and Dis~ plan che~ and insp~on ~11 ~ muired for Dis~ a~p~n~. Plan ~e~, ins~on a~ adminis~five fees ~11 ~ r~uired. ~is proje~ ~ses ~nnels, sto~ drains 36 in~es or larger in diameter, or o~er ~cilities fiat ~uld be " conssdered ~ional in nature an~or a Io i~l e~ension of ~e adopt~ Master Drainage Plan. ~e Dis~ ~1~ ~nsider a~pfing ~e~hip of su~ ta~lmes on ~Ren ~u s of ~ C~. Fadlffi~ mu~ ~ ~n~ ~ Di~ ~nda~s, and D~ plan ~ ~d ins~on ~1} ~ mqui~ for Dis~ ~ptn~. Plan ~, ins~on and admini~five f~s ~11 ~ requi~. ~is pmje~ is Io~ ~ffiin ~e lim~ of ~e Dis~s shoul~ ~ a~ b ~s~ petit. GENE~L INFORMATION ~is proj~ mam uire a National PollSant DiseaSe Elimination System (NPDES petit from ~e S~te Water Resoumes ConSUl ~oard. Cleamn~ for grading, m~ffiafi~, or offer final appm~ should not be given until ~e City has dete~ined ~at ~e proje~ has ~n granted a petit or is sho~ to be exempt. If this pm'e~ involves a Federal Emergen~ Management Agen~ (FE~) reaped flood plain, then ~e Ci should require ~e appli~nt to pm~de all studio, ~l~lafions, plans and other snfo~afion refiuimd to me~ FE~ m~uirements, and should ~er require fiat ~e appli~nt obtain a Conditional Le~er of Map Revision CLOMR) pdor to grading, m~ffiafion or other final approval of the proje~, and a Le~er of Map Revision (LOMR~ pdor to occupant. If a natural ~ter~ume or reaped flo~ plain is im a~ed by ~is proje~, ~e Ci~ should require ~e a licant to obtain a Seaion 160111603 Agreement ~0m ~e Caff~mia Depament of Fish and Game and a Clean ~ater A~ Seaion 4~ Petit from ~e U.S. ~y Co~s of Engin~m, or ~en ~ffespondence from ~ese a enc'e indicting ~e proje~ is exempt from ~ese requirements. A Clean Water A~ Se~on 401 Water Quail Cement'on may be required from the I~1 Cal~omia Regional Water Qual~ Con~ol Board pdor to issuance of ~e Co~s ~0~ petit. c: STUART E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer Boa~l of Dir~t~n: President Doug Kulberl St. x~ce President Lisa D. Herman Cuba F. Ko Scott A, Mclntyre deftroy L, Mink/er George ~L Woods Officers: John F. Hennigar Genefil[ ,tv~a~ager PhUlip L. Fortes Direc~r of Finance- Tre&mrer E. P. "Bob" Lemon/ Dix~zer of Erai, meenng Kenneth C. Dealy Du, eczor of OperaUons Perry IL Louck Controller Linda NL Fregoso Distncc Secreu~/AdmimstratWe Services .%lanager C. NLichae| Cowerr Best Best & Krleger LLP C, eneraJ Counsel C Ju!y 21, 1999 Carole Donahoe. Case Planner -City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 APN 950-020-044 PLANNING APPLICATIONS NO. PA99-0283, NO. PA99-0284, NO. PA99-0285 AND NO. PA99-0286 Dear Ms. Donahoe: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to' RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at tms office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 99NS B:m¢189~c012-T3%,cCF C: Laude Willjams, Engineering Services Supervisor Raneho California Water District 42135 Winchester Rosd · Post Offic~ Box 9017 * Temecula. Cslifornis 92589-9017 * (909) 676-4101 * FAX (909) 676-0615 hiedne/dal~ J;,,ty 21, 1999 lO:Sbe -- Free '909~ 09' -- Page SENT BY:UCR ,/-21-g9 ;11:41AM ; ARCH RESEARCH CALIFORNIA "' "''~ HISTORIC~e~ RESOURC S INFORM TION ~YSTEM I CULTURAL RESOUzlCE REVIEW Eastam Information Center UrdversayofCelEorrU PJverslds, CA 92521-0418 Phone (909) 787-5745 Fax (901;}) 787-5409 DATE: (~ ~ [~ ,,~!1 l q ,g q RE: Case Trm,tr, mltt~ Reference Designation: Records a~ the E~tenl Information Center of the California :-ILsmrical Resources Informaxion System have beco rcvlcwed to determine if this project would xlvefsely ~'~ect prehhtoric or historic cultural resourcex: The propoed pm~.t mm~ku not bern mrveyed ror ouhni .gmour~c. md ruowr, c(s). A Ram ! study b Altaeledlunlneoenealudy~4F/ .)kkadS~ m~mmmd~d. y'/-A ph__, .dn~..,~..~dy o,m,...~q~ m,ar,,d -. o-m,,a ,,,,,-.. F,,,h,.,,dy - ,~ ,~-...d,-, T'h,~m =- · knv Febability of c.,!mral rmom~=,. Furflare. mmjy '~ _~' If. durMg mamtrm:tion. cultural mm~ouam are eacoutu~, work ;houTA a qualiSmd an,Me~2~g ~va3m the finds mud mah:. mmmmondafitma. The et~.m~-mbe of · c,,dlurd mesoun= ~ report 'b roecommended fullowlng 2uidelh~ for ARba~lotiad ' ~ie~uf~Mma~eaeatReF~rap/q:ecdbytkeCa5f~n~a~E5cc~Hiat~rbPreeewN~4i~Preaer~/i~eP/meb&~jaba~ rkml Plumell COMMBN'II: · If you have any quesdo~s. please coma~ m. Eastern Informsfion Ceatet ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 29431 F:~EPTS~PLANNING',STAFFRP"I~64pa99.pc.do¢ 19 A~'I'i'ACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0286 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431, SUBDIVIDING 66.828 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950- 020-042 AND -044, AND 950-087-006 VVHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0286, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99--0286 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0286, on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headrig as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter, WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0286; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Spedtic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. ~\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'~84pe.~--cl.pc.doc C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and drculation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan is proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and drculation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitaL There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Fudhermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a podion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Comoliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedified 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distribution to the City Council for consideration. 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal cedification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) for the subdivision of 66,828 gross acTes into seven (7) lots, located nodh of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-020-042, -O44 and 950-870-006 subject to the project spedtic conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. ',%TEMEC_FS1 01 ~VOL11DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT%284pagg.pc.cloc 21 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerriero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary %%TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRP'T'~.pc.doc EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 \\TEMEC_FS101 ~,VOL11DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFRP~99.pc.doc EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0286 - Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots 950-020-042, -044 and 950-087-006 September 28, 1999 September 28, 2001 PLANNING DIVISION Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division twenty (20) copies of a revised exhibit that includes corrections as required within these Conditions of Approval. The applicant shall remove reference to a "vesting" map. All requirements of the Public Works Department shall be met. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project o 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 Seventy-Eight Dellam ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod 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 Requiremente The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of Califomia Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless 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, if made 30 days pdor to the expiration date. 4. 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, judgements, 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 or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning ~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 'OEPTS%PLAN NI NG%STAFFRPT~,COA-TENT MAP.doe 1 Application. City shaft promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and -shall furlher cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its dght 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. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a Dhasino plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to Development Agreement No. PA99-O283. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 235. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 10. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. 11. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Munidpal 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. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: 1) 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 recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. 2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235 and Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 were prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. 3) This project is within the Alquist-Pdolo Special Studies Zone. 4) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. c. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open \\T.EMEC_F$101 ~VOLI %DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRPT~.COA-TENT MAP .doc 2 space, recreation areas, parking areas, .;.;~¥ate roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. 2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, properly owners group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all propedies individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common fadlities 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 for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the dty pdor to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 3) Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appudenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and radiities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. 4) In addition to the other provisions described in this section which must be included in the CC&Rs, the applicant shall also include the following text in the CC&Rs: Consent of City of Temecula Condition No. 15.C. 1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29431) require the City to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Tract. Declarant acknowledges that the C..,ity has reviewed these CC&Rs and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs propedy implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Tract. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments procedures, assessment enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the land use entitlements issued by the City for the Tract or federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and resolutions and these CC&Rs, the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the language of the CC&Rs. d. These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise modified without the express written consent of the Planning Manager of the City of Temecula. ~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~:)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~_~_99.COA-TENT MAP .doc 3 ee Consent of the City of Temecula Condition No. 15.C. 1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29431) requires the City of Temecula to review and approval the CC&Rs for the Tract. The City's review of these CC&Rs has been limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs propedy implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Tract. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of assessments, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. Subject to the limitations set fodh herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey 13. The Final Map shall delineate a westbound bus tumout located on the nodh side of Campanula Way, as approved by the C, ity Traffic Engineer and the Riverside Transit Agency. 14. Development of any parcel where bus tumouts are located shall include the installation of a bus shelter, amenities and appropriate landscaping when bus service is activated in the area. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 15. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: ae Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: 1) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantinge and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1M:)EPTSMaLAN NING~STAFFR P'r~86pa,99.COA-TENT MAP .doc 4 5) The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. 6) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for:. a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots pdor to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). b) Private common areas pdor to issuance of the any building permit. All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services Distdct (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to private slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. 7) Hardscaping for the following: a) Pedestrian trails within private common areas be Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: 1) Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a Public Right-of- Way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for comer lots. 2) Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. Ce Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 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 Planning [:)iredor approval. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 17. If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 18. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working order. 19. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 20. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection pdor to issuance of the first occupancy permit. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'D286p__~_L~.COA-TENT MAP.doc 5 21. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Pinning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within pdvate 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 certirrJte of occupancy. Altar that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. 22. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative tract map all existing and proposed easements, topography, drainage fadlities, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 24. A Grading Permit for either rough or predse 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. 25. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Depadment of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 26. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Depadment of Transportation pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State dght-of-wsy. 27. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and C. altrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. 28. 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. 29. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centedine of the access to the southerly ddveway on Highway 79 South. 30. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: Highway 79 South at the eastedy access to the site shall be restricted to a dght in/right out movement subject to approval by C, altrens. This access restriction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Depadment of Public Works. Meadows Parkway from Campanula Way to De Portola Road shall be restricted to right in/right out movements. \~TEMEC_FS 101 ~VOL1 ~EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'I~,86pa99.COA-TENT MAP .doc 6 c. De Portola Road along the frontage of Parcel 5 is restricted to dght in dght out movement. d. De Portola Road along the frontage of Par-,el 7 shall have full movement and shall be aligned with Street "A" of Tentative Tract Map No. 24136. e. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/dght out movement. f. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to dght in/dght out movement. Prior to Approval of the Par;el Map, unless other Uming is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 31. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho California Water Distdct c. Eastern Municipal Water Distdct d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct 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. Caltrans k. Community Services Distdct I. General Telephone m. Southem Califomia Edison Company n. Southem Califomia Gas Company 32. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. a. Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~OEPTS%PLAN NING%STAFFRP'I'~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.(Ioc 7 Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. De Portola Road (Major Highway Standards - 1 IX)' R/VV) Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and stdping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous from Margadta Road to Meadows Parkway with openings at Campanula Way, Paloma [:)el Sol Park entrance and Parcel 7 (as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map). Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South to De Portola Road Improve roadway to include 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), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with one opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way. d. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) i) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts ii) Improve roadway 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). Construct raised landscaped median on Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway exclude locations where on-street parking is permitted as shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. e. Install a traffic signal at the following intersections: i) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows PadoNay and Margarita Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. iv) Margadta Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive \\T _EMEC_FSl 01 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'F286pa99,COA-TENT MAP.doc 8 credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. f. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 33. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street contedine 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. 207A and/or 208. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with Ordinance No. 461. d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining propedies. f. Minimum centedine radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. h. All street and ddveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. i. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. j. 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. 34. 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 Depadment of Public Works. 35. The existing alignment of Campanula Way shall be vacated. 36. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from the following roadways: a. Meadows Parkway with the exception of one opening to Parcel 6 and one opening to Parcel 7. Locations to be determined upon submittal of future development plans. b. De Podola Road with the exception of two openings: i) One opening to Parcel 5. Location to be determined upon submittal of future development plan. ii) One opening on Parcel 7 as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNINGI,STAFFRPT'~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 9 The south side of Campanula Way on the Parcel Map with the exception of five openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. The north side of Campanula Way with the exception of two openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. 37. Comer property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian radiities shall be provided at all street intersections in a__r~-~_rclance with Riverside County Standard No. 805 or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 38. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropdate 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 Depadment of Public Works. 39. 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. Pdor to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reappodionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 40. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 41. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Depadment for review and approval. 42. 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. 43. 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. The Developer shall notify the Citys cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 45. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by Riverside Transit Authority and approved by the Department of Public Works. 46. Pdvate drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 47. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through pdvate property. 48. An easement for a joint use ddveway and/or redprocal ingress/egress shall be provided pdor to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 49. 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 shaft be kept free of buildings and obstructions. ' \\TEMEC_F$101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFRP'D286pI/t. COA-TENT MAP.doc 10 Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 50. 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. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works d. Caltrans 51. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Depadment of Public Works pdor to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining propedies from damage due to erosion. 52. A Soils Repod shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Depadment 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. 53. 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 pdvate, drainage radiities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate ouffall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or pdvate 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. 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. 55. 56. 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. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining propedies. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 57. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 58. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Depadment 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. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~286pagg. COA-TENT MAP.doc 11 59. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading ,,~_rmit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial cenformance with the approved rough grading plan. 60. 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 Munidpal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 61. Upon the first Cedi~cate of Occupancy, the Developer shall install a traffic signal at the following intersections in accordance with City Standards: ae Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. b. Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. 62. Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow an access opening onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway. 63. As deemed necessary by the Depadment of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho Califomia Water District b. Eastem Municipal Water Distdct c. Department of Public Works All necessary cedifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 65. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 66. 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 Submitted Under Separate Cover. \\TEMEC_FSI 01 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR~.COA-TENT MAP.doc 12 BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit 67. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees. OTHER AGENCIES 68. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated July 20, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 69. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastem Municipal Water Distdct's transmittal dated July 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 70. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia Water Distdct's transmittal dated, a copy of which is attached. 71. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information Center's transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I furlher 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 Depadment approval. Applicant Signature \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'PG86pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 13 OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July 20, 1999 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ATTN: Carole Donahoe, AICP RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 (PA99-0286): THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING PARCEL "B' OF LOTLINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA93-0215 RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1995 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 4166646 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE COUNTY. (5 lots) Dear Gentlemen: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 and reconuTtends: , A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the xvater system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one-inch equal's 200 t~et, along with the ofi,.zinal drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe dian~eter, locatio~q of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The pl,'ms shall comply in all respects with Div. 5. Part 1. ,-rod Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code. Califbrnia Administrative Code, Title I 1.'Chapter 16. and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. ~vhen applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify.. that the design of the water system in Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map". This certification does not constitute a gusantee that it will supply ~vater to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressttres for fire protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the ~vater company. The plans must be submitted to the Citv of Temecula to review at least TWO WEEKS PRIOR to the rec~uest tbr the recordation of the final maD. JUL 2 7 i999 By Local Enforcement Agency * RO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 955-8982 * FAX (9091 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Roor. Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use and Water Engineering * RO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502-1206 * {909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Street. 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA92501 City. of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Two Attn: Carole Donahoe June 21, 1999 , This subdivision has a statement fi'om Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisthcto~' financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary tbr financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastem Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to pl,'ms and specifications as approved by the Eastern Municipal Water District, the City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing. to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the intemal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and watefiines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be si~,ned by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the tbllox~dng certification: "I certify tl~at the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 29431, is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system i~ adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map". The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. 5. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely f'malized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. 6. It will be necessary fbr the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 7. Additional approval from Riverside County Environmental Health Department will be required for all tenants operating a food facility or generating any hazardous waste. Sincerely. Gregor Dellenbach, Environmental Health Specialist IV GD:dr (909) 955-8980 cityswr.doc EASTERN 1V[UNI( :IPAL WATER DISTRICT Board of Directors Presidem D',vid J. Slawson ~<'e President Clayton A. Record. Jr Marion V. Ashley Richard R. Hall Rodget D. Sicms &mrd Secretat3.' Mary. C. White General Manager John B. Brudin Director of the Metropolitan Water District of So. Calif. Clayton A. Record. Jr. Treasurer Joseph J. Kuebler. CPA Legal Counsel Redwine and Shetrill July 19, 1999 PECEIVED O!9:j9 County of Rivenick Health Services Agency Depamaent of Environmental Health P. O. Box 1206 4080 Lemon Street, 2ND Floor Rivehide, California 92502 MARKHAM & ASSOClATE~ /EMECULA, CA 9239'3 Sanitary Sewer Service Availability for Parcel Map 29431, located on Highway 79 South between Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, CA. Dear County: The District is writing to confirm a "will serve" for the proposed subject property, consisting of Neighborhood Commercial and Residential Parcels on approximately 61 acres. The developer must ~ arrangemere with the District to resolve sewer service issues and related fees. The availability of service will be centingent on limiting conditions existing beyond EMWD's control, or a determination by the developer to be cost-ineffective. Should there be questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Dist~ct's Customer Service Depa~huent at (909)928-3777. Sincerely, Warren A. Back Civil Engineer Customer Service Deparanent WAB/jf CC: Patti Nahill Markham & Associates 4 1750 Winchester Road, Suite N Temecula, CA 925904898 Mttilin~,Add~z,ss.' Post Office Box 8300 Pegis. CA 92572-8300 Tel (909) 928-3777 Fax 19()9} 928-6 77 Locatitm: 2270 Trumble Road Perris. CA 92570 l ncho Water Board of Direcwrs: Ralph H. Daily President Doug Kull~rg Sr. Vice P~sident ~ D. Herman Csaba F. Ko Scott A. Mclntyre Jeffrey L Mialder George IV[, Woods John F. Hesmigsr General Manager Phillip L, Forbes Dtru~r of Finance - Treasurer E. P- '~Bob" Lemons Dirt~mr of Eng~n~rmg Kenneth C. Ikaly Dir~c~r orOp~ations & Maintenance Perry R, Louck Contmi|er Linda M. Fr~goso District Se~et,mry/AdmlnistratWe S~rvices Manager C. Michel Cowerr !kst Best & Krieger LIP Genera| Couns~{ July 19, 1999 RECEIVED Greg Dellenbach, REHS County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health Land Use Section 4080 Lemon Street, 2"d Floor Post Office Box 1206 Riverside, CA 92502 2 01999 IIARKHAM & ASSOC~A'ril 'EMECtAA, CA 923.~.~ SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 APN 950-020-044 Dear Mr. Dellenbach: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 99~SB:mcl 83~012-C 1 ~FCF C: Laurie Williarns, Engineering Services Supervisor Kencho California Water District 11,ledrteeay J~.ty 21, 1999 lO:Mam -- Fram '9097 09' -- hie 2l SENT BY:UCR . t-21-66 ;11:41AN ARCH RESEARCH bh:T~ 9096946477;# 2 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCES INFORMATION {YSTEM Eastam Information Center r',c+.~... b'nent oi' Arm'wopoloW University of Califon'i PJve~de, CA 92521-0418 Phone (909) '787-,S74S Fax (909) 787-5409 DATE: q ~ [~ ,~//Iq q q RE: Case Tp,smlrr~: Refcrcn~8 Deliadon: Records at the Eastern Information Center of the C&liforuia :-Xistodcal Resources Information System have been reviewed to determine if this project would adversdy ,ffect prehbtoric or hi~oric cultural resources: nmourc~:). A REam ! staly :,. recc,~,.-4-4~ Al:kueleuiani~eoek~atudytMFi pmjeet er lx~dMa nmovsry Mmiiee, ume~ect om caburd femoun:ga k nol anlloiFed. Fmlbm'mtady keod; __ Tl~mis&kwpmbabilkyofmdlxwdmso~-~.~. Fwtl~rstu~y'~motam3omm,~rO, J~ If, during ~onmmaiott. cultural mf, oumu Ue e~counMed. 'work d~dd be a qualirmcl ar~ma~lolist ~alud~. tim rinds and mak= M m OM admmtogied sens~y of tim arm, eanlxmoving du,~ oomtruotion mhould be, nmnbomd by a pmfeuional 'rum submhdoa of · _**..h,,,d, m.ourcc mmag~ a'rap, an 'b eeonunak:bd funowlng ~ to,' Awr. hamok,glmi P-mo~bimgeat itepom l~q:Irmi by dM Ca~ OfSc;afltistork Pmamvadon. Protrve/imu P/mm~ ~grdk 4t~, r~- : ,~v~ t t 11189. '~ m m !'tum:l b il T~I I~vatum mo~ ,~,;5~---,; popoa. ,d~on mcuu~a ta~ "~ mimJ l~'k'~e [X:Ma' re.very by -*..-vatlore, pmmmSNa h ~ m' · momt,lmzima of Uae two.! COMMm~rS: · If you tmve any quastions, please contact us, ~'tem Information Center ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99- AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PA99..0285) ~\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1 '~DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRPT~,pc.doc 24 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), TO CHANGE LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1,6, AND 8; TO REALIGN AND RECONFIGURE CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; THE REALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1 AND 6; 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 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 DWELLING UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF UNITS FROM 590 TO 508 IN THESE AREAS; THE PROVISION TO DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE, GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6; AND AN UPDATE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES; ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND .WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0285, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0285 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0285, on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter;, WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and af~er due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City' Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA9cJ-0285 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'I'%264pI99.p¢.cloc Sol), AmendmeN No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the ty,,,e and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC :'.ommunity Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre: -_nd H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and :;nditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problem. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logicel development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and droulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Depadment has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fLsh, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitst off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a podion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Comoliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I 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 Spedtic Plan. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-fcot major street sealion to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendure document pdor to distribution to the City Council for consideration. 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These \'~TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~TAFFRPT~.pc.doc measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original codification of Environmental impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTSM:~LANNING%STAFFRP'D284Pa99-Pc-doc EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~Z) EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc 28 EXHIBIT B ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) ~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTSV)LANNING~STAFFR PT~84pa99.pc.doc 29 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99~)283 VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ~\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)E PTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~!6~.~_99.pc.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 99-. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF. TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPUCATION NO. PA99-0283 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, COVERING 23.75 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: follows: Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds determines, and declares as A. Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of Califomia and Temecula City Resolution No.' 91-52 authorize the execution of development agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; B. In accordance with the procedure spedfled in said statutes and Resolution, del Sol Investments, LLC, a Califomia limited liability company ("Developer") have filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for approximately 23.75 acres located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway ("Property") for retail commercial uses consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7, which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director;, C. Notice of the Citys intention to consider adoption of the Development Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the public headng before the City Council; (1) Notice of the public headngs before the Planning Commission and City Council was published in a newspaper of general drculation at least ten (10) days before the public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headngs to the project applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600~ of the Property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; (2) Notice of the public headngs before the Planning Commission and City Council included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; D. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on September 15, 1999 at which time the Planning Commission heard and \%TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLAN NING~STAFFRPT~O4po99.pc.doc 31 considered all of the written material and oral comments presented to it on the proposed environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby furlher finds and determines that the Project site has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review:. A. The Paloma del Sol Specific Ran Environmental Impact Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I 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. B. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. C. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document prior to distribution to the aty Coundl for consideration. 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staft acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the original cedification of Environmental Impact Repod No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed. D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the Citys General Plan, Spedtic Plan 219, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 235 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses, density, design, improvement, development fees, and construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development Agreement. E. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the Amendment unless required by 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15161 or 15163. Section 3. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful consideration of the evidence, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that neither a Subsequent EIR a Supplemental EIR, nor further environmental review is required for the Development Agreement pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163, based on the following findings of the Planning Commission: A. The elements of the Project as described in the Development Agreement were contemplated and fully and properly analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the County of Riverside and the Addendures thereto, for the approval of Spedtic Plan 219 and subsequent Amendments; ~%T_EMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pIgg.pc.doc B. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project which would require major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the seventy of previously identified significant effects. C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new signfficant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty of previously identified significant effects. D. There is no new information since the cedificetion of the previous FEIR which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous FEIR and Addendures. E. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendures. F. There is no new information since the cediflcation of the FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternative previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project. G. There is no new information since the cedi~cation of the FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendums would s.ubstantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds, determines and declares that: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that: (1) The Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of the Property for commercial development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Community Cornmartial for the Property which provide for commercial development; (2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will provide for the creation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Fadlity, Land Use, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan; B. The Development Agreement is consistent with Specific Plan 219 in which the Property is located in that: (1) The Development Agreement provides for commercial development pursuant to and in conformance with the terms of Specitic Plan 219; (2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the Development Agreement are spedtically allowed by Spedtic Plan No. 219; (3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of the public improvements as described in Specitic Plan 219; V~T~EMEC_FS1 01 ~.VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc (4) The Applicable Rules set forth in k;.~ Development Agreement do not change the provisions of the Specifm Plan. but dadties the use- :o be allowed and standards to be imposed where the Specific Plan provides for altematives; C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City;, D. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to, and in fad enhances, the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof through the implementation of the Applicable Rules; E. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Coundl to approve of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and the evidence presented at the hearings before the Planning Commission on the Development Agreement; F. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from the Development Agreement: (1) Generation of municipal revenue; (2) Construction of needed public infrastructure radiities; (3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as well as the payment of municipal revenue; (4) Enhancement of quality of Ih for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and providing retail development necessary to serve the community; and (5) Payment of Public Facility Fees. Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that it make the environmental findings described herein and approve a Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and del Sol Investments, LLC (Planning Application No. PA 99-0283). Section 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. %%T_EMEC_FS101%VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNINGITAFFRP'D284peIi,pc.cloc Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1 g99. Ron Guerriero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary %\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLI ~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFR P'D28~.pc.doc EXHIBIT A VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) %~TEMEC_FS101%VOL1 ~)EPTSIPLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99,pc.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION AND ADOPTION OF ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO EIR NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 ~\T_EMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFR PT~28~_99.pc.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 9_-__ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AND ADOPT ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC submitted Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol); WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3 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 Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3 on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headrig as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter;, WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Addendum No. 3 to hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Munidpal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (36 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conforrnance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and \~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLAN NING%STAFFR Pln2.84pa99.1x;.doc circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. 'The map and developmeN plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and drculation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a podion of a larger spedtic plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. 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 cadified 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out' traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distribution to the City Council for consideration. 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudrig the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. %%T_EMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~TAFFRP'D284pI99.pc.doc Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED the; 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretan/ \~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 IDEPTS%PLANNINGISTAFFRPT~.pc.doc EXHIBIT A ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIROMENTMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 235 (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) ~TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc 41 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS \%TEMEC_FS101 ~,VOL1 ~)EPTS~LANNING~TAFFRP"r~!84pa99.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA VICINITY k,, ~~PROJECT SITE MAP NOT TO SCALE CASE NO. - PA99..0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 VICINITY MAP F:~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT1284pIgg.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) OS 7 LM ~ )os ~-~// 0 · t"' L~ LM LM VL EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN 4TC NC DESIGNATION - CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, H HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, LM LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND OS OPEN SPACE CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~H~,~_99.pc,doc CITY OF TEMECULA ,-'-"i T'. i :' I II CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-.0286 EXHIBIT- D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 SITE PLAN F:~DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRPT'~'84(agg. Ix:-doc CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGES @ PASEO del SOL n-::',t, :::~-- ; ..... ... . -,,_..q_,- '..'-' -.'77-, ,-- , L~- ...-. .~.;._ :., ...., ..... --L'-'. """"~""'~ -= -..:'-,j" '-:-... !.2,' 'i ",..-" ': · ,, ,, ,,, .- '? ,) : !,'. CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 GRADING PLAN F:~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc.cloc CITY OF TEMECULA I #L~, CASE NO. - PA99..O283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 150 1999 MONUMENT SIGNAGE PLAN F:tDEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~8,d, pa99.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99.-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - G PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15~ 1999- HOME DEPOT ELEVATIONS F:%DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'~284pa99.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA "'7 .,", " ,-..,~.,.---.""~ } { 7" """""" """ """""'""' """""' ~L_:;.;~.. ',. >.,--. ,,_ ...... ~ ~, :~.,.""'. ',, -. '-' Of.,,,.. ,, ,,. CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999- HOME DEPOT SIGNAGE F:~:)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.1x;.do~ CITY OF TEMECULA · DI e ee e e e (D ® ® .... I oo ]iI I .it_ ....ji 1L~ .~, CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 1,5, HOME DEPOT FLOOR PLANS F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~.84pa99.1ac.~Io¢ CITY OF TEMECULA '~S',4~-'=~Tj-.%L LAN~-~A=-: PLAN CASE NO. - PA99-.0283 THROUGH PA99..0286 EXHIBIT - J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 HOME DEPOT LANDSCAPE PLANS F:~Z)EPTS~LANNING%STAFFRP~gg.pc,doc CITY OF TEMECULA CITY OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0286 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 29431 CITY OF TEI~IECULA. COUNTY OP R|VERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA $LOOI'T:N eONSUL1,NG B,~C. CASE NO. - PA99-.0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- M PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'B284pagg.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA I CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-.0286 EXHIBIT - N INFORMATIONAL EXHIBIT (RETAIL VILLAGE ELEVATIONS) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 F:~)EPTS',PLANNING~STAFFRP~99.pc.do¢ ATTACHMENT NO. 5 SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT R:\STAFFRFT~85pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doc 25 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANN!NG COMMISSION September 29, 1999 Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division. Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council certify and adopt the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No.' 219, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 ) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement") based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PROJECT STATUS The project was set for hearing before the Planning Commission on September 15, 1999. However, the applicant requested and was granted a continuance to a special meeting of the Planning Commission on September 29, 1999. In the interim, staff met with the applicant and his development team to discuss the conditions of approval, the project exhibits, the terms of the F:\D. EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84Pa99,Pc revised 9-29-99,,doc 1 Development Agreement, and the text changes to the Specific P:cn Amendment, Zoning Ordinance and Addendure to the EIR. As a result of these meetings, the followin9 issues were resolve~ to the satisfaction of staff and the applicant: Vesting Map: Additional language was inserted in the Development Agreement allowing for the complete reconstruction of buildings for a pedod of 25 years in the event of casualty damage. This language removes the need for a vesting map, and the tentative parcel map is recommended for approval. m TCSD: The Temecula Community Services District shall maintain the medians and traffic circles in Campanula Way. Signalization: The applicant has accepted the condition to install a traffic signal at the main entry intersection to the Villages from Campanula Way for the safety of pedestrians. The applicant has accepted the condition to install a traffic signal at the intersection of De Portola Road and Margadta Road prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the project. Access Points and Tuming Movements: The applicant has accepted the condition that' access points and turning movements from all parcels within Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 are subject to review and approval based upon future development plans and traffic studies. Addendum to EIR: The text of the Addendum has been reviewed by staff and recommended for certification and adoption. SDeci~C Plan Amendment: The text of the Specific Plan Amendment has been reviewed by staff and recommended for approval as conditioned. Zoninq Ordinance: The text of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment has been reviewed by staff and recommended for approval. DeveloPment Agreement: The Deal Points of the Development Agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol" have been reviewed by staff and recommended for approval as conditioned. ANALYSIS: The applicant proposes to construct Home Depot's 131,848 square foot building (with garden center) in combination with an additional 276,243 square feet of commercial buildings that form "retail villages." This combination of commercial uses provides an opportunity to attract a large number of consumers to the site, and to offer reasons to linger and enjoy a variety of shopping, dining, exercise and social activities. While not employing all the elements of the City's Village Center Design Guidelines, the project has made major efforts to orient the project toward a redesigned and reconfigured Campanula Way that is more inviting to pedestrians and bicycles. Two traffic circles and sections of on-street parallel parking are proposed as traffic calming devices. Transit access is provided by a bus turnout near the plaza area, and a bicycle lane is proposed. These design elements encourage the pedestrian linkage between this commercial development and the multi-family residential proposed directly across Campanula. The focal point for the retail villages is the plaza area, where building siting and configuration, architectural elements and fixture features, and specificity of uses are designed to attract pedestrian activity. The applicant has provided vignettes that illustrate the style and amenities F:'~D,EpTS~oLANNING\STAFFRPT%284pa99.pc revised 9--29-99..doc 2 that are detailed within the Villages at Paseo del Sol Design Manual. The Design Manual will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager. Subsequent construction at the site beyond the Home Depot building shall require Administrative Development Plan applications and approvals in conformance with the approved Design Manual. Unresolved Issues There are four areas of concern where staff and the applicant could not reach agreement: 1) 2) 3) 4) The amount and appearance of permanent outdoor display area. The occurrence, duration and appearance of temporary seasonal sales. Architectural enhancement to the Home Depot building. The proposed landscape concept for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. Outdoor Display The project has been conditioned by staff for a maximum of 2,300 square feet of permanent outdoor display of finished product, similar to other home improvement stores within the City. Home Depot desires, and has shown on their plans, four separate areas totaling 2500 square feet. Additionally, Home Depot has proposed two scenarios for their building, one with a Tool Rental Center and one without. If the Tool Rental Center is constructed, the front elevation wall will be broken up with a "pop out" portion, between the Indoor Lumber porte cochere and the main entry. This area would have columns that extend beyond the building wall by 12 inches and replace the main outdoor display area proposed at this location. However, should the Tool Center not be constructed, this wall will be a long expanse with display area. The applicant has agreed to add trelliswork over this outdoor display area and the project is so conditioned. Should the Tool Center be constructed, Home Depot still wishes to have 2,500 square feet of display, without proposing another location at this time. Staff has conditioned the project to comply with locations as shown on exhibits on file with the department, and to submit suitable, alternate locations for review and approval by the Planning Manager prior to their use. Seasonal Sales Staff has asked the applicant to internalize the 7,650 square feet proposed for seasonal sales, similar to other home improvement stores within the City. However, the applicant located this area within the parking lot in front of the garden center. Home Depot's Statement of Operations indicates that they intend to use the Seasonal Sales Area up to three (3) times per year for a period of 45 days each. Christmas tree sales start at the end of November, and spdng foliage start around the end of March. They propose temporary, portable fencing for security reasons. The City's Development Code allows Christmas tree sales lots in the City from NOvember 1= through December 31 .t. Christmas tree lots and other seasonal sales are permitted by Temporary Use Permit and the entire project has been conditioned to follow Code. Home Depot wishes to be exempted from applying for a TUP for each event because their seasonal sales displays are ongoing, year after year. Elevations Staff has asked the applicant to internalize the downspouts on the rear elevation. Due to the location of the Home Depot building, the rear elevation will be visible from adjacent residential homes, the park site and Campanula Way. Consistent with other developments in the City, staff has conditioned the applicant to revise his plans. The applicant feels that he has addressed the concern voiced by staff and Commissioners by berming, providing a screen wall and landscaping at the rear of Home Depot. The berm height is not noted on the cross-sections shown on Exhibit "F" (Monument Signage Plan), but the applicant indicated that the berm proposed is two to three F:\D_EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 3 feet high. The applicant is conditioned to revise Exhibit "F" to show a berrn height dimensioned at five to seven feet measured from the grade of the loading area. Landscape Concept The applicant is proposing that the ten foot (10') wide perimeter planters re.,;uired within the Paloma del Sol Spedtic Plan be reduced to six foot (6') wide planters. He believes that his project provides more planter area and trees overall by interspersing finger planters to breakup the parking field, rather than implementing the clustering concept required by the specific plan. The applicant has revised the specific plan text to allow his design. The project has been conditioned to add extensive turf mounding, shrubs and grouped trees along State Highway 79 South to screen the vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. However, staff believes that the change to the specific plan landscape concept is unnecessary. Corrections to the Staff Report of September 15. 1999 Signage Staff incorrectly stated that Home Depot's proposed signage was consistent with the sign program for the existing Lucky center. Upon closer review, the staff found that the Lucky center is conditioned for wall signs no larger than four (4) feet for capital letters and thirty (30) inches for' lower case letters. Furthermore, signage length is limited to 75% of the store frontage. The Home Depot building is proposed to have main signage at the front entry, with two additional specialty signs for the indoor lumber yard and the nursery. Signage is comprised of all capital letters, either at five or two feet in height, all totaling 549 square feet. The length of all three signs combined is 100.5 lineal feet. With a building frontage of 418 lineal feet, the proposed signage length falls below the 75% limitation. They also propose signage with four foot (4') illuminated channel letters along the north and east elevations. Staff concurs with the applicant that; given the size of the Home Depot building, nearly twice the length of Lucky's, their sign proposal is appropriate. Staff believes that the elevations of the building, showing the proposed signage, supports that statement. 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. I was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendure 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. The Addendum 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. 7 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. F:\qEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRFT~84pa99.Pc revised 9-29-99..doc 4 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The applicant proposes a unique interpretation of the Village Center Oveday that is placed on the site by the City's General Plan. The proposed changes to Sped~,' Plan No. 219 remain consistent with the General Plan underlying designations and densities on t,h: property. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Spedfic Plan Zoning Ordinance Arr~ndment as conditioned will bdng the project into consistency with zoning. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the project as conditioned. FINDINGS The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High' Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. o The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. The design of the proposed land divisior. ,Jr proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger spedtic plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. F:\D~EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'i~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 5 Attachments: 1. PC Resolution approving Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 7 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11 2. PC Resolution approving Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431)- Blue Page 12 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval- Blue Page 16 3. PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page 17 Exhibit A: Amendment No. 7 to Specffic Plan No. 219, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B: Zoning Ordinance Amendment, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under Separate Cover Exhibit C: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 23 4. PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. 99-0283 approving that certain development agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement" - Blue Page 24 Exhibit A: Villages as Paseo del Sol Development Agreement, dated September 20, 1999 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 31 5. PC Resolution recommending certification and adoption of Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page 32 Exhibit A: Addendum No. 3 to EIR No. 235, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under Separate Cover) 6. PC Staff Report dated September 15, 1999 - Blue Page 37 7. Informational Exhibit - Presentation Brochure from del Sol Investments, LLC, dated September 21, 1999 (Under Separate Cover) 8. Exhibits - Blue Page 39 I-1 Home Depot Outdoor Display Plan M Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 (Revised September 21, 1999) F:~I~_EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- APPROVING PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84Pa99.Pc revised 9-29-99..doc 7 A'i'FACHMENT NO. I PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0284, DEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 276,243 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A 131,848 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT STORE, A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOTNE SUPPLY STORE, AND 137,395 SQUARE FEET OF VILLAGE SHOPPING SPACE ON 23.74 ACRES, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-044 and 950-870-006 WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0284, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0284 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0284, on September 15, 1999, and September 29, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0284; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) heraby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commerdal, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistant with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.1~c revised 9-29-99..doc 8 approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at !args, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land dMsion. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and drculation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Paloma del Sol Spedtic 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 certffied 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. The Addendum 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. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards tu air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) for the design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space on 23.74 acres, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessors Parcel Nos. 950-020- 044 and 950-870-006 subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. F:'%.DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP"r~84Pa99-Pc revised 9-29.,.99..doc 9 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED tills 29t1', day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, Chairperson I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:~:)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.Pc revised 9-29-99..doc 10 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN F:\qEpTS'~DLANNING\STAFFRFT'~84pa99.pc revised 9.-29-99..doc 11 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Revised by Staff Planning Application No. PA99-0284 - Development Plan Project Description: The design, construction and operation of 276243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space. DIF Category: Home Depot - Retail Commercial Others - Various, to be determined with the submittal of Administrative Development Plans Assessor's Parcel Nos. Approval Date: Expiration Date: 950-020-044 and 950-870-006 September 28, 1999 September 28, 2001 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 1. Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project by the City Council The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant 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 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, judgements, 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 or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, cenceming 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 \%TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc. doc.doc 1 fully in the de. fense of the action. The City reserves its dght 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. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year pedod which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall take effect only alter the effective date of Planning Application No. PA99- 0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) by the City of Temecula City Council. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all measures recommended by the Traffic Study dated September 7, 1999, by Wilbur Smith Associates, which have been incorporated and conditioned to be incorporated into the project. A written report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division summarizing the obligations of the developer and how the obligations have been met, prior to the issuance of permits. The development of the premises shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structure. A Design Manual shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager that is consistant with the City Design Guidelines, the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan guidelines, and these Conditions of Approval, including the following: Details of architectural style and design amen,ties as depicted in the "Village Vignettes" on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. b. Use of colors and materials, with samples of each. c. Comprehensive Sign Program for the entire site. d. Coordination of retail uses. Landscaping details around the buildings and within the courtyard areas, including the use of plant arbors. Furniture and fixture specifications including but not limited to: planter boxes, seating areas, benches, tables, chairs, shade structures, awnings, plaza lamps, hanging plants, trash receptacles, fountains and other water features, art, sculptures, bollards, enhanced paving areas, archways, gateways, gazebos, outdoor vendor carts, heaters, fans, misters and clocks. 9. To ensure compliance with the Design Manual, an Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager for all buildings with uses permitted at the site excepting the 131,848 square foot Home Depot building, which shall be approved by this application, Uses that are permitted by conditional use permitshall require the application for a CUP in accordance with the City's Development Code. \\TE_MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc. doc.doc 2 10. A maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor finish~,~ product display shall be allowed at the project site, in accordance with revised Exhibit "1-~." - Home Depot Outdoor Display Plan. A re-submittal of this exhibit is required to modify the !ocation of outdoor display, for review and approval by the Planning Manager. 11. Seasonal sales areas shall be propedy screened. Temporary Use Permits shall include a screening plan that meets this condition, for review and approval by the Planning Manager. 12. Each and every temporary use of exterior area for retail sales, including seasonal sales, shall require a Temporary Use Permit, in accordance with the City's Development Code. 13. When bus service to the area is activated, the applicant shall install a bus shelter, amenities and appropriate landscaping and access, at the bus turnout located on the approved Exhibit "D" - Site Plan. Building "F" (Home Depot) 14. Landscaping shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "J" (Home Depot Landscape Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and' contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the authority to require the property owner to bdng the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. 15. Building elevations shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "G" (Home Depot Elevations). as amended by these Conditions of Approval. and contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. In the event that the Tool Center is not constructed, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Planning Manager, a revised elevation showing trelliswork along the front wall, over the permitted outdoor product display area between the Indoor Lumber porte cochere and the main building entrance. 16. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "K" (Home Depot Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager. Material Color Building walls, man doors Towers, entry, canopies, porte cochere Wainscot, Columns, covers Soffits Cornice Signs, trusses Stone veneer ICI Paint Co. #548 "Beachcomber" ICI Paint Co. #565 "Woodwind" ICI Paint Co. #462 "Western Trail" ICI Paint Co. #685 "Grey Mountain" ICI Paint Co. #583 "Grey Hearth" ICI Paint Co. #-4208/9200 "Safety Orange" Emser Tile Co. #574 "Autumn Lilac" %\TEMEC_FSI 01%VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 3 Prior to the Issuance of Grading Perm~s 17. 18. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapt. r 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by payif,g the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and retum one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 19. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H, I, I-1, J, K, and L", (Site Plan, Grading Plan, Monument Signage, Home Depot Elevations, Home Depot Signage, Home Depot Floor Plan, Home Depot Landscape Plan, Color and Matadal Board, Architectural Site Plan) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and submit five (5) full size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color pdnts of approved Exhibit "G" (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F", the colored architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the' photographic pdnts. The applicant shall correct plan legends, where applicable, to reflect accurately the gross and net acreage, the gross and net square footage, and the percentage to total gross acreage of landscape and hardscape. The applicant shall add the height of berms to all applicable exhibits. The applicant shall revise Exhibit 'F" to show a berm height of five (5) to seven (7) feet measured from the grade of the loading area. The applicant shall revise Exhibit "1-1" decreasing the allowable area of outdoor product display to a maximum of 2,300 square feet. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "J", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, spedes, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. a. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. A row of evergreen trees shall be provided along the rear of the Home Depot building and Buildings G and H, which shall be a minimum 36-inch box size, that provide a quick screen for the loading docks in these areas. Plantings along the street side of the loading dock screen wall shall include vines and shrubs. \\TE_MEC_FS101 \VOLI\DEPTS~PLANNI NG\STAFFRPT~?.84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc. doc. doc 4 Perimeter landscaped areas along State Highway 79 South shall include extensive tuff mounding, grouped trees, and shrubs that screen vehicle parking spaces fr. onting the highway. Planter areas on both sides of the main entry ddveway shall be reconfigured and enlarged to install plantings that make an entry statement and complement entry signage. Extensive turf mounding, shrubs and grouped trees shall be provided along State Highway 79 South to screen vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: 1 ) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 22. 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). The applicant shall submit a "Bike Rack Plan" that locates a minimum of 37 bike racks throughout the project site in accordance with the City's Development Code, and at locations that are convenient for employees and customers. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 23. 24. 25. 26. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, 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 Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off- street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEpTS~DLANNiNG\STAFFRpT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 5 "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 27. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 28. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 29. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 30. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 31. All improvement plans, grading plans, and raised landscaped median 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. 32. 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. 33. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. 34. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centedine of the access to the southerly driveway on Highway 79 South or as approved by the Director of Public Works. 35. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/right out movement. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to right in/right out movement. \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 6 Prior to 36. Issuance of a Grading Permit A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and pdvate property. 37. The Developer shall post secudty 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. 38. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director 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. 39. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream fadlities,' including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 40. 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. 41. As deemed necessary by the Diredor of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 42. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 45. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Parcel Map No. 29431 shall be recorded. 46. Unless otherwise approved on the tentative parcel map, all improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. Flowline 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 of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc. doc 7 47. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400, 401 and 402. e. All street and ddveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. The Developer shall design and post securities for the following public improvements to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted on the approved development plan. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works. a. Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) i) Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer as required to serve this development). Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South to Campanula Way Improve roadway to include 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), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with an opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way or as approved by the Director of Public Works upon submittal of future development plans. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Street Standards - 78' R/W) from De Portola Road to Meadows Parkway iii) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts Improve roadway to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-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). The raised landscape median shall be continuous with the exception of median breaks and areas where on-street parking is permitted as shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. de Traffic signals at the following intersections: i) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998. %\TE~MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEFTS~Di_ANNiNG~STAFFRpT~84pa99,COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc. doc 8 iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. iv) Margadta Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Fadlities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 55. 56. e. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. The Developer shall design and post securities for the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of Public Works. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, ddve approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems d. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Striping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following roadways: a. Campanula Way b. Meadows Parkway between Highway 79 South and Campanula Way c. De Portola Road associated with signal improvements at the intersection of Margadta Road and De Portola Road Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works. All access fights easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through pdvate property. All building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. The Developer shall provide an easement for ingress and egress to the adjacent property. 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 as otherwise modified in the Villages @ Paseo Del Sol Development Agreement. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~)EpTS~pLANNiNG~STAFFRpT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc. doc 9 Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 57. Pdor to issuance of the FIRST Certificate of Occupancy' a. The Developer shall install a traffic signal at the fo~!owing intersections in accordance with City Standards: 1) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. 2) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway 3) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. 4) Margadta Road and De Portola Road with suffident improvements to support impacts from this development within the existing right-of-way. 58. Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy for Parcel 2, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. to allow an access opening with a dght in/right out vehicular movement onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway. 59. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho Califomia Water District b. Eastem Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works 60. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 61. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 62. 63. 64. 65. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 66. The Occupancy classification for the proposed Home Depot buildings will be M/S-1 and the occupancy classification of the Village Center buildings will be A/BIM. The proper \%TE_MEC_FS101%VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'r~2.84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc. doc. doc 10 67. 68. 69. classffications and construction types for each building will be addressed at time of plan submittals and plan check by the Department of Building and Safety Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings pdor to submittal for plan review. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 70. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 71. 72. 73. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 4-g4~ 1998 edition of the California Building Code, Appendix 29. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans submitted for plan review. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of any building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls, if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 81. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 82. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-I. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3850 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 11 dudng the approval process to reflect changes in design, _,:o_nstructjon type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as providc,~. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 83. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 feet apart and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 84. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 85. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Ord 460) 86. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection pdor to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 87. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 88. Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 89. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1 ) 90. Pdor to building construction, dead end mad ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 91. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1 ) 92. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. 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 Bureau 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. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) \~TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~284Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 12 COMMUNITY SERV!CES DEPARTMENT General Comments: 102. Pdor to the installation of the arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into the respective TCSD maintenance program. 103. Landscape plans for the proposed raised medians and traffic circles shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services. 104. Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians and traffic circles shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and monitored in accordance with the TCSD inspection process. 105. All perimeter landscaping and parkways within the commerdal development shall be maintained by the property owner. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy: 106. The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians and traffic circles shall be completed to TCSD standards pdor to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. OTHER AGENCIES 106. 107. 108. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control Distdct's transmittal dated August 6, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water Districts transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastem Information Centers transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 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 Name \\TEMEC FS101 \VOLI\DEPTSM=LANNI NG~TAFFRPT~84Pa99.COA'DEVPLAN revised for pc,doc.doc - ' 14 93. 95. 96. Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commerdal buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4) Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 97. 98. 99. 100. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by the alarm system. (CFC 902.4) All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. (CFC Article 81 ) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, fiammeble liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 101. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau addressing all items on the hazardous materials list. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA- 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. \\TE.MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT',284Pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- APPROVING PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:\DEPTS%PLANNING\STAFFRPT~?84pa99.pc revised 9-:29-99..doc 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0286 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431, SUBDIVIDING 66,828 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-042 AND -044, AND 950-087-006 WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0286, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0286 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0286, on September 15, 1999, and September 29, 1999, 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 in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0286; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above redtations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 ) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commerdal, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and F:\DEpTS\pLANNiNG~STAFFRPT~284pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc 13 circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project sitG will determine the suitability and !ocation of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and developrn6nt plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and we!fare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. 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. I 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. The Addendum 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. 7 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 odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 ) for the subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950- 020-042, -044 and 950-870-006 subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 14 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 15 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:\D_EpTS~DLANNiNG\STAFFRFT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99.,doc 16 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Revised by Staff Planning Application No. PA99-0286 - Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots 950-020-042, -044 and 950-087-006 September 29, 1999 September 29, 1999 PLANNINGDIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 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 Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. 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 The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of Califomia Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless 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, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 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, judgements, 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 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 dght 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. 4. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager. ~\TE~MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 1 10. 11. This approval shall take effect only after the effec~ve date ,',f Planning Application No. PA99- 0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) by the City. of Temecula City Council. This project and all subsequent projects within this site sha;l be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. Parcel 1 shall be required to provide a major community entry statement at the comer of Meadows Parkway and State Highway 79 South and a minor project entry statement at the corner of Campanula Way and Meadows Parkway in conformance with Specific Plan No. 219. These improvements, along with appropriate landscaping and streetscape, shall be completed prior to the first certificate of occupancy upon Parcels 2, 3 and 4. The owner of Parcel 1 shall provide evidence that CC&Rs or another suitable instrument is in place that guarantees the ongoing maintenance of landscaping at the site. All projects within Parcels 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to Development Agreement No. PA99- 0283. The balance of parcels covered by this map shall be subject to the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement Paloma del Sol recorded February 18, 1993 and as subsequently amended. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 235. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all measures recommended by the Traffic Study dated September 7, 1999, by Wilbur Smith Associates, which have been incorporated and conditioned to be incorporated into the project. A written report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division summarizing the obligations of the developer and how the obligations have been met, pdor to the issuance of permits. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 12. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. 13. 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 14. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: 1) 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 recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. 2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235 and Addendum No. 3 to \\TE, MEC_FS101%VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86Pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 2 Environmental Impact Report No. 235 were prepared for this project and are on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. 3) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. c. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, pdvate roads, extedor of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. 2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity or other equivalent instrument has been formed with the dght 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 suffident 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 for provisions required 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. 3) 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) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. 4) In addition to the other provisions described in this section which must be included in the CC&Rs, the applicant shall also include the following text in the CC&Rs: Consent of City of Temecula ae Condition No.16.C.1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) requires the City to review and approve CC&Rs for the map. b. Declarant acknowledges that the City has reviewed these CC&Rs and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the map. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments procedures, assessment enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DEPTS%DLANNING~STAFFR~86pa99,COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 3 In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the land use entjtlements issued by the City for the map or federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and resolutions and these CC&Rs, the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the language of the CC&Rs. These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise modified without the express wdtten consent of the Planning Manager of the City of Temecula. Consent of the City of Temecula Condition No. 15.C.1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) requires the City of Temecula to review and approve CC&Rs for the map. The City's review of these CC&Rs has been limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the map. The' City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of assessments, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney 15. 16. The Final Map shall delineate a westbound bus tumout located on the north side of Campanula Way, as approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the Riverside Transit Agency. Development of any parcel where bus turnouts are located shall include the installation of a bus shelter, amenities and appropriate landscaping when bus service is activated in the area. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 17. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Eftdent Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: \\TE, MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86Pa99-COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 4 18. 19. 1 ) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of T~.mecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading p:Gn. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter i7.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). 5) The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. 6) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). b) Pdvate common areas prior to issuance of the any building permit. c) All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to private slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to soften perimeter walls adjacent to a public fight-of- way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. 7) Plans for hardscaping for pedestrian trails within private common areas. b. Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: 1 ) Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a Public Right-of- Way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. 2) Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. c. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the residential subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Director approval. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment within commerdal areas shall be screened from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structure. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING',STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 5 Pdor to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 20. 21. If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and flee of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 22. 23. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. Pdvate common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection pdor to issuance of the first occupancy permit. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within pdvate 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 Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. 25. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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 26. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative parcel map all existing and proposed easements, topography, drainage facilities, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 27. A Grading Permit for either rough or predse grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any consb'uction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 28. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 29. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of- way. 30. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. \\TE, MEC_FS101\VOL%DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 6 31. 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. 32. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centedine of the access to the southerly ddveway on Highway 79 South or as approved by the Director of Public Works. 33. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Meadows Parkway from Campanula Way to De Portola Road shall be determined upon submittal of future development plans. C= De Portola Road along the frontage of Parcel 5 shall be determined upon submittal' of future development plans, De Portola Road along the frontage of Parcel 7 shall have full movement and shall be aligned with Street "A" of Tentative Tract Map No. 24136. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/right out movement. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to right in/right out movement. Prior to Approval of the Parcel 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: 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. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau e, Planning Department Department of Public Works g. Riverside County Health Department h. Cable TV Franchise i. Caltrans \\TE, MEC_FS101\VOL1%DEpTS~PLANNING%STAFFRFT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 7 j. Community Services District 35. k. General Telephone Southem Califomia Edison Company m. Southem Califomia Gas Company The following public improvements shall be designed to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. a. Highway 79 South (Urban Artedal Highway Standards - 134' R/W) 1) Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer as required to serve this development). b. De Portola Road (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) 1) Improve roadway to include 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), and raised landscaped median. 2) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous from Margarita Road to Meadows Parkway with openings at Campanula Way, Paloma Del Sol Park entrance and Parcel 7 (as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map). Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South to De Portola Road 1) Improve roadway to include 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), and raised landscaped median. 2) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with an opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way or as approved by the Director of Public Works upon submittal of future development plans. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Street Standards - 78' R/W) from De Portola Road to Meadows Parkway 1 ) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts 2) Improve roadway 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). 3) The raised landscape median shall be continuous with the exception of median breaks and areas where on-street parking is permitted as shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1 ~:)EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 8 Traffic signals at the following intersections: 1) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. 2) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998. 3) Campanula Way and main access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and main access to the site. 4) Margadta Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998. 36. 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 on the tentative parcel map, the following minimum cdteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans subject to approval by the Director of Public Works: Street centedine 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. 207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with Ordinance No. 461. de Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400, 401, and 402. 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. g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. h. All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. i. 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. j, All utilities except electrical lines rated 33 kV of greater shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of- \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEpTS~pLANNiNG~STAFFR~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 9 37. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. way does not exist for installation of the fadlities. 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 closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. The existing alignment of Campanula Way shall be vacated. Relinquish and waive dght of access to and from the following roadways: Meadows Parkway with the exception of one opening to Parcel 6 and one opening to Parcel 7. Locations to be determined upon submittal of future development plans. b. De Portola Road with the exception of two openings: 1) One opening to Parcel 5. Location to be determined upon submittal of future development plan. 2) One opening on Parcel 7 as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. The south side of Campanula Way on the Parcel Map with the exception of five openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. The north side of Campanula Way with the exception of two openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. Comer property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian fadlities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805 or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other apprepdate 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 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. Pdor to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concems and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. 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. 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. \\TE,MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEFT'S\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MaP revision for pc1 .doc 10 47. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by Riverside Transit Authority and approved by the Department of Public Works. 48. Pdvate drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 49. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 50. An easement for a joint use ddveway and/or reciprocal ingress/egress shall be provided pdor to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 51. 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." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 52. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works d. Caltrans 53. 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. 55. 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 pdvate, 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. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEpTS~pLANNING\STAFFRpT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 11 56. 57. 58. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Stat~ W3ter 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. The Developer shall post secudty 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. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 59. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 60. 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. 61. 62. 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. 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 or as otherwise modified in the Villages @ Paseo Del Sol Development Agreement. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 63. Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall install a traffic signal at the following intersections in accordance with City Standards: Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway Campanula Way and main access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and main access to the site. Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy for Parcel 2, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow an access opening onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway. 65. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~286Pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 12 a. Rancho Califomia Water District b. Eastern Munidpal Water Distri;~ c. Department of Public Works 66. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 67. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 68. 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: 69. All perimeter landscape and parkway areas within the commercial development shall be maintained by the property owner. 70. Proposed landscape improvements within the raised medians and traffic circles shall be installed in accordance with TCSD standards. 71. Prior to the installation of artedal street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into the respective TCSD maintenance program. 72. Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians and traffic circles shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and monitored in accordance with the TCSD inspection process. Prior to approval of the Final Map: 73. Landscape construction plans for the raised medians and traffic drcle shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy: 74. The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians and traffic circles shall be completed to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit 75. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees. \\T~MEC_FS101%VOL1~DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRP'T~86Pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 13 OTHER AGENCIES 76. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations s:t forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Healt,h's transmittal date:, ,July 20, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 77. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water Distdct's transmittal dated July 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 78. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water Distdct's transmittal dated, a copy of which is attached. 79. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information Center's transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 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 \\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~286Pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99- AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PA99-0285) F:\~EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 17 A'i'rACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A ~ESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), TO CHANGE LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1,6, AND 8; TO REALIGN AND RECONFIGURE CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; THE REALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1 AND 6; 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 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 DWELLING UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF UNITS FROM 590 TO 508 IN THESE AREAS; THE PROVISION TO DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE, GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8; AND AN UPDATE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES; ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0285, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0285 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0285, on September 15, 1999, and September 29, 1999, 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 in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 18 The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Resictential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) an~ H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with t.hese designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of apDroval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation am adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlib or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in~ll site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlib resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the recon~guration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. The Addendum 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. 7 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,. F:~DEpTS~DLANNING\STAFFRP'I'~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 19 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th ,~ay of September, 1999. RoI-~ Guerriero, 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 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\DEpTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..cloc 20 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1999 SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER F:\DEpTS\pLANNING%STAFFRP'r~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 21 EXHIBIT B ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.Pc revised 9-29-99..doc EXHIBIT C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRP'T~284Pa99.Pc revised 9..29-99..doc 23 EXHIBIT A CrrY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0285 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 Project Description: To amend Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) as follows: land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area I 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, pdvate, 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: October 26, 1999 PLANNINGDIVISION Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division twelve (12) copies of a revised Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Zoning Ordinance that includes corrections as required within these Conditions of Approval and as required by the Planning Commission in their recommendation for approval. 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, judgements, 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 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. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~285pa99.COA-sPa.doc 1 3. The applicant shall comply with all underlying Condition~ of Approval for Specific Plan No. 219 and its amendments unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval. 4. The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall conform with Exhibit No. 3A, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7" dated September 23, 1999, or as amended by these conditions. 5. The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 Zoning Standards shall conform with Exhibit No. 3B, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No. 7" dated September 21, 1999, or as amended by these conditions. Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the Amendment 6. 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, 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 F:\I~EPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPT~85Pa99-COA-sPa.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0283 VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'1'~284pa99.Pc revised 9-29--99,.doc 24 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISS:-~N OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0283 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, COVERING 23.74 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds determines, and declares as follows: A. Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of development agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; B. In accordance with the procedure specified in said statutes and Resolution, del Sol Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Developer") have filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for approximately 23.75 acres located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way, east of Margadta Road and west of Meadows Parkway ("Property") for retail commercial uses consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7, which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director; C. Notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of the Development Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the public hearing before the City Council; (1) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearings to the project applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; (2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; C. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on September 15, 1999 and on September 29, 1999, at which time the F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 25 Planning Commission heard and considered all of the wdtten material and oral comments presented to it on the proposed environmenta! finclings and the proposed Development Agreement; Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby further finds and determines that the Project site has been the subject of extensive pdor environmental review: A. 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 Addendure 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. B. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendure No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. C. The Addendum 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. 7 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. D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 235 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses, density, design, improvement, development fees, and construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development Agreement. E. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the Amendment unless required by 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15161 or 15163. Section 3. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful consideration of the evidence, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that neither a Subsequent EIR a Supplemental EIR, nor further environmental review is required for the Development Agreement pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163, based on the following findings of the Planning Commission: A. The elements of the Project as described in the Development Agreement were contemplated and fully and propedy analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the County of Riverside and the Addendums thereto, for the approval of Specific Plan 219 and subsequent Amendments; B. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project which would require major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR due F:M:)_EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99,.doc 26 to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty of previously identified significant effects. D. Them is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous FEIR and Addendums. E. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendures. F. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and Addendums which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternative previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project. G. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendures would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds, determines and declares that: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that: (1) The Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of the Property for commercial development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Community Commercial for the Property which provide for commercial development; (2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will provide for the creation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Fadlity, Land Use, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan; B. The Development Agreement is consistent with Specific Plan 219 in which the Property is located in that: (1) The Development Agreement provides for commercial development pursuant to and in conformance with the terms of Specific Plan 219; (2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 219; (3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of the public improvements as described in Specific Plan 219; (4) The Applicable Rules set forth in the Development Agreement do not change the provisions of the Specific Plan, but clarifies the uses to be allowed and standards to be imposed where the Specific Plan provides for alternatives; F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..cloc 27 C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general we!fare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; D. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to, and in fact enhances, the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof through the implementation of the Applicable Rules; E. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council to approve of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and the evidence presented at the headngs before the Planning Commission on the Development Agreement; F. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from the Development Agreement: (1) Generation of municipal revenue; (2) Construction of needed public infrastructure facilities; (3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as well as the payment of municipal revenue; (4) Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and providing retail development necessary to serve the community; and (5) Payment of Public Facility Fees. Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that it make the environmental findings described herein and approve a Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and del Sol Investments, LLC (Planning Application No. PA 99-0283). Section 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. F:\D, EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'T'~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 28 Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\D.EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'I%284pa99.Pc revised 9-29-99..doc 29 EXHIBIT A VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 20, 1999 (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 30 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL F:~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'T~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99.,doc 31 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0283 - Development Agreement Project Description: The request for approval of a Development between the City and del Sol Investment California limited liability company Agreement Co., LLC, a PLANNING DIVISION Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division twelve (12) copies of a revised Development Agreement that includes corrections as required within these Conditions of Approval and as required by the Planning Commission in their recommendation for approval. The document shall correctly refer to Title 17, as previously requested by the City Attorney. 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 F:~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~83pa99.COA-da.doc 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION AND ADOPTION OF ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO EIR NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 F:~:)EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 32 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 9_- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AND ADOPT ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC submitted Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol); WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3 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 Amendment No. 7 and Addendure No. 3 on September 15, 1999, and September 29, 1999, 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 in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Addendum No. 3 to hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010. F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for me site includes CC Community Commerdal, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or 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 land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 33 circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of a!l access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. 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. I 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. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles. The Addendum 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. 7 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. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerriero, 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 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\DEpTS~pLANNING\STAFFRPT'c?.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 35 EXHIBIT A ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIROMENTMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 235 DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) F:'%.DEpTS\pLANNiNG\STAFFRP'T%284pa99.pc revised 9.-29-99..doc 36 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 6 PC STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) F:\D_EpTS~DLANNiNG~STAFFRP'T~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 37 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 INFORMATIONAL EXHIBIT- PRESENTATION BROCHURE FROM DEL SOL INVESTMENTS, LLC DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~?84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 38 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 EXHIBITS F:~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT%284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 39 CITY OF TEMECULA *--,t !m I CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - I-1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 OUTDOOR DISPLAY PLAN F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc 40 CITY OF TEMECULA UNDER SEPARATE COVER CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- M PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9--29-99..doc 41 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES R:\STAFFRFF\285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doc 26 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 CORRESPONDENCE R:\STAFFRPT~285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .doc 27 R:\PlanComm\minutes\092999 Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) and Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Vestinn Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) Planninfi Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment) Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) 1. Request to design, construct and operate a 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space; 2. Request to subdivide 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots; 3. Request to Amend Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), amending the following: land uses within Planning Area 1, 6, and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the allocation of acreage within Planning Area 1 from 32.3 acres to 35.0 acres; the allocation 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 development of an active, private, gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an update of Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. 4. Request for approval of a Development Agreement between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a limited liability company. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. By way of overheads, Associate Planner Donahoe presented the staff report (via agenda material); reviewed the specifications of the Specific Pan amendment, the proposed Parcel Map, and the Development Plan, inclusive of the Development Agreement; highlighted the site plan, focusing on the Home Depot site, noting the location of the loading area, the drive aisle, access, and the outdoor seasonal and permanent display areas; specified the issues staff and the applicant have not agreed upon, as follows: a) the applicant has proposed a 2500 square foot permanent outdoor display, while staff's recommendation would be to reduce the area to 2300 square feet, noting that the applicant has agreed to trellis this particular area, additionally, explaining the potential location of the tool rental area, b) temporary outdoor seasonal sales area, noting the City's process of permitting temporary uses, c) the elevations of the Home Depot building, specifying the exposed exterior downspouts and staff's desire to achieve a consistent visual appearance with respect to the adjacent Lucky's Grocery Store, specifically recommending that the downspouts be installed on the interior of the building, and d) the proposed landscape plan which would not be consistent with the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan; referenced the memorandum (per supplemental agenda material), noting the modifications to the language of the Conditions of Approval .el~ R:\PlanComm\minutes\092999 (COA's); and presented the proposed vignettes proposed by the applicant in order to achieve a Village Center design. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided clarification with respect to the parcel lines, and the associated proposed turning motion; noted that staff would not recommend a joint use access (specifically, in the area of Parcel No. 7); for Chairman Guerriero, provided additional information regarding the traffic analysis with respect to Highway 79 South, noting that the COA's adequately mitigate any impacts associated with this proposed project; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed that all the surrounding developments were included in the traffic analysis associated with this particular project, inclusive the County projects. For the record, the Commissioners relayed that they had met with applicant outside of the hearing in order to discuss the issues related to this particular project. in response to Commissioner Mathewson's querying regarding the proposed Zoning Ordinance, (denoted on pages 1-4 of the agenda material), Associated Planner Donahoe provided clarification; provided additional information regarding staff's recommendation regarding the landscape plan, noting the existing Specific Plan's requirement for ten-foot planters at the ends of all parking aisles. The applicant's representatives provided the following presentations: >- Mr. Robert Davis, representing the applicant, for Commissioner Mathewson, provided a detailed overview of the traffic analysis conducted with respect to this particular project, inclusive of the incorporation of the impact of the adjacent residential developments at build-out. For Commissioner Webster, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff has not reviewed the recently provided recommendations by the applicant to revise the Conditions of Approval (per supplemental agenda material), noting that staff received the information at the time of the hearing. >- In response to Commissioner Naggar's references to the traffic mitigation report, Mr. Davis provided an overview of the traffic conditions projected to be at build out, noting that the Level of Service (LOS) would not go below Level D; for Commissioner Mathewson, provided additional information regarding the timing of the proposed Margarita Road improvements; for Chairman Guerriero, relayed further information regarding the proposed improvements with respect to the area south of Highway 79 in the Wolf Valley, Pala Road area. In response to Commissioner Naggar's comments, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified that Level of Service (LOS) D was an acceptable LOS per the City's General Plan standards. >> Mr. Allan Davis, representing the applicant, provided additional information regarding the Tentative Parcel Map; highlighted the site plan, parking, the village center design, the overall proposed landscape plan, architectural design, access, and pedestrian flow; relayed that due to previous Commission comments, revised entry designs have been developed; further specified the landscape design; presented the newly revised design plans, inclusive of the major and minor entryway statements. Chairman Guerriero relayed that per his previous request, provision of a line-of-sight diagram from the major streets. R:%PlanComm\minutes\092999 he would recommend At 7:59 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 8:12 P.M. ~ Mr. Kareem All, representing the applicant, noted the applicant's diligent efforts to work with staff in order to develop elevations acceptable for the City of Temecula; relayed the enhanced architectural elements, per staff recommendation; clarified the rationale for the location of the exterior downspouts in order to allow adequate interior space; presented the site elevations, and landscape plan; provided a brief overview of the general line-of-sight from the back of the building, inclusive of the three-foot lowered elevation from the street, the two-foot berm, and the six-foot screen wall; provided additional information regarding staff's recommendation to install trellis-work or additional columns to the building frontage; with respect to the outdoor seasonal display area, relayed the applicant's desire to have the fixed designated time-periods approved for seasonal sales which would be consistent year after year, in order to alleviate the need to attain a Temporary Use Permit for each event; advised that the applicant would be agreeable to reducing the size of the permanent outdoor display to 2300 feet, per staff's recommendation; with respect to Commissioner Fahey's comments, relayed that the applicant would be flexible with respect to the loss of one or two parking stalls in order to enhance the entry statement; for Chairman Guerriero, specified the location of the outdoor seasonal display area which would be utilized three times a year; reiterated that the applicant would be flexible with respect to revising the number of parking stalls; for Commissioner Mathewson, advised that he would need to further discuss with the applicant the issue of flexibility with respect to relocating the outdoor seasonal display area. ~ Mr. Frank Cota, representing the applicant, for Commissioner Mathewson, advised that the applicant would be agreeable to remaining flexible with respect to relocation of the outdoor seasonal display area in order to attain improved internal circulation; for Chairman Guerriero, relayed that the applicant would be agreeable to replacing the outdoor chained-link fencing with a comparably priced wrought iron look fencing referenced by Chairman Guerriero; although the applicant would be willing to accommodate staff's recommendation to install the downspouts on the interior of the building, relayed the restrictions which would be placed upon the interior spacing; for Chairman Guerriero, relayed that the applicant would be willing to add additional texturing or enhancements on the exterior of the building with respect to the exterior downspouts in order to improve the negative aesthetic appearance. ~- By way of overheads, Mr. Barry Burnell, representing the applicant, provided further specification with regard to Parcel Area Nos. 6A, 6B, and 8, noting the reduction in acreage with respect to Planning Area No. 6, specifying the reduction in density in the northern area, specifically, reducing the multi-family area from the allowable 590 units to the proposed 240-250 units; with respect to the parcel lines referenced by Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, relayed that the applicant would be flexible with regard to the location of the parcel line; advised that if the parcel line would be modified that the units would be adjusted accordingly; provided additional information regarding the parking lot landscaping, noting that there would be no objection to modifying the landscape requirements in the Specific Plan if it was the desire of the Commission to do so, in order to accommodate the current proposed landscape plan with respect to the ¢~ R:\PlanComm~minutes~092999 Home~'~ Depot use, since there would be provision of additional shading in the parking lot and the plan would restrict cut-though traffic in the parking lot; for Commissioner Naggar, further clarified the reductions in the number of units in the multi-family area (Parcel No. 6), presenting the proposed plan, split into Parcel Nos. 6A and 6B, noting the reduction of densities in the northern portion (Parcel No. 6A); relayed the current evaluating process which may further reduce the densities per potential future development; specified Planning Area No. 8, noting the potential Senior Housing Overlay, relaying that this particular proposal would be presented to the Commission in the coming weeks; and confirmed that there was a general reduction in the generation of traffic with respect to development of a senior facility. ~ Mr. Dean Meyer, representing the Newland Communities, relayed support of the proposed project; and was available for questions and comments of the Commission. -- Ms. Patti Nahill, representing the applicant, presented the recommendations of the applicant with respect to the requested revisions to the Conditions of Approval (CONs) (per supplemental agenda material), reading the recommendations into the record; and in response to Commissioner Naggar, relayed that it would be the applicant's desire for the Commission to approve the revisions at this time. ~- Mr. Allan Davis relayed that with the above-mentioned modifications to the COA's, the applicant would be in complete agreement with the terms of this project. The community members addressed their concerns, as follows: · Mr. Timothy J. Miller, 45052 Corte Bella Donna, relayed that he had previously addressed his concerns to Commissioners Guerriero, Naggar, and Webster; advised that in his opinion the Home Depot use would not be a use consistent with the Village Center concept; and referenced the General Plan with respect to description of the design of the buildings in the Village Center concept (Section 6, paragraph B, of the General Plan.) · Ms. Iris Abernathy, 43980 Margarita Road, noted her concerns with respect to flood control and traffic issues associated with this particular proposal. For Ms. Abernathy, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided additional information regarding the flood channel; and invited Ms. Abernathy to come the Public Works Department for additional information regarding the drainage analysis associated with this particular area. · Mr. Stephen Corona, 33320 Highway 79, requested that the Commission not approve the proposed project until a flood control channel was built, east of Butterfield Stage Road in order to mitigate the increased flood hazard; read into the record a letter addressing his specific concerns (submitted to staff during the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting), noting the effect with respect to the Corona Ranch and the Corona family parcels with regard to the negative impacts of the Newland Communities development. In response to Commissioner Naggar, Mr. Corona relayed that if the channel were installed to mitigate the flooding issues that he would have no objection to the project. ¢~ R:\PlanComm~minutes\092999 · Mr, J, David Gardner, 43053 Teramo Street, voiced his concerns, as follows: a) truck traffic and the oil residue on the pavement due to the truck travel, b) recommended concealing the exterior downspouts, c) suggested that the applicant add additional landscaping on the perimeter of the parking area, d) with respect to the development of Parcel Nos, 6A and 6B, recommended separating the areas in order to review each as separate entities, e) relayed a preference for condominiums verses apartments in the multi-family area, noting that if apartments would be constructed, he would like assurance that the residents would not utilize amenities paid for by the HOA, and f) relayed that the eight-and-a-half by eleven inch (8 ¼" by 11 ") notice of public hearing at De Portola Road was an insufficient means cf noticing this project, · Ms. Kim Bourgeois, 32914 Charmes Court, submitted for the record a petition encompassing approximately 200 signatures opposing this particular project, primarily due to the potential for the construction of apartments in the multi-family area. Mr. Allan Davis relayed his concluding remarks, as follows: a) advised that the Home Depot use would be consistent with the Village Center concept, as designed, and b) requested that the Commission approve the revisions to the COA's, previously mentioned. For Chairman Guerriero, and Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided additional information regarding the drainage issues referenced by Mr. Corona. Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided additional information regarding the entitlements for this particular project, which had been solidified through the prior Development Agreements. Chairman Guerriero advised that due to the significant issues that had not been previously brought before the Commission (i.e., flooding, traffic, and CEQA modifications), that the matter be continued. Commissioner Naggar specified the assets of this particular project; noted the issues still unresolved, as follows: traffic, flood control, Mr. Miller's comments regarding the Village Center concept being implemented, and the request for revisions to the COA's; and concurred with continuing the matter. Commissioner Fahey advised that since this project had been reviewed by the Commission in the conceptual phase of development, that if the Commission had objections to the implementation of the Village Center concept that the comments should have been addressed at that time; advised that in her opinion, the applicant has made diligent efforts to incorporate the Village Center concept at this difficult site, noting the restrictions associated with the site; concurred with continuing the matter due to the outstanding issues, advising that the Commission provide direction to staff with respect to issues of concern; recommended that staff address the language of the revisions to the COA's, requested by the applicant; commended the applicant for their efforts to modify the entry statements, advising that staff develop additional conditions for this particular area; concurred with the applicant's request for approval for the fixed time periods for the outdoor seasonal sales area in order to alleviate the need for a Temporary Use Permit; noted her confusion with respect to the administrative development plan issue, advising that staff address the matter; concurred with the 10 ¢1 R:\PlanComm\minutes\092999 .pla~te. ontn of the downspouts due to the applicant's clarified rationale for the exterior ~ns a a~ , if additional enhancements are added to mitigate the negative visual appearance; advised that if the applicant remains flexible with respect to the recommendations of the staff and the Commission, the project could move forward; relayed that the traffic analysis was adequate for this particular project; recommended that the flooding issues be further investigated by staff in order to provided assurance that the impacts have been adequately mitigated; and recommended that the matter be continued to the October 6, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, and that the public hearing be closed. Relaying concurrence with Commissioner Fahey's comments, Commissioner Mathewson concurred with the applicant's proposed landscape plan within the parking lot area due to the additional shading and the provision to restrict cut-through traffic; concurred with the installation of the downspouts on the exterior of the building, requesting that staff provide recommendation with respect to specific additional elements to be added in order to screen the visual appearance; commended staff for their assiduous efforts with respect to this project; with respect to the proposed uses in the Retail Village (denoted in 1B and in Village Court 1A) requested additional information regarding the proposed liquor store, gourmet wine shop, and the evening nursery school (with the hours of operation from 8:00 P.M. to 5:00 A.M.) uses; with respect to Planning Area 1, 27 and 36 relayed objection to the Recycling Collection facility use at this location; queried the deletion of the news store as a permitted use, advising that this use would be an appropriate use for the Village Center concept. Planning Manager Ubnoske advised that the applicant provide no further information with respect to the project in order for staff to address the current issues of concern. Due to the concern with respect to a proliferation of alcoholic establishments, Chairman Guerriero requested that staff contact ABC to attain provision of a zoning map in order to compare ABC's permitted alcoholic uses verses the current number of uses existing in the area. In response to Attorney Curley's advisement that due to the time constraints, staff may not be able to attain the data from ABC in a timely manner, Chairman Guerriero offered to assist in the matter of attaining the requested information due to his previous success with respect to having queries addressed expeditiously with ABC. Relaying concurrence with Commissioner Fahey's comments, Commissioner Naggar requested that Mr. Davis provide, the following: a) a Level of Service map for the projected Level of Service at five-ten years, b) data indicating the difference in the traffic reduction due to the amended Specific Plan which would reduce the number of proposed dwelling units in the multi-family area; requested additional information regarding the issue of truck deliveries on Campanula Way and the effect upon the adjacent residential area, querying whether restraints should be placed with respect to the time of deliveries, and querying the impact with respect to the use of the adjacent park. For Chairman Guerriero, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that staff would further investigate the above-mentioned matter, noting that Campanula Way had been designed to adequately carry the weight of the trucks. 11 k__~ R:\PlanComm~,minutes~092999 For informational purposes, Commissioner Fahey relayed for the community that the proposed developments within the Specific Plan would be brought forward for Commission approval at a future point in time, relaying that the community could address specific concerns at that point in time. Due to the time constraints associated with bringing this issue back to the Commission in one week's time, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff may present information verbally, or in the form of a memorandum in lieu of the standard staff report procedure. For Commissioner Mathewson, the applicant voiced no objection to continuing the matter to the October 6, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to close the public hearing; continue the matter to the October 6, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fahey. Chairman Guerriero requested that staff obtain a copy of the letter presented by Mr. Corona in order to address the issues of concern. At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval. PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that the American Planning Association Design Review Workshop had been rescheduled for November 13, 1999, noting that the Commission would be e-mailed with further information. For Chairman Guerriero, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that due to the difficulties he has had in receiving data via e-mail, that she would send a note. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Mathewson thanked staff for the City Tour provided for the Commission on September 21, 1999. Chairman Guerriero commended Assistant Project Planner Anders with respect to her successful efforts associated with contacting the Van Daele Development with respect to the raising of the tennis court fences which was a previous issue of concern with regard to safety. Due to the confusion regarding notification of the City Tour for the Planning Commission, Chairman Guerriero requested that staff hold a workshop in order to update the Commission with respect to the discussed issues and to address any other Commission questions. 12 TESTIMONY TEXT AND DOCUMENTATION FROM STEVE CORONA R:~,STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT ,CC .doc 28 September 2 9, 2 9 9 9 Planning Commission . City of Temecula " 41200 Business Park Drive My name is Stephen Corona and I represent James and Mary Corona, Corona Ranch, Big Horse Feed and Farm Supply and the Corona family· We own land adjacent to the Newland project, northeast of the intersection of Butterfield State Road and Highway 79. , To preface my comments, ~i~ that we do riot object to the rezoning or e uepo~'s wish to b.a in the area if th~s would be a benefit for the area. H~ving ,&id'k'~ we respectfully request that the Planning Co.m~..issioners suspend any action on this application until a flood control channel is built to mitigate the increased flood hazard to our property created in part by the Newland project. Planning Commission City of Temscula September 29, 1999 Page 2 When the environmental impact report (EIR) vas first approved for the project in 1988, it prohibited increased flood hazards to adjacent properties like ours, and mandated appropriate mitiqation measures prior to project development. The EIR provides that the Development Criteria applicable to the project include the following: "Development shall not result in increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties. In order to avoid these hazards, both on and off-site improvements maybe utilized. Drainage fees or other appropriate mitigation measure~may be requited to improve the area's flood control System prior to development". Newland has been allowed to build on land that was once the natural drainage course of flood waters. Additionally, County flood control facilities and Butterfield Stage Road improvements were constructed in a manner that benefitted development of the Newland project even though the improvements created a flood hazard on our property that did not previously exist. Our property was not within the lO0-year flood area before the improvements. After the improvements, a large area of our property is now in a lO0-year flood area. The portion of our property that is now subject to flood risk includes commercial Planning Commission City of Teme~ula September 29, 199g Page 3 buildings and the equipment yard. When ve objected to the improvements, we were assured the flood hazard .__,ksdW our property was only a temporary condition and that a permanent flood control channel would be constructed by the County to relieve the flood hazard created on our land. Under County Assessment District 159, the Newland pro~ect is allocated ~. of the cosYof that channel. Up until now, the City has relied on the County Assessment District #159 to construct an ofT-site intercap=or channel while allowinq Newland to build on filled land that once was a stream. I wish ~o viqorously point out also that the slnterim detention basinn that Newland was required to build is only ~o protect its project, and does no~hin; to alleviate the flood hazard created on cur property. We also objected to the A~my Corps of Engineers proposed issuance of an individual permit to Newland in connection wi~h the proSecUte flllinq of watercourses and wetlands. Ws were informed at ~ha time by the Army corps that the C~ty had reviewed the engineerin~ for the off-site interceptor facility and had Planning Commission City of Temecula September 29~ 1999 Page 4 found it adequate to alleviate any increased ~lood hazards. We were further informed that based upon ~he City~s representation of the adequacy of =he in=erceptor facility, the Army Corps intended to issue ~he individual permit over our objections. The City has allowed t_he Newland project to proceed on the basis that a permanen~ facility was going to be built that would alleviate the "temporary" flood hazard created on our property. This has no~ been done and ~here is a good possibility that the facility will not be constructed without adequate funding. We are told by the Assessmen~ District nov, that there is insuffioien~ money to construc~ ~he permanen~ facility. The City should no longer allow the Newland project to proceed in violation of the project conditions. Newland'e requested zone change should be oonditioned upon construction of the required channel, and no more building permits should~ssue~ until the channel is constructed. A member of Newlandts s~aff stated at one point that ail~he Coronas are c~oncerned about~ having someone else pay for our flood control. Th9 Ca~'s will be only too happy to pay for Planning Commission City of Temecula September 29, 1999 Page 5 ~8W flood control if drainage was once again permitted to flow in its natural course to the north of our property, across / Butterfield Stage Road, and through the Newland property. ' Obviously, it is too late to turn back the clock. Instead, we fewest ~hat the City enforce the project conditions placed on the Newland project. Specifically, we request that the City condition the re~ested zone change on construction of the retired interceptor channel and that no more building permits be issued until after ~e channel is constructed..~ ~/~ Tha~ you. OCTOBER 5, 1999 TO: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS WE WISH TO EMPHASIZE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT WE REGARD THE BU'I'I'ERFIELD STAGE RD. AS PART OF NEWLANDS PROJECT. IT IS CLEAR THAT BUTTERFIELD STAGE RD. WAS BUILT FOR THE BENEFIT OF NEWLAND PROPERTIES OR I'I"S PREDECESSORS, TO ENABLE THEM TO BUILD THEIR PROJECT. CERTAINLY THE MANNER THE ROAD WAS BUILT, WAS NOT FOR OUR BENEFIT. IRREGARDLESS OF OUR OPINION ON THAT SUBJECT, THE CITY CONTINUES TO ALLOW NEWLAND TO BUILD ON THE BASIS OF A TEMPORARY RETENTION BASIN, IN LIEU OF THE PERMANENT FLOOD FACILITY, AT THE RISK OF LIFE AND PROPERTY. WE FEEL IT IS THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS ARE MET PRIOR TO THE NEEDS OF DEVELOPMENT. THEREFORE WE REQUEST THAT YOU CONDITION ANY FURTHER CHANGES OR BUILDING PERMITS ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF PROPER FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES. RESPECTFULLY, JAMES CORONA, MARY CORONA, STEPHEN CORONA, ROSEMARIE CORONA AND JOHN CORONA THE FOLLOWING MAPS ILLUSTRATE THE "STREAM" BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT BY NEWLAND. THE "STREAM" RAN EAST TO WEST JUST SOUTH TO MARGARITA, ACROSS HIGHWAY 79S THROUGH WHAT IS NOW STATER BROS AND THEN INTO TEMECULA CREEK. / / f > D~ i-~lH ~00 Ci~IH / / / ,.; i' " "~ I ':' / ,. ,.¢-'. /' ...>% ,,, / .., ,,~. ,, · .. -% THE FOLLOWING IS PART OF THE "EIR" REPORT WHICH WAS FILED, AS WE UNDERSTAND, IN 1988. THE CITY HAS THE FULL REPORT ON FILE. WHEN THE "EIR" WAS FIRST APPROVED FOR THE PROJECT, IT PROHIBITED INCREASED FLOOD HAZARDS TO ADJACENT OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES, AND MANDATED APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES PRIOR TO PROJECT DEVELOPMENT. ~_.,'-) MAPS DATING BACK TWO DECADES CONCLUSIVELY SHOW THE LOCATION OF THIS STREAM. WHY WAS THIS STREAM OMMITrED FROM THE "EIR"? BLFFFERFIELD STAGE ROAD WHICH NOW ALSO SERVES AS A DAM, WAS BUILT IN THE LATTER PART OF 1993. WE WERE NEVER INCLUDED IN ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING THE NEWLAND PROJECT BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE BLFFFERFIELD STAGE ROAD AS A DAM AND DIVERT THE STREAM ON OUR PROPERTY SO THAT THEY COULD COVER THE STREAM ON THEIR PROPERTY FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING. ~f 'Tone o~her sAgnAfAcantly large off-site drainage basin haZ' · ~een Adentt~led which may impac~ the pro~ect. This area is located east o~ 3utter~leld 2ta~e ~Dad and sou~h of De Porecola Road and As naturally trAbutary to Temecula Creek. (See FAgure s$, ZxistAn~ .Hydrolo~y,) A regional master plan of., the area could include this as a tri~utar7 to T. he inteEsection of De Po~ola Road and Bu=~erf~eld S~age Road, but was not . cons~dered in ~his anal~s~s ~ince naturally tribu~a~ at this loca=iDn. Coordination with ~e land use master plans and proper~y owners should be investigated ~o refine the location of th~s System. The remainder of the smaller drainage basins originate on-site' since the project is located on or near the ridge- line, =he small drainage areas are generally in the form of small narrow canyons in the northerly portions of the site Which are very steep. The slopes or the drainaVe courses flatten significantly where they d~scharge into the Temecula Valley near Highway 79. Temecula ValleF is an alluvAal wash type valley and this is a typical response for this type of drainage pattern. A ~ortion of the pro~ect site may be located within' the ~urrie=a Creek Area Drainage Plan and would be subject to drainage ~ees, The Temecula Valley area has.a ~rainage"fee of $932/acre associated vith development. Approximately 142 acres of the sate is within th~s assessment area. The remainder of the site As ~ot encumbered with ~ny other knovn drainage fees. General Plan Policies The project sate is shown as being subject to inundation from Vail Dab on the County Map of Dam Inundation Areas - 100 }Year Flood Plains - Area Draina · Plans. Though not depicted as lying within the limits of an Area Drainage Plan; ~he project engineers have stated that approximately 142 acres of the sate l~e wAth~n the Temecula Valley Drain- age Area and that northern poz~cions of the site may lie wArhim the Murr~eta Creek Area Drainage Plan. The foliowAng Land Use Standards - Flooding from the Envi- ronmental Hazards and Resources Element of the Comprehen- save Camera1 Plan are applicable to the project site: FloOd -Eazard MltAgation - Proposed developments are revAewed for location in f · lood hazard areas, including floodways~ floodplains# areas subject to sheetflow or local pondl~g, and dam An~tndation areas, A drainage study may. be re ired, All flood-related hazards mus~ be adequately m~Agated. _~ S1~MT~+1989~ / Ranchc Villages Develop=ant project is as follows: ' D~velopment shall not ~lood 1aims ~ ZZ a development proposal includes an .-- i: ks Up ~o Or above ~he 100-year fie d · drainage study may be re~uired- Drainage Improvement ~ees - A development proposal .located wi~.hin th~ boundaries of an adopted Area Drainage Plan is required ~o pay a fee in the amount set forth in the plan for the s~pport of drainage i~provemen~s. Criteria appl.icab}.e to the result in increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream properties. In or'dot ~o avoid these hazards, bo~h on- and oil-site improvements may be utilized- Drainage fees or o~her appropriate mitigation measures ma~ be required to improve ~he area's ~lood control s~stem prior to development. / b. .project r~pact/RelationshiP to .GeD.e.r_~3_.~a3. po.~.~cies Developmen~ oZ The Meadows at Rancho California Specific Plan would require a combine=ion of cu~s and flAls which would alter =he existing on-site drainage patterns. Howev- in~reasee runo'er due to the creaticn.of,,imPervi-. cos surfaces. Pigore 57, Drainage Plan, includes calcu- lated 100-year frequency discharees associated with project development-. Calculations were based on the Riverside County Flood Control District H~drolo~ Manual a~d Proce- dures. AS shcw~ on Figure 57, Drainage Plan, the storm drain mas~er pla~ is comprised ~f several large conduit systems which traverse ~he project. The largest of these storm drain systems intercepts proposed storm drains from ~he development to the east ~f Butter~ield Sea e Road. This system ranges in size from a 39" to a 120" d~ame~er storm ctrain. This system generally follows ~he same alignment ~d direction as ~he exis~in~ drainage pattern, flowing in an ere= tc west direotio~, This system ~ill outlet into i~s nature1 s~reamccurse ~hen it leaves ~he eastern pro~ect bounder~ at ~ha crossing oZ Margari=e Road. The configura- tion oZ ~e storm drain ou~let at Margar~ta Road will be a concrete energ~ dies~pat~on/Zlow spreading device In order ~o mitigate higher pipe exit velocities and provide a non-erosive velocity into ~he existing stream. As previ- ousl~ dis~usse~ project implementation will result in L.-12;58 ,. ~ PI TRRC-,ER -> 19~969~. £ncreaaed runo~f,' Zn order to mitigate =he increase An runo~f at Xargarita Road outlet, the lar~er drain could beI realigned to discharge directly into Teasouls Creek. Three s~otm drain eyste~s are proposed along the southern pro~ec~ boundary to ou let directly into Temecula Creek. The precise discharge locations would have :o be determined by oZf-si~s owners. These three storm drains generally run An a north to south direction, generally following the e. xisting drainage pattern. The proposed storm drain system zn Butterfield Stage Road will intsrcap~ two proposed s~orm drains by V~e adjacent development co the east. All of the storm drain o~tlets viII be hi~her pipe outlet velocities. Relati,onship to General Plan Policies The Hasdaws at Rancho California Specific Plan responds The Lar~d Use S~anderds ~or Floodin~, as follows: 1) to FlOod Hazard Mitigation - In accordance with these standards, a drainage study has ,been propored, resul~ing in the Figure 57, Drainage Plan. This study is included as Section D, Technical Appendices. Due to the sito's location within a "Dam Inundation Area" of the vail Dam, the development proposal will be reviewed for siting constraints by the County Flood Control District and ~he County Plannin~ Department. Flmmdplains - The site does not lie within the identi- fied floodplain area, though addi~ional study of the Temecula floodplain is recommended. (See "Mitiga- tions".) 3) Drainage. Improvement Fees - If required, ~he developer will contribute $932 per acre for the approximately 142 acres of the site which lie vithin the Temecula Valley Drainage Area. A portion of the project site ,~may alsc be s~bJect to fees associated with the ~Murrieta C~eekArea Drainage Plan. In a~oordance with the Rancho Villages Development Crite-" ria, development will not result An increased flood hazards to adjacent or downstream proper~ies. As discussed above, drainage fees will be paid for those portions of the site located within the Temecula Valley or Hurrie~a creek Area Drainage Plans. -- c. ~{ticalions A more in-depth assessment of the Temecula floodplain should be conducted during ~he final design and preparation of ~he tentative tract maps. The study will require a regional hydrolo~ic analysis of the Temecula Creek wa~er- 320 PUBLIC NOTICE US Army Corps of Engineers® LOS ANGELES DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR PERMIT Public Notice/Application No.: 97-00275-ES Comment Period: July 3, 1997 through August 3, 1997 Project Manager:. Eric Stein Phone: (213) 452-3415 Email: estein@spl.usace.army.miI Applicant Newland Associates, LLC Attn: James Delhamer 9404 Genesse Avenue, Suite 230 La Jolla, California 92037 Contact Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. 23441 South Pointe Drive, Suite 150 Laguna Hills, California 92653 Location The project site is located within the City of Temecula in westem Riverside County approximately 2.5 miles east of the 1-15 Freeway and immediately north of State Highway 79. The site is adjacent to the existing residential neighborhoods of Paloma Del Sol and bordered by Pauba Road to the north and Butterfield Stage Road to the east. The southern property edge is State Highway 79 and the Temecula Creek drainage lies south of Highway 79. Impacts would occur to unnammed tributaries to Murrieta and Temecula Creeks in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, Caiifomia. Activity Construction of the 809-acre Paseo Del Sol residential community and commerce center. The proposed project would involve filling portions of 16 watercourses and several wetlands (see attached drawings). On August 26, 1996, the Corps verified in writing that impacts resulting from development of Paseo Del Sol were authorized by nationwide permit number 26. Work on the project commenced prior to expiration of the nationwide permits on January 21, 1997 and may continue until January 21, 1998 under the grandfathering clause at 33 CFR 330.6(b). Due to engineering and economic constraints, the permittee would like to spread the authorized work over a longer period of time, beyond the January 21, 1998 date authorized by the grandfathering clause. The work expected to remain unfinished by January 21, 1998 would affect 2.11 acres of waters of the U.S., including 0.47 acre of wetlands. Since the remaining work would impact more than 500 linear feet of waters of the United States, the permittee is applying for an individual permit to perform the previously authorized work beyond January 21, 1998. For more information see page 3 of this notice. Interested parties are hereby notified that an application has been received for a Department of the Army permit for the activity described herein and shown on the attached drawing(s). Interested parties are invited to provide their views on the proposed work, which will become a part of the record and will be considered in the decision. This permit will be issued or denied under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344). Comments should be mailed to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District Regulatory Branch ATTN: CESPL-CO-97-00275-ES P.O. Box 532711 Los Angeles, California 90053-2325 Evaluation Factors The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof. Factors that will be considered include conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food production and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. In addition, if the proposal would discharge dredged or fill material, the evaluation of the activity will include application of the EPA Guidelines (40 CFR 230) as required by Section 404 Co)(1) of the Clean Water Act. The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian tribes; and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. Preliminary Review of Selected Factors EIS Determination- A preliminary determination has been made that an environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed work. Water Ouality- The applicant obtained a waiver of water quality certification, under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board for the original Section 404 authorization. A new Section 401 certification or waiver is not being required for this reauthorization. 2 Coastal Zone Manastement- This proiect is located outside of the coastal zone and will not af_f~ct coastal zone resources. Cultural Resources- The Paseo [:)el Sol project site does not contain any properties registered on the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, investigations conducted by Chris Drover, Consulting Archaeology, consisting of archival research, archaeological survey, and extensive excavations done in accordance with federal guidelines and standarcls,'has determined that only one of the six historic/archaeologicalsites present within Paseo Del Sol appears to satisfy criteria that would make it potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The one potentially' eligible property, an adobe ruin site, lies below the surface at the top of a large knoll being preserved as permanent open space and will not be affected by the project. A copy of the "Interim Report-Cultural Resource Management Investigations of the Paloma Del Sol Development, Temecula, California" and a management summary of the Report were provided to the State Historic Preservation Office in connection with the Predischarge Notification and verification of Nationwide Permit Number 26 with respect to this project. Subsequently, a final Report, which confirmed the 'tentative conclusions of the Interim Report, was also prepared and provided. The Palorna Del Sol East project site does not contain any properties registered on the National Register of Historic Places. This. review constitutes the extent of cultural resources investigations by the District Engineer, and he is otherwise. unaware of the presence of .such resource,s,...'. Endangered Species- A focused survey for the Stephen's kangaroo rat conducted between March 21, 1996 and April 4, 1996, identified the' presence of a small rat population located only on and adjacent to several hilltops within the pioject site l~eSi'de Butterfield Stage Road. The approximate acreage' of occupied habitat conlp~i~s 0:84 ~icre' Corresponding to an area at the ' extreme eastern end 'of Drain_age N. At the request of the Corps, the projec{ has been recently redesigned to avoid all discharges of dredged and fill material into Drainage N and its weftands. Therefore, nO federally-listed threatened· or eddangered species, or a species proposed for such would be affected by the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United 'of the site failed' to detect the host plantdesignati°n' (Plantago erecta) for the Federally States. BotaniCal'sU~re~ listed endangered quino ~checl~erspot butterfly; therefore, it is not expected to breed on the project Public Headng-"Ahy 'p~=r/on~r/m:~/equest, in writing, within the comment-period specified in this notice, that a public he~ring be' held t6 consider this application.' Requests for public hearing shall state with partichlarity' the re/aSons for holding a .public hearing. ,. .. Proposed Activity for Which a Permit 'i~= Required . . · , ..:. 3. -" The 809-acre Paseo del Sol development would involve grading of lots for approximately 2,940 dwelling units and arnenities (e.g., schools, roads, parks, etc.) in the Temecula area. The project also involves construction of seven infiltration basins and trenches to provide first flush treatment of stormwater runoff for the 809-acre project and for an additional 395.9 acres of existing t,//_~_.off-site development (Paloma Del Sol .West) that currently has no such facilities and 210.2 acres of ~_off-site undeveloped land likely to be developed in the near future (east of Butterfield Stage Road). The proposed project involves filling portions of 16 watercourses and several wetlands. Of the 7.09 acres of waters of the U.S. on the project site, 4.95 acres (including 0.48 acres of wetlands) would be filled as part of the proposed project.~' The 2.18 acres of Drainage N, which contains the highest quality habitat on the project site, would be avoided. The sideslopes of Drainage N would be graded to a 2:1 slope with the toe of Slope approximately six feet above the OHWM.- ' "" "~' " ' '3 -i , -- .: . . · -: ,..:: ~. , The 4.47 acres of unvegetated "other waters" to be filled would be mitigated with the preservation of high quality willow woodland habitat with at least a 2-to-1 ratio (9.4 acres) in Temecula Creek. The 0.48 acre of onsite wetlands to be filled would be mitigated by the creation of on-site wetlands infiltration basins and trenches. The proposed preservation land in Temecula Creek is contiguous with 16.5 acres of wetlands in Temecula Creek previously dedicated for preservation by the Vail Lake mitigation plan. The proposed project is currently' underway under the authority of nationwide permit number 26 and the grandfathering clause at 33 CFR 330.6Co). By January 21, 1998 (the date on which the grandfathering period ends) it is expected that 2.11 acres of jurisdictional waters will remain within the area to be developed. The permittee is requesting that an individual permit be issued to allow the work to continue for an additional five years. Additional Project Information Site Description: Paloma Del Sol East is comprised of approximately 809 acres and contains 16 sandy-bottomed drainages. Four of the 16 drainages support small wetlands or limited riparian vegetation. The remaining 12 watercourses lack riparian habitat and support only weedy upland species along their margins. The average width of ordinary high water marks (OHWM) for the drainages on-site is approximately 2-5 feet, and only rarely widths exceed 12 feet. Vegetation on the property is composed of ruderal grassland and sparse sage scrub communities. Ruderal species characteristic of upland situations include mustards (Brassica nigra, and Hirsctifeldia incana), San Diego tarweed (Hernizonia paniculata), brome and oat grasses (Bromus mollis, B. rubens, and Avena laura). The sage scrub community is best developed on north-facing hillsides and is often dominated 'by California buckwheat (Eriogonurn fasciculatum), deer weed (Lotus scoparius), and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). Wetland and riparian vegetation is not abundant on-site and is restricted to narrow bands along drainage margins or in seepage depressions in meadows. Mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), arroyo willow (Salix laseolepis), cocklebur (Xanthiurn strumariurn), and rabbit-foot grass (Polypogon rnonspeliensis) are the most common species- The southern two-thirds of the property is located within the Temecula Creek watershed- The four largest drainages found on the property occur within this watershed. Drainage A is a sandy wash that supports limited wetland and riparian habitat, but is primarily vegetated with weedy salt-tolerant plants and tumbleweed. Drainage B and Drainage L are sandy-bottomed washes fed by small tributaries that flow through ruderal vegetation and sparse sage scrub. Drainage N is an east-west trending streamcourse that presently terminates at an earthen bench installed by the previous owner as part of the construction of Meadows Parkway; prior to construction of the bench Drainage N also flowed to Temecula Creek. The primary streamcourse of Drainage N supports the highest quality Corps jurisdiction wetlands and willow scrub which occurs on the project site. The project has been recently redesigned to avoid all discharges of dredged and fill material into Drainage N and its wetlands. The remaining drainages within the Temecula Creek watershed are small, mostly north-south trending watercourses which include Drainages C-E, G-K, M and O. These are sandy washes mostly vegetated with mustards and tarweed or sparse sage scrub. Drainage F is an isolated non- jurisdictional wetland that has developed from irrigation and runoff from adjacent ballfields at Campanula Road. Drainage I supports a very small jurisdictional wetland. Willow scrub may 4 ocra~onally develop on the property in seepage depressions along canyon bottoms. These isolated depressions lack an OHWM and do not support hydric soils, and therefore, are not jurisdictional. Only one drainage (Drainage P), located in the northem portion of the project, constitutes a portion of the Murrieta Creek watershed. Drainage P is a narrow sandy wash with banks thickly vegetated with ruderal vegetation. t'-- A large segment of the southeastem portion of the property between State Highway 79 and De Portola Road is the former site of sewage treatment ponds operated by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). After these ponds were decornmissioned the site was graded flat by EMWD, partially affecting the drainage course running east to west immediately north of the former ponds. Pronosed Snecial Conditions The following special conditions were included on the original nationwide permit authorization for this project (No. 96-00210--ES) and would be included on any subsequent authorization issued on this project. 1. The permittee shall compensate for impacts to 4.95 acres of waters of the U.S. and wetlands by preserving at least 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat within the Temecula Creek floodphin. Prior to December 1, 1996, the permittee shall record or cause to be recorded a conservation easement or covenant, which shall run with the land, obligating the landowner 6r their successor or assigns to preserve the mitigation/easement area in Temecula Creek as natural open space in perpetuity. The permittee shall receive written approval from the Corps of this easement or covenant prior to it being recorded. 2. Prior to initiating construction in waters of the U.S, but no later than October 1, 1996, the permittee shall post an irrevocable letter of credit or performance bond for 120% of the anticipated cost of installation of the infiltration basins and trenches. The bonding company must appear on the Department of Treasury Circular 570, Companies Holding Certificates of Authority as Acceptable Sureties on Federal Bonds and Acceptable Reinsuring Companies. The performance bond shall be conditioned such that if the permittee defaults on such mitigation requirements 6f this permit, the bonding company shall assume all responsibility for such mitigation requirements. The performance bond or letter of credit shall be reduced as each infiltration basin and trench is completed in an amount equal to the actual cost thereof and shall be released entirely upon a determination by the Corps that all the infiltration basins and trenches have been completed in accordance with the August 8, 1996 letter referenced in Special Condition Number 3 below. The permittee shall fully implement the non-point source runoff/first flush treatment program (including construction of the infiltration basins and trenches) described in the August 8, 1996 letter to the Corps of Engineers from Glenn Lukos Associates. The permittee shall develop an operations and maintenance plan for these basins and trenches and submit this plan to the Corps and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board for review and approval. This plan should include the names of responsible parties, provisions for control of invasive weeds, and mechanisms to minimize temporal loss of wetland habitat and functions. If these infiltration basins or trenches develop an ordinary high water mark or weftand characteristics (i.e. hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology) they would be considered jurisdictional waters of the U.S. If this occurs, the operations and 5 notice :is 'issued by the maintenance plan would require authorization from the Corps under Section. 404 of the Clean Water Act. The permittee shall not discharge any fill or excavate material from Drainage N within the boundaries of the proiect site. The permittee shall flag aquatic habitats to identify areas that must be avoided. Any additional acreage of waters of the US. impacted outside of the approved construction footprint without prior Corps' authorization shall be mitigated at a 5:1 ratio. ' ' ': ':: ' ' ' "' ' For additional information please call Dr. Eric Stein of my staff at (213) 452-3415. This public Chief, Regulatory Branch. 6 LEGEND Portion of ProjeCT ExiaCted 1o Ix Graded Print 1o January 21. 1998 Po. ton of Project himtied 1o Remain Woded as of Jue~y 21. 1998 lp~'o=smete I, Icet,eel Iw On-l~te Iceclties 1o Tree; NMtSNtCO FlewS sad Rest b RMItOfl ; '7: Drainage N 1o remain ungrsded. ! elmee, 5 4 , :ll '~ASEO .DEL' SOL' ire 'Plan'- : -~.--'~ -. Ssle of In adobe ruin to =e preserved as permanenl 0DIn space, GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT 3, Site of temporNy . detention/sedimentation basin -~:Z.-'b;;''° / / · ~ / } '~ /o 2ooo -- -.r D, > ATEACHED SHEET BLOCK 18 Nature of Activity Continue development of 809-acre Paseo Del Sol planned community with (1) the filling of 2.11 acres of waters of the United States of which 0.47 acre is jurisdictional weftand, (2) conswuction of temporary water quality detention/seaimentation basin along Drainage A in southeastern corner of project site (in an area to be developed a?ter permanent stormwater facilities are installed), (3) remove temporary water quality detention/sedimentation basin along Drainage A after permanent stormwater facilities are installed, and (4) maintain seven proposed non-point source rimoff/first flush treatment basins and trenches in accordance with an operations and maintenance plan to be approved by the Corps and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. J 1. On August 26, 1996, the Corps verified in writing that impacts, resulting from development of Paloma Del Sol East (now known as Paseo Del Sol), to 4.95 acres of mostly dry, relatively unvegetated arroyos were authorized by nationwide permit number 26. Work on the project commenced prior to expiration of the nationwide permits on January 21, 1997 and may continue until January 21, 1998 under the grandfather, rig clause at 33 CFR 330.6(b). Due to engineering, economic, and other regulatory constraints, permittee would like to spread the authorized work over a longer period of time (up to · five years), beyond the January 21, 1998 date authorized by the grancffathering clause. The work expected to remain -hilts'shed by January 21, 1998 would affect 2.11 acres of the original 4.95 acres authorized by nationwide permit; however, because more than linear feet of waters of the United States would be impacted the permittee must apply for an individual permit to complete the previously authorized work beyond January 21, 1998. The permittee is requesting that an individual permit be ismed to authorize fill into approximately 2.11 acres of waters of the United States resulting from ongoing grading between January 21, 1998 and January 21, 2003 (a period of five years). 2. As part of the construction process, a temporary detention/sedimentation basin will be constructed in the southeastern portion of the project site, along Drainage A. This basin would detain water that would normally flow through Drainage A during storm events while permanent stormwater facilities are being constructed in the general ~area of Drainage A. In addition, this basin would capture sediment from construction site stormwater runoff that would otherwise flow to Temecula Creek. The basin would be constructed in an area that would ultimately be graded for residential pads. The permittee is requesting that an individual permit be issued to authorize discharges of dredged and/or fill material resulting from the construction of a deten~orgsedimentation basin in the southeast comer of the project site in or around Drainage A. This temporary basin would be constructed in an area to be developed after completion of the .oermanent stormwater facilities; any impacts resulting from construction of the temporary basin are included in the 4.95- and 2.11-acre impact figures for the entire development. Upon construction of permanent stormwater facilities in the general area of Drainage A, the temporary detention/sedimentation basin would be removed, filleeL and graded for residential pads. The preamble to Corps regulations states that the Corps will not generally consider waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity as jurisdictional waters of the United States. However, the preamble reserves the fight for the Corps or EPA to make a case-by-case decision otherwise. Therefore, 'the permittee is requesting that an individual pennit be issued to authorize discharges of dredged and/or fill material resulting from the removal and filling of the above-referenced temporary detention/sedimentation basin. The removal and filling of the temporary basin_. would occur within five years of issuance of an individual permit. The August 26, 1996 letter of verification that the proposed fill of 4.95 acres of jurisdictional waters is authorized by nationwide perntit number 26 included four conditions, one of which required the permittee t6 c~onstruct seven infiltration basins and/or trenches described in an August 8, 1996 let~r to the Corps from Glenn Lukos Associates. The condition also required that, if the basins .and/or trenches are deemed jurisdictional, then a permit must be obtained to maintain the basins and/or trenches. The permittee is requesting that an individual permit be issued to authorize the discharge of dredged and/or fill material resulting from the maintenance of the seven basins and/or trenches referenced in the August 8, 1996 letter to the Corps in accordance with an operations and maintenance plan to be developed by the permittee and approved by the Corps and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. BLOCK 19 Project Purpose The purpose of the request for an individual permit is to provide additional time to complete the grading of lots for approximately 2,940 dwelling units and amenities (e.g., schools, roads, parks, etc.) in the Temecula area and to provide first flush treatment of stormwater runoff for the 809- acre project and for an additional 395.9 acres of existing off-site development (Paloma Del Sol West) that currently has no such facilities and 210.2 acres of off-site undeveloped land likely to be developed in the near future {east of Butterfield Stage Road). Work is currently 'underway under the authority of nationwide permit number 26 and the grandlathering clause at 33 CFR 330.6(b). By January 21, 1998 (the date on which the grandlathering period ends) it is expected that 2.1 1 acres of jurisdictional waters will remain within the area to be developed. The permittee is requesting that an individxml permit be issued to allow the work to continue for an additional five years. BLOCK 24 Names and Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Project Site (and the aquatic sites where work is being proposed) Paloma del Sol Homeowner's Association c/o Merit Property Management, Inc. 25910 Acero Street, 2nd Floor Mission Viejo, California 92691 Stenmar, Inc. 28465 Front Street Temecuia, California '92590 MDC, Vail 9474 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 203 San Diego, California 92126 Taylor Wobdrow Homes 24461 Ridge Route Drive Laguna Hills, California 92653 Leonard & Kath Savala 16402 E. Comsm~ction Ct Irvine, California 92714 James & Mary Corona 33320 State Highway 79 Temecula, California 92592 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SHEET Project and Site Descriptions On August 26, 1996, the Corps verified in writing t/rot impacts, resulting from development of Paseo Del Sol, to 4.95 acres of mo.sfly dry, relatively unvegetated arroyos were authorized by nationwide permit number 26. Work on the project commenced prior to expiration of the nationwide permits on January 21, 1997 and may continue until Jantmry 21, 1998 under the grandlathering clause at 33 CFR 330.6(b). Due to engineering, economic, and other regulatory constrairlts, the permittee would like to spread the authorized work over a longer period of time, beyond the January 2 l, 1998 date authorized by the grandfathering clause. The work expected to remain unfinished by January 21, 1998 would affect more than 500 linear feet of waters of the United States; therefore, the permittee is applying for an individual permit to perform the previously authorized work beyond January 21, 1998. The project site is located within the City of Temecula in western Riverside County approximately 2.5 miles east of the I-15 Freeway and immediately north of State Highway 79 (Regional and Vicinity Maps - Exhibits 1 & 2). The site is adjacent to the existing residential neighborhoods of Paloma Del Sol and bordered by Pauba Road to the north and Butterfield Stage Road to. the east. The southern property edge is State Highway 79; Temecula Creek lies south of Highway 79. The eastern boundary of the property along Butterfield Stage Road is shared with the Butterfield Stage Rauch which is curren~y in the early stages of development. Paseo Del Sol is located within the U.S.G.S. Bachelor Mountain and the Pechanga quadrangles (dated 1953, photorevised 1973; and dated 1968, photorevised 1988, respectively). The project design for the entire 809-acre Paseo Dcl Sol site proposes the multi-use development of a residential community and commerce center consisting of single and multi-family units, elementary and middle schools, community facility sites, open space, recreational parks and bike trails, and neighborhood commercial lots (Site Plan; Exhibit 3). The project has been determined to be a combination of Heavy Urban and Urban land use categories which would include regional and community commerce centers, and a heavy density of residential units ranging from eight to 20 dwellings per acre. The grading of the site will be conducted ~ith maximum respect and sensitivity to natural land forms, including vegetated swales which will be designed to carry flood waters. Other natural floodways, flood-risk zones, and unstable slopes will be retained as open space and in greenbelt and roadway paseos. The Paseo Del Sol site contains 16 sandy-bottomed drainages, of ~txich four are depicted as intermittent blue-line streams on the above-mentioned USGS quadrangles. Exhibit 2 depicts the approximate location of jurisdictional drainages within the property; Exhibit 3 depicts the portion of the property where impacts to waters of the United States are expected to remain uncompleted by January 21, 1998. Only four drainages support small weftands or limited riparian vegetation. The remaining 12 watercourses lack riparian habitat and support only weedy upland species along their margins. Only 2.11 acres of the previously authorized 4.95 acres of jurisdictional waters within six jurisdictional dralnagcs will remain to be filled after January 21, 1998. The average width of ordinary high water m~_rks (OHWM) for the drainages on-site is approximately 2-5 feet, and only rarely widths exceed 12 feel The topographic relief of the prol~rty is char~~ by rolling hills with gently inclined broad valleys and meadows. Elevations range from approximately 1,050 feet to 1,300 feet above sea level; topographic features with slopes greater than 25-percent are infrequent and isolated. Basement rocks are absent from the site which is underlain by sandstone and alluvial and colluvial deposits. The soils are moldy sandy learns or lotuny sands. A large segment of the southeastern portion of the property between State Highway 79 and De Portola Road is the former site of sewage treatment ponds operated by the Eastern Municipal Water District CEMWD). After these ponds were decommissioned the site was graded fiat by EMWD, partially affecting the drainage course running east to west immediately north of the former ponds. Vegetation on the property is composed of mderal grassland and sparse sage scrub communities. Ruderid species characteristic of upland situations include mustards (Brassica nigra, and Hirschfeldia incana), San Diego tarweed (Hemizonia paniculata), brome and oat grasses (Bromus mollis, B. rubens, and ,~vena laura). The less frequently encountered sage scrub community is best developed on north-facing hillsides and is of~n domlnsted by California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), deer weed (Lotus scoparius), and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). Weftand and riparian vegetation is not abundant on-site and is restricted to narrow bands along drainage margins or in seepage depressions in meadows. Mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), arroyo willow (Salix laseolepis), cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and rabhit-foot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis) are the most common species. The southern.two-thirds of the property is located within the Temecula Creek watershed. The four largest drainages found on the property occur within this watershed. Three of these drainages (Drainages A, B, L) correspond to blue-line streams flowing to Temecula Creek. Drainage A is a sandy wash that supports limited wetland and riparian habitat, but is primarily vegetated with weedy salt-tolerant plants and tumbleweed. Drainage B and Drainage L are sandy-bottomed washes fed by mall tributaries that flow through ruderal vegetation and sparse sage scrub. Drainage N is an s-west trending streamcourse that presently terminates at an earthen bench installed by the previous owner as part of the construction of Meadows Parle,vay; prior to construction of the bench Drainage N also flowed to Temecnla Creek. The primary streamcourse of Drainage N supports the highest quality Corps jurisdiction wetlands and willow scrub on the project site. Drainage N flows through rudenil grassland and sparse sage scrub plant communities along its eastern half within the project site. Minor tributaries (N2-NS) of Drainage N support mostly weedy upland vegetation; Drainage N4 terminates in a small jurisdictional wetland. Approaching Meadows Parkway near the mid-point of the drainage, however, riparian scrub hevelops along the streamcourse. Drainage N was altered by the construction of Meadows Parkway during construction of the road. An earthen bench has impounded seasonal waters flowing down Drainage N, creating hydrological c~nditions appropriate for the development of riparian vegetation. At the request of the Corps, the project has been redesigned to avoid all discharges of dredged and fill material into Drainage N and its weftands. The remaining drainages within the' TemeCula Creek watershed are small, mostly north-south trending watercourses which include Drainages C-E, G-K, M and O. These are sandy washes mostly vegetated with mustards and tarweed or sparse sage scrub. Drainage F is an isolated non- jurisdictional wetland that has developed from irrigation and runoff from adjacent ballfields at Campanula Road. Drainage I supports a very small jurisdidtional weftand. Rarely willow scrub may develop on the pwporty in seepage depressions along canyon bottoms. These isolated depressions lack an OHWM and do not support hydric soils, and therefore, are not jurisdictional. Only one drainage (Drainage P), located in the northern portion of the project, constitutes a portion of the Muftieta Creek watershed. Murrieta Creek is located off-site, west of the project. Drainage P is probably not the artifact of a blue-line stream which historically traversed the area. It is a narrow sandy wash with banks thickly vegetated with ruderal vegetation. Table 1 itemires project impacts to jurisdictional areas within each drainage and indicates for each-drainage the impacts expected to be completed by January 21, J998 and the mount expected to be remaining after January 21, 1998. The jurisdictional delineation was verified by the Corps through a site visit by Dr. Eric Stein on April 30, 1996 and subsequent coordination with the staff of Glen Lukos Associates, Inc. 3 TABLE 1 IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AS PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED AND AS EXPECTED TO REMAIN UPON EXPIRATION OF GRANDFATHERED NATIONWIDE PERMIT Drainage A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Total Previously 'Permitted Impacts to Waters of the United States :Total 137 1.25 0.04 0.17 0.04 0.00 o.oo o.19 0.19 o.oo o.o2 0.02 o.ol o.ol 0.02 0.00 0.39 0.39 ::. !.: i:::0.oo! ::.~-'!:i i;::!!::::!i:o;oo ~!i: 0.00 :..: ====================== :....,.-... 0.05 ·: :.. ::::::::- .-, . !E'::'::: ::'.:: .::::::~::.::;:i :~P~::'-':.:'::::i ~:~::;~0~06~:!::i ~:.:i:~:.O:07i:i0.13 -:.'~:.:-.:.: !., .:::-::: .:::..... -: .::.. · ~.::-!:.:::.:.:iL! :-:..- :.:i ::: ~:':::: O:00.:~ !:~:!::!!i =~!:!::i~O:04 ':.::~ 0.04 :-" :: i..::::-:~: - " -: ......: -..':: i..:' ' '! · "~: ~':::::O.00!~:::!.-~X::' ~:::.!;:0.28 .:~: 0.28 , :.- . :::: ':::: .:: · ..: ... :!' ' o;4s:X"'Z:! !:~-~4:47 : .. 4.95 .. Impacts Expected to Remah upon Expiration of Grandfathered Nationwide Permit Wetland Other Total 0.4x 0.74 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 o.oo o.o6 0.06 0.oo o.o4 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 o.oo o.o2 0.02 o.oo o.oo 0.00 o.oo o.oo 0.00 o.oo o.oo 0.00 o.00 0.11 0.11 o.00 o.o5 0.05 0.045 0.07 O. 13 o.o0 o.o4 0.04 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.47 1.64 2. l l Change -0.22 -1.25 0.00 -0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.39 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.84 4 Federa!ly Listed Speeiu Surveys for California gnntc~tchers (a fedendly listed threatened species) were performed by Pacific Southwest Biological Services in November through December of 1995. No California g, ntcatchers were found on-site or in the immediate viOhlity. The survey report notes that ~Astoric land uses such as sheep and .c~de grazing, in conjunction with more recent discing and ORV activities, have compounded the degradation of the site and inhibit the growth of the more typical and dense higher quality sage scrub preferred by the California ~,ntc~tcher.' USFWS has approved a Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen's kangaroo rat (SKR) (a federally listed endanger~ species and a State listed endangered species) in western Riverside County and has issued a Section 10(a) Permit authori~4ng "take" of the SKR. A focused survey for the SKR was conducted by Biodiversity Associates between March 21, 1996 and April 4, 1996. This survey identified the presence of occupied Stephen' s kangaroo rat habitat only on and adjacent to several hilltops within the project site along But~'field Stage Road. The area of occupied habitat comprises only 0.84 acre, near the extreme ~ end of Drainage N. At the request of the Corps (during the original pre-discharge notification) the pwject was redesigned to avoid all discharges of dredged and fill material into Drainage N and its weftands. Therefore, no federally-listed threatened or endangered species, or a species pwposed for such designation, would be affected by the discharge of dredge or fill m,t_~dal into waters of the United States. Historic Properties The Paseo Del Sol project site does not contain any properties registered on the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, investigations conducted by Chris Drover, Consulting Archaeology, consisting of archival research, archaeological survey, and extensive excavations done in accordance with federal guide. lines and standards, has determined that only onc of thc six historic/archaeological sites present within Paseo Del Sol appears to satisfy criteria that would make it potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The one potentially eligible property, an adobe ruin site, lies below the surface at the top of a large knoll being preserved as permanent open space and will not be affected by the project. A copy of the "Interim Report-Cultural Resource Management Investigations of the Paloma Del' Sol Development, Temecula, California" and a management summary of the Report were provided to Eric Stein of the Corps and Mr. Clarence Caesar of the State Historic Preservation Office in connection with the Pre6j~harge Notification and verification of Nationwide Permit Number 26 with respect to this project. Subsequen~y, a final Report, which confmned the tentative conclusions of the Interim Report, was also prepared and provided. Water Quality L~uu 5 In the course of processing the existing authorization by means of nationwide permit number 26Co) the Corps, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, and EPA both expressed concerns about the impact of the project's rimoff upon downstream water quality, especially in the Santa Margarita River, located approximately one mile downstream of the project site. Concerns were specifically raised concerning increased levels of nitrate, herbicide, and other urban pollutants often associated with nuisance flows and first flush stormwater flows. In response, the permittee developed a system of first flush basins that not only treat the nuisance flows and first flush stormwater flows from the entire project site, but also do the same for an additional 606.1 acres of developed and soon-to-be-developed land adjacent to the project site. The permittee will consuuct a series of on-site structural treatment facilities for nuisance flows and first flush runoff. The final desi_o~n-~ for these facilities will have to bc approved by the City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control, however, the desiLm-~ are being adapted from designs provided and discussed in the Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Exhibit 3 shows the general location of each facility. The type of facility to be designed for each location and the size of the drainage area handled by each facility is discussed below. Facilities at these seven locations will handle first flush molT from 1,358.7 acres. This includes 752.6 acres of the Paseo Del Sol project (the project for which we are applying for a permit), 395.9 acres of the Paloma Del Sol West project (a site in various stages of development by others for which no such facilities were required), and 210.2 acres off-site, east of Butterfield Stage Road. The following is a brief discussion of each facility: 1. At point 1 there will be an off-line infiltration basin with a bottom surface of at least 2,300 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 171.6 acres (including 39.3 acres east of Butterfield State Road, off the project site). At point 2 there will be an infiltration trench of a design similar to Exhibits 5 and/or 6 (taken from the DAMP). This infiltration trench will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 44.6 acres (all located on-site). At point 3 there will be an off-line infiltration basin with a bottom surface of at least 3,000 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 1 g-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed. the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 279.1 acres (including 48.3 acres east of Butterfield State Road, off the project site). e At point 4 there will be an off-line infiltration basin with a bottom surface of at least 7,000 squar~ feet. Exhibit 4 is a 'typical drawing for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provid~ in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 1 g-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flowS. and first flush flows from 137.9 ac~.s (all located on-site). At point 5 there will be an off-line in~lln~on basin with a bottom surface of at least 7,000 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing for an' off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during lar~er storm events which exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and first flu-~h flows from 627.3 acres (including 395.9 acres of the existing Paloma Del Sol West development and 53.0 acres east of Butter~eld State Road). Point 6 is the basin at the end of Drainage N which is being preserved. Water draining · into this basin will not normally enter the storm drain unless or until it reaches a height of nearly 16 feet. Local runoff from the slopes of Drainag~ N (appro~dmately 14 acres) and off-site nm0ff' from 69.6 acres east of Butterfield Stage Road will enter Drainage N. At.point 7 there will be an infiltration trench of a design ,,~imilar to Exhibits 5 and 6 (taken from the DAMP) and/or water quality inlet structures of a design similar to Exhibits 7 and 8 (taken from the Attachment to Supplement "A" of the Riverside County DAMP). These facilities will bandie nuisance flows and first flush flows from 14.6 acres (all locamd- on-site). In addition to the seven on-site treatment facilities discussed above, the permittee will implement six non-structural BMPs and five structural BMPs as recommended in the county's DAMP. These BMPs are designed to rnlnlmiTe non-point construction urban runoff pollutants from entering the drainage system. 1. Non-StmcUn'al BMPs The permittee will provide environmental awareness education materials on general good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of stormwater quality to all initial residents, occupants/tenants. Such materials will be provided to the permittee through the Riverside County NPDES Co-permittees' County- wide educational program. 7 Conditions, covenants, and restrictions of the property owner's association will include measures to protect surface water quality. All pesticicles shall be applied in strict accordance to pesticide application laws as stated in the State of California Agricultural Code. All pesticicle applicators shall be certified by the State as Qualified Applicator or be directly supervised by a Qualified Applicator. All fertilizers shall be applied at the rate stipulated by the manufacturer. Fertilizer Applicators shall be trained in the proper procedures of determining fertilizer rates and calibration of application equipment. Fertilizer shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid application onto harriscape surfaces. Annual LSOil teStS are recommended to advi~e on which fertilizer elements are needed to avoid application of unnecessary elements, or over application. Catch basins owned by the Property Owner's Association will be inspected and, if necessary, cleaned prior to the storm season, no later than October 15th of each year. Streets and parking lots owned by the Property Owner' s Association will be swept prior to the storm season, no later than October 15th of each year. The responsibility for implementation of each non-structural BMP and scheduled cleaning of all structural BMP controls shall b~ identified (owner, agency name, phone number, and address). Structural BMPs Impervious areas -~hAll be graded and constructed so as to drain to a flintion BMP, such as a landscaped area or equally effective alternative wherever practi.cable and as recommended by the engineer of record. Direct drainage from impervious areas to the street or a storm drain facility is discouraged and should be avoided. For example, parking lot catch basin-~ could be placed in landscaped areas with allowances for minor ponding. All sites shall employ multi-programmable irrigation controllers which have enough programs to break up all irrigation stations into hydrozones. If practical and feasible, rain shutoff devices shall be employed to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation. Irrigation systems shall be designed so areas which have different water use requirements are not mixed 'on the same station (hydrozones). The use of drip irrigation should be considered for all planter areas which have a shrub density that will cause excessive spray interference of an overhead irrigation system. Flow reducers will be used nex~ to sidewalks, streets and driveways to mitigate broken heads. 8 The landscape design will minir~iTe runoff. Means of implementation include (1) use mulches in planting areas that have no ground cover so as to avoid sedimentation runoff; (2) set irrigation times to avoid runoff and split nighfly irrigations into several short cycles if slope and soil conditions warrant; (3) use only enough water to provide for adequate plant health and growth; (4) use the water budget mode to make global/weather related scheduling changes; (5) install appropriate plant materials for the location, in accordance with Sunset climate zones; and (6) install native plants with low water requirements. Energy dissipators such as riprap will be installed at the outlets of new storm drains which enter unlined channels in/ccordance with applicable agency specifications. The phrase "No Dumping - Only Rain in the Drain" or an equally effective phrase approved by the County/City NPDES Advisory Committee will be stenciled on catch basins to alert the public as to the destination of pollutants discharged into stormwater. Finally, runoff from the site will have an oppommity to be treated prior to reaching the Santa Margarita River. Runoff from the site will be routed into one of four storm drains leaving the site. These four storm drain outlets are described as follows: ~- Pauba Road Storm Drain-This storm drain exits the northwest comer of the project site"'as an underground channel under or parallel to Pauba Road. It surfaces as an open channel at three locations prior to passing under I-15 and emptying into Murrieta Creek. At one point, the open channel is known locally as Sun Mist Creek and passes through a desiltafion pond and a pond at Lake Village. Country Glen Storm Drain-This storm drain exits the v,~stem edged of the project site as an underground channel, follows Montelegro Lane and Pio Pico Road to Margarita Road when it becomes an open channel. The open channel continues to Highway 79 where it is again placed underground parallel to Country Glen and empties into Temecula Creek. Meadows Parkway Storm Drain--This storm drain exits the southern boundary of the project site, at the foot of Meadows Parkway (at Highway 79), as an underground channel and empties into Temecula Creek. Butterfield Stage Road Storm Drain--This storm drain exits the southern boundary of the project site, between Meadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road, as an underground channel and empties into Temecula Creek. Water passing through the Pauba Road storm drain will be subject to vegetative treatment in the open portions of the channel and in the desiltation pond and ornamental pond. A reclamation project consisting of placing rock gabions and planting of trees to prevent erosion is currently underway in the section of the channel above the desiltation pond. Vegetation in the open sections of the channel and in the ponds help to reduce sedimentation and provide vegetative treatment of the runoff. The other four storm drains will empty into Temecula Creek through existing storm drain outfalls that were constructed as part of Riverside County Assessment District 159 (AD 159) improvements (authorized under Corps permit number 89-386-MD). Mitigation for channel improvements to Temecula Creek and the storm drain outfall~ (affecting approxirnately 7.3 acres of degraded weftands) consisted of the creation of approximately 25 acres of riparian wetlands in a 100-foot-wide swath along the northern bank of Temecula Creek. These four outfalls were designed to flow into this riparian area, Water from the storm drains was intended to support the riparian vegetation and the vegetation was intended to help treat the water. Between the end of the AD 159 project (at Avenida de Missiones) and 1-15 there are roughly 100 acres of fiparian wetlands that will further treat water in Temecula Creek. As mitigation for 4.95 acres of impacts to waters of the United States (of which less than 0.5 acre are weftands) the permittee will place a conservation easement over 9.4 acres of existing riparian wetlands immediately adjacent to 16 acres previously preserved as mitigation for impacts at Vail Lake. Additional preservation and creation of ~parian wetlands will likely take place in this area for impacts resulting from the reali,.crnrnent of Paia Road. All of these existing wetlands and wetlands to be created are only a few hundred feet downstream of the Country Glen storm drain (the most downstream of the four outfails related to this project that empty into Temecula Creek). These fiparian wetlands will further treat runoff from the project site. Mitigation Pursuant to the conditions of the previously verified nationwide permit authorization, 'the permittee has compensated for the 4.95 acres of impacts to mostly dry, unvegetated arroyos with the preservation of 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat within the Temecnla Creek floodplain. The permittee shall caused to be recorded a conservation easement which will nm with the land, obligating the landowner or their successor or assigns to preserve the mitigation/easement area in Temecula Creek as natural open space in perpetuity. The permittee has obtained written approval from the Corps of this easement. Pursuant to the conditions of the previously verified nationwide permit authorization, the permittee will fully implement the non-point source runoffffirst flush treatment program (including construction of the infiltration basins and trenches) described above and as shown in Exhibits 3 through 8. The permittee shall also develop an operations and maintenance plan for these basins and trenches and submit the plan to the Corps and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board for review and approval. The plan will 10 include the names of responsible parties, provisions for control of invasive weeds, and mecb~nisrv-~ to minlmi~e telltlporal loss of weftand habitat and functions. Pursuant to the conditions of the previously verified nationwide permit authorization, the permittee has posted a performance bond for 120% of the anticipated cost of the installation of the infiltration basins and trenches. The performance bond is conditioned such that if the permittee d~fat~ts on such mitigation requirements of the previously verified nationwide permit authorization, the bonding company shall assume all responsibility for such mitigation requirements. The performance bond shall be reduced as each inf~tration basin and trench is completed in an mount equal to the actual cost thereof and shall be released entirely upon a determination by the Corps that all the infiltration basins and trenches have been completed in accordance with the August 8, 1996 letter to the Corps from Glenn Lttkos Associates, Inc. Pursuant to the conditions of the previously verified nationwide permit authorization, the permittee will not discharge any fill or excavate any material from Drainage N within the boundaries of the project site. The permittee shall flag aquatic habitats to identify areas that must be avoided. Any additional acreages of waters of the United States impacted outside of the approved construction footprint without prior Corps' authorization shall be mitigated at a 5:1 ratio. 11 The jurisdictional delineation was verified by the Corps through a site visit by Dr. Eric Stein on April 30, 1996 and subsequent coordination with the staff of Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. Environmental and Public Interest Factors Considered: Purpose and need: 'To provide additional time to complete the grading of lots for approximately 2,940 dwelling units and amenities (e.g., schools, roads, parks, etc.) in the Temecula area and to provide first flush treatment of stormwater runoff for 395.9 acres of existing development (Paloma Del Sol West) that currently has no such facilities and 210.2 acres of undeveloped land likely to be developed in the near future (east of Butterfield State Road). B. Alternatives (33 CFR 320.4(b)(4), 40 CFR 230.10) 1. No Action The no action alternative is the same as the applicant's preferred alternative, but with an accelerated schedule to complete all grading within jurisdictional waters by January 21, 1998. The no action alternative would normally be a project which could be constructed without a Section 404 permit (i.e., which could be constructed without discharges into waters of the United States). In this case, Section 404 authorization was granted through a letter of verification that the proposed work was authorized by nationwide permit number 26. That letter of verification was written on August 26, 1996 and work commenced prior to January 21, 1997, the date that the nationwide permits expired. Pursuant to 33 CFR 330.6(b) work authorized within jurisdictional waters at the site may continue through January 21, 1998. The permittee states that although it is possible to complete all grading within jurisdictional waters by January 21, 1998, it would not be economically desirable to install all of the drainage facilities necessary. to permanently remove physical characteristics of waters of the United States from the area to be developed before the actual development of habitable structures requires such facilities. Additionally, the permittee notes that it may not be environmentally desirable to force acceleration of grading solely for the purpose of completing fill activities prior to the expiration date of the nationwide permit authorization. Page S 2. Other project designs (smaller, larger, different site layout, etc.) No other project designs are evaluated in this document. The applicant's preferred alternative has already been authorized by nationwide permit and is already under consu'uction. If an individual permit to allow work to continue beyond the grandlathering period is not issued, the schedule would be accelerated to complete all work within jurisdictional waters prior to the expiration of the existing authorization. Alternative desi.~rnn were examined during the processing of the pre- 'discharge notification pursuant to cohdition number 13 of the nationwide permits. Most notably, development was removed from the area in and around Drainage N (the primary riparian habitat at the site) and seven non- point source/first flush treatment facilities were added to the design. 3. Other sites No other sites for the project are evaluated in this document. Development of the project at this site has already been authorized by nationwide permit and the project is already under construction at this site. If an individual permit to allow work to continue beyond the grandlathering period is not issued, the schedule would be accelerated to complete all work within jurisdictional waters prior to the expiration of the existing authorization. Many of the jurisdictional waters at this site have already been impacted by the work already underway and mitigation for impacts to all jurisdictional waters has been provided. Selection of another site would only result in two sites being impacted. PhysicaYchemical characteristics and anticipated changes (check applicable blocks): (x) substrate The substrate of 4.95 acres of waters of the United States (of which 0.48 acre is wetland) will be f~led with native materials to an elevation that they are no longer waters. It is expected that all but 2.11 acres of these 4.95 acres will have been filled by January 21, 1998 under the existing 404 authorization. (x) currents, circulation or drainage patterns Drainage patterns within the site will be highly modified, with drainage routed through storm sewers and first flush basins. However, drainage Page 6 (x) (x) from the site will exit the site (through existing storm sewers) near the location at which said drainage currently exits the site. suspended particulates; turbidity The jurisdictional. waters at the site are normally dry, except during storm events. All work will be performed in the dry and no increases in turbidity is expected during construction. A stormwater prevention plan is in place to prevent/mlnlmiTe runoff from the work site during construction. After construction, sediment runoff from the site is expected to be less than b~fore-project conditions due to a reduction in erodible surfaces on the site and construction of first flush basins. water quality (temperature, salinity patterns and other parameters) The jurisdictional waters at the site are normally dry. except during storm events. All work will be performed in the dry and no increases in turbidity is expected during construction. A stormwater prevention plan is in pl~e to prevent/minimiTe runoff from the work site during construction. After construction, a series of first flush basins will remove/treat pollutants carried via "nuisance runoff'. flood control functions The existing jurisdictional waters are primarily at the bottom of narrow, deeply incised channels and provide little, if any, flood control functions. The construction of first flush basins will provide a small amount of flood water retention. Furthermore, the preservation of Drainage N creates opportunities for water retention on the site. The project engineers have provided an analysis of the 1-hour l O-year peak flow. This is the worst case condition in which all of the rain from a 10-year event falls within a single hour. Their figures are provided below: Drainage N Entire Site (Including D nase ND Pre-Construction Post-Construction Increase Runoff Runoff in Runoff (CFS) (CFS) (CFS) 204.9 241.8 38.9 1,019.8 1,234.6 214.8 Page 7 Thus, construction of the project will cause an increase in nanoff during a 1-hour 10-year event of 214.8 cubic feet per second for the entire property. After the project is completed, the runoff in Drainage N during a 1-hour 10-year event will be 241.8 cubic feet per second. The runoff passing through Drainage N will not normally leave the site, but will be retained until the water surface reaches an elevation approximately 16 feet higher than the bottom of the basin (an elevation that will likely hold the water from several such 1 O-year events). Therefore, the increase in runoff from the entire site (214.8 cfs) is less than the runoff that will be retained on- site within Drainage N (241.8 cfs). Tl~.us, total post-project nmoff will be less than existing conditions. ( ) storm, wave and erosion buffers The project will not affect storm, wave and erosion buffers. ' (x) erosion and aeeretion patterns Project completion will reduce erosion from the site by placing erodible surface flows into storm dr~n-~ within the site. Erosion during construction will be mitigated through best management practices outlined in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. ( ) aquffer recharge The site is not known to be an important aquifer recharge area. The surface drainages at the site are narrow, deeply incised, and of fairly high gradient; therefore, it is likely that water within the drainages does not have an opportunity to percolate. There will be less oppornmity for percolation after project construction as most surface waters will be placed in concrete storm drains. Some pereolation opportunities will remain in the preserved Drainage N which will continue to retain water captured during storm events and in the various first flush basins. ( ) baseflow The surface drainages on the site are normally dry and do not exhibit a base flow. () mixing zone, in fight of the depth of water at the disposal site; current velocity, direction and variability at the disposal site; degree of turbulence; water column stratification; discharge vessel speed and direction; rate of discharge, dredged material characteristics; number Page 8 of discharges per unit of time; and any other relevant factors affecting rates and patterns of mixing Not applicable Biological characteristics and anticipated changes (check applicable blocks): special aquatic sites (wetlands, mudfiats, coral reefs, pool and riffle areas, vegetated shallows, sanctuaries and refuges, and defined in 40 CFR 230.40-45) Of the 4.95 acres of waters of the United States to be filled, only 0.48 acre constitute special aquatic sites (weftands).. This 0.48 acre of weftands is characterized as consisting of weedy hydrophytes that meet the minimum criteria in each of the three wetland parameters. This 0.48 acre of weftands has been mitigated through the preservation of 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat on nearby Temecula Creek. This 9.4 acres of preservation was a mitigation condition of the previously issued letter of verification that the project was authorized by nationwide permit. Of the 0.48 acre of jurisdictional wetlands, only 0.01 acre is expected to be filled prior to January 21, 1998. The remaining 0.47 acre would be re- authorized by the individual permit. ( ) habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms The waters of the United States to be filled at the project site are mostly narrow, deeply incised channels that are dry except during storm events and do not generally support riparian vegetation. They do not provide habitat for fish or other aquatic organi-~ra-~. (x) endangered or threatened species Surveys for California gnatcatchers (a federally listed threatened species) were performed by Pacific Southwest Biological Services in November through December of 1995. No California gnatcatchers were found on-site or in the immediate vicinity. The survey report notes that "Historic land uses such as sheep and cattle grazing, in conjunction with more recent discing and ORV activities, have compounded the degradation of the site and inhibit the growth of the more typical and dense higher quality sage scrub preferred by the California gnatcatcher." USFWS has approved a Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen's kangaroo rat (SKR) (a federally listed endangered species and a State listed endangered species) in western Riverside County and has issued a Section Page 9 10(a) Permit authorizing "take" of the SKR. A focused survey for the SKR was conducted by Biocliversity Associates between March 21, 1996 and April 4, 1996. This survey identified the presence of occupied Stepben's kangaroo rat habitat only on and adjacent to several MHtops within the project site along Butterfield Stage Road. The area of occupied habitat comprise.s only 0.84 acre, near the extreme eastern end of Drainage N. At the request of the Corps (during the original pre-discharge notification) the project was redesigned to avoid all discharges of dredged and fill material into Drainage N and its wetlands. Therefore, no federally- listed threatened or endangered species, or a species proposed for such designation, would be affected by the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United States. () biological availability of possible contaminants in dredged or fan material, considering hydrography in relation to known or anticipated sources of eontaminants; results of previous testing of material from the vicinity of the project; known significant sources of persistent pesticides from land runoff or percolation; spill records for petroleum products or designated (Section 3112 of the CWA) hazardous substances; other public records of significant introduction of eontaminants from industries, municipalities or other sources. No such COntRrnlnRnts are knoval to occur on the Paseo del Sol site. Human use characteristics and impacts (check applicable blocks): ( ) existing and potential water supplies; water conservation The project will be supplied with water from the Rancho California Water .District and the Eastern Mtmicipal Water District. Additional lines and facilities will be required and improvement districts formed to provide this service effectively to all developments in the area. Annexation fees and water and sewer service fees, charged on a per unit basis, will cover the costs of expanded facilities. ( ) recreational or commercial fishcries Neither recreational nor commercial ~sheries occur on site or on downstream waters; neither will be affected the project. ( ) other water related recreation No water-related recreation occurs on site or on downstream waters. Page 10 (x) aesthetics of the aquatic ecosystem () The aquatic ecosystem to be impacted by the proposed fill consists of relatively barren, dry drainages that are narrow and deeply incised. What little aesthetic value they may have to trespassers on the property will be lost during grading of the site. Drainage N, the only drainage on the site to retain water for significant portions of the year and the o~y drainage on the site to support significant riparian habitat, will be avoided by the proposed grading. 'parks, national and historic monuments, national seashores, w~d and scenic riven, wilderness areas, research sites, etc. The project will not affect any national and historic monuments, national seashores, wilderness areas, or research sites. The project includes the creation of neighborhood parks and paseos. The Santa Margarita River (downstream of the project site) is being considered for nomination as a wild and scenic river; however, f'ffst flush basins which have been added to the proposed project design and which have been made a condition of the existing Corps letter of verification, are expected to mitigate any potential water quality impacts from the project on the Santa Margarita River. In fact, the seven on-site first flush basins will provide first flush treatment to an additional 606.1 acres of development off-site as well. traffic/transportation patterns Development of the dwelling units, open space, recreational, commercial, and industrial land uses will impact existing roadways, 'necessitating the expansion and improvement of existing and construction of new regional roadway networks. The County of Riverside planning goals reflected in the Master Plan of Arterial Highways and the Circ'alaaon Element of the City of Temecula's General Plan includes programming major roads in the area for incremental widening and/or extension to serve expected growth energy consumption or generation Development of the project will increase pressure oa energy resources in the project area. Energy consumption will increase on both a temporary and long-term basis through short-term consumption of energy during project construction and long-term operation and maintenance of the project site. Page 11 () () naviKation There is no navigation at the project site or in nearby downstream waters. safeW Growth in the 1;wject area will increase the demand for fire and pofice services provided by the City of Temecula law enforcement ancl~-fire protection agencies. Property taxes generated by this growth are expected to fund expansion of such services. air quafity During site preparation and construction heavy duty trucks, earth movers, air compressors and generators will be usccL Various pollutants, principally exhaust cmi~qions, dust, and particulaw. s, will be emitted on a short-term basis. When the project is completed and occupied, air qua~ty in the pwject area will be directly. affected by motor vehicle emissions from project traffic and indirectly influenced by pollutants emitted by power generation plants which serve the project Implementation of the project will result in increased noise levels due to construction equipment, motor vehicle traffic, and stationary sources. The ambient noise levels on the site will be increased to levels which characterize most suburban areas. historic properties The Paseo Del Sol project site does not contain any properties registered on the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, investigations conducted by Chris Drover, Consulting Archaeology, consisting of archival research, archaeological survey, and extensive excavations done in accordance with federal guidelines and standards, has determined that only one of the six historic/archaeological sites present within Paseo Del Sol appears to satis~ criteria that would make it potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The one potentially eligible property, an adobe ruin site, lles below the surface at the top of a large knoll being preserved as permanent open space and will not be affected by the project. A copy of the "Interim Report-Cultural Resource Management Investigations of the Paloma Del Sol Development, Temect~a, California" and a management summary of the Report were provided to Eric Stein of Page 12 () () () the Corps and Mr. Clarence Caesar of the State Historic Preservation Office in connection with the Predischarge Notification and verification of Nationwide Permit Number 26 with respect to this project. Subsequently, a final Report, which confirmed the tentative conclusions of the Interim Report, was also prepared and provided. land use classification The proposed project is in compliance with current land use classifications. economics The proposed project will provide temporary. jobs associated with preparation of the site and construction of facilities. Upon completion, permanent jobs will be created in the commercial portions of the project. The project will increase the property tax intake by the City, County, and State, although this increase my well be offset by the increased costs of services to the residents. prime and unique farmland (7 CFR Park 658) No prime and unique farmlands will be affected by the project. food and fiber production No food and fiber production will be affected by the project. general water quality In the course of processing the existing authorization by means of nationwide permit number 26Co) the Corps, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, and EPA both expressed concerns about the impact of the project's runoff upon downstream wa~'r quality, especially in the Santa Margarita River, located appro~cimm~-iy one mile downstream of the project site. Concerns were specifically raised concerning increased levels of nitrate, herbicide,-and other urban pollutants often associated with nuisance flows and first flush stormwater flows. In response, the permittee developed a system of first flush basins that not only treat the nuisance flows and first flush stormwater flows from the entire project site, but also do the same for an additional 606.1 acres of developed and soon-to-be- developed land adjacent to the project site. The permittee will construct a series of on-site structural treatment facilities for nuisance flows and first flush runoff. The final designs for these Page 13 facilities will have to be appwved by the City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Contwl, however, the designs are being adapted from desi~crn.~ provided and discussed in the Riverside Count}' Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Exhibit 3 shows the general location of each facility. The type of facility to be designed for each location and the size of the drainage area handled by each facility is discussed below. Facilities at these seven locations will handle first flush rimoff from 1,358.7 acres. This includes 752.6 acres of the Paseo Del So! project (the project for which a permit is being requested), 395.9 acres of the Paloma Del Sol West project (a site in various stages, of development by others for which no such facilities were required), and 210.2 acres off-site, cast of Butterfield Stage Road. The following is a brief discussion of each facility: 0 At point 1 there will be an off-line infiltration basin with a bottom a ic~l surface of at least 2,300 square feet. Exhibit 4 is typ drawing for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 171.6 acres (including 39.3 acres east of Butterfield State Road, off the pwject site). At point 2 there will be an infiltration trench of a design similar to Exhibits 5 and/or 6 (taken from the DAMP). This'infiltration trench will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 44.6 acres (all located on-site). At point 3 there will be an off-line inf~tration basin with a bottom surface of at least 3,000 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and first flush flows from 279.1 acres (including 48.3 acres east of Butterfield State Road, off the project site). At point 4 there will be an off-line infllwation basin with a bottom surface of at least 7,000 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing Page 14 for an off-line infiltration basin as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which exceed. the capacity of the basin. This basin will bandie nuisance flows and first flush flows from 137.9 acres (all located on-site). At point 5 there will be an off-line infiltration basin with a bottom surface of at least 7,000 square feet. Exhibit 4 is a typical drawing for an off-line infiltration basih as adapted from drawings provided in the DAMP. Low flows from the 84-inch storm drain will be diverted into the basin through a series of 18-inch pipes. At the opposite end of the basin a 30-inch pipe with a riser will carry water back into the storm drain during larger storm events which ~ exceed the capacity of the basin. This basin will handle nuisance flows and fwst flush flows from 627.3 acres (including 395.9 acres of the existing Paloma Del Sol West development and 53.0 acres east of Butterfield State Road). e Point 6 is the basin at the end of Drainage N which is being preserved. Water draining into this basin will not normally enter the storm drain unless or until it reaches a height of nearly 16 feet. Local runoff from the slopes of I)rsin:~ge N {approximately 14 acres) and off-site runoff from 69.6 acres east of Bunerfield Stage Road will enter Drainage N. At point 7 there will be an inf~tration trench of a design similar to Exhibits 5 and 6 (taken from the DAMP) and/or water quality inlet structures of a design similar to Exhibits 7 and 8 (taken from the Attachment to Supplement "A" of the Riverside County DAMP). These facilities will himdie nuisance flows and first flush flows from 14.6 acres (all located on-site). In addition to the seven on-site treatment facilities discussed above, the permittee will implement six non-structural BMPs and five structural BMPs as recommended in the county's DAMP. These BM~s are designed to minimiTe non-point construction urban runoff poHutants from entering the drainage system. Page 15 1. Non-Structural BMPs The permittee will provide environmental awareness education materials on general good housekeeping practices that contribute to pwtec,tion of stormwater quality to all initial residents, occupants/tenants. Such materials will be provided to the permittee through the Riverside County NPDES Co-permiUees' County-wide educational pwgram. Conditions, covenants, and ~estrictions of the property owncr's association will include measures to protect surface water quality. All pesticides shall be appfied in strict accordance to pesticide appfication laws as stated in the State of California Agricultural Code. All pesticide applicators shall be certified by the State as Qualified Applicator or be directly supervised by a Qualified Appficator. All fertiliTers shall be appfied at the rate stipula~d by the manufacturer. Fertilizer Appficators shall be trained in the proper procedures of determining fertilizer rates and calibration of application equipment. Fertilizer shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid application onto hardscape surfaces. Annual soil tests are recommended to advise on which fertilizer elements are needed to avoid application of necessary elements, or over application. Catch basins owned by the Property O~er's Association will be inspected and, if necessary, cleaned prior to the storm season, no later than October 15th of each year. Streets and parking lots owned by the Property Owner's Association will be swept prior to the storm season, no later than October 15th of each year. The responsibility for implementation of each non-structural BMP and scheduled cleaning of all strucnnl BMP controls shall be identified (owner, agency name, phone number, and address). Structural BMPs Impervious areas shall be graded and constructed so as to drain to a filtration BMP, such as a landscaped area or equally effective alternative wherever practicable and as recommended by the engineer of record. Direct drainage from impervious areas to the Page 16 street or a storm drain facility is discouraged and should be avoided. For example, parking lot catch basins could be placed in landscaped areas with allowances for minor ponding. All sites shall employ multi-programmable irrigation controllers which have enough programs to break up all irrigation stations into hydrozones. If practical and feasible, rain shutoff devices shall be employed to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation. Irrigation systems shall be designed so areas which have different water use requirements are not mixed on the same station (hydrozones). The use of dri~ irrigation should be considered for all planter areas which have a shrub density that will cause excessive spray interference of an overhead irrigation system. Flow reducers will be used next to sidewalks, streets and driveways to mitigate broken heads. The landscape design will minimiTe rllnoff. Means of implementation include (1) use mulches in planting areas that have no ground cover so as to avoid sedimentation runoff; (2) set irrigation times to avoid runoff and split nightly irrigations into several short cycles if slope and soil conditions warrant; (3) use only enough water to provide for adequate plant health and growth; (4) use the water budget mode to make global/weather related scheduling changes; (5) install appropriate plant materials for the location, in accordance with Sunset climate zones; and (6) install native plants with low water requirements. Energy dissipators such as riprap will be in.stalled at the outlets of new storm drains which enter unlined channels in accordance with applicable agency specifications. The phrase '~No Dumping - Only Rain in the Drain" or an equally effective phrase approved by the County/City NPDES Advisory Committee will be stenciled on catch basing to alert the public as to the destination of pollutants discharged into stormwater. Finally, runoff from the site will have an oppornmity to be treated prior to reaching the Santa Margarita River. Runoff from the site will be routed into one of four storm drains leaving the site. These four storm drain outlets are described as follows: Pauba Road Storm Drain--This storm drain exits the northwest comer of the project site as an underground channel under or parallel to Pauba Road. It surfaces as an open channel at three Page 17 locations prior to pa.~ing under I-15 and emptying into Murricta Creek. At one point, the open channel is known locally as Sun Mist Creek and passes through a desiltation pond and a pond at Lake Village. Country. Glen Storm Drain-This storm drain exits the western edged of the project site as an underground channel, follows Montelegro Lane and Pio Pico Road to IViargarita Road where it becomes an open cbanneh The open channel continues to Highway 79 where it is again placed underground parallel to Country Glen and empties into Temecula Creek. Meadows Parkway Storm Drain--This storm drain exits the southern boundary of the project site, at the foot of Meadows Parkway (at Highway 79), as an underground channel and empties into Temecula Creek. Butterfield Stage Road Storm Drain--This storm drain exits the southern boundary of the project site, between Meadows Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road, as an underground channel and empties into Temecula Creek. Water passing through the Pauba Road storm ' ' ' tt~oe desiltation pond and ornamental pond. A reclamation project consisting of placing rock gabions and planting of trees to prevent erosion is currently underway in the section of the channel above the desiltation pond. Vegetation in the open sections of the channel and in the ponds help to reduce sedimentation and provide vegetative treatment of the runoff. The other four storm drains will empty into Temecula Creek through existing storm dra~ outfalls that were constructed as part of Riverside County Assessment District 159 (AD 159) improvements (authorized under Corps permit number 89-386-MD). Mitigation for channel improvements to Temecula Creek and the storm drain outfalls (affecting approximately 7.3 acres of degraded wetlands) consisted of the creation of approximately 25 acres of riparian weftands in a 100-foot-wide swath along the northern bank of Temecula Creek. These four outfalls were designed to flow into this riparian area. Water from the storm drains was intended to support the riparian vegetation and the vegetation was intended to help treat the water. Between the end of the AD 159 project (at Aven~da de Missiones) and 1-15 there are roughly 100 acres of riparian wetlands that will further treat water in Temecula Creek. As mitigation for 4.95 acres of impacts to Page 18 waters of the United States (of which less than 0.S acre are weftands) the pcrmiUec will place a conservation casement over 9.4 acres of existing riparian wedands immediately adjacent to 16 acres previously preserved as mitigation for impacts at Vail Lake. These existing ,,'eftands arc only a few hundred feet downstream of the Country Glen storm drain (the most do~ of. the four outfalls related to this project that empty into Temecula Creek). These riparian wetlands will further treat nmoff from the project site. ( ) mineral needs The project will not affect mineral needs. ( ) consideration of private property All work will bc performed on property owned or controlled by the permittee. ( ) other Summary of secondary and cumulative effects: Findings: A. Other 1. authorizations: Water quality certification: Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that any discharges of dredged or fill material within waters of the United States, requiring a fcdcrai license or permit, be certified as to meeting state water quality standards. In California, the certification is issued by the various Regional Water Quality Contwl Boards. Application for certification was made to the San Diego Regional Board on June 12, 1996. On August 27, 1996, C-reg Peters of the Regional Board issued a verbal waiver certification for the project, largely due to the addition of infiltration basins incorporated into the final design. Coastal zone management consistency determination: Not applicable. Page 19 3. State and/or local authorization (ff issued): B$ Section 1603 of the California Fish and Cynme Code requires that any person wanting to perform work in a strumbed must notif~ the Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and come to an agreement as to how to minimize impacts. The permittee and CDFG have entered into an agreement (number 5-263-96) with respect to the project; this agreement is valid until June 30, 2001 and can be extended an additional two years to June 30, 2003. A complete application was received on *~**. A public notice describing the agreement as to how to mlnimi~-e impacts. A draft agreement was provided to us on ***, and sent to all interested parties (mailing list) including appropriate state and Federal agencies. 1. Summary of comments received. a. Federal agencies: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency iL U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service iii. National Marine Fishcries Service iv. Other b. State and local agencies: e. Organizations d. Individuals 2. Evaluation: I have reviewed and evaluated, in fight of the overall public interest, the documents and facton concerning this pemit appfication as well as the stated views of other interested agencies and the concerned public. In doing so, I have considered the possible consequences of this proposed work in accordance with regulations published in 33 CFR Part 320 to 330 and 40 CTR Part 230. The following paragraphs include our evaluation of comments received and of how the project compiles with the above cited regulations. Page 20 Consideration of comments: Evaluation of Compliance with 404(b)(I) guidelines (rutfictions on discharge, 40 CFR 230.10). (A check in a block denoted by an asterisk indicates that the project does not comply with the guidelines. X Yes* No Yes No* Yes* No Yes'. No X Yes* No X Yes* No i. Alternatives test: (1) (2) Based on the discussion in HB, are there available, practicable alternatives having less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem and without other significant adverse environmental consequences that do not involve discharges into "waters of the United States" or at other locations within thue waters? Based on HB, if the project is in a special aquatic site and is not water-dependent, has the applicant clearly demonstrated that there are no practicable alternative situ available? Special restrictions. Will the discharge: (1) violate state water quality standards? (2) (3) (4) violate toxic effluent standards (under Section 307 of the Act)? jeopardize endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat? violate standards set by the Department of Commerce to protect marine sanctuaries? Page 21 Yes No Yes· No No · Yes* No · Yes* No (s) Evaluation of the information in HC and HI) above indicates that the proposed discharge material meets testing exclusion criteria for the following reason(s). () based on the above information, the material is not a carrier of contaminants. the levels of eontaminants are substantially similar at the extraction and disposal sites and the discharge is not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site and pollutants will not be transported to less contaminated nreas. ( ) acceptable constraints area available and will be implemented to reduce contamination to acceptable levels within the disposal site and prevent contaminants from being transported beyond the boundaries of the disposal site. Other restrictions. Will the discharge contribute to slo~ni~eant degradation of "waters of the United States" through adverse impacts to: (1) human health or welfare, through pollution of · municipal water supplies, fish, shellfish, wildlife and special aquatic sites? (2) life states of aquatic life and other wildlife? (3) (4) diversity, productivity and stability of the aquatic ecosystem, such as loss of lash or wildlife habitat, or loss of the capacity of wetland to assimilate nutrients, purify water or reduce wave energy? recreational, aesthetic and economic values? Page 22 NO* Actions to minimize potential adverse impam (mitigation). Will aH appropriate and practicable steps (40 CTR 230.70-77) be taken to minimize the potential adverse impacts of the discharge on the aquatic ecosystem? The following conditions are paraphrased from the existing 404 authorization (letter of verification 96-00210-EA issued August 26, 1996) and will remain in fox'ce under any new individual permit issued by the Corps. The permittee sh~ compensate for impa~ts to 4.95 acres of waters of the U.S. and wedands by preserving at least 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat within the Temecula Creek floodplain. The permittee has recorded or caused to be recorded a conservation easement which runs with the land and preserves the mitigation/easement area in Temecula Creek as natural open spa~e in perpetuity. The permittee has obtained written approval from the Corps of this easement or covenant prior to its being recorded. Prior to initiating construction within waters of the U.S., the permittee posted an irrevocable letter of credit or performance bond for 120% of the anticipated cost of installation of the infiltration basins and trenches. The bonding company is on the Department of Treasury Circular 570, Companies Holding Certificates of Authority as Acceptable 5~reties on Federal Bonds and Acceptable Rein.vuring Companies. The performance bond is conditioned such that if .the pami~e defaults on such mitigation requirements of this permit, the bonding company shall assume all responsibility for such mitigation requirements. The performance bond shall be reduced as each infiltration basin and trench is completed in an mount equal to the actual cost thereof and shall be released entirely upon a determination by the Corps that all the infiltration basins and trenches have been completed in accordance with the August 8, 1996 Page 23 letter referenced in Special Condition Number 3 below. The permittee shall fully implement the non-point source runoff/first flush treatment program (including construction of the infiltration basins and trenches) described in the August 8, 1996 letter to the Corps of Engineers from Glenn Lukos Associates. The permittee shall develop an operations and maintenance plan for these basins and trenches shd submit th~s plan to the Corps and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board for review and. approval. This plan should include the names of responsible parties, provisions for control of invasivc weeds, and mechani-~rn-~ to minimb'e temporal loss of wetland habitat and functions. Maintenance of these infiltration basins or trenches, fithey are deemed jurisdictional, will be authorized by this individual permit, if said rn~intenance is performed in compliance with the operations and maintenance plan approvcd by the Corps and the Regional Water Quality Control The permittee shall not discharge any fill-or excavate any material fi'om Drainage N within the boundaries of the project site. The permittee shall flag aquatic habitats to identify areas that must be avoided. Any additional acreage of waters of the U.S. impacted outside of the approved consU'uction footprint without prior Corps' authorization shall be mitigated at a 5:1 ratio. General evaluation (33 CFR 320.4(a)): L The relative extent of the public and private need for the proposed work. The proposed work is already authorized by nationwide permit The proposed issuance of an individual permit will allow the applicant to extend the construction over a longer period of time, thus saving money through (1) a more reasonable construction schedule and reduction of carrying charges for infrastructure that ,A~_II not be required until a Page 24 later date, and (2)resulting in a temporal gain in habitat value through the delay of impacts. The practicability of using reasonable alternative locations and methods to accomplish the objective of the .proposed structure or work. The proposed work is already authorized by nationwide permit and is ourren~y under construction. Mitigation for impacts to all of the areas within Corps jurisdiction has already been completea (preservation of 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat within Temecula Creek). Therefore, no alternative locations or methods to accomplish the proposed project were examined. The extent and permanence of the beneficial and/or detrimental effects that the proposed structures or work may have on the public and private uses to which the area is suited. The project and its impacts to 4.95 acres (2.11 acres expected to be remaining as of expiration of existing 404 authorization) of mostly dry, unvegetated wash are permanent. The preservation of 9.4 acres of willow riparian habitat within Temecula Cr~k is also permanent. by me~n-~ of a recorded conservation easement which runs with the land and preserves the area as natural open space in Determinations: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) (33 CFR Part 325). Having reviewed the infomation provided by the applicant, all interested parties, and our assessment of environmental impacts contained in Part HB of this document, I fmd that this permit action will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Therefore, an Environmental lmpact Statement will not be required. Page 25 B. 404(b)(1) Compliance/Non-compliance Review (40 CFR 230-12). ( ) The discharge complies with the guidelines. (x) The discharge complies with the guidelines, With the inclusion of the appropriate and practicable conditions listed above to minimize pollution or adverse efteeLs to the affected ecosystem. () The discharge fails to comply with the requirements of these guidelines because: , () there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge that would have less adverse effect on the aquatic ecosystem and that alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences- () the proposed discharge will result in significant degradation of the aquatic ecosystem under 40 CFR 230.10Co) or (c). () The discharge does not include all appropriate and practicable measures to minimize potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem, namely *** () There is not sufficient information to make a reasonable judgement as to whether the proposed discharge will comply with the guidelines- Public interest deteminafion: I f'md that issuance of a Department of the Army permit (with special conditions), as prescribed by regulations published in 33 CTR Parts 320 to 330, and 40 CFR Part 230, ( ) is/( ) is not contrary to the public interest. Page 26 LETTER DATED OCTOBER 6, 1999 FROM NEWLAND COMMUNITIES R:~STAFFRF'f'~85pa99.STAFFRPT .CC .doc 29 NEWLAND COMMUNITIES NEWL,~ND CALIFnRNIA 27393 Ynez Road Suite 253 Temecula. CA 92591-4608 909.694.5572 Fax 909.694-3612 project(- paseodelso[ .corn www.paseodelsol .corn October 6, 1999 Mr. Ron Guerriero, Chairman Mr. Mike Naggar Mr. Andrew Webster Mr. David Matthewson Ms. Linda Fahey CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Planning Application PA99-0284 (Development Plan), PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 ), Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment) and Planning Application No. PA99-0823 (Development Agreement) Dear Mr. Guerriero and Commission: On September 29, 1999 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above referenced applications. During the course of the hearing certain public comments were made regarding drainage issues both on-site and off-site of our Paseo del Sol community. This letter is written in response to those comments. Since its purchase in December 1995, Newland has been the developer of the Paseo del Sol Master Planned Community. Paseo del Sol makes up approximately one- half of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan 219 and is included, along with numerous other properties, in Assessment District 159 CAD 159"). As you know, AD 159 has provided many public improvements of regional significance to the South Temecula area. Thus, the construction of Butterfield 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. ~- __ One of the public improvements to be provided by AD 159 is the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. This channel is to be built to the east and upstream from our Paseo del Sol community and its purpose is to collect waters flowing from these undeveloped areas and divert them into Temecula Creek. Newland has been working diligently with both AD 159 and the County of Riverside for over three years in an attempt to facilitate and accelerate the construction of the Butterfield Interceptor Channel. Planning Commission October 6, 1999 Page two 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 comer 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 the El Nifio of recent years this twenty acre facility remained dry. On February 2, 1998 the Planning Commission approved revisions to our Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24182 CVTM 24182") 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 as the Conditions of Approval for VTM 24182 require that the detention basin or an equivalent facility remain in place until upstream drainage facilities are installed to mitigate off-site flows. Finally, we would like to respectfully bring to the Planning Commission' s attention that the current planning applications before you in no way impact the drainage conditions existing at our detention basin or the Corona property, both of which are found approximately one mile upstream. The properties under current review are picked up by storm drain facilities existing or to be built in DePortola and Margarita Roads. We will be available to answer any questions you may have at the Planning Commission hearing. Thank you for your kind attention. Sincerely, presiden3C CO: Ron Parks Dean Meyer 7'X12' .~ 66. 57' I G I . m I I z 3> r'x12' O :. I , m I ~ I . m I s z '1 )>OfY) ~o~ o~ O)ZO ZO mU)"n (f) 33 In U)~) "nO 0 ~r-~C) r-.~n mO~. O> r' ZH_ -I .-~mZ nl-~ t3 c3 m °°~r' m~ -I m 0 -I 0 03 33 Z PETITION IN OPPOSITION R:\STAFFRPT\285pa99 .STAFFRPT .CC .d~c 30 CITY OF TEMECULA CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager ~(~Susan W. Jones, Director of Support Services/City Clerk September 29, 1999 Papers Presented at September 28, 1999 Council Meeting Attached is a copy of papers presented at the September 28, 1999 Council Meeting. The Council requested that a copy be given to each Planning Commissioner as they will be discussing Home Depot which includes issues relating to the Spedtic Plan at tonight's Planning Commission Meeting. cc: Gary Thornhill E:IDEPTSICITYCLRKtFO,RMSiM£MO - ST"ANDARD MEMO FOFIMA T. DOC 9/29/99 S UBJ ECT: 60NSTRUCTION OF APARTMENT DWELLINGS AT THE lOCATION OF DEPORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY The residents of Paseo del Sol are OPPOSED to the proposed construction of apartments adjacent to the single family dwellings of the Paseo del Sol development. Consider the following: Owners of the '~iew lots" would have their views limited to the apartments directly opposite their homes thus decreasing the value of the home which no longer has a view, the location for which it was purchased at an additional premium. Construction of condominiums and/or townhomes would promote and support the value, stability and responsibility of the Paseo del Sol community as compared to the transient residency associated with apartment dewllings. PRINT NAME SIGNATURE TELEPHONE &l 241 Z- SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENT DWELLINGS AT THE LOCATION OF DEPORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY The residents of Paseo del Sol are OPPOSED to the proposed construction of apartments adjacent to the single family dwellings of the Paseo del Sol development. Consider the following: 1. Owners of the '~iew lots" would have their views limited to the apartments directly opposite their homes thus decreasing the value of the home which no longer has a view, the location for which it was purchased at an additional premium. Construction of condominiums and/or townhomes would promote and support the value, stability and responsibility of the Paseo del Sol community as compared to the transient residency associated with apartment dewllings. TELEPHONE ] o3 -i~,~z, ~<~,~ 5~.~,~.t-._ ~£~tTrmt Lc, r~ryo Cd. 3c,~- 2--03Lt SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENT DWELLINGS AT THE LOCATION OF DEPORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY The residents of Paseo del Sol are OPPOSED to the proposed construction of apartments adjacent to the single family dwellings of the Paseo del Sol development. Consider the following: 1. Owners of the "View lots" would have their views limited to th~ apartments directly opposite their homes thus decreasing the value of"~he home which no longer has a view, the location for which it was purchased at an additional premium. Construction of condominiums and/or townhomes would promote and support the value, stability and responsibility of the Paseo del Sol community as compared to the transient residency associated with apartment dewllings. PRINT NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS TELEPHONE S UBJ ECT: CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENT DWELLINGS AT THE LOCATION OF DEPORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY The residents of Paseo del Sol are OPPOSED to the proposed construction of apartments adjacent to the single family dwellings of the Paseo del Sol development. Consider the following: 1. Owners of the "View lots" would have their views limited to the apartments directly opposite their homes thus decreasing the value of the home which no longer has a view, the location for which it was purchased at an additional premium. Construction of condominiums and/or townhomes would promote and support the value, stability and responsibility of the Paseo del Sol community as compared to the transient residency associated with apartment dewllings. PRINT NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS TELEPHONE 2 o.Z SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENT DWELLINGS AT THE LOCATION OF DEPORTOLA AND MEADOWS PARKWAY The residents of Paseo del Sol are OPPOSED to the proposed construction of apartments adjacent to the single family dwellings of the Paseo del Sol development. Consider the following: 1. Owners of the "View lots" would have their views limited to the apartments directly opposite their homes thus decreasing the value of the home which no longer has a view, the location for which it was purchased at an additional premium. Construction of condominiums and/or townhomes would promote and support the value, stability and responsibility of the Paseo del Sol community as compared to the transient residency associated with apartment dewllings. PRINT NAME SIGNATURE ADDRESS ~ TELEPHONE ITEM 11 APPROVALCE)"~ D~ITY ATTORNEY CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/~tl~o ncil Gary Thornhill, Dep~D'~ity Manager October 19, 1999 Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company PREPARED BY: David Hogan, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application PA 99-0274, and 2. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF YNEZ ROAD, WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND SOUTH OF OVERLAND DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274) BACKGROUND: The proposed Development Agreement will resolve litigation initiated by the right-of-way acquisition for the extension of Overland Drive between Ynez and Margarita Roads. The City of Temecula is initiating this agreement to resolve legal issues between the City and the property owner relating to eminent domain proceedings required for the construction of Ovedand Road. The Development Agreement confirms the City's ownership and right to access the areas acquired for the extension of Overland Drive and guarantees that the property owner can apply for, and receive appropriate consideration of, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for approximately 37.4 acres. The timing and precise details of this General Plan Amendment and Zone Change have not been determined. As a result, the future land uses for the site have not been identified. A copy of the final Development Agreement is included as Exhibit A to Attachment No. 1, the proposed ordinance approving the Development Agreement between Eli Lilly & Company and the City of Temecula. F:~epts~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~74PA99 CC.doc 1 This item was originally scheduled for the September 15, 1999 Planning Commission meeting but had to be continued due to a lack of quorum. The Planning Commission considered the proposed Development Agreement at its September 29, 1999 meeting. After some discussion, the Commission recommended that the Council adopt a Negative Declaration and Ordinance and approved the Agreement. The Planning Commission Resolution recommending approval of the Agreement and the minutes from the meeting are contained in Attachment Nos. 2 and 3 respectively. The Initial Environmental Study is contained in Attachment No. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Study for the Development Agreement. The Study indicated that the proposed Development Agreement would have no environmental impacts that had not been previously addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and Development Code. As a result, the Planning Commission recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: The Development Agreement commits the City's financial participation in an amount not to exceed $188,006. This includes the following amounts: $95,556 toward the acquisition (through eminent domain) of the right-of-way for Overland Drive. This amount has been paid as a deposit with the Riverside County Superior Court. Adequate funds have been appropriated in the Ovedand Road Overcrossing capital improvement project budget for this cost. The waiver of up to $78,450 in future development impact and processing fees. The waiver of up to $14,000 in application and processing costs for the general plan amendment and zone change. ATTACHMENT: Proposed Ordinance A. Draft Development Agreement Planning Commission Resolution Planning Commission Minutes Initial Environmental Study F:~Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~274PA99 CC,doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99- \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRpT~74pA99 CC.doc 3 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF YNEZ ROAD, WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND SOUTH OF OVERLAND DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274) WHEREAS, Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of Califomia and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Eli Lilly and Company have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September 29, 1999 (Planning Commission), and October 19, 1999 (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Eli Lilly and Company, that it: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General' Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential development; and B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning distdct in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, F:~Depts',PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 CC.doc 4 D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, the public reasonable E. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, F. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public headng, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headng to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, G. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the headng body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the headng, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 2. APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "A" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. F:~epts~LANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 CC.doc 5 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 1999. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, CMC/AAE, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk Susan Jones, CMC/AAE F:9ePts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.74PA99 CC.doc 6 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~DLANNING\STAFFRPT~74pA99 CC,doc 7 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of the __ day of ,199__ ("Agreement Date"), by and between ELI LILLY AND CO., (hereinafier "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereina~er "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the tbllowing facts: A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to OWNER for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the County of Riverside, State of Califomia (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section 1.15. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 1 D. OWNER has applied for, and CITY has granted this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and complement the goals of CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As part of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of CITY (hereinafter the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has issued a Negative Declaration as regards any significant effects arising from the Project and has otherwise carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA") of 1970, as amended. Project: The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the 1. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement; 2. On , after a duly noticed public hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration for this Agreement and the Project; 3. On , after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On , after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. ~ - approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on the City Council ~'~-tc , ,,u,-,v ,-, ,,,. Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Development Services Department at the CITY, and adopted the findings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project. F. The CITY has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the City. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by this Agreement, CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYx,DEVAGR 3/9/99 2 conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on CITY's covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of CITY's General Plan, provide 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 CITY, (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of CITY and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as it applies to CITY, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution. and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, all of w-hich are expressly incorporated into this Agreemenk the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. No. 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance __ approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula, Califomia a municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California, and all of its officials, employees, agencies and departments. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 3 1.3. City Council. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of the CITY. 1.4. Development. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5. Development Agreement Legislation. The "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Development Fees. "Development Fees" means development impact and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development and limited as more particularly set forth in Section 4.3. 1.7. Development Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.8. Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.9. Existing Regulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, rules, regulations, policies, requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect, govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plans in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations shall also include the text of the zoning district designations of any combination of Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Office Professional or High Density Residential for the site of the Project. 1.10. Future Development Approvals. "Future Development Approvals" means those entitlements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by CITY or OWNER to develop the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The parties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of Business Park-Light Industrial, Office Professional, Residential and Commercial uses. The CITY shall cooperate with OWNER, pursuant to Section 3.1.3., if OWNER undertakes to implement a Planned Development Overlay zoning district for the purposes of authorizing the intermixing of these uses. L\TEMECULAXELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 4 1.11. Off-site Improvements. "Off-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or Facilities which are not and will not be located on the Property. 1.12. On-site Improvements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property. 1.13. OWNER. "OWNER" is initially ELI LILLY AND COMPANY., an Indiana corporation. 1.14. Planning Commission. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of CITY. 1.15. Project. "Project" means changes in General Plan Land Use and City Zoning Map designations, as well as any associated specific plan amendments and environmental review for the approximately 37.4 acres located generally north of Solana Way, west of Margarita Road, south of Overlar~d Drive, and east of Ynez Road as depicted on Exhibit "B", that are necessary to allow some combination of Business Park, Light Industrial, Office Professional, High Density Residential, and/or Commercial uses thereon. This Agreement envisions that the following changes will be made so as to encourage a high quality development that enhances the City's economic base, complements other developments in the vicinity, responds to market demands as seen by OWNER, and that is compatible with the surrounding area. These changes could include the following: 1. That the southerly +/-20.7 acres may be redesignated to primarily High Density Residential. 2. That the western half of the northerly +-16.7 acres may be redesignated to either Service or Community Commercial. 3. That the eastern half of the northerly +-16.7 acres may be redesignated to either Community Commercial or High Density Residential. 1.6 Project Approval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the legislative land use amendments as described in Section 1.15. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 5 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Bindine Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof. and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. 2.2. Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the Property. 2.3. Term. The term (hereinafter called "Term") of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of twenty (20) years thereafter terminating at the end of the day preceding the twentieth (20th) anniversary of the Effective Date, subject to specific extensions, revisions and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4. 1. If termination occurs pursuant to any specific provision of this Agreement; 2.4.2. Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to complete Development; or 2.4.3. Entry after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement for any part of the Project. The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and AssiEnments. 2.5.1. Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 6 Property") to any person or entity at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, assignment, or other transfer, (i) OWNER shall notify CITY within twenty (20) days of such event of the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each transferee and OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of each respective obligations. 2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assigns. Any and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. 2.6. Amendment of Development Affreement. 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Either party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. Operating Memoranda. The parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes. adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYNDEVAGR 3/9/99 7 addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended from time to time as necessary, with further approval by City Manager, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing. 3. Description of Development. 3.1. Development and Control of Development. 3.1.1. Project. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested right to implement the Development authorized by the Project pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals and CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. the Existing Regulations shall control the design and Development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off-Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timing of Development. Regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Future Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. Specifically, CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlements to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Existing Regulations. The parties hereto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984) as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development. 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and Approvals - Cooperation. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal and legal manner for processing such matters, all applications for Future Development Approvals anticipated under this Agreement. CITY shall not withhold any building permit, final inspection or certificate of occupancy from OWNER if OWNER has satisfied all conditions and requirements of this Agreement and the Future Development Approval. In regards to the Project Approvals, CITY shall have the sole responsibility to apply for, if necessary, a revision to the City of Temecula General Plan, a change of zone from Business Park to any combination of Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Office-Professional or High Density Residential to facilitate the Project and necessary specific plan revisions. L\TEMECULA\ELIL1LLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 8 CITY shall commit an amount. not to exceed Fourteen Thousand Dollars ($14,000.00), to pay its own processing and application fees needed to accomplish these revisions. OWNER shall bear no cost for any such application but shall have the right to participate in all stages of the consideration of such revisions. All other entitlements, permits. or approvals shall be obtained by OWNER at its own sole cost and expense. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitigation. In connection with the completion of the Project, CITY shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that do not depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use alternatives or mitigation measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed reasonably necessary in light of the development activity proposal. 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. CITY also agrees to assist and cooperate with OWNER in securing any County, State and Federal permits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development of the Project. 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shall be the Existing Regulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which CITY is permitted or has the right to make under this Agreement relating to the Project, CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a rnanner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Exhibit "C". CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Exhibit "C". CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of California, such as the Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended, and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by CITY from time to time. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 9 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations after taking into consideration all reasonable alternatives. 3.3.3. Reeulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement. CITY shall have the right to apply CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CITY after the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in CITY's sole discretion if such application is required to protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested RiEht. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, ~afety and wel~are, a pm'tial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. CITY therefore agrees to the following: 3.4.1. No Conflieting Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings or other improvements; or L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 10 (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. The above list is not intended to be comprehensive or to limit the types of action that would conflict with Existing Regulations and this Agreement. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Relocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application from OWNER: and (ii) application from OWNER. Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, it is the intent of OWNER and CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development permits. precise plans, site development plans, building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within CITY, or portions of CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Agreement. or any portion hereof, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Current Laws. CITY represents that there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force as of the Agreement Date that would interfere with Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 11 3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.1. OWNER's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Development Agreement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter, affect. impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 4. Obligations of the Parties. 4.1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: effort; 4.1.1. Comprehensive Planning. Providing a comprehensive planning 4.1.2. Short Term Employment. Creating substantial employment opportunities through the construction and development phase; 4.1.3 Long Term Employment. Creating subst~,mtial cmployrncnt opportunities subsequent to the Development; 4.1.4 Improvements. The development of the Property, including offsite infrastructure improvements; and 4.15 Settlement of Litigation. The adoption of this Agreement shall result in the settlement of an eminent domain action between the parties. 4.2. Limitation on Development Fees. Certain presently undefined development impact and processing fees will be imposed on the Development as conditions of approval. In addition to the account described in Section 3.1.3, CITY shall establish an account in the full sum of Seventy-eight Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Dollars ($78,450.00) to be used, from time to time, to satisfy the development impact and processing fees attributed to the Development or any portion thereof. Such account shall L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 12 not accrue interest and shall not be subject to reimbursement to OWNER as to any unexpended sums. This principal sum reflects an amount that CITY would otherwise have transferred to OWNER as consideration for certain land acquisition necessary for CITY right-of-way. 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. At the appropriate points in the Development of the Property, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication or reserve for acquisition by City or its designee the streets. rights-of-way, parkland and other areas as more fully set forth in the Future Development Approvals. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, CITY shall not levy or require any further dedications on or along Margarita Road or Overland Drive, nor shall CITY levy or require any exactions in connection with Project Approvals or Future Development Approvals which would directly limit access to the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Future Development Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Development Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.4. Public Improvement Districts. CITY agrees not to, on its own initiative, undertake to include the Property in any public improvement district, assessment district and/or community facilities district (collective "Districts") which District is not intended to have a city-wide or substantially city-wide effect. A substantially city-wide effect shall mean the District is applicable to not less than sixty percent (60%) of the land or owners within the City. 4.5 Existin~ Community Facilities District Assessments. CITY agrees to use its reasonable best efforts to maintain the level of the current tax rate and amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness. CITY shall, at all times, conduct its deliberations with 4-1-- ~ ~ ~1 Lnc o,~ whole and shall base its g ~ of satisfying the highest levels of benefit to CITY as a decision on the best interests of CITY as a whole. Nothing herein shall require CITY to challenge, in any manner, decisions of superior levels of government that may affect the tax levels on the Property. 4.6 Termination of Eminent Domain Action. In addition to the other compensation in this Agreement, the entire deposit in the eminent domain action (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RIC 314613, referred to in the rest of this section as the "Action") of Ninety-six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty-six Dollars ($96,556.00), plus any interest that accrued on the deposit, shall be immediately released to OWNER. If other person(s) claim any part of the deposit, CITY shall instead pay OWNER Ninety-six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty-six Dollars ($96,556.00) by check. Once OWNER receives such funds, OWNER shall, at CITY's option, either (a) stipulate to a final order of condemnation for the "subject property" defined in the Complaint in L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 13 Eminent Domain in the Action, or (b) sign and deliver a deed transferring said "subject Property" to CITY, with CITY then dismissing OWNER from the Action. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reserved Authority. 5.1. Adoption of General Plan and Granting of Other Project Approvals. In preparing and adopting a general plan amendment, zoning district change and in granting the other Project Approvals, CITY will consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of CITY. 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that CITY shall not and CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.3. Judicial Review. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNERjudicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, O~x,q',/ER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and CITY shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by CITY in violation of this Agreement. 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them, the transferee agrees: (i) to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and alleging that CITY is liable therefor as a direct or indirect result of CITY's approval of this L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 6/1/99 14 Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend and/or indemnify CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 6(i), the parties hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents. officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to set aside. void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. If CITY(in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim, it may notify OWNER of the same. in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself.. but CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CITY's decision is predicated upon a legitimate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 7. Relationship of Parties. The contractual relationship between CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shall be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers or partners. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the patlies itx the matmet provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit CITY's or owner remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement. 9.1. Periodic Review. CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Govemment Code Section 65865.1. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 15 9.2. Good-Faith Compliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as CITY, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. The failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of Owner's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY's general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER. 9.5 Administration of Agreement. Any decision by CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after OWNER receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render, at a noticed public hearing, its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after [h~ appeal was filed. 9.6. Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by CITY, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from CITY's receipt of such request. 10. Events of Default Remedies and Termination. Unless amended or canceled as provided in Section 8, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10, this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 16 10.1. Defaults by OWNER. If CITY determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER. specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that its default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER, except as provided in Section 10.3, CITY's sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be CITY's right to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults by CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to CITY, specify the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply, CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement and OWNER may terminate this Agreement and, in addition, may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Specific Performai~ce Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the fight to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, CITY shall have the fight to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY',DEVAGR 3/9/99 17 have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, CITY's remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. CITY's right to specific perfoniance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of Legal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Orange County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the Califomia Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et seq. OWNER and CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY are unable to agree on a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 10.5. Estoppel Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: 10.5. 1. The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2. The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. 10.5.3. No default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY'xDEVAGR 3/9/99 18 Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. 10.5.4. In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. 11.1. No Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its rights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person, except as provided in Section 11.3. 11.3. Force Majeure. OWNER shall not be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes. other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities. strikes and other labor difficulties beyond OWNER control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resource regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoria (including, without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by O;~,IER or CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litigation. The period of time after the Effective Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pending, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be filed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government Agencies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental agency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 19 11.5. Notice of Delav. OWNER shall give notice to CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section 11.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time after OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 Attn.: City Planner With a copy to: Richards. Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, Califomia 90071 - 1469 Attn.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: Eli Lilly and Company Lilly Corporate Center Indianapolis, Indiana 46285 Attention: John J. Crisel Manager, Strategic Real Estate With a copy to: Hect, Solberg, Robinson & Goldberg, LLP 600 West Broadway, 8th Floor San Diego, California 92101 Attention: Paul E. Robinson L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 20 Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery, personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Recording. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to CITY, in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of Agreement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and CITY agree that this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Rights. OWNER and CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon, or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereinafier defined) may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the project and City agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary. of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns. including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10. 1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre-condition to the institution of L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 21 legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall allow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to cure such default, in which case no default shall exist and the City shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof. and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or. if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, then to commence to cure such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to cure any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material pan of consideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 17. Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 3.3.2 above, to hhc extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. Interpretation and Governing Law. The language in all pans of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be govemed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and govemmental L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 22 functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach hereof by an OWNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation. or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemnify CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER that committed the breach. However, CITY shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. Recitals. All Recitals set forth herein are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. 18.7. Entire A~reement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the parties, and no paro! evidence of m'.y prior or ~ther agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Maps. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of (i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentative map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of CITY and OWNER and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,199 "CITY" CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ATTEST: By: Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: June 9 ,1999 "OWNER" ELI LILLY AND CO., a corporation By: flt~cTha~C ( ~' Its: Vice President - blanufacturing By: Its: L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 24 State of California ) ) ss County of ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or 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 his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ) ss County of ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or 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 his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary L\TEMECULA\ELIL1LLYXDEVAGR 3/9/99 25 State of Califomia ) ) ss County of ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or 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 his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of Oalifu, .ia ) ) SS County of f0acZ6r3 ) On :X'aa¢- c~, / 9q 9 before me,'74ae,h.~/ZX'. 'T'l'mr4~,s , personally appeared fi'l:ckm.,e.I .l.. fa~/.c , personally known to me or proved to mc 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 his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Si nature o~tary ~/~O/O~ L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/9/99 26 CERTIFICATE I, James B. Lootens, Assistant Secretary of Eli Lilly and Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Indiana ("Company"), certify that pursuant the Company's By-Laws, resolutions of its Board of Directors, and delegations of authority thereunder, Michael L. Eagle, Vice President - Manufacturing, has the authority to execute for and on behalf of the Company that particular instrument entitled "Development Agreement" and entered into by and between the Company and the City of Temecula, a m~micipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and that this authority remains in effect as of the date of this Certificate. I further certify that the signature below is the signature of Michael L. Eagle. Michael L. agl IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certificate and affixed the seal of the Company this q~, day of jon+, 1999. ~'~iS"""" esB. L ~ ' tant Secretary STATE OF INDIANA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF MARION ) Before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, this ~/'~\ day of .~j'& ~, 1999, personally appeared James B. Lootens, Assistant Secretary of Eli Lilly and Company, an Indiana Corporation, and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing Certificate for and on behalf of said corporation. I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed by official seal. (Seal) Notary Public Resident of County, Indiana. My Commission expires: MARY J. EVERI'R', i~Jotary Public My Commission Expires: April 26, 2008 Residing in Hamilton County, Indiana EXHIBIT A PROPERTY OWNED BY ELI LILLY & COMPANY F:OEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~)EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.doc 1 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY OWNED BY ELI LILLY & COMPANY OVERI ROAD F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~74pa99 Exhibits.doc 2 EXHIBIT B PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE POTENTIAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'D274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.doc 3 EXHIBIT B PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE POTENTIAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE ROAD F:,~DEpTS~DLANNING~TAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274Patt Exhibits.doc 4 EXHIBIT C NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS F:~DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT%274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT%274pa99 Exhibits.doc 5 EXHIBIT C NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS 2. 3. 4. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. General Plan The Development Code (Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code) The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 16 of the Temecula Municipal Code) Citywide Design Guidelines Habitat Conservation Ordinance Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance Uniform Building Code, as locally adopted Uniform Fire Code, as locally adopted Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction F:~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274pa99 Exhibits.docF:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRpT,~.74pa99 Exhibits.doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-038 \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~EPTS~LANNING~STAFFRpT%274pA99 CC.doc 8 RESOLUTION NO. 99-038 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Eli Lilly and Company have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company; Planning Application No. PA99-0274, (hereinafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public headng on September 29, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt and approve the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement contained in Attachment "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: (a) The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential development; and, (b) The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, (c) The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, (d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, the public reasonable \\TEMEC_FS101 \VO L1 ~EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~74PA99 CC,doc 9 (e) The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, (f) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, (g) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, (h) The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerriero, 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 29th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: FAHEY, GUERRIERO, MATHEWSON, WEBSTER NONE NAGGAR Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \~TEMEC_FS101\VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 CCodoc 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~oLANNING~STAFFRpT~74pA99 CC,doc 11 R:~PlanComm~minutes~092999 Plannin.~ Al~plication No. PA99-0274 (Develol~ment A.~reement between Eli Lilly and Comicany and the City of Temecula) Request to approve a Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Attomey Curley presented the staff report (of record), clarifying the purpose and specifications of the Agreement; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed the subsequent process if this Agreement would not be approved; provided clarification with respect to the scope of the Agreement, noting the identified general range of anticipated land use (denoted on page 5, Section 1.1.5 of the Agreement); further specified the standard process of development per Section 3.1.3 regarding entitlements (page 8 of the Development Agreement); relayed that the language could be modified in Section 1.1.5 as a 'recommendation to the City Council (specifically referencing the phrase objectionable to Commissioner Mathewson, on page 5, Section 1.1.5, whereby it was recommended that the following be modified: the phrase the following changes will be made, be replaced with the following changes may be made); advised that while the Agreement creates the opportunity for a zoning change, it does not change it; noted that if at a future point in time there would be a proposal for a zone change, the standard process would be carried out, inclusive of the CEQA analysis; relayed the benefits for the owner of the parcel associated with the Agreement; for Commissioner Webster, reiterated the process of the standard land use process with respect to proposals within this particular area, providing additional information regarding the denoted zoning. Commissioner Fahey relayed that any proposal that would come forward would be required to mitigate any negative impacts, in order to attain approval of the proposal. Initially, Commissioner Mathewson relayed hesitance supporting the densities denoted in the Agreement; recommended that the matter be postponed until the Housing Element Update would be complete; and reiterated his desire to modify the language on page 5, Section 1.1.5 of the Development Agreement. Commissioner Fahey clarified the approval process of Development Agreements, and the associated purview of the Commission; reiterated that any proposed project I'~;~/~ be required to mitigate any negative environmental impacts pdor to approv~ relayed her support of the Agreement.O~ R:%PlanComm~ninutes%092999 MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; approve the Development Agreement, adopting Resolution No. 99-038 recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0274 based upon the Analysis contained in the Staff Report; and adopts the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0274, with the attached modification to the Development Agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 99-038 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99- 0274 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY Modify- On page 5, Section 1.1.5 of the Development Agreement replace the phrase the following changes will be made with the phrase the following changes may be made. Commissioner Webster seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Naggar who was absent. It was noted the Commissioner Naggar arrived at 6:44 P.M. At 6:44 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 6:54 P.M. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%oLANNING\STAFFRpT~274pA99 CC.doc 12 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number ' Project Location Project Sponsors Name and Address Development Agreement between Eli Lilly and Company and the City of Temecula (PA99-0274) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Generally east of Ynez Road, north of Solana Way, west of Margarita Road, and south of Ovedand Road in the City of Temecula Eli Lilly and Company and the City of Temecula General Plan Designation Business Park Zoning Description of Project Business Park (BP) and Specific Plan (SP-7) The Development Agreement proposes to allow the property owner to request, and the City to consider, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change on approximately 37.4 acres in exchange for resolving a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula. The General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element Map would be from the Business Park designation to either Business Park, Office Professional, High Density Residential and/or Commercial. The Change to the Zoning Map would be from Business Park to an undefined combination of the following zones: Business Park, Light Industrial, Professional Office, High Density Residential and/or Commercial, Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required The Development Agreement does not specify what the future land uses will be, only that the City agrees to consider changes at a future date. North: East: South: West: None. Vacant land. Vacant land and single family and high density residential. Commercial land uses and high density residential. Commercial land uses. R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS1 01 \VOL1 \DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA~74PA99 IES.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning Population and Housing Geologic Problems Water Air Quality Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Public Services Utilities and Service Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a sigqificant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (D) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Pdnted name Date ~-A,- R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES,doc\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: ' i ': ' Ir~b~ and Supborting Information SourCes Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? : Polentialiy. · Slgni~ant : · Impact · Incorporaled · :: Iml~d .: : 'impact ' 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: C, :: 'lslue:a~d Supporting Informalion Sources Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Polenlially . Significant Unless Lest :Than· · Miligal|on : 5ignj~canl Incorporated · Imrad · 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? · Ir~ues and Suppoffing Information Sources a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? R:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc\~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1~I::)EPTS~PLANNING\CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc 3 Polentially: Polentially. Signi~canl Unless Less Than Significant · Miligation Signil'mant Impact Incorporated Impoct No e, Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial dsks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?. 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: he ":':" :;. "'li~es'ahdSuppb;ting Informalion'Sources Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a Iowedng of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Place housing with:n a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? · Pcte~tiall~r ~ignilicanl Impact · Potenlially ' Significant Unler,~ Mitigalion · 'Incorporated · :Significant :' · Impact..: impact · R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA%274PA99 I ES.doc 4 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: be d, ..... '~,__~-_'a~,d S.b~r~.. S.~o~.~,tao. So..:. · Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quali~ plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or pmjeded air quality violation? Result in a ~mula~vely considerable net increase of any cdteda pollumnt for which the proje~ region is non- a~inment under an appli~ble federal or state ambient air quali~ standard (including releasing emissions whi~ exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone pre~rsors? Epose sensitive receptors to substantial pollumnt con~ntmtions? Create obje~ionable odors affe~ing a substantial number of people? Potentially' Slgnificint · Impaot Potentially: Signi~canl Unless Miligation Ir~corporaled " .Less Than · :.. . : 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: at Issue and Supporting Information Sources Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety dsks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially: Significant Unless Mitigalion Incorporated · Slgnifici~nt ~mpad Impant' ,/ 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Issues end Supporting Information Sources a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~LAN NING\CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc 5 Polentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Miligation Incorporaled Lea Than $ignifmant. ~rnpact No' local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues end Supporting Information Sources Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Pctentially : · Significanl Impact Polenlially ~ignificant Unless .Mitigation · 'Incorporated 'L~__ Tl'~n Signif~nt Impact: . Impact 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: issues end $uppoding Information Sources Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Polentially Signi~canl Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than. Significant Impact No Impact ,/ R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 6 d9 h, Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: ' Is~,ues and Supporting Informalion Sources Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? A subsrant;all temporary or pedodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? · Potentially · Significant Impa~'l Polenlially Significant Unler~ Mitigalion Incorporated Signir~canl liniment · · ImpaLl R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES .doc\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLAN NING\CEQA~274PA99 I ES .doc 7 11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: ~'..i.:i:... ...... : . ~' .. ::. · Issues and Supporting Informalion Sources.. : Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? · Potentially :Polp~tlally ' Sigrd~cenl Unless, Significanl '. Mitigal!o~t. Impact Incoq~orated :. Signfi'~anli : No.'..: · Impact · ' Impact Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? Other public facilities? 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: C, fm · ' I~s~s'i~d Supporting Information Sources Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of ex;sting facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc\~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc 8 · Potentially Potenlially: · Significant Unless .Signi~canl Mitigalion Impact Incorporated ~ Th~n:. · i'. Signif'mint No.. Impact: Impact 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: · '. E · :lssue~ ~f;d Supporting Inform;,tion Sourues . . . :: S!gnifio~ : · Impact Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? be Ce Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and histodc building within a state scenic highway?. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? :. Polentially: · Signi~canl Unless. · Millgati~a Incorporaled · ' · Signirmard :No.:.' Impact. Impact: 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: ae Is~t~ and Supporting Information ·Sources Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Polenlially SIgnificant Impact : Potenlially Significant Unless Mlfigafion Incorporated Le~ .Thani · SignifiCant. · Impact.. · No' Impact. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: 'lssbes and Supporting Information Source~ Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Polentially Significant Irnp.lcl Polentially Signi~canl Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less TItan · Signilicant Impact No Impact ,/' R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc\~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLAN NING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. : i:.... .: Potentially ..... " .: .. Pptenllally: Si~nilicanl Unless:. :' 'Less.T~n;' ': ': "':' · · Signifmanl · . Miligati~ti ' :Signif'mint: :: N~) ::.: "Impad Incorporated . 'Impact: ..Impact': : ' ' ' Is~ue~ and $u~p;)rting Intorm;;tio~ Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restdct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? c. Does the project have environmental effects which will ,/' cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: The proposed Development Agreement does not approve any specific land use changes. The agreement only indicates that an appropriate change will be considered by the City at some later date on approximately 37.4 acres in exchange for resolving a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula. The Agreement indicates that the future land uses could include any of the following: Business Park, Light Industrial, Professional Office, High Density Residential and/or Commercial. Any future development proposals will receive appropriate environmental review prior to their approval. Because the agreement is process rather than result oriented, it is not possible to evaluate what the future land use changes might be. Because of the result is highly speculative, no detailed analysis is possible. Detailed environmental review will be performed and approved by the Lead Agency prior to the approval of any future General Plan Land Use or Zoning Map changes. R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLAN NING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 10 ITEM 12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT October 19. 1999 Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC PREPARED BY: David Hogan, Senior Planner RECOM MEN DATION: Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application PA 99-0273, and Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79- SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) BACKGROUND: The proposed Development Agreement will acquisition for the new Pala Road bddge. property owner to do the following: resolve litigation caused by the right-of-way The Development Agreement would allow the Develop the property in cenformance with the requirements of the existing Highway Tourist Commercial and Professional Office zones; Adjust the required building setbacks in cenformance with the existing Development Code; Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; F:~epts\PLANNING~STAFFRP'F~273PA99 CC.doc 1 Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and Receive a financial contribution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of the extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage facilities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediate construction of the new Pala Road bridge and associated improvements. The Agreement conveys no additional land use development dghts not previously allowed or authorized under the City's adopted Development Code (zoning ordinance). A copy of the final Development Agreement is included as Exhibit A to Attachment No. 1, the proposed ordinance approving the Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow, LLC and the City of Temecula. The Planning Commission considered the proposed Development Agreement at its September 15, 1999 meeting. After some discussion, the Commission recommended that the Council adopt a Negative Declaration and Ordinance and approved the Agreement. The Planning Commission Resolution recommending approval of the Agreement and the minutes from the meeting are contained in Attachment Nos. 2 and 3 respectively. The Initial Environmental Study is contained in Attachment No. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Study for the Development Agreement. The Study indicated that the proposed Development Agreement would have no environmental impacts that had not been previously addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and Development Code. As a result, the Planning Commission recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: The Development Agreement commits the City's financial participation up to $412,491.75. This includes the following amounts: $312,491.75 toward the acquisition for the right-of-way for the Pala Road Bddge. $295,000 has already been paid as a deposit with the Riverside County Supedor Court in the eminent domain action.; and An amount not to exceed $100,000 for one-third of the cost involved in the extension Jedediah Smith Road storm drain. Adequate funds are available in the Pala Road Bridge capital improvement program project budget for these costs. In addition, the City will receive $112,212 from Pala Rainbow LLC for the sale of 28,053 square foot of former right-of-way identified as Area A on Exhibit M-3. ATTACHMENT: Proposed Ordinance A. Draft Development Agreement Planning Commission Resolution Planning Commission Minutes Initial Environmental Study F:~Depts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~273PA99 CC.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99- R:~TAFFRP'T~273PA99 CC.doc 3 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79- SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) WHEREAS, Section 65864 et seq. of the Govemment Code of the State of Califomia and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and October 19, 1999 (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Pala Rainbow, LLC, that it: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Professional; and, B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the pedod of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning distdct in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, R:~STAFFRP'r~273PA99 CC.doc D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, E. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, F. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public headng, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headng to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, G. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 2. APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "A" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. F:~epts~LANNING~STAFFRPT~273PA99 CC.doc 5 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 1999. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk APPROVEDASTO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OFRIVERSIDE) CITY OFTEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, CMC/AAE, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk F:%Depts%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'~.73PA99 CC.doc 6 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:~TAFFRPT~273PA99 CC.doc 7 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of the __ day of , 1999 ("Agreement Date"), by and between PALA RAINBOW, LLC., (hereina_Qer "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to OWNER for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the County of Riverside, State of California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section 1.15. D. OWNER has applied for, and CITY has granted this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and complement the goals of CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As part of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of CITY (hereina~er the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has issued a Negative Declaration as regards any significant effects arising from the Project and has otherwise carded out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA") of 1970, as amended. E. The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the Project: F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreemera.doc 1 hearing, the Agreement; 1. On September 15, 1999, following a duly noticed and conducted public City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this 2. On October 19, 1999, after a duly noticed public hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration for this Agreement and the Project; 3. On October 19, 1999, after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On October 19, 1999, after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. __ - approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on , the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Development Services Department at the CITY, and adopted the findings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project. F. The CITY has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the City. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by this Agreement, CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on CITY's covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of CITY's General Plan, provide 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 CITY, (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of CITY and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. F:XDEPTS~PLANNING'STAFFRPT~273PA99 Development Agr~ment. do~ 2 NOW, THEEFOE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as it applies to CITY, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1.1. Authorizinl, Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. __ approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California, and all of its officials, employees, agencies and departments. the CITY. City Council. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of 1.4. Develonment. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5. Develooment Ai, reement Legislation. The "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Develooment Fees. "Development Fees" means development impact and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development as more particularly set forth in Section 4.2. 1.7. Develonment Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.8. Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.9. Existin~ Regulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, rules, regulations, policies, requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect, govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plans in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations F:~DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 3 shall also include the text of the zoning district designations of any zoning district applicable to the site of the Project in effect on the Effective Date. 1.10. Future Develooment Aporovals. "Future Development Approvals" means those entitlements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by CITY or OWNER to cause the Development to occur upon the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The paxties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of Business Park-Light Industrial, Office Professional, Residential and Commercial uses. 1.11. Off-site Imorovements. "Off-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities which are not and will not be located on the Property. Certain Off-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.12. On-site Imorovements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property. Certain On-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.13. OWNER. "OWNER" is initially PALA RAINBOW, LLC and all successors in interest, in whole or part, to this entity. 1.14. Plannin9 Commission. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of CITY. 1.15. Project. "Project" means the adoption of this Agreement thus securing the scope and intensity of land uses to be developed upon the parcel which is approximately fourteen and three tenths (14.3) acres in area and which is generally located adjacent to State Highway 79 South at Pala Road. The uses permitted and scope of the Development shall be consistent with the development standards set forth in the zoning district in effect on the Effective Date (copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference) subject to the express limitations in this Agreement. 1.16 Proi ect A~mroval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the actions as described in Section 1.15. 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Bindin~ Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. 2.2. Property. Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement doe 4 2.3. Term. The term (hereinaRer called "Term") of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter terminating at the end of the day preceding the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date, subject to specific extensions, revisions and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4. 1. If termination occurs pursuant to any specific provision ofthisAgreement; 2.4.2. Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to complete Development; or 2.4.3. Entry after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement for any part of the Project. The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and Assi~,nments. 2.5.1. Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred Property") to any person or entity at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, assignment, or other transfer, (i) OWNER shall notify CITY within twenty (20) days of such event of the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each transferee and OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of each respective obligations. 2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assipns. Any and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. F:XI)EPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRPTX273PA99 Development AgreemenLdoc 5 2.6. Amendment of Develooment Al, reement. 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Either party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. O~}eratin9 Memoranda. The parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes. adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended from time to time as necessary, with further approval by City Manager, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing. 3. Descriotion of Develooment. 3.1. Development and Control of Development. :t.l.l. Proiect. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested right to implement the Development authorized by the Project pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals and CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Existing Regulations shall control the design and development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off-Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timin~ of Develooment. Regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Future Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. Specifically, CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlements to develop and use the F:XDEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRFB273PA99 Development Agreement.doe 6 Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Existing Regulations. The parties hereto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984) as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development. 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and Aoorovals - Coooeration. A. Procedure without a land use plan. Upon satisfactory completion by OWNER of all required preliminary actions, applications, studies, and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, CITY shall, subject to all legal requirements, diligently process, and complete at the earliest reasonable time all required steps, and expeditiously act upon approvals and permits necessary for Future Development Approvals anticipated under this Agreement including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The processing of applications for and issuing of all discretionary approvals requiting the exercise of judgment and deliberation by CITY, including without limitation, the Future Development Approvals; (2) The holding of any required public hearings; (3) The processing of applications for and issuing of all ministerial approvals requiting the determination of conformante with Existing Regulations, including, without limitation, site plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specification, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, temporary use permits, certificates of use and occupancy approvals and entitlements and related matters as necessary for the completion of the development of the Property. B. Procedure with land use plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if OWNER elects, at its own sole cost, to prepare and process a comprehensive land use plan for the subject real property, then the further processing of such further approvals shall be done administratively and as set forth in the land use plan. The land use plan shall be reviewed and approved by the CITY by and through its Planning Commission and, if necessary, its City Council. An example of the nature and scope of the land use plan contemplated for the subject real property is the plan prepared for the regional mall project in the City of Temecula. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitigation. In connection with the completion of the Project, OWNER shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use alternatives or mitigation F:~DEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTx273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 7 measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed reasonably necessary in light of the development activity proposal. 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. CITY further agrees to reasonably cooperate with OWNER in securing any County, State and Federal permits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development of the Project. This cooperation shall not entail any economic contribution by City. 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shall be the Existing Regulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which CITY is permitted or has the right to make under this Agreement relating to the Project, CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Exhibit "C". CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Exhibit "C". CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of California, as State Codes, such as the Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended, and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by CITY from time to time. 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations aRer taking into consideration all reasonable alternatives. 3.3.3. Ret, ulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to apply CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CITY after the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in CITY's sole discretion if such application is required to F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTx273PA99 Development Agre~'nent. doc g protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested Right. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. CITY therefore agrees to the following: 3.4.1. No Con~ictin~ Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings or other improvements; or (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Relocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application from OWNER; and (ii) Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an application from OWNER. (iii) Any enactment authorized by this Agreement. 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, it is the intent of OWNER and CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development permits, precise plans, site development plans, building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within CITY, or portions of CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of F:XDEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTM273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 9 this Agreement, or any portion hereof, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Current Laws. CITY represents that at the Effective Date there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force as of the Agreement Date that would interfere with Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement. 3.5. Future Amendments to Develooment Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.1. OWNER's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Develooment A~,reement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 4. Oblipations of the Parties. 4.1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: 4.1.1. Comprehensive P!annim,. Providing a comprehensive planning effort; 4.1.2. Short Term Employment. Creating substantial employment opportunities through the construction and development phase; 4.1.3 Lon~ Term Emolovment. Creating substantial employment opportunities subsequent to the Development; 4.1.4 Imnrovements. infrastructure improvements; and The development of the Property, including offsite 4.1.5 Settlement of Litigation. The adoption of this Agreement shall result in the settlement of an eminent domain action between the parties. 4.2. Development Fees. Certain presently undefined development impact and processing fees will be imposed on the Future Development Approvals as conditions of approval. Owner shall be responsible for payment of such fees as they may become due. The fees charged by the City of Temecula shall be at the rate effective for such action on January 1, 1999. F:XDEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRP'B273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 10 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. Future Development Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Development Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.3.1. Curb Cut Access to Subiect Prooertv. CITY agrees to process, in a reasonable and customary manner, the amendments to that certain Memorandum of Understanding with CalTrans and the County of Riverside (identified as the "Highway 79 South M.O.U.") as regards access to the subject property. CITY shall bear no costs other than those related to its reasonable allocation of personnel necessary to accomplish the amendment. Any and all costs shall be borne by OWNER. The area of the curb cut activity is as defined on Exhibit "D" attached hereto. 4.3.2 Jedediah Smith Road Extension South of Highway 79. A. Construction Component CITY agrees to contribute an amount equal to one-third of the total costs involved in the extension of the storm drain necessary to permit the extension of Jedediah Smith Road. Notwithstanding any of the contrary in no instance shall CITY's contribution to the construction component exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00). The costs of which contributions are permissible include engineering costs, permit application costs, environmental studies and project specific professional services. CITY shall contribute its proportionate share of the construction monies at any time subsequent to OWNER's commencement of the storm drain construction process, as demonstrated by OWNER' s obtaining a CITY building permit. Upon receipt of a detailed invoice from OWNER describing the basis of the funding request and showing the amount sought is one-third (1/3) of the total monies expended, CITY will promptly deliver the portion of the funds for the current stage of construction to OWNER. Exhibit "E" attached hereto describes the general physical location of the storm drain in relation to Jedediah Smith Road within the public right-of-way. B. Plan Check and Permit Fee Waiver CITY agrees to waive its routinely charged fees for plan check and permits for the storm drain construction described in Section 4.3.2A above. C. Further Cooperation CITY will reasonably cooperate in coordinating the storm drain project with the OWNER and County of Riverside to facilitate the efficient development of the facility, including, without limitation, the City's encouragement of the County to contribute its funds to the City, and commitment to administer such funds consistent with the procedures set forth in Section 4.3.2.A. F:~DEPTSNPLANNING~STAFFRFI~73PA99 Development AgreemenLdoc 11 4.3.3 Administrative Discretion - Site Desipn and P!anninp. The OWNER and CITY recognize that certain on-site circumstances may require deviation from the strict application of CITY's zoning standards. The CITY desires to allow for the administrative discretion of certain of the design issues for the facilitation of OWNER's site planning purposes. The CITY hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his or her designee, to act on or to determine that such matter should be acted upon by the CITY Planning Commission, the following issues: A. Reduced Set Back on Highway 79 South and Pala Road The front yard set back may be reduced to zero, or any dimension less than the generally applicable from yard setback mount, in the discretion of the City Manager after consideration of the OWNER's proposals and subject to reasonably accepted planning principles. Mitigation Area B. On-site Landscape Area Requirements Incorporating Wetlands The parties recognize that a portion of land owned by OWNER is currently limited in its development potential because it is reserved as wetlands mitigation land. The City Manager, or his or her designee, may, in their reasonable discretion, allow all or some portion of the wetland mitigation area (as shown on Exhibit "F") to be calculated as a portion of OWNER's on-site landscaping requirements for the approximately 14.3 acre subject site. 4.4 Limitation on Restaurant Uses. Concurrently with the quit claim referenced in Section 4.5(B)(1), OWNER agrees to impose, to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, covenants and conditions upon that portion of the Property located west of Pala Road which serve to prohibit drive-in restaurant uses on such portion of the Property. The restricted area is shown on Exhibit "G.' The covenants shall insure that no diminution or release of the land use limitation may occur without the prior written consent of CITY. 4.5 Related Real Prooertv Conveyances; Conditions to Develoument A~reement. A. Intent of the Parties The CITY and OWNER agree that the timely completion of the related real estate transactions described hereafter are a material component of the consideration each party has relied upon in its respective decision to enter into this Agreement. OWNER and CITY, individually and collectively, represent that neither party would have entered into this Agreement but for the promises of the other to transfer the interests in real property described hereunder to the other party. Further, OWNER and CITY, individually and collectively, agree that the failure of any one of the conveyances to be completed in a timely manner will be an event of default under Section 10 of this Agreement. F:'xDEPTSXPLANNING'xSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 12 B. Conveyances to OWNER from CITY 1. Easement Quit Claim (Pala Road Vacation) CITY, pursuant to the deeding instrument recorded as 91436-RS 54/89-90 previously was granted a nonspecific easement by OWNER over a portion of the property subject to the jurisdiction of this Agreement. This property is generally described on Exhibit "M-2" hereto. CITY, agrees to, after the Effective Date of this Agreement and concurrently with the conveyance identified in Section 4.5(c)(1) and 4.6 below, deliver to OWNER a quit claim deed describing the interest presently held by CITY and conveying the same to OWNER.. 2. Easement Ouit Claim CITY has previously had dedicated to it, for public purposes, that certain real property described on Exhibit "M-I". The CITY received its interest from the entity identified as "KI/FKLA." CITY will deliver a quit claim deed to OWNER quit claiming the interest identified on Exhibit "M-I" concurrently with the delivery of the quit claim deed described in Section 4.5(B)(1) above. 3. OWNER's Purchase of City of Temecula Real Property CITY presently owns fee title to that certain parcel of real property identified on Exhibit "M-3" for the portion of real property shown as Area A. OWNER has offered to purchase, and CITY has conditionally agreed to sell, subject to the satisfaction of its customarily required proceedings and conditions, the parcel for the sum of Four Dollars ($4.00) per square foot. The parcel is 28,053 square feet in area, resulting in a sales price of One Hundred Twelve Thousand, Two Hundred and Twelve Dollars ($112,212.00). C. Conveyances to CITY from OWNER 1. Additional Pala Road right-of-way OWNER has agreed to convey, in addition to the real property described in the Action, an additional 12-feet of right-of-way on both sides of Pala Road to provide for the ultimate width of 134 feet as shown on the CITY Circulation Element of the General Plan, all as shown on Exhibit "M-4" hereto. CITY has agreed to pay $4.00 per square foot for the additional right-of-way less any consideration provided for in the eminent domain action for permanent use by the CITY (i.e., slope easements.) The parties agree that the value CITY conveyed to OWNER in the Action is as set forth hereunder. The subject property is specifically described on Exhibit "M-4", hereon, as Parcels 1 & 2 of that exhibit. Parcel 1 is on the westerly side and has an area of 3,370 SF. The eminent domain action provides for a slope easement over that area (Parcel J) at a cost of $2/sq. ft. The additional consideration for Parcel 1 would be 3,370 SF at $2.00/sq. ~. = $6,740. Parcel 2 is on the easterly side and has an area of 5,744 SF. The eminent domain action provides for a slope easement over 4,299 SF of that area (Parcel M) at a FADEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~273pA99 Development Agreementdoe 13 cost of $0.75/SF. The additional consideration for Parcel 2 would be 5,744 at $4.00/SF less 4,299 SF at $0.75/SF or $19,751.75. Total consideration for the additional right-of-way is $26,491.75. 2. OWNER has agreed to enter into a License Agreement ("License") substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "H" for the purpose of insuring CITY access to the wetlands mitigation area described in the Action as Parcel B. The License shall be conveyed at such time as OWNER receives consideration, in the amount of One Dollar ($1.00), from the CITY. 4.6 Termination of Eminent Domain Action. In addition to the other compensation in this Agreement, the entire deposit in the eminent domain action (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RIC , referred to in the rest of this section as the "Action") of Two Hundred Ninety-five Thousand Dollars ($295,000.00), plus any interest that accrued on the deposit, shall be immediately released to OWNER. Once OWNER receives such funds, OWNER shall, at CITY's option, either (a) stipulate to a final order of condemnation for the "subject property" defined in the Complaint in Eminent Domain in the Action, or (b) sign and deliver a deed transferring said "subject Property" to CITY, with CITY then dismissing OWNER from the Action. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Repardinp Exercise of Reserved Authority. 5.1. Adoution of General Plan and Grantinp of Other Project Anorovals. In preparing and adopting any general plan amendment, zoning district change and in granting the other Project Approvals, CITY reserves its right to and shall consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of CITY. 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that CITY shall not and CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.~5. Judicial Review. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNER judicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and CITY shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by CITY in violation of this Agreement. F:NDEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRF/~73PA99 Development Agreement. doe 14 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them, the transferee agree: (i) to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and alleging that CITY is liable therefor as a direct or indirect result of CITY's approval of this Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend and/or indemnify CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 6(i), the parties hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents, officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. If CITY(in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim, it may notify OWNER of the same, in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself, but CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CITY's decision is predicated upon a legitimate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 7. Relationshio of Parties. The contractual relationship between CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shall be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers or partners. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of A~,reement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit CITY's or owner remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Comoliance with A~reement. 9.1. Periodic Review. CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. F:~DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTx273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 15 9.2. Good-Faith Com!lliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as CITY, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. The failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review bv City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY' s general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by 9.5 Administration of Apreement. Any decision by CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after OWNER receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render, at a noticed public hearing, its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was filed. 9.6. Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by CITY, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from CITY' s receipt of such request. 10. Events of Default: Remedies and Termination. Unless amended or canceled as provided in Section 8, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10, this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. 10.1. Defaults by OWNER. If CITY determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER, specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. CITY may F:~DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRPTk273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 16 terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that its default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER, except as provided in Section 10.3, CITY's sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be CITY's right to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults by CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to CITY, specify the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply, CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement and OWNER may terminate this Agreement and, in addition, may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Snecific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, CITY's remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of Let, al Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Riverside County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et seq. OWNER and CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development AgreemenLdoc 17 or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY are unable to agree on a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 10.5. Estoot~el Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: 10.5. 1. The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2. The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. 10.5.3. No default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. 10.5.4. In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. 11.1. No Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its rights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person, except as provided in Section 11.3. 11.3. Force Maieure. OWNER shall not be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond OWNER control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resource regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoria (including, without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. F:XDEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRFl~73PA99 Development AgreemenLdoc lg 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by OWNER or CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litigation. The period of time after the Effective Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pending, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be filed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government A~encies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental agency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 11.5. Notice of Delay. OWNER shall give notice to CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section 11.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time aRer OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attn.: PlannerManager With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90071 - 1469 Attn.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: Pala Rainbow, LLC 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 102 Temecula, California 92590 Attn.: Michelle D. Schierberl, Managing Member F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~.73PA99 Development Agreement. doe 19 With a copy to: Lorenz Alhadeff Cannon & Rose, LLP 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 203 Temecula, California 92591-4677 Attn.: Philip D. Oberhansley, Esq. Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Recording,. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to CITY, in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of A~reement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and CITY agree that this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Rivhts. OWNER and CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon, or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereina~er defined) may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the project and City agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10.1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre- F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTN273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 20 condition to the institution of legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall allow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the fight, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to cure such default, in which case no default shall exist and the City shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, then to commence to cure such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to cure any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material part of consideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party bene~ted thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 17. Subsec~uent Amendment to Authorizim, Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 3.3.2 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. lnteroretation and Governin~ Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headin~,s. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. F:XDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 21 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach hereof by an OWNER. shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation, or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemni~r CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER. that committed the breach. However, CITY shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. Recitals. All Recitals set forth herein are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. 18.7. Entire A~reement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Maus. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of (i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentative map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of CITY and OWNER. and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,1999 "CITY" CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation By: Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk F:~DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRFI~73PA99 Development Agreement. doe 22 APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: ,1999"OWNER" PALA RAINBOW, LLC By: By: Its: State of California ) ) ss County of ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or 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 his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. State of California ) ) ss County of ) Signature of Notary F:xDEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 23 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY OWNED BY PALA RAINBOW, LLC F:~k'pts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRFYx273PA99 Development Agreanent. docF:XDepts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT'x273pA99 Development AgreemenLdoc 25 LI,I a, 0 EXHIBIT B ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS F:NDEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRFI~73PA99 Development Agt~emenLdocF:~DEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~273PA99 Development 28 Z CHAPTER 17.08 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS SECTIONS: 17.08.010 17.08.020 17.08.030 17.08.040 17.08.050 17.08.060 17.08.070 17.08.080 Purpose and intent. Description of commercial/office/industrial districts. Use regulations. Development standards. Special use regulations and standards. Landscape requirements and standards. Commercial/office/industrial performance standards. Environmental standards. 17.08.010 PURPOSE AND INTENT. The following zoning districts are intended to provide regulations for the safe, efficient and creative design of the commercial, office and industrial areas within the city. The zoning districts are intended to be consistent with the land use designations that are described in the land use element of the Temecula general plan. In certain situations several zoning districts are established to implement the goals and objectives of the general plan. The commercial/office/industrial zoning districts are intended to permit the range of industrial or commercial uses in areas where uses are consistent with the general plan. It is further intended to accomplish the following: Provide for appropriate commercial areas to provide the city with a sound retail and industrial base with employment opportunities for the community. To ensure compatibility of retail commercial and office uses with adjacent land uses and to minimize traffic congestion and overloading of the city's utility systems. To encourage and assure that new commercial and industrial development will be planned in a comprehensive manner with high standards of architecture, landscape and site design. (Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.020 DESCRIPTION OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. The purpose and intent of the zoning districts are described as follows: Neighborhood Commercial (NC). The neighborhood commercial designation includes smaller-scale business activities which generally provide retail or convenience services for the local residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Typical uses include traditional small food markets (floor area less than twenty-five thousand square feet), drug stores, clothing stores, sporting goods, offices, hardware stores, child care and community facilities. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Community Commercial (CC). The community commercial designation includes retail, professional office and service-oriented business activities which serve the entire community. Community commercial areas typically include some neighborhood commercial uses as well as larger retail uses including department stores, theaters, restaurants, professional offices, specialty retail stores and shopping centers. Chapter 17.08- I Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT). The highway commercial designation is intended to provide for those uses that are located adjacent to major transportation routes or within convenient access from freeway interchanges. Highway commercial development should be located near major arterials, and developed as clusters of commercial development rather than permitted to extend along the major streets. Typical uses may include tourist accommodations and lodging facilities, automobile service stations, restaurants, convenience shopping, and food stores, and gift shops. Service Commercial (SC). The service commercial designation is intended to provide for intensive commercial uses and selected light manufacturing uses that typically require extensive floor area. Typical uses include home improvement stores, discount retail stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships and auto service and repair. Warehousing and light manufacturing may be permitted as supporting uses for a business that is consistent with the service commercial designation. Professional Office (PO). The professional office designation includes primarily single-tenant or multi-tenant offices and may include supporting uses. The office developments are intended to include low rise offices situated in a landscaped garden arrangement and may include mid-rise structures at appropriate locations. Typical uses include legal, design, engineering or medical offices, corporate and governmental offices, community facilities. Limited supporting convenience retail and personal service (such as dry cleaners, barbers, shoe repair shop) commercial may be permitted to serve the needs of the on-site employees. A maximum of fifteen percent of the total square footage of the floor area shall be devoted to retail or personal service uses. Business Park District (BP). It is the intent of the business park zoning designation to develop well designed business and employment centers that include attractive and distinctive architectural design, innovative site planning, and substantial landscaping and visual quality. Typical uses may include administrative offices, research and development laboratories, custom made product manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging, and fabrication of goods, such as jewelry, furniture, art objects, clothing, on-site wholesale of goods produced, and labor intensive manufacturing, assembly, and repair processes which do not involve frequent truck traffic. Retail uses are not permitted in this zoning district except as supporting a principal business park use (limited to fifteen percent (15%) of the square footage of the development). Light Industrial District (LI). It is the intent of the light industrial zoning designation to promote the development of attractive comprehensively planned industrial uses that will help to provide the city with a sound and diverse industrial base. This district allows for a wide variety of industrial uses including manufacturing, compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials, and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. Wholesaling, storage and warehousing within enclosed building, storage and wholesale to retailers from the premises of finished goods and food products are also allowed. Also included in this zoning distdct are the following uses; warehousing, freight handling, shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unrefined raw or semirefined products requiring further processing or manufacturing. Storage of raw or finished materials may occur outside providing there is adequate screening from adjoining land use areas. Standards are provided to protect adjoining uses from excessive noise, odor, smoke toxic materials, and other potentially objectionable impacts. (Ord. 96-19 § 2(EE)(part); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (pad); Ord 97-17 § 2(D)) Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 2 17.08.030 USE REGULATIONS. The land uses list in the following Table 17.08.030 shall be permitted in one or more of the commercial zoning districts as indicated in the columns corresponding to each residential district. Where indicated with a letter "P" the use shall be a permitted use. Where indicated with a "-," the use is prohibited within the zone. A letter "C" indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use I Ni~ I CC ~ HT I SC } PO ] B= LI A Adult business-subject to Chapter 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code Aerobics/dance/gymnastics/jazzercise/martial arts C F P P C C - studios (less than 5,000 sq. ~.) :i Aerobicsldancelgymnasticsljazzerciselmartial arts F P P C - studios (greater than 5,000 sq. ft.) Airports - C C Alcoholism or drug treatment facilities C C C C Alcohol and drug treatment (outpatient) C C C P Alcoholic beverage sales C C C C - Ambulance services P P - P P Animal hospital/shelter P P P - P P Antique restoration C C C C P Antique sales P P P P Apparel and accessory shops P P P P Appliance sales and repairs (household and small P P - P C C appliances) Arcades (pinball and video games) C C C - - - Art supply stores P P P P - - Auction houses - C P - C C Auditoriums and conference facilities C C C C C C Automobile dealers (new and used) - C - C Automobile sales (brokerage)-showroom only (new C C P - C and used)-no outdoor display Automobile repair services - C C F - P Automobile rental C C F - P Automobile painting and body shop - C - P Automobile salvage yards/impound yards - - - C Automobile service stations with or without an P P F C C F automated car wash Automotive oil change/lube services with no major C P F - F repairs Automotive parts-sales P P P P - F Automotive service stations selling beer and/or wine- C~ C~ C~ C1 C~ C with or without an automated car wash Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 3 B Bakery goods distribution Bakery retail Bakery wholesale Banks and financial institutions Barber and beauty shops Bed and breakfast Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) Billlard parlor/poolhall Binding of books and similar publications Blood bank Blueprint and duplicating and copy services Bookstores Bowling alley Building material sales (with exterior storage/sales areas greater than 50 percent of total sales area) Building material sales (with exterior storage/sales areas less than 50 percent of total sales area) Butcher shop C Cabinet shop Cabinet shops under 20,000 sq. ft.-no outdoor storage Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) Candy/confectionery sales Car wash, full service Carpet and rug cleaning Catering services Clothing sales Coins, purchase and sales Cold storage facilities Communications and microwave installations2 Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use I I~CICC HT SC I - P = p P P , p- P P P P > p P P - C P P P P P - C C C - p P P - p P P P P P P P P P - p. C C P P P P P P P P P C P P P P P P p ~ PO EP P P P P P - C - p P P P P P C P LI P P P P P P P P P P P P C P P P P Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 4 Table 17.08,030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use NC Communications equipment sales Community care facilities Computer sales and service Congregate care housing for the elderly Construction equipment sales, service or rental Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Convenience market Costume rentals Crematoriums Cutlery D Data processing equipment and systems Day care centers Delicatessen Discount/department store Distribution facility Drug store/pharmacy Dry cleaners Dry cleaning plant E Emergency shelters Equipment sales and rentals (no outdoor storage) Equipment sales and rentals (outdoor storage) F Feed and grain sales Financial, insurance, real estate offices Fire and police stations Floor covering sales Florist shop Food processing Fortunetelling, spiritualism, or similar activity P P P C CC C P P P P P P HT P P P P SC C P P P C- C P P P PO BP LI P P P P P p - - p - p C - C C P P P P P P Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 C P p - p P P P ~ . P P- P ~ ~ p ) _ p ~ p _ _ ) p ~ p ~ Chapter 17.08 - 5 C C C C C P - C P C - P C C - P P P P C P P C P C - C P P P P P P p - p - C- C P P P P P P - _ P P P P P P C C C C - P Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use !~ .C CC Freight terminals Fuel storage and distribution Funeral parlors, mortuary Furniture sales Furniture transfer and storage G Garden supplies and equipment sales and service Gas distribution, meter and control station General merchandise/retail store less than 10,000 sq. ~. Glass and mirrors, retail sales Governmental offices less than 5,000 sq. ft. Grocery store, retail Grocery store, wholesale Guns and firearm sales H Hardware stores Health and exercise clubs (less than 5,000 sq. ft.) Health and exercise clubs (greater than 5,000 sq. ~.) Health food store Health care facility Heliports Hobby supply shop Home and business maintenance service Hospitals Hotels/motels I Ice cream parlor Impound yard Interior decorating service J Junk or salvage yard Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 HT $C PO E.P U - p - C - C - p P - C P -= - C .... C C C P P = - o p P = . _ C P P = P P P - P P > C - - - P - C P - p - p - P P P P P ~3 C P C P P P P P P P C P C P p - C - P P P C C P P C C C C C = = p ~ p .... C = = p ~ p ~ J- C Chapter 17.08 - 6 Description of Use Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts I NClcc K Kennel L Laboratories, film, medical, research or testing centers Laundromat Laundry service (commercial) Libraries, museums and galleries (private) Liquified petroleum, sales and distribution Liquor stores Lithographic service Locksmith M Machine shop Machinery storage yard Mail order businesses Manufacturing of products similar to, but not limited to, the following: - C IHT P P P P _ _ p- - C C C - C C C , . p P P P P PO C IBP P P C P L , , _ p - - - C P P P P F C C F F Custom-made product, processing, assembling, packaging, and fabrication of goods within enclosed building (no outside storage), such as jewelry, furniture, art objects, clothing, labor intensive manufacturing, assembling, and repair processes which do not involve frequent truck traffic. F P Compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. Wholesaling, storage, and warehousing within enclosed building, freight handling, shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unrefined, raw or semirefined products requiring further processing or manufacturing, and outside storage. P Uses under 20,000 sq. ft. with no outside storage Massage Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 P P - p P p = Chapter 17.08 - 7 Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use Medical equipment sales/rental Membership clubs, organizations, lodges Mini-storage or Mini-warehouse facilities4 Mobilehome sales and service Motion picture studio Motorcycle sales and service Movie theaters Musical and recording studio N Nightclubs/taverns/bars/dance club/teen club Nurseries (retail) Nursing homes/convalescent homes O Office equipment/supplies, sales/services Offices, administrative or corporate headquarters with greater than 50,000 sq. ft. Offices, professional services with less than 50,000 sq. ft., including, but not limited to, business law, medical, dental, veterinarian, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, real estate, insurance P Paint and wallpaper stores Parcel delivery services Parking lots and parking structures Pawnshop Personal service shops Pest control services Pet grooming/pet shop Photographic studio Plumbing supply yard (enclosed or unenclosed) Postal distribution Postal services P P P (~ C C C - P p + c c c + C C C - C C P C C C C C p; p P . ! C C C ii p. P P r C C C P P P = p P p' '; C - C :~ p P P = p P P - - C ~ p P P PO ~BP L! C C C - C P - p - p P - C , - p P : - c -i C P P p p Fi P P P P P c P , P P -, - p - p P P P - P - P P P P Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17,08 - 8' Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use Printing and publishing (newspapers, periodicals, books, etc.) Private utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission) Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting studios, offices Radio/television transmitter Recreational vehicle parks Recreational vehicle sales Recreational vehicle, trailer, and boat storage within an enclosed building Recreational vehicle, trailer and boat storage-exterior yard Recycling collection facilities Recycling processing facilities Religious institution, without a daycare or private school Religious institution, with a private school Religious institution, with a daycare Residential (one dwelling unit on the same parcel as a commercial or industrial use for use of the proprietor of the business) Residential, multiple-family housing Restaurant, drive-in/fast food Restaurants and other eating establishments Restaurants with lounge or live entertainment Retail support use (15 percent of total development square footage in BP and LI) Rooming and boarding houses S Scale, public Schools, business and professional Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 NC ~eC - C HT = p P P sC - p P P C C C C Po eP C ~ P p ~ p C - p P - p C P - C P C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C G C C - C > P P P C C ~3 C C - C - - - C C C P C - C P P C Chapter 17,08 - 9 Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use N ~ CC HT SC PO E P Schools, private (kindergarten through Grade 12) C P P C P C Scientific research and development offices and - C P laboratories Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care) P P P P - Solid waste disposal facility - - Sports and recreational facilities C C C C C C Swap Meet, entirely inside a permanent building3 - C C Swap Meet, Outdoor - - Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales P P - T Tailor shop P P Taxi or limousine service - P P Tile sales - P - Tobacco shop C P P Tool and die casting - - Transfer, moving and storage o - Transportation terminals and stations - C Truck sales/rentals/service - - TVNCR repair P P P U Upholstery shop V Vending machine sales and service ~ - W Warehousing/distribution - Watch repair :~ P P Wedding chapels - P P Welding shop - - Welding supply and service (enclosed) - - Y Reserved - p p - p - F C - p - C - p - P L C C C P P P P C P P P P P Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 10 Z Reserved 1. 2. 3. 4. Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use } NCJC; HT IS'; PO The CUP will be subject to Section 17.08.050(G). Subject to standards outlined in appendix. See Chapter 5.22 of the Temecula Municipal Code. See Section 17.080.050(R), special use regulations and standards for self-storage or m~ni- warehouse facilities. (Ord. 96-19 §§ 2(EE)(part) and 4; Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part);Ord. 97-03 § 2;Ord. 97-06 § 2; Ord 97- 17§(5)) 17.08.040 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The development standards listed below are the minimum standards for development with the respective zoning districts. It is intended that these standards will be met in addition to the commercial/office/industrial performance standards of Section 17.08.070. Considerations for approval of development plans and for awarding floor area ratio bonuses will be based upon both the development standards and the degree of conformance with the performance standards. In the event of a conflict between the development standards and the performance standards, the director of planning shall determine which requirement best implements the intent of the development code. Separate development standards have been established for developments on a single lot and for those commercial shopping centers or industrial planned developments which include multiple structures on one OF more Jots. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 11 The following Table 17.08.040A provides the development standards for the commercial/office and industrial districts for developments within planned shopping centers or industrial/business parks. Table 17.08.040A Development Standards - Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts For Developments within Planned Shopping Centers or Industrial/Business Parks Commercial Development Standards I~ C CC HT SC PO Minimum gross area of site 5 acres 10 acres 10 acres 10 a:res 5 acres Target floor area ratio 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.50 Maximum floor area ratio 0.40 1 .,) 1.0 1.5 1.0 with intensity bonus as per Section 17.08.050 Front yard adjacent to a street: Arterial street 25 ~. 20 ~. 25 ft. 25 ~. 25 ~. Collector 2(2 ~. 15 ~. 20 ~. 20 ~. 20 ~. Local 1,= ~. 10 =t. 15~. 15~. 10~. Yard adjacent to 2,= ~. 25 =t. 30 ~. 30 ~. 25 ~. residentially zoned property. Interior side yard ) 0 0 C 0 Rear yard 1,= ~. 10 't. 10 ft. 10 ~. 10 ~. Accessory structure- 5 ~. 5 ~. 5 ft. 5 1. 5 ~. side/rear setback Minimum building separation: Onestory: 1C ~. 10 =t. 10~. 15~. 15~. Two stories: 15ft. 15 =t. 15~. 20ft. 20~. Three stories or more 20 "t. 20 ~. 25 ft. 25 ~. Maximum height 35 ~. 50 =t. 75 ~. 50 ~. 75 ~. Maximum percent of lot 25% 30% 30% 30 ~/o 50% coverage Minimum required 25% 20% 20% 20 ~/o 25% landscaped open space Fence, wall or hedge 6 h. 6 1. Not screening outdoor storage- allowed minimum height Fence, wall or hedge 6 ~. 8 ft... 8 ~. 12 ~. Not screening outdoor storage- allowed maximum height BP 10 acres 0.40 15 20 ~. 20 ~. 10~. 35 ~. C 10ft. 51. 15fi. '20 ~. 25 ft. 50 ~. 40% 25% 6't, 12ft. LI 10 a :res 0.40 1.0 20 ft. 20 ft. 10ft. 40 ft. C 10~. 5~. 15't. 20 =t. 25 ~. 40 40% 20% 12~t, Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 12 The following Table 17.08.040B provides the development standards for the Commercial/Office and industrial Districts for a development on a separate lot, Table 17.08.040B Development Standards - Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts For a Development on a Separate Lot Commercial/Development Standards Minimum net lot area (sq. ~.) Target floor area ratio Maximum floor area ratio with intensity bonus as per Section 17.08.050 NC CC HT S; PO B = L 30,C00 30,( 00 20,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,C 00 sq. ~, sq. ~. sq. ~. sq. ~. sq. ~. sq. ~. sq. ~. 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.50 0.40 0./-0 0.z 0 1,3 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1 Minimum width at required 50 't 50 ft. 80 ft. 101:: ft. 80 ft. 10(: ft. 100 ft. front setback area Minimum depth 100 ~, 10(: ~. 100 ~. 12(: ~. 120 ~. 12(: ~. 120 ft. Minimum frontage on a street 30 :t, 30 ft, 50 ft. 80 ~. 60 ~. 80 ~. 80 Yard area adjacent to a street: Arterial street 25 :t, 15 ~, 25 ~. 25 =t, 20 ~. , 20 ~. 20 Collector 25 '"t. 10 ~ 25 ~. 25 ~. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 't. Local 15 =t, 10~. 15~, 15'=t, 10ft. 10ft. 10't. Interior side yard 0 C 0 0, 0 0 0 Rear yard 15 ~. 10~, 10ft. 10't, 10~, 10ft. 10't. Accessory structure-side/rear 5 f:.. 5 1. 5 ~. 5 f'. 5 ~. 5 ft. 5 f:.. setback Yard areas adjacent to 25 :t. 25 ~. 30 ~. 30 -t. 25 ~. 30 ~. 40 :t. residentially zoned property, Maximum height 35 :t, 50 ft. 75 ft. 50 l. 75 fi. 50 ft. 50 :t. Maximum percent of lot 25% 30% 30% 30% 50% 40~o 40% coverage Minimum required landscaped 25% 20 % 20% 20% 25% 25 ~ 20% open space Fence, wall or hedge- 6 f:, 6 1. 6 ~, 6 fL 6 ~. 6 1. 6 f:.. maximum height Accessory structure- 12 't 12 ~. 12 ft. 12 ft.. 12 ~, 12 ~. 12 maximum height Fence, wall or hedge ~ 6 't, 6 ~. Not 6 ft. 6 screening outdoor storage- i allowed minimum height Fence, wall or hedge 6 ~. 8 't.. 8 ft. 12 ~. Not 12 ~.. 12 :t. screening outdoor storage- allowed maximum height (Ord. 96-19 § 2(EE) (part) and (FF) and 3(B) and (C); Ord, 95-16 § 2 (part); Ord. 98-14 § 3) Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 13 17.08.050 SPECIAL USE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS. Commercial/Office/Industrial Incentives. Increase in the Floor Area Ratio. As a part of the process of the review and approval of a development plan or conditional use permit, the planning commission and city council may consider an increase in the maximum allowable intensity as indicated on Table 17.08.040A. The amount of the increased intensity shall not exceed the maximum of the density range or floor area ratios stated in the general plan for the specific land use designation. In addition, the city engineer must determine if the project at the increased intensity does not create unmitigable impacts upon the traffic circulation in the area or overburden the utilities serving the area. The city council shall consider the following factors in determining if an increase in the intensity is justified: The project includes use(s) which provide outstanding and exceptional benefits to the city with respect to the employment, fiscal, social and economic needs of the community. Examples include: the provision of affordable housing with proximity to convenient shopping and employment, accessibility to mass transit facilities, and creative mixtures of land uses, housing types, and densities. The project provides exceptional architectural and landscape design amenities which reflect an attractive image and character for the city. Examples include but extraordinary architectural design, landscaped entry features (maybe within the public right-of-way,) public trail systems, or public plazas, and recreational features in excess of what is required by this development code. The project provides enhanced public facilities which are needed by the city. Beyond those required mitigations. Examples of such facilities include: the provision of community meeting centers, enhanced transportation improvements, off-site traffic signalization, police or fire stations, public recreation facilities and common parking areas or structures to serve the community. B. Entertainment Establishments Providing Dancing, Music and Similar Activities. Noise levels shall not exceed the standards set forth in the nois. e element of the general plan or the environmental performance standards of this development code (Section 17.08.070). Dancing, music, and similar entertainment uses shall be limited to between the hours of six p.m. and two a.m. The city may apply additional requirements or limitations depending on the location, surrounding uses and other considerations. Arcades. In consideration of a request for an arcade, the following criteria will be considered and application material requested. The planning commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the need for adult supervision, hours of operation, proximity to schools and other community uses, compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses, noise attenuation, bicycle facilities, and interior waiting areas. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 14 The applicant shall submit with his application, three sets of typed gummed labels, listing the name and address of all businesses within a shopping center and all landowners within a three-hundred-foot radius of the shopping center or arcade. Each application shall contain a description of the types of machines, a floor plan, and hours of operation. Car Washes. A conditional use permit shall be required for all full-service or self-service car washes within the commercial districts. Car washes shall comply with the following criteria: Such business shall be located at least two hundred feet from any residential district. 2. Wash bays and vacuum areas shall be screened from public view. Regular monitoring of the facility by an attendant shall be provided during business hours to control noise, litter, and other nuisances. Hours of operation shall be limited to seven a.m. to ten p.m., unless otherwise specifically established as a condition of approval. Automatic shut-off of water and electrical systems, except for security and fire protection, shall be provided during non-business hours. Permanent Indoor Swap Meet Facilities. Indoor swap meets shall be established only in buildings containing five thousand square feet or more of gross floor area. City business licenses and state seller permits shall be obtained by every tenant operating a stall space. No more than one business license shall be granted per one hundred fifty square feet of building floor area. The minimum average square footage of a partitioned cubicle or stall space (booth) shall be one hundred fifty square feet. The minimum size for an individual stall shall be one hundred square feet, and no more than twenty-five stall spaces shall be permitted to contain one hundred square feet. 5. No adult business, as defined in the Temecula Municipal Code shall be permitted. 6. No loudspeakers or sound equipment which can be heard from exterior or semipublic areas shall be used on the premises. Each stall space shall be partitioned with partition walls at a height of not less than five feet, six inches. Scissor-type gating shall not be used to separate vendors or vending areas. All floor areas of indoor tenant spaces, shall be covered with a high-grade tile or carpeting. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 o 15 9. Aisles shall have a minimum width of seven feet. 10. Security personnel shall be provided during hours of operation. F. Used Motor Vehicle Sales. The minimum lot width of any site supporting a used motor vehicle sales business shall be one hundred feet. 2. The minimum lot area shall be ten thousand square feet. o Buffer walls and landscaping shall be as provided as required for the zoning district in which the use is located. A building containing not less than two hundred square feet shall be maintained on the lot supporting the business. The building shall be a permanent structure; portable buildings or mobilehomes are not permitted. G. Alcoholic Beverage Sales. All businesses or establishments offering the sale of alcoholic beverages, except for the incidental sale of beer and wine at a restaurant, shall require the appropriate license from the state of California and the city and be subject to a conditional use permit. Any automotive service station which proposes to sell beer and wine concurrently with motor vehicle fuel shall require a conditional use permit which permit shall be subject to the provisions of Business and Professions Code Section 23790 et seq. and shall require that: a. The' decision be based on written findings. A denial of an application for a CUP be subject to appeal to the city council in accordance with Section 17.03.090 of this code. The same procedure for noticing, and conducting the CUP hearing that is utilized by the city for all other CUPs be used and provide for all parties to be present and to present evidence. The decision and findings be based on substantial evidence in view of the whole record to justify the ultimate decision. The above businesses shall not be located within five hundred feet of any religious institution, school or public park. The license application shall be reviewed by the city's police services prior to city approval. Trash Collection Areas. Trash collection areas shall be located within a screened enclosure. The enclosure should not be visible from a public street or from any adjacent residential area. Trash collection shall include separate facilities for the recycling of paper, bottles, plastic and aluminum. Additional design requirements are provided in the performance standards of this chapter. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 16 Lo Outside Storage and Service Areas. Outside storage should be confined to the rear of the principal structure(s), rear two- thirds of the lot, whichever is more restrictive. All storage areas shall be located on appropriate paving and be screened from public view from any adjoining properties and from the public rights-of-way by appropriately designed walls, fencing and landscaping. Storage on Vacant Lots. When permitted by the zoning district regulations or by a development permit outside storage on a vacant lot shall be screened from public view from any adjoining properties and from the public right-of-way by appropriately designed, walls, fencing and landscaping. Lighting. All lighting fixtures, including spotlights, electrical reflectors and other means of illumination for signs, structures, landscaping, parking, loading, unloading and similar areas, shall be focused, directed and arranged to prevent glare or direct illumination on streets or adjoining property. Mechanical Equipment· Mechanical equipment used in the manufacturing process may be required to be enclosed in a building and roof-mounted accessory equipment may be required to be screened from view· Retail Sales. Retail sales and services that are incidental to permitted use are subject to the following conditions: The operations are contained within the main structure which houses the primary use. The retail sale area occupies no more than fifteen percent of the total building square footage. 3. No retail sales or display of merchandise shall occur outside the structures. Drive-Thru Facilities. Commercial uses including restaurants, financial institutions or other business providing drive-thru facilities shall be subject to the following requirements. 1. All drive-thru facilities shall require a conditional use permit. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the drive-thru aisles. If pedestrian walkways do cross the drive aisles, they shall be clearly marked with paving or striping. Drive-thru aisle shall have a minimum width of eleven feet on the straight sections and twelve feet on curved portions. For fast food restaurants the drive-thru aisles shall have a sufficient stacking area behind the menu board to accommodate six cars. The speakers shall be located so as to protect adjoining residential areas from excessive noise. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 17 Includes Amendments as of June 1. 1999 Temporary Office Modules. 1. A master plan for development of permanent buildings shall be submitted in conjunction with such request. 2. The design of the office modules shall have a permanence, as mu~:h as practicable. This shall include such things as screening temporary foundations, screening utility equipment, and using overhangs, walkways and stepped roofs to mitigate the temporary appearance. 3. The approval of temporary office modules shall require necessary street improvements, grading, drainage facilities and landscaping. Outdoor Sales of Merchandise. All businesses shall be conducted complete within an enclosed building. The following outdoor sales and commercial activities may be permitted to operate outdoors, within their respective districts and subject to any required reviews and permits: 1. Automobile, boat, trailer, camper, and motorcycle sales and rentals (subject to a conditional use permit); 2. Building material, supplies and equipment rental and sales (subject to a conditional use permit); 3. Fruit and vegetable stands (required temporary use permit); 4. Horticultural nurseries (subject to a conditional use permit); 5. Gasoline pumps, oil racks and accessory items when located on pump islands; 6. Outdoor display of merchandise as accessory to current on-site business (subsection Q of this section); 7. Outdoor recreation uses; 8. Parking lot and sidewalk sales (subject to temporary use permit and regulations set forth in this chapter); and 9. Other activities and uses similar to those above as determined by the director of planning. Outdoor Display of Merchandise Accessory to Current On-Site Business. Any outdoor display must be done in conjunction with the business being conducted within the building and shall comply with the following regulations: 1. The items being displayed shall be of the same type that are lawfully displayed and sold inside the building on the premises. 2. The aggregate display area shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the linear frontage of the store front or ten linear feet, whichever is greater. 3. Items shall not project more than four feet from the store front. Chapter 17.08 - 18 No item, or any portion thereof, shall be displayed on public property; provided, however, items may be displayed within the public right-of-way if an encroachment permit has first been procured from the city. Items shall be displayed only during the hours that the business conducted inside the'building on the premises is open for business. No item shall be displayed in a manner that: causes a safety hazard; obstructs the entrance to any building; interferes with, or impedes the flow of pedestrian or vehicle traffic; is unsightly or creams any other condition that is detrimental to the appearance of the premises or any surrounding property; or in any other manner is detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or causes a public nuisance. Flag Poles. A maximum height of seventy five feet. Self-Storage or Mini-Warehouse Facilities. 1. Development Standards The following standards shall be applied to all new self-storage or mini-warehouse facilities: The design of the facility shall be compatible with the surrounding area in terms of design, bulk and mass, materials and colors. Building exteriors shall not be corrugated metal or similar surface, but shall be of finished quality. Metal containers are prohibited. In commercial zoning districts the rear and side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet. In industrial zoning districts no rear or side yard setbacks are required. The director of planning may increase the setbacks to a maximum of 25 feet when adjacent to an existing residential development project. The front yard setback shall maintain the setback for the underlying zoning classification. c. The maximum lot coverage shall be 65 percent. The development site shall provide a minimum of 10% landscaped open space for a project within commercial districts. In industrial districts, the total landscaping shall be equal to the required setback areas. No interior landscaping is required, but the setback areas shall be landscaped. e. A manager's residential unit may be provided, but is not required. Required parking spaces may not be rented as, or used for, vehicular storage. However, additional parking area may be provided for vehicles. boats, buses, trailers, etc., provided that the storage area is adequately screened from public view with enhanced landscaping, decorative walls, fences, or other methods as deemed appropriate by the director. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 19 2. Performance and Use Regulations Any business activity, other than rental of storage units, including the on-site sale of merchandize or garage sales, and transfe~storage businesses which utilize vehicles as part of the business is prohibited. No servicing or repair of motor vehicles, boats, trailers, lawn mowers, or any similar equipment is permitted. Storage units shall not be used for the storage of fiammable liquids, highly combustible or explosive materials, or hazardous chemicals. Truck or vehicle rental is prohibited without obtaining all necessary approvals subject to the Development Code Schedule of Permitted Uses. Automobile, Motorcycle and Truck Dealership Landscape Standards. Landscape Standards· The following standards shall be applied to all new automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships or substantial alterations to existing automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships. ae Display areas: a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape island shall be required at the end of all display area lanes adjacent to the main entry drive lane· A one-foot strip, made of concrete or other materials acceptable to the Community Development Director, shall be located next to the curb immediately adjacent to the end display parking space. Said landscape islands shall have a mixture of trees, shrubs and groundcover shall have automatic irrigation. Street frontages. All portions of the property which have street frontage shall meet one of the following criteria: A minimum of twelve feet (12') of landscaping shall be provided, measured from the rear of the sidewalk to the display area length and shall be surrounded by low growing shrubs, groundcover and tuff; or A minimum of twenty feet (20') of landscaping shall be provided, measured from the rear of the sidewalk to the display area, with display area allowed to encroach into eight feet (8') of the landscape area. a) Display areas shall be paved with concrete, a maximum of twenty (20) feet in length and shall be surrounded by low growing shrubs, groundcover and tuff. b) The number of display areas allowed shall be calculated in the following manner: 3 display spaces per 100 linear feet of street frontage. Fractional spaces (.5 and over) shall be rounded up. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 20 c) No display area shall be located immediately adjacent to another display area. Landscaping shall be provided between display areas. Development adjacent to existing and proposed residential uses. All portions of the property which abut an existing or proposed residential use shall have a minimum ten foot (10')wide landscape buffer. d, All other portions of the property which do not abut a street or existing or proposed residential uses shall have a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape buffer. e, All customer parking on the site shall be clearly identified, either through special paint (i.e. curb painting) or signage and shall be subject to the landscape requirements contained in Section 17.24.050H of the Development Code. Service bays shall not be visible from a public street and shall be adequately screened from adjacent residential uses. Inventory and vehicle-in-repair storage areas on the site shall be clearly identified and will not need to be intemally landscaped. If they are located on the perimeter or adjacent to residential development or sensitive areas they shall be screened in the manner discussed above..(Ord. 96-19 §§ 2(GG)-(II); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part); Ord 97-17 § 3(C), § 10; Ord. 98-17 § 2) 17.08.060 LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. A. Plant Materials. Landscape design and construction shall emphasize drought-tolerant materials when possible. Street trees shall be planted at a minimum of one tree per thirty linear feet of street frontage. Trees shall be a minimum fifteen-gallon size at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallons at the time of planting. I All landscape materials shall be subject to approval by the city for appropriateness and consistency with the water efficient landscape ordinance. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 21 Irrigation Requirements. All landscaped areas shall include an automation irrigation system approved by the city that provides adequate coverage and irrigation. Efficient water conservation systems such as drip irrigation systems should be used. Property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy, growing condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing or trimming. Landscape Design Standards. Setback areas that are not used for vehicular and pedestrian access shall be landscaped. In addition, all interior courts open space areas and boundary areas that are not covered with buildings, pavement, or other impervious surface shall be landscaped. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, berming, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials, drought-tolerant plant materials for water conservation, and utilize planting (i.e., combination of shrubs, trees and climbing vines) to break up large building masses and perimeter walls and fencing. The use or combination of berming, landscape materials, low level walls and structures, shall be used to screen parking areas, loading areas, trash enclosures, and utilities from public view. lope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes between 5:1 and 2:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with an appropriate groundcover for erosion control. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate groundcover for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: One fifteen-gallon or larger tree per each six hundred square feet of slope area; ii. One gallon or larger shrub for each one hundred square feet of slope area; and iii. Appropriate groundcover. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 22 b, Slope banks in excess of ten feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2:1 shall also provide one five-gallon or larger tree per each one thousand square feet of slope area in addition to the requirements of subsection (C)(5)(a) of this section. C, All trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. Where trees are planted in pedestrian areas, a protective tree grate shall be provided. Trees and shrubs should be planted and maintained so that they do not interfere with utilities, light standards, sight lines for traffic safety, encroach on adjacent property, or obstruct to the solar access rights of adjoining property owners. (Ord. 96-19 §§ 2 (J J) and 3(D); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.070 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide for uniform performance standards and criteria for the design of commercial buildings within the city in accordance with the recognition that the quality and compatibility of building design directly impacts the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the community. Moreover, quality and compatible building design promotes and preserves the stability of the city through orderly growth and enhancement of a quality business environment. These purposes are further achieved through the following: The enhancement of the physical character of the community and quality of life through sound planning and coordinated development. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 23 2. The balancing of aesthetic design qualities with functional development. The preservation and enhancement of the physical character, integrity and quality of commercial/office/industrial areas. The enhancement and protection of property values and the adherence to the goals and policies of the general plan. The stimulation of improvements and maintenance of surrounding properties, thereby preventing and reversing the effects of urban blight. General Performance Standards. Developments in the commercial/office/industrial districts should be designed to provide variety and visual interest while still creating a unified overall image. Performance standards to achieve this image include, but are not limited to the following: Use creative entry treatments with such features as canopies, awnings, cornices or atriums. Use a variety of complementary colors and avoid the use of just one color and dark co[ors. 3. Use various window shapes and sizes. 4. Vary the building shapes by using curved or angled walls. Separate buildings or accessory structures should be designed as an integral part of the primary building by using complementary materials, common architectural elements, and special landscape design techniques. Use a consistent design theme throughout the project. Employ complementary or consistent details, shapes, materials and colors. In addition, consistent signage should be provided with complementary colors, lettering, placement and materials. The bulk of the building should be divided to reduce the apparent scale and provide visual interest. Box-like designs should be avoided. This can be accomplished through the following: Use variations in the building footprints and facades. Such variations should be proportional to the overall bulk of the buildings with variations being greater for large buildings. bm Use a variety of shapes and forms including architectural projections such as roof overhangs, box windows, stairways, balconies, and cantilevers that create shadows on the buildings. Use contrasting vertical and horizontal elements that help to break the visual mass of the facade into smaller areas. d. Divide the bulk of the roof into smaller areas to reduce the apparent scale of the building and provide visual interest. The roof can be designed with varying heights and slopes to contrast with a flat roof. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 24 Co , Where the character or scale is identifiable, new development should be designed to maintain that character and to be compatible with that scale. In areas where the character is not identifiable, new development should be designed to be complementary or consistent with desirable characteristics of the surrounding area in a way that contributes to the establishment of a positive character and scale for the area through the use of similar or complementary materials, colors, or building forms and design details. Development should be designed to minimize detrimental impacts on surrounding properties, including, but not limited to, visual, noise, air quality and other environmental impacts. Strategies for minimizing the impacts include protecting residential areas adjacent to commercial development through screening of circulation areas, loading areas and trash collection points or other areas that could potentially be disruptive to the residential character of the adjacent area. Commercial Development Performance Standards. 1. Circulation. Limit egress and ingress to commercial areas to common entrance points. Orient most of the vehicular access from side streets rather than directly from major arterial. Separate vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems should be provided if possible. Pedestrian linkages between uses in the commercial areas should be provided. In shopping centers, provide separate pedestrian walkways from parking areas to the major commercial tenants. Whenever possible, parking lots should be designed to separate vehicular circulation routes from parking aisles. 2. Architectural Design. Large buildings should be designed in such a manner to avoid excessive mass and bulk. This can be accomplished by dividing the building form, varying the height of the roof structure and by creating offsets in the exterior walls. The lower floors of commercial structures should not have blank walls. Windows, trellises, wall articulation, and entrances can provide relief along expansive wall surfaces. C, Upper portions of multistory commercial structures can be stepped-back to reduce the bulk and mass of the buildings and to preserve pedestrian scale. 3. Site Planning and Design. Pedestrian amenities in commercial developments should be provided to enhance the opportunities for pedestrian circulation and social activities. Strategies to achieve this high degree of pedestrian orientation and activity include, but are not limited to, the following: Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 25 Orient the design of the buildings to the scale of pedestrian. First floor uses should be primarily retail commercial, restaurants, or public use areas. Windows and door entrances should be located on the ground floor to encourage pedestrian activity. Large expanses of uninterrupted wall surfaces should not be permitted. ii. Provide covered or enclosed walkways between the buildings on the site. iii. Provide pedestrian plazas and sidewalks of sufficient width adjacent to buildings along with amenities such as special lighting, interesting paving materials, landscaping benches and other street furniture. bo Whenever possible, new structures should be clustered. This creates plazas or pedestrian malls instead of rows of commercial or "S!rip commercial." Separate structures can be linked with arcades, trellis or clearly defined walkway. C, Minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular traffic as much as possible by orienting pedestrian circulation areas parallel with the flow of traffic through the parking areas. Loading facilities shall not be located in front of structures without screening. These facilities are most appropriately located at the rear of the structures where screening can be minimal or not needed. Open space areas should be concentrated or clustered into larger more meaningful spaces at areas of significant activity, rather than dispersed into small areas of low impact or on the periphery of the site. Compatibility. When a commercial structure is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood additional setbacks from the residentially zoned area shall be required. Multistory buildings may be stepped back to preserve the scale of the adjacent low rise structures. Industrial Development Performance Standards. 1. Circulation. The circulation plan for an industrial development should clearly differentiate circulation plans for employees, visitors, truck traffic, loading areas and pedestrian circulation. b, Facilities should be provided, when appropriate, for access to bus routes, bus stops. c. Bicycle parking areas should be provided for employees. de Walkways and paths should be provided opportunities for ~/alking or jogging for employees. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 26 2. Architectural Design. ao Long unarticulated walls should be avoided. Wall planes should not extend in a continuous direction for greater than fifty feet without an offset. b. Outstanding building and roof forms, and distinctive windows patterns. c. Blank wall elevations should be avoided on street frontages. d. Highly reflective surfaces are discouraged especially at the ground level. Wall materials should be selected that are resilient to damage from machinery. If rolling shutter doors are required, the doors should-be mounted on the inside of the building to create an uncluttered appearance from the exterior. Site Planning and Design. Placement of structures which creates opportunities for plazas, courts or gardens, lunch areas for employees with amenities such as outdoor seating and garden areas. Design features which contribute to the design character of a project may include: ceremonial entrance drives, enhanced visitor parking areas, highlighted visitor entrance areas, decorative pedestrian plazas and walkways, focal landscape treatments, site sculptures, employee recreational facilities (exercise courses, jogging paths). In order to provide security, lighting should be provided at a minimum illumination of one footcandle across parking areas and two footcandles at entrances. Lighting fixtures should be shielded to confine the spread of light to adjoining properties. The design of the lighting fixtures should be compatible with the architecture of the building. Loading areas should generally not be located in the front of the building where it is difficult to adequately screen the loading areas from public view. These areas are most appropriately located in the rear or side of the property so that the loading docks and doors are not directly in the public view. When walls or fences are necessary in the frontage of the property to conceal storage and mechanical equipment areas, walls should be architecturally treated on both sides and should be designed to complement and blend with the architectural design of the building. Long expanses of fencing or walls should be avoided unless offsets are provided, height variations, and combinations of materials are used to avoid monotony. Landscaping along the fences and at specific pockets should be provided. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 27 ii. Screening for outdoor storage should be a minimum. of eight feet and a maximum of twelve feet high depending on the height of the material being screened. Exterior storage should be in the portions of the site least visible from public view. iii. Chain link fencing with wood or metal slatting between the links is acceptable for areas that are not visible from the street. iv. When screening is required, a combination of screening techniques may be used, including solid masonry walls, landscaped berms and landscaping. Mechanical or other utility equipment shall be screened whether it is located on the roof, side of building or on the ground. The method of screening shall be architecturally integrated in terms of materials, color-and form. Roof top equipment should be integrated into the design of the building. Compatibility. Where industrial uses are adjacent to nonindustrial uses, appropriate buffering techniques such as increased setbacks, screening, berms and landscaping must be provided to mitigate any negative effects of industrial operations. (Ord. 96-19 § 2(KK); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.080 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. Development projects and buildings should be designed to minimize detrimental impacts on surrounding properties, including, but not limited to, visual, noise, air quality and other environmental impacts. Strategies for minimizing the impacts include protecting residential areas adjacent to industrial development through screening of circulation areas, loading areas and trash collection points or other areas that could potentially be disruptive to the residential character of the adjacent area. Noise. Any existing or proposed uses which generate sounds that are or may be considered a nuisance or hazard to any adjacent property due to the intermittence,.beat, frequency, or shrillness of the sounds, shall have the source of the noise muffled or otherwise controlled so that the noise is subdued to acceptable levels. Construction work is exempt from this requirement during the period a valid building permit is in force. Particulate Matter. Any existing or proposed use shall not discharge excessive particulate matter into the atmosphere for a period that exceeds three minutes in any one hour. The following standards establish maximum acceptable levels: Smoke. The density reading designated as Number 1 on the United States Bureau of Mines Ringelmann Chad is the maximum acceptable level. Dust, Dirt and Ash. Any level which can or may cause damage to the health of any individual, animal, or plant or physical soiling or discoloration of the surfaces of any structure or material which is located outside the property lines of the lot or parcel from which the particulate matter is emanating. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17,08 - 28 Odors, Toxics and Noxious Matter. Any existing or proposed use which produces odors, toxic gases or noxious matter in such quantities as can or may be readily detectable at any point outside the property lines of the premises and when such emissions are or may become a public nuisance or hazard, the use shall be modified to prevent such releases. Vibration. Any existing or proposed use which generates vibrations that can or may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property shall be cushioned or isolated to prevent generation of such vibrations. Glare. Any existing or proposed use that constitutes or may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property due to emittance of excessive light or glare from mechanical or chemical processes or from reflective materials used or stored on the site shall be shielded or otherwise modified to prevent such emissions. Heat, Radiation and Electromagnetic Disturbances. Any existing or proposed use that can or may generate excessive heat, electrical disturbances or radioactive emissions that can or may be considered hazardous or a nuisance shall be shielded, contained or otherwise modified to prevent such generations, disturbances or emissions. (Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 29 EXHIBIT C NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS F:XD EPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273pA99 Development Agreem~nt. docF:~DEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRFI~73pA99 Development Agreement. doc 29 EXHIBIT C NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS 2. 3. 4. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. General Plan The Development Code (Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code) The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 16 of the Temecula Municipal Code) Citywide Design Guidelines Habitat Conservation Ordinance Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance Uniform Building Code, as locally adopted Uniform Fire Code, as locally adopted Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction F:XI)EPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRFI~73pA99 Development AgreemenLdocF:\DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRPTM273pA99 Development Agreemera. doc 30 EXHIBIT D CURB CUT ACTIVITY F:~k'ptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRIv~73PA99 Development Agreement. docF:~)eptsXPLANNING~STAFFRpTX273pA99 Dovelopment Agreementdoe 28 7 0 !5 t~ ,,~ w, U3 0 0 x - ~" m.m m.m EXHIBIT E JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD STORM DRAIN F:~DeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTx273PA99 Development Agreement. docF:~DeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX273PA99 Development Agreement. doe 29 EXHIBIT F WETLAND MITIGATION AREA F:~Depts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTN273PA99 Development Agreement. docF:~)epts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRFY~73PA99 Development Agreement. doc 30 L--// !i ",, EXHIBIT G RESTAURANT PROHIBITION AREA F:XDEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRPT~73PA99 Development Agreement. doe 32 EXHIBIT H WETLAND ACCESS LICENSE F:XDepts~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~273PA99 Developmere AgrcemenLdocF:XI)epts~PLANNING~STAFFRFI~73PA99 Development Agr~-mcnt. doc 32 Recording requested by and when recorded, mail to: City Clerk City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 Exempt from Recording Fee per Govt. Code Sec. 27383 City of Temecula By: A.P.N. 950-110-022 (Space above ~is line for Recorders use) DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX IS NONE. Pubic Agency exempt. Revenue and Taxal:fon Code Sectbn 11922 LICENSE AGREEMENT The CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal "City" and. Pala Rainbow, LLC hereby agree as follows: corporation, hereinafier referred to as hereina~er referred to as "Grantor" 1. The right is hereby granted to City or City's designee, contractor or subcontractor to emer upon and use the real property of Grantor in the City of Temecula, State of California, described as follows: Being portions of the Temecula Rancho, in the County of Riverside, State of Califronia, which Rancho was patented to Luis Vignes by patent recorded in Book 1, Page 37 of Patents, in the office of the Count7 Recorder of San Diego County, Califronia, also being a portion of Parcel 43 as described in deed to Kacor Real ty, Inc. recorded September 29, 1977, as Instrument No. 192314 on file in the office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County. For all purposes necessary and convenient to facilitate and accomplish the construction and maintenance of the wetland creation area described further as Parcel "B" of Order of Possession, Case No. 315426, Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside filed July 24, 1998. A three- (3) day written notice shall be given to Grantor prior to using the rights herein granted. The term of this agreement shall be five- (5) years t?om the date of said notice; or acceptance of the wetland creation area by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Califomia Department of Fish and Game, whichever is less. It is agreed that the City shall emer upon Grantors property where appropriate, or designated by the Grantor, for the purpose of getting construction and maintenance equipment, and a temporary water service to and from the wetland creation area. City agrees to use reasonable care on Grantor's property in the process of performing such activities. lof3 The right to enter upon and use Grantors property includes the fight to remove and dispose of real and personal property located thereon. Grantor reserves the fight to remove salvageable real and personal property on or before the expiration of the three- (3) day notice. At the termination of the period of use of Grantors property by City, but before its relinquishment to Grantor, debris generated by City's use will be removed and the surface will be graded and lef~ in a neat condition. Each party hereby indemnifies and saves the other parties harmless from any and all liability, damage, expense, causes of action, suits, claims, liens, or judgements arising from injury to person or property and occurring on its own parcel unless caused by the act or neglect of any other party hereto and any liens arising from construction or maintenance. 5. Grantor hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of said property described above and that be/she has the fight to grant City permission to enter upon and use the property. This agreement is the result of negotiations between the parties hereto. This agreement is intended by the parties as a final expression of their understanding with respect to the matters herein and is a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof. 7. This agreement shall not be changed, modified, or amended except upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 8. This agreement supersedes any and all other prior agreements or understanding, oral or written, in connection therewith except for that certain agreement entitled. 9. Grantor, his assigns and successors in interest, shall be bound by all the terms and conditions contained in this agreement and all the parties thereto shall be jointly and severally liable thereunder. 10. The fights and obligations as described herein shall create mutual benefits and servitude upon the parcels nmning with the land. This agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their respective heirs, representatives, tenants, successors and/or assigns, and shall bind every person having any fee, leasehold, or other interest in a parcel, to the extent that covenant provisions apply to the parcel. IN WITNESS THEREOF, these presents have executed this instrument this day of ,19 Signature Signature Print Name Print Name 2of3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA} SS. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE} On , before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) w~ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the inslntme~t the person(s), or lhe m~y upon beha~ of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature 3of3 EXHIBIT M-I EASEMENT QUIT CALIM F:~)eptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~73PA99 Development Agreement. docF:XDeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRFFa73PA99 Development Agreement doe 33 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Pala Road Vacation Revised August 18, 1999 March 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M1 Page 1 of 1 That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Pala Road as described in Strip 1 and Cupeno Lane as described in Strip 3 of an easement deed recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder; bounded on the West by a curve having a radius of 933.00 feet and being concentric with and 12.00 feet easterly from a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road as described in Parcel "A" of an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; and bounded on the South by the following described line: COMMENCING at GPS Station PINYON 1 as shown on a map filed in Book 102, Pages 50 through 65 of Records of Surveys in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, said Station having coordinates of N 2166428.3493 and E 6498294.9778 based on the California State Plane Coordinate System, Nad 83, Epoch 1995.5; thence South 76°30'20.89'' West 210,105.87 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 80°49'34'' West 92.79 feet; thence South 78°06'16" West 70.41 feet to a point on a curve in the westerly line of said Pala Road (110.00 feet wide) as described in said Strip 1, said curve being concave easterly and having a radius of 1055.00 feet. RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Parcel "M" of said Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998. CONTAINING: 0.966 Acres, ,more or less. "" his reference made a pan hereof. My license expires 3/3 1/02. -~ ~' rn o , No. 6185 ~F C 1 O0 0 100 200 300 POC GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET ....... ; .... ;~ ;::; · ,",:; ..,,;o,.,, 1;,,- .... S72o58'01.46"E 310562.00 (GRID) ~2257398. 5576 LAKE 6201355.2919 (3 1 HE HIGHWAY f~Tg ~ ' ' (~T ' ' ['~ ' ~ , . ~ (R)~, , ~~ T. ~. - 2 05"08'06" 1055.00' 94.55' 3 S78"06'16"W -- 70.41' 4 NSO"49'34"W -- 92.79' 5 21'50'56" 945.00' 360.56' 6 NO9'O4'46"W -- 12.15' 7 N79"O1'41"E -- 2.75' 8 03"54'44" 1571.00' 107.27' 9 N09°04'46"w -- 12.18' 10 07"49'27" 1055.00' 144.07' 11 N24'O7'25"E -- 33.09' 12 NTO°lO'19"E -- 20.84' 13 03"44'23" 933.00' 60.90' 14 N70"10'19"E -- 10.48' LXHI~II "hi" PALA ROAD VACAT I ON REVISED 8/18/99 MAY 24, 1999 \ \ PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: RAYMOND L. MATHE, L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-31-02 PALA ROAD PER STRIP 1, I NST, NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) CUPENO LANE PER STRIP 3, I NST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) SHEET I OF 1 SHEET PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS s, SURVEYORS (909) 676-B042 FAX (9093 676-7240 SCALE ~ FIELD BOOK SCALE: ', "= 1 O0 ' JOB 15100053-M1 E EXHIBIT M-2 EASEMENT QUIT CLAIM (PALA ROAD VACATION) F:XDeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTa73PA99 Development Agreement. docF:xDeptsXPLANNING\STAFFRPTx273PA99 Development Agre~ment doc 34 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 Revised August 18, 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M2 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" Leaal Descrintion Pala Road/Cupeno Lane Vacation That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Pala Road and Cupeno Lane: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County; bounded on the West by the easterly line of said Tract No. 20319; bounded on the South by the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" for Parcel "D" of an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; bounded on the Northeast by a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from a line shown as "North 54°19'31'' West 99.02 feet" in Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession; and bounded on the general easterly side by the following described line: BEGINNING at the intersection of said parallel line with a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road concave easterly and having a radius of 220.92 feet as shown on a map filed in Book 54, Pages 89 and 90 of Records of Surveys in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 6 l°32'52"East; thence along said curve southerly 211.36 feet through a central angle of 54°48'59'' to the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in said Office of Riverside County Recorder; Thence along said northerly line North 70°10'19'' East 78.33 feet; thence South 16°31' 19" West 14.59 feet to said northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" of Parcel "D" of said Order of Possession and THE POINT OF TERMINATION of the described line. H-~GRP60~PDATA~IS10OOS~OppICEXWpWiNL$31gl00Z~d Legal Description Pala Road/Cupeno Lane Vacation Revised August 18, 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053-M2 Page 2 of 2 RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in said Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records. ALSO, RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within said Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998. CONTAINING: 1.570 Gross Acres EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Ra~ond L. Mathe, P.L.S. 6185 My license expires 3/31/02. HAGRPf0%PDATA\lSI00053\OFHCSWpWiNX531g1002.~xl 100 0 100 200 300 GRAPHIC F--, NIO° 14'05"E / (R) / SCALE IN FEET /C/L S03° 17' 13"W r (R) ( STATE HIGHWAY 79 "'- PER TRACT NO. 203 ~ g "N54°19'31"W ~ 99 02"' PER m · ....._ PCL. "J" G) PALA ROAD PER PCL. 4 INST. NO. 91436,0.R. (7-12-73) ®PALA ROAD PER PCL. 5 INST. NO. 91436,0.R. (7-12-73) (~)PALA ROAD PER RS 54/89-90 O PORT[ON OF STRIP 3 INST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) DATA TABLE 1 06°56'52" 1571.00' 190.50 2 S54°17'24"E -- 92.12 3 54°48'59'' 220.92' 211.36 4 N70°lO'19"E -- 78.33 5 St6°31'19"W -- 14.59 6 11°09'12" 270.00' 52.56 7 S74"54'48"W -- 169.43' 8 62°48'46" 305.00' 334.37' 9 NO8°43'36"E -- 36.71' TOTAL PARCEL=1.570 ACRES PREPARED DER THE SUPER ON OF: ~MATHE, L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-31-02 EXHIBIT "B" PALA ROAD/CUPENO LANE VACATION REVISED 8/18/99 MAY 24, SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET Robe'~t Be~,~F~ll'~m Frost & Assoc~LGtes PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS I( SURVEYORS SCALE F[ELD BOOK JOB NO, 1999 SCALE: 1"=100' 15100053-M2 EXHIBIT OWNER' S PURCHASE OF CITY OF TEMECULA REAL PROPERTY F:XDepts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~273PA99 Development Agreemcnt. docF:~ts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~73pA99 Development Agreement. doe 35 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula. CA 92591 EXHIBIT "A" Revised September 14, 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M3 Page 1 of 1 LeEal Description Pala Road Quitclaim That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Pala Road: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County; bounded on the West by the easterly line of said Tract No. 20319; bounded on the South by the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" for Parcel "D" of an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; bounded on the Northeast by a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from a line shown as "North 54°19'31" West 99.02 feet" in Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession; and bounded on the East by a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road, concave easterly and having a radius of 220.92 feet as shown on a map filed in Book 54, Pages 89 and 90 of Records of Surveys in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder. RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 in said Office of Riverside County Recorder. ALSO, RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within said Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998. CO NTAI NI NG: 1,549 Gross Acres 0.644 Acres in Area "A" per Exhibit "B" 0.905 Acres in Area "B" per Exhibit "B" EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Ra~oond L. Mathe, P.L.S. 6185 L~ NO ~~. ~, o. 6'185 , H:',GRP6~PDATA 1510005310FpICEXWpWiN~53181OO3.vepd ~1~~~] I00 400 2O0 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET N10°14'OS"E /' (R) / G /,,-C/L 300 STATE HIGHWAY 79 / PER TRACT NO. 20319 f., 5 "" /F R ~ N54°19'31''W --- 99.02' PER PCL."J" OF SUPERIOR COURT -- 5' CASE NO. 315426. 55' \ [Z]INDICATES PORTION \ OF ROAD EASEMENT \ PER STRIP 3 0 INST NO 180581 0 . REC.'5/1~/90 ' COP' DATA TABLE 1 N54°17'24"W -- 92.12' 2 57"45'22" 220.92' 222.69' 3 N74°54'48"E -- 153.74' 4 62048'46" 305.00' 334.37' 5 N08°43'36"E -- 36.71' 6 06°56'52'' 1571.00' 190.50' TOTAL PARCEL= 1. 549 ACRES AREA <D =0. 644 ACRES AREA Q) =0.905 ACRES EXHIBIT "B" PALA ROAD QU ]' TCLA I M REVISED 9/14/99 MAY 24, 1999 PREPARED UN R THE HE, L.S. EXPIRES ,3-31-02 6185 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET Robert Bein,~gilliam Frost & Associc~tes PROFESSIONAl_ ENGINEERS, PLANNER~ k S%IRVEYOR~ SCALE ~ FIELD BOOK JOB NO. SCALE: 1"=100, 15100053-M3 E / / EXHIBIT M-4 ADDITIONAL PALA ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY F:XDeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~273pA99 Development Agreement. docF:XI)epts~PLANNING~STAFFRpTX273pA99 Development Agreem~nt.doc 36 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 EXHIBIT "A" August 18, 1999 J.N. 15-100053-M4 Page 1 of 3 Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way Those certain parcels of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of the Temecula Rancho patented to Luis Vignes by patent recorded in Book 1, Page 37 of Patents in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California, described as follows: Parcel 1 BEGINNING at the most northwesterly corner of Parcel "B" as described in an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; thence along the southwesterly line of said Parcel "B", the westerly line of Parcel "A" of said Case No. 3 15426 and the northwesterly line of Parcel "F" of said Case No. 315426 through the following courses: South 54017'24" East 99.02 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 1055.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 72°43'51" East; thence along said curve southerly 160.85 feet through a central angle of 08°44'09"; thence non-tangent from said curve South 17°35'51'' West 19.13 feet to the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County; thence leaving said northwesterly line of Parcel "F", along said northerly line of Cupeno Lane South 70°10'19'' West 11.91 feet; thence North 16°31'19'' East 19.28 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concentric with said curve in the westerly line of said Parcel "A" and having a radius of 1067.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 63°59'32'' East; Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way August 18, 1999 JN 15-100053:'M4 Page 2 of 3 thence along said curve northerly 157.02 feet through a central angle of 08°25'54'' to a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from said southwesterly line of Parcel "B"; thence non-tangent from said curve, along said parallel line North 54°17'24'' West 113.61 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve in the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 ~ed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 03°17'13'' East; thence along said curve and southerly line easterly 22.13 feet through a central angle of 00°48'26" to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 3370 square feet, more or less. Parcel 2 BEGINNING at the most northeasterly corner of Parcel "C" as described in an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; thence along the southeasterly line of said Parcel "C"and the easterly line of Parcel "A" of said Case No. 315426 through the following courses: South 34°26'46" West 71.98 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 945.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 71°01'17'' East; thence along said curve southerly 438.79 feet through a central angle of 26°36'15" to a point on a non-tangent curve in the easterly line of Pala Rd. (110.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 1 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 56°21'27" East; thence leaving said easterly line of Parcel "A", along said curve and easterly line of Pala Road as described in Strip 1 northerly 58.75 feet through a central angle of 03011'27" to a point on a non-tangent curve concentric with said curve in the easterly line of Parcel "A" and having a radius of 933.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 47°55'37'' East; thence along a line parallel and/or concentric with and 12.00 feet easterly from said easterly line of Parcel "A" and southeasterly line of Parcel "C" through the following courses: along said curve northerly 370.04 feet through a central angle of 22°43'28"; Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way August 18, 1999 JN 15-100053-M4 Page 3 of 3 thence non-tangent from said curve North 34°26'46'' East 76.29 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve in the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 06°40'45'' West; thence leaving said parallel line, along said curve and southerly line westerly 15.86 feet through a central angle of 00034'43'' to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 5744 square feet, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, fights-of-way and easements of record. EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a pan hereof. ~y~o~athe, PLS 6185 My License Expires 03/31/02 H.'GRP6~DATA\lSI00053\OFPICEXWpWII~531gI004.~d 1 O0 0 1 O0 200 300 . ._, ~ S72"58'01.,46"E 310562.00 (GRID) T E H [ GHW AY 7 9 . C/L- PER I'RACI' NO. ST ( - C; ~ 'X PARCEL 2 7e 4 ~ \ DATA TABLE (~ BRNG/DELTA RADIUS LENGTH 1 S54"17'24"E -- 99.02' 2 08"44'09" 1055.00' 160.85' 3 S17"35'51"W -- 19.13' 4 S70"10'19"W -- 11.91' 5 N16"31'19"E -- 19.28' 6 08'25'44" 1067.00' 157.02' 7 N54°17"24"W -- 113.61' 8 00°4B'26" 1571.00' 22.13' 9 S34°26'46"W -- 71.98' 10 26"36'15" 945.00' 438.79' 11 03"11'2T' 1055,00' 58.75' 12 22"43'28" 933,00' 370.04' 13 N34"26'46"E -- 76.29' 14 00"34'43" 1571,00' 15.86' EXHIBIT "B" PALA ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AUGUST 18, 1999 No.6185 , F, xp. 3131 PREPARED UND THE SUPERV]S 0 F: ~HE, L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-31-02 SCALE SCALE: 1"=100' PALA ROAD PER STRIP 1, [NST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) <~CUPENO LANE PER STRIP 3.[NST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET Rohp~ R~..Will~a~. Frn~t k A~nr4nlp~ FIELD BOOK I ,JOEl NO, 15100053-M4 E \ ~0 0 · / o o / / ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99.034 p:%forms%city clerk forms~staff report - shell 8 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-034 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79-SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; Planning Application No. PA99-0273, (hereinafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt and approve the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement contained in Attachment "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: (a) The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Professional; and, (b) The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, (c) The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, p:~forms~city clerk forms,staff report - shell 9 (d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, (e) The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, (f) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headng to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, (g) Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the headng body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the headng, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, (h) The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: FAHEY, NAGGAR, MATHEWSON NONE GUERRIERO, WEBSTER Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary p:~forms~city clerk forms~staff report - shell 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING p:%forms%city clerk forms~staff report - shell 11 R:PlanComm/minutes/091599 e Planning Application No. PA99-0273 (Development Agreements between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula) Request to approve a Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. By way of overheads, Attomey Cudey presented the staff report (of record); noted the modifications to the proposed Agreement, as follows: 1) in Section 14.5, on page 15, subsection B.1 entitled Easement Quit Claim, noted that additional language would be added stating that the City will prosecute the completion, inclusive of the street vacation, 2) on page 16, in subsection C, entitled Conveyances to City from Owner, noted that this portion of the Agreement will be removed, 3) there would be added an additional right- of-way that the property owner has agreed to convey [specifically twelve feet (12') on each side] in order to attain the width required for the improvements, and 4) on page 5, Section 2.2.3 entitled Term the language will be modified to reflect a period of ten (10) years in lieu of the stated period of five (5) years; for Commissioner Mathewson, provided additional information regarding the determination of the length of the 10-year Agreement; for Vice Chairman Naggar, clarified the terms of the Development Agreement, specifying the proposed scope of development in per the Agreement for a future point in time, in accordance with the existing zoning districts; and relayed the legal specifications with regard to the Development Agreement. In response to Commissioner Fahey's recommendation, Attomey clarified the process of development of a Development Agreement and the associated role of the Planning Commission and the City Council. Commissioner Fahey provided additional information regarding the purview of the Planning Commission with respect to this proposal. For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Cudey provided additional information regarding the issues for analysis of the Commission, noting that the Commission could provide comments on any portion of the Agreement; for Vice Chairman Naggar, relayed additional information regarding the ten-year length of the Agreement. With respect to Commissioner Mathewson's querying with respect to page 14, Section 4.3.3 subsection A (regarding the zero foot lot line) Attorney Cudey provided additional information, noting that this allowance was not a grant of right but would take place solely via the determination of Deputy City Manager Thornhill; with respect to subsection B (regarding a landscape credit for a portion of the wetland mitigation area) provided clarification with respect to the restrictions of the Agreement, noting that this credit would be granted via the discretion of Deputy City Manager Thomhill. Mr. Phil Oberhansley, representing Pala Rainbow LLC, was available for questions and comments. R:PlanComm/minutes/091699 MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public hearing; adopt Resolution No. 99-034 approving/recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0273 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; and to adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0273. RESOLUTION NO. 99-034 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception Chairman Guerdero and Commissioner Webster who were absent. At this time, the Commission considered Agenda Item No. 6. ~~.~ 6. Planning Application No. PA99-0215 Request to amend No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract map 24187 (A subdivision of 72.9 acres into 256 single-family detached residential lots and nine open space lots. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Project Planner DeGange provided an overview of the proposal (per staff report), highlighting location, densities, and lot sizes; provided the rationale for the applicant's request for modification due to a shift in the home market; and specified the proposal to increase the size of the lots. At this time Vice Chairman Naggar closed the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to approve staffs recommendation. (This motion ultimately died for lack of a second.) For Commissioner Mathewson, Vice Chairman Naggar reopened the public hearing, and invited the applicant's representative to the podium. Mr. Dean Meyer, representing the applicant, for Commissioner Mathewson, clarified the request for the larger lot sizes. At this time Vice Chairman Naggar closed the public hearing. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY R:~STAFFRPT~73PA99 CC.doc 12 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsors Name and Address Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula (PA99-0273) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Southeast comer of State Route 79-South and Pala Road in the City of Temecula Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula General Plan Designation Highway Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) and Open Space-Conservation (OSC) Approval of a Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula to allow the property owner to do the following: 1. Develop the property in conformance with the requirements of the existing Highway Toudst Commercial zone; 2. Adjust the required building setbacks in conformance with the existing Development Code; 3. Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; 4. Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and 6. Get a financial contribution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage facilities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediate construction of the new Pala Road bddge and associated improvements. The Agreement conveys no additional land use development rights not previously allowed or authorized under the City's adopted Development Code (zoning ordinance). North: Vacant land and single family residences on 2 ~ acre lots. East: Vacant land. South: Channel/open space areas associated with Temecula Creek West: Vacant land. None. R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning Population and Housing Geologic Problems Water Air Quality Tra n s po rtati on/Ci rcu l ati o n Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Public Services Utilities and Service Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the eadier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project cou!d na';e a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been 9naiyzed adequately in an eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standares, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Pdnted name Date R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Ce · · :' ':: 'lsr, ues ~nd 5~,pporting Information Soum~a · · Physically divide an established community?. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? · 'Pat~ntially ' Sighirmant · Potentially Sighific~nt Unless- · Mitigelion Incoq)orated · Signific8~ :. : No . "'lmpa~:: Impsot 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: ae be c, · :lsaues and Supporting Informalion Sources · Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impaot' Potentially ..: .. ::.. Significant Unlest Les~ .Than... Miligalion: :. 5igni~canl Incorporated Imract' 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? ii) iii) iv) I;=aues end Supporting Information Source~' Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.docR:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc Potentially Significant Potentially : . . Signifmant Unlm Ler~ Than Miligation Signrant Incorporated · Impad NO' ee Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial dsks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Ce de h, Islue~ and Supporhng Information Sources Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? OtheRvise substantially degrade water quality? Place h'~using within a l O0-year flood hazard area as mapp6d on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a l O0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Polentially Signiliuwd Impact Potenhaliy Significant Ulileil I Less Than Mitigalion ; Signirmant Inco_.~.Jx)lated ! Impact No ,/ R:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 4 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Issues end Supporting h:fotmation Sources Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicabl~ ' air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteda pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Siflnificent ~mp.act Pelenhally Significant Unl,,,~- M,ligalion Irtco~pofaled Loss Than Significant Impect Impact 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: ae C, Issue end S.ppofling Inlo~melion Sources Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety dsks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Putenlially Sigmlicant hnFacl Pclenhally Sign,f~cant U:aless Mdigalion Incoeixlrated Less Than Significanl If wiped Impact 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: : 'issues.end Supporting Information Sources : Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA%2.73PA99 IES.doc · Potentially Significant impact Polentially Significant Unless Mitigation' Incorporated 'Slgnir.~ant Impact · fe local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any dpadan habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: · 'IssUes end Suppoding Ir~tmalion Sources Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? .:. .. : Potentially Polenliaily ' 'Significant Unles~ Signi~canl. . Mitigalion Impact ' Incorporated Less .Than. $ignlfmant:. No. Impact Impad 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Issues end Supporting Information Sources Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Potenlielly Significanl Impact · Potentially Signilicanl Unless · Mitigation Incorporaled Significant: !~. Impact Impact R:%CEQA%273PA99 IES,docR:\CEQA%2.73PA99 IES,doc 6 h, Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: · ' ' '.. :.: .. · i ' · · : i: · ' Potentia . .... · :... i': ::':.. Significant · .... :': · :' ! I~suem and Supporting Information Sources Impact · a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the pr~ect? d. A c~jDstantial temporary or pedodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a pdvate airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Pntentially.: ... .. Significant Unless . q.essThan i. i '; ' Mitigation Significant': No Incorporated · · Impact" · 'Impact I ,/ R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc 7 11, PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: ae be : ·" · "· Issues arid Supporting information Sohrc~ : Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? · Potentially: ....; .............. :'P61enliall~'BignificantUnle~-4 "EeiiThan::' "':"' · Significant . .~ Mitigation" .:Sign!l~ql:. .:. NO .! ·: Impod ' Incorporated . ~"lmpi~t....' Impa~'i Ca Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? Other public facilities? 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a, c, de ee Issde~ end S~ppoding Information Sources Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the cons';ruction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansicn of existing facilities, the construction of which cduld cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projecrs projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projecrs solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? · ' · Potentially · .. Potenllally Sig~ificaot Unle,,.s ' ~ Then .... : Significant . Mitigalion' Si~nifr, aot. No 'lmpbcl Incorporated 'Impact': ' impact R:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.docR:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc 8 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: · :' i. :~:i..i ':" "':: ............ : · :. . ;. :. ila~el'end'$hpp~ding:lnformationSources: .... .:. a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? be C, Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and histodc building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Polentlally: Significant Unlss. · 'LaSs :Than: : · · · · Signilicant .. ': Mitigation . . iSigni~Cant~ : ':.' NO :ii" impact ... Incorporated :.: · Impact' impact ' 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: ae · · · ': Issues and Supporting Information Source~ . . Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? : Potentially : .: ::.:::.:: .: ::.i: :. : .PDlentialty $igni~cant Unles~ LassThan::. ;;.:: :: .:: SIgnificant . .Mitigation · · 5ignificam:: :' ;' N~ :..: · Impact Incorporated. . Impact ....... Impact 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a, be :: ' ':: . ' ·; ' ' 'lme~ and Supporting In~ormaiion Sources · · Would the project increase the use of exist, ig neighborhood and regional parks or other recreationa~ facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Pplentially .... Polentially 'Significant Unle~ I:es~ Than · Significant Mitigalion: · Signif*mini Impaet Incorporated 'ImPact · · 'impact R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~.73PA99 IES.doc 9 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. · 's~n~ca.tun~,: :.L~T~,.;: · 5' '. :. :" . ~ : . . .$ignificanl '.. Millg"!ioai': .. :'.,qign!r~nl' · · : Issue~ gnd Sul)lx;rlinl~' Irdormalion Source~ ' ' ' ' ": ': :: Impacl "i ' 'lm:otlx>mled: .: ' ' Iml)ect..' a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restdct the range of a ram or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major pedods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project am considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: The proposed Development Agreement will not approve or result in any land use or other physical changes to the local environment. Any future development proposals will need to conform with the approved General Plan and Development Code and will receive appropriate environmental review pdor to their approval. Because the agreement proposes to allow development that is consistent with the previously approved General Plan and Development Code and no detailed development plans have been submitted, new environmental impacts are identifiable. All future development plans will receive the appropriate environmental review when specific information is available. R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc 10 ITEM 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance October 19, 1999 Temecula Valley Playhouse Community Service Funding Program Request RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award a Community Service Funding grant in the amount of $15,000 to the Temecula Valley Playhouse for their community service programs. DISCUSSION: The Temecula Valley Playhouse is a not-for-profit organization established in 1983. Since that time the Playhouse has provided a high quality community theater by using numerous volunteers and community donations. This organization provides important, valuable services to all age groups in our community. Educational Services: Since 1990 the Playhouse has provided community service hours to local high school students assisting them in fulfilling their graduation requirements. Individual Improvement: Both young and old individuals improve themselves by participating in Playhouse productions while learning important academic and social skills such as: teamwork, communication, accountability, public speaking, respect, commitment and patience. These skills lead to improved self-esteem and confidence which in turn helps improve the quality of the community as individual citizens grow in a positive, proactive environment. Cultural Amenity: The Playhouse is a community theater in the Temecula Valley area that is for all ages, regardless of sex, race, or religion. The Playhouse provides a community service that offers inexpensive fun, live entertainment, presented by family members, friends and neighbors of residents of the City of Temecula. In the future, the Temecula Valley Playhouse plans to: become self sufficient; implement a marketing program to reach surrounding communities; introduce scholarship funds for the Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore school districts; obtain corporate sponsors and members to improve the short-term revenue and volunteer support base. The City of Temecula has supported the Playhouse annually through the City's Community Service Funding Program. F.'~DEP TS~FINANCEWOR TONL ~AGENDAS~9900CSFTVpAGNDOC 08/04'97 In prior years, the Playhouse has used its funding for the replacement of sound equipment, replacement of seating, cleaning the air ducts and heating system, repair of lighting equipment, and operating expenses of the facility. The Playhouse is requesting $23,000 for FY 1999-00 for the purpose of assisting the organization with its annual operating costs associated with theater productions and to upgrade the lighting and sound equipment. The Playhouse's projected operating expenses for the 1999-00 season total $59,511, with ticket sales anticipated to cover only $32,200 of these costs. The Community Service Funding Program Adhoc Committee has reviewed the Temecula Valley Playhouse application and is recommending a grant of $15,000 which has been appropriated in the 1999-00 Operating Budget. The committee supports the Playhouse and encourages increased fundraising activities. FISCAL IMPACT: request. $15,000 is included in the FY 1999-00 Community Support budget to fund this Attachment: Application F ~DEPTSVclNANCEWORTONL~AGENDAS~9gOOCSFTVPAGN. DOC 08/04/97 CITY OF ~,~C[~A CITY OF TEMECULA lsss-2000 SEP 3 0 1999 COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING PROGRAM APPLICATI%ANCE DEh'-;,F{'i"M~,~,!T (Please Print or Type) ...... 1999-2000 Program Submission Deadline: Thursday, September 30, 1999 (6 copies total required) Amount Requested: (Maximum allowable $5,000) Project Name: TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE Project Start Date: SEPTEMBER 1999 ORGANIZATION DATA: Project End Date: CONTINUAL Name of Organization: Contact Name: Mailing Address: TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE JULIE PITRUZZELL0 Title/Position: P.O. BOX 74 TEMECULA, CA 92593 BOARD DIRECTOR Telephone: 909-676-0775 Year Organization Founded: 19R2 Number of Paid Staff: ZERO 260 Number of Volunteers: .. Geographic Area(s)Served: "FEHECULA VALLEY, lvtJRRIETA, IvE'NIFEE, SUN CITY, ELSINORE, WIIJ:X:I4a,R. & SURRdUFDING AREAS Is this organization incorporated in Califomia as a non-profit organization? Yes X No__ Effective Date: 06/10/83 If "yes": Date of incorporation as a non-profit 06/10/83 Federal identification number 33-0008806 State identification number 1144097 [.O,//Llrok. Nrft eO eJgo *Include a copy ~f your statement of non-profit status from the State of California. If "nO": Name of sponsoring organization Federal identification number State identification number This application has been authorized by the organization's: Executive Committee X Board of Directors X Members-at-large ----r---- -- R: INOR TONL I CSF19900t 9900CSFAppl. doc 07/29199 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Based on your organization's last fiscal year) THIS PAGE MUST BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PAGES 2B & 6B Balance Sheet as of Assets Cash and Investments $ Receivables (detail) Inventory Fixed Assets Other Assets Total Assets $ Application Page 2 Liabilities & Fund Balance Current payables $ Notes Payable Fund Balance Total Liabilities & Fund Balance $ Income Statement for the Year Ended June 30, 1999. Income Expenses Fundraising $ Salaries $ Foundation Grants $ Operating Expenses $ United Way $ Community Services $ Government Funds $ National/Parent Organization Fees $ 1998-99 City Grant $ Other sources $ Other expenses $ Please note with an astedsk (*) any amounts that require additional explanation, and comment on these items. THIS PAGE MUST BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED. In addition, please attach the organization's current budget, treasurers report, financial statements and footnotes. (It does not require a CPA's audit, but please submit if available.) R: t NOR TONI t CS~ ,9900~ .~,.900CSFApp I. do c 07/29/99 TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE BALANCE SHEET 09/23/99 ASSETS Current Assets Total Checking $I,232.31 Fixed Assets (estimated values) Equipment Lights Sound Seats Drapes Sets, props, costumes Office furnishings $ 3,200.00 1,400.00 2,900.00 1,700.00 4,000.00 500.00 TOTAL ASSETS $14,932.00 LIABILITIES No outstanding Liabilities Status on all expenses are currein Liabilities are as stated on the TVP FINANCIAL INFORMATION PROJECTIONS I MISSION STATEMENT Application Page 3 Bdefly describe the goals and objectives of your organization and community services it provides, Describe the ways your organization meets the criteda listed on page 2. llEM~CULA 'VALLEY PLAYHOUSE is dedicated to the CCmT~qity as a non-profit, non-dencminational cultural a~enity by helping the individual, young and oid, develop the mind, the body, and the spirit. We will, throgh hard work and a ccmnon caTmitment to excellence, jnin th~ individ~l~]~ tr~j~fh~r fo create, motivate, educate, and inspire beyond what any individ,aI he. lieves pe~ih]~ nf th~m~lw~_ Per the ~ligibilelist on page 2 *TVP IS I+E ONLY CCr~dUNITY THEATRE IN I~E VALLEY THAT IS OPEN TO EVERY, t~D IVIDUAL WlrFHOLF[_'REGa/~D FOR RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION, SEX, RACE, OR AGE. *TVP IS AVAILABLE FOR PARTICIPANTS OF EVERY AGE A~E3 IS NOT IN ANY WAY TUITION-BASED. ~ *TVP INCLUDES PARTICIPANTS FRCM, RiD PROVIDES ENTERTAIN~_NT FOR, T~E ~NITIES OF TENECULA, MU~IETA, NENIFEE, WI~, SUN CITY, ELSINORE,&HE]vL:T. TVP CURRENTLY EXPERIENCES PARTICIPATION OF PEOPLE FRCM THE CCM~UNITIES OF RIVERSIDE, CORONA, MORENO VALLEY, FALLBROOK, At{) ~IDO. *TVP HAS PROVIDED ~ OPPORTUNITY FOR LOCAL Slll)ENTS TO FULFILL CCFMJNITY SERVICE REOJIREME]~[S. *AS A N!~vBER OF T~E I~ E~PIRE lt{ATRE LEAGUE, OUR C~ITY ltF_ATRE HAS RECEIVED NOTED RECOGNITION VIA ~GUS NCMINATIONS ~ AWARDS FOR OUR PERFOB~E]~S Ar~) PRODUCTIONS. T~ESE AWARDS HAVE ELEVATED TE~ECULA'S PRESTIGE ~ REPUTATION AMONG COMv~JNITIES WHICH SUPPORT T~E ARTS. *TVP IS INCREASINGLY PROVIDING T~E VEHICLE FOR LOCAL YOUTH TALE~IT TO CONTINUE TO ElegANCE THEIR ART ANO TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE ONCE SO MANY HAVE "AGED OUT" OF VARIOUS CHILDREN'S ~ERF~E ORGANIZATIONS. *AS LISTED ON PAGE 5 OF THIS APPLICATION,T~E ~ITY THEATRE CONTINUES TO STRIVE TO PROVIDE LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS, SCHOOLS, STUDENTS, ETC. WITH A LOCATION WHICH NE1ETS THEIR VARIED NEEDS. R: INOR TON/I CS/-'lg~O019900CSFApp/. doc 07/29/99 Community Service Funding Program Criteda (from pg. 3 of packet) A. TVP has held non-proffi status continuously sin, ce 1983. B. Since 1983, the Temecula Valley has continued to provide high quality community theatre to the community and all the services to which that relates, specifically included that which outlined in accompanying pages of this application.) C. The size and make-up inherent in this organization equips TVP to provide service to the entire community. TVP has a volunteer/participation base of over 240. Services are available to the entire city of Temecula as well as surrounding areas. D. TVP has received heightened and support from the commuunity. The playhouse continues to increase in patron and volunteer base. E. Regarding Fiscal Management, TVP has enjoyed improved fiscal management. The TVP Board of Directors currently has 9 executive members and has 5 chairmanship positions with individuals who are experienced in management, accounting, human resources, and marketing. Over the most recent 7 months, we have been assisted by a local CPA firm and local law firm acting in advisory positions. F. With a history dating from 1983, TVP continues strong management, participation, and community interest to continue for countless years to come-providing, of course, that we receive grant funding! G. TVP's service to the community is evidenced and outlined in the accompanying pages. H. TVP is completely non-discdminitory. I. TVP does not requde attendance or participation in any other organizations or activities and is not tuition-based. J. Financial statements can be provided at any time, and TVP is appreciative of the assistance and advisement of a well-respected Temecula CPA firm. K. Please sea the attached budget. L. Participation in TVP and all services which 'I'VP provides are available to everyone in the community and extend beyond the city limits. M. The organization has implemented evaluation programs over the recent two years and continues to effective use these tools. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application Page How will your organization use the funding awarded? Describe the project, project objectives, those served, area serviced, and number of volunteers involved. Be specific. Include equipment or services that would be purchased and why. Include a detailed budget and a schedule of significant activities related to this project. You may attach a maximum of one double-spaced typewritten page of information. (Please type or pdnt legibly.) ~ ~scribedin the accompanying pages of this application, Temecula's sole community theatre is an on-going project which serves the entire T~mec,la valley and surrounding areas. Specific use of the grant funding is designated for allowinq the theatre to continue to exist. (As always, the theatre's larqest challenqe is meetinq the expense of risin~ lease payments.) TVP is ab[~ to pn~sent this request for funding, for a second time, while at a current "break-even" status--this is an accomplishment for any community theatre and was only possible through the funding granted last ~- year, as well as through concerted efforts of the membership. Of the $23,000 total requested, $3,000 would be designated for technological improvements. These improvements would be assests that would be entirely tra~sferrable to a new or different facility. PAST PROJECT BENEFITS Application Page 5 If your organization received City of Temecula funding in the previous year, please explain and show how Temecula residents benefitted. It was the funding that the City of Temecula granted TVP W~ich enabled the playhouse to remain open for the 1998 - 1999 seasons. The Temecula residents have benefitted from TVP in the following areas: °TVP has continued to provide high quality community theatre ~has provided the opportunity for individuals of all ages to improve themselves by participating in productions and taking an active role in intellectual and social skills ~has provided the community with an ~.nexpensive event of fun and live entertainment °TVP has proudly provided the location for various community events ~TVUSD Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) students used the playhouse for four sessions of a writer's workshop enrichment program. Not only did TVP pr~ovide'the location, but also provided volunteers to provide the technical production for the workst~ ~-TVP was the location for a regional sales rally for the Target store over a course of 3 days. TVP be1 ieves in mutual support, and as Target is a store which stFongly supports our COTm~qity, TVP ~eS determined to likewise SUppoFt Target. ~-Temecula's 'Vintage Singers' have staged scme of their productions at the playhouse in order to perform and raise money for their own gFOL~ · -the playhouse has provided meeting space for the local 'Toastmasters' chapter. 'Toast of the Valley' District 12 (7917) has heId a series of 6 meetings at TVP and have requested more use as the need arises ~he 1999-2000 season is featuring a different local artist during each production. Throughout the run of each show the lobby of *~e playhouse will exhibit the v~rk of local artists. The artists select what they desire to exhibit and have the opportunity for further recognition and sales. °TVP contributes to the coTmunity by consistently donated tickets for cur shows to local stores~ athletic teams, radio stations, nen-pFofit organ'~zations, and the senior citizen's center. °TVP has contributed to the cc~munity by donating a Murder Mystery Ententai~ to the Arts Coulci l for the auction at the annual Mayor' s Ball. This year it was 'purchased' by the Assistance League and will in turn be used for their fundraiser. (This is a $1,000 value. ) °TVP has provided the location for t~o local playwrites to ~resent their work ISIGNATURE PAGE Application Page 6 We hereby certify the information contained in this application is true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Prepared By.', JULIE A. PITRUZZELL0, BOARD DIRECTOR NAME AND TITLE (Please Print or Type) President or Authorized Officen PATFI DF~, VICE PRESIDE~rl',;3F ADMINTSTRATION NAME AND TITLE (Please Print or Type) (Signature) Oroanization: TE~CU-.~ VAI IFY PLAYI-BJSE (Organization Name) P.O. BOX 74 TEivECULA, CA 92592 (Mailing Address of Organization) 909-676-0775 9--.20-99 (Telephone) (Date) BE SURE TO INCLUDE THE ORIGINAL PLUS 5 COPIES {TOTAL OF 6 COPIES) AND SUBMIT TO: Mail Completed Application to: Or Deliver in Person to: City of Temecula Community Service Funding Program Linda Norton P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 City of Temecula Community Service Funding Program Linda Norton 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, CA 92590 INCOME TVP ORGANIZATIONAL FINA2NCIAL ~'FO1LMATION PRO.IECTED 1999-2000 (BASED UPON ACTUAL FIGL~dES FOR 1998-1999) Earned Income: Fundraising Income: Contributed Income: TOTAL INCOME Ticket and Membership Sales $ 32,200 Concession Sales . ,. 2,500 Murder Mysteries ' · 3,060 Theatre Rentals 300 Broadway Review 2,400 Individual Contributions 800 EXPENSES Lease 28,800 Lrmurance 1,740 Utilities (Phone &Electric) 4,430 Printing Tickets, programs, ~yers, Postcards, newletters 4,500 Advertising (media) 600 Repairs &Maintenance 1,200 · all physical ctmnm~ & re'parts completed by Board & volunteers Productions Expense~ :nc:~,d~o ~pyrights, royal,;,~. music, Scripts, sets, costumes, etc. 12,496 Director's Stipends t,250 Supplies &Concession supplies 1,850 Postage & PO Box Rental 2,200 Civic Dues 250 Bank Service Charges 64 Taxes 106 Professional Fees 25 TOTAL EXPENSES S 59,511 **TVP is requesting a grant in the amount of $20,000 to balance our projections. In addition, we are respecOcully requesting that funds be provided for technolo~cal improvements, as stated below. The community theatre has a ser~us need for electrical re-wiring, light, and sound improvement& The estimated cost is $3,000. The improved technology would be assets that could be transferred and effectively used in a new theatre facility if the opportunity becomes available. ITEM 14 CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council usan W. Jones ~ity Clerk/Director of Support Services October 19, 1999 Community Services Commission Appointment PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: Appoint one applicant to serve on the Community Services Commission for a full three-year term through October 10, 2002. BACKGROUND: The term of Commissioner Meyler expired on October 10, 1999. The City Clerk's office has followed the Coundl's established procedure for filling Commission vacancies by advertising the opening in two different local publications. When the deadline was reached for receiving applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee composed of Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilmember Comerchero for review and recommendation. Both Mayor Pro Tem Stone and Councilmember Comerchero recommend the reappointment of Commissioner Meyler. Commissioner Meyler will serve a full three-year term, expidng October 10, 2002. Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of August 27, 1999. ATTACHMENTS: Four (4) Copies of Applications for Appointment R:\agenda.rpt\appoint.lrb I II Check one: CITY OF TEMECULA APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION Qualification Requirement: Planning Commission Resident of the City of Temec~d~d~ __ Public/Traffic Safety Commission NAME: YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: OCCUPATION: EMPLOYER NAME: ~,~ ~ ¢= /~ ~/~7~.'- ~/,r/~,,~ WORK PHONE: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR(S) OF SERVICE: ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service): BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if necessary): I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. SIGNATURE: ~T~ //~Zs/i~e~~_' DATE: ' Return to: City ,43200 ss Park Drive (909) 694-6444 OR Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Commissions~Application for various Commissions Community Services Commission Recreational and community activities are vital to an energetic and balanced community. They keep senior citizens young and provide the opportunity for youth and adults to be involved with each other. Temecula has set the benchmark for providing recreation and community activities for all its citizens. Based on my past experience and community spirit I want to contribute my time and energy to help the City maintain and expand its innovative and successful programs. I grew up participating in municipal swimming and aquatic programs and from that training learned to teach swimming and was able to put myself through college as a swim instructor and lifeguard for the Culver City Recreation Department. Later, I managed the aquatics program for Culver City for four years. I have been active as a volunteer, serving as the president of my Homeowners Association for 10 years, as a Board member of the Community Association Institute and as a Friend of Temecula Library. I appreciate the value recreation plays in our lives, be it sports, crafts, theater or just enjoying a warm day in the park. These activities help build character, keep us healthy and lower the stress of our daily lives. Time, energy, commitment, willingness to try new things and evaluate new ideas are some of the qualities that I bring as a volunteer for the Community Service Commission. Kathy Hoagland 08-24-9 9A 10: 10 CITY OF TEMECULA APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION RCVD Check one: Qualification Requirement: __ Planning Commission Resident of the City of Temecula. "/~ Community Services Commission __ Public/Traffic Safety Commission HOME PHONE: 62t~/~,~ '70 ~~ WORK PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: ~} ~ ~ ~. EMPLOYER ADDRESS: LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR(S) OF SERVICE: BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if necessary): I understand that any~or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information fc public information purposes. SIGNATURE: ~~ DATE: Return to: City ,43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 OR Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Commissions%Application for vadous Commissions 42293 Agena Street Temecula, CA 92592 Janet Kramer Voicemail: 909/401-0208 Email: ibJKramer@aol.com · Extensive experience in adminstrative field. · Attracted to community-service related projects. · Excellent written and oral communication skills. · Well developed time/task management skills. idueutlml · Juris Doctorate, Western State University School of Law, San Diego, CA, 1994. Member, Califomia State Bar/Lssodation. · Bachelor of Arts in Sociology, UC San Diego, 1988. Minors in Biology, English. Awarded 'Outstanding Research Project', 1987. · University of Pennsylvania, 1983-84. · Francis W. Parker High School, San Diego, CA., 1979-1983. Class Valedictorian. Expedence · Director of Administration, San Diego Volleyball Club; an elite, non-profit Junior Olympic youth program, 1988-1998. · Responsible for hiring and administration of 35 coaches; accounts receivable and payable, creating and adhering to a strict budget; coordinating travel arrangements to weekly tournaments; hosting monthly, local friendship tournaments; scheduling practices for 35 teams (400 players); ordering and distributing uniforms; creating and implementing fundraising activities to assist needy players; soliciting donations. · Accomplishments include over 200 athletes with college athletic scholarship assistance; growth from 40 participants to over 300; National Championship calibre teams; one of the largest and longest-lasting programs in the country. Founding Board Member, San Diego SportCenter Management; a multi-use, sport facility, 1993-1998. · Integral member of seven-person development team; answered directly to Chairman of the Board; responsible for ancillary profit-center analysis and procurement, budget, development of business plan and marketing video, intense scheduling with core tenants, grant writing and submission. Head Clinician, Chula Vista Elementary School District, ARCO Olympic Training Center, 1994-presenL · 'Grassroots-Amedcorps' Project: Responsible for developing curriculum and educating Americerps members about teaching, time-management, techniques and volleyball skills. · 'Exercise the Dream' Program: Responsible for directing monthly clinics for 300-400 sixth grade students. · 'Na[jonal Girls and Women in Sports Day': Responsible for staffing and overseeing the volleyball venue at this 2-day event with over 2,000 young girls from 33 schools. Treasurer, USA Volleyball, Inc., a local Board supporting the USA National Men's and Women's Volleyball teams, 1990-presenL Responsible for site acquisition, invitations and decorations, media relations, budget, sponsor solicitation and fulfillment, catering, raffle/silent auction and coordination of event volunteers and staff. · Co-Chairperson, Team Awards Banquet, 1995, 1996. · Co-Coordinator, Celebrity Golf Tournament, 1995, 1996. Computer Uteracy · Microsoff Word - word processing · Filemaker Pm- database · Microsoft Excel - spreadsheets · Calendar Creator - scheduling · PowerPoint - presentations · QuickBooks- accounting · Microsoff Publisher - ~yers, brochures ·Intemet competent · Learn new programs easily Achlevementsllnterests · NCAA Division III 'Player of the Year', Volleyball, 1987; All-American, 1985, 1986. · Member, NCAA National Championship Team, U.C. San Diego, 1984, 1986, 1987. · 'Woman Sailor of the Year', 1982; Member, San Diego Yacht Club. · Volunteer, Children's Hospital Canine Therapy Program, present. RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION Check one: Planning Commission X Community Services Commission Public/Traffic Safety Commission JUL 27 NAME: James A. Mevler YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA 17 ADDRESS: 29930 Santiago Rd., Temecula, CA 92592 HOME PHONE: (909) 676-6069 WORK PHONE: (909) 699-1040 OCCUPATION: President Mesa Business Services, Inc. P. O. Box 1294 Temecula, CA 92593 Associate Donald McLean & Co., CPA's 27720 Jefferson Ave., Suite 101 Temecula, CA 92590 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR(S) OF SERVICE: 1992 - 1993 Served on Economic Development Committee for formation of General Plan for City of Temecula 1997 - Present City of Temecula Community Services Commission (incumbent) ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: Arts Council of Temecula Valley - Founding Member- served three years as President. Resigned this year to avoid conflict of interest as Commissioner Temecula Sunrise Rotary Club - Member since 1989. Director for eight years. Treasurer for four years. Currently director and Foundation Treasurer. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce -Mcmber since 1982. Director for five years, three years as Treasurer. Also served as Chairman of Ambassador's Committee. 1985 nominee for Business of the Year. Assistance League of Temecula Valley - Volunteer (spouse is member) and Accountant Rancho Temecula Area Woman's Club - Volunteer (spouse is member) and Accountant California Society and National Society of Enrolled A~ents - served on executive board and as vice president of Palomar Chapter American Society of Mechanical Engineers - served six years on Los Angeles Section Executive Committee and one year as Chairman of this six thousand member group. Donor: Friends of the Library Temecula Museum Friends of the Arts Assistance League of Temecula Valley Rancho Tcmecula Area Woman's Club Community Recreation Center Foundation BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. The City of Temecula is placing more and more emphasis on arts and cultural activities. This is evidenced by the City's development of a Cultural Arts Master Plan and the current budget funding to implement the plan. I have worked with the Committee for development of this plan and have offered my services as a Commissioner to assist the Community Services Department to oversee the implementation of the Plan. I have aftended and participated in most of the meetings leading to the development of the Temecula Valley Museum. My wife and I have been members of the Friends of the Library for many years and we intend to participate in the development of the new facility when funds become available. In 1982 my wife and I formed General Business Services in Temecula. This tax and accounting practice grew to be the largest of its kind in the Temecula Valley, and in 1989 1 sold the business to Donald McLean & Co., CPA's, with whom I have been continuously associated. I served for six years as manager of this CPA firm. My accounting and financial background has been helpful in providing input to the Community Services Commission. I will be attending my second League of California Cities Community Services and Economic Development Conference this year. These Conferences have been valuable in providing educational background in the nuts and bolts of serving as a Community Services Commissioner. This training has been a great help to me in serving on the Commission. I love Temecula and I can help to keep it improving by continuing as a Community Services Commissioner. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. SIGNATURE:~;~m, ~' Jq~ /4, DATE: PLEASE NOT iications will b/ek~;t on file for consideration of future vacancies. Return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 OR Mail to: P. O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589 - 9033 CITY OF TEMECULA 0o-04-~9 Pu'I :~ IN APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSION Check one: Qualification Requirement: __ Planning Commission Resident of the City of Temecula. Community Services Commission __ Public/Traffic Safety Commission NAME: ADDRESS: z~/3 ~/ HOME PHONE: OCCUPATION: YP-[)- / EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR(S) OF SERVICE: BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE I unde~tand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public info:~p~[ oses.DATE: Return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6~ OR Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Commissions~Application for vadous Commissions ITEM 15 AN ORAL UPDATE WILL BE GIVEN AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING! TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager GaW Thornhill, Deputy City Manager~)4'u1~.~~' October 5, 1999 Woodside Homes Reimbursement Agreement RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve the first amendment to subdivision Agreement with Weedside Chantemar Homes to compensate the developer in an amount not to exceed $78,292 for the costs associated with installing the landscaping for the wetlands mitigation area and the letter agreement with Woodside Chantemar for changes to the project. Approve a transfer of $78,292 in Capital Reserve Funds from the Nicolas Road Sidewalks project ($75,000) and the 1-151 Santiago Road Additional Interchange Improvements project ($3,292). BACKGROUND: The City Council approved an amendment to the Campoe Verdes Specific Plan on March 23, 1999. This amendment provided for several changes in the design of the project. Most of these revisions resulted from a decision by the Temecula Valley Union School Distdct to construct a middle school on approximately 20 acres of land, rather than the previously proposed elementary school on 10 acres of land. The increase in school area by 10 acres required a significant re-design of the project. The changes to the project reduced the number of residences from 308 to 242. Since the approval of the revised project and after the rough grading occurred, several property owners adjacent to the easterly boundary within Meadowview expressed concerns about the heights of the slopes next to their property and related landscaping and trail issues. After holding several meetings with the homeowners and the developer (Woodside C.,hantemar, Inc.), Woodside agreed to voluntarily make changes to their approved project to enhance the slopes and trail area next to Meadowview. These changes are as follows: Woodside Homes agrees to: Lower the pads of lots 5, 6, 7, by five feet, and lot 8 by two feet. In addition, the upper five feet of all slopes shall be graded at a 3:1 angle, effectively adding five feet of additional buffedng space at the top of slope. Install all landscaping and bail improvements consistent with the project's conditions of approval, and after the Citys standard maintenance pedod, dedicate to the City all areas previously depicted as H.O A. owned and maintained. F:~2~-pts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT%woodsidc.doc · Provide a letter to the City acknowledging responsibility for erosion control and drainage in accordance with the approved grading plans. · Install City required erosion control measures immediately as required by City ordinance. , No later than April of 2000, install the landscaping and trail improvements in the 40 foot buffer area. · Where possible, meander the trail through the buffer area. · Submit a wall plan along the top of the slope with adjacent Meadowview residents to provide input as to whether it is to be solid, open, or a combination of both. City aorees to: Compensate developer in an amount not to exceed $78,292 for the costs associated with Installing the landscaping for the wetlands mitigation area. The City will accept the monitoring and maintenance of the mitigation area to satisfy Woodside's obligation for the Army Corps of Engineers permit. Create a zone of benefit area and accept maintenance of all common landscaped areas within Woodside Development. All installation is to be in conforrnance with TCSD standards and every attempt shall be made to get the district on place by July, 2000. The proposed changes in staff's opinion, will reduce view impacts, increase the buffer area by five feet, and substantially improve the trail/buffer area. FISCAL IMPACT: A fund transfer of $78,292 in Capital Reserves is required to fund the costs assodated with installing the landscaping from the Nicholas Road Sidewalks project ($75,000) and the i-15/Santiago Road Additional Interchange Improvements project ($3,292). Savings of capital reserves have been identified in these projects to fund the necessary transfer. ATTACHMENTS First Amendment to Subdivision Agreement date September 20, 1999 - Page 3 Letter agreement between City and Woodside Chantemar F:~pts\pLANNING~qTAFFRJrI~woodsid, .doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. I 1sT AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT F:'~)~pts~LANN[NGLfr;woodeid~.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 1~r AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT F:~)cpt~;!.,ANNINO~b"'rAFFRFl~woodeie,.do~ 3 ~EP-28-1999 11:88 p. B2/B9 em:agzqmj/llqOl;l~ ,rolqlllmmlM:l ~ · ,,,., ~__,,,,,=~,,,.~---,, O. aNNtl. lallqOtm' c. mmOLIM. LVIIGmq 1~41Mll, liilg t.'llle l. mmlq~ jelw/xll~,Alvale Ommel~R. tl. se. medm!' ,,IANf'FI.e~L~IOM ImOVA.~ ,-:~,,.~-,, .,,_,,.,.,,, ..,.,, ,..,,_- RICHARDS, WATSON &. GEIRSHON AI .r,,_ ,tZ,.vSATLMN A,., ~1 --ramv,m,mf, me CONFIDEhlTIAL. THis MAITiliN- 18 SUBJECT TO THEAe at,,.._ ,f.,CUENTAND/ORTHE ATroevaeY WORK pRO(XJCT pRIVIL.EGE6. DO NOTOp~''~ r~I~IHE~ONI'E~I~ cn3) 2ss-Q216 M~. Gary Thorphil1 City of Tc~ccola 43200 ~,,d~.ss Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Tcmccula. Califonda 92589-9033 Re: Woodside Chsn~em,,r Homcs Enclosed plessc find drafu of the "Fu-sx ~mp~me~ to Subdivision Improveme~ AFrohens' and d= ~ a;z'nse~ b:twnm tie C'~ and Woodside Cl~n,'m-,' rciadag to ttac mH"""""""""~d0n of bs slops Mjann to Mesiowview. Please bavc someone check to make sure tbax the Wedzllds ~['Iti~Stlnn ~ ~ the ~ Is:nd-_e~)b)~ ~ shown on the plsn-~ approved as par1 of ~ devclolxIlenI approvals. The agreements both assume mese improvancnu are shown on dsc spproved nmps and plans, If they arc not, then wc will need ro revise these agrcanems Xo includc a map of the improvcmcxns. If yOU have any furgler qUegriOne or com~% plC2Se do no~ hPsi#nrc Io call me. Very truly youn. Genie Roberrs Hemsms Parkcr Debbic Ubnoskc l~n Parks Beryl Yasinosky ~ ~8-1999 11:8 P.I~ FIRST AMENDM~rf TO SUBDXVI~ON AGREEMENT 1999 by and h,~ccn the C'xty of T,~v~!t, a ....... ~-~o;I ~ ('City') and W~ Chn-,~, Inc., a California co, i~,~u ('Subdivider'). In amsidenfion of the mmml Tcmecula knowu as Tma 285 1~._. b. On ,1998 the Tentative Tract Map for Tract 28510 wac approyed by the City. Tlac comfifim= of approval of the Tentative Map ~ th~ Snlxiivikr to I~nd-~pe the W~sxi Mitigation Area descn'bed therein. t--d~.ping of this area will provid~ Ix.aJ~ to the City. c. On July 2.3, 1999 Subdivider and City entaul into the Subdivision s.ml~ovement ~ for TraCt 2851~__ which requitu to construct andinsta!lcertninpublk:,~,1~ovementsaudtoptovidebonds'totheCitYminsure completion of the Improvements (*Subdivision Agreement"). elevations and slopes, modify ptolz, ty line w,tnt and iraroll nddifioml Wails and' landscape bttffen Wjthin Traa No. 28510. 2. Subdivida agnzs that the .,,,d,,-.,q.,ing of the Walands Mi~ Area is part of the l.m~,ovemmls for Tract 2851~._. and will be installed as part of the Improvements for this Tract. NOtWidt~ndln=a the provisions Of the Subdivision Ayg(-b(-~ the City agre~ to rclmhntse Subdivider for its aamd costs in ~ ttz JnndecTping in the W_~i~-ds lVfitigadon Area in an amount not to extzcd seventy eight dmusand two hundred ninety two dollars and no cents ($78,292.00). Developer aban submit an invoice to City showing thc cost of the t.~md~ along with evidence of paymcnt of such costs. Cityslmll pay the amount of the actual costs im.ma,d !mrsuant to this Fu'st Axne,~ment Whbln ,bhZy days of receipt of tbe comp~ invoice. 3. City ~ accept the mm)itoring SOd t~int~w~n~e OI)lig;d*iOne for the Wetland Mitigation Area in an:ordmi~ with the tams and conditiom of the Army Corps of Engineer'spennitno. ,datedasof ,1999. City shah asstune the monitoring and maintenance obligations upon the randation of an easemeut by which Subdividff gram to the public and the City, its ~rs. assigns smt agents, the right to go outo ]i Mitigatiou Area. 11:89 p.~4,~9 5., EXcept as speclflc~ny provided herein. all other Subdivision Agrcgmcnt remain in full force and In wimcu whereof, this Fast P, mP~hnent is cxentu~ by the parties u of the date first written above. ClTYOFT!~IECL~A Stevm J. Foul Mayor Susan Jones, CIVIC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: PetcrM. Thorson City Attorney ~X1/99 1481155 - 2 - SEP-28-1999 11: 18 P.85/~9 WOODS~DE CHANTEMA~ INC., a California corporation 9,~tPJ9 14~11,N5 ' ~ ' ~'~""~28-1999 11:18 P.e6/I~ ALX~I'U~ ACKNO~4T State of Califernia County of , pcrso~y [l [1 personally known to nm -OR- proved ia me on tlat luresis of mti,faamy evidcucc to be time tinmort(s) whoee mine(s) is/are subscribed to the wbhln insmnnnt and acknowledged to n2~ that sigp--,re(s) on the instrumeml the Iraran(s), or the entity upon bchalf of which the person(s) acted, exean~ the immmacm. Vvqmcsm my baud and ofl]dal seal. SIGNATUR~ OF NOTARY CAPACrrY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [1 [] INDIVn)UAL(S) OFFICEIt(S) ClTrLEiS]): [1 [l [1 [l [1 P,,~T/~(S) AI-fO{-!I~{-FACT TRUStEE(S) CTLAIRPERSON/IvLa-YOR OTHER: SIGIqER IS 9t'lY99 14811.~ - 4 - ~EP-28-1999 11: 10 P.BT/~9 ALL-P~ ACKNOVa,.EDOMI~rr Stale of Catifornls county of · personany [1 [1 personany known ~o me -OR- proved m nz tm siz basis of ss.~y evidence to be the petson(s) whose nzn~s) e~ec-,st~ t!~ ssn~ in his/her~ smtm~ed t=tm:ity6es). and Ihat by hlWzrltlzir signature(s) on the instorment tl~ lzrso~s), or the entity upon be.l~f of which Wiln~ss my hss~ and official sinai. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY [] [1 tNDWtDUAL(S) O~'tCER(S) (TrttE[S]): CAPACITY CLMMED- BY :SIGNER [ ] PARTNER(S) [ ] ATI'ORNEY-IN-FACT [ ] TRUStEE(S) [ ] CHAIRPERSON/MAYOR [ ] OIItER: SIGNER IS REPRF~ENTING: City of Temecula J 43200 Business Parl~ Drive · Ternecul& CA 925~ · ~li~: P.O. ~ 903~ · T~ ~ 925~9033 (~9) 6~ · F~ (~ 6~i~ Mr. Pugsley Woodside Chantemar, Inc. c/o Woodside Homes 23121 Antonio Parkway, Suite 120 Rancho Santa Margarita, Ca. 92688 R~: Tract 285 10 Dear Mr. Pugsley: We appreciate the efforts of Woodside Chantemar, Inc. to work with us in resolving the concerns of the neighbors adjacent to Tract 285 10-_. This letter confirms the mitigation measures which Woodside Chantemar, Inc. and the City will take in resolving these matters. following: With respect to Tract 28510, Woodside Chantemar, Inc. agrees to complete the 1. Lower the building pads on Lots 5, 6, and 7 on Tract 28510 by five feet (5') and Lot 8 of Tract 28510 by two feet (2') from the current as built height of the building pads. In addition, the upper five feet (5') of the slope of each of these Lots shall be graded at an angle of 3:1, effectively adding five feet of additional buffering space at the top of each slope. 2. Install all landscaping and wail improvements consistent with the conditions of approval for the Project (PA98- ). 3. Install the erosion control measures required by the City pursuant to the Temecula Municipal Cede on or before October 15, 1999 and maintain the erosion control measures until such time as the permanent ewsien control measures have been installed and established. 4. Install the landscaping and Wail improvements in the forty (40') foot buffer area adjacent to Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 ofTFact 28510 no later than April 30, 2000. 5. Where physically possible, meander the trail thwugh the forty (40') foot buffer area adjacent to Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Tract 28510. 6. Consult with the adjacent pwperty owners of the Meadowview Tract as to whether the walls at the rear property lines of LOts 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Tract 28510 and submit a new wall plan for the walls on or before January 30, 2000. 9/20199 14~1156 ~j~Pnnled on Recyded Paper Woodaide Chantemar, Inc. acknowledges its responsibility for erosion control and drainage on Tract 285 10 as required by the grading plans for the Tract and the requirements of the Temecula Municipal Code. As provided in the First Amendment to the Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract 28510- ., City will compensate Woodside Chantemar, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $78,292.00 of the costs associated with installing the landscaping for the Weftands Mitigation Area. Additionally, as provided in the First Amendment, the City will accept the monitoring and maintenance requirements of the Weftands Mitigation Area in satisfaction of the monitoring and maintenance requirements of the Army Corps of Engineer' s permit for the Area. City will also agree, as set forth in the First Amendment, to accept maintenance of all landscaped areas within Tract 28510 provided an election is held in which the property owners of Tract 285 10 approve the fees/charges for landscape maintenance and the landscaping is in conformance with City and TCSD standards. City will use its best efforts to complete the election process by July 30, 2000. If Woodside Chantemar, Inc., agrees with the mitigation obligations described in this letter, please sign the original letter and return it to me. Thanks you for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, Shawn Nelson City Manager The terms of this letter agreement are hereby approved and accepted by Woodside Chantemar, Inc. WOODSIDE CHANTEMAR, INC., a California corporation By: Name: Title: By: Namc: Title: 9/20/9914811~6 - 2 - DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CiTY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Mana~ October 19, 1999 SUBJECT: Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloda Wol~ick, Marketing CoOrdinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of September 1999. Economic Department Meetings The Mayor, City staff, and Bonnie Hanna from the EDC held a lunch meeting on September 29 with representatives from Bianchi, Hudson RCI, and International Rectifier as part of the City's Business Retention Program that is being implemented in conjunction with the EDC. The lunch was informative and allowed for the shadrig of information. Traffic issues, entry-level employee turnover, professional development, and availability of mechanical engineers and information systems technicians were stated areas of concern. Staff is planning on coordinating through the high school's apprenticeship and ROP training programs to help provide better employment opportunities for these companies. Staff attended the State of the Inland Empire Luncheon, which was presented by The Business Press on September 22"d in San Bernardino. This was the first time government and business leaders from all over the Inland Empire assembled to hear directly from their elected and appointed officials, on where the Inland Empire is headed as we enter the new millennium. Keynote Speaker was Mada Contreras-Sweet, Secretary of Califomia's Business, Transportation and Housing Agency. She is responsible for maintaining the strength of Califomia's infrastructure and the efficiencies of its financial markets. Presentations were made by Ted Ooms, IEEP; Supervisor Jon MikeIs; Emcee Mayor Judith Varies, City of San Bernardino; Supervisor Roy Wilson; Chairman, Riverside Co. Beard of Supervisors; and John Husing, PhD. Economist. Staff met with representatives from the El)C, Muraleta, Lake Elsinore and the Press- Enterprise on the Riverside County Grant Business Needs Survey and Business Resource Guide on September 1= and September 15th, The committee met with the graphic designer from the Press-Enterprise and discussed several concepts for the guide. On September 15~', Jim O'Grady met with representatives of Riverside County, Lake Elsinore and Murdeta to discuss finalizing the proposed regional marketing plan. Staff attended the Manufacturer's Council Meeting on September 8t' and met with the EDC regarding the upcoming Expo in November. The City is a sponsor and will have its own exhibit bcoth. Staff members met with the Economic Development Subcommittee on September 13~' to discuss the draft of a City Banner Program Policy and sample street banner designs. Non-profit groups have expressed interest in advertising their events on the banners (i.e. Rod Run, Arts Festival, etc.) The Subcommittee recommends that the City Banner Program Policy be considered as part of the FY2000-01 Operating Budget as this would greatly impact the Public Works Department as they are responsible for the banner changeovers. The program will include additional banners and changeovers, which would require a lift truck, which is currently borrowed from the School District. Staff met with Sue Robbins of Hedtage Media Corp. and the Sen Diego Chamber of Commerce regarding advertising opportunities in their Greater San Diego Newcomer and Relocation Guide (official relocation guide of the San Diego Chamber). The publication provides information on relocating to, doing business in and living in the Sen Diego area. The guide is distributed throughout the year by the San Diego Chamber, builders, developers, financial industry, human resource departments, public relations and other promotional programs. Over 40,000 prospects per year use this source as a reference. This is a great opportunity for Temecula to align with San Diego and tap into their business and tapor market. Staff met with the Southwest Riverside County EDC on September 14"' and 21,~ to discuss marketing/planning issues, leads and programs. Temecula hosted the Inland Empire Economic Partnership Community Partner's Meeting on September 23~. Ted Ooms updated the group on the successful Forbes campaign. Chds Del Ross Risher gave an update on the project report, which was distributed and discussed at the meeting. IEEP is compiling information from the member cities for their Fact Book 2000, which will be published at the end of the year. This marketing piece will be sent to prospective businesses and sent out when responding to RFPs. An Industrial Project Fee Estimates and Time Line data report was distributed for member cities to review and to add additional information if appropriate. Staff attended the EDC Southwest Riverside County Quarterly Luncheon at Embassy Suites on September 23d. The EDC, in cooperation with the Metropolitan Water District, presented the status of the Eastside Reservoir project. Dennis Majors, Assistant Chief Engineer Project Manager, gave a construction update. Peter Carpenter, Director Asset Management, reported on the recreation plan development and private/public partnership and regional economic opportunities. Tim Skrove, Regional Outreach Manager, reported on statewide water issues. 2 On September 17th, Jim O'Grady attended the Temecula Connect Meeting. The topic included SBA Financing. Jim O'Grady attended the Business Retention Committee Meeting at Diversified Temporary Services on September 2"a. City staff began tabulation of site visits over the last four years. The information will be presented in a power point presentation to the committee in October. Jim O'Grady attended the Murdeta/Temecula Group Meeting on September 3r~. Staff provided information about Temecula to the EDC of Southwest Riverside County for follow-up on a possible Call Center. On September 14m, staff held a follow-up meeting with several representatives from Old Town to discuss Business Improvement Districts. Jim O'Grady met with representatives from LOGRES on September 16th regarding a possible open access fiber optic system for Temecula. Staff held a City Marketing Committee Meeting on Sept. 20th at Callaway Winery. The following items were covered: · Jim O'Grady gave an update on the regional marketing efforts between the County of Riverside, Muraleta, Lake Elsinore and Temecula. The main emphasis of the partnership will be to promote the business development and economic opportunities of the region. · Staff gave an update and report on the City's outreach materials, advertising and media exposure. · SW Riverside County Supplement- Business Press · San Diego Business Journal High Tech Directory · IETC Two-County Visitor Guide · San Bemardino County Sun · Toudsm Rack Brochure Comp. · Rural Toudsm Conference (Refer to toudsm section of this report.) · Jim O'Grady updated the committee on the Economic Development Sub- committee's recommendation of the City Banner Program Policy. (Refer to economic development section of this report.) · Jim O'Grady gave an update on the Hotel Conference Center Feasibility Analysis and the Impact of the Pechanga Project Addendum. · Business Resource Guide Update (Refer to economic development section of this report.) · Judi Staats reported that the Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council and The Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' EXPO will be held November 4, 1999, at Temeku Hills. · Alice Sullivan gave an update on the research being done on forming a Temecula CONVIS. (Refer to toudsm section of this report.) · Each committee member gave an activities report on their organization. O'Gredy attended the ICMA Conference in Portland, Oregon from Sept 28 - sessions on economic development and Jim October 1'*. The conference included telecommunications, which Jim attended. 3 In September, Tony Elmo and the Fire Department met with a pool supply manufacturer company regarding city building and fire code requirements. This company has approximately 60 employees. Grand Ol~eningis Staff artended the Robinson's-May Opening on September 1". Staff attended the Office Depot Opening on September 13t". Leads & Inauides In the month of September, the City responded to 2 leads and 10 inquiries. Note: Information on Fast Track, Expansion, Relocation and Speculative Building can be found in the Community Development Department report. Staff prepared updated information to Kosmont & Associates, an economic development and real estate advisory firm. Temecula was reselected to be included in the sixth edition of the 2000 Kosmont Cost of Doing Business Survey, which is recognized as a leading information source for municipal development fees, business taxes, and economic incentives for hundreds of communities throughout the U.S. The survey will be national in scope and will be published online. The survey will give Temecula nationwide exposure for business opportunities, as it is used by both public and pdvate sector professionals as an authoritative guide for comparing communities and in making fiscally prudent development and site location decisions. Staff wrote an article for the Chamber of Commer~;e Monthly Newsletter announcing the "Expanded Emergency Medical Aid Services Offered Through The F.A.S,T. Program," Tourism Staff attended the California Rural Toudsm Conference in Palm Spdngs on September 27th and 28a'. The program featured timely issues facing the rural travel and toudsm sectors of our industry. This was the first conference on rural toudsm in seven years. The emphasis was for "Gateway cities to work with rural communities to lure visitors to visit rural areas." Cities are working with lower toudsm budgets and it is beneficial for larger and smaller cities to partner by co-op projects in packaging destinations, advertising and media ventures. The sessions and key speakers were extremely informative and Temecula will be able to incorporate many of the ideas learned at the conference. Gloda Wolnick attended the IETC Board Meeting on September 29t". At the meeting it was approved that the IETC will remain under the IEEP. This is a great economic development and toudsm partnership. This will allow the IETC to obtain more money for tourism. The board discussed its participation at the California Travel Market travel tradeshow which will be held in San Jose from February 8 - 11th, All of the Inland Empire tradeshow booths will be located together and the theme will be carded 4 throughout. Temecula will join the IETC and share a booth. The Chamber will staff the booth. Temecula will participate on the planning committee, Staff attended the Chambers CONVIS Meeting on September 23"~. Guest Speaker Camie Mattson of the North County CONVIS gave a presentation on how their bureau began and answered questions committee members had regarding starting up a CONVIS. Staff sent toudsm information to Doo Paek of The Korea Times Los Angeles (Korean Daily Newspaper). They are planning to run a story on Temecula in their travel section. This edition is the oldest and largest circulation Korean daily newspaper in the U.S. With a reader-to-copy ratio in excess of three-to-one, readership of more than 245,000. Attachments: Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Temecula Valley Film Council Activities Report Inland Empire Economic Partnership Activities Report 5 27450 Ynez Road, Suite 104 Temecula, CA 92591 Phone (909) 676-5090 · Fax (909) 694-0201 September 10, 1999 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn: Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report provided as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of August at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights 6 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business in Temecula. They received a business packet which includes information on demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Committee Highlights Tourism Committee: Ms. Camie Mattsen of the North County CVB is scheduled to speak at the September 23rd Convention & Visitors sub-committee meeting. The October 74 Tourism meeting will be held at Callaway Winery. The committee will tour the vineyards to view first hand the affect the Glassy Winged Sharpshooter Pierce's Disease have had on on the vineyards. To create local awareness staff will invite local media, Board of Directors and The City of Temecula council candidates. The end of October is the planned completion date for the City of Temecula Map. Education Committee: The committee has been in contact with Chaparral High School's video production class. Video taping of business leaders in the community will be scheduled to support the job mentoring programs for the local high schools students. Business leaders will be filmed speaking in regards to their occupation and company. Individuals interested in participating with the school's reading programs should contact the school' s Reading Buddies Program coordinator. The committee is working on a book donation program which was formerly the Bring A Book Breakfast. There is a possibility of setting up a book drop- box at a local bookstore for people to donate books. Ways & Means Committee: Committee members reported each of the following events were an outstanding success: Monte Carlo held Wednesday, August 18, at Embassy Suites Hotel, attendees enjoyed an evening of fun, food and games. Temecula Valley Pageant held Saturday, August 28, at Temecula Middle School crowned six young ladies, to represent the City of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce during the 1999/2000 year. A panel of eleven judges selected the reigning court. This year's Autumn Fest '99 Business Showcase is slated for October 20, at Temeku Hills Auditorium. The event has been completely sold out, with over 90 businesses participating. Promotional material has been distributed through Temecula Today! Newsletter, and The Califomian newspaper. Pechanga Entertainment Center is the venue for the 2000 Installation Banquet and Awards Presentation to be held Saturday, February 5, 2000. The Newsletter Advisory Council has continued to expand the monthly newsletter Temecula Today! This committee is comprised of chamber members, each bringing new exciting ideas, suggestions and advise in order to take Temecula Today! to the next level. Distribution of Temecula Today! has increased its readership throughout Temecula Valley. Local Business Promotions Committee: The Mystery Shopper program was activated during the month of July. A local business will be recognized, due to their outstanding customer service, and will be awarded a plaque during our monthly mixer. Preparations for the November campaign of Shop Temecula First are in process. The Business of the Month program has continued with the selection of a local small business and a large business. Nomination process for Business of the Month is based on community and committee involvement within the Chamber. Government Action Committee: The Chamber has continued its support to find funding for research of the glassy-winged sharpshooter and its devastation affecting Temecula wineries. Letters have been sent to legislators to ask for their support in finding a solution to Pierce's Disease. Responses have been received from Govemor Davis, Assemblyman Thompson, and the Dept. of Food and Agriculture. The Candidates Forum is scheduled for October 13, 1999 at City Hall. Bryan Reece will be the facilitator of this forum. Candidates will speak on topics pertaining to the business community. Temecula-Murrieta Good Morning Sacramento has been scheduled for October 26, 1999 at Bear Creek. Invited guest speakers are Assemblyman Bruce Thompson and Senator Ray Haynes. Membership Committee: Ambassadors attended 8 Ribbon Cuttings in August. The Ambassador Networking Breakfast had 65 business members in attendance. The Committee is focusing on the Membership Drive scheduled for Sept 13 - 1 7~'. The goal this year is 100 new members in this time period. the Committee is hosting a membership appreciation night for the entire membership on Sept 281h at the TVCC. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution) · 250 Travel Packet Bags to Destination Temecula for distribution to top Tupperware producers visiting Temecula. · 225 Visitor Guides and 40 Old Town Maps to TVCC's Weekend Visitor Center. · 225 Visitor Guides and 150 Winery Brochures to Silver Spoon Caf~ for distribution to tourists. · 150 Winery Brochures and 30 Visitor Guides to Tacalota RV Park and Campground for distribution to guests. · 100 Winery Brochures to Ros a's Cantina for distribution to tourists. · 50 Temecula Brochures, 50 Visitor Guides, 50 Winery Brochures and 15 Old Town Maps to American Coach for distribution to rally participants staying at Outdoor Resorts in March. · 50 Old Town Maps, 50 School Brochures, 50 Temecula Brochures and 50 Winery Brochures to Portofina Apartments for new resident packages. · 30 Visitor Guides and 30 Winery Brochures to Tours of Distinction for distribution to clients. · 40 Old Town Maps to Gramma Audrey's for distribution to tourists. · 25 Winery Brochures, 25 Relocation Packets and 10 Visitor Guides to Spanos Co. for distribution to new residents. · 25 School Brochures, 25 Temecula Brochures and 10 Relocation Packets to Century 21 Wright for distribution to prospective buyers. · 15 School Brochures and 15 Relocation Packets to Rancon Real Estate for distribution to new residents. Marketing Report · Chamber staff submitted 10 Temecula Special Events Calendar Nominations to the Califomia Celebrations 2000 Publication. Activity Report · Overall Tourism phone calls are up 37.79 percent from last year. · Overall phone calls are up 25.12 percent from last year. · Walk-ins are up 20.74 percent from last year. E-Mail requests: 86 · Web page user sessions: 6,257 Also attached are the Meeting Minutes for the Tourism, Education, Ways & Means, Local Business Promotions, Government Action and Membership Committee report. If you have any question regarding this information, please feel free to call me. Thank you. Sincerely, , President/CEO CC: Mayor Steven J. Ford Mayor Pro Tem Jeffcry E. Stone Councilman Jeff Comerchero Councilman Karel F. Lindemans Councilman Ronald H. Roberts Shawn Nelson, City Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT For August, 1999 PHONE CALLS TOURISM TOURISM REFERRALS Calendar of Events Special Events General Information TOTAL TOURISM CALLS Chamber Vis. Center This Month This Month 459 100 327 1524 2,410 Total Year-To-Date 3550 881 4840 8,847 18,118 RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PHONE CALLS * CHAMBER REFERRALS 169 76 2,431 129 5,215 12,040 1662 523 14,552 959 22,911 83,435 WALK-INS TOURISM CALENDAR OF EVENTS SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL INFORMATION RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL WALK-INS 153 102 223 1030 164 80 1033 73 2,858 104 5 1 49 6 1 0 50 216 2,413 900 859 6,597 1330 469 7,258 510 20,336 MAILINGS TOURISM RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS TOTAL MAILINGS 119 98 91 308 1285 793 820 2,898 E-MAIL TOURISM RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 29 15 42 86 6,257 160 132 403 695 19,430 GRAND TOTALS PHONE CALLS WALK-INS MAILINGS E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS CHAMBER REFERRALS THIS MONTH 5,215 2,858 3O8 86 6,257 12,040 YEAR-TO-DATE 22,911 20,336 2,898 695 19,430 83,435 ANNUAL VOLUME COMPARISONS Chamber August, 1998 Chamber August, 1999 Percentage Increase PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 586 459 -21.67 Calendar of Events 161 100 -37.89 Special Events 263 327 24.33 General Information 739 1,524 106.22 TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 1,749 2,410 37.79 RELOCATION 201 169 -15.92 DEMOGRAPHICS 106 76 -28.30 CHAMBER 1,722 2,431 41.17 MISCELLANEOUS 390 129 -66.92 TOTAL PHONE CALLS 4,168 5,215 25.12 CHAMBER REFERRALS 5,019 12,040 139.89 WALK-INS TOURISM 178 153 -14.04 CALENDAR OF EVENTS 104 102 -1.92 SPECIAL EVENTS 148 223 50.68 GENERAL INFORMATION 563 1030 82.95 RELOCATION 193 164 -15.03 DEMOGRAPHICS 78 80 2.56 CHAMBER 1004 1033 2.89 MISCELLANEOUS 86 73 -15.12 VISITOR CENTER WALK-INS 192 216 12.50 TOTAL WALK-INS 2,546 3,074 20.74 MAILINGS TOURISM 276 119 -56.88 RELOCATION 88 98 11.36 DEMOGRAPHICS 70 91 30.00 TOTAL MAILINGS 434 308 -29.03 E-MAIL TOURISM N/A 29 N/A RE LOCATIO N N/A 15 N/A MISCELLANEOUS N/A 42 N/A TOTAL E-MAIL 86 N/A 6,257 **WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS N/A * Chamber referrals reflects faxes, walk-ins and phone calls **New category relects Web-page requests October 7, 1999 Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 l evelopment OrporatiOn Sottthu,est Rit,er~'ide Ontn(l' RE: Activity Summary The following highlights the activities of the EDC during the month of September: Business Development The EDC did not respond to requests received from IEEP during the month. It is no longer receiving the requests directly from IEEP. Requests are being forwarded to the EDC through the City of Temecula. Those inquiries received required zoning for hazardous materials; an existing 24,250 sf facility with parking for 300 that required occupancy by 10/31/99; an inbound call center of 30,000 sf with an 8 to 1 parking ratio; a 50,000 sf warehouse/distribution site that won't be occupied for two years and a project that required a one day response. The EDC responded to five requests for information from leads received through Business Facilities and Site Selection magazine. The requests were from two warehouse and distribution operations, an office facility for a REIT, fabricated metal products and a consulting engineering firm. The time line for most of these projects is two to four years. Information was also sent to a company contemplating a new operation in the Western United States. EDC hosted a tour of available property and lunch with a site selector and a representative from a company planning to set up an insurance call center operation in the area. Marketing Outreach Staats attended the General Meeting for the Manufacturers' Council held on September 8, 1999. GTE, EMWD, The Gas Company and SCE gave a presentation entitled "How do public utilities offer assistance to new and existing manufacturing firms with cost-conscious solutions? Staats attended two planning committee meetings with representatives of the SWRC Manufacturers' Council to plan the Annual Expo in November. The EDC-SWRC is jointly sponsoring the event with the Manufacturers' Council continuing to build the relationship between the two organizations. Staats attended the Marketing California Forum held by California Trade and Commerce on September 21, 1999 in San Bemardino. The meeting focused on the marketing plans the State of California is promoting this year. Staats attended the State of the Inland Empire Luncheon on September 22, 1999. State of California Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing, Maria Contreras-Sweet was the keynote speaker, Ms. Sweet relayed her department's desire to work with the Inland Empire on key issues in employment, infrastructure, education and housing. The EDC-SWRC quarterly luncheon was t>ost()fficc Box 1388 · Tcmccula, CA 92=,93-138bl ° Officc9()9/69~-5130 · FAX 909/695-5126 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula October 7, 1999 Page Two held on September 23, 1999. Representatives from Metropolitan Water Distdct presented current project updates for construction and preparation of the recreational areas of the Eastside Reservoir project. Business Relations The Business Relations Committee met on September 2, 1999. Visits to two companies in Murrieta were made via telephone. One in person visit was made to a company in Temecula. Follow up reports were given on the visit and tour conducted for Mark Fauci of Omni-Corder Technologies. John Fili, President of the Manufacturers' Council attended the meeting and discussed some of the joint projects the EDC and Manufacturers' Council are working on. The members of the Southwest Riverside County Grant Committee met to begin design of the Business Resource Guide. The Press Enterprise art director assigned to this project met with the group concerning design guidelines and layout of the publication. Another meeting will be held in October to finalize design and review content revisions. Administration/Organization The September 29~h Board of Directors meeting was held at Murrieta City Hall. Those directors present reviewed the slate of candidates presented by the nominations committee. Discussions were held concerning the election and seating of the new board of directors. Plans were made to complete the process by November. A membership report was given and discussion was held concerning the membership status. The resignation of Judi Staats as Executive Director of the organization was announced and discussion was held concerning filling the vacated position. This concludes the written summary of activity for the month of September. Please call if there are questions concerning this report. TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COUNCIL ACTIVITIES REPORT September 1999 Members of the Temecula Valley Film Council are Maggi Allen, President; Sunny Thomas, Vice-President; Judi Staats, Treasurer; Steve Phelps, Secretary; Brian Padberg, Sheri Davis, Stacey Sivek and Penny Rivera. The Business of the Film Council This month we received 33 phone calls 4 - Film Festival, 17 - locations and information requests, 11- council business. New member, Stacey Sivek, was installed this month. Stacey is a former member of the TVFC. He resigned to devote more time to developing his film lighting and electrical business, Indie Grip & Lighting, which is now well known in the Southern California film industry. Sheri Davis, Director of the Inland Empire Film Commission, reported that there has been a decline in filming in California. This is partly due to a huge campaign by the Canadian government to attract major studio filming to that country and Governor Gray Davis's decision to not give additional funding to the California film industry, as it would be funding for a "special interest group" which is against his current policy. Shed suggested that in light of the above information, the TVFC needs to focus on the Independent Filmmaker and Student Filmmakers appreciate the close proximity of Temecula to Hollywood, our willingness to help the small filmmaker and our policy of no permit fees. This will be the focus of our upcoming marketing plan. TVFC is continuing to support the Chamber and the City' s Tourism Committees. Our plan is to have our website ready in January with online access to our location photo library. Filming in Temecula "3000 Miles" is currently on hold for filming in this area. It was reported that the production company is waiting for further funding. The locations they have chosen in the Temecula area are pivotal to the script so we still expect to see them here later this year. TVFC received location requests for green grassy fields, old wooden barns, and working cattle or horse ranches. In all cases we were able to meet with the location scout and to provide the needed photo opportunities. We will continue to support the daily management of ~lmmaker's requests, and encourage the growing awareness of the industry in this community. It is our goal to generate a higher awareness of the Temecula Area within the context of filmmaking activities, and to present the opportunities and benefits of this production to local merchants and businesses Respectfully, Maggi Allen President, TVFC INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP For Period: January, 1999 to Auqust, 1999 Item ~ August INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP 1. 'Public Speaking Engagements 3 2. Community Outreach 21 3. Economic Development: · Direct Mail · Advertising · Local Retention 2 · TeamCA Ads · Magazines · Directories · Journals · Outdoor Ads · Radio · Articles · TOTAL · Tradeshows · Press Release/Col. Inches · Media Relations 1 · Prospect Missions · Site Selector Outreach 1 · Leads 11 · Source of Leads · Inquiries/Forbes Inquiries 14/82 · Attractions · Jobs Created 16 · Retention 1 · Jobs Retained 73 · Financial Investment** $6,500,000 · Tours Corporate: · Member Visits/Calls 11 · Membership Events · Special Events · New Member Prospects/ Interest Letters 15 · New Members 2 · Corporate Advertising · Corp. Mktg./Press Release · Other Projects Cumulative J Comments 27 114 11 8 15 4 6 1 2 3 40 4 16/88.5 17 2 16 56 491/298 11 953 3 308 $76,236,256 5 98 7 1 Col. inches tracking begun 7/99 (5) Broker; (20) Govt.; (13) Site Selector; (2) Client Referral; (2) IEEP; (4) Ad Response; (1) Website; (2) SBDC; (2) Members Sears, Disney, American Tire Disposal, Hilton, Quality Cabinets, Poly Pacific, Toybox Creations, ConAgra, InterMetro, Old Dominion Freight Line, Starkist/Heinz Auto Supply 106 9 5 3 6 CATCA, GE Capital, Univ. of Phoenix, Yucca Valley, ESRI, Raincross Med., Twentynine Palms; KVCR; Ultimate Internet Access Marketing award - CALED 1/2 WORKFORCE COLLABORATIVE 1. Career Club Clients 2. School Enrichment Standard INLAND EMPIRE FILM COMMISSIO 1. Industry Outreach 2. Filming, broken down as follows (these numbers reflect known I.E. filming activity): · Features · T'V · Commercials · Stills · Music Videos · Student Films · Document./Indus. Videos TOTAL* 3. Request for Locations 4. Filming Credits 5. Permits 6. Economic Impact FOUNDATION · Activities SBDC Jobs Created/Jobs Retained Economic Impact 1. Client Activity · Client Hours 2. Training Events · Training Hours · Training Event Attendees 3. Outreach Update/Public Speaking 4. I.E. International Trade · Export Actions · Dollars 5. Other TOURISM COUNCIL 1. Industry Outreach 2. Marketing Activity · Tradeshows · Promotional Materials 3. Mailings (cd-rom) 4. Ads 5. Leads HIGH TECH 1. Clients/Inquiries 2. Client Hours 3. Training Events 4. Financial Economic Impact 5. Other Projects $11,000 3 2 24 20 1 1 7 58 135 25 10/0 $4,495,500 157 634.5 8 383 105 5 $2,030,000 1 1 1 ongoing 30 $50,500.00 23 12 144 203 14 16 51 463 1,108 93 $926,850 107/62 $34,223,500 1,141 3,868.5 81 4,990 1,033 0 19 $13,137,000 1 43 3 7 4 6 11 VVkg. with BLM *Preliminary numbers Riverside and San Bernardino total Partial Amount/Preliminary Numbers 2 TriComm Pictures, Golf Tournament 3 2 19 33.5 2 $100,000 9 SBA Awards Luncheon responded to 457 leads from LA Travel Show; 1,239 from Sunset 2/2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 19, 1999 Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for the month of September, 1999. MOACTRPT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Bill Hughes, Acljng Director of Public Works/City Engineer <E~Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent October 4, 1999 Monthly Activity Report - September, 1999 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in- house personnel for the month of September, 1999: SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 10 B. Total signs installed 15 C. Total signs repaired 4 II. III. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons 5,968 67.5 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 22 RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 87,066 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. 49 2,873 VII. STENCILING A. 296 New and repainted legends B. 2,808 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 53 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 45 service order requests for the month of Seotember, 1999. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 44 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of $eotember, 1999 was $ 48,979.50 compared to $ 43,050.00 for the month of Auoust. 1999. Account No. 5402 $ 42,964.50 Account No. 5401 $ 6,015.00 Account No. 999-5402 $ -0- CC: Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (CIP/Traffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer - (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) z,,:l: Z~ Z 008 008 08 ci o d n, 0 o z z i- z , ~ , · ~ ~ STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of September, 1999 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK ~;IZE CONTRACTOR: Date: MONTHLY # 5402 WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. CITYWIDE R.O.W. TREE TRIMMING TRIMMED 294 R.O.W. TREES CONTRACTOR: Date: 09108199 # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 9,447.00 TORAN DEVE1A')PMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OLD TOWN BOARDWALK TREATMENT AND SEAL OF NEW BOARD- WALK AND PLANTER BARRELS Date: # 5402 09117199 OLD TOWN TOTAL COST $ 24,942.50 CLEANING AND SEALING OF CURB AND GUTTER AND P.C.C. SIDEWALKS Date: #5402 09118199 OLD TOWN TOTAL COST $ 2,000.00 CONVERT 6 WOOD WHISKEY TRASH BARRELS AND CONSTRUCT WOODEN STEP TOTAL COST $ 1,000.00 STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of September, 1999 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR: RENEWS :: · ........ ......... ... Date: 09/10/99 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD BRUSH REMOVAL AND CLEAN-UP OF R.O.W. # 5402 Date: 09121199 CALLE KATHERINE AT CALLE CHAPOS TOTAL COST $ 2,500.00 WEED SPRAYING & WEED ABATEMENT IN R.O.W. · CONTRACTOR: "':.:. ;BECKER ENGINEERING':': ':" Date: 09108199 CITYWIDE #5~1 TOTAL COST $ 3,075.00 ..... :: .:: '.:!!:: .'!.:~ .... i.'ii:' · ~i ': ... :.' :': ':'d '~ .... :: CATCH BASIN REPAIRS AND SAFETY BAR INSTALLATIONS Date: /f 5401 09/10/99 CALLE VALARDO TOTAL COST $ 1,850.00 REPAIRS TO C.M.P. AND DRAINAGE SYSTEM TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT si199-5402 TOTAL COST $ 4, 165.00 $ 6,015.00 $42,964.50 '0' RECEIVED o9/ol/99 o9/ol/99 o9/ol/99 o9/ol/99 o9/ol/99 09/01/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/02/99 09/03/99 09/03/99 09/03/99 09/03/99 09/07/99 09/07/99 09/07/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 09/09/99 09/09/99 09/10/99 09/10/99 09/10/99 09/13/99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 39537 OAK CLIFF DRIVE 31335 CORTE SONORA 31529 AVENIDA DEL REPOSO 42250 CEE CEE ROAD 42307 AGENA 41588 BIG SAGE COURT 45528 CLASSIC WAY 29901 AVENIDA CIMA DEL SOL 39868 NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY 31115 DOG LEG CIRCLE 43740 CAJON DRIVE 30692 DORAL 30207 SILVER RIDGE COURT 30511 BAY HILL DRIVE 45566 MASTERS DRIVE 31104 NASSAU COURT 30241 SIERRA MADRE 41417 AVENIDA DE LA REINA 30241 CORTE CANTANIA 42567 REMORA STREET 43096 VISTA DEL RANCHO 30692 DORAL COURT 42889 VIA ALHAMBRA CALLE PII~A COLADA @ NO. GENERAL KEARNY 29601 WAYNE WOOD DRIVE 42321 AGENA .... :: i. i:i'::.:: i.: ........... COMPLETED. DISEASED EUCALYPTUS 09/01/99 RED CURB REQUEST 09/01/99 OPEN TRENCHES 09101199 DEBRIS PICK-UP 09/01/99 TREE REMOVAL 09/01/99 CAT CH BASIN CLEANING 09/01 DISEASED EUCALYPTUS 09/02/99 TREE TRIMMING 09/02/99 POTHOLE 09/02/99 STREET SWEEPING 09/02/99 TREE TRIMMING 09/02/99 GRAFFITI 09/03/99 POTHOLE 09/03/99 TREE TRIMMING 0903/99 DISEASED EUCALYPTUS 09/03/99 STREET REPAIRS 09/07/99 POTHOLE 09/07/99 ROOT PRUNING 09/07/99 TREE TRIMMING 09/08/99 TREE DOWN 09/08/99 OIL SPILL 09/09199 DEBRIS PICK-UP 09/09/99 OIL SPILL 09/10/99 DEBRIS PICK-UP 09/10/99 TREE TRIMMING 09/10/99 STUMP REMOVAL 09/13/99 R:'d~C~'NTAINXWKCMPLTD~,.~OR,.~EFTEM~ER.~ :; DATE : .:.;.; .. ~"' ':' :'LOCATtON:..;;.;: :...:.~:. ~.· ":':"":REQUgST::'i. '~.': ~'7': 'DA;FE'WORK RECEIVED .... ' ......... COMPLETED : .....:: . . . ............ . .: ........ 'E: :' ...E .E ....: .:: ...... 09/13/99 CALLE HALCON SLURRY SEAL STREETS 09/14/99 29778 CALLE PANTANO TREE TRIMMING 09/14/99 45520 CLASSIC WAY CATCH BASIN CLEANING 09/15/99 CORTE MONTIEL SIGN REPAIR 09/15/99 42036 AVENIDA VISTA LADERA TREE TRIMMING 09/16/99 42307 AGENA TREE REPLACEMENT 09/16/99 COPPER BEACH AND IRON BARK ODOR 09/13/99 31705 PASEO GOLETA ROOT PRUNING 09/14/99 30576 IRON BARK ROOT PRUNING 09/14/99 41555 AVENDA DE LA REINA TREE REMOVAL 09/16/99 31241 CORTE ALHAMBRA ROOT PRUNING 09/16/99 29363 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD 'TREE TRIMMING 09/17/99 28242 CORTE MALBINO EMPTY LOT MAINTENANCE 09/18/99 40696 AVENIDA CENTENARIO SIGNPICK-UP 09/21/99 31985 CALLE CHAPOS V-DITCHREPAIR 09/22/99 30330 CHURCHILL COURT TREE TRIMMING 09/22/99 45362 ZUMA DRIVE TREE TRIMMING 09/23/99 30510 IRON BARK TREE TRIMMING 09/23/99 31791 VINEYARD AVENUE TREE TRIMMING 09/23/99 45362 ZUMA DRIVE TREE TRIMMING 09/23/99 41585 AVENIDADELAREINA TREEREMOVAL 09/23/99 41915 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SIDEWALK REPAIR 09/27/99 29375 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD ROCK SPILL 09/28/99 30480 ANACONDA COURT .TREE TRIMMING 09/29/99 TEMECULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TREE TRIMMING 09/29/99 30509 IRON BARK TREE TRIMMING 09/30/99 29275 SANTIAGO ROAD GRAFFITI 09113199 09114199 09114199 09115199 09115199 09116199 09116199 09113199 09114199 09/27/99 09/16/99 09/16/99 09/17/99 09118199 09/21/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/23/99 09123199 09/23/99 09123199 09/23/99 09/27/99 09/28/99 09/29/99 09/29/99 09/30/99 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS R:~MAINTAIN~WKCMPLTD~qORS~SEPTEMBER.99 DATE o9/ol/99 09/03/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 o9/13/99 o9/13/99 o9/14/99 o9/15/99 o9/15/99 o9/16/99 09/20/99 09/20/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/23/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 09/27/99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 LOCATION MAIN AT PUJOL DORAL / CREEKSIDE MARGARITA AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD 41955 MAIlq STREET 6n~ STREET AT PUJOL PAUBA 300' WEST OF VIA DEANDA WILLOW RUN ROAD AT LA SERENA VETERANS PARK DE PORTOLA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY CALLE ARAGON PARK 44535 BEDFORD COURT LA SERENA EAST OF WITJ,OW RUN ROAD MARGARITA NORTH OF DE PORTOLA 42140 LYND~ LANE MARGARITA AT SANTA GERTRUDIS MARGARITA NORTH OF RAMSEY COURT PALA ROAD SOUTH OF VIA CONSUELO \ 28465 FELIX VALDEZ LYNDIE LANE RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT BLOCKBUSTER RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT VIA LAS COLINAS 26201 YNEZ ROAD 26411 YNEZ ROAD 28465 FELIX VALDEZ RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT HOPE WAY RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT HUMBER WORK COM PI..ETED REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 56 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 100 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 200 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 70 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 663 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED 55 S.F. OF GRAFFITI \\TEMEC_FSIOI\VOLl~DEFtI'S~V4XMAINTAINXWKCMPLTDM3RAFFITIX99\SEPTEMBE1L99.DOC 09/27/99 RANCHO CALIFORNIAROAD AT MORAGA REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/27/99 PUJOL AT 1sr STREET REMOVED 600 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 YNEZ AT TOWN CENTER REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 WINCHESTER AT PROMENADE MALL REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 VIA PU'ERTA AT LA SERENA REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 LA SERENA EAST OF WILLOW RUN REMOVED 24 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 RANCHO VISTA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/28/99 MARGARITA AT LUCKY CENTER REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 MARGARITABETWEEN SOLANAAND RANCHO REMOVED 38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI CALAIFORNA ROAD (7 LOCATIONS) 09/29/99 LA SERENA AT VIA PUERTA REMOVED 600 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 42197 MARGARITA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 MARGARITA AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REMOVED 50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 MARGARITA AT RAMSEY COURT REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 MARGARITA AT AVENIDA BARCA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/29/99 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/30/99 29275 SANTIAGO REMOVED 65 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 09/30/99 27780 JEFFERSON REMOVED 152 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 2,873 TOTAL LOCATIONS 49 \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLIx, DEPTS~P'W~g. AINTAINXWKCMPLTD\GRAFF1T~99XSEPTEMBEIL99.DOC 0 , uJ rn DATE 09/02/99 09/07/99 09/08/99 09/08/99 09/15/99 09/15/99 09/15/99 09/15/99 09/16/99 09/20/99 09/21/99 09/21/99 09/28/99 09/30/99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 LOCATION RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. E/O RIDGE PARK DR. PALA ROAD AT VIA EDUARDO PALA ROAD 150' NORTH OF WOLF VALLEY ROAD SOLANA RDGE APARTMENTS DE PORTOLA AT MEADOWS MURFIELD AT PALA PIUTE AT HURON PALA ROAD AT LOMA LINDA YNEZ AT RANCHO CALIFORNIAROAD CORTE MONTIEL AT PASEO GOLETA MARGARITA EAST OF NO. GENERAL KEARNEY MARGARITA AT OVERLAND LA SERENA AT VIA PUERTE SANTIAGO AT FROg STREET WORK COM PLEI~ED INSTALLED [ 7 CARSONITES INSTALLED R-2 "25" INSTALLED "CASINO ENTRANCE" INSTALLED 3 "CRIME FREE" REPLACED R-7 "T.C." REPLACED 2 R- 1 "EGGED" REPLACED R- 1 BULLET HOLES REPLACED 2 CARSONITES MISSING INSTALLED [2 R-49 INSTALLED W53 REPLACED W66 REPLACED R-7 REPLACED R- 1 REPLACED [ R-l-2 TYPE K MISSING T.C. FADED T.C. TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 10 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 1~ TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 4 R:~blTAIN~WKCMPLTD~IG~gXg~SEPTEMBER.99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 · ' .. ·SCOPE OF WOnK~ :': '~ ....... ::";" ":.. ":' :'~ '. :.Z ZZZ:. :.!:. :.'!':.:TONS" 09/02/99 NICHOLAS ROAD EAST OF WINCHESTER A.C. OVERLAY 284 4.5 09107199 NICHOLAS ROAD EAST OF WINCHESTER R & R A.C. 187 6.5 09/08/99 30747 SAN PASQUEL / 42270 AGENA A.C. OVERLAY 825 3.5 09/09/99 VINCENT MORAGA / BUSINESS PARK DRIVE A.C. OVERLAY 484 3.5 09113199 FRONT STREET AT SANTIAGO A.C. OVERLAY 507 3.5 09114/99 DIAZ SOUTH OF WINCHESTER A.C. OVERLAY 869 3.5 09/15/99 LA SERENA WEST OF SOUTH GENERAL KEARNEY R & R A.C. 235 7.5 09/16/99 BRADLEY COURT A.C. OVERLAY 320 1.5 09/20/99 30777 SAN PASQUEL A.C. OVERLAY 644 3.5 90/21/99 PALA ROAD AT VIA GILBERTO R & R A.C. 330 8.5 09/22/99 PALA ROAD AT VIA GILBERT0 A.C. OVERLAY 364 3.5 09123199 MARGARITA NORTH OF DE PORTOLA A.C. OVERLAY 280 2.5 09/27/99 PUJOL SOUTH OF 1sr STREET R & R A.C. 164 3.5 09/28/99 FELIX VALDEZ AT 6TH STREET R & R A.C. 255 6.5 09/29/99 VIA DOS PICOS AT DIAZ R & R A.C. 160 5.5 09130199 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD POTHOLES 60 TEMP. A.C. TOT AL S.F. OF REP AIRS TOTAL TONS I 67,~ R:~X~JNTAINXWKCMPLETD'~A~pHALT.RPRX99~EpTEMBER.99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 DATE :: i .: . : i · :LOCA~TION ....... ...... · ' . WORK COMPLETED ...... · i :. .... .... 09/07/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 45 LEGENDS 09/08/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 22 LEGENDS 09/08/99 PALOMA DEL SOL REPAINTED 500 L.F. YELLOW CURB 09/09/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 26 LEGENDS 09/20/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 41 LEGENDS 09/21/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 37 LEGENDS 09/21/99 RIDER AT COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE INSTALLED 586 L.F. RED CURB 09/23/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 40 LEGENDS 09/27/99 AREA #1 REPA1NTED 51 LEGENDS 09/29/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 17 LEGENDS 09/29/99 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD EAST OF YNEZ INSTALLED 1,722 L.F. RED CURB 09/30/99 AREA #1 REPAINTED 17 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 2.808 \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~DEPTgPW'd~,iAINTAINXWKCMpLTD\STRIpINGL~)~EpTEMBER.99.DOC ~DATE 09/14/99 09/1:5/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/22/99 09/23/99 09/27/99 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 LOCATION RIDGE PARK DRIVE AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD CORTE ALAMAR AT CALLE RIO VISTA LA PRIMAVERA AT PAUBA 45362 ZUMA DRIVE PALA ROAD CHANNEL PALA ROAD CHANNEL RAINBOW CANYON ROAD WORK CO]~IPLETED TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 7 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 18 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED ~4 \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl~,DE~AII~WKCMpLTD~TREES~99~$EFrEMBER.99.DOC CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1999 DATE 09/01/00 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/01/99 09/02/99 09/08/99 09/13/99 09/13/99 09/14/99 09115/99 09/16/99 09/17/99 09/17/99 09/20/99 09/21/99 09/27/99 09/30/99 LOCATION CALLE CORTEZ AT JEFFERSON MARGARITA NORTH OF PAUBA WINCHESTER AT ENTERPRISE CIRCLE BLACK DEER LOOP AT DIAZ ALVARADO AT RIO NEDO AGENA AT SOUTHERN CROSS CALLE MEDUSA MARGARITA NORTH OF DE PORTOLA MARGARITA AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD CALLE PII~A COLADA AT NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD WAX, COT LANE WALCOTT LANE WALCOTT LANE WALCOTT LANE 4ra STREET PARKING LOT PALA ROAD CHANNEL PALA ROAD CHANNEL PALA ROAD CHANNEL JERFERSON SOUTH OF CITY LIMITS DIAZ SOUTH OF DENDY ROAD WORK COMPLETED ABATED 150 ABATED 320 ABATED 700 ABATED 300 ABATED 2,500 ABATED 1,960 ABATED 600 ABATED 3,250 ABATED 15 ABATED 20 ABATED 2,800 ABATED 3,755 ABATED 4,200 ABATED 850 ABATED 400 ABATED 1,400 ABATED 19,564 ABATED 34,882 ABATED 1,200 ABATED 8,200 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S.F. R-O-W WEEDS AlIATED F:~DEPTS~W~tAINTAINXWKCMpLTD~WEEDS~99~SEpTEMBER.99.DOC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report September/October 1999 Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: October 19, 1999 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. 1-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Winchester Road This Project is Phase I, which will add one (1) southbound lane on the 1-15 Freeway and widened the northbound on-ramp to two lanes. Phase II will widen the bridge over the Santa Gertrudis Creek at the southbound off-ramp. The City Council awarded the construction contract on August 24, 1999 to E. L. Yeager in the amount of $544,329.40. Construction on this project is complete, with the exception of the overhead sign structure. The sign structures are expected to be delivered in about two months. They will be installed, along with the overhead signs, as soon as they are delivered. 2. 1-15 Southbound Auxiliary Lane at Rancho California Road This project will add one (1) southbound lane on the I-15 freeway. The City Council awarded the construction contract on August 24, 1999 to Riverside Construction Company in the amount of $450,000. Construction is almost complete, with the exception of the overhead sign structures. The sign structures are expected to be delivered in two months. They will be installed, along with the overhead signs, as soon as they are delivered. 3. 1-15 Southbound Off-Ramp Widening at Rancho California Road ~ 1-15 Ramp Improvements -This project widened both on-ramps to two lanes, widened the north side of Rancho California Road from Ynez Road to the north bound on-ramp to provide an additional lane and an optional westbound right turn lane, and lengthened the west bound left turn pocket at Front Street. Construction on this project is complete. 4. 1-15/Overland Drive Overcrossing Improvement Bridge construction is almost complete. Stage 3 of Jefferson Avenue improvements is underway with traffic being was routed onto the east side of Jefferson Avenue while the west side of Jefferson Avenue is under construction. During this stage, Overland Drive was closed from Jefferson Avenue to a point 200' west of jefferson to allow for construction of the transition to the new roadway grades. Temporary partial blockages to existing driveways may be experienced during concrete and asphalt placement operations. Stage 3 completion will coincide with bridge opening, scheduled at the end of this October 1999. 5. Pala Road Bridge The placement of the underground waterline improvements continues. Bridge deck forming is complete, placement of deck rebar is in progress, and a bridge deck pour is scheduled for mid October. Traffic will be allowed through the work zone and delays can be expected. Estimated completion for Stage I of the project remains to be early December 1999. I R:\MontlflyActivityReport\CIP\99XSeptember.doc 6. Rotary Park This project will install a picnic shade structure, picnic tables, fencing, concrete and drainage structures. The concrete slab and foundation have been poured. Construction is to be completed at the end of this month. 7. Traffic Signals Installation on Margarita Road at Pio Pico Road and at Pauba Road Construction on these two signals have started. Completion is scheduled for November 1999. 8. Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail Undercrossing at Winchester Road (Hwy. 79 North) The concrete for the bike path and slope lining have been poured. Construction on this project is almost complete. The missing link of the bike path at Winchester road has been constructed. A bike path undercrossing (under -Winchester Road) is in place now. 9. Street Name Sign Replacement - Phase I Work is underway in this project. The signs are being manufactured at this time. Installation of all the sign is expected to be done by early November. 10. Butterfield Stage Park Improvements A pre-constmction meeting was held on October 5, 1999. Construction is scheduled to begin October 25, 1999. 11. Traffic Signal and Median Modification at Rancho California Road and Town Center Drive This project will modify the intersection to expedite turning movements and to allow for longer green time on Rancho California Road. Improvements will include the relocation of signal poles, installation of new handicap ramps, modification of median islands, and restriping the intersection. A pre-construction meeting was held on October 7, 1999 and work started on Wednesday, October 13. Completion of this project is scheduled for mid- November 1999 PROJECTS BEING BID 1. Citywide Bike Path Construction This project will stripe bike lanes along Margarita Road from Solana Way to Moraga Road, Ynez Road from Tower Plaza North to Overland Drive, and Rancho California from Margarita Road to Piesling Court, and portion of La Serena Way. Bids were received and opened on September 30, 1999. The apparent low bidder is JP Striping with a bid amom~t of $20,807. The City Council is to award the contract on October 19, 1999. Completion is scheduled for December 1999. 2 R:\MomhlyActivityReport\CIB99\Septetnber. doc PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Pavement Management System This project will provide street rehabilitation of Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Rancho California Road and on Winchester Road from Jefferson Avenue to Diaz Road. This project will also include the installation of streetlights along the entire length of Jefferson Avenue. Staff has determined that the rehabilitation of Winchester Road, from Jefferson Avenue to Diaz Road can be done as a separate project. Work on Jefferson would be delayed until construction of Overland is complete. The specifications to rehabilitate Winchester Road is complete and is ready to be advertised for bids. A request for State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding has been submitted to Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). As soon as the City receives authorization for the funds, the project to rehabilitate Winchester Road will be advertised for construction bids. 2. Pujoi Street Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter Design is complete. Council is scheduled to approve the plans and specifications and authorize the project to be bid at the October 19, 1999 meeting. 3. Old Town Southside Parking Lots This project consists of two proposed parking lots. One will be located on the west side of Front Street just north of Second Street, and the other lot is located on the south side of Fourth Street west of Front Street. The project is currently being designed in-house. The conceptual design for Second Street Parking Lot submitted to RDA for first review on September 27, 1999. Design for Fourth Street Parking Lot is on hold. 4. First Street Bridge Staff is currently working with Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) to determine which agency has prior rights concerning the accommodation or relocation of a sewer line that is in conflict with the new construction. Initial findings by the City Attorney indicate that the City may have prior rights. Final construction drawings are complete. Staff is reviewing and assembling the plans and specifications to bid this project. Advertisement for construction bids is expected in late October. 5. Margarita Road Widening, Pauba Road to Dartolo Road ~Yhis project is in design 30% submittals of plans is expected in later this month (October 1999). 3 R:\MontldyActivityReport\CIP\99\September.doc au~Q. Z 0 I.- I.-. Q. 0 n,' uJ LU UJ D a Z al u) Q. Z LU 0 a. ~ a,. LU 'r a 0 LU Q' ' U} ~ ~' :> Z u~ ~ ~0 I-- ,( Z I.- _.1 ...I 0 LU APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY E~~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/~vcC uncil Gary Thornhill, De~y Manager October 19, 1999 Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Depadment in the month of September, 1999. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 39 new applications for administrative, other minor cases and home occupations and 13 new applications for public hearings during the month of August. The new public hearing cases are as follows: Conditional Use Permit General Plan Amendment (w/specific plan) Minor Conditional Use Permit Parcel Map/Commerical Industrial Development Plan subject to CEQA 2 2 2 3 4 Pre-applications Linkletter Development submitted plans for three industrial speculative buildings totalling 67,193 square feet. Pre-Application meeting is scheduled for October 13, 1999. Provident Bank submitted plans for a 3,280 square foot bank building located in the Winchester Meadows project. This applicant has withdrawn their pre-application and submitted plans for formal review. Status of Fast Track Projects The City's award-winning Fast Track process provides a way for major businesses relocating to or expanding in Temecula to get their facilities constructed and occupied in the shortest possible time. The current Fast Track projects are as follows: \\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\Depts\PLANNING\MONTHLY.RPT~1999~september 99.doc 1 Burkey Machine & Tool- Development Plan for new 16,000 square feet machine and tool facility with 27 employees at the northeast corner of Winchester Road and Colt Court. The project is under construction. Status of Major Projects Staff is working with project applicants to address any remaining issues and get the following cases ready for public hearing before the Community Development Director or Planning Commission: Rancho Community Church expansion on Vallejo Avenue. The project is still on hold, as the applicant is looking at other options for their development. Tentative Parcel Map 28627, the Margarita Canyon Property. Planning Commission hearing is scheduled for October 20, 1999. Wolf Valley Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: A community meeting was held on August 17, 1999. A Planning Commission Workshop was held on September 1, 1999. The EIR will be circulated for public review and comment in the month of October, 1999. A 24-1ot tract map on Via La Vida east of Calle Palmas (Tentative Tract Map 29036) was approved by the Planning Commission at their September 29, 1999 meeting and a Development Agreement will be before the City Council in November, 1999. -k Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: A Planning Commission Workshop was held on June 30, 1999. GMC Building - Development Plan for new 19,000 square feet light industrial speculative building on the north side of Rio Nedo, between Via Industria and Tierra Alta Way. Planning Commission approved the project on October 6, 1999. Tentative Parcel Map 29162 - Subdivide 48 acres into eight industrial parcels and one open space lot located at Winchester Road and Dendy Parkway. Development Review Committee meeting was held June 10, 1999. Awaiting revised traffic study and resubmittal. Temecula Valley RV - Conditional Use Permit for Recreational Vehicle, Truck and Auto Sales and Rentals located at 27941 Jefferson Avenue. Development Review Committee meeting was held on July 15, 1999. Re-submittal is under review by Staff. Tentative Tract Map 29286, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change - Subdivision of 9.75 acres into 40 single family residential lots and two open space lots, a General Plan Amendment to change the current land use classification of "SP" (Specific Plan) to LM (Low Medium Density Residential) and a zone change to change the zoning classification from "SP" (Specific Plan) to LM (Low Medium Density Residential) located on the southeast corner of Margarita Road and Date Street. Development Review Committee meeting was held on July 15, 1999. Planning Commission meeting is scheduled on October 20,1999. Home Depot - Design and construction of a Home Depot anchored community shopping center with retail villages and day care center; the subdivision of 61.2 acres into seven lots; an amendment to Specific Plan 219 (Paloma Del Sol) and a Development Agreement to \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLI\Depts\PLANN ING\MONTHLY.RPT%1999%september 99.doc 2 accommodate the project located on the northwest corner of Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. Planning Commission approved the project on October 6, 1999 and the Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement will be before the City Council on October 19, 1999. David Smith, DDS - A request for the development of a 9,983 square foot medical office complex capable of being converted to medical office condo units located on the south side of Roripaugh Road, west of Winchester Road. Development Review Committee meeting was held on August 12, 1999. Project re-submitted, Director's Hearing is pending in November, 1999. Tim Shook Company, Inc. (PA99-0277) - The design, construction and operation of a 13,064 square foot speculative commercial building on the north side of Buecking Drive, approximately 150 feet west of the intersection of Madison Avenue and Buecking Drive. Development Review Committee meeting was held on August 12, 1999. Staff is reviewing re-submittal. Tim Shook Company, Inc. (PA99-0278) - The design, construction and operation of a 13,064 square foot speculative commercial building on the north side of Buecking Drive, approximately 150 feet west of the intersection of Madison Avenue and Buecking Drive. Development Review Committee meeting was held on August 12, 1999. Staff is reviewing re-submittal. Meadowview Golf Course - The design, construction and operation of an 18 hole public golf course with clubhouse, cart barn, maintenance and other accessory buildings and an equestrian trail park located on 297 acres south of Nicolas Road, north of Del Rey Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Calle Medusa, within the Meadowview Community. Development Review Community. Development Review Committee meeting was held on August 19, 1999. Staff is awaiting additional studies and plan re-submittal. ',r Tentative Tract Map 24136, Amendment No. 2, consisting of 89 acres, into 400 dwelling units; to design the subdivision as a senior community as an option for development; to amend Specific Plan No. 219 to accommodate these changes and the realignment of Campanula Way by the commercial development proposed for Planning Area 1 located northeast of the intersection of Margarita Road and State Highway 79 South, Planning Areas 1,6 and 8 of the Paloma Del Sol Spedtic Plan No. 219. The Development Review Committee meeting was held on August 26, 1999. Planning Commission hearing date is scheduled for October 20, 1999. Temecula Village - The proposal is for a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Overlay zone and Parcel Map for 23 acres located on the south side of Rancho California Road, between Moraga Road and Cosmic Drive. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. Temecula Ridge Apartments - The design and construction of 266 apartment units on 22.21 acres on the south side of Rancho California Road, east of Moraga Road. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. Temecula Gas Station and Car Wash - To construct and operate a self-serve gas station and drive-thru car wash facility located on the southwest corner of the intersection of the proposed Western Bypass and Front Street. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. \\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\Depts\PLANNING\MONTHLY.RPT~1999~september 99.doc 3 Del Taco - The design and construction of a Del Taco Restaurant with drive-thru services in the Winchester Meadows Center on the northeast corner of Winchester Road and Margarita Road. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. Quaid Harley Davidson - The design, construction and operation of a 17,371 square foot Harley Davidson motorcycle dealership with sales and repairs located on the north side of Front Street, approximately 1,800 feet west of the Interstate 15 Freeway on-ramp. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. Small Business Assistance Hometown Buffet: Staff assisted developer with site selection and provided information regarding the Campos Verdes Specific Plan, .development applications, signs and landscaping requirements. Christ the Vine Lutheran Church: Aided prospective applicant with demographic information pertaining to the possible development of a private elementary school. Dr. Farrod Ahmad: Advised this tenant improvement applicant for a dental office in the Zonos Center about plan check timelines and procedures. Helped him get through the process in order to obtain a building permit. Habitat for Humanity: In an effort to speed up the processing time for two houses built in Old Town, staff held meetings with representatives of this group and helped them save time by resolving grading and planning issues. McConville House Relocation: Worked with applicant and the Old Town Local Review Board in approving the relocation of this historic dwelling to a new location. Special Event Permits Tractor Race: Worked with the Temecula Town Association to coordinate this event with agencies from the City of Temecula and the County of Riverside. Staff held special meetings with the applicant and helped develop a comprehensive plan Inland Empire Race for the Cure: Staff helped applicant obtain a Special Event Permit for road closures necessary for this event to be held at the Promenade Mall on Novement 13% Meetings are being held with the organizers, Public Works, Police and Fire in order to iron out all the details. HOG Rally: Advised applicant regarding the Temporary Use Permit process and aided him in obtaining departmental approvals. Joint meetings were held with Mr. Rich Quaid, the City of Temecula Police Department and the California Highway Patrol in order to ascertain any potential traffic problems. Model A Regional Meeting: Staff provided applicant with information regarding the Temporary Use Permit Process for this event scheduled on October 7 - 10 in Old Town. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\MONTHLY.RP'R1999~september 99.doc 4 SPECIAL PROJECTS & LONG RANGE PLANNING ACTIVITIES The Division also commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of the major special projects and long range planning activities are as follows: Housing Element Update: The City has received a draft of the City's Regional Housing Need Assessment obligations. The consultant is quantifying the data and will report back to staff with preliminary results of where the City stands in relation to the programs contained within the existing Housing Element. A preliminary meeting date in September is planned to inform the City Council of the results. Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the City Redevelopment Plan: The consultant has gathered much of the information needed to begin preparation of the Draft EIR. The final missing data is the circulation element traffic study that is still being revised. Massage Business Ordinance: The ad hoc subcommittee of two council members met with local massage practitioners on August 24th and the 31 ,t to discuss potential amendments to the draft ordinance. Based upon their direction, the draft ordinance will be amended and brought back for the Council's consideration on September 28, 1999. General Plan Circulation Element Update: The Subcommittee met on August 31, 1999 to discuss the draft traffic study and Element. The committee has directed staff and the consultant to make additional changes to ensure that area traffic impacts are mitigated and addressed. The next meeting has been scheduled for October 4, 1999. Staff is currently drafting the required environmental impact report. Subdivision Ordinance: The Second Reading occurred on August 24, 1999. The Ordinance will be effective September 24, 1999. Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance: Final changes are being made prior to scheduling this item for the Planning Commission's consideration. Redhawk/Vail Ranch Annexation Study: The preliminary efforts have all been completed. No additional work is expected on this project until after the election. Surface Mining Ordinance: The staff and City Attorney are making final changes based upon feedback from the State prior to submitting this item to the Council for their consideration. Geographic Information System (GIS): Recent products included a City Parks map for the Community Services Department, conflict of interest maps for the City Council and the various City Commissions, Census Tract boundary and Assessor Map Book Index maps for the Community Development Department front counter staff, and a map of vacant commercial property was prepared for the City's Economic Development program. Maps and aerial photographs were also prepared to deal with issues relating to the grading and development of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Finally, the process of preparing the base data for the implementation of ESRI's MapObjects program has also started. The GIS staff continues to update the database and previously completed maps and reports. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\MONTHLY.RPT~1999~september 99.doc 5 -k -k Antenna Ordinance: The working draft of the Ordinance has been re-written. Staff is in the process of contacting wireless communication industry representatives to develop a working committee to develop a mutually agreeable ordinance. Coordination with the Bureau of Census. Staff continues to work with the Bureau to ensure an accurate and complete count for the 2000 census. Staff is monitoring the County Complete Count Committee process. Application Fee Study: Staff recently received a revised study from the consultant. The revisions are currently under review. Hillside Development Policy: The policies are being discussed internally by City staff in an effort to create fair and useable development policies. Multi-species Habitat Conservation Planning Efforts for Western Riverside County: Staff is attending committee meetings and monitoring the process of determining conservation reserve needs and will report back to the Council when a draft plan is available. Development Code Amendment: Staff is preparing an amendment to the Code to address large family day care facilities and to further refine how the City reviews and approves Temporary Use Permits. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of much of the amendment to the Council. It is scheduled for the Council's consideration in mid- September. Citywide Sign Inventory: Staff has started the process of cataloging all the commemial and industrial signage in the City. Hotel Conference Center Feasibility Study Addendum: A draft of the study was received and reviewed by staff. The final report has been received and will have been distributed by the time this monthly report is received. \\TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \Depts\PLAN N I N G\MONTH LY. RP'R1999~september 99.doc 6