Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout092402 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 A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 - 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 11:00 P.M. and may continue ail other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 11:00 P.M. 6:00 P.M. - Closed Session of thc City Council/Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) with respect to three matters of existing litigation involving the City. The following case will be discussed: 1) City of Temecula v. Riverside County (French Valley/Tucalotta Hills Associates); 2) City of Temecula v. Riverside County (Domenigoni-Barton); and 3) City of TemeculaJCity of Corona, et al. v. County of Riverside, et al. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property negotiations, property located at APN No. 921-680-014, APN 921-680-002, and APN 921-680-018, generally located east of Ynez Road and Motor Car Parkway. Under negotiation are the price and terms of the real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula/Redevelopment Agency and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation (Guidant). City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim O'Grady, and John Meyer. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. · CALL TO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: R:\Agenda\092402 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2002-04 Resolution: No. 2002-78 Mayor Ron Roberts Eve Craig Pastor Ed Garcia of Community Christian Fellowship Mayor Pro Terr, Stone Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts 1 PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Special Achievement Award for Matthew John Sappin.qton for attaininq EaRle Scout rank Meqan's Law Public Access Computer Presentation 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) minufe time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Resolution Approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:'~Agenda\092402 2 Purchase of seven City Vehicles RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the purchase of the following vehicles from Rancho Ford: · Two 2003, mid-sized Ford trucks $18,507.11 (each) · Two 2003, Y2-ton Ford trucks $22,115.69 (each) · One 2003, 3A-ton Ford truck $25,663.15 · One 2003, 15-passenger van $22,735.25 · One 2003, cab and chassis stencil truck rehab $46,122.39 3.2 Approve an additional appropria!ion of $18,507.11 for the purchase of the second mid-sized truck. 4 5 Authorization to execute the Supp emental A.qreement for the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Community Development Block Grant Funds RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for fiscal year 2002-03 Community Development Block Grant Funds. Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Aqreement for per meter andscapin.q alonq Seraphina Road and Rita Way for Tract Map Nos. 26828, -1, and -2 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC, for landscaped slopes and parkways along Seraphina Road and Rita Way within Tract Map Nos. 26828, -1, and -2. Award of Construction Contract - Rancho Vista Road Drainaqe Improvements - Proiect .No. PW02-12 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Award a construction contract for Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvements - Project No. PW02-12 -to McLaughiin Engineering & Mining, Inc. of Temecula, California, in the amount of $27,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,700.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. R:~Agenda\092402 3 7 Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract - Margarita Road Widening (interim Phase il) - Proiect No. PW99-01 8 9 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Accept the Margarita Road Widening Project (Interim Phase II) - Project No. PW99- 01 - as complete; 7.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a twelve- month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 7.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for John WarnedSantiaqo Road Assessment District Improvement Proiect - Hydroloqy Study - Proiect No. PW02-07 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 in an amount not to exceed $8,215.00 to the Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. to provide additional design services for the John WarnedSantiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study - Project No. PW02-07 - and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Award of Construction Contract for Intersection Traffic Monitoring System and Traffic Siqnal Interconnect - Project No. PW99-05 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Award a construction contract for DBX, Inc. for the Intersection Traffic Monitoring System and Traffic Signal Interconnect - Project No. PW99-05 - in the amount of $945,103.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 9.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $47,255.15 which is equal to 5% of the contract amount; 9.3 Award a construction contract to MCSi, Media Consultants/System Integrators for modification and installation of a Traffic Operation Center in an amount not to exceed $150,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 9.4 Approve a transfer in the amount of $300,000.00 from the French Valley Parkway Interim Southbound Off-Ramp to Jefferson Avenue Phase I project to the intersection Traffic Monitoring System - Project No. PW99-05. R:~Agenda\092402 4 RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, AND THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY R:~,Agenda\092402 5 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING ***************************************************************************************************************** Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2002-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2002-09 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no__t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 17, 2002. 2 Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract - Chaparral Hiqh School Swimminq Pool- Proiect No. PW00-08CSD RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Accept the project Chaparral High School Swimming Pool - Project No. PW00- 08CSD as complete; 2.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a twelve- month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 2.2 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. R:~Agenda\092402 6 DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, October 8, 2002, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\092402 7 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2002-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2002-09 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts, Comerchero 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 no._.~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be flied 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 17, 2002. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, October 8, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:'~Agenda\092402 8 TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Next in Order: Ordinance: No. TPFA 2002-02 Resolution: No. TPFA 2002-07 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ron Roberts ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Temecula Public Financing Authority on items that are not tisted on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no.__~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to spe~ak, 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 Septernber 17, 2002. Authorization of Special Tax Levy in Community Facilities Services District No. 01-02 (Harveston) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\092402 9 RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2 (HARVESTON) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT BOARD MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT R:~Agenda\092402 10 WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY Next in Order: Ordinance: No. WHFA 2002-01 Resolution: No. WHFA 2002-03 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson ROLL CALL AUTHORITY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, and Comerchero 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 July 9, 2002; 1.2 Approve the minutes of August 13, 2002. 2 Authorization for Cancellation of Resolution No. WHFA 02-01 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\092402 11 RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY CANCELING THE SPECIAL TAX LEVY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. 02-01, WHICH RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-1 (WINCHESTER HILLS) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AUTHORITY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT R:~Agenda\092402 12 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 10 Rancho California Road Bridqe Wideninq over Murrieta Creek - Approval of Proiect and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BRIDGE WIDENING OVER MURRIETA CREEK PROJECT NO. PW99-18 11 Plannin,q Application Nos. PA01-0522 (Zone Chan,qe) and PA00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) - Rancho Community Church RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00- 0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,.8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060- 001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. R:~Agenda\092402 13 11.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 02-__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. 11.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39- ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES; FIVE SPORTS FIELDS; A GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. R:~Agenda\092402 14 11.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO 'ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROJECT WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500- SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300-SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDINGS TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 EEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, October 8, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Catifornia. R:~,§enda\092402 15 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ITEM 1 ITEM 2 RESOLUTION NO. 02- 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 $867,773.57. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 24t~ day of September, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- I STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 02- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 24th day 0f September, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC Ci~ Clerk R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 09/12~2 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 09/12/02 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEM/~IDS FOR 09/24/02 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 192 193 194 210 280 3OO 32O 33O 34O GENERAL FUND RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES 100 165 190 192 193 194 28O 3O0 32o 330 340 GENERAL FUND RDA-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: iPRE P~/~.~/~~O U NTING SPECIALIST SHAWN NI~LSO N, CiTY MANAGER $ 579,697.70 288,075.87 $ 867,773.57 344,615.58 6,453.26 107,966.56 16,943.25 534.81 25,680.74 8,133.51 2,236.90 17,718.83 2,806.77 201,740.77 5,113.42 57,634.71 73.03 4,543.43 624.19 2,301.86 947.65 7,600.83 2,142.84 5,353.14 $ 579,697.70 288,075.87 $ 867,773.57 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING tS TRUE AND CORRECT. apChkLst 99/12/2002 3:28:30PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 35 9/12/2002 36 9/12/2002 37 9/12/2002 38 9/12/2002 39 9/12/2002 79130 9/9/2002 79131 9/1~/2002 79132 9/12/2002 79133 9/12/2002 79134 9/12/2002 79135 9/12/2002 000283 INSTATAX(IRS) 000444 INSTATAX(EDD) 79136 9/12/2002 79137 9/12/2002 79138 9/12/2002 79139 9/12/2002 79140 9/12/2002 Final Check List City of Temecula Description Employees fed pr taxes Employees fed pr taxes 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIU Employees health insurance 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREME Employees state retirement 000642 TEMECULACITY FLEXIBLE 001014 COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS 005126 A E G SOLUTIONS 003552 AFLAC Employee contribution to Flex Fac Impr Prgm:Rancho Attny Svcs CIP Division AutoCAD drawing suppli CIP Division AutoCAD drawing suppli Supplemental std & cancer insurance 001700 A PLUS TEACHING MATERIALS Recreation Suppties:Tiny Tots Prgm 000434 ACCELA.COM Accela mod[f to scantron machine 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS 003285 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERVI Lifeguard training supplies:Aquatics Lifeguard training supplies:Aquatics Lifeguard training supplies:Aquatics Floor mats/towels rental:City Hall 000101 APPLEONE, INC. Kau temp help PPE 07/06/02 Arreola temp help PPE 07/27/02 Kau temp help PPE 07/13/02 Steward temp help PPE 07/20/02 Arreola temp help PPE 08/17/02 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN CA Vehicle lockout kit w/bag:Fire 004855 BABER, GABRIELE 002848 BADGER, THE TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor esmings Jr Police Sticker Badges:Crime Prev p Amount Paid 56,101.15 12,793.86 34,299.75 44,135.89 5,364.36 4,668.83 102~00 92.99 1,586.30 23.23 1,320.00 255.00 135.00 5.00 413.89 312.00 157.95 520.00 513.50 468.00 260.31 374.40 276.00 240.00 408.90 Page: 1 Check Total 56,101.15 12,793.86 34,299.75 44,135.89 5,364.36 4,668.83 194.99 1,586.30 23.23 1,320.00 395.00 413.89 1,971.45 260.31 890.40 408.90 Page:l Final Check List Page: 2 City of Teme~ula apChkLat 09112/2002 3:28:30PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79141 9/12/2002 004206 BANUELOS, TERESA 79142 9/12/2002 79143 9/12/2002 79144 9/12/2002 79145 9/12/2002 79146 9/12/2002 79147 9/12/2002 79148 9/12/2002 79149 9/12/2002 79150 9/12/2002 79151 9/12/2002 79152 9/12/2002 79153 9/12/2002 79154 9/12/2002 79155 9/12/2002 79156 9/12/2002 79157 9/12/2002 79158 9/12/2002 (Continued) Description Amount Paid TCSD instructor earnings 170.00 13,908.00 79,75 826.00 25.00 25.00 511.63 463.50 1,650.00 132,36 25.70 96.16 004828 BEVERLEY SIMMONS & ASSOC Devel Library Bond Application 005103 BUCKLEY, TIM 002099 BUTrERFIELD ENTERPRISES 000154 CSMFO 000154 CSMFO 003214 CAL MAT 003214 CAL MAT 001054 CALIF BUILDING OFFICIALS 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 005375 CAMMAROTA, SUSAN Reimb:Gov't Innovation Conf:8/25 Sept restroom lease:Old Twn Application fee for Budget awards prg Application fee for Budget awards prm PW patch truck materials PW patch truck materials ED Week:09/12/02:B&S staff Misc. Welding Supp[es:PW Mntc Helium tanks reffiI:TCSD Reimb:Custom framing of Netherlands 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE CO Life insurance premium 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY I 002534 CATERERS CAFE 004602 CHALLENGER DOOR'S 005373 CHINIAEFF, DENNIS 005379 CHRISTENSEN, PAT]~ 002989 CLEAR IMAGE WINDOW CLEA Claim adjuster services Claim adjuster services Refshm nts:TCSD:budget wkshp:1/16/ Res Impr prgm: Sanchez Credit:Invoice exceeds po Reimb:APA Annl Mtg:4/13-17 Refund: Music-Instant Piano City hall exterior window cleaning svcs 1,131.50 977.27 349.90 64.31 725.00 -5.00 1,047.01 20.00 345.00 Check Total 170.00 13,908.00 79.75 826.00 25.00 25.00 511.63 463.50 1,650.00 158.06 96.16 1,131.50 1,327.17 64.31 720.00 1,047.01 20.00 345.00 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 09/1 2/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 79159 9/12/2002 005380 COLEMAN, SANDRA Refund: Music-Instant Piano 79160 9/12/2002 79161 9/12/2002 79162 9/12/2002 79163 9/12/2002 79164 9/1 2/2002 79165 9/12/2002 79166 9/12/2002 79167 9/12/2002 79168 9/12/2002 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARI Employees Charities contributions 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS & Entertainment:Old Twn summer nights 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 005381 COX, LINDA 005376 D'CARPIO, PATRICIA 21 Batteries for access control TCC security/fire alarm moitoring Citywide Radio Repair & Mntc Refund: Eng deposit 31098 Del Rey R Refund: Music-Little Mozarts 003272 DAISY WHEEL RIBBON COMPA~ Plotter paper and ink:GIS 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK Aug special events premiums 005366 DON MOSCO BUILDERS Refund:Plan check fees 79169 9/12/2002 79170 79171 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELI Fuel for cit Fuel for cit Fuel for cit Fuel for cit Fuel for cit Fuel for cit Fuel for cit 9/12/2002 . 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Naaseh-Shahry temp help PPE 08/23 Hansen temp help PPE 08/23/02 TEMP HELP - OFC ASST & BLDG IN 9/12/2002 000395 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO 3rd Qtr Luncheon:Pratt:9/26 Fuel for city vehicles:Planning , vehicles: B&S , vehicles: PW mntc ' vehicles: TCSD , vehicles: CIP ' vehicles:Traffic ' vehicles: City Van , vehicles:Land devel 79172 79173 9/12/2002 9/12/2002 005052 EMCOR SERVICE 002939 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS R H.V.A.C. repair @ Sr Center H.V.A.C. repair @ City Hall Map Objects Consulting S~,cs Amount Paid 25.00 141.50 250.00 1,218.00 246.00 15,218.00 995.00 43.00 461.12 355.36 2,799.00 340.34 161.68 744.49 485.44 142.73 29.70 8.18 395.26 6,236.00 2,588.34 1,417.92 25.00 97.50 97.50 835.10 Check Total 25.00 141.50 250.00 1,464.00 15,218.00 995.00 43.00 461.12 355.36 2,799.00 2,307.82 10,242.26 25.00 195.00 835.10 Page3 apChkl.st Final Check List Page: 4 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 79174 9/12/2002 005251 EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE InstallPinaIHookw/Plug:PWpatchtr Amount Paid Check Total 882.77 79175 9/1~2002 79176 ~1~2002 002060 EUROPEAN DELI& CATERING 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 79177 ~1~2002 002037 EXPANETS refshmnts:City mgr business mtgs Refreshments:PlarVdevel review proce Aug Idscp impr:Margarita Park Aug Idscp impr: Mirada July Idscp impr:Vail Ranch Pkwy Aug Idscp impr:Winchester slopes June Idscp impr:Trandewinds July rdscp impr:PDS July Idscp impr:Ovedand Repair & mntc city hall telephone equ 405.68 61.63 142.67 162.77 162.20 148.75 3,366.00 699.97 279.19 737.35 467.31 4,961.55 737.35 79178 9/12/2002 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMP,a let bk repts Res impr & FTHB prgm. 1,650.00 1,650.00 79179 9/12/2002 79180 9/12/2002 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 000795 FRED PRYOR SEMINARS/CARE xx-2292 G.Roberts:Misc supplies xx-9277 R.Roberts:League Conf xx-0515 Thornhill:ULI-RL publication xx-7824 Comemhero:League conf xx-0432 Elmo:Skillpath conf:lCBO xx-1143 Parker:Indian affairs Itr/misc. Handle people w/tact conf:8/6:Ubnosk 58.10 2,951.54 9.31 1,532.99 993.00 509.75 149.00 6,054.69 149.00 79181 9/12/2002 005282 FURNITURE & MORE INC 10 new beds for fire stn 84 2,790.73 2,790.73 79182 9/12/2002 79183 9/12/2002 79184 9/12/2002 002528 GLASS BLASTERS INC 001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY I 000186 HANKS HARDWARE New employee glass mugs New employee glass mugs security/fire alarm monitoring:sub stn security/fire alarm monitoring:Police Hardware supplies;Old Town Hardware supplies: TCC Hardware supplies: Info Sys Hardware supplies: B&S Hardware supplies: CRC Hardware supplies: West Wing Hardware supplies: Aquatics Hardware supplies: Parks Hardware supplies: City Hall Hardware supplies:PW st mntc 32.33 32.33 81.00 C~).O0 7.15 23.86 20.56 10.72 88.00 52.76 24.05 614.12 180.47 137.11 64.66 141.00 1,158.80 Page~ apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date' Vendor 79185 9/12/2002 79186 9/12/2002 79187 9/12/2002 79188 9/12/2002 79189 9/12/2002 79190 9/12/2002 79191 9/12/2002 79192 9/12/2002 79193 9/12/2002 79194 9/1 2/2002 79195 9/12/2002 79196 9/12/2002 79197 9/12/2002 79198 9/12/2002 79199 9/12/2002 79200 9/12/2002 79201 9/12/2002 000116 HEALTH NET DENTAL AND VI 002107 HIGHMARK INC 005377 HILDE, TARA 003624 HOWELL, ANN MARIE (Continued) Description Amount Paid Premium for ee vision plan City life ins policy premium Refund: Level 3 Swim Lessons Graphic design of San Diego N.C.Com 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUST 45 Retirement contributions 004911 IMBSEN & ASSOCIATES INC Ped. Bridge SR 79N Feasibility study 005374 IMPERIAL PALACE HOTEL & CA Hotel:EdenConf:10/14-17:KJ/PB/JY/B Hotel:Eden Conf:10/14-17:Krueger 002776 INTOUCH AMERICA July cellular svcs:Sr van July cellular svcs:city van 002140 JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS Network equipment mntc/repairs Network equipment mntc/repairs 003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO Broadcasting:Old Twn Summer Nights 005378 KAPPLE, MARY Refund; Tiny Tots-Creative Beg 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICES HarringtontemphelpPPE08/18/02 Harrington temp help PPE 08/25/02 002634 LITELINES INC Install brackets on light poles in Old 004041 LUBEMASTER CONSTRUCTION Catch Basin Mntc supplies:PW 003054 LYNDE ORDWAY 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS 004141 MAINTEX INC Copy Center folder mntc contract Misc. Hardware & Signs for PW Misc. Hardware & Signs for PW C.R.C Custodial Supplies City Hall Custodial Supplies City Hall Custodial Supplies Parks Custodial Supplies Old Town restrooms custodial suppli 895.93 567.70 25.00 2,478.25 7,882.63 3,748.61 425.10 212.55 27.96 27.20 974.77 1,778.63 700.00 30.60 1,080.00 985.50 2,316.65 234.90 225.00 1,021.04 292.00 193.73 102.09 448.77 258.33 241.79 Check Total 895.93 567.70 25.00 2,478.25 7,882.63 3,748.61 637.65 55.16 2,753.40 700.00 30.00 2,065.50 2,316.65 234.90 225.00 1,313.04 1,244.71 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 09112/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79202 9/12/2002 79203 9/12/2002 79204 9/12/2002 79205 9/12./2002 79206 9/t2/2002 79207 9/12/2002 79208 9/12/2002 79209 9/12/2002 7921O 9/12/2002 79211 9/1 2/2002 79212 9/12/2002 79213 9/12/2002 79214 9/12/2002 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASSN 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS IN(; (Continued) Description Aug Officiating Services 000944 MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY INC Oper Budget Tab Dividers ClP Tab Dividers Printing svcs:Commission Recogn. CIP & Oper Budget Covers CD Jackets:City Marketing CD Blank Stock for Finance Dept. Replace signs:R. C. Rd @ Btrfld Stg 003076 MET LIFE INSURAN(;E COMPAN City dental insurance 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES 004508 NAGGAR, MICHAEL S. Business Cards:White/De La Torre TES pool:repair broken fence Aug Temp Help: M. Boardman Reimb:Mayors/Councilmbrs Cf:7/24- 003707 NAT'L ASSN OF PURCHASING tv Membership dues7/02-7/03:Vollmuth 002898 NIXON EGLI EQUIPMENT COMP Repair/maint PW patch truck 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATTN: Aug recruitment ads for H.R. Aug display ads:CIP constr updates 005372 OASIS CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHI Refund:Sec Deposit/Rental 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office Supplies:P.D. main stn Office Supplies:Code Enfomement Office Supplies for Finance Dept. Office Supplies:P.D. Storefront Stn Office Supplies for GIS Office Supplies:P.D. Storefront Stn Amount Paid 3,790.00 633.57 471.95 123.91 2,063.41 1,592.55 693.91 241.36 5,729.62 315.38 205.26 3,750.40 97.97 160.00 1,413.75 802.37 550.12 160.00 74.78 74.76 73.47 668.19 194.33 87.31 Check Total 3,790.00 5,579.30 241.36 5,729.62 315.38 205.26 3,750.40 97.97 160.00 1,413.75 1,352.49 160.00 1,172.84 Page~ apChkLst 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79215 9/12/2002 002105 OLDTOWNTIRE&SERVICE 79216 9/12/2002 79217 9/12/2002 79218 9/12/2002 79219 9/12/2002 79220 9/12/2002 79221 9/12/2002 79222 9/12/2002 79223 9/12/2002 79224 9/1 2/2002 79225 9/12/2002 79226 9/12/2002 79227 9/12/2002 79228 9/12/2002 79229 9/12/2002 Final Check List City of Temecula (Continued) Description City vehicle maintJrepair svcs City vehicle maintJrapair svcs City vehicle maintJrepair svcs City vehicle maint~repair svcs City vehicle maint/repair svcs City vehicle maint/mpair svcs 003299 OLDERTHAN DIRTGANG Entertainment:Summer Nights:9/06/02 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES Sept duck pond water maint, svcs 001619 ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER I Recruitment ads for H.R.:Plan/Eng 001171 ORIENTALTRADING COMPANY Teen Prgm Supplies 005152 PACIFIC PRODUCTS & SERVICE MISC. SIGN POSTS & HARDWARE F 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA IN Recreation Supplies for MPSC 003218 PELA Aug TCSD plan check services 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIU Employees health insurance 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG Employee benefits 000249 P~- ~ ~ Y CASH Petty cash reimbursement 005276 PHOTO MAX SUPPLIES COMPA Photo supplies for Police Dept. 000580 PHOTOWORKSOFTEMECULA Augfilm/photodevelopment:EconDev Aug film/photo development:Land Dev Aug film/photo development:ClP Aug film/photo development:SMART P Aug film/photo development 004625 PLANT EQUIPMENT, INC ORION MapMobile I yr Svc Maint 000253 POSTMASTER Express mail & postal services Credit:Dupl. billing error Amount Paid 64.48 47.50 19.19 496.03 352.04 83.03 200.00 800.00 692.52 80.64 2,543.80 56.90 3,345.00 744.78 250.15 352.69 497.81 31.25 28.64 9.15 178.19 99.38 540.00 234.15 -107.10 Page: 7 Check Total 1,062.27 200.00 800.00 692.52 80.64 2,543.80 56.90 3,345.00 744.78 250.15 352.69 497.81 346.61 540.00 127.05 Paget apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79230 9/12/2002 79231 9/12/2002 79232 9/1 2/2002 79233 9/12/2002 79234 9/12/2002 79235 9/12/2002 79236 9/12/2002 79237 9/12/2002 79238 9/12/2002 79239 9/12/2002 003493 PRO-CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR 003697 PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTAN 005067 PURSUIT TECHNOLOGY INC 003687 QUEST ENVIRONMENTAL 004792 R H A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 000981 RHFINC 004029 R J M DESIGN GROUP INC 002612 RADIO SHACK INC 004494 RAMdNA TIRE INC 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 79240 9/12/2002 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 79241 9/12/2002 005370 RASBAND, SABRINA (Continued) Description ,N~ount Paid Res imprv prgm: H. Rivera Apr design svcs:Murr Crk/Ovdnd Dr. Fire Dept Lap Top Prgm Installation Remove Haz-Mat from City yard Jul consulting svcs:Vail Ranch Park repair/maint P.D. radar equipment Jul Consult svcs:NW Sports Complex Jun consulting svcs:NW Sports Comph Misc Computer Supplies emergency repair:Fire vehicle Various water meters Various water meters Aug 01-02-98010-0 Stn 84 Aug 01-06-84860-5 Pujol St Aug 01-02-98000-0 Stn 84 Various water meters Aug 02-79-10100-1 NW Sports Pk Aug 01-08-38009-0 Stn 92 Dupl. Blueprints:Traffic Monitoring Sys DupL Blueprints:Mercantile Bldg Dupl. Blueprints:Children's Museum Dupl. blueprints:Land Dev. Dupl. blueprints:Diaz Rd re-align Dupl. Blueprints:Pachanga Pkwy DupL blueprints:Diaz Rd re-align Refund: Level 5 Swim Lessons Refund: Level 3 Swim Lessons 725.00 1,284.73 6,968.13 1,867.00 689.80 73.48 1,853.89 1,073.45 96.16 27.92 29,510.04 2,237.75 360.93 45.11 10.10 293.05 89.92 79.12 536.61 98.91 53.88 37.30 16.49 10.72 176.88 30,00 30.00 Check Total 725.00 1,284.73 6,968.13 1,867.00 689.80 73.48 2,927.34 96.16 27.92 32,626.02 930.79 60.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79242 9/12/2002 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING 79243 9/12/2002 79244 9/12/2002 79245 9/12/2002 79246 9/12/2002 79247 9/12/2002 79248 9/12/2002 79249 9/12/2002 (Continued) Description Amount Paid VARIOUS SPORTS PARK SITES HP various parks electrical supplies VARIOUS PARK SITES ELECTRICA various parks electrical supplies Old Town area electrical supplies C.R.C. electrical supplies City Hall electrical supplies Old Town area electrical suppties City Hall electrical supplies 001500 REGIONALTRAINING CENTER- Strategies working w/Public:10/09/02 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATI Misc. Equipment Rental for PW 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSH£ July 2002 legal services 000266 RIGHTWAY Sept equipment rental - Long Cyn Crk Long Cyn Crk Pk equipment repairs 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO TECHNOL( Repair/Maint P.D. emerg radios 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEP FY 02/03 member agency assessmen 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. 005367 RUECKEL, ROBERT 79250 9/12/2002 79251 9/12/2002 005283 SALSAGARDENCAFE 79252 9/12/2002 005279 SAMNRON MGMNT ENT INC 79253 9/12/2002 001053 SAN DIEGO ICE ARENA 79254 9/1 2/2002 003492 SCHOLASTIC SPORTS Reimb:Mayors/Councilm brs Cf:7/24- Reimb:Public Safety Policy Comm:8/1 Refund: SMART-S.D. Ice Arena Rfmhmnts:Council closed session:8/ Grill guard for medic squad 73. SMART Excursion: 6/05 & 8/21 support ads:Chaparral sports prgms 79255 9/12/2002 005051 SEISMIC WARNING SYSTEMS I Network Service Agreement:l year 79256 9/12/2002 000385 SHELDON EXTINGUISHER COM Fire extinguishers maint for PW 167.30 741.97 402.93 331.27 160.01 123.70 86.89 309.98 253.95 270.00 46.83 664.25 54.39 18.26 412.75 53,40~.00 49.91 13.00 3.00 278.38 271.99 318.00 150.00 11,685.51 46.28 Check Total 2,578.00 270.00 46.83 664.25 72.65 412.75 53,406.00 62.91 3.00 278.38 271.99 318.00 150.00 11,685.51 46.28 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 79257 9/12/2002 004609 SHREDFORCE INC 79258 9/12/2002 004814 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING I Amount Paid Sept document shredding services Aug document shredding services Jul document shredding services Jun-Jul design svcs:Barrier Rail 110.00 110.00 110.00 2,200.00 Check Total 330.00 2,200.00 79259 9/12/2002 003804 SKYHAWKS SPORTSACADEM TCSDInstructor Earnings 1,637.60 79260 9/12/2002 79261 9/12/2002 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 000374 SO CALIF EDISON Supplies for SMART Pgrm Day Camp Supplies Supplies for SMART Pgrm Supplies for SMART Pgrm Teen Council Supplies Aquatic supplies for meetings Supplies for SMART Pgrm Supplies for SMART Pgrm Team Pace Supplies Aquatic supplies for meetings Recreation Supplies for MPSC Install headlight fixture @ La Serena 43.51 24.14 67.35 55.02 53.65 95.53 77.12 70.53 425.96 313.35 193.19 715.00 1,419.35 715.00 79262 9/12/2002 79263 9/1 2/2002 79264 9/12/2002 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR(~ 000293 STADIUM PIZZ~ Aug 2-23-051-9399 Margarita Ped Sept 2-23-548-1975 various metem Aug 2-24-077-3069 Pala Rd Aug 2-23-693-2810 Pala Rd Sept 2-10-331-1353 Stn 84 Aug 2-22-417-8772 Rancho Vista Jul-Aug 2-20-798-3248 Children's Mus Sept 2-00-987-0775 Vail Ranch lamps Aug 2-05-791-8807 various metem Aug 2-06-105-0654 various meters Sept 2-01-202-7330 Citywide St. Lamp Sept 2-01-202-7603 Arterial St. Lamps Aug 2-02-351-5281 CRC Pest Control Svcs:Var Parks pest control services:Mercantile Bldg P.D. Caboose Pest Control Svcs Day Camp Supplies Refreshments:SMART Pgrm:Pala Refreshments:SMART Pgrm:Va[I Ranc Refreshments for SMART Pgrm 14.28 31.75 31.51 14.72 1,370.39 257.74 92.56 5,146.28 3,464.81 2,508.09 35,399.07 13,766.90 7,768.24 403.00 84.00 29.00 114.78 88.80 360.96 119.51 69,866.34 516.00 684.05 Page:lo apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 09112/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79265 9/12/2002 000574 SUPERTONER 79266 9/12/2002 000305 TARGET STORE 79267 9/12/2002 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 (Continued) Des~rlption Amount Paid Check Total Sept HP Printer Maintenance Svc HP Printer Supplies HP Printer Supplies Recreation Supplies - Sports Recreation Supplies - Family Fun Nig Recreation Supplies for CRC SUPPLIES FOR SMART PGRM~ Recreation Supplies - Family Fun Nig Day Camp Supplies Day Camp SuPPlies Day Camp Supplies Aquatic Supplies Recreation Supplies for MPSC Employee's union 828.32 810.28 699.28 3.54 23.09 16.53 10.53 49.07 56.40 48.48 26.33 83.53 61.13 2,280.00 2,337.88 378.63 2,280.00 79268 9/12/2002 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL Sunshine Fund 62.44 79269 9/12/2002 003067 TEMECULA R V repair/maint of P.D. Command Ctr RV 22.41 22.41 79270 9/12/2002 79271 9/12/2002 79272 9/1 2/2002 79273 9/12/2002 79274 9/12/2002 004541 TEMECULA RADIATOR/AUTO R 000307 TEMECULATROPHY COMPAN 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY, 003140 TEMECULAVALLEY TAEKWON 002766 THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS repairs/maint medic squad 84 repairs/maint Fire Prev. vehicles repairs/maint, medic squad 73 Adult Basketball Winter League Award Name Badge:J. Payne Maint Fac repair handicap access doo City Hall Iccksmith services T.C.C. locksmith services TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS Annual database license agreement 2,168.27 1,008.73 130.00 177.79 7.00 187.39 58.96 22.67 20.00 100.00 40.00 3,232.50 3,307.00 184.79 269.02 160.00 3,232.50 79275 9/12/2002 004913 TOP DAWG TERMITE COMPAN Pest Control Svcs:Sr. Ctr. 650.00 650.00 79276 9/12/2002 002452 TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL PW Maint vehicle parts 272.91 272.91 79277 9/12/2002 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS Office Supplies for Land Dev 600.57 600.57 Page~l apChkLst Final Check List Page: 12 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City o1 Temecula Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor (Continued) Description Amount Paid 79278 9/12/2002 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE I Misc. Traffic ContmI Supplies for PW Traffic Control Supplies for PW 79279 9/12/2002 000978 TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRG 1st qtr emerg.response vol. prgm 79280 9/12/2002 79281 9/12/2002 79282 9/12/2002 79283 9/12/2002 79284 9/12/2002 79285 9/12/2002 005364 TREND LE'r'FER 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE 002065 UNISOURCE 004846 UNITED GREEN MARK INC "Trend Letter" publication 1 year Employee daf comp plan PIT EE retirement Postage meter deposit color paper for central services various parks irrigation supplies various parks irrigation supplies various parks irrigation supplies Meter Controller Enclosure various parks irrigation supplies various parks irrigation supplies 79286 9/12/2002 79287 9/12/2002 79288 9/12/2002 79289 9/12/2002 79290 9/12/2002 79291 9/12/2002 000325 UNITED WAY Employee contributions 004819 UNUM LIFE INS. CO. OF AMERI Employee group health pmt 000854 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE 10/01/02-09/30/03 mbrshp:G. Thomhi 000332 VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATE Aug plan check services:Bldg & Safer 005368 VATAVE, SANGITA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA Refund: Music-Instant Piano AUG XXX-2670 911 AUTO DIALER Aug xxx-5840 general usage AUG XXX-5509 GENERAL USAGE AUG XXX-1289 pRATT AUG XXX-5029 GENERAL USAGE Aug xxx-5780 general usage AUG XXX-0049 GENERAL USAGE AUG XXX-2629 NAGGAR AUG XXX-2730 ELEVATOR 49.30 1,610.86 1,920.00 195.00 17,409.97 2,946.44 2,386.34 1,236.62 85.40 62.67 52.17 2,116.77 220.41 146.48 255.80 5,720.97 170.00 19,869.39 25.00 28.75 32.42 148.16 49.32 677.67 32.42 32.06 65.39 57.50 Check Total 1,660.16 1,920.00 195.00 17,409.97 2,946.44 2,386.34 1,236.62 2,683.90 255.80 5,720.97 170.00 19,869.39 25.00 1,121.69 Page:12 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 13 09112/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bank: union UNtON BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 79292 9/12/2002 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. (Continued) Description AUG ACCESS-CRC PHONE LINE AUG ACCESS-RVSD CO PHONE LI 79293 9/1 2/2002 79294 9/12/2002 79295 9/12/2002 79296 9/12/2002 79297 9/12/2002 79298 9/12/2002 79299 9/12/2002 79300 9/12/2002 79301 9/12/2002 793O2 9/12/2002 002109 WHITECAP INDUSTRIES INC 004829 WILSON GROUP LLC, THE 005369 WONG-CNURY, TABITHA 004774 WOODCREST UNIFORMS 003607 XPECT FIRSTAID 004789 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTION Phone svcs/EOC backup @ stn 84 005371 WA'Frs, MARY Refund: Level 4 Swim Lessons 000339 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY I City Hall legal publications supplies for PW Maintenance Sept lobbyist & consulting services Refund:Tiny Tots-Creative Beg P.D.C.A.P. uniform embroidery City Mgr vehicle first aid kit first aid kits for TCSD vehicles First Aid Kits for Bldg & Safety First Aid Supplies for PW Maint Planning vehicle first aid kit SERVICE 2 CODE ENFORCEMENT E First Aid Supplies for PW Maint 003776 ZOLLMEDICALCORPORATION Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies 005195 ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY Amount Paid Check Total 343.30 268.20 69.95 25.00 162.15 213.86 3,500.00 47.50 29.00 46.32 598.94 502.29 306.63 46.01 166.94 61.01 650.70 45.32 SMART Prgm Excursion:8/14/02 432.50 SMART Prgm Excursion:7/31/02 317.25 Sub total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 611.50 69.95 25.00 162.15 · 213.86 3,500.00 47.50 29.00 1,728.14 696.02 749.75 579,697.70 Page~3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 14 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula 178 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 579,697.70 Page:14 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 15 09/12/2002 3:28:30PM City of Temecula Bankcode: union Void Checks Page:15 ITEM 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANC~ ~C~ CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance[~l~ September 24, 2002 Purchase of Seven (7) City Vehicles Prepared by: Gus Papagolos, Fiscal Services Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1) Approve the purchase of the following v~hicles from Rancho Ford: Two (2) 2003, Mid-Size Ford Trucks Two (2) 2003, % ton Ford Trucks One (1) 2003, % ton Ford Truck One (1) 2003, 15 Passenger Van One (1) 2003, Cab & Chassis Stencil Truck Rehab $18,507.11 (each) $22,115.69(each) $25,663.15 $22,735.25 $46,122.39 2) Approve the additional appropriation of $18,507.11 for the purchase of the second Mid-Size Truck DISCUSSION: The adoption of the fiscal year 2002/03 Annual Operating Budget approved the funding for the purchase of six (6) vehicles. The six (6) vehicles are additions to the current fleet and will be used by the Community Services District (2), Public Works (2), Building & Safety (1), and Fire (1). The seventh (7~h) vehicle is a new request and will replace a fire inspection vehicle that was involved in a traffic accident on September 5, 2002. The 1994 Chevrolet S-10 truck was damaged beyond economic repair (totaled) and this vehicle was fully depreciated. Although an insurance settlement is pending with the at-fault driver's insurance company, Staff is recommending to replace this vehicle at this time utilizing the current bid pricing. On August 13, 2002, staff held a vehicle specification review meeting with the fleet managers of the local dealerships and on August 14th the Requests for Proposal (RFPs) were mailed to all of the local dealerships for the purchase of the six (6) vehicles (see attached vendor list). Three (3) proposals were received as listed below. Based on previous purchases the received bids are considered competitive and are recommended by staff. The Iow bids are under the budgeted amounts and the purchase of these vehicles will satisfy the vehicular requirements for the aforementioned departments. Community Services District One (1) Mid-Size 4WD Truck & One (1) 15 Passenger Van Dealer Vehicle/model Rancho Ford Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up 15 Passenger Van Price $18,507.11 (Low Bid) $22,735.25 (Low Bid) Paradise Chevrolet Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $19,746.50 15 Passenger Van $25,499.00 Norm Reeves Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $21,387.99 ChrysledJeep/Dodge 15 Passenger Van No Bid Public Works Department One (1) % ton 4WD Truck and One (1) Cab and Chassis Stencil Truck Rehab Dealer Vehicle/mode! Price Rancho Ford Full-size ~ ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Cab and Chassis Stencil Truck Rehab $22,115.69 (Low Bid) $46,122.39 (Low Bid) Paradise Chevrolet Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Cab and Chassis Stencil Truck Rehab $24,325.60 No Bid Norm Reeves Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Full-size ¼ ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Cab and Chassis Stencil Truck Rehab $26,044.94 No Bid Fire Department One (1) 3/. ton 4WD Truck and One (1) Mid-Size 4WD Truck Dealer Rancho Ford Vehicle/model Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Price $25,663.15 (Low Bid) $18,607.11 (Low Bid) Paradise Chevrolet Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $28,494.00 $19,746.50 Norm Reeves Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up Mid-size 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $28,727.92 $21,387.99 Building and Safety Department One (1) % ton 4WD Truck Dealer Vehicle/model Price Rancho Ford Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $22,115.69 (Low Bid) Paradise Chevrolet Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $24,325.60 Norm Reeves Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Full-size % ton 4WD Extended Cab Pick-up $26,044.94 FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Vehicle Internal Service Fund for this purchase. Adequate funds are also budgeted in the respective departments for depreciation expense. Attachment: Vehicle Vendor List Vehicle Vendor List Carriage Motors 41872 Motor Car Pkwy Temecula Ca 92591 Toyota of Temecula 26631 Ynez Road Temecula Ca 92591 Norm Reeves 26755 Ynez Road Temecula Ca 92591 Paradise Chevrolet 26845 Ynez Road Temecula Ca 92591 Rancho FoR 26895 Ynez Road Temecula Ca 92591 Nissan of Temecula 41895 Motor Car Pkwy Temecula Ca 92591 Saturn of Temecula 27540 Ynez Road Temecula, Ca 92591 ITEM 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City ManagedCity Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance September 24, 2002 Authorization to Execute the Supplemental Agreement for the Fiscal Year 2002- 03 Community Development Block Grant Funds PREPARED BY: Gus Papagolos, Fiscal Services Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for fiscal year 2002-03 Community Development Block Grant Funds. DISCUSSION: On January 22, 2002, the City Council recommended funding for Fiscal Year 2002-03 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects. This recommendation was forwarded to the Riverside County Economic Development Agency for review and processing with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD provides CDBG funding for local projects, which meet at least one of the following nationally established goals: The activity benefits 51 pement Iow/moderate income persons; or, The activity aids in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or, The activity meets an emergent community development need. The Economic Development Agency (EDA) has processed the City's recommendation and has submitted the attached supplemental agreement for signature. The projects and levels of funding approved by the (EDA) are as follows: American Red Cross Old Town Gymnasium Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase II Operation School Bell YMCA Summer Camp Alternatives Domestic Violence Rape Crisis Center Senior Citizen Emergency Food Pantry Boys and Girls Club Total CDBG Funding $ 2,393 283,571 50,000 11,000 4,500 10,000 4,000 10,000 11,000 ~386.464 Execution of the fiscal year 2002-03 Supplemental Agreement and Sub-Recipient Agreement facilitates CDBG funding for these projects. The actual CDBG award of $386,464 is $33,841 more than the projected amount approved by the City Council on January 22, 2002. The County Economic Development Agency (EDA) has increased the funding for the Old Town Gymnasium by $33,841. All other projects were funded at the City Council approved funding level. Fiscal Impact: CDBG funds will be budgeted in a special revenue fund for the approved programs and projects. Attachment: Supptemental Agreement for the use of 2002-03 year CDBG funds 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 File: 0.550,O.552,~'.558,0.559,0.567 0.568,1.TM105,1.TM1061.TM107 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE of the State of California, herein called, "COUNTY," and the CITY OF Temecula, herein called "CITY," mutually agree as follows: 1. GENERAL. COUNTY and CITY have executed a Cooperation Agreement dated June 15, 1999, whereby CITY elected to participate with COUNTY, which has qualified as an "Urban County" for purposes of receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds; and to assist and undertake essential community development and housing assistance activities pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, hereinafter referred to as "Act". Said Cooperation Agreement dated June 15, 1999, is l~corporated herein by reference and made a part of this Agreement as if each and every provision was set forth herein. 2. PURPOSE. CITY promises and agrees to undertake and assist with the community development activities, within its jurisdiction, by utilizing the sum of $386,464 , CDBG Entitlement Funds, as specifically identified in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I are attached hereto and consist of 3 bages (each), and by this reference are incorporated herein, for the projects: 0.550 Southwest County Operation School Bell, 0.552 Southwest YMCA Childcare, $4,500.00. $11,000. 0.558 Services to Victims and Children of Domestic Violence, $10,000.00. 0.559 Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center, $4,000.00. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .26 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0.567 Emergency Food Purchase and Storage, $10,000'.~'0.' 0.568 The Learninq Connection, Boys and Girls Club $11,000.00. 1.TM105 American Red Cross Service Center, $2,393.00. 1.TM106 Gymnasuim - Old Town Temecula, $283,571.00. 1.TM107 Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvement - Phase II, CITY shall obtain COUNTY's approval, through Development Agency, of the project plans $50,000.00. its Economic and specifications prior to projects CITY's construction of same when a project consists of a construction activity. 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement for the shall be for a period of one (1) year from July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003, and proceed consistent with the completion schedule set forth in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I. In the. event that the projects are not substantially completed by the time set forth in the completion schedule du'e to unforeseen or uncontrollable causes, the schedule for the completion of the project may be extended by the period of the enforced delay. Times of performance may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of CITY and COUNTY. If substantial progress toward completion in conformance with the completion schedule, as determined by COUNTY of the projects are not made during the term of the Supplemental Agreement, COUNTY may suspend or terminate this agreement b~ the procedures set forth in the Section titled "Termination", of this agreement and the entitlement funds associated by COUNTY after appropriate notice is 4. DISPOSITION OF FUNDS. shall determine the final received by COUNTY under be reprogrammed with the projects may given. COUNTY's Board of Supervisors disposition and distribution of all fuhds the Act consistent with the provisions of 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Agreement. COUNTY, through its Economic Development Agency, shall: (1) Make payment of the grant funds to CITY as designated in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I; (2) It is the CITY's responsibility to monitor the projects activity of Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I to ensure compliance with applicable federal regulations and the terms of this Agreement. CITY shall comply with timely drawdown of funds by submitting monthly requests for rein~ursement. All disbursements of grant funds will be on a reimbursement basis and made within thirty (30) days after the CITY has submitted its letter identifying payments and documentation which supports expenditures. All authorized obligations incurred in the performance of the Agreement must be reported by June 6, 2003 for projects eligible under 570.201(e), Public Services; 3) The COUNTY will directly manage and monitor projects identified in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F. These projects have been determined to be Countywide, receiving grant funding from multiple sources; therefore, these projects will be managed and monitored by the COUNTY. 5. COOPERATION WITH HOUSING ACTIVITIES. CITY shall cooperate with COUNTY in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and public assistance housing, and shall assist COUNTY in carrying out its Strategic Plan of the Consolidated Plan and .other requirements of the Community Development Block Grant Program. 6. LEAD AGENCY FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15051(d) of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code, CITY is designated as the lead agency for the projects that are the subject matter of -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 this Agreement. 7. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION. CITY shall comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations, and shall indemnify, save and hold harmless COUNTY and its agency members and their respective agents, servants and employees of and from any and all liabilities, claims, debt, damages, demands, suits, actions and causes of action of whatsoever kind, nature or sort including, but not by way of limitation, wrongful death, expenses said parties, and the payment of attorney's fees, arising out in any manner connected with the performance by CITY under Agreement. 8. RECORDS AND INSPECTIONS. a. .CITY shall establish and maintain records in accordance with 24 CFR Part 570 and Part 85 and OMB Circular A-87 as of the defense of of or this applicable and as they relate to the acceptance and use of federal funds under this Agreement. b. CITY shall maintain a separate account for CDBG Entitlement funds received as set forth in Exhibits (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I). c. make available to CITY shall, during the normal business hours, COUNTY and to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for examination and copying all of i%s records and other materials with respect to matters covered by this Agreement. d. CITY shall not retain any program income as defined in Section 570.500 of Title 24 of the Federal Code of Regulations. Said program income shall be used only for the activities that are the subject of this Agreement. Further, all provisions of this Agreement shall apply to such activities. 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 . 27 ' 28 e. The CITY shall ensure project's"that are serving limited clientele (570.208(a) (2) (i), that at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the persons benefiting from the CDBG funded activities are of low and moderate income and meet the program income guidelines attached as Exhibits (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I). The CITY must provide the direct benefit documentation required. 9. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. CITY shall comply with the provisions of the Act and any amendments thereto and the federal regulations and guidelines now or hereafter enacted pursuant to the Act. More particularly, CITY is to comply with those regulations found in Part 85 and Part 570 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations. CITY is to comply with OMB Circular A-87, or any subsequent replacement. CITY is to abide by the provisions of the Community Development Block Grant Manual, prepared by COUNTY and cited'in the above-mentioned Cooperation Agreement. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. CITY and its agents, servants and employees shall act at all times in an independent capacity during the term of this Agreement, and shall not act as, shall not be, nor shall they in any manner be construed to be agents, officers or employees of the COUNTY. 11. TERMINATION. a. CITY. CITY may not terminate this Agreement except upon express written consent of COUNTY. b. COUNTY. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph lla, COUNTY may suspend or terminate this Agreement upon written notice to CITY of action being taken and the reason for such action: (1) In the event CITY fails to perform the -5- 1 2 3 4 5 6 covenants herein contained at such times and ~' ~uch manner as provided in this Agreement; and (2) In the event there is a conflict with any [ederal, state or local law, ordinance, regulation or rule rendering any of the provisions of this Agreement invalid or untenable; or (3) In the event the funding from the Department 7 of Housing and Urban Development referred to in Paragraphs 1 and 2 8 above is terminated or otherwise becomes unavailable. 9 c. Upon suspension of this Agreement, CITY agrees to 10 return any unencumbered .funds which it has been provided by COUNTY. 11 In accepting said funds, COUNTY does not waive any claim or cause of 12 action it may have against CITY for breach of this Agreement. 13 d. Upon suspension of this Agreement, CITY agrees 14 not to incur any additional cost with regard to the projects that 15 are cited in the written notice as necessitating the suspensions. 16 12. NONDISCRIMINATION. CITY shall abide by Sections 17 570.601 and 570.602 of Title 24 of the Federal Code of Regulations 18 which requires that no person in the United States shall on the 19 grounds of race, color, national origin, or sex, be excluded from 20 )articipation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to 21 ~iscrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in 22 with Community Development funds. 23 13. PROHIBITION AGAINST CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 24 a. CITY and its assigns, employees, agents, 25 and elected and appointed officials shall 26 and shall comply with the CDBG regulations 27 interest contained in 24 CFR 570.611, 28 "C__I" and by this reference incorporated consultants, officers become familiar'with )rohibiting conflicts of lttached hereto as Exhibit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 herein. b. CITY and its assigns, employees, agents, consultants, officers, and elected and appointed officials shall become familiar with and shall comply with Section A-11 of the County's CDBG Policy manual, attached hereto as Exhibit "C__I" and by this reference incorporated herein. c. CITY understands and agrees that no waiver of exception can be granted to the prohibition against conflict of interest except upon written approval of HUD pursuant to 24 CFR 570.611 (d). Any request by CITY for an exception shall first be reviewed by COUNTY to determine whether such request is appropriate for submission to HUD. In determining whether such request is appropriate for submission to HUD, COUNTY will consider the factors listed in 24 CFR 570.611 (e). d. Prior to any funding under this Agreement, CITY shall provide COUNTY with a list of all employees, agents, consultants, officers and elected and appointed officials who are in a position to participate in a decision making process, exercise any functions or responsibilities, or gain inside information with respect to the CDBG activities funded under this Agreement. CITY shall also promptly disclose to COUNTY any potential conflict, including even the appearance of conflict, that may arise with respect to the CDBG activities funded under this Agreement. material breach of this Agreement, immediately terminated by the COUNTY. 14. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY. Any violation of this and section shall be deemed a the Agreement shall be As to CITY or its claimants, COUNTY shall bear no liability for any later determination by the -7- 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 United States Government, the Department of H~using and Urban Development or any other person or entity that CITY is or is not eligible under 24 CFR Part 570 to receive CDBG funds. 15. USE OF PROPERTY. Whenever federal CDBG funds or program income are used, in whole or in part, for the purchase of equipment or personal property, the property shall not be transferred from its originally funded use for a period of five (5) years from the date that the City is no longer a part of the urban COUNTY program. The CITY shall maintain an inventory for COUNTY review. 16. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES TO BE CAUSED BY PROJECT. CITY agrees to notify and to require any lessee or assignee to notify Riverside County Workforce Development Center/JTPA and GAIN Department of Public Social Services of any and all jOb openings that are caused by this project. 17. PUBLICITY. Any publicity generated by CITY for the project funded pursuant to this Agreement, during the term of this Agreement, will make reference to the Contribution of the County of Riverside Community Development Block Grant Program in making the project possible. 18. PROGRAM MONITORING AND EVALUATION. CITY shall be monitored and evaluated in terms of its effectiveness and timely compliance with the provisions of this Agreement and the effective and efficient achievement of the Program Objectives. Quarterly reports shall be due on the last day of the month immediately following the end of the quarter being reported. The quarterly written reports shall include, but shall not be limited to the following data elements: -8- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a. Title of program, description of activities/operations. b. The projected goals, listing'" Of components, indicated numerically, and also the goals achieved (for each report period). In addition, identify by percentage and description, the progress achieved towards meeting the specified goals; additionally, identify any problems encountered in meeting goals. c. If CDBG funded Activity meets National Objective under 24 CFR 570.208 (a) (2) (i), SPONSOR shall report the following: 1) Total number of direct beneficiaries (clientele served) who are: · Moderate income · Low income · Very-low income 2) Percent of the Low/Moderate income beneficiaries 3) SPONSOR Racial ethnicity of clientele Number of Female Headed Households shall report beneficiary statistics to EDA on the pre-approved Certification Form (certifying ethnicity) as required by HUD. monthly Direct Benefit Form, and Self- income, family size, and racial Updated forms are ~o be provided to said SPONSOR by EDA should HUD implement this agreement. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. Agreement together with the changes during the term of It is expressly agreed that this cooperation Agreement between the )arties, embodies the entire agreement of the parties in relation to the subject matter thereof, and that no other Agreement or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 understanding, verbal or otherwise, relative to this subject matter, at the time of execution. ACTS. The Executive Director of the or his or her designee(s) are actions as may be necessary or provisions, and conditions of exists between the parties 20. MINISTERIAL COUNTY's Economic Development Agency authorized to take such ministerial appropriate to implement the terms, this Agreement as it may be amended from time to time by COUNTY. /// 21. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a writing signed by the duly authorized and empowered representative of COUNTY and CITY respectively. DATED: ATTEST: Nancy Romero Clerk of the Board By: Deputy (Seal) DATED: ATTEST: JV:SH:aj COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By: Chairman, Board of Supervisors CITY OF TE~ECULA By: Mayor F: \Shared\CDBG\ lST \TM\ SUPPAGRMT02. 550-TM107. doc -10- .Prohibition Against Conflicts of Interest EXHIBIT CI , page 1 of 4 570.611 Conflict of interest. (a) Applicability. (1) In the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction, and services by recipients, and by subrecipients (including those specified at § 570.204(c)), the conflict of interest provisions in 24 CFR 85.36 and OMB Circular A 110, respectively, shall apply. (2) In all cases not governed by 24 CFR 85.36 and OMB Circular A-il0, the provisions of this section shall apply. Such cases include the acquisition and disposition of real property and the provision of assistance by the recipient, by its subrecipients, or to individuals, businesses and other private entities under eligible activities which authorize such assistance (e.g., rehabilitation, preservation, and other improvements of private properties or facilities pursuant to § 570.202, or grants, loans and other assistance to businesses, individuals and other private entities pursuant to § 570-203, § 570.204 or § 570.455). (b) Conflicts prohibited. Except for the use of CDBG funds to pay salaries and other related administrative or personnel costs, the general rule is that no persons described in paragraph (c) of this section who exercise or have exercised any functions or responsibilities with respect to CDBG activities assisted under this part or who are in a position to participate in a decision making process or gain inside information with regard to such activities, may obtain a personal or financial interest or benefit from a CDBG assisted activity, or have an interest in any contract, subcontract or agreement with respect thereto, or the proceeds thereunder, either for themselves or those with whom they have family or business ties, during their tenure or for one year thereafter. For the UDAG program, the above restrictions shall apply to all activities that are a part of the UDAG project, and shall cover any such interest or benefit during, or at any time after, such person's tenure. (c) Persons covered. The conflict of interest provisions of paragraph (b) of this section apply to any person who is an employee, agent, consultant, officer, or elected official or appointed official of the recipient, or.of any designated public agencies, or subrecipients which are receiving funds under this part. (d) Exceptions: threshold re~n/irements. Upon the. written request of the recipient, HUD may grant an exception to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section on a case-by-case basis when it determines that such an exception .'will serve to further the purposes of the Act and the effective and efficient administration of the recipient,s program or project. An exception may be considered only after the recipient has provided the following: (1) A disclosure of the nature of the conflict, accompanied by an assurance that there has been public disclosure of the conflict and a description of how the public disclosure was made; and Prohibition Against ~fl'icts of Interest EXHIBIT CI, page 2 of 4 (2) An opinion of the recipient's attorney that the interest for which the exception is sought would not Violate State or local law. (e) Factors to be considered for exceptions. to grant a requested exception after the recipient has requirements of paragraph (d) of this section, HUD shall effect of the following factors, where applicable: In determining whether satisfactorily met the consider the cumulative (1) Whether the exception would provide a significant cost benefit or an essential degree of expertise to the program or project which would otherwise not be available; (2) Whether an opportunity was provided for open competitive bidding or negotiation; (3) Whether the person affected is a member of a group or class of 10w or moderate income persons intended to be the 'beneficiaries of the assisted activity, and the exception will permit such person to receive generally the same interests or benefits as are being made available or provided to the group or class; (4) Whether the affected person has withdrawn from his or her functions or responsibilities, or the decision making process with respect to the specific assisted activity in question; (5) Whether the interest or benefit was present before the affected person was in a position as described in paragraph (b) of this section; (6) Whether undue hardship will result either to the ~ecipient or the person affected when weighed against the public interest served by avoiding the prohibited conflict; and (7) Any other relevant considerations. Prohibition Against C~flicts of Interest Exhibit CI, page 3 of 4 Community Dvlpmt. Block Grant Policy Manual I.D. # A-Ii (pg. 1 of 2) TOPIC: CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODED RIVERSIDE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: October 1989 This Conflict of Interest Code is written to comply with Federal Regulations (24 CFR Part 85). These Regulations. "Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State, Local and Federally Recognized Indian Tribal Governments,, require that grantees and sub-grantees will maintain a written code of standards of conduct governing the performance of their employees engaged in the award and administration of contracts. 1) No employee, officer or agent of the grantee shall participate in the selection, in the award or in the administration of a contract supported by Federal Funds if a conflict of interest, real or apparent, would be involved. 2) Such a conflict will arise when: i) The employee, officer or agent; ii) Any member of the immediate family; iii) His/Her partners, or; iv) An organization which employs, or is about to employ any of the above has a financial or other interest in the firm's selection for award. 3) The grantee's or sub-grantee's officers, employees or agents will neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors or anything of monetary value from contractor~ or parties to sub-agreements except as noted in Section 4. 4) A 9rantee,s or sub-grantee,s officers, have a financial interest in a business following: employees or agents .will be presumed to if their financial interest exceeds the i) Any business entity in which the official has a direct or'indirect investment worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more. ii) Any real property in which the official has a direct or indirect interest worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more. TOPIC: DATE: CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE RIVERSIDE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY October 1989 Prohibition Against ~fl'icts of Interest Exhibit CI, page 4 of 4 Community Dvlpmt. Block Grant Policy Manual I.D. # A-II (pg. 2 of 2) iii) Any source of income, other than gifts and other than loans by a commercial lending institution in the regular course of business on terms available to the public without regard to official status, aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by or promised to the official within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is made. iv) Any business entity in which the official is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of managements. v) Any donor of, or any intermediary or agent for a .donor of, a gift or gifts aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by, or promised to the official within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is made. 5) For purposes of Section 4, indirect investment or interest means any investment or interest owned by the spouse or dependent child of an official, by an agent on behalf of an official, or by a business entity or trust in which the official, the official's agents, spouse, and dependent children own directly, indirectly, or beneficially a 10-percent interest or more. EXHIBIT A Page 1 FILE: 0.550 SPONSOR' S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Assistance League of Temecula Valley Address: 28720 Via Montezuma, Temecula, CA 92590 Project Title: Southwest County Ooeration School Bell Location: 28720 Via Montezuma Description: The Assistance League of the Temecula Valley provides chlidren of low and moderate income families with school clothes, supplies, a backpack, a reading book, and hygiene items. CDBG funds will be used to assist in the purchase of necessary clothes, and school supplies. Project Requirement: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. In addition, the project will be administered by the Riverside County EDA as follows: Project Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved $21,000.00 $21~000.00 CDBG Funding Sources: First District Cities of- Lake Elsinore Murrieta Temecula $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $11,000.00 Total CDBG Funding Total Funding $21,000.00 EXHIBIT B Page 1 SPONSOR'S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Southwest Family YMCA a branch of YMCA'of Riverside City. and County. Address: 26111 Ynez Road Ste. B26, Temeeula, CA 92591 FILE: 0.552 Project Title: Southwest YMCA Childcare Location: Childcare for the Lake Elsinore and Menifee School District Description: The YMCA will provide a day camp (6am to 6pm) for Temecula residents at the Temecula Elementary School. A variety of activities from arts & crafts to sports will be offered. CDBG funds will be used for children of low/moderate income families for day camp scholarships. Project Requirements: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. Project Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved $14,500.00 $14~500.00 CDBG Funding Sources: Third District City of Temecula Total Funding Total CDBG Funding $10,000.00 $ 4,500.00 $14,500.00 EXHIBIT C FILE: 0.558 Page 1 SPONSOR'S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Alternatives to Domestic Violence (ADV) Address: P.O. Box 910, Riverside, CA 92502 Project Title: Services to Victims and Children of Domestic Violence Location: Shelter address remains unclosed for client protection Description: The program provides 24-hour Crisis Hot-Line, intervention counseling, information (outreach), referrals and emergency shelter to victims (women/children) of domestic violence. CDBG funds will be used to pay for: salaries (direct service), training, rent, utilities,equipment, supplies, and travel. Project Requirement: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. In addition, the project will be administered by the Riverside County EDA as follows: Proiect Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Adr:finislration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved CDBG Funding Sources: First District Second District Fifth Disthct City of Mumeta City of Temecula Total CDBG Funding $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $10,000.00 $30,000.00 Total Funding $30,000.00 EXHIBIT D Page 1 'FiLE: 0.559 SPONSOR'S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center Address: 1485 Spruce Street, Ste C, Riverside, CA 92507 Project Tire: Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center Location: 1485 Spruce Street, Ste C Riverside, CA 92507 Description: The Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center provides a direct service to rape survivors and their families, i.e. counseling, reassurance, explanation of legal and medical procedures, clothing, and follow-up. CDBG funds will be used to expand services (outreach/recruit bilingual volunteers) and for continued program operation -- salaries (direct services), volunteer training/recruitment, outreach, and travel. Served: 300 clients. Project Requirement: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. In addition, the project will be administered by the Riverside County EDA as follows: Project Budget: Cost CDBG Approved 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs .6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency $13,750.00 $13~750.00 CDBG Funding Sources: First District Second District Fifth District City of Temecula $ 3,000.00 $ 3,750.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,00O.00 Total CDBG Funding Total Funding $13,750.00 ~XItlBIT E Page 1 SPONSOR' S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Temecula Senior Service Center & Food Bank Address: P.O. Box 987, Temecula, CA 92593 FILE: 0.567 Project Tire: Emergency Food Purchase and Storage Location: 27539 Jefferson St. Temecula, CA 92590 Description: The Senior Citizen Service Center of Temecula Valley provides an emergency food program for individuals that are homeless, elderly, or a migrant farm worker. CDBG funds will be used for program operations, food, supplies, salaries and transportation. Project Requirement: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. In addition, the project will be administered by the Riverside County EDA as follows: Project Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved · $20,000.00 CDBG Funding Sources: First District City of Munieta City of Temecula $ 5,000.00 $10,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Total CDBG Funding $20~000.00 Total Funding $20,000.00 EXHIBIT F Page I FILE: 0.568 SPONSOR'S AGREEMENT Sponsor: Boys & Girls Clubs of Southwest County Address: 28790 Pujol Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Project Title: The Learning Connection Location: 28790 Pujol St. Temecula, CA 92590 Description: The Boys & Girls Club will provide before and after school programs to children of low/moderate income families. CDBG funds will pay for scholarships and site transportation. Proiect Requirement: This project serves limited clientele; therefore, the attached document for Direct Benefits needs to be completed and submitted to the County of Riverside Economic Development Agency on a monthly basis. Should no service be provided, submit the form indicating NO SERVICE. In addition, the project will be administered by the Riverside County EDA as follows: Project Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved $34,000.00 $341000.00 CDBG Funding Sources: First District City of Murrieta City of Temecula Total Funding $10,000.00 $13,000.00 $11,000:00 $34,0O0.00 Total CDBG Funding EXHIBIT G Page 1 Sppnsor: Address: FILE: 1.TM105 SPONSOR' S AGREEMENT The Riverside Count,/Chapter American Red Cross Service Center 7001 Indian Ave., Ste 3, Riverside, CA 92506 Project Title: American Red Cross Service Center Location: 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, CA 92590 Description: With CDBG funds, sixty young people will be able to attend the Red Cross courses, and will be trained in childcare skills by the end of fiscal year 2002-2003. The Red Cross will maintain a database of certified students in order to make referrals to community members interested in interviewing certified babysitters. Red Cross instructors take great care to work with individual students, insuring that few students fail to complete courses without achieving curriculum goals and becoming certified as having completed training. The babysitting and Family Care Academy is offered year round in different locations inside Riverside and is not contingent upon receipt of CDBG funds. CDBG funding will cover costs associated with texts, instructors, equipment, and certification. Project Budget: 1) Architect/Engineer Design Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Construction Costs 6) Relocation Costs 7) Equipment Costs 8) Other Costs 9) Operation/Maintenance 10) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved $ $2,393.00 $2,393.00 TOTAL I~XI-IIBIT G FILE: 1.TM105 Page 2 Timetable Implementation Schedule Milestones Start Date Completion Date Program Services July 1, 2002 Submit Quarterly Report (in accordance to section 26 of Sponsor's Agreement) October 31, 2002 January 31, 2003 April 30, 2003 July 31, 2003 EXHIBIT G FILE: 1.TM105 Page 3 -. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROJECT SUMMARY PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY FROM TO 4. July 1, 2002 June 30, 2003 1. NAME OF APPLIC~NT County of Riverside 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER B-02-UC-06-0506 X Original (each year). Revision, Date Amendment, Date 5. NAME OF PROJECT 6. PROJECT NUMBER 7. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS American Red Cross Service Center 1.TM105 Exempt 8. ENTITY WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT The Riverside County Chapter American Red Cross Service Center 9. TELEPHONE NUMBER (909) 328-0013 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: With CDBG funds, sixty young people will be able to attend the Red Cross courses, and will be trained in childcare skills by the end of fiscal year 2002-2003. The Red Cross will maintain a database of certified students in order to make referrals to community members interested in interviewing certified babysitters. Red Cross instructors take great care to work with individual students, insuring that few students fail to complete Courses without achieving curriculum goals and becoming certified as having completed training. The babysitting and Family Care Academy is offered year round in different locations inside Riverside and is not contingent upon receipt of CDBG funds. CDBG funding will cover costs associated with texts, instructors, equipment, and certification. ELIGIBILITY: 570.201 (e) BENEFIT: 570.208 (a) (2) (i) (B) 11. CENSUS TRACT(S)/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S) 12. ~%ITICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Provider services to 60 young people. 13. CDBG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES PROGR3~M YEAR FUNDS(in thousands of $) (List component activities using names CDBG OTHER of activities shown in Part A, COST Low/Mod Other Amount Source SUMMARY, Form HUD-7067.) Benefit Benefit (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) $ $ $ Public Services $2,393.00 14. Totals $2,393.00 $ $ 15. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Grant Funds (Sum of Columns b and c) $2,393.00 EXHIBIT H Page I Sponsor: Address: FILE: 1.TM106 SPONSOR' S AGREEMENT CiW of Temecula - Community Services Department P.O. Box 9033, Tcmecula, CA 92589 Project Title: Gymnasuim - Old Town Temecula Location: On First Street in between Front and Pujol Street. Description: The proposed project includes the design and construction of a 6,800 square foot recreation facility to be located within the Redevelopment Area of the City of Temecula. This parcel is 1.83 acres and is owned by the City. This recreational facility will feature a full sized basketball court, bleacher seating for 100 spectators, restrooms as well as a small office. The goal of this project is to provide a safe and positive facility for adults and children who live dwithin the established economically disadvantaged Redevelopment Area. Project Budget: 1) ArchitecffEngineer Design/Construction Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5 Relocation Costs 6) Equipment Costs 7) Other Costs 8) OperatiordMaintenance 9) Contingency Cost CDBG Approved $283,571.00 TOTAL $283,571.00 EXHIBIT H FILE: I.TM106 Page 2 Timetable Implementation Schedule Milestones Start Date Completion Date Prepare Plans & Specifications Bid Documents & Review Bid Advertisement, Bid Review & Award Construction Notice of Completion July 1, 2002 December 2002 March 2003 November 1, 2002 February 2003 May 2003 June 2003 EXNIBIT N FILE: 1.TM106 Page 3 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF MOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1. NAME OF APPLIC~_NT County of Riverside 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER PROJECT SUMMARY B-02-UC-06-0506 3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY FROM TO 4. X Original (each year) Revision, Date July 1, 2002 June 30, 2003 Amendment, Date 5. NAME OF PROJECT 6. PROJECT NUMBER 7. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS Gymnasuim - Old Town Temecula 1.TM106 Categorically Excluded 8. ENTITY WITM RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT TME PROJECT 9. TELEPHONE NUMBER City of Temecula - Community Services Department (909) 694-6480 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed project includes the design and construction of a 6,800 square foot recreation facility to be located within the low income Area of the City of Temecula. This parcel is 1.83 actes and is owned by the City. This recreational facility will feature a full sized basketball court, bleacher seating for 100 spectators, restrooms as well as a small office. The 9oal of this project is to provide a safe and positive facility for adults and children who live dwithin the established economically disadvantaged Area. ELIGIBILITY: 570.201 (c) BENEFIT: ' 570.208 (a) (1) (i) 11. CENSUS TR-ACT(S)/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S) 432.05 Low/Mod 1,774/1,666 94% 12. ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISMMENTS: Construction of 6,800 sq ft recreation facility 13. CDBG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM YEAR FUNDS(in thousands of $) (List component activities usin9 names CDBG OTHER of activities shown in Part A, COST Low/Mod Other Amount Source SUMMARY, Form HUD-7067.) Benefit Benefit (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) $ $ $ Public Facilities $283,571.00 14. Totals $283,571.00 $ $ 15. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Grant Funds (Sum of Columns b and c) $283,571.00 EXHIBIT I Page 1 Sponsor: The City of Temecula SPONSOR' S AGREEMENT FILE: 1.TM107 Address: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589 Project Title: Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvement - Phase II Location: Pujol street between First and Sixth Street - North Side Descr/ption: Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements will mn on the north side of Sixth Slreet between Pujol Street and Felix, west of Felix, North of Sixth. CDBG funds will be used for construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and parkway improvements. Design and consh-uct curbs, gutterrs, sidewalk.s, and parkway improvements. Design can be done in-house to help conserve the funds for construction of this project. The goals of the project will provide safe pedestrian access along Sixth Street and support development of 24 affortable single family residences. This project will also support off-site improvements for a 24 unit single family detached affordable housing project. Project Budget: I) Architect/Engineer Design/Construction Costs 2) Administration Costs 3) Planning Costs 4) Acquisition Costs 5) Relocation Costs 6) Equipment Costs 7) Other Costs 8) Operation/Maintenance 9) Contingency TOTAL Cost CDBG Approved $50,000.00 $50,000.00 EXI-IIBIT I FILE: 1.TM107 Page 2 Timetable Implementation Schedule Milestones Prepare Plans & Specifications Bid Documents & Review Bid Advertisement, Bid Review & Award Construction Notice of Completion Start Da~ November 1, 2002 January 2003 March 2003 Completion D~e December 1, 2002 February 2003 May 2003 June 2003 EXHIBIT I FILE: 1.TM107 Page 3 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROJECT SUMMARY PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY FROM TO 4. 3 o July 1, 2002 June 30, 2003 1. NAME OF APPLIC3kNT County of Riverside 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER B-02-UC-06-0506 X Original (each year) Revision, Date Amendment, Date 5. NAME OF PROJECT 6. PROJECT NUMBER 7. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvement - Phase II 1.TM107 Categorically Excluded 8. ENTITY WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT 9. TELEPHONE NUMBER Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula (909) 694-6412 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements will run on the north side of Sixth Street between Pujol Street and Felix, west of Felix, North of Sixth. CDBG funds will be used for construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and parkway improvements. Design and construct curbs, gutterrs, sidewalks, and parkway improvements. Design can be done in-house to help conserve the funds for construction of this project. The goals of the project will provide safe pedestrian access along Sixth Street and support development of 24 affortable single family residences. This project will also support off-site improvements for a 24 unit single family detached affordable housing project. ELIGIBILITY: 570.201 (c) BENEFIT: 570.208 (a) (1) (i) 11. CENSUS TRACT(S)/ENUMERATION DISTRICT(S) 432.05 Low/Mod 1,774/1,666 94% 12. ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Construction of approx 1 ~ side walk Improvements. 13. CDBG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM YEAR FUNDS(in thousands of $) (List component activities using names CDBG OTHER of activities shown in Part A, COST Low/Mod Other Amount Source SUMMARY, Form HUD-7067.) Benefit Benefit (a) (b) (c) · (d) (e) $ $ $ Public Facilities $50,000.00 14. Totals $50,000.00 $ $ 15. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Grant Funds · (Sum of Columns b and c) $50,000.00 ITEM 5 AP P ROV/~.//~'"'~- CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCJ~ ~'~- CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Servic~ September 24, 2002 Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Agreement for Perimeter Landscaping along Seraphina Road and Rita Way for Tract Map Nos. 26828, -1, and -2 PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst ~.¢~ RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the agreement and surety bonds from Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC for landscaped slopes and parkways along Seraphina Road and Rita Way within Tract Map Nos. 26828, -1 and -2. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the conditions of approval the developer is proposing to improve slopes and parkways by installing landscaping along Seraphina Road and Rita Way. These slopes and parkways are a result of the development of 130 homes within Tract Map Nos. 26828, 26828-1 and 26828-2. To insure that the future landscaped slopes and parkways are constructed to Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) standards, the developer is required to post security to improve these areas based upon the approved landscape/irrigation plans and the certified construction cost estimates for the improvements. As a result, Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC has entered into an agreement with the TCSD and has provided surety bonds, issued by Developers Surety and Indemnity Company, as follows: Faithful Pedorrnance Bond No. §26772S the amount of $116,656.00. Labor and Materials Bond No. 826772S in the amount of $58,283.00. Warranty Bond No. 826772S in the amount of $11,657.00. Upon completion and acceptance of the improvements by the City Council, staff will exonerate or reduce the bonds as needed. FISCAL IMPACT: borne by the developer. None. The cost of construction for the landscaped medians will be ATFACHMENTS: Vicinity Map Project Map Agreement/Surety Bonds MURRIETA TRACT / --~.~ CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY SERAPHINA ROAD PROJECT SITE RITA --JOSEPH ROAD FINBROOK ROAD WAY CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY NORTH NO. 26828-~, 26828-2 AND 26828 VICINITY MAP TRACT 26828-~, 26828-2 ~ 26828 T.C.S.B. EASEMENTS VICINITY MAP / ~l! t0 9 8 7 6 5 4 2 ~14Ol 4~ I' ~ ~ERRACE v~. E~ CZRCLE ~ 0 TR. 26828 AREA "3-D" 1675 S.F. TR. 26828 AREA "3-C" 4452 S,F. TR, 26828 t80 S.F. TR. 26828 ~'"'--AREA "3-A" J748 S.F. '~,,._.TR. 26828-2 AREA "2-B" t00 S.F. TR. 26828=2 AREA "2-A" · J359 S.F. TR. 26828-~ AREA "I-A" ~6254 S.F. RITA NAY TR; 26828-! AREA "~-B" 12665 S.F. CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND ! LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT DATE OF AGREEMENT: Au_~unt !. 2o(~2 NAME OF SUBDIVIDER: HERITAGE SYCAMORE SPRINGS~ (Referred to as "SUBDIVIDER") LLC NAME OF SUBDIVISION: HERITAGE SYCAMORE SPRINGS; LLC f TEMECULA 1:30) (Referred to as "SUBDIVIDER") TRACTNO.: VTTM 26828 TENTATIVE MAP RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL NO.: RESOLUTION # 92-27 (Referred to as "Resolution of Approval") PARKLAND IMPROVEMENT PLANS NO.: RESOLUTION # 92-27 ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF PARKLAND IMPROVEMENTS:$ 11 6, ~_ 1 ~, COMPLETION DATE: Aunt, st X, 2004 ~ NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND: DEVELOPERS SURETY & INDEMNITY COMPANY - BOND # 826772S NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND: DEVELOPERS SURETY & INDEMNITY COMPANY - BOND # 826772S NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR WARRANTY BOND: DEVELOPERS SURETY & INDEMNITY COMPANY - BOND # 826772S R:~.IGLERG~V, AGREEMN~oarkland landscape improvementl~greementdoc This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. RECITALS A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDIVISION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required, as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a final map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement by Parkland/Landscaping Improvement Security required by R:~ZIG LERG~(AGREEMN',parkland landscape improvement2~greement.doc the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term "Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement are on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications for the Improvements as approved by the Director of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the Parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Director of Community Services. The estimated amount is stated on Page I of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The Parkland/Landscape improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the final map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substantial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDIVISION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDIVISION. As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform its obligation under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of R:~IGLERG~XAGREEMN~oarkland landscape improvement~greernent.doc Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDIVISION constitutes an adequate remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. J:~, THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval and recordation by the City Council of the final map of the SUBDIVISION, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows: 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscapin.q Improvements. SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply with all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any amendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Pursuant to the requirements of Labor Code Section 1720, SUBDIVIDER shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required by this Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor 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 the City of Temecula. Subdivider shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall R:~ZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~arkland landscape improvement4~greement.doc pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Subdivider shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code and other applicable laws and regulations with respect to the payment of prevailing wages. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Subdivider shall for[eit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less, than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by it or by any subcontractor under it, in violation of the provisions of the Agreement or in violation of any applicable laws or regulations pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages. c. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: d. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. e. Except for easements or other interest(~d in real property to be dedicated to the Homeowners Association of the SUBDIVISION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights- of-way, easements and other interests in real property for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off-site rights-of-way, easements and other R:~ZIGLERG~V, AGREEMN~arkland landscape improvernent~j~greement.doc interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. 2. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Ri.qhts-of-Way. If any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed .on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights-of- way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, or b. The dedication to, and acceptance by, the CITY of appropriate rights-of-way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. c. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance of this Agreement by furnishing to CIT;Y', and maintaining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; and R:~.IGLERG~XAGREEMN~,parkland landscape improvement~greement.doc b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/Landscape Improvements required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50% of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and c. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated into this Agreement by this Reference. If any security is replaced by another approved security, the replacement shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost if the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful perf(~rmance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for R:~ZIGLERG~(AGREEMN~parkland landscape improvementT~greement.doc faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100% of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the right to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDIVISION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. Inspection and Maintenance Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection Of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community Service's authorized representative. representative, accordance with If the Director of Community Services, or the designated determine that the work has been completed in this Agreement, then the Director of Community R:~ZlG LERG~XAGR EEMN~arkland landscape improvement~,greement,doc Services shall certify the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements to the Board of Directors. b. SUBDIVIDER shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and CITY standards. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and certification. 6. Release of Securities. Subject to approval by the Board of Directors of the Community Services District of the CITY, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: a. Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agreement shall be released upon the expiration of the 'maintenance period and the final completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. b. The Director of Community Services may release a portion of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25% of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50% of the total Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and R:~ZIGLERG'vXAGREEMN~parkland landscape improvemenl~oJ~greement.doc acceptance of the improvement work. In no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security, which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. c. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been filed and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonable determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements by the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. Injury to Public Improvements, Public Property or Public Utilities Facilities. SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision R:~ZIGLERG~(AGREEMN~parkland landscape improvemer~ ~greement.doc monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacement or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement whether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER'S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER a. default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure the defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after commencement of the work; SUBDIVIDER'S insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDIVISION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. R:~ZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~parkland landscape improvemen1 ~greement.doc b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to his section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDIVIDER. The right of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specifically recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CITY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIVIDER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVlDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for an excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances, plan and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. R:~ZlGLERGg(AGREEMN~parkland landscape improvemen~ ~3reement.doc c. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY, d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. Warranty. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period and final acceptance by the City Council of the work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after CITY acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, installed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER falls to fulfill any of the requirements of 'this Agreement or the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and R:'ZIGLERG~,AGREEMN~oarkland landscape [mprovemen~ ~reement.doc specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. 11. Subdivider Not Aqent of City. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under ihis Agreement. 12. Injury to Work. Until such time as the Parkland/Landscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Aqreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the ~r costs o, water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to R:~.IGLERG~XAG R E EMN~parkland landscape improveme~ i~reement.doc the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionment. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obliqation to Warn Public Durinq Construction. Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vestinq of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance 0f the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after final completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall act upon the Director of Community Services recommendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Director of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement. SUBDIV'~ER further agrees to protect and hold harmless CITY, its officials and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions o~SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnification and R:~ZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~arkland landscape improvemen~ ~reement.doc Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY in approving the plans, unless the particular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph shall remain in full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY of Park!and/Landscape Improvements. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability for design and construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements installed or work done pursuant to this Agreement and the CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph. R:~ZlGLERG~XAG REEMN~parkland landscape improvemen~ ~reement.doc 18. Sale or Disposition of SUBDIVISION. Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion oi the property within the SUBDIVISION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 20. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete construction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than ~,,~,~,- ~. ~n04 · In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affect the validity of this Agreement or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. Delay, other than delay in the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion., As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing R:~ZlGLERG~XAGREEMN~parkland landscape improvemer~ ~reement.doc performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for an increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. 22. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Notice to SUBDIVIDER: Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC. 43529 Ridge Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 23. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. R:~IGLERGg(AGREEMN~oarkland landscape improvemen~ ~lreement.doc 24. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litiqation or Arbitration. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 26. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals to this agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this agreement. 27. Leqal Responsibilities. The Subdivider shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The Subdivider shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Subdivider to comply with this section. 28. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representative of the parties. In the case of the CITY, the appropriate party shal'l be the City Manager. R:~ZlGLERG'0(AGREEMN~arkland landscape improvemen~ ~greement.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDER CITY OF TEMECULA Name: ~c, L. L"~ t~-1-~.-~-7 7- Name: Title:.¢////~-~ ~ Title: By: Name: Title: (Proper Notarization of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) ATTEST: By: Susan W, Jones, CMC, City Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By: Name: City Engineer By: Name: Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY:pe~ · City Attorney R:~ZIGLERGg(AGREEMi'Aparkland landscape improvemen~greement.doc CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California Count~ of ~/?,! V'~ ~'"'~' i .~)'-~-_. SS. On -~"~1~ ,~-I, '~-~O~.~before me, ~[~1~ ~ .~V{~, ~ ~F~ ¢~ ~ Date Name and TiUe of ~r (e.g.,~Jan~D~, NO~ Publir) personally appeared ~ ~ ~ ~) Name(s) ~ Signer(s) ~personally known to me ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfacto~ evidence -' ~ Commission # 1222969 ~z ~ Notary Pul~tlc -- Cohfomla j Riv ioe coun .] ~ My Comm. Expires Jun 1,2003 Place Notary Seal Above to be the person(~,~ whose name(~ is/a~. subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/s~tR~'y executed the same in his/J~/th~r authorized capacity(t:~'-~)~ and that by his/h~/t~r signature(s~on the instrument the person(9'), or. the entity upon behalf of which the person(~ acted, executed the instrument. OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by/aw, il may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another docurnenL Description of Attached Document 'Rtle or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] individual [] Corporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here © 1997 National Netaq/Association. 9350 De Soto Ave.. P.O, Box 2402 - Chatswodh, ca 91313-2402 Prod. NO. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1 ~00~76~827 EXHIBIT A (Attach the basis for the estimate of the cost of improvements,) R:~ZIGLER~3'~(AGREEMN~arkland landscape improvemer~greement.doc ::;": THE LiGHfF00T "'' PLANNING XTEM PLANI'ZNG Trees 15 Gal Shrubs 5 Gal 1 Bark Mulch Groundcover PLANTING SU~-i-O'FAL ZRR/GA1/ON /rrigaUon Systems POC/~ckflow Booster Pump Conbollenv/enclosure IR~GAT~ON SUBTOTAL MA/NTENANCE PRO3ECI' SUBTOTAL Contingency 15% PRO3ECT TOTAL TLPG .lob # 835,03.! Tracts 26828 - 1 & 2 aXHIBIT A The Garrett Group Tract 26828 - 1 & 2 Landscape Opinion of Cost TCSD Maintenance Areas 3/18/02 UNTr QTY UNIT COST F:XTENsTON 171 EA $100.00 $17,100.00 158 F~ $25.00 $3,950,00 360 ER $6,00 $2,160.00 12,508 SF $0.25 $3,152.00 447 EA $17.00 $7,599~0 64,~00 SF $0.75 $48,300.00 1 ER $2,000.00 $2,000.00 i EA $~.0,000.00 $10,000.00 1 ~ $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Month $700.00 $2,100.00 $33,961.00 $65,300.00 $2,100.00 $101t361.O0 $116,565.15 Surety Bond Review The attached surety bonds (Developers Surety and Indemnity Co) have been reviewed. (Heritage Sycamore Springs, LLC) Bond Amount 826772S $ 58,283.00 $116,565.00 $ 11,657.00 ~The surety company is an admitted company in the State of California ~The admitted company was verified at www. insui-ance.ca.govldocslfsladmitted.htm [-IThe surety company is not an admitted company in the State of California Surety bond reference is A.M. Best 2002 version 071400 (A-:FSC V) Verified by: G(~'Papa-golos, Fiscal Services l~l~nager Approved As to Form: Company Profile Page 1 of 2 Company Profile DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY 17780 FITCH, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CA 92613 Agent for Service of Process LAWRENCE G. KEPIRO, 17780 FITCH, SUITE 135 IRVINE, CA 92614 _U_n_a_b_l.e__t_o.._L_o~a_t¢ t~he~A_gent for Service of Process? Reference Information NAIC #: NAIC Group #: California Company ID #: Date authorized in California: License Status: Company Type: State of Domicile: 12718 0075 4606-0 August 30, 1999 UNLIMITED-NORMAL Property & Casualty IOWA Lines of Insurance Authorized to Transact The company is authorized to transact business within these lines of insurance. For an explanation of any of these terms, please refer to the gLo.~_.s_a_.~_. SURETY Company Complaint Information ~Qmp~y_p. erformance & Compari~Qn_Dat~ Composite Complaint Studies http ://www4.insurance. ca. gov/wu/idb_co_pro f_utl, get_co_prof?, p_EID= 100170 8/27/2002 BOND NUMBER: 826772S I ~ PREMIUM: $1,632.00/2 YR TERM CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE FAITItFUL PERFORMANCE BOND HERITAGE sYCAMORE SYRt~,~o, -L~C. WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated P,u us 20 I~ ? , and identified as Project TRACT 26828-1&2 ., is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to furnish a bond for the Faithful Performance of the Agreement; DEVELOPERS SURETY AND NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal andI_._NDEMIqITY COMPANY as surety, are held and fn'rnlv bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of ONE ItlINDRED SIXTEEN TItOUS~f2qD FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE $ 116,565.00 , lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above-bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Tcmecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement orto the work to be performed thereunder orthe specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the work or to the specifications. //! IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on APRIL 2 , 20 02 SURETY DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNTIY COMPANY ~kVk~R. BONILLA ATTORNEY IN PACT PRINCIPAL HERITAGE SYCAMORE SPRINGS, LLC. PAUL GARRETT MANAGING MEMBER BY:. 0qAME) Ap~/~S TO FORM: Peter ~ City Attorney POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA PO BOX 19725, IRVINE, CA 92623 · (949) 263-3300 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that except as expressly limited, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIEOR_NIA, do each severally, but not jointly, hereby make, constitute and appoint: ***STEVEN R. BONILLA, S. SMITH-BOWMAN, D. KOHL, JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY*** as the true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalf of said co~pomtions as sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of stwetyship giving and granting unto said Attomey(s)-in-Faet full power and authority to do and to perform every act necessary, requisite or proper to be.done in connection therewith as each of said corporations could do, but reserving to each of said coq~orations full power of substitution and revocation, and all of the acts of said Attomey(s)-in-Faet, pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by authority of thc followifig resolutions adopted by the respective Board of Directors of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, effective as of November 1, 2000: RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Board, the President and any Vice President o£the corporation be, and that each of them hereby is, authorized to execute Powers of Attorney, qualifying the attorney(s) named in the Powers of Attorney to execute, on behalf of the coq3orstions, bonds, undertakings and contracts o£ suretyship; and that the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary of the corporations be, and each of them hereby is, authorized to attest the execution of any such Power of Attorney; RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of such office~ may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any such Power of Attorney or certificate beating such facsimile signatures shall be valid and binding upon the corporation when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it is attached. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA have severally caused these present~ to be signed by their respective F~xexative Vi~ Pr~ident and attested by their respective Secretary this 8~h day of November, 2000. By: David H. Rhodes, Ex~afive Vice President Walter A. Cmwell, Secr~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On November 8, 2000, before me, Diane J. Kawata, personally appeared David H. Rhodes and Walter A. Crowell, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the entity upon behaff of which the persons acted, executed thc instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. CERTIFICATE The undersigned, as Chief Operating Officer of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, does hereby certify that the foregoing Power of Attorney remains in full force and has not been revoked, and furthermore, that the provisions of the resolutions of the respective Boards of Directors of said corporations set forth in the Power of Attorney, are in foece as of the date of this Certificate. This Certificate is executed in the City of lrvine, California, thc ~N]J d~y of APRIL ., 2002 By. ~ David G. Lane, Chief Operating Officer ID-13R0 (! 1/00) .7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTYOF SAN DIEGO On 4-~t-02 PERSONALLYAPPEARED ,beforeme, STEVEN R. BONILLA SS. S. SMITH-BOWMAN personally known to me (orproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person~)) whose name~)) isA~'~ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to rrie that ha(-.a..~q!:G' executed the same in his, q,~;/;;;~i; authorized capacity~), and that by signature(/ on the instrument the person~t~, or the entity upon behalf of which the person~t~ acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. COMM. # 1298087 Notary Public · Calilomia This area for Offuzial Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form, CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION Of ATTACHED DOCUMENT [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] ATI-ORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OFDOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING; NA~AE OF PERSON(S) OR EN'UT~(IES) SIGNER(SI OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ID-1232 (REV. 5/01) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of R personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s) J~personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence · ~t'r~.~,,~, Commission # 1222969 ~ ~ Notary Public-- California :~ ~ Riv~ide Coun~ Place NoIa~ Seal ~ve to be the person(C,, whose name(~ is/a~ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sh~/th~ executed the same in his/h~Vr./tb~fi: authorized capacity(i~&), and that by his/hel,/t~ signature(~ on the instrument the person(a.)~or the entity upon behalf of which the person(z) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here © 1997 National Notary Association · 9350 De Soto Ave., RO. Box 2402 - Chatswodh, CA 91313-2402 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call TolI-F re~ 1~0~876~827 BOND NUMBER: 826772S PREMIUM: INCL W/PERF BOND CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND HERITAGE_SY~AMORE WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, and SPRINGS ~ LLC. , (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated ?.u~u.~t ~.~t 20 02 and identified as Project TRACT 26828-1 & 2 , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the term of said Agreement, Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with thc City of Temecula, to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California; and DEVELOPERS SURETY NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and INDEMNITY COMPANY as Surety, are held and fil-mly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Agreement and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE $ 58,283.0Q lawful money of the United States, for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount set forth. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be incinded costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgement r~ndered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 R:ksmithb~rkland landscape labor and mat~'ials b<md.doc - I - (commen~ing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. If the condition of this bond is fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby .waive notice of any such changes, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. R:~smithb'~arldand landscape labor and ma~rlals bond.doc - 2 - IN WITNESS WItEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on APRIL 2 SURETY DEVEJ~OPERS SURETY AND STEVEN R. BONILLA (Name) ATTORNEY IN FACT (Title) , 20 02 (Seal) PRINCIPAL '-HERITAGE- $~,~R.~ ............... SPRI/~GS, LLC. pAUL GARRETT (Name) MANAGING MEMBER (Title) (Name) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: R:~nithb~lmrldand landscape labor and mateaials bi:md, doc - 3 - POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA PO BOX ] 9725, IR'vTNE, CA 92623 * (949) 263-3300 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that except as expressly limited, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, do each severally, but not jointly, hereby make, constitute and appoint: ***STEVEN R. BONILLA, S. SMITH-BOWMAN, D. KOHL, JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY*** as the true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalf of said corporations as sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship giving and granting unto said Attomey(s)-in-Fact full power and authority to do and to perform every act necessary, requisite or proper to bc done in connection therewith as eOch of said conpocatiofis could do, but reserving to each of said corporations full power of substitution and revocation, and all of the acts of said Attomey(s)-in-FacL pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the respective Board of Directors of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA. effective as of November 1,2000: KESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Board, thc President and any Vice President of the eorpounion ha, and that each of them hereby is, authorized to execute Powers of Attorney, qualif, fing the attorney(s) named in the Powers of Attorney t~ execute, on behalf of the corporations, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship; and that the Secreta~ or any Assistant Secretary of the corporations be, and each of them hereby is, authorized to attest the execution ofan~; such Power of Attumcy; RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of such officers may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any such power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures shall ha valid and binding upon the corporation when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond, undertaking or conlraet of suretyship to which it is attached. IN V~I'NESS WHEREOF, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA have severally caused these presents to be signed by their respective E.xecutive Vice Pr~ident and attested by their respee6ve Secretary this 8~ day of November, 2000. By: David H. Rhodaa, Executive Vice President Walter A. Crowe[l, Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS. CO~ OF ORA~IGE ) On November 8, 2000, before me, Diane J. Kawata, personally appeared David H. Rhodes and Walter A. Crowell, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfanto~ evidence) to be the persons whose names are subsctibed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. CERTIFICATE The undersigned, as Chief Operating Officer of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, does hereby certify that the foregoing Power of Attorney remains in fi~ll force and has not bee~ ~evoked, and furthermore, that the provisions eftbe resolutions of the respective Boards of Directors of said coq)orations set forth in the Power of Attorney, are in force as of tbs date of this Certificate. This Certificate is executed in the City of Irvine, California, the 9'[q'~ day of. .APRIL __, 2 002 David G. Lane, Chief Operating Officer STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTYOF SAN DIEGO On 4'-0~'02 PERSONALLY APPEARED , before me, STEVEN R. BONILLA ISS. S. SMITH-BOWMAN personally brown to me (orproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(/whose name~) is/arc subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to hie that I~ executed the same in hi$/ho~/tb**ir authorized capacity~), and that by his~teriYaeir signature(f~ on the instrument the person~, or the entity.upon behalf of which the person~) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. This area for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER 'nT~E(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] A'I-fORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: DESCRIPTION OF A1TACHED DOCUMENT TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) O" ENTn'Y(IES) SIGNER(S/ OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ID-1232 (REV. 5/01) ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of personally appeared SS. Name and ~e of ~cer (e.g., 'Jane D~, N ta~ Public") Name(s) d Signe~s) ~personally known to me ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfacto~ evidence Commission# 122~'67 Notary Public-- California Rive~3ide County M_y C~O m_m .~Expi,_r es~J u n_ 1 ,~20~__ to be the persort~ whose name~ is/a~,. subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/st~/tl~ executed the same in h is/l"J~k/t ~ authorized capacity(lc;d,), and that by his/l:~-r~tl:t~ signature(~).on the instrument the person(~ or the entity upon behalf of which the person('~ acted, executed the. instrument. WITNESS my, hand and official seal. - Sigr~re of Nota~ Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document ' and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner--[] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here BOND NUMBER: 826772S PREMIUM: INCL W/PERF BOND CITY OF TEMECULA pARKLAND/LANDSCAPE WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as "City"), _ tlERIT~GE sYCAMORE .. and SPRINGS, LLC. ..(hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an Agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated Parkland Improvements, which said Agreement, dated Auqusl: 1 st .20 o~ . and identified as Project TRACT 26828-1&2 , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the Agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the mount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; DEVELOPERS SURETY AND NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and INDDINITY C0I,~ANY as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum Of ELEVEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FIFTY SEVEN $ 11,657.00 , lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above-bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, en his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. R:~mithb~parkland landscape Warranty Bond 1.doc As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's foes, incurred by City in successfully enfoming such obligation, all to be taxed a'~ costs ' and included in any judgement rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. R:~smithb\parkland landscape Warranty Bond 1.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument ha's been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on APRIL 2 ,20 02 . .- ?, c ': '~ .: "'SIJRET~ DEVELOPERS SURETY AND ~]~v~ ~ GO~N~ " STEVEN R. BONILLA (Name) ATTORNEY IN FACT (Title) (Seal) PRINC~L HERIT2~.E SYCAMOR_E_ By:(_"~F'~ ~ .~ PAUL GARRETT (Name) MANAGING MEMBER (Title) By: (Name) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney RAsmithb~parkland landscape Warranty Bond l.doc POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA PO BOX 19725, IRVINE, CA 92623 · (949) 263-3300 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that except as expressly limited, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, do each severally, but not jointly, hereby make, constitute and appoint: ***STEVEN R. BONILLA, S. SMITH-BOWMAN, D. KOHL, JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY*** as the true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalf of said corporations as sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship giving and granting unto said Attomey(s)4n-Faet full power and authority to do and to perform every act necessary, requisite or proper to be done in eonnec6on therewith ~ each of said corporations could do, but reserving to each of said corporations full power of substitution and revocation, and all of the acts of said Attomey(s)-in-Fact, pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by authority of thc following resolutions adopted by the respective Board of Directors of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, effective as of November I, 2000: RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Board, the president and any Vice President of the corporation be, and that each of them hereby is, authorized to execute Powers of Attorney, qualifying the attorney(s) named in the Powers of Attorney to execute, on behalf of the corporations, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship; and that the Secretary or any Assislant Secretary of the corporations be, ~nd each of them hereby is, authorized to attest the execution of any such Power of Attorney; RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of such officers may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any such Power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures shall be valid and binding upon the corporation when so affixed and in thc future with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of sm'etyship to which it is attacbed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA have severally caused these presents to bo signed by theft reepeodve ~xeeufive Vine lh~sidant and attested by their respective Secretary this 8th day of November, 2000. By: STATE OF CALIFORaNIA ) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On November 8, 2000, before me, Diane .1. Kawata, personally appeared David ti. Rhodes and Walter A. Crowell, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person~ whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by the r s gnatures on the instrument the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed thc instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. CERTIFICATE The undersigned, as Chief Operating Officer of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND ]NDEMNITV COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, does hereby certify that the foregoing Power of Attorney remains in f~ll force and has n(~t been revoked, and furthermore, that the provisions of the resolutions of the respective Boards of Directors of said cohoorations set forth in the Power of Attorney, are in force, as of the date of this Certificate. This Certificate is executed in the City of Irvine, California, the ~]) day of 3~RiL 2 002 By David G. Lane, Chief operating Officer ID-1380 (I 1/00) STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUN~ OF SAN DIEGO On 4-~'-02 PERSONALLY APPEARED , before me, STEVEN R. BONILLA ISS. S. SMITH-BOWMAN personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person~t~ whose name~g~ isA~-re subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to mb that he/she/they executed the same in his/ber/~r authorized capacity, and that by signature~) on the instrument the person~, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(i~ acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. SAN D~EGO COUNT',' This area for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form, CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF A'FI'ACHED DOCUMENT [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] ATTORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: TITLE OF TYPE OF DOCUMENT HUMBER OF PAGES DATE Of DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: ID-1232 (REV. 5/01) SIGNER(S/ OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ~ County of ~]~ [ ~/"~-~ ~ / ~ / ss. On ,'-~'~t.~[/~D~/'~.~ before personally appeared Name{s) of Signer(s) ~,personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence Commission# 1222969 Notary Public-- Califomlo Riverside County M~yy C_o m_m ._F-.xpi_res_.J u~ to be the person(.~ whose name~ is/a'~-. subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/~executed the same in h is/l~J~t h~,,~ authorized capacity(ie~, and that by his/J"~l:/~ir signature(~on the instrument the person(m), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individua{ [] Corporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General. [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here ITEM 6 APPROVAL J'Z,,f/.)l¢~-' CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE .~::~, CITY MANAGER .~_~' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 Award of Construction Contract Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvements Project No. PW02-12 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar. Principal Engineer Brian Guillot, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a construction contract for Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvements, Project No. PW02-12 to McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. of Temecula, California, in the amount of $27,000.00, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $2,700.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: The storm drain system located immediately east of the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) easement at Rancho Vista Road is backed up with silt; and, therefore is net functioning properly. The system consists of an inlet to accept storm flows from the adjacent single- family housing development to the northeast, a catch basin to accept storm flows from Rancho Vista Road, an existing manhole in Rancho Vista Road, approximately 300 linear feet of 33-inch diameter concrete pipe, and an outlet structure which discharges into the Sports Park desiltation basin. In order to improve access to the storm drain system so that city forces may maintain the pipe, the project will add a manhole approximately half way along the existing pipe reach. The project includes cleaning the storm drain system and disposal of accumulated silt deposits. Four (4) bids were received and publicly opened on September 12, 2002. The results of the bids ara as follows: 1. McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. $27,000.00 2. KAS Equipment and Rental. Inc. $30,907.50 3. KEC Engineering $42,950.00 4. R.J. Noble Company $49,050.00 A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the office of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 1 R:'C, GEN DA REPORTS~2002\O92402\PW02-12awd. DOC Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. of Temecula, California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. has extensive experience in general engineering contracting and has successfully completed similar projects for the City in the past. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $23,000.00. FISCAL IMPACT: The Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvement project is funded with Capital Project Reserves for Localized Storm Drain Improvements, Various Locations for Fiscal Year 2002- 2003. The total construction cost is $29,700.00 which includes the contract amount of $27,000.00 plus a 10% contingency amount of $2,700.00. Adequate funds are available for this project in Account No. 210-165-715-5804. ATTACHMENT: 1. Location Map 2. Project Description 3. Contract 2 R:'~AGEN DA REPORTS~OO2~092402\PW02-12awd,DOC CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT ' FOR PROJECT NO. PW02-'I2 RANCHO VISTA ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 24TM day of September, 2002,by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: 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. PW02-12, RANCHO VISTA ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, 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. PW02-12, RANCHO VISTA ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. 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. PW02-12, RANCHO VISTA ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. 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 other,vise 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'~]2-12\Contm ct 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. PW02-12, RANCHO VISTA ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: TWENTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($27,000.00), the total amount of the base bid: CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Twenty (20) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. 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 CITY, 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 CONTRACT CA-2 R:\dp~projects~'02-12~Conffact 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 CITY on forms provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. 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 Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, 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 CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are available from the California Department of Industrial Relation's Internet Web Site at http://www.dir.ca.gov. 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. CONTRACT CA-3 R:~ip~projects'~02-12~Contmct 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16, 17. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the previsions of the Contract. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. 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 CITY, 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 CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CITY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, 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 previsions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, 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 CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and CONTRACT CA-4 R:~d p~projects~ow02-12\Co nffact 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. GOVERNING LAW. The City 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 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. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the Contractodconsultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 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 CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-5 R:\cip\projects~02-12~Contract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. 41934 Main St., #107 Temecula, CA 92590-2701 (909) 699-7957 Wayne White, Vice President DATED: CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ron Roberts, Mayor Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-6 R:~ p~o rojects~:),#02-12\Contract ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: /~/~Nity ManagedCity Council illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 SUBJECT: Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract Margarita Road Widening - (interim Phase II) Project No. PW99-01 D/, PREPARED BY: ,~,,~mer Attar, Principal Engineer ~ Brian Guillot, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Accept the project Margarita Road Widening - (Interim Phase Ii), Project No. PW99-01, as complete; and, File a Notice of Completion, release the performance Bond, and accept a twelve (12) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; and Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On February 26, 2002, the City Council awarded the construction contract to R. J. Noble Company in the amount of $125,906.00 for said project and authorized the City Manager to approve change orders that are within the 10% contingency. This project provided two traffic lanes in each direction on Margarita Road between Pauba Road and Santiago Road. The interim improvements included pavement widening, pavement rehabilitation, asphalt berm, grading, signing, striping, and traffic signal modifications at the intersection of Margarita Road and Santiago Road. The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, and within the allotted time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on or about 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. FISCAL IMPACT: The Margarita Road Widening - (Interim Phase II) project is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Capital Project Reserves. Adequate funds are available in account number 210-165-706-5804 to cover the total cost of the project including authorized contract change orders and quantity adjustments in the amount of $137,345.77. In order to accelerate the project completion date, traffic signal poles were purchased from another supplier at a premium. This resulted in Contract Change Order No. 1, which increased the contract price in the amount of $1,290.00. Final field measured quantities resulted in an increase of $10,149.77 primarily for excavation, road base, and asphalt pavement. 1 R:\CIP~PROJECTS\PW99\99-01 (Phase II)\StaffiPW99-01 NoticeofCompletion.doc ATrACHMENT: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release 2 R:\CIP~°RO J ECTS\PW99~99-01 (Phase II)\StafflPW99-01 NoticeofCompletion.doc RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. Nature of Interest Vendee Under Contract 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to R.J. Noble Company, 15505 E. Lincoln Avenue, Orange, CA 92865 to perform the following work of improvement: Margarita Road Widening - (Interim Phase II) Project No. PW99-01 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on September 24, 2002. That upon said contract the Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Margarita Road between Santiago Road and Pauba Road The location of said properly is: Temecula, California Dated at Temecula, California, this 24"' day of September 2002. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Teme(~ula, California, this 24"' day of September 2002. Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MAINTENANCE BOND BOND NUMBER 83 SB 103769216 BCM PREMIUM INCLUDED IN PERFORMANCE PROJECT NO. PW99-01 BOND MARGARITA ROAD WIDENING (INTERIM PHASE II) KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: R.J. NOBLE COMPANY 15505 E. LINCOLN AVE., ORANGE, CA 92856 a NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S , hereinafter called Principal, and (fill in whether a Corporation, Partnership or individual) TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, 21688 GATEWAY CENTER DR., DIAMOND BAR, CA. 91765 NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of THIRTEEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY- FOUR ............. DOLLARS and 58 CENTS ($13,734.58 - - ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 26th day of FEBRUARY , 2002, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW99- 01, MARGARITA ROAD WIDENING (INTERIM PHASE II). WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said ContracZ has been ccmp!otcd, and was thc fina! cstima',c approvcd on ___ AUGUST 21, ,2002. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. CALIFORNIA STATE OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY OF On ~/~b/~)~ , before me, PERSONALLY APPEARED SS. R. STANDLEY MICHAEL D. STONG personally kaown to me (ct ?roved tz mc zn t!:z kaz~z cf -~) to be the personal)' whose nam0~' is/m.~-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowl- edged to me that he/~k,./:l-,cy executed the same in his/ .'hzr/tY.z!r authorized capacity(ice), and that by his/-l:~.rd tl;~si~atur~n the instrument the perso1~.t4, or the entity upon behalf of which the person~pacted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. This area for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT TIl%E(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] A~rORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATEOFDOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME O~ PERSON(S) OR ENTIW(IES) SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE 1D'081 Rev. S/94 ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY Hartford, Connecticut 06183-9062 POWER OF ATTORNEY AND CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY OF ATTORNEY(S)-IN-FACT KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut, and having their principal offices in the City of Hartford, County of Hartford, 'State of Connecticut, (hereinafter the "Companies") hath made, constituted and appointed, and do by these presents make, constitute and appoint: Michael D. Stung, Shawn Blume, Susan C. Monteon, Rosemary Standley, of Riverside, California, their tree and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, execute and acknowledge, at any place within the Un/ted States, the following instrument(s): by his/her sole signature and act, any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and other writings obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, or conditional undertaking and any and all consents incident thereto and to bind the Companies, thereby as fully and to the same extent as ff the same were signed by the duly authorized officers of the Companies, and all the acts of said Attorney(s)-in-Fact, pursuant to the authority herein given, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This appointment is made under and by authority of the following Standing Resolutions of said Companies, which Resolutions are now in full force and effect: VOTED: That the Chairmen, the President, any Vice Chairman. any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President, eny Second Vice President, the Treasurer, any Assistant Treasurer, the Corporate Secretmy or any Assistant Secretary may appoint Attorneys-in-Fact and Agents to act for end on behalf of the company end may give such appointee such anthority as 1~ or her certificate of authority may prescribe to sign with the Compeny's name end seal with the Company's seal bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, end other writings obligatory in the nature of a bond. recognizance, or conditional undertaking, and any of said officers or the Board of Directors at any time may remove eny such appointee end revoke the power given him or her. VOTED: That the Chairman, the President, eny Vice Chairmen, eny Executive Vice President, eny Senior Vice President or eny Vice President may delegate all or any part of the foregoing authority to one or more officers or employees of this Company, provided that each such delegation is in writing and a copy thereof is filed in the office of the Secretary. VOTED: That any bond, recognizance, contract of indemnity, or writing obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, or conditional undertaking shall be valid end binding upon the Company when (a) signed by the President. any Vice Chairmen. eny Executive Vice President, eny Senior Vice President or any Vice President, any Second Vice President, the Treasurer, any Assistant Treasurer, the Corporate Secretary or any Assistant Secretary and duly attested end sealed with the Compeny's seal by a Secreta.w or Assistant Secretary, or (b) duly executed (under seal, if required) by one or more Attorneys-in-Fact end Agents pursuant to the power prescribed in his or her certificate or their certificates of authority or by one or more Company officers pursuant to a written delegation of authority. This Power of Attorney and Certificate of Authority is signed and sealed by facsimile (mechanical or printed) under and by authority of the following Standing Resolution voted by the Boards of Directors of TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, which Resolutlon is now in full force and effect: VOTED: That the signature of each of the following officers: President, eny Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President, any Assistant Vice President, any Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, and the seal of the Compeny may be affixed by fecsimJ, le to any power of attorney or to any cedificate relating thereto appointing Resident Vice Presidents, Resident Assistant Secretm'ies or Attorneys-in-Fact for purposes only of executing and attesting bonds end undertakings and other writings ~ligato~y in the nature thereof, end any such power of attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company and any such power so executed and certified by such facsimile signature and facsimile seal shall be valid end binding upon the Company in the future with respect to eny bond or undertaking to which it is atlached. ( 114)0 Slandard) State of County of CALIFORNIA ORANGE On 08/28/02 before me, Pamela Kitchens personally appeared Stan Hilton, Secretary of R.J. NOBLE COMI~ANY and Craig Roth, Assistant Secretary of R.J. NOBLE COMPANY personally known to me :OR- [] grovetl to .m.e on the asis of:'.sattsfactory evid'e*nce ~-to be.'the De,son(S) whOse name(s) m/are Su~bscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same 'in his/her/their authorized capacity((es), and that by his/her/their signature(s);- On .the ' instrument the person(s), or .the entity, upon behalf · o~ which the person(s) ' acte.d~ '.-eXecuted the inSlttdm~ntl- . ' (SEALI Witness ·my.hand and Official seal. (SIGNATORE OF'NOTARY) ATTENTION NOTARY: The nformation requested 5elow and in the column to the:right is OPTIONAL, Recording of this document'is not required by'law andis also.optional. It could,.however, prevent fraudulent attachment of this Certificate to any unauthorized document. THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO '~IE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT: RIGHT THUMBPRINT (Opeon~l) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIQNERIS) DINDIVIDUAL{S ~]coRPORATE ~ecretary OFFICER(SI [3GENERAL ~ATI'ORNEY IN FACT OTRUSTEE(SI r~GUARDIANICON SERVATOR [~OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: (Name of PerIon(i) or Entity(iai) RIGHT THUMBPRINT (Optional) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER(S) r~INDIVIDUAL(S) F'iCORPORATE OFFICER(SI ~]PARTNER(S) [~ LIMITED nGENERAL OATfORNEY IN FACT E]~]~USTEE(SI ~]GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OOTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: (Name of Perlon{~) or Entity(iai) CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PW99-01 MARGARITA ROAD WIDENING (INTERIM PHASE II) This is to certify that R.J. NOBLE CO. , (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW99-01, MARGARITA ROAD WIDENING (INTERIM PHASE II), situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: MARGARITA ROAD WIDENING (INTERIM PHASE II) The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute NONE Pursuant to Public Contracts Code §7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by raason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. Dated: AUGUST 21, 2002 STAN HILTON, SECRETARY Print Name and Title ITEM 8 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE_.~ CITY MANAGER ~}/ ' TO: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT FROM: DATE: City ManagedCity Council ~f~/[///William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study, Project No. PW02-07 PREPARED BY:/~Amer Attar, Principal Engineer- CIP ~"~' Laura Bragg, Project Engineer - RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment No. 1 in an amount not to exceed $8,215.00 to the Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. to provide additional design services for the John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project - Hydrology Study, Project No. PW02-07, and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. BACKGROUND: The overall project will ultimately complete the asphalt concrete paving of rural dirt roads including John Warner Road from Santiago Road to Jeramie Drive, Lolita Road, Paulita Road, La Presa Loop and Colver Court. The portion of the project covered under this contract consists of performing a Hydrology and Hydraulics Study and report preparation, calculation of amount of annual sediment transport, and preparation of storm drain plans and profiles. Design services will include the preparation of plans and specifications as needed to accompany the street improvement plans that have already been prepared by a private engineer and are under review. Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. of Hemet, California is currently under contract to perform the above stated work. While performing the preliminary hydrology study the focus was to align and size the storm drain to effectively control the current and projected flow with the least impact to downstream facilities. In order to adequately protect'downstream facilities it is necessary to expand the study area and to extend the storm drain system to ensure sufficient conveyance of the flow. The boundary for the new study area will include John Warner Road to the south and east, Ynez Road to the west and Santiago Road to the north. The expanded scope will include utilities and right-of-way research for the additional study area, hydrology study to include Santiago Creek Watershed, sediment analysis for Santiago Creek, a revised system and alternative analysis that include the Vallejo Channei, topographic survey limits extended westerly to Ynez Road and properties that are affected between Ynez Road and Interstate 15, Base Sheets and Construction Drawings with expanded limits to include the proposed drainage alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road R:~AGENDA R EPORTS~002~092402~PW02-O7John Warner HydrologyAmendment. DOC FISCAL IMPACT: The John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment Distdct improvement Project- Hydrology Study is a Capital improvement Project funded through Capital Project Reserve Funds with the Improvements being constructed through a proposed Assessment District. The original ' contract limit was $60,940.00 which included the contract amount of $55,400.00 plus the 10% contingency amount of $5,540.00. The revised contract amount including Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $8,215.00 is $69,155.00. Adequate funds are available for Amendment No. 1 in Account No. 210-165-727-5802. ATTACHMENTS: Project Location Project Description Professional Services Agreement Amendment 2 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2002~092402~PW02-07John Warner HydrologyArnendment. DOC FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF SO. CALIFORNIA, INC. JOHN WARNER/SANTIAGO ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO. PW02-07 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of September 24, 2002, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth heroin, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with rospect to the following facts and purposes: A. On June 11, 2002 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agroement for the John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District Improvement Project, Project No. PW02-07 Hydrology Study'' ("Agroement'') in the amount of $55,400.00. B. The parties now desire to increase the payment for services in the amount of $8,215.00 and amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 5 Payment of the Agroement is heroby amended to read as follows: a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated heroin by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment aro null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Three Thousand Six Hundred Fifteen Dollars and No Cents ($63,615.00) for the total term of the Agroement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 3. The ten percent (10%) contingency amount shall not exceed $5,540.00. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. I r:\ClP\PROJECTS\PW02-07~Engineering Resources Amend 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Engineering Resoumes of So. California, Inc. 3550 E. Florida Ave., Suite B Hemet, CA 92544 (909) 765-6622 Matt Brudin, P.E., President Michael J. Stearns, Vice President/Secretary (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:\ClP\PROJECTS\PW02-07~Engineering Resources Amend 1 R INGINEERING ESOURCES 96018002 Ai~gust 29, 2002 RECEIVED SEP 0 5 2002 CiTY OF TEMEOULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant Engineer ......... City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92590 CONTRACT AbIENDbIENT FOR JOHN WARNER ROAD / SANTIAGO ROAD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT -- HYDROLOGY .STUDY Dear Laura: As the preliminary hydrology study for above project continues, the efforts have been focused on development of a storm drain alignment that would mitigate the existing drainage problem for the community with a minimum impact on the existing down stream facilities and the property owners. With that objective in mind, along with the follow-up of what was learned from our field visit with City staff, the study area is to be expanded to address the impacted down stream facilities to ensure adequate conveyance of the tributary flows without any adverse impact on the property owners. Therefore, we have revised the original scope of work dated May 15, 2002, to address the above concems as following: UTILITIES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY RESEARCH This task will be extended to include the area of influence encompassed by Santiago Avenue to the north, Ynez Road to the west and John Warner Road to the south and east. Revised fee .................................................. $1,305 PROJECT BASE b~J~P The hydrology study base map will be based on Riverside Coimty Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) topography maps. The Drainage study area will be bounded on the east by Margarita Road, to the west by Ynez Road, to the north by Pauba Road and by John Warner Road to the south. However, a more detailed base map will be provided to delineate the proposed storm drain alignment and will include all items.specified in the original contract. Revised fee .................................................. $1,200 3550 E FtOmDA AVE. SUn 8 Hr~ET, f.A 92544 (909) 765-6622 (909) 765-6621 r~ 100.000P Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant E~gineer City of Temecula August 29, 2002 ]?age 2 HYDROLOGY STUDY The hydrology study will be extended to include Santiago Creek Watershed in accordance with the criteria and guidelines specified in the original contract. Revised fee ..................................................$ 4,050 SEDIMENT ANALYSIS This task will be expanded to include the sediment analysis for Santiago Creek. Revised fee .................................................. $ 2,710 ~YSTEM ALTERNATIVES The work under this item will be as specified in the original contract. However, the preferred alternative was selected by City Staff in our previous submittal. This alternative will be revised to reflect the Vallejo channel and the relief drain in the proposed system. R~isedfee .................................................. $ 3,930 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS --This work will be as outlined in the original contract. However, the analysis will be revised to include culverts within original study area, channel along Vallejo Avenue and the proposed storm drain system. The hydraulic analysis will be performed to determine the capacity of the existing system and how it would be impacted by the proposed system. Upon the completion of this task a meeting will be scheduled with the City Staff to present the viable alternative. Revised fee .................................................. $ 5,700 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FIELD SURVEY-- This task is eliminated to be included as part of the topographic survey as specified in the original contract. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY -- This task will be revised to provide specifics about storm drain alignment and desilting basin at John Warner Road, and cross sections for the existing flood control channel along Vallejo Avenue and Ynez Road. Cross sections are crucial for hydraulic modeling to determine the capacity of the existing drainage system and to develop an ultimate storm drain alignment for the proposed proj eot The limits of the topography will be extended westerly to include IO0.O00P Ms. Laura Bragg, Assistant Engineer City of Temecula August 29, 2002 Page 3 the Ynez Road and the properties impacted between Ynez Road and Interstate Freeway 15. Revised fee ................................................. $10,335 BASE SHEETS Base sheets willbe prepared in accordance to the guidelines in the original contract. However, it will be extended to include the proposed alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road within the limits specified above. Revised fee .................................................. $ 3,445 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS This task will remain as outlined in the original contract. However, it will be extended to include the proposed alignment between John Warner Road and Ynez Road within the limits specified above. R~ised fe~ ................................................. $26,740 SPECIFICATIONS This task will remain as outlined in the original contract. Revised fee .................... 2. ............................ $ 2,760 COST E STI/vlATES TNs task will remain as outlined in the original contract. Revised fee .................................................. $1,440 Enclosed for your edification is our Fee Estimate table which has been revised to reflect these expanded items of work. If you have any questions regarding this amendment please give me a call. Respectfully yours, Matt Brudin, P.E. President MB/ir ITEM 9 APPROVAL .,¢~,~-- CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE,...6~¢.,_ CITY MANAGER _~ TO: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 Award of Construction Contract for Intersection Traffic Monitoring System and Traffic Signal Interconnect - Project No. PW99-05 PREPARED BY: ~Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - Traffic RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a construction contract to DBX, Inc. for the Intersection Traffic Monitoring System and Traffic Signal Interconnect - Project No. PW99-05 in the amount of $945,103.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $47,255.15 which is equal to 5% of the contract amount. Award a construction contract to MCSi, Media Consultants/System Integrators for modification and installation of a Traffic Operation Center in an amount not to exceed $150,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Approve a transfer in the amount of $300,000.00 from the French Valley Parkway Interim Southbound Off-Ramp to Jefferson Avenue Phase I project to the Intersection Traffic Monitoring System, Project No. PW99-05. BACKGROUND: At the meeting of April 23, 2002, the City Council approved the Plans and Specifications and authorized Staffto solicit construction bids for the Intersection Traffic Monitoring System and Traffic Signal Interconnect project. On July 15, 2002 the City received authorization to advertise and award a construction contract from Caltrans Headquarters, which administers the funding for this project. The combined project includes the installation of a fiber optic backbone system and Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) cameras at~ight (8) locations throughout the City, and the installation of a traffic signal interconnect facility on Winchester Road between Margarita Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. The City received a grant of approximately $197,000.00 from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to implement the Intersection Traffic Monitoring System funded by the Transportation Equity Act for 21st Century (TEA-21). The City appropriated a mandatory matching fund to supplement the Intersection Traffic Monitoring project. Additionally, a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant of approximately $323,000.00 was received through the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the implementation of a traffic signal interconnect facility on Winchester Road between Margarita Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Following several 1 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~2002\092402\PW99~)5awd. DOC meetings with Caltrans' Office of Local Programs staff, it was decided to combine the two (2) projects into one project, which included the CCTV project and the intemonnect project. Six (6) bids were received and publicly opened on September 12, 2002. The results of the bids including the Additive Alternate No. 2 are as follows: 1. DBX, Inc. $ 945,103.00 2. Moore Electrical Contracting $1,035,377.00 3. Steiny & Company, Inc. $1,040,809.00 4. HMS Construction $1,149,993.00 5. V.T. Electric, Inc. $1,202,164.00 6. MBI $1,203,140.00 A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the office of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found DBX, Inc. of Temecula, California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. DBX, Inc. has extensive experience in the construction of traffic signals and communication systems and has successfully completed similar projects for the City in the past. Time of completion for this project is 90 working days. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $1,150,000.00, which included two (2) additional CCTV cameras at the intersections of Winchester Road at Margarita Road, and Rancho California Road at Lyndie Lane. However, due to funding constraints, only the intersection of Winchester Road and Margarita Road (Alternate No. 2) will be included in the contract with DBX, Inc. Staff is recommending approval of the DBX, Inc. contract amount of $945,103.00 plus the 5% contingency amount of $47,255.15, for a total contract cost of $992,358.15. The contract with DBX, Inc. does not include the modification and installation of equipment in the Traffic Operation Center (TOC) located in the Public Works Department. The TOC modification will be completed concurrently as a separate project through MCSi Media Consultant/System Integrators in an amount not to exceed $150,000.00. MCSi Media Consultant/System Integrators is a sole source pre-qualified State of California contractor. FISCAL IMPACT: The Intersection Traffic Monitoring System Project is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Development Impact Fees - Traffic Signal, TEA-21 and CMAQ. The transfer in the amount of $300,000.00 from the French Valley Parkway Interim Southbound Off- Ramp to Jefferson Avenue Phase I project, Account No. 210-165-719-5804 is necessary to ensure that adequate funds are available in Account No. 210-165-607-5804 to cover the construction contract Base Bid and Alternate Bid No. 2 in the amount of $945,103.00 plus the 5% contingency amount of $47,255.15 and $150,000.00 for the TOC for a total project amount of $1,142,358.15. A'I-FACHMENT: 2. 3. 4. Location Map Project Description DBX, Inc., Contract MCSi, Media Consultants/Systems Integrators 2 R:~AGENDA REPOR'TS~2002\092402~PW99-05awd. DOC Y ~-~ ,~ CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW99-05 INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT CCTV/COMMUNICATION SYSTEM FEDERAL AID PROJECT No, ITS 99-5459(010) THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 24th day of September, 2002, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and DBX, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, ~rthe consideration hereinaflernamed, mutuallyagree as ~llows: ,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. PW99-05, INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM, 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. PW99-05, INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM. 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. PW99-05, INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. CONTRACT CA-1 R:\CIP~P RO J ECT SIPW99199-05~Contract.dccContract 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. 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. PW99-05, INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM 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 CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: NINE HUNDRED FORTY FIVE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THREE DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($945,103.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Ninety (90) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCEHDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. CONTRACT CA-2 R:ICIP~PROJ E CTS~N99\99-05~ContmcLdoc Contr sct 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 CITY, 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 unenc.umbered, 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 CITY on forms provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an .acceptance of any part of the work. 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 Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY 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- $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,000- $500,000 180 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 CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be CONTRACT CA-3 R:\CIPP ROJ E CTS~W99~99-05~Contract.doc Contract 10. 11. 12. 13. deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, 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 CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. 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 CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or podion 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. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. 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 CITY, 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 CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CiTY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONTRACT CA-4 R:\CIP~P RO J ECT S~PV~39199-051Con[r ~ct. dccContract 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, 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 CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, 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 CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY 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. GOVERNING LAW. The City 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 City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the padies 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. PROHIBITED INTEREST. NO member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractodconsultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business CONTRACT CA-5 R:ICIPIPROJ E CTS~PW99~99-05~Cont~L doc Con tr act 22. 23. of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 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 CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92569-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 CONTRACT CA~ R:\CI P,P RO J ECTS~PW99\99-05~Contract.docContract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: · CONTRACTOR DBX, INC. 42066 Avenida Alvarado, #C Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 296-9909 Jim Perry, President DATED: CITY OFTEMECULA APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ron Roberts, Mayor Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-7 R:\ClPIP ROJ ECT SIPW99199-05~Contract.dcc Contract EXHIBIT 'B" - FEDERAL PROVISIONS B-1 R:ICIP~PRO JECTSIPWgg~99-0,~Con~'act.doc.jcd CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES INTERSECTION TRAFFIC MONITORING SYSTEM & TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT PROJECT NO. PW99-05 MODIFICATION & INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC OPERATION CENTER THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of September 24, 2002, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and MCSi Media Consultants/System Integrators, ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on September 24, 2002, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2003, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. Consultant shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or sub-contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic~gmployed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 5. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($150,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 1 r:\cip~projec~pw99-O5\MCSI Contract b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any sen/ices rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional sen/ices are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional sen/ices in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said sen/ices. The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten pement (10%) of the amount of the Agreement or $25,000.00, but in no event shall the total sum of the agreement (basic agreement amount and contingency amount) exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall b.e approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual sen/ices performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for sen/ices provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days pdor written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 7. DEFAULT OFCONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder adses out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. rAcip~rojects~pw99-05\MCSI Contract b. If the City Manager.or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with wdtten notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails t.o cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be cleady identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained fora period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable wdtten request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and pdnting computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 9. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability adsing out of the negligence of the City. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. r;~ci p~ r ojects~pw99-05'dvl CSt Contract a. . Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covedng Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: One Million Dollars $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by 4 r:\cip~projects~w99-O5\MCSI Con~*act the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained bythe City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior wdtten notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coveraqe. Consultant shall fumish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall' have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without wdtten authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, emPloyees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, headng or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's dght to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, 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. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager MCSi Media Consultants/Systems Integrators 10855 Business Center Drive Cypress, California 90630 Attention: Steven R. Gameros r:~cip~projects~w99-05\MCSI Contract 15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise 'agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 16. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govem the dghts, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its fights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub-contractors for this project, dudng his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub-contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or wdtten, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entedng into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. ? r:\c[p~proje cts~w99-O 5'W1CSI Contract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT MCSi Media Consultants/System Integrators 10855 Business Center Dr. Cypress, CA 90630 (714) 952-8377 Steven R. Gameros, Business Developing Manager By: Name: Title: (Signatures of two corporate officers 'required for Corporations) r:~cip',p r oje cts~pw99-O5\M C S I Contract EXHIBIT A TASK8 TO BE PERFORMED AND PAYMENT RATE8 AND 80HEDULE 9 r:~cip~o roi ects',,pw99-O 5",MCSi Contract 09/19/02 12:40 FAX 13107878661 MCSI ~001/001 Sep~mberl9, 2002 Mr. Ali S. Moghadam, P.E. City of Temecula Public Works Department Temecula, California 92589-9033 Subject: New Traffic Management Center (TMC) Dear Mr. Moghadam, Based on our recent discussions, we have prepared this document to help you implement your new TMC Project. This document is summary of the project, the scope of work with design/build services and project cost for the project. Project Description The scope of work and services for the project is to provide plans and perform ail work necessary to design, install, construct and integrate the City's field CCTV systems and equipment with the City's New TMC equipment complete and fully operational. ScoPe of Work The City has designated an area in City Hall as the Traffic Operations Center (TOC). The scope of work will consist of providing plans, constructing and installing TOC modular furniture, fiat panel display monitors, High-Resolution projection unit, control system, and performing the inter connections between the TOC and the existing rack in the Information Systems Equipment Room. Project Cost The scope of work described above will be performed at a Not-To-Exceed cost of ~150T000.00. Mr. Moghadam Based on all our discussions with, the above approach will meet your needs today and address all future requiremenis too. MCSi 10855 Business Center Drive, Suite A · CA 90630 714/763-2000 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:25 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Stone presiding. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Roberts, Pratt, Stone ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Naggar Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 27, 2002. Tract Map No. 23209 - Service Level B, Service Level C, and Service Level D Rates and Charqes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO SERVICE LEVEL B, SERVICE LEVEL C, AND SERVICE LEVEL D RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23209 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH Minutes.csd\091702 1 3 Acceptance of Landscape Bonds and Agreements for Tract Map No. 29639 - Harveston, LLC RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Harveston, LLC, to improve the perimeter slopes and parkways along Date and Margarita Roads within Tract Map No. 29639; 3.2 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Harveston, LLC, to improve the Landscaped medians on Margarita, Date, and Lakeview Roads within Tract Map No. 29639; 3.3 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Harveston, LLC, to improve the perimeter slopes along the interior Loop Road within Tract Map No. 29639. 4 Award of Construction Contract - Proiect No. PW02-01CSD - Children's Museum Buildin,q Shell Improvements RECOMMENDATION: 4,1 Award a construction contract to R.E. Fleming Construction, Inc. of Hesperia, California, for the Children's Museum Building Shell Improvements - Project No. PW02-01CSD - in the amount of $347,881.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract; 4.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the Contingency amount of $52,182.15 which is equal to 15% of the contract amount. (President Stone abstained with regard to this item.) 5 Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2002. MOTION: Director Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I - 5. The motion was seconded by Director Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of President Stone who abstained with regard to Item No. 4 and Director Naggar who was absent. Minutes.csd\091702 2 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No comment. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT General Manager Nelson extended his appreciation to the Community Services Department staff with regard to their efforts associated with the September 11, 2002, ceremony as well as the Sister City week-long events. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS President Stone echoed General Manager Nelson's comments and commended the Community Services Department staff and other City staff on a job well done and commended Mayor Roberts on the wonderful speech he had given at the ceremony. Knowing that the September 11, 2002, ceremony/week-long visit had been videotaped, Director Roberts requested that a copy be forwarded to the Sister City and that it also be broadcast for public viewing. ADJOURNMENT At 7:27 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\091702 3 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~CE~I CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: Herman Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: September 24, 2002 SUBJECT: Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract Chaparral High School Swimming Pool Project No. PW00-08CSD [. PREPARED BY~'William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer /r ~ Brian Guillot, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Accept the project chaparral High School Swimming Pool, Project No. PW00-08CSD, as complete; and, File a Notice of Completion, release the performance Bond, and accept a twelve (12) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; and, Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On July 10, 2001, the Board of Directors awarded the construction contract for said project to California Commercial Pools, Inc. in the amount of $2,370,147.71, and authorized the General Manager to approve change orders within the 10% contingency. The project consisted of the construction of a 25 meter competitive swimming pool, a separate three lane pool with shallow end for lessons and a deep end with a diving board, a water play area, spectator seating, shower and locker room accommodations, an equipment room for the pool filters and heaters, and staff offices. The City and Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) have previously entered into a joint use agreement for the pool facility. The agreement required the City to pay the costs for design and construction, which included construction administration, geotechnical and materials testing, and other related items. The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, and within the allotted time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on or about 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. FISCAL IMPACT: The Chaparral High School Swimming Pool is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Capital Project Reserves, Quimby Fees and Reimbursement from TVUSD. Total contract change orders amounted to $178,269.56, of which $92,250.00 was for Additive Bid No. 3, the Installation of the Metal Halide Competition Pool Area Lighting. Itwas determined that it would be costly and excessively invasive to install the competition lighting system after construction due to the type and size of the pole foundations. Other significant contract change order costs included 1 R:\C ] P~J~ Re J ECTS\~wOO\O0-08 Chap HS pC~I\S/aff~PWOO-O8CSDN off ceof Cot ~Oletio~ i doc relocating utilities, changes to the roof design, and correcting omissions on the plans. Quantity adjustments amounted to an increase in cost of $2,100.00. Adequate funds are available in account number 210-190-170-5804 to cover the total cost of the project including authorized contract change orders and quantity adjustments in the amount of $2,550,526.09. The joint use agreement with the TVUSD provides for TVUSD to reimburse the City 50% of the total cost of the School Districts portion of the project with payments made over a five-year period. Annuat operations and maintenance costs for the facility are estimated at $150,000, excluding staffing. The City will reimburse TVUSD for one-third of the actual maintenance costs each year. Funds for maintenance reimbursement will be provided from the Temecula Community Facilities District (TCSD) annual operating budget A'I-I'ACHMENT: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release 2 R:~AGENDA REP O RTS~2002\092402\PW 00~ 8CS D Not[ceofComplet[on.doc RECORDtNG REC~UESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. BOX 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Ternecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. Nature of Interest Vendee Under Contract. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to California Commercial Pools, Inc., 2255 E. Auto Center Drive, Glendora, CA 91741 to perform the following work of improvement: Chaparral High School Swimming Pool Project No. PW00-08CSD 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula, and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on September 24, 2002. That upon said contract the XL Specialty Insurance Company was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: 27215 Nicolas Road 6. The location of said property is: Temecula, California Dated at Temecula, California, this 24th day of September 2002. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. th Dated at Temecula, California, this 24 day of September 2002. Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk i CITYOF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT i CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PWOO'OSCSD I I I I CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL SWIMMING POOL This is to certify that ~a~t~l~33~l~-~, '~~'er~inafter the "CONTRACTOR")declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW00- 08CSD, CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL SWIMMING POOL, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: I I CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL SWIMMING POOL The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third,party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute II Ii Pursuant to Public Contracts Code {}7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. Dated: CONTRAI By: ,~/~ ~gnat~ Print N~ ~nd Title RELEASE R-1 R~C~PeRO~ECTS'~W4X)~p~W~O'0eCSO,d~c BOND NO. XLSF-O~O?2 PRE[VIii. IN: INCLUDED IN THE PERFORf~C[ BONO CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBUC WORKS DEPAR'rMENT MAINTENANCE BOND PROJECT NO. CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL SWIMMING POOL KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: CALIFORNIA CDiYllERCIAL POOLS, INC., 2255 E. AUTO C/NTRE DRIVE, GLENOORA, CA 91740 NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S a CA[.IFORNIA CORPORATION , hereinafter called Principal, (t#l ~ whe~er a ~a~,-,. Paflr. e~lY~p and XL SPECIALTY' ZN5URANCE COflPANY, 1~50 EAST A~ERICAN LANE, 20TH FLOOR, 5ONALII~URG, 'IL 60173 NAME AND ADDRF-.88 OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of FOUR HUNDRED 5EVENTY FOUR llJOUSAND l~ENTY NINE ........................................ :DOLLARS and 54/1OO'S ....................... C~NT~ ($ ~?~.o~9.s~ ........ ~) In lawM money of the United States, said aum being not less than ten (10%} of the Contract value payable by the sa~l City of Tamecul~ under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jolnUy and severally, flnmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered Into a certain Contraot with the OWNER, datedthe' lOTH ._dayof :)'liLY ,~00.~1 a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the oonstruotion of PROJECT NO. PWOO- O8C$D, CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL SWIMMING POOL WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of on__e (1) year alter approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, aOainst all defects in workmanship end materials which may become apparent dudng said period; WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and the final estimate was approved on NOW, 'tHEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the tinai estimate on ssld job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of saki work, and the carmTing out of the terms of said Contra~t, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished th(~reunder, then this obligation shall remain in tull force and virtue, othen~se this Instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby sn(I in aUdition to the fa~a amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the City of Temecula In successtully enfomlng this obligaUon, all to be taxed as co6~s and included in any iudgment rendered. The Surety hereby ~pulates end agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the ten-ns of the Contract, or to the work to be pedormed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same. shall in any way affecl its obligations on this bond, and It does hereby waive notice of any suoh ohange, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the contract, or to the work, or to the Spe~lo~tiona. Signed and sealed this. 2?TH day of 3ULY ., 20 ..m .. (Seal) iL~URANCE 3LILIA B. LEONARD ~ame) ATTORNEY IN FACT (Tree) APPROVED AG TO FORM: Peter M. Thomen, C~y Attorney COFIPANY (Ii. ama PRESIDENT By:. RCTAL POOLS, INC. ECRETARY (Name) ~Tille) IState of CALIFORNIA / I County of RIVERSIDE 'On JUL 2 ? ZOO1 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT before me, S.L. KYSETH, NOTARY PUBLIC , Name and Title of Officer(e.g. 'Jane Doe, Nota~J Public) )ersonally appeared JULIA B. LEONARD, ATTORNEY IN FACT Name(s) of Slgr~er(s) ~;~]personally known to me - OR - r"~proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the pemon(s) whose name(s) is/are subec~ibed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authol~zed capac'~',q=-~), and that by his/hers/theb 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. - "~ignat~re of N~t~ Public OPTIONAL Though the information below ts not required by law. it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reaffachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title of Type of Document:. Document Date: Number of Pag Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: JULIA B. LEONARD i--{Individual [-]Corporate Officer Title(s): [-~Pa rtne r--[-ILimited [-~General ~;~]Attorney-in-Fact [-ITrustor/Trustee r--IGuardian or Conservator [-IOther:. Signer's Name: ~"Jlndividual [-ICorporate Officer Title(s): i--IPa rtner--I-'lLimited [-"]General r-~Attomey-in-Fact [-ITrustor/Trustee I-'lGuardian or Conservator I-~Other.. Signer is Representing: Signer is Representing: C UFoRNiA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of CAI,~ORH~ County of 1DS ANc,~3 On AUGUST l, 2001 before me, KARl. AR. sTONE / NOTARYPD~LIC E. LEE ~ACKSON ' ~ personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactor~ evidence to be the person(~ whose name(S) isla~ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), 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, execut~/~ment. WITNESS n3¥~nd e~d'b'~iai seal. / - OPTIONAL Though the informe#on below is not required bylaw, it may prove valuable to petsocs relyfng on the document and could prew~nt fraudulent removal and teattachment of ~is fonw to another document. personally appeared Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: M_A]~r~N~CE BOND - CHAP~ FJGH S(3-~ ~OOL Document Date: 3U~¥ 27,200! Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: NON~ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: E. L]E~ JACKSON Signer's Name: [] individual ~ Corporate Officer Title(s): p~.~I'~EHT & SECRETARY [] p.a~tne~r~3Limited -. [] General [] Attomey-ln-Fact FI Individual I-I Corporate Officer Title(s): [] Partner --[3 Limited [] General [] Attorney-in-Fact [] Trustee E] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing; E] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: ~PWOO-O~CSD PECI ALTY - I IIil[[lll[llllll ll l]llll l ill ll[ KNOW ALL MEN BY THr~E PRESENTS: .That the XL SPECIALTY INSURe. CE C.OMP .A~. Y,$~c[~P~,ra~a~ra~Cd and existing by vi~ue of th, lava of the State of Illinois CCon~tsny' or 'Co~orailon'), does hereby nominate, conshtute ann appoint ill tree and lawful Attorney(s)-in-fnct to make, execute, attest, seal, and deliver for and on its bshalf, as surety, and as its act and deed, where t~qultnd, any and all bonds, undenaklngs, recognizances and valtten obligations in the nature thereof, the penal sum Of no one of which is in any event to exceed $5,000,000.00 as required by Surety Obilgens. Such bonds and Undertuklngs, when duly executed by the aforesaid AUomey(s~-in-fact shall be binding upon the said Company as fully and to the same extant as if such bonds and undetlshings were signed by the President and Secretary of thc Company and sealed with its co~oratu ~eal This power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by the suth?rity of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of Company on the 5th day of December, 1988: 'RESOLVED, That the president, or any Vice President of the Compnny or any person deslgnatnd by any one of them is hereby authorized to ex~cul~ Powers of Attorney qualifying the attorney named in the given power of Attorney to execute in behalf of the Company, bonds, ur~ertakings and all contracts of suretyship, and that any Secretary or any Asslstsnt Secretary of the Company be, and that each or any of them hereby is authorized to attest the execullon of any such power of Attorney, and tu attach thereto the Seal of the Company. FURTHER RESOLVED, That the signature of such officers and the Sent of the Company may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or certificate relating thereto by facsimile, ami any such Power of Attorney or cetlilicata bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimile seal shah be thereal~r valid and binding upon the Company with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it is at~achnd.' Bonds executed under this power of Attorney may be eyxctued under facsimile signature and seal pursuant to the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors oftbe Company on Angusl 7, 1997. 'RESOLVED, That the signature of Stanley A. Galanskl, as president of this Co~oratlon, and the seal of this Co~oration may he affixed or printed on any and nil bonds, undettakings, recognizances, or other written obligations thereof, on any revocation of any Power of Attorney, or on any ~elating thereto, by facsimile, and any Power of AIlomcy, any revocation of any Power of Attorney, bonds, undertakings, recognizances, certificate or other written obligation, beating such facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and bind ng upon the Cosporat on.' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its cmporate seal to be hereunto affixed, and these presents to be signed by -ils duly authorized officers this 3rd day of January, 2000. XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY BY: STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK ss. STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK ss. 1, Ben M. Llaneta, Secretary of thc XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY n co~oration of the State of Illinois, do hereby certify that the above and · Company, arid that ! have compared same with the original and that it is a correct foregoing is a full, true and correct cop)' of power of Attorney issued by said transcript therefrom and of the whole of the original and that the said Power of At.omcy is still in full force and effect and has not been revoked. my hand and affixed the seal of said Company, at thc City of Schsumborg, this 27th TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL ClTY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Servic~ September 24, 2002 Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gall L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary The Master Plan for the Temecula Public Library was adopted at the September 26, 2000 City Council Meeting. Staff has negotiated a contract with LPA for the final construction documents and specifications for the Temecula Public Library. Staff is resolving the final issue with the construction documents and they will be submitted for final plan check. Staff released an RFQ for grant writing services to apply for the California State Library's Bond Act 2000. Staff and the consultant worked tirelessly to complete the grant application, which was delivered in person by Phyllis Ruse and Aaron Adams to Sacramento on June 13, 2002. The Board of Directors awarded a construction contract to R.E. Flemming, Inc. at their September 17, 2002 Board meeting. This contract will construct the white box tenant improvements for the Children's Museum. These improvements will include replacement of the roof, replacement of the wood siding on the building, reconstruction of the porch area and also reconstruction of the restroom facilities, office space and the driveway entry. The exhibitry for the interior of the building is under construction and progressing well in San Diego at the warehouse of Sparks Exhibits and Environment. Exhibits will begin to be installed in late November 2002. RHA Landscape Architects is preparing the construction documents for the improvements to Vail Ranch Park Site "C" adjacent to Pauba Elementary School. This project is identified in this year's CIP. The new amenities will include a tot lot, picnic shelter, tables, benches and walkways. The Community Services Commission reviewed and approved the conceptual master plan at their February 11, 2002 Commission meeting. This project is currently in plan check. The Development Services Division continues to participate in the development review for projects within the City including Wolf Creek, Roripaugh, Villages of Old Town and Harveston, as well as overseeing the development of parks and recreation facilities, and the contract for refuse and recycling, cable television services and assessment administration. The Maintenance Division completed sports field renovations at the Rancho California Sports Park for the upcoming soccer season. The Maintenance Division also is coordinating the construction of the site for the installation of the Voorburg monument to be dedicated at the September 11,2002 R:~ZIGLERGL,XDEPTRPT~0P02.doc September 19, 2002 remembrance ceremony. Staff continues to oversee the maintenance of all parks and recreation facilities, as well as all other City owned public buildings and facilities. In addition, the Maintenance Division assists in all aspects of Citywide special events. The Recreation Division just completed the coordination and implementation of the September 11 Remembrance Ceremony. This included coordination of visiting dignitary's itineraries, coordination of the September 11 event and also City special ceremonies for the week. We estimate that 500 people attended the program and witnessed the dedication of the Voorburg monument "Singing in the Rain". On September 17, the Community Services Department hosted a training exchange with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Community Services Department. 20 members of their staff toured Temecula facilities and exchanged information related to parks and recreation services. The Recreation Division is currently planning for the upcoming holiday festivities. R:LZIGLERGLXDEPTRPT~0902.doc September 19. 2002 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SEPTEMBER '17, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:28 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Pratt, Roberts, Stone, and Comerchero ABSENT: I AGENCY MEMBER: Naggar Aisc present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 27, 2002. 2 Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2002; 2.2 Increase the Debt Service bond proceeds revenue estimate by $23,586,600; 2.3 Increase the Debt Service Fund appropriation for refunding bonds by $12,044,100; 2.4 Increase the Debt Service Fund appropriation for cost of issuance by $997,300. MOTION: Agency Member Roberts moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 2. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Naggar who was absent and Agency Member Stone who abstained with regard to Item No. 2. R:\Minutes.rda\091702 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:25 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, September 24, 2002, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:~Minutes.rda\091702 2 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIR ECTO R~_.~ CITY MANAGER ~J' TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members John Meyer, Redevelopment Director.~-~/ September 24, 2002 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report as of September 24, 2002 for the Redevelopment Department. First Time Homebuyers Program Funding in the amount of $200,000 is available for FY 01-02. Residential Improvement Programs The program budget for FY 01/02 was $250,000 and $237,192 was funded on 57 units. The program budget for FY 02/03 is $250,000, with $42,400 funded on 12 units. Affordable Housing The Planning Commission approved the tentative map on August 21. Construction is tentatively scheduled for the end of September 2002. Old Town Community Theater The Architect has submitted the construction drawings to the City for plan check. The Mercantile Building Retrofit Council approved the construction contract for the retrofit on August 13, 2002. The retrofit has begun with an estimated construction period of 60-90 days. R:\SYERSK~MONTHLLY\reportsept2002.doc I Facade Improvement/Non-Conforming Si.qn Program The following facade improvement/sign projects are in process or have completed: · Dentures4 U Sign Program · Premier Properties Sign Program · Bev-Ray Camera Repair & Sales Sign Program · Tricia's Wishes Sign Program Old Town Promotions/Marketing recently been Summer Nights · The next "First Friday Summer Nights" is scheduled for October 4th celebrating Americana featuring bluegrass bands, country western bands and cowboy poets. The third "First Friday Summer Nights" themed "Jugglers, Clowns, Mimes and Musicians was held on September 6th in Old Town. The evening featured the country western Older Than Dirt Band, a country music band comprised mostly of war veterans; Pete's Music Band, which is comprised of local musicians and employees of Pete's Music in Old Town Temecula performing a variety of oldies, beach music and rock and roll and the Musicians Workshop Jazz Band. The jugglers and mimes performed throughout Old Town Temecula streets. The September 6th "First Friday Summer Nights" also included Dynamite Dave, party jumps, pony rides and carriage rides. Howl-O-Ween in Old Town The Agency will be sponsoring Howl-O-Ween in Old Town Temecula on October 27 and 25, 2002 from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The event will consist of a costume walk and contest each day at 3 p.m. on both Saturday and Sunday. Winners will be announced at the Shire at 3:30 p.m. each day with categories consisting of best family or group, best individual, and best pet and owner. The event will also be featuring Dynamite Dave and the Juggling Zombies, as well as friendly trick or treating from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. and pumpkin decorating from 11:00 a,m. to 1 p.m. both days. Erie Stanley Gardiner Weekend R:\SYERS K~vlONTH LLY~reportsept2002.doc The Agency, in conjunction with the Temecula Museum and Temecula Valley Players will be presenting Erie Stanley Garnder Murder Mystery Weekend on November 2 and 3, 2002 in Old Town Temecula. The weekend will consist of a Murder Mystery Contest where a cast of characters will be strolling through Old Town leaving various clues. In addition, there will be a mystery writing competition for youth and adults, as well as writing seminars and speakers. 2 OLD TOWN TEMECULA September 6 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. 3 LIVE BANDS PM Band c~-~ Musicians Workshop r~-~ Older than Dirt Band MarkWenzel the Mime ~-4~ Jugglers -The Juggling Duo Solo Musicians Strolling the Streets Kids Crafts atWild Cactus 6 p.m .... Froggy 92.9 Party Jump Pony Rides at 4th and Front Street Carriage Rides /-~, Dynamite Dave for more information ~~ THE P~$S-E~N~I'ERPRISE /~aa$~ ¢~n%~r (909) 694-6412 visit our website at www. temeculacali£ornia.com Americana Weekend Friday, October 4th 6-9 p.m. Silverado Bluegrass Band in Concert OldTown Temecula Gunfighters Dave Stamey In Goncert at oldTemecula Jail Courtyard Saturday, October 5th 6-9 p.m.10 a.m.-4 p.m. OldTown Temecula Gunfighters QUILT SHOW Hundreds of quilts on display Murder Mystery Weekend Saturday & Sunday November 2, and 3, 2002 presented by the City of Temecula, Temecula Museum and Temecula Valley Players MURDER MYSTERY CONTEST Watch for clues throughout 01d Town Temecula all Weekend as our Cast of Characters stroll through town. MYSTERY WRITING COMPETITION For Youth and Adults WRITING SEMINARS AND SPEAKERS All Free for infon~tio~ =als (909) 694-6412 or visit the website at www.temeculacalifornia.com Farmers' tradit Market day in the village square is an ancient tradition. In olden times, girls got fresh braids and boys got a good scrub behind the ears before the family set off for town. At the market, the things people needed in their daily lives-grain, turnips, honey, candles and a squeal- ing piglet--were bought and sol& Today the tradition is alive and well in California in the form of farmers' markets. There are 350 to 400 certified farmers' markets be- ing held throughout the state, with markets in Santa Monica, San Francisco and Sacramento being among the oldest and biggest. About 2,600 California farmers sell at least part of the crops they produce at these markets. The state's certified farmers' market concept was introduced in the 1970s and is aimed at maintaining the traditional link between farm- ers and consumers. Certified farmers' markets are places where genuine or "certified" farmers sell their crops directly to a public interested in quality, variety and freshness. County agricultural commissioners verify that sellers grow their own crops and they ap- prove locations for markets in their counties. The city of Temecula, in Riverside County, has been holding cer- tified farmers' markets on Saturday mornings in its old-town section for more than a decade. Recently a second farmers' market was added Wednesday mornings at The Promenade, an upscale shopping and en- tertainment center nearby. Organizers in Temecula say market days are not just an opportuni- ty to buy the best quality seasonal produce available-directly from farmers-it's also a community event where shoppers socialize and families spend time together. In addition to reasonably priced farm products, the market offers arts and crafts, as well as prepared foods. Nearby shops and restau- rants open early, many putting on sidewalk sales and special offers. Because Temecula is a well-known winegrape growing region popu- lar with tourists, its farmers' market draws shoppers from across the nation and the world. Citrus grower and Temecula Farmers' Market manager Gayle Cunningham said, "We've done sur~eys and find people come not just for the produce, but also for the opportunity to visit with the farmers. It's a chance to talk about growing practices and solve backyard gar- den problems. Everybody has a farm in their background and they like to tell us about it." The Cunninghams own a citrus grove in Fallbmok, a nearby com- munity of small farms that produces a wide range of specialty crops. The Cunninghams grow 15 varieties of fruit on about 12 acres. "We grow exotic citrus,' Cumfingham said. "That includes Buddha's ion diversity hand, an unusual fruit that looks like an octopus crossed with a lemon. It's grown for the rind and chefs use it as zest and candied peel. It's a type of citron, which is popular in fruitcakes. We also grow kumquats, persimmons and macadamia nuts." On a recent sunny morning, things were just beginning to bustle at the Temecula market. One shopper was having a bridal shower for her friend's daughter in the afternoon and needed salad fixings and flowers for a table centerpiece. Two young boys elbowed each other in front of a the stall where a farmer was selling fresh strawberries and Gerber daisies. Mom decided to buy the boys some of each. Before the morning was over, more than 3,500 people had come to shop, eat and socialize. And, about 65 to 70 vendors-half of them firmers--had the opportunity to talk directly with consumers about their tastes, interests and preferences. What happens every week in Temecula is played out throughout California, from Beverly Hills to farm-friendly towns in the Central Valley. Farmers set up their stands in the parking lots of shopping malls, in parks and under freeway overpasses. Some assemble in city squares and in front of transit plazas. Dan Best, president of the California Federation of Certified Farmers' Markets, explained that in the early days of the certified markets there were more alternative farmers, but now the markets have hmily farm- ers who grow on as much as 1,000 to 2,000 acres. The markets of- fer hrmers instant payment, low overhead and access to a concen- tration of customers. "Everyone wants a farmers' market on their own doorstep,' Best said. "But if communities want them, they have to be willing to sup- port them. There are a couple of philosophies at work in the markets. One is that the market's purpose is to sell produce. The other is that it's a community event where produce also is sold.' He said either concept works, if communities are willing to put effort into making the markets a success. One of the things Best said farmers bring to these bustling market days is diversity, not just in the produce offered, but also diversity in who the farmers are themselves. "Many are immig~ra?ts,~ some are farm laborers who have been able to buy or lease'tfi~i~ b~vn ground," said Best, who also manages the farmers' markets in Sacramento. "They're Hmong, Japanese, central Europeans. We're starting to see Russian beekeepers. Although farm- ers will always provide for mainstream tastes, there is a lot of variety in what's grown." Best said California farmers are increasingly turning to farmers' markets to improve their cash flow because low commodity prices, global competition and increased operating costs mean farmers need direct help from consumers to stay in business. "We offer the safest, tastiest and most nutritious produce in the world," Best said. "We need to invest in our local farmers. That sures they stay in business and farmland is preserved. We're all health- ier for it." Best said farmers are looking forward to the marketing support the state's new "Buy California" campaign will offer. This program, which was just funded through legislative action, will encourage the state's residents to choose California-grown produce over that pro- duced elsewhere. "If Californians are known throughout the world as preferring their own locally grown produce, that's a testimonial," Best said. For more information on California's certified farmers' markets and to locate a nearby market, visit the California Federation of Certified Farmers' Markets online at http://farmersmarket.ucdavis.edu/. (Kate Campbell is a reporter with the California Farm Bureau Federation. She may be reached at (800) 698-FARM or by e-mail at kcampbell@cJbf, com.) "Everyone wants a farmers' market on their own doorstep. But if communities wahl them, they have to be willing to support them." DAN BEST, PRESIDENT Calilornia Federation of CeMified Farmers' Markets Friday Night & October 4 & 5, 2002 TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public Financing Authority was called to order at 7:28 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Pratt, Stone, and Roberts ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBER: Naggar Aisc present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 13, 2002. MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Board Member Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Naggar who was absent. COUNCIL/AUTHORITY BUSINESS 2 initial Actions relatin.q to formation of Community Facilities District for Crown Hill RECOMMENDATION: 2,1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 02-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT 2.2 That the Authority adopt a resolution entitled: R:minutes tpfa\091702 1 RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 02-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A DEPOSIT RELATIVE TO THE FOR~IATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO Finance Director Roberts reviewed the staff repod (of record). For Agency Member Stone, Public Works Director Hughes advised that the applicant has submitted a general itemization of the proposed improvements to be included in this Assessment District; that staff has not yet reviewed the list and has, therefore, not agreed to a particular facilities list; that the list will be reviewed, by staff, in detail and brought forward at the time of formation; and that the requested action, this evening, would be to fund the consulting team necessary to begin the process. Agency Member Stone relayed his concern with not having a list of improvements in order to determine the necessary regional/City improvements prior to the authorization of expending funds for a consultant team. To his understanding, Agency Member Comerchero noted that this would be the standard procedure and that the facilities list would be obtained once the process of determining a relevant list has been completed and then forwarded at the time of the Assessment District formation. City Attorney Thorson further clarified that the developer will be paying for staff time necessary to study the list and determine the appropriate improvements and the details of the financing mechanism; that the public improvements necessary to serve the Subdivision are determined by the Subdivision approvals which are already in place; that action, this evening, would not be to sponsor an Assessment District but to initiate a study to determine whether the Authority would be desirous of sponsoring such an Assessment District; that Lennar would be paying for those studies; that no building permits are being issued for this tract because the park has not been completed; and that park construction and park issues would be addressed prior to the issuance of any building permits. Desirous of having local/regional infrastructure in place prior to development approvals, Agency Member Stone reiterated his desire to have this list available for review to ensure the infrastructure will meet the City's needs. MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Pro Tem Stone who opposed and Councilman Naggar who was absent. MOTION: Board Member Comerchero moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Board Member Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Board Member Stone who opposed and Board Member Naggar who was absent. At this time, the City Council meeting convened. R:minutes.tpfa\091702 2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:37 P.M., the Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Chairman Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:minutes.tpfa\091702 3 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANC~ ~9~:~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Authority Members Genie Roberts, Director of Finance~J~~''-'~ September 24, 2002 Authorization of Special Tax Levy in Community Facilities Services District No. 01-2 (Harveston) RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. TPFA 2002-_entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2 (HARVESTON) BACKGROUND: The Temecula Public Financing Authority (the "Authority") was created pursuant to a joint exercise of powers agreement between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency to assist in the refinancing of the Winchester Hills CFD 98-1. The Winchester Hills 98-1 CFD was originally established to refinance delinquent assessments and to prepay and discharge all future assessment liens on properties within the District levied by the County of Riverside acting through its Assessment District 161 and Assessment District 156. On December 11, 2001 the Authority adopted two resolutions of intention relative to a proposed community facilities district (the "District"). The resolutions of intention called for public hearings on the formation of the District, the levy of special taxes therein and the issuance of bonded indebtedness for the District. On March 26, 2002, resolutions were adopted forming the District and declaring the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness. On August 13, 2002 the Authority Board of Directors approved a resolution authorizing the issuance of special tax bonds. On August 28, 2002 special tax bonds in the amount of $17,310,000 were issued. The proceeds of the bonds were applied to the pay the redemption price of $11,025,000 of the 1998 Winchester Hills bonds and to establish an escrow fund for the payment of $560,000 of the 1998 bonds on their sinking fund payment dates or maturity date. The bonds are special, limited obligations of the Authority secured solely by the special taxes levied in the District and a letter of credit provided by the developer. The special tax levy as calculated by Albert Webb Associates, special tax consultant, required for the 2002-03 fiscal year is $893,468.90. FISCAL IMPACT: $893,468.90. The calculated special tax levy required for the 2002-03 fiscal year is Attachments: -Special Tax Calculation Worksheet -Resolution No. TPFA 2002- RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 01-2 (HARVESTON) WHEREAS, the Temecula Public Financing Authority is the legislative body for Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston)(the "CFD"), created pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District Act of 1982, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has enacted Ordinance No. TPFA 02-01 in accordance with Government Code Section 53340 authorizing the levy of a special tax assessment on the property located within the CFD; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has completed all steps necessary to levy a special tax assessment in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority, acting as the legislative body for Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston) as follows: Section 1. Each of the above recitals is true and correct. Section 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Resolution No. TPFA 02-03 and Ordinance No. TPFA 02-01, there is to be levied an aggregate special tax of $893,468.90 on the taxable parcels located in the CFD for Fiscal Year 2002-03 as set forth on a magnetic tape to be provided by Albert A. Webb Associates to the Auditor-Controller of the County. Section 3. The special tax levy set forth above does not exceed the amount previously authorized by Resolution No. TPFA 02-03 and Ordinance No. TPFA 02-01, and is not in excess of that previously approved by the qualified electorate of the CFD. Section 4. The proceeds of the special tax levy shall be used to pay, in whole or in part, the costs of the following items: Payment of principal and interest on the outstanding authorized bonded indebtedness. Replenishment of the required bond reserve funds, or other reserve funds, if necessary. Payment of the administrative costs and incidental expenses of the CFD, as provided in Resolution No. TPFA 02-03 the indenture of trust for the CFD and the Act. The proceeds of the special tax levy shall be used as set forth above, and shall not be used for any other purpose. Section 5. The Auditor-Controller of the County is hereby directed to enter the installment of the special tax for the exact rate and amount of the special tax levied in accordance with this resolution for each lot or parcel of land affected in a space marked "CFD No. 01-2 (Harveston)" on the next County assessment roll on which taxes will become due. Section 6. The County Auditor-Controller shall, at the close of the tax collection period, promptly render to the CFD a detailed report showing the amounts of the special tax installments, penalties, interest and fees collected, and from which properties they have been collected. Any expenses to be paid to the Auditor-Controller for carrying out the foregoing responsibilities shall be in accordance with a contract entered into between the CFD and the Auditor, pursuant to Section 29304 of the Government Code. Section 7. The Authority Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Chairperson Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Winchester Hills Financing Authority at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of July, 2002, by the following vote of the Board of Directors: AYES: DIRECTORS: NOES: DIRECTORS: ABSENT: DIRECTORS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary Bonds Outstanding $17,310,000.00 Delinquency Rate for Fiscal Year 2000-01 0.00% Delinquency Rate for Fiscal Year 2001-02 0.00% Mamh 2003 Interest September 2003 Interest September 2003 Principal Total Debt Service Reserve Fund Requirement Current Reserve Fund Balance Surplus/(Deficit) Reserve Adjustment Earnings Credit Total Obligation Based on Max (3.5%) Interest $861,468.90 $861,468.90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $86t,468,90 Prior Year Current Year Actual Levy Fiscal Agent $8,000.00. Tax Consultant 0Nebb) $10,000.00 Auditor -Controller $0.00 Standard & Poors $3,500.00 Rebate Calculation $500.00 Remarking Fee 0.09% $0.00 Foreclosure Counsel $0.00 Letter of Credit Fee 1.25% $0.00 District Administration $10,000.00 Total Administration $0,00 $32,000.00 Total Obligation Total Administration Prior year Deficit (Surplus) Total Requirement $861,468.90 $32,000.00 $0.00 $893,468.90 Administration % of Levy District % of Levy Total Calculated Levy $893,468.90 Adjustment (Per District) $0.00 I FY 2001-02 Lew $0.00 Difference $893,468.90 3.58% 1.12% WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY JULY 09, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Winchester Hills Financing Authority was called to order at 7:47 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Comerchere presiding. PRESENT: 4 BOARDMEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, and Robeds. ABSENT: 1 BOARDMEMBERS: Stone. Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorsen, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 10, 2001. Authorization of Special Tax Levy in Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-1 (WINCHESTER HILLS) MOTION: Authority Member Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar item Nos. 1 and 2. The motion was seconded by Authority Member Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Authority Member Stone who was absent. R:\Minutes.whfa\070902 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comments. AUTHORITY MEMBERS' REPORT No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 7:48 P.M., the Temecula Winchester Hi/Is Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned. Ron Roberts, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes~whfa\070902 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY AUGUST 13, 2002 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Winchester Hills Financing Authority was called to order at 7:42 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Comerchero presiding. PRESENT: 5 BOARDMEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, and Roberts. ABSENT: 0 BOARDMEMBERS: None. Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. AUTHORITY BUSINESS 1. Amendment to Fiscal Aqent Agreement and Defeasance of Bonds - Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) Special Tax Bonds, 1998 Series A RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY APPROVING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 2 TO FISCAL AGENT AGREEMENT AND AN ESCROW AGREEMENT MOTION: Authority Member Stone moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Authority Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comments. AUTHORITY MEMBERS' REPORT No comments. R:~'vlin utes.wh fa\081302 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:42 P.M,, the Temecula Winchester Hills Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned. Ron Roberts, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W, Jones1 CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes,whfa\081302 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL ~j~ CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE _/.m~Q-~ CITY MANAGER WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Authority Members Genie Roberts, Director of Finance September 24, 2002 Authorization for Cancellation of Resolution No. WHFA 02-01 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. WHFA 2002-.entitled: RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY CANCELING THE SPECIAL TAX LEVY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02-0'1, WHICH RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-1 (WINCHESTER HILLS) BACKGROUND: The Winchester Hills Financing Authority (the "Authority") was created pursuant to a joint exercise of powers agreement between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency to assist in the refinancing of public improvements or bonds in connection with fixed special assessment liens in the Winchester Hills area of the City. On February 24, 1998, the Authority adopted two resolutions of intention relative to a proposed community facilities district (the "District"). The resolutions of intention called for public hearings on the formation of the District, the levy of special taxes therein and the issuance of bonded indebtedness for the District. On April 14, 1998, resolutions were adopted forming the District and declaring the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness. On June 23, 1998 the Authority Board of Directors approved a resolution authorizing the issuance of special tax bonds. On July 29, 1998 special tax bonds in the amount of $12,255,000 were issued. The proceeds of the bonds were applied to pay delinquent assessments, and to prepay and discharge all future assessments levied on properties located in the District by the County of Riverside, acting through its Assessment District 161 and Assessment District 156. The bonds are special, limited obligations of the Authority secured solely by the special taxes levied in the District, a letter of credit provided by the developer, and amounts held in a reserve fund. The calculated special tax for the 2002-03 fiscal year of $838,437.90 was approved by Resolution No. WHFA 02- on July 9, 2002. On August 28, 2002 the Temecula Public Financing Authority (TPFA) completed the refinance of the Winchester Hills CFD 98-1 with the new Harvestion CFD 02-1. The previous levy approved for the Winchester Hills CFD 98-1 by the Board must now be cancelled. The TPFA will approve a resolution for the special tax levy of the Harveston CFD 02-1 at the September 24, 2002 meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: -Resolution No. WHFA 2002- RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY CANCELING THE SPECIAL TAX LEVY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. WHFA 02-01, WHICH RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-1 (WINCHESTER HILLS) WHEREAS, the Winchester Hills Financing Authority is the legislative body for Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills), created pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District Act of 1982, as amended; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2002, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 02-01 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WINCHESTER HILLS FINANCING AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-1 (WINCHESTER HILLS);" and WHEREAS, the Temecula Public Financing Authority has conducted proceedings under and pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, to form the Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-2 (Harveston), to authorize the levy of special taxes upon the land within CFD 01-02 (Harveston), and to issue bonds secured by the special taxes the proceeds of which are to be used to construct public improvements, maintenance certain public improvements, and to defease the bonds issued by the Community Facilities District No. 98-1 established by the Winchester Hills Financing Authority; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said proceedings of the Temecula Fir~ancing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-02, said bonds were defeased on August 29, 2002 and, therefore, no further need exists to levy the special tax for the Winchester Hills Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Winchester Hills Financing Authority, acting as the legislative body for Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) as follows: Section 1. Each of the above recitals is true and correct. Section 2. The special tax levy described in Resolution No. WHFA 02-01 Community Facilities District No. 98-1 (Winchester Hills) is hereby canceied and of no further force and effect. Section 3. The Auditor-Controller of the County is hereby directed to cancel the special tax described in Resolution No. WHFA No. 02-01 as provided in this Resolution. Section 4. The Authority Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24h day of September, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Chairperson Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OFTEMECULA ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. WHFA 02-01 was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Winchester Hills Financing Authority at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 24th day of September 2002, by the following vote of the Board of Directors: AYES: DIRECTORS: NOES: DIRECTORS: ABSENT: DIRECTORS: ABSTAIN: DIRECTORS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary ITEM 10 APPROVAl CITY A]-FORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC~_ CiTY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY Of TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek - Approval of Project and Mitigated Negative Declaration PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer Steve Charette, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BRIDGE WIDENING OVER MURRIETA CREEK PROJECT NO. PW99-18. BACKGROUND: The project will include the widening of Rancho California Road Bridge to accommodate a total of six (6) lanes of traffic. The bridge was originally built for two lanes in the early 1970's and was subsequently widened to four lanes in 1986. The proposed widening will consist of an additional lane in each direction and include a new left turn lane and a free right turn lane for eastbound traffic. The proposed improvements will mitigate existing traffic congestion occurring at peak hours at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Old Town Front Street. The added bridge lanes will expedite eastbound access to the 1-15 freeway and improve traffic flow to the business parks west of the creek. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), The City's consultant, EDAW, Inc., prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Based on the findings contained in that Study, it was determined that the project could have potentially significant impacts on the environment if the potential impacts are not mitigated. The Study determined that the bridge widening could have significant impact on the creek water quality and on certain biological resources present in the creek. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. Accordingly, the proposed project will include mitigation measures to achieve a less than significant impact on the environment. Measures will include implementation of best available technology to ensure that pollutant concentrations in wastewater discharge do not cause violation of State Water Quality Control Board requirements. In conclusion, staff recommends that the City Council approve the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening and approve the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. R:~agdrpt\02\0924\RCB ridge.negdec 1 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is anticipated as a result of City Council approval of the project Mitigated Negative Declaration. A'I-rAC HMENTS: Resolution No. 2002- Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration R:\agdrpt\02\0924\RC Bridge.negdec 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BRIDGE WIDENING OVER MURRIETA CREEK PROJECT NO. PW99-18. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. A project is proposed by the City to widen Rancho California Road Bridge over Murdeta Creek (the "Project"). The Project will include the widening of Rancho California Road Bridge an additional 50 feet to accommodate six (6) through lanes of traffic. An additional left turn lane and a free right turn lane will also be added for eastbound traffic. These improvements will mitigate existing traffic congestion occurring at peak hours at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Old Town Front Street. The added bridge lanes will expedite eastbound access to the 1-15 freeway and improve traffic flow to the business parks west of the creek. B. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") the City's consultant, EDAW, Inc., prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Based on the findings contained in that Study, it was determined that the project could have potentially significant impacts on the environment without mitigation and therefore a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Study determined that the bridge widening could have potentially significant impact on the creek water quality and on certain biological resources present in the creek. Accordingly, the proposed project, pursuant to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, will include mitigation measures to achieve a less than significant impact on the environment. Measures will include implementation of best available technology to ensure that pollutant concentrations in wastewater discharge do not cause violation of State Water Quality Control Board requirements. A copy of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. C. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca. 92589. D. The City Council has reviewed the Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds that: (1) The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment after mitigation; (3) the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council; and (4) the mitigation monitoring plan set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with law. Section 2. Based on these findings set forth in Section 1., the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project and approves the mitigation-monitoring plan for the Project. R:\agd rpt\02\0924\RCBridge.negdec 3 Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening over Murrieta Creek Project (Public Works Project No. PW99-18). Section 4. The Director of Community Development shall file a Notice of Determination in the offices of the County Clerk of the County of Riverside in connection with the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 24th day of September, 2002. Ron Roberts, Mayor A"FI'EST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on this 24th day of September, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk R:\agdrpt\02\0924\RCBddge.negdec 4 DRAFT INITIAl. STUDY/ MITIGATEO NEGATIVE OECLARATION Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared Fort City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 · Prepared By: EDAW, Inc. 3780 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 250 Los Angeles, CA 90010 July 2002 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Location ......... : ........................................ 1-1 1.2 Project Objectives ................................................. 1-1 1.3 Description of Project .............................................. 1-2 1.4 Construction Scenario .............................................. 1-3 2.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKIJST ............................................ 2-1 3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ................................. 3-1 3.1 Aesthetics ....................................................... 3-1 3.2 Agricultural Resources ............................................. 3-2 3.3 Air Quality ...................................................... 3-2 3.4 Biological Resources ................................................ 3-7 3.5 Cultural Resources ............................................... 3-16 '3.6 Geology and Soils ................................................ 3-18 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................... 3-24 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality ....................................... 3-27 3.9 Land Use and Planning ............................................ 3-33 3.10 Mineral Resources ............ ................................... 3-34 3.11 Noise .......................................................... 3-34 3.12 Population and Housing ........................................... 3-38 3.13 Public Services .................................................. 3-39 3.14 Recreation ...................................................... 3-39 3.15 Transportation/Traffic ............................................. 3-40 3.16 Utilities and Service Systems ....................................... 3-42 3.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................. 3-43 4.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................... 4-1 5.0 REFERENCES ......................................................... 5-1 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project ISfMND Page TOC-1 Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1-1 Regional Map .......................................................... 1-2 1-2 Vicinity Map ........................................................... 1-3 1-3 Preliminary Design Drawings Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project ..... 1-5 2-1 City of Temecula Land Use Designations ..................................... 2-2 3-1 Vegetation Communities ................................................ 3-10 3-2 Regional Fault Map ..................................................... 3-19 3-3 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones ...................................... 3-21 34 Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards .......................................... 3-23 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1-1 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Details ....................... 1-2 2-1 City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Designations .......................... 2-4 3-1 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards .............................. 3-3 3-2 Lake Elsinore Monitoring Station - Ambient Air Quality ........................ 3-4 3-3 SCAQMD Air Quality Impact Significance Thresholds .......................... 3-5 3-4 Maximum Daily Construction-Related Emissions .............................. 3-6 3-5 Permanent and Temporary Vegetation Impacts ............................... 3-12 3-6 Mitigation Requirements ................................................ 3-13 3-7 City of Temecula Noise Standards (db CNEL) ................................ 3-35 3-8 Construction Equipment Source Noise Levels ................................ 3-36 3-9 Typical Construction Noise Levels ......................................... 3-36 APPENDICES A. Site Assessment Report Page TOC-2 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 1.0 In~oduction SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Temecula (City) has prepared this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) to address the proposed widening of the Rancho California Road bridge over Murdeta Creek in Temecula, California. This section of the IS/MND describes the proposed bridge widening project, including the location of the site, the project objectives, and the anticipated construction scenario. 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION Murrieta Creek lies in southwestern Riverside County and flows through the unincorporated community of Wildomar and the cities of Murrieta and Temccula. Murricta and Temecula creeks converge to form the Santa Margarita River. The Santa Margarita River flows into San Diego County, passing through Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton and oufletting to the Pacific Ocean (see Figure 1-1). Rancho California Road crosses Murrieta Creek in the City of Temeeula. As shown on Figure 1-2, the bridge crossing is located west oflnterstate 15 near Old Town Temecula (latitude 33029'74" north, longitude 117°09'18" weso. The area is characterized by business, commercial, recreational and civic/institutional land uses on either side of the creek. Old Town · Tamecpla is located just south of Rancho California Road on the east side of the creek. 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES In 1998, the Rancho California Road bridge over Interstate 15 was widened to accommodate two additional through lanes and one northbound on-ramp, creating a bottle neck at the Murrieta Creek bridge. This condition adversely affects circulation patterns along Rancho California Road and Front Street, the primary access roads to the Old Town Temecula area. Because there are few bridge crossings along Murrieta Creek in the City of Temecula, vehicular access to the west side of the creek is particularly affected by the exi~ing traffic congestion. The primary objective of the proposed project is to improve traffic circulation along Rancho California Road and Front Street immediately east of Rancho California Road bridge. The road width and traffic capacity of the bridge modifications should be consistent with the City of Temecula's General Plan Circulation Element. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 1-1 (IblI'W$I 1jva(] ;~o.fO~d ~u.mop!A~ o~p!~t p~o}I ~!tuo.~!le"O oqoueH o o 0 Generat Kearny Rd RIVERSIDE COUNTY Temecula PROJECT SITE U.S.G.S. NO SCALE Figure 1-2 Vicinity Map Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draft IS/MND 1.0 In~oducfion 1.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The City of Temecula is proposing to widen the Rancho California Road bridge over Murrieta Creek between Front Street and Diaz Road near Old Town Temecula. The existing bridge accommodates two lanes of through-traffic and a left-mm lane in each direction with a sidewalk along the north side. The widened Rancho California Road bridge would accommodate two through-lanes with a left-turn lane in the westbound direction and three-through lanes, two left-turn 1.anes, and a right-turn lane in the eastbound direction. A.sidewalk would be reconstructed on the north side of the bridge and pedestrian crossings would be established at both ends of the bridge. Rancho California Road would be widened at the northwest and southwest comers of Front Street and along the south side of the eastbound approach. Details of the construction process are described below under Construction Scenario. Table 1-1 provides a general comparison of the bridge with and without the project. Table 1-1. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Details Number of Lanes Length Width Support Sidewalk Columns Existing Bridge 2 EBT; I EBL; 361' 3" 71' 9" 16 north side 2 WBT; 1 WBL Proposed Bridge 3 EBT; 2 EBL; 361' 3" 121' 9" 28 south side (temporary) 1 EBR; 2 WBT (max.) north side (permanent) · . 1 WBL Not~: EBT = eastbouhd through lane; EBL ~ eastbound leRdum lane; EBR = eastbound fight-turn lane; WBT = westbound through lane; WBL = westbound left-turn lane The Rancho California Road bridge was constructed, in 1970. The original five-span continuous structure bridge consisted of a cast-in-place, conventionally reinforced concrete box girder on two- column bents supported by a combined footing on driven piles. In the mid-eighties, the bridge was widened in kind by adding another colum on each side, in line with the existing supports. The proposed bridge widening project would involve the construction of twelve additional support columns. As shown on Figure 1-3, the bridge would be widened on both sides with four new bridge supports on the north (upstream) side of the bridge and eight new supports on the south (downstream) side of the bridge. Structural design considerations include the need to align bridge Page 1-4 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/IvllqD .~B[D' ' ' 1.0 Introduction support columns with the existing columns in order to accommodate the existing flow characteristics of the river and minimize turbulent flow and scour potential. All foundations would be designed t° withstand the 100-year flood. The widening portions of the bridge would be designed and constructed such that it will not reduce the existing freeboard ~. This would be achieved by constructing the low chord (lowest beam) elevation of the widened portion above the current Iow chord elevation. Specific measures have been incorporated into the bridge design to address scour potential, liquefaction hazards, and lateral spreading potential. These measures include a row of stone columns parallel to and in front of the eastern abutment and pilings, riprap slope protection, and subsurface concrete armor units. These features are described below. 1.4 CONSTRUCTIONSCENARIO All construction activities within the 100-year floodpla'm would be undertaken during the dry season (April 1 to November 30). Overall, the entire project would require approximately nine months to complete. The bridge would remain open to vehicular and pedestrian traffic throughout the construction period. Temporary lane closures may be required for certain construction operations such as the closure pour; however, these lane closures would be infrequent and primarily limited to non-peak traffic hours. The construction boundaries within the channel (including pedestrian and equipment access routes) would be clearly marked and all activities would occur within the designated "disturbance areas." The areas of disturbance would extend no more than 50 feet beyond the edge of the widened bridge to the north and south. Staging of construction equipment would occur only on previously reared, graded, or paved areas (including streets) or level areas where grading and vegetation removal are not required. No overnight staging of large construction equipment would occur in channel invert. The following is a description of the main design features of the bridge and the expected steps involved in its construction. First, a path would be cleared on each side of the structure within the expected area of disturbance. Once the limits of construction are clearly defined, work would begin on the bridge foundations. If necossary, soil removed for construction of the column foundations and scour protection features would be hauled off-site for disposal. Large diameter cast-in-drilled Freeboard is defined as the vertical distance betweea the level of the water surface and a point of interest on the structure, in this case the lowest bridge beam (low chord). Rancho California Road B[idge Widening Project IS/MND Page 1-7 1.0 Introduction hole (CIDH) piles would be used fOr supporting the widened bridge. Once the foundation is in place, steel forms would be used for the construction of the columns, which would extend from the large diameter piles. A temporary wooden bridge, commonly called "falsework," would then be constructed on both sides of the existing bridge to serve as a platform for the proposed structure. Falsework would extend across the entire creek width and would serve as a platform to support construction of the wooden forms for building the concrete box girders. This temporary structure would be supported by "falsework pads" consisting of timber members. Steel reinforcement bars (rebar) would be placed inside the column forms to structurally tie the columns to the piles, and concrete would then be poured into the forms. Once the concrete in the columns is cured, the falsework would be completed and the widened roadway or "deck" would be constructed on both sides of the bridge. The concrete box girders would be constructed in place and bridge abutments would be constructed to stabilize the side slopes and provide a pedestal on which to structurally secure each end of the widened bridge. The bridge abutments would be designed to withstand the 100-year flood conditions and would include the driving of steel piles to support a concrete foundation on which the bridge abutment would be constructed. Following construction of the box girders and bridge abutments, forms would be constructed for the deck, rebar would be installed, and the deck would be poured. Stone columns would be installed at mid-slope, parallel to and in front of several piles along the eastern abutment. The columns would be installed approximately 7.5 feet apart, between the piles. A total of nine columns would be installed, six on the south side of the abutment and three on the north side. Subsurface scour protection features would be installed under the widened bridge. Interlocking concrete armor units (A-Jacks2) would be installed around each pier colunm. A dosed-cell concrete mat (Annorflex3) would also be installed under the entire bridge, extending approximately 15 feet upstream and 10 feet downstream fi'om the edge of the widened deck. These scour protection features would be buried approximately three feet under the bridge and covered with soil. Riprap slope protection would be installed along both banks under the bridge. A-Jacks units are reinforcement units that are assembled into a highly permeable, interlocking matrix. The voids in the matrix are filled with soil and provide a stable base for support. Installation of A-Jacks'is similar to installation of a tiptop bank with toe protection. Armorflex mats consist of machine compressed cellular concrete blocks of a unique interlocking shape that are made up into mats for easy handling on site. The blocks are then cabled longitudinally by means of galvanized steel aircraft or polyester cables. Page 1-8 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Projedt IS/MND 1.0 Introduction Installation o fseismic steel jackets around the existing bridge columns Would require dewatering up to 10 feet below the existing creek bed. Wastewater would be treated and discharged under an NPDES permit for construction dewatering. Installation of the piers would require boring to depths of 90 feet; however, dewatering would not be required for installation of the piers. The design of the proposed bridge and roadway improvements would be in accordance with City of Temeeula Department of Public Works standards. Contract documents for the construction of the project would incorporate provisions regarding standard construction practices including, but not limited to, worker and public safety measures, construction equipment operation and maintenance, erosion and drainage control, traffic control, placement of fill materials and disposal of excavated soil, and environmental mitigation requirements. A "safe construction practices" plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements for worker and public safety during construction. The construction contractor would be responsible for properly implementing the required Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent sediments and pollutants from discharging to adjacent surface waters. Approximately 8 to 12 construction workers would be required to construct the widened bridge. Construction crews would access the consmaction site from Interstate 15 or surface streets via Rancho California Road, Front Street, and Diaz Road. Generally, the following pieces of heavy equipment may be operated during construction: · 1 Loader 1 Air compressor · 1 Backhoe · 1 Forklif~ 1 Concrete pump · 1 Dozer · 1 Crane 2 Concrete trucks · 2 pickup trucks · 'I Pile driver · 1 Pump (dewatering) · 1 Drilling machine · 1 Electric generator · 1 High side end dump track 2 Delivery trucks Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 1-9 1.0 Introduction This page leR intentionally blank. Page 1-10 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checldist SECTION 2.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1. Project title: Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project 2. Lead agency: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 Contact person: David Hogan City of Temecula (909) 694-6400 4. Project location: Rancho California Road Bridge over Murrieta Creek in the City of Temecula (between Diaz Road and Front Street). 5. General plan designation: Rancho California Road is identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. East of the Murrieta Creek bridge crossing, the road is designated as a four-lane arterial highway. To the west of the bridge, the road is identified as a four-lane secondary highway. In the vicinity of the bridge, General Plan land use designations are Highway/Tourist/Commercial (east side of the creek), Open Space/Recreation (along the creek), Professional Office (west side of the creek), and Service Commercial (west side of the creek). The General Plan Land Use designations for the project area are shown on Figure 2-1. 6. Zoning: The Murfieta Creek channel is zoned as Open Space on the north of the bridge and SP-5 (Old Town Specific Plan) on the south side. Zoning classifications on either side of the creek near the bridge, include Highway Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, and Professional Office. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-1 H BP SC CC'~ ~ BP CC cc .-'""-L BP BP SITE M' O BP OS LM LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL H HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL HTC HIGHWAY/TOURIST COMMERCIAL O PROFESStONAL OFFICE SC SERVICE COMMERCIAL BP BUSINESS PARK P PUBLIC/INSTiTUTIONAL FACILITIES OS OPEN SPACE/RECREATION --'-- MURRIETA CREEK ,, L BP OS Figure 2-1 City of Temecula Land Use Designations Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draft IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist 7. Description of project: The CitY0fTemecula is proposing to widen the Rancho CalifomiaRoad Bridge over Murdeta Creek between Front Street and Diaz Road near Old Town Temecula. The existing bridge accommodates two lanes of through-traffic and a left-tum lane in each direction with a sidewalk along the north side. The widened Rancho California Road bridge would accommodate two through-lanes with a left-mm lane in the westbound direction and three-through lanes, two left-mm lanes, and a right-tum lane in the eastbound direction. A sidewalk would be reconstructed on the north side of the bridge and pedestrian crossings would be established at both ends of the bridge. Rancho California Road would be widened at the no~hwest and southwest comers of Front Street and along the south side of the eastbound approach. In general, bridge widening activities would include the following major components: Vegetation would be cleared on each side of the bridge within the expected area of disturbance. · A coffer dam would be constructed around the existing columns for de-watering operations. Steel colunm casings would be installed on the existing columns. · A single row of stone columns would be installed in fi'ont of the eastern abutment. · Soil would be removed and large diameter cast-M-drilled hole (CIDH) piles would be constructed to anchor the new bridge support columns. · Steel forms would be used to construct the new columns. · Steel reinforcement bars (rebar) would be placed inside the column forms to structurally tie the columns to the piles, and concrete would then be poured into the forms. · Bridge abutments would be constructed to stabilize the side slopes and provide a pedestal on which to structurally secure each end of the widened bridge. · A temporary wooden "falsework" structure would be constructed on both sides of the existing bridge to serve as a platform for the structure. Falsework would extend across the entire creek width and would serve as a platform to support construction of the wooden forms for building the concrete box girders. · Once the concrete in the columns is cured, the falsework would be completed and the widened roadway or "deck" would be constructed on both sides of the bridge. · Concrete box girders would be constructed in place. · . Following construction ofthe box girders and bridge abutments, forms would be constructed for the deck, rebar would be installed, and the deck would be poured. Falsework would be removed after the superstructure prestressing operation. Soil would be removed to 984 feet above mean sea level (msl). Armoflex and Ajacks would be installed and covered with soil. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-3 2.0 Initial Study Checklist All construction within the 100-year floodplain would be undertaken during the dry season (April I to November 30) and the project would require approximately nine months to complete. Construction boundaries (including pedestrian and vehicle access routes) would be clearly marked and all activities would occur within the designated "disturbance areas." The area of disturbance would extend no more than 50 feet from the edge of the proposed bridge deck on either side. Staging of construction equipment would occur only on previously cleared, graded, or paved areas (including streets) or level areas where grading and vegetation areas are not required. 8. Surrounding land uses and setting: The Rancho California Road bridge is located near Old Town Temeeula in the central western portion of the city. In general, the Rancho California Road bridge is surrounded by business park, retail, and some residential development on both sides of the creek. Existing and planned land uses in the vicinity of the bridge are described in greater detail below. Existing Land Use Murrieta Creek Murrieta Creek, located in southwestern Riverside County, drains an area of approximately 220 square miles and is an important component of the Santa Margarita River watershed, which encompasses approximately 750 square miles. The creek is fed by two main tributaries, Santa Gertrudis Creek and Warm Springs Creek. The Warm Springs Creek confluence is apProximately two miles upstream of the bridge, whereas Santa Gertmdis Creek is located approximately three miles upstream of the project site. Effluent released from the Santa Rosa Water Reclemation Facility (SRWRF) provides a source of high-nutrient water into the creek, which acts to support vegetation along the creek bed. The SRWRF outfall is located just upstream of the Santa Gertrudis Creek confluence. Th~ Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) currently conducts regular vegetation mowing and sediment removal within the ereekbed to maintain flow, as prescribed in the Floodplain Maintenance Plan (FMP) for Murrieta Creek. Under the FMP, the majority of the channel is subject to annual maintenance in the vicinity of the Rancho California Road bridge. A narrow corridor of vegetation along the eastern bank of the creek is subject to mowing once every two years. The environmental conditions that typically exist in the Murrieta Page 2-4 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Smd}, Checklist Creek channel at the Rancho California Road bridge are described below. These conditions reflect the ongoing FMP maintenance activities. At the bridge, streamflow appears to be perennial with a relatively Wide low-flow channel attributable primarily to discharges by the SRWRF. Cattail and bulrush are the principal obligate wetland species associated with the low flow and saturated soils, whereas willows (salix spp.) and mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) are the dominant riparian species. This stretch of the creek, dominated by normative grasslands and ephemeral wetlands, is highly disturbed with development ddjacent to the uplands, approximately 25 to 100 feet from the channel banks. Adjacent Development South of the bridge in the Old Town Temecula community, land uses adjacent to the creek include multi-family and single-family residential developments and specialty (tourist-serving) retail uses. The majority of the specialty retail stores are located along Front Street in Old Town Temecula, which maintains an"Old West" frontier town theme. The majority of residential development near Old Town Temecula is located to the west of the creek. In the immediate vicinity of Rancho California Road, the land uses along the western side of Murrieta Creek transition from residential developments to business park uses. On the eastern side of Murrieta Creek, land uses near Rancho California Road include visitor-serving retail; however, they no longer follow the "Old West" theme, including such modern appearing facilities as gas stations, mini-markets, and fast food restaurants. These facilities are more oriented toward serving highway travelers than Old Town tourists. Progressing upstreamio Winchester Road, business parks become the predominant land use type along Murrieta Creek. Planned Land Use Adjacent land use designations from the City of Temecula General Plan are consistent with ~e existing land uses described above. The project site is designated Open Space/Recreation, while surrounding property is designated Highway/Tourist/Commercial, Professional Office, and Service Commercial. The land use categories and their approximate location in relation to the creek are described in Table 2-1 below (also refer to Figure 2-1). The Rancho California Road bridge lies within the Specific Planning Area No. 5 (Old Town). Specific plan areas are intended to provide a comprehensive planning approach to areas with special Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-5 2.0 Inifi~/l Study Checklist Table 2-1 City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Designations Land Use Designation Description Location Open Space/Recreation Public and private areas of permanent open The Murfieta Creek corridor. (Floor area ratio of.01 to. 1 ) space for such uses as parks, golf courses, recreation facilities, natural open space, recreation trails, grcenbelts, lakes, and undevelopable portions of floodplains along waterways. Highway/Tourist Commercial Commercial uses adjacent to major East of Murrieta Creek north and south (root' area ratio of .25 to 1.0) transportation mutes and oriented to the of Rancho California Road. ' needs of tourists and recreation enthusiasts. Professional Office single or multi-tenant office buildings with West of Murrieta Creek south of (Floor area ratio of .3 to 1.0) uses such as legal, design, engineering, orRancho Califomia Road. medical offices; corporate and governmental offices; and community facilities. Service Commercial Commercial usas that typically require West of Murfieta Creek, north of (Floor area ratio of .5 to 1.5) extensive floor area such as home Rancho California Road. 'improvement stores, discount retail stores, furniture stores, and auto dealerships. development opportunities. The key objectives are to "preserve historic character;, enhance economic vitality; improve public facilities and services; and to encourage infill development." 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) The Rancho Califomia Road bridge modifications would result in permanent and temporary impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and "waters of the U.S." As such, a California Department offish and Game (CDFG) 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement and a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Clean Water Act Section 404 permit would be required for project construction. Pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 401, a certification/waiver from the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would also be required for project construction. Other permits and/or approvals for this project would include a RWQCB Dewatering Permit and City of Temecula construction-related permits (encroachment permit, etc.). Page 2-6 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "P.otentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ~ Aesthetics ~ Biological Resources [~ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ~ Mineral Resources ~ Public Services ~ Utilities/Service Systems ~'~ Agficultuml Resources ~ Cultural Resources ~ Hydrology/Water Quality.. ~'-] Noise ~ Recreation 5] Air Quality ~ Geulogy/Soils [-~ Land Use/Planning ~ Population/Housing ~-~ Transpor tatinn/Traffic ~ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERM~ATION: (To b~ completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I fred 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 to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I f'md that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I fred that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impaet" or '"potentially significant unless mitigated" intpaet on the enviromnent, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlle~ document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I f'md that although the proposed project could have a significant 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 (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. Signature Printed Name Date Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-7 2.0 Initial Study Checklist I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect ona scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in thc area? H. AGRICUI,TURAL RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant anviromnental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Deparanent of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program oftbe California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act conWact? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, duc to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: ~olmpa~ Page 2-8. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/IvlND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Suooortin~ lnfornmtion ~ources a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net h/crease of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ~ Would the project: 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 local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? L~s Than Significant b. Have a substantial adverse impact 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as de£med by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act · (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any uative 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? Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-9 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & SuDl~ortin~ lnfornmtion Sources N9 Impa~ e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conununities Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.57 b. Cause a substantial adverse change m the stgmficance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? cl Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a. 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-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. i) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Page 2-10 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial StudyChecklist 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, liquefactiop or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Buildin~ Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sowers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIA!.,q - Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the i'outine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create 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? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or p?oposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Potentially Potenlially Significant With Less Tb:m Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-11 Secto2-c~kli~t.~pd 7/15/02 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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 me airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a preject within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an · adopted emergency respouse plan or emergency eva6uation plan? h. Expose people or stractures to a significant risk of loss, injury ~ or death involving wildlend fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intemtixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAL1TY - Would the · project: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. 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 (i.e., 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)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Page 2-12 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Mitigation Sig~flcant No lmoact d. Substaatially 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 rnaoffin a mauner which would result in flooding o0- or off- site? e. Create or contribute nmoffwater which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federai Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood haza/d delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or ~xlirect flood flows? i. lLxpose 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? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: Physically divide an established community?. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific pla~, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conServation plan or natural communities conServation plan? Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-13 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Su~oorting Information Sources Potentially Significant [muaet X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a..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? b. 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? XI. NOISE. - Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure ofpersous to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groendbome noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic 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 p!an has not been adopted, within two miles of a public aliport 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 private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or Working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or Page 2-14 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & SuoDortln~ Information Sources indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infi:astm?ture)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the coustmcfion of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of r~plaeement housing elsewhere? XI1-L PUBLIC SERVICES · Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision 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: Potentially $~gnificant With Le~s Than Mitigation Significant In~or~orated Impact XIV. RECREATION a. Wbuld 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? Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 2-15 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Suooorting Information Sources b. 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? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a. 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)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. 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 risks? d. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?. g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Page 2-16 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist lskues & Suooortine Information Sources No Impac~ b. Require or result ia thc construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result ia the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to servc the project fi.om existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result ia 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 ia addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 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 or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate illlportant 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 ora project are considerable Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MINI) Page 2-17 2.0 Initial Study Checklist Issues & Supporting Information Sources 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? Page 2-18 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 2.0 Initial Study Checklist This page lef~ intentionally blank. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MIqD Page 2-19 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures SECTION 3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 3.1 AESTHETICS -Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The Rancho California Road bridge is not visible fi:om any designated scenic vistas or ~seenic corridors. Accordingly, the widened bridge and new support columns would not affect any scenic vistas in the project vicinity. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. Interstate 15, an Eligible State Scenic Highway, is located approximately one-quarter mile east of the Rancho California bridge; however, the bridge is not visible fi:om Interstate 15 or any officially designated State Sceni~ Highways. AccordIngly, the project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. c. Substantiallydegradetheexistingvisualcharacter~rquali~y~fthesiteanditssurr~undings? No Impact. The current bridge elevation would be maintained and the bridge would appear very similar to the exist'rog structure, only slightly wider on both sides. The architectural style of the bridge would not be modified and the new support columns would be placed in-line with the existing columns. As such, the proposed project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site and its surroundings: The bridge widening project would be consistent with the goals and policies identified in the Community Design Element of the City of Temecula General Plan. d. CreateanewsourceofsubstantiallightorglarewhichwouMadverselyaffectdayornighttime views in the area? No Impact. The proposed project would not create a new source of light or glare and would not affect day or nighttime views in the project area. No street lighting is proposed for the widened portion of the bridge. ~Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-1 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and' Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages of the affected project area were overlain with farmland mapping information provided by the California Department of Conservation (California Department of Conservation 1998). No Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance was identified within the Rancho California Road bridge widening project area; therefore, impacts to designated farmland would not occur. b. Conflici with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Rancho California Road bridge widening project area is not zoned for agricultural use and there are no Williamson Act contract lands within the project area; therefore, impacts would not occur. c. Involve other changes tn the extsttng envtronment whtch, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. As discussed under 3.2(a) above, there is no designated farmland within the area of potential effect; therefore, impacts would not occur. 3.3 AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Califomia is divided into 15 air basins for the purpose of managing the state's air resources on a regional level. The project site is located within the South Coast Air Page 3-2 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/lvfND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Basin, which consists o fall of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernard[no counties-including some portions ofwhat used to be the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In May 1996, the boundaries of the South Coast Air Basin were changed by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to include the Beaumont-Banning area. In addition, the Southeast Desert Air Basin was separated into two areas and renamed as the Mojave Desert Air Basin and the Salton Sea Air Basin. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the agency responsible for protecting public health and welfare through the administration of federal and state air quality laws, regulations, and policies in the South 'Coast Air Basin. Included in SCAQMD's tasks are the monitoring of air pollution, the preparation of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the South Coast Air Bas[n, and the promulgation of Rules and Regulations. The SIP includes strategies and tactics to be used to attain the federal air quality standards in the basin. The Rules and Regulations include procedures and requirements to implement the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), control the emissions of pollutants, and prevent adverse impacts. The SCAQMD elements of the SIP are taken from the AQMP, which contains the SCAQMD plans for attaining the federal and state Standards. Both the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established to protect public health and welfare; each air basin is designated as attainment or nonattaiument based on these standards. The federal and state ambient air quality standards are presented in Table 3-1. Table 3-1. Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time Federal Standard State Standard Ozone (O0 1-hour 0.12 ppm 0.9 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1-hour 35.0 ppm 20.0 ppm 8-hour 9.0 ppm 9.0 ppmm Nitrogen Oxides 0qO0 1-hour 0,053 ppm 0.25 ppm Particulates (PM10) 24-hour 150 pg/m3 50 pg/m3 o~ Prior to 1997, the State standard was 9.1 ppm. ppm - paas per million; pg/m~ - micro,rams per cubic meter SOURCE: California Air Resources Board, Air Quality Data Summary, 1998. The South Coast Air Basin is state-designated nonattaiument for particulate matter (PM~0), ozone (O3), and carbon monoxide (CO) standards, and federal nonattainment for ozone, CO, and PMt0 standards. The closest air monitoring station to the site is located in the City of Lake Elsinore, approximately 18 miles northwest of the Rancho California Road bridge. Table 3-2 presents a summary of the highest pollutant values recorded at this station from 1996 to 2000. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-3 ,3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-2. Lake Elsinore Monitoring Station - Ambient Air Quality Pollutant Ozon~ Maximum Concentration Days Exceeding Standard Nitrogen Dioxide Maximum Concentxation Days Exceeding Standard -. Inhalable Particulate Matte&} Averaging Time 1-h°url California Air Qual ty Standards 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 0.09ppm 0.145 0.099 0.170 0.136 [ 0.128 14 I 52 51 45 0.25ppm 0.102 0.106 0.084 [ 0.114 0.077 0 0 0 0 0 1 -hour I Days Exceeding Standard I 24-hour Maximum Concen~ation I 50 gg/m3 87 139 98 112 na 20 19 14 30 na Note: Cat,on monoxide data were not available for the Lake Elsinore or the Perils monitoring s~ation; al.so within 20 miles of the project site. lo pM~0 is not measured at the Lake Elsinore monitoring station; data are from the Petals monitoring station; approximately 20 miles north of the site. ha-- not a'~ai[able Source: California Air Resomee* Board, California dir Quality Data, available at http://www, arb.ca.gov/aqdd aqd. htm, FebmaW 11, 2000. The proposed bridge widening project would involve the addition of three new lanes and twelve new support colunms to the existing bridge. Construction activities, which would occur for a period of nine months, are not anticipated to generate significant air 13ollutant emissions ( please refer to response to 3.3(b) below). Upon completion of the project, the widened bridge would alleviate traffic congestion on the Rancho California Road bridge, which would result in the reduction of local air pollution concentrations associated with local traffic congestion. Accordingly, the proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District for the air basin. b. Vi~late any air quality standard ~r c~ntn.bute substantia~ly t~ an existing ~r pr~jected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or pr°Jeered air quality violation. Construction activities would involve ( 1 ) minor excavation for the support columns and scour protection features, (2) construction workers' trips, (3) construction equipment operation, and (4) construction material handling and delivery. These activities would occur for a period of nine months and are not anticipated to generate significant air pollutant emissions. Air quality impacts associated with this project were evaluated using the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD gnd presented in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993). The SCAQMD's thresholds of significance for the criteria pollutants are shown on Table 3-3. Page 3-4 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-3. SCAQMD Air Quality Impact Significance Thresholds Pollutant Project Construction Project Operation Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day Reactive Organic Compounds (ROC) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Nitrogen Oxides (NO) 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Particulates (PM~o) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Note: No significance thr~Imld is e~tablished for ozone as it is not emitted directly but is a secondary pollu~m p~u~ ~ ~e a~h~ through a complex se~es of photochemical reactions involving ROCs and NO~. lbs/day - pounds pa' day SOURCE: South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quali~y Handbook, April 1993. Construction Emissions Air contaminant emissions during construction activities would result primarily from the use of construction equipment and trips generated by construction workers and haul/material delivery tracks. Construction equipment used for project construction would primarily consist ofone loader, one backhoe, one concrete pump, one crane, one to two pickup trucks, one dewatering pump, one electric generator, one air compressor, one forklit~, one dozer, one pile driver, one drilling machine for installation of piles (foundation), one dump truck, two concrete tracks, and two delivery tracks. All of these pieces of construction equipment are not anticipated to be used concurrently; however, to present the worst-ease scenario and the most conservative estimate, it has been assumed that these pieces of equipment would be used simultaneously for six hours per day during the nine-month construction period. As shown in Table 3-4, project-related construction emissions would have a temporary and less than significant effect on air quality in the vicinity of the projec.t site as these emissions would remain below the SCAQMD thresholds listed in Table 3-3. Accordingly, no mitigation measures are required. Due to the relatively limited amount of earthwork and the short duration of construction activity, air quality impacts resulting from the project construction would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air qUality violation. OperationalEmissions The widened bridge would alleviate traffic congestion on the Rancho California Road bridge, which would result in the reduction of local air pollution concentrations associated with local traffic Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-5 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-4. Maximum Daily Construction-Related Emissions Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day) Emission Source CO ROC NO, PM~s Cons~uction equipment* 0.00 7.89 85.62 7.78 Consa~ucfion workers' txips~ 8.67 0.97 2.01 0.03 Construction tracksc 8.17 0.36 1,69 0.01 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 16. 84 9. 22 89,32 Z 82 Daily Thresholds for Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 550 75 100 150 Do emissions exceed significance thresholds? No No No No a. Iaeludes the following pieces of equipment operated six hours per day: one loader, one baeld~oe, one concr~e p~, one e~g one to two pickup tmcl~, one dewaterln~ pump, one el~ch-lc generator, one air comp~sor, one foddit~, one dozer, one pile driver, and one dr~lllng machine. b. A.s.sum~ a total of 12 comtmction workers, two t~ps pex workec and 30 mi]cs per trip (50% autos and 50% light<luty tmck~). c. Inelud~ one high side end dump h~uck, two concrete ~ucks, and two dellvery ~ucks; assumes 2 trips per ~uck and 30 miles per Uip (100% heavy-duty m~cks). Souse: California Air Resources Board, URBEMiSTG (Version 3.1 ); SCAQMD, CE~ Air Quali~ Hand~ool~ April 1993. congestion. Although the widened bridge could accommodate more idling cars at any given time, the addition of multiple lanes would allow for more efficient traffic flow, resulting in less cuing and stacking of cars on the bridge and at nearbyintersections. As such, air quality impacts resulting from project operation would not 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 criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors) ? Less Than Significant Impact. AS discussed above, the South Coast Air Basin is designated as nonattainment for state PM~0, ozone, and CO standards, and federal ozone, CO, and PM~0 standards. The sho~t-term impacts associated with the construction of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any of these criteria pollutants. Long-term air quality impacts WOuld not result because the widened bridge would alleviate traffic congestion on the Rancho California Road bridge, which would result in the reduction of local air pollution concentrations associated with local traffic congestion. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to cumulatively contribute to a net increase in criteria pollutants for which the air basin is in nonaitainment. Page 3-6 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors generally include the elderly, young children, and individuals with acute or chronic illnesses; these receptors are more sensitive to air pollution than other receptors. No hospitals or schools have been identified within one-quarter mile of the project site. Although some residences are located in the general vicinity, these areas would not be subject to substantial pollutant concentrations as the project would be short-term and temporary, and emissions associated with bridge widening activities would remain below the SCAQMD significance thresholds. As such, impacts to sensitive receptors are not anticipated. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact. Paving materials, including asphalt, may create objectionable odors; however, this would occur for a very short-duration, and the odor would dissipate once the paving materials have settled and dried. Operation of the Widened bridge would not create any objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople. 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. Murrieta Creek occurs within the Santa Margarita River watershed and helps drain one of the largest watersheds in southern California. Murfieta Creek connects with many high quality riparian systems that drain the larger watershed, and provides a limited resource for north-south wildlife movement between the Santa Rosa Plateau and the Temeeula Creek/Santa Margarita River confluence. Numerous wildlife species utilize this riparian corridor for migration, breeding and residential use. Permanent impacts from the expansion of the Rancho California Bridge would occur from new bridge pilings and increased shading of the riparian habitat. These impacts wout~l reduce ecological space and cover for wildlife travel; however, mitigation through onsite restoration ofirnpor~ant vegetation c~mmunities would reduce impacts to the wildlife movement corridor to a less than significant level. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/lvlND Page 3-7 3.0 Impacts and Mitisation Measures Focused biological surveys of the project area were conducted for the recent Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project Final EIS/EIR (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1999). No federally listed species were detected in the project area during the year 2000 listed species surveys and none are expected · to occur in the area of potential effect. The proposed project could, however, potentially affect potential habitat of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). The MBTA protects all common wild birds found in the United States except the house sparrow, starling, feral pigeon, and resident game birds. Mitigation measures are provided to reduce impacts below a level of significance for birds covered under the MBTA. No sensitive or listed plant species were observed in the proposed project area. Mitigation Measures M 3.4-1 Construction within the channel that occurs during the breeding season for raptors and other migratory birds (February 1 through August 31) would require weekly monitoring during construction for nesting bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. M 3.4-2 All necessary wetland permits will be obtained prior to project construction. Permit requirements are expected to include a Section 404 permit (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), a Section 401 Water Quality Certification/waiver (Regional Water Quality Control Board), and a Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement (California Department of Fish and Game). The conditions of these permits will be adhered to during all stages of project construction and operation. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. A formal determination and delineation of wetlands and other "waters of the U.S." was conducted by Dudek (1992). Results of this determination and delineation are presented in the Delineation of Wetlands of the Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project Riverside County California. In addition, a vegetation map for the project area was created in July 2001. Jurisdictional determinations for vegetation communities presented herein were made based on Dudek (1992) and vegetation mapping done in July' 2001. Due to yearly clearing of the creek bed by the ACOE and the dynamic nature of Murrieta Creek, the positioning and abundance Page 3-8 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures of vegetation communities and land cover types likely displays annual variability. In spite of this on-going flood control maintenance within the creek, the average position of the ordinary high water mark (OHM) should remain relatively constant. Three wetland/riparian communities and unvegetated open water or sand land cover types were defined within the proposed Rancho California Bridge project area (see Figure 3-1). The location of the OHM was not recorded during the July 2001 vegetation mapping; however information on the OHM is noted in Dudek (1992). The wetland/riparian communities (ephemeral wetland, freshwater marsh, and mulefat scrub) and unvegetated open water or sand cover types are within the OHM for Murrieta Creek. Therefore, the various wetland/riparian communities and open water/sand cover types are considered ACOE jurisdictional "Wetland .Waters of the U.S." and "Non-wetland Waters of the U.S." respectively. In addition, these communities and cover types are under the jurisdiction of the CDFG and the RWQCB. Due to the proposed impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and waters an ACOE Section 404 permit, a RWQCB 401 water quality certification, and a CDFG 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required. Two upland habitat types including non-native grasslands and disturbed habitat were defined within the proposed Ranch California Bridge project area. These habitat types may be under CDFG jurisdiction if they fall within the banks of Murrieta Creek. The extent of agency jurisdiction for upland habitats will be determined in the regulatory permit process. The vegetation communities and cover types located in the project area are described briefly below. Ephemeral wetlands are .low-lying areas adjacent to creeks, with gently-sloping banks subject to irregular flooding. Typical species include telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), Mexican tea (Chenodiurn arnbrosioides), common horseweed (Conyza canadensis), northern willow herb ( Epilobiurn ciliatum ), common sunflower ( Helianthus annus), white sweetclover (Melilotus indica), giant creek nettle (Unica dioica ssp. holoserica), cocklebur (Xanthiurn strutnariutn), rabbits-foot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), lowland cudweed (Gnaphaliurn palustre), barnyard grass (Echinochloa crusgalli), and smooth tarplant (Hernizonia pungens ssp. laevis). Freshwater marsh (referred to as "coastal and valley freshwater marsh" by Holland [1986]) is a community dominated by perennial, emergent monocots, which grow in standing fresh water. Uniform stands of bulrushes (Scirpus spp.) or cattails (Typha latif°lia) often characterize this habitat. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-9 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mulefat scrub is a riparian shrub community that is strongly dominated by mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), in association with scattered willow species (Salix spp.), heliotrope (Heliotropum curassavicum), mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), and blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana). In addition to the species typically found in mulefat scrub habitat, on the banks of the Murrieta Creek channel, but outside of the project impact areas are scattered mature cottonwood (Populusfremontii) and willow trees. Non-native grassland is a disturbance-related community most often found in old fields or openings in native scrub habitats. Typical grasses within the region include wild oat (Avena spp.), soft chess (Bromus mollis), red brome (Bromus rubens), ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), and foxtail rescue ( Vulpia megalura). Disturbed habitat is any land on which the native vegetation has been significantly altered by agriculture, construction, or other land-clearing activitieS, and the species composition and site conditions are not otherwise characteristic of the disturbed phase of one of the plant associations within the study region. Typical plant species include Russian~thistle, tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus), sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), horseweed (Conyza spp.), mustard (Brassica spp.), lamb's quarters (Chenopodium album), fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum), and castor bean (Ricinus communis), among others. Nonnative trees, such as eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), pepper-trees (Schinus sp.), and Russian olive (Olea europea), can also occur in this association. The loss of habitat that is regionally unique, declining, or designated sensitive by resource agencies, such as wetland and riparian habitats which occur in the proposed project boundaries, would be considered a potentially significant impact due to the sensitivity of these habitats. Table 3-5 lists the permanent and temporary impacts to the described vegetation communities, as well as the open water and sand cover, in the project area. All vegetation under the widened bridge deck is considered to be permanently impacted; whereas, alt vegetation within the 50-foot construction boundary on either side of the widened bridge is considered to be temporarily impacted. The 50-foot temporary impact boundary encompasses all ~eas of potential disturbance, including the footprint of the Armorfelx and A-Jacks structures. Mitigation measures are provided to reduce the permanent and temporary impacts of the project to a less than significant level. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-11 So,roes: U.S. Army Ceq~ of Englneem. EDAW 200 Feet Figure 3-1 Vegetation Communities Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-5. Permanent and Temporary Vegetation Impacts Impact Type I Impact Area (acres) PERMANENT IMPACTS ACOE, RWQCB and CDFG Jurisdictional Wetland and Riparian Habitats Frcshwa~gr marsh 0.068 Mulefat Scrub 0.264 Open Water/Sand 0.031 Ephemeral Wetland 0.034 Total 0.397 Upland Habitats* Non-native Grassland 0.019 Disturbed Habitat 0.028 Total 0.047 TEMPORARY IMPACTS (worst-case based on 50-fl construction zones) ACOE, RWQCB and CDFG Jurisdictional Wetland and Riparian Habitats Freshwater marsh 0.094 Mulefat scrub 0.522 Open Water/Sand 0.100 Ephemeral Wetland 0.081 Total 0.797 Upland Habitats* Non-native Grassland 0.061 Disturbed Habitat 0.054 Total 0.115 * These habitat types may be under CDFG jtuisdiction if they fall within banks of Murrieta Creek. The extent of agency jurisdiction for upland habitats will be determined in the regulatory permit process. To meet the objectives of the Rancho California Bridge Widening Project, unavoidable impacts to sensitive resources would occur. Resource agency policies (i.e., ACOE, CDFG, RWQCB) require that avoidance and/or minimization, to the extent practicable, of damages to ecological and water resources must be demonstrated, that unavoidable damages to ecological resources have been compensated to the extent justified and adverse impacts to wetlands have been compensated, and tha{ restoration opportunities for significant ecological resources have been given appropriate consideration. The measures provided below address these agency requirements and are consistent with the type and extent of mitigation that would be required for the regulatory permits. Implementation of these measures would ensure that all permanent and temporary impacts to sensitive wetlands would be mitigated to a level below significance. Page 3-12 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures Permanent Impacts M 3.4-3 In-kind compensatory mitigation will be required for all significant losses of wetlands and riparian habitat. As indicated in Table 3-6 below, this will require the creation of 0.797 acre of habitat to compensate for the permanent impacts to freshwater marsh, mulefat scrub, open water/sand, and ephemeral wetland. This habitat creation shall occur within or adjacent to the Murrieta Creek system in areas not affected by the proposed bridge widening or the proposed ACOE flood control project. Table 3-6. Mitigation Requirements Impact Quantity Total Mitigation Type of Resource (acres) Mitigation Ratio (acres) Permanent Impacts Freshwater Marsh 0.068 3:1 0.204 Mulefat Scrub 0.264 2:1 0.528 Open Water/Sand 0.031 1:1 0.031 Ephemeral Wetland 0.034 1:1 0.034 Total (permanent impacts)~ 0.397 0.797 Temporary Impacts Freshwater Marsh 0.094 1:1 0.094 Mulefat Scrub 0.522 1:1 0.522 Open Water/Sand 0.100 1:1 0.100 Ephemeral Wetland 0.081 1:1 0.081 Total (temporary impacts) 0.797 0.797 Wetland and riparian habitat creation must occur in areas with suitable hydrology and soils to support the respective habitats (i.e., mulefat scrub, freshwater marsh, open water/sand, and ephemeral wetland). Habitat creation for mulefat scrub will include, but may not be limited to, as combination of vegetating the mitigation site with select container plantings, use of pole plantings, application of a native hydroseed mix, and a three- to five-year maintenance and monitoring program to ensure that a native plant cover is achieved and aggressive nonnative species (i.e., giant reed and tamarisk) do not out-compete the native species. The monitoring and maintenance requirements described below (under Temporary Impacts) will also be applicable to the 0.797 acre of wetland and riparian habitat creation. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-13 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Freshwater marsh creation areas will be contoured to provide the appropriate hydrology and allowed to naturally recruit marsh vegetation such as Scirpus sp. and Typha sp. It is expected that natural vegetation establishment in these areas will occur rapidly from recruitment of upstream seed and asexual reproduction. A three- to five-year maintenance and monitoring program will be required to ensure that a native plant cover is achieved and aggressive nonnative species (i.e., giant reed and tamarisk) do not out-compete the native species. Open water/sand and ephemeral wetlands are currently devoid of vegetation. Open areas provide structural divemity within wetland communities and could be incorporated into the mitigation plan. However, additional freshwater marsh or mulefat scrub habitat could also be created at the mitigation site to offset the loss of the unvegetated areas at the project site. The site-specific conditions at the selected mitigation site, as well as discussions with the resoume agencies, will determine whether open water and sand cover, or additional vegetated wetlands, compensate for the loss of the unvegetated portion of the creek that is permanently impacted. As with the other habitat mitigation areas, there will be a three- to five-year maintenance and monitoring program to ensure that a native plant cover is achieved and aggressive nonnative species (i.e., giant reed and tamarisk) do not out-compete the native species. Temporary Impacts M 3.4-4 Temporary impacts would be mitigated through the implementation of a revegetation plan designed to minimize the duration of temporary impacts by accelerating the natural recruitment process within the affected areas. A total of 0.797 acre of revegetation would occur in portions of the channel and along the lower portions of the channel slopes in areas that do not conflict with the ACOE' s flood control project for Murcieta Creek. Based on field observations and a review of composite aerial photographs, the in-stream wetland vegetation appears to be relatively resilient to the frequent channel disturbance conducted by the RCFC&WCD. Therefore, the riparian habitat within the temporary impact areas is expected to recover to its pre-construction condition rather rapidly through natural recruitment and regeneration. Mitigation options for temporary impacts have been formulated to facilitate the recovery precess and/or to minimize the potential for exotic species re-establishment. Therefore, fo~ temporary Page 3-14 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures impacts to all jurisdictional wetlands, the areas will be planted with native species, including tree transplants, as feasible, to enhance the canopy cover. Overall, the objective of compensating for temporal losses is to facilitate and enhance the natural recruitment of native species. To further minimize the temporal losses, the removal of riparian vegetation deemed suitable for nesting will be prohibited during the period March 15 through July 30. In making this determination, the quality, composition, and patch size will be taken into consideration. Have it substantial adverse effect on 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, filling, hydrological interruption, other means? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. The proposed Rancho California Bridge Widening project would impact ACOE jurisdictional wetlands through direct removal of wetland vegetation as described in Table 3-5 and through hydrological interruption with the placement of new bridge pilings. Therefore, this project would require application for a Section 404 permit due to the substantial adverse effects on federally protected wetlands. The mitigation measures described in Table 3-6 would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures described in Section 3.4(b) may be refined through the ACOE permit application process. 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 ? Less Than Significantlmpact. The current status of Murrieta Creek allows for movement of wildlife within the banks of the creek, but the limited width of the riparian habitat and extended length of the stream course does not allow for the system to assume the designation of a habitat linkage or wildlife corridor as defined by Ogden (1992). Currently, there is a diverse mosaic of vegetation communities in the Murrieta Creek study area, but rapid development in the past 30 years has encroached upon the riparian system. Additionally, RCFC&WCD maintenance activities have limited the development of mature overstory and thicket development within certain portions of Murrieta Creek. As discussed in Section 3.4(a) above, Murrieta Creek connects a north-south corridor between open space areas of high quality habitat and other substantial drainages within the Santa Margarita watershed. Riparian obligate migratory birds usually choose wide patches of forest or woodland for nesting, but may use thinner patches for foraging during their migration. It is unknown if Murrieta Creek Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-15 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures provides a viable route for movement of sensitive bird species between tributaries. However, the proposed project could potentially interfere with the movement of certain resident or migratory bird species, as well as, reptile and mammal species. Avoiding construction during the breeding season as described in Section 3.4(a) would mitigate for impacts to resident and migratory bird movement. Impacts to reptile and mammal species would not be substantial because no listed species are known for the project area and impacts to wildlife movement would be temporary. No impacts to migratory fish species would occur in the project area. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance ? No Impact. There are no known local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources in the project area. As such, impacts would not occur. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. Currently Riversid county is preparing a Multiple Species and Habitat Conservation Plan for Western Riverside County (MSHCP). It is planned that the MSHCP will encompass such habitats as Riversidean sage scrub, and populations of Stevens' kangaroo rat. However, wetlands resources, although discussed in the plan, will not be affected by the MSHCP implementing agreements, as they will continue to be regulated by the ACOE and CDFG. The proposed project would impact wetland resource habitats and non-native grasslands; therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP. Impacts to wetland r6sources would be addressed through the application of ACOE and CDFG permits as discussed above. 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? No Impact. For the recently prepared Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project EIS/EIR, the ACOE conducted a records and literature search through the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside. Information obtained from the EIC included data from the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), Office of Historic Preservation's (OHP) Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, Page 3-16 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures OHP's Historic Property Data File (dated January 15, 1997), copies of the 1901 USGS Topographic Quadrangles of Elsinore and San Luis Rey, and a copy of the NRHP listing for the Murrieta Creek Archaeological Area (MCAA). In 1999, the ACOE also conducted a field survey of the flood control pr6ject area, which encompasses the entire Rancho California Road bridge widening project area. This field survey was conducted to supplement a comprehensive survey of the creek conducted in 1992 by the RCFC&WCD. The records search and surveys described above are used as the basis for this IS/MND analysis. Based on the previous field surveys and records search, 31 recorded historic buildings have been identified within the City of Temecula. The earliest construction date for these buildings is 1882, with most dating from the early 20* century. These buildings represent the early settlement and development of the Temecula Valley. None of these buildings would be affected by the proposed bridge widening project. Four historic archaeological sites were identified witlfin a one-mile radius of the creek, none of which are located near the Rancho California Road bridge widening project area of potential effect. The Rancho California Road bridge, constructed in 1970, is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and is not considered an historic resource. Because the project would not affect any historic resources as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, impacts would not occur. No mitigation measures for historic resources would be required. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact. Several prehistoric archaeological sites are known to be present within a one-mile radius of the creek in the project area. Three of these sites are listed on the National Register of Historical Places (National Register). Most of the sites in the area consist of sparse scatters of flaked stone from the manufacture of stone tools, campsites, and village sites. Many of the sites found in the records search may no longer be in existence due to the rapid urbanization and development of the surrounding area. None of the sites identified in the records search or ACOE field surveys are located in the area of potential effect; therefore, buried archaeological resources are not anticipated to be encountered during the limited subsi~fface excavation and earthwork required to construct the bridge supports and abutments. Also, the project's ground-disturbing activities would primarily occur in the active floodplain of the creek where buried archaeological resources would not be expected to occur. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND ' Page 3-17 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Accordingly, the project is not anticipated to cause an adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. The bridge widening project would involve limited subsurface excavation in an active floodplain where paleontological resources are not anticipated to occur. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, there are no sensitive paleontological areas on-site and in the immediate vicinity of the existing Rancho California Road bridge; the project site and its vicinity also do not support any unique geologic feature. As such, the project is not anticipated to cause an adverse change in the significance of a paleontological resource or unique geologic feature. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of forrnal cemeteries? No Impact. No human remains are anticipated to exist in the Murrieta Creek floodplain; similarly, no cemeteries are located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. As described under 3.5(b), there are several archaeological sites located within one mile of the project site; however, none are located near the area of potential' effect. In addition, the project would involve only limited subsurface excavation to construct the bridge supports and scour protection features. Accordingly, the proposed project would not result in the disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside of.formal cemeteries. 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 0 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. No Impact. The Elsinore Fault Zone, shown on Figure 3-2, is one of the largest and least active fault zones in southern California. There are three faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone that are designated as Special Studies Zones under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Page 3-18 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Figure 3-2 Regional Fault Map Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draf~ IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures Zone Act of 1972 (see Figure 3-3). The Willard Fault Special Studies Zone, located immediately northwest of the project site, generally marks the boundary between the Santa Ana and Elsinore Mountains. The Wildomar Fault Special Studies Zone, is located approximately half a mile east of the project site. The Wolf Valley Fault Special Studies Zone, located south of Temecula Creek, is approximately 2.5 miles south of the bridge. The bridge is located outside of the three Alquist-Priolo special studies zones. Because no habitable structures are proposed, it is expected that the seismic conditions at the project area would be satisfactorily addressed through standard construction and engineering practices as required per Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (1999) and Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications. Fault rapture is not anticipated at the project site; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. A major earthquake on any of the faults near the project site, including the Willard fault, Wildomar fault, and Wolf Valley fault, could generate strong ground shaking in the general area and could cause portions of the bridge to collapse. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the project site is within Groundshaking Zone II, a County-established zone indicating the level of risk from grotindshaking based on distance from faults and geologic characteristics of an area. Groundshaking in Zone II is expected to vary from moderate to intense in the event of an earthquake, depending on the composition of underlying geologic formations, the earthquake's epicenter, and the order of magnitUde of the seismic event. It is expected that the seismic hazards in the project area would be satisfactorily addressed through standard bridge construction and engineering practices and site-specific seismic design requirements. The bridge must conform with all applicable design and engineering requirements as well as any recommendations set forth in geology and soil investigations prepared for this project. Page 3-20 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND '~ General Kearny Rd Willard Fault Zone -Temecula JIt Zone PROJECT SITE ,S. GAGE River Wolf Valley Temecttla Creek~ Fault Zone~ MILES Figure 3-3 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draft ISfMND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction ? Less Than Significant Impact. The potential for liquefaction in an area is a function of soil type and depth of groundwater. Soils that are poorly consolidated and combine with groundwater during an earthquake loose their shear strength and take on the properties of a heavy liquid. Liquefaction can result in the loss of foundation support, ground failure due to lateral spreading, and settlement of affected soils. As shown on Figure 34, the project site is located within a liquefaction hazard area. Geotechnical investigations undertaken for this project identified the potential for liquefaction (lateral spreading) and slope failure near the eastern abutment of the bridge. However, it is expected that these seismic hazards would be satisfactorily addressed through standard bridge construction and engineering practices and site-specific seismic design requirements, including the stone columns described in Section 1.4, Construction Scenario. iv) Landslides? No Impact. Landslides are a geologic process that can be induced by seismic activity. This process involves the downslope movement of geologic materials. The stability of slopes is ' related to a variety of factors, including the slope's steepness; the strength of geologic materials in terms of resistance to the downslope stress of gravity; the characteristics of bedding planes, joints, and faults; and surface water and groundwater conditions. Potential landslide conditions in the hillside areas of the City of Temecula may pose constraints to development; however, the project site is not located immediately adjacent to any hillside areas in the City. The potential for landslides in the project vicinity is considered low and impacts related to landslides would be less than significant. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project, which would involve ihe addition of several lanes to the existing bridge, would require minor excavation to accommodate the installation of the bridge foundations, support columns, and scour protection features. This is not anticipated to result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Page 3-22 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND PROJECT SITE Figure 3-4 Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project Draft IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a kesult of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse ? Less Than Significant Impact. As shown on Figure 3-4, the bridge is located within a liquefaction and potential subsidence hazard area. However, it is expected that the seismic conditions, including liquefaction, lateral spreading, and subsidence in the project area would be satisfactorily addressed through standard bridge construction and engineering practices and site-specific seismic design requirements, including the stone column features near the eastern abutment. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located on expansive soil. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the project site is located within an area of potential subsidence, which results from the shrinking of earth material caused by natural or artificial removal of underlying support. As described above, it is expected that soil hazards in the project area would · be satisfactorily addressed through standard bridge construction and engineering practices and site- specific design requirements. e. Have soils 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? No Impact. The proposed project would not require the use of septic tanks or alteroative wastewater disposal systems and would not result in any wastewater generation. Therefo~e, no impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or othe? wastewater disposal systems would occur. 3,7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ~ Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed bridge widening project would not result in the use or disposal of hazardous materials; however, like many other urban streets and freeways in the project area, the bridge may be used by vehicles carrying hazardous substances. The proposed project would not result in any increased hazard to the public or the environment, compared to existing conditions, and would not create a significant impact. Page 3-24 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Miti[~ation Measures Create 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? No Impact. The proposed bridge widening project would not result in any increased hazard to the public or the environment through the accidental explosion or release of hazardous materials, compared to .existing conditions. Mitigation measures to address potential groundwater~ contamination are provided in Section 3.8(a). If contaminated soils are encountered during excavation, proper handling procedures would be implemented by the construction contractor and contaminated soils would be disposed of at a certified landfill. Accordingly, the proposed project would not pose a significant risk to the public. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The proposed project may result in the treatment of contaminated groundwater and disposal of a small amount of contaminated soil during construction; however, there are no existing or proposed schools within one-quarter mile of the project site. As such, the proposed project would not create a significant impact from hazardous materials near schools. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials siteb compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. A hazardous materials database search was conducted for this project (see Appendix A). As indicated in this report, the Rancho California Road bridge widening project site is not included on the list of hazardous materials sites. Several known hazardous material sites are located in the general vicinity of the bridge. The nearest sites are located to the east and south of the bridge along Front Street and Rancho California Road where several underground storage tanks (USTs) have been identified. Several of these sites, including county, regional, and state leaking USTs, are located under one quarter of a mile from the site. In general, these sites are associated with underground gasoline storage tanks at existing gas stations. These potential sources of contamination are located outside of the immediate project area, however, and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from the projecL Since the existing bridge is not a hazardous materials generator, its proposed expansion is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-25 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures eo 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 result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area ? No Impact. There are no airports located within two miles of the site, nor is the project located within airport land use plan boundaries; therefore, no impacts regarding airport safety hazards would result. The nearest airport to the project site is the Bear Creek Airport, approximately seven miles north west of the Rancho California Road bridge. This airport supports light aircraft on a dirt airstrip. 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 ? No Impact. The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, no impacts regarding airport safety hazards would result. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plain or emergency evacuation plan ? Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not result in any road closures or significant traffic delays during construction. Construction activities would be accomplished in such a manner as not to affect normal traffic flow across the Rancho California Road bridge; therefore, the project would not hamper any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. Upon completion of the project, access to and from the opposite side of the creek would be improved. This would have a beneficial effect on emergency response or evacuation efforts requiring access to both sides of the creek. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands ? No Impact. The proposed bridge widening project would not result in the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland rites. The bridge site, surrounded by commercial, industrial, and residential land uses, does not abut any wildlands. As such, impacts related to wildland fire hazards would not occur. Page 3-26 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. Under Section 40i of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the RWQCB implements the water quality certification process for any activity that requires a federal permit or license and that may result in the discharge of pollutants into "waters of the U.S.," including wetlands. As this project would result in the latter, a Water Quality Certification/Waiver would be required for project construction. For this project, a request for water quality ceaification or waiver would be submitted to the San Diego Region of the RWQCB. The San Diego RWQCB would review the proposal to determine whether the activity would comply With state water quality objectives identified in the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9) (Basin Plan) and, subsequently, either issue a certification with conditions or deny the certification. Adherence to this process would ensure that the proposed project complies with established water quality standards pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The San Diego RWQCB enfomes water quality standards within Murrieta Creek to assure that water quality-related impairment of beneficial uses for the creek are minimized. Beneficial uses for surface water resources in the region were established by the Basin Plan. The following beneficial uses are applicable to Munieta Creek: Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN); Agricultural Supply (AGR); Contact Water Recreation (REC-1); Non-contact Water Recreation (REC-2); Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM); and Wildlife Habitat (WILD). Some of these beneficial uses (e.g., WARM and WII.D) may be affected during construction; however, impacts would not be significant when considered in conjunction with the required mitigation measures for hydrology/water quality and biological resources (Section 3.4). The project's long-term effect on beneficial uses would be less than significant. The RWQCB implements provisions of Section 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act and, in particular, administers permitting procedures for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). NPDES regulations apply to stormwater discharges and area-wide generators of urban runoff. Under the EPA's Stormwater Phase I Final Rule, NPDES stormwater permits are required for construction projects that disturb greater than five acres of land and for certain industrial facilities. The project would disturb less than five acres of land; however, because of the project's dewatering requirements and the existence of groundwater contamination immediately east of the site, a NPDES permit for waste discharges to surface waters may be required. Parties may apply for coverage under a General NPDES Permit by submitting a Notice of Intent to the RWQCB. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-27 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures The project would require dewatering to a depth of approximately 10 feet for installation of seismic steel jackets around the existing bridge columns. Groundwater samples conducted at the northwestern comer of Rancho California Road and Jefferson Avenue in December 2001 indicate that dissolved-phase methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) is present in the groundwater near the east side of the creek: Accordingly, wastewater generated by dewatering a6tivities may need to be treated and discharged under an NPDES permit for construction &watering. Groundwater contamination levels are not 6xpected to affect public health or worker safety during construction; however, mitigation measures are provided to ensure that dewatering activities do not significantly impair beneficial uses of the creek or violate any water quality standards. Mitigation Measures M3.8-1 Prior to construction, groundwater samples will be taken at the proposed dewatering locations on the eastern side of the bridge. Sampling locations will be selected based on the potential for MTBE contamination from nearby sources, including the gas stations at the northeast and southeast comers of Rancho California Road and Jefferson Avenue. The sampling results, combined with any recent groundwater monitoring data, will serve as the baseline data for the project's &watering activities. Dewatering activities shall be undertaken using one of three methods: discharge to a sanitary sewer system, transport offsite using a disposal contractor, or discharge into a storm drainage system or Murrieta Creek in compliance with an NPDES permit. Under each of these options, the City shall prepare a dewatering plan, describing the basic components of the &watering system and its planned method of operations. Specific mitigation requirements for each of the three options are discussed below. Disposal in Sanitary Sewer System Prior to construction, the City will coordinate with the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) to determine testing, monitoring, and disposal requirements for the dewatering effluent. Based on the level of contamination identified at the site, the City will implement best available technology (BAT) economically achievable to ensure that pollutant concentrations in the wastewater discharge do not exceed the disposal requirements. If the treated effluent is discharged only into the sanitary sewer system, an NPDES permit is not required. Page 3-28 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Miti[~ation Measures Transport Offsite Under this option, dewatering effluent will be removed from the site by a licensed commemial transportation, storage, and disposal (TSD) contractor. If less than 100,000 gallons per day (gpd) of treated dewatering effluent are generated, no permits from the RWQCB will be required. If all dewatering effluent is transported offsite, an NPDES permit is not required. Discharge into Storm Drainage System or Murrieta Creek Under this option, the City will coordinate with the RWQCB regarding the disposal of dewatering effluent in local storm drains or the creek. If contamination levels exceed RWQCB effluent limitations, the project must comply with RWQCB's Tentative Order 2001-96 prior to discharging any wastewater. BMPs and BAT will be implemented to ensure that Pollutant concentrations in the wastewater discharge do not cause violation of any applicable water quality objective for the receiving waters, including discharge prohibitions. In addition, BAT will be implemented to ensure that the discharges do not cause acute nor chronic toxicity in receiving waters. Dewatering activities will be monitored under RWQCB' s Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2001-96. Monitoring of groundwater discharge will be undertaken using "indicator constituents" for petroleum related compounds, to ensure that petroleum related contaminants are removed from the waste stream. 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 (i.e., 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) ? No Impact. Boring samples taken at the project site indicate that groundwater is present from 16 to 22 feet below the ground surface. The new support columns for the bridge widening project would extend up to 90 feet under the ground surface; however, dewatering would only occur at depths of up to 10 feet during installation of seismic steel jackets on the existing columns. The new support columns would occupy a small portion of the overall creekbed and would not alter the dynamics of the Iow-flow channel. Accordingly, the bridge widening project would have a negligible effect on groundwater supplies and groundwater recharge along Murrieta Creek. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/IVlND Page 3-29 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course ora stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No Impact. The new support columns would be placed in-line With the existing bridge supports, as not to alter the normal flow characteristics of the creek. In addition, the current mad bed elevation and freeboard clearance would be maintained so that the flow characteristics of the creek would not be affected in large storm events. Inclusion of the Armorflex and A-Jacks scour protection features would also prevent substantial erosion from occurring. Accordingly, the project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the creek nor would it result in substantial erosion or siltation. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to 3.8(c) above. eo Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. No Impact. Widening of the bridge would have a negligible effect on surface water flows and drainage patterns. After the project, runoff from the bridge would continue to flow to local storm drains on either side of the creek. Given the relatively minimal increase in paved surface area, the quantity of runoff would remain essentially unchanged. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. Site preparation, excavation, minor grading; and other ground disturbing activities could discharge soil and sediment directly into stormwater runoff. Soil transported by stormwater or discharged directly into the channel could increase turbidity, stimulate the growth of nuisance algae and aquatic plants, and increase sedimentation of habitat used by aquatic organisms along Murrieta Creek. Construction activities also have the potential to discharge hazardous substances such as fuel, oils, greases, and other petroleum products into surface water. Hazardous materials that enter water bodies can be toxic to aquatic organisms and other terrestrial wildlife that inhabit the area. Page 3-30 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures The project would comply with all applicable guidelines protecting water quality (particularly Clean Water Act Sections 401, 402, and 404). As described under 3.7(a), RWQCB Water Quality Certification/Waiver would be obtained. It is likely that dewatering would be required during construction; therefore, a RWQCB dewatering permit would also be required which would identify specific BMPs for dewatering activities (see Measure M 3.8-1). Although construction activities would occur during the dry season (April 1 through November 30), mitigation measures would be required to reduce potential water quality impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures M3.8-2 Construction of the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project within the 100- year floodplain will occur between April 1 and November 30. M 3.8-3 All construction staging activities must occur at least 150 feet away from the creek. Staging areas outside of the designated construction boundaries in the creek will be approved by an environmental monitor prior to use. M3.8-4 BMPs will be in6orporated before, during, and after construction to minimize erosion and runoff from constmction activities. At minimum, the BMPs will include: Equipment access routes will be selected as to minimize ground disturbance and contaminated runoff. Silt fences will be installed at the toe of slopes to prevent sloughing of material into the channel. Cut and fill slopes disturbed during construction will be revegetated with the appropriate native ground cover vegetation. M 3.8-5 Measures to reduce turbidity during construction will include, at minimum, the following: No work will be allowed in flowing water and no "wet crossings" will be permitted. If the creek must be crossed by construction equipment, a. temporary bridge shall be installed. Catchment basins utilizing geotextile filter fabric, gravel bags, or other BMPs will be placed downstream of any activity that may cause turbidity in the creek. Such devices will reduce turbidity to the level immediately upstream of the project. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-31 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures M 3.8-6 Conditions required by the 401, NPDES, and 404 permits will be strictly adhered to during construction to reduce impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. M 3.8-7 Strict construction site~mles for handling hazardous materials will be implemented to prevent spills and provide controlled storage areas away from the creek. Petroleum products, concrete, asphalt or other coating materials, and other hazardous materials will be stored a minimum of 150 feet away from the creek and hazardous materials will be prevented from contaminating soil or entering surface waters. M3.8-8 Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the creek will be properly maintained to minimize leaks. Parking of motorized equipment will be located outside of the creek and positioned over drip pans. Place housing within a l O0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation hump? No Impact. No housing would be constructed as a result of this project; therefore, impacts regarding 100-year flood hazards would not occur. Place within a 100-yearfiood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed under 3.7(c), new support columns would be placed in-line with the existing bridg~ supports. This would ensure that the project does not alter the normal flow characteristics of the creek. Also, the bridge has been designed to maintain the current freeboard clearance. By maintaining the existing freeboard clearance, the project would not alter the flow characteristics of the creek during large flood events. 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? No Impact. The project would not increase the potential for flooding along Murrieta Creek. As described under 3.8(h), the bridge modifications have been specifically designed to be consistent with the ACOE flood control project and not exacerbate the existing flood potential. Page 3-32 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures j. Inundation by seiche; tsunami, or mudflow ? No Impact. The project site is nearly 22 miles from the Pacific Ocean at an elevation of approximately 1,000 feet above sea level, and there are no large bodies of water in the general vicinity. Accordingly, inundation by tsunami or seiche is highly improbable. The potential for inundation by mudflow in the channel would not change as a result of the bridge widening project. 3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community ? No Impact. The project involves the widening of an existing bridge in a developed area. No communities would be physically divided by the project. Conflict with any 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 mitigating an environmental effect ? Less Than Significant Impact. Rancho California Road is identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. East of the Murrieta Creek bridge crossing, the road is designated as a four-lane arterial highway. To the west of the bridge, Rancho Califomia Road is identified as a four-lane secondary highway. The bridge would provide five through traffic lanes where only four- lane roads are designated on the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. The additional lanes are needed to provide adequate room for vehicle storage between the Front Street and Diaz Road intersections which are less than 400 feet apart. This additional width would not significantly conflict with the circulation element since no new lanes would be added outside of the bridge. · Widening the bridge would be consistent with the General Plan, in that it would alleviate the "bottle neck" at Rancho Califomia Road and allow more efficient traffic flow along the highway and across the bridge. The improved traffic circulation would be a beneficial land use impact. The creek is designated as Open Space/Recreation in the City's General Plan. Support columns for existing roadways are permitted on open ~pace lands. Although the project would result in some temporary and permanent impacts to biological resources, the project would not conflict with the Open Space/Conservation Element of the General Plan. As discussed in Section 3.4, Biological Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-33 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Resources, mitigation measures are provided to reduce temporary and permanent impacts from construction of bridge components to a less than significant level. c. C~nflict with any applicable habitat c~nservati~n plan ~r natural c~mmunities c~nservati~n plan ? No 'Impact. Refer to Section 3.4(0. 3.10 MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a. 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? No Impact. The bridge widening project would involve minimal ground disturbance. Also, there are no known mineral resources of value to the region or the state within the immediate project area. Considering these factors, the project would have no effect on mineral resources. b. 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 ? No Impact. Refer to 3.10(a) above. 3.11 NOISE - Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies ? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Temecula General Plan, adopted in 1993, includes a Noise Element that assesses community noise and contains noise policies and implementation programs to address the effects of noise related to development of lands under this plan. The Noise Element provides noise standards to be used as a basis for impact analyses. Table 3-7 identifies these standards. Page 3-34 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS[MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-7 City of Temecu.la Noise Standards (db CNEL) Land Use Interior Standard Exterior Standard Residential 45 65~ Commercial - 70 Professional office 50 70 Business Park/Industrial 55 75 Public/Institutional Facilities 50 70 Open Space/Recreation -- 652 Schools 50 65 Pursuant to Plans and Ordinances No. 2, a maximum exterior noise level u ) to 70 db CNEL is allowed for Multiple-family Housing. Where quiet is a basis for use. Construction Noise The City of Temecula Noise Ordinance contains specific requirements for construction-related noise. · This ordinance requires that whenever a construction site is within 0.25 mile of an occupied residence, no construction activities shall be undertaken between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May. Exceptions to these standards are only allowed through the written consent of the City's building official. Land uses that would be exposed to noise from bridge construction activities primarily include business and commercial uses located adjacent to the creek on or near Rancho California Road. There are some medium to high density residential units along the creek south of the project area; however, these residences are greater than 0.25 mile (1320 feet) from the project site. As such, the construction-timing requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance would not apply. The types of equipment that may be used during construction include a loader, bulldozer, pavers, trucks, pumps, generators, and other equipment described in Section 1.4. Construction activities are expected to occur five days per week for 10 hours a day, over the nine-month construction period. Table 3-8 presents noise levels associated with various types of construction-related equipment, including those listed above. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-35 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 3-8 Construction Equipment Source Noise Levels Equipment Type Typical Equipment at 50 ft. (in dBA) Quie~t Equipment at 50 ft. (in dBA)' Air Compressor 81 71 Backhoe 85 80 Concrete Pump 82 80 Concrete Vibrator 76 70 Concrete Breaker 82 75 Truck Crane 88 80 Dozer 87 83 Generator 78 71 Loader 84 80 Paver 88 80 Pneumatic Tools 85 75 Water Pump 76 71 Power Hand Saw 78 70 Pile Driver 90 80 Shovel 82 80 Trucks 88 83 ~ Quieted equipment can be degigned with enclosures~ muffiers~ or other noise-reducing features. Source: Boll et al. 1971 Table 3-9 shows typical noise levels associated with different stages of construction. Noise levels would decrease by approximately six dBA with each doubling of distance from the construction site (e.g., noise levels from excavation would be approximately 83 dBA at 100 feet from the site and about 77 dBA at 200 feet from the site). Interior noise levels would be approximately 10 dBA (open windows) to 20 dBA (closed windows) less than exterior noise levels (Comett, et. al. 1979). ~able 3-9 Typical Construction Noise Levels Construction Phase Noise Levels (dBA, Ground Clearing 84 Excavation 89 Foundation 78 Erection 85 Finishing 89 *Average noise levels 50 feet from the noisiest source associated with a given construction phase. Source: Bolt, et. al. 1971 The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residences along the creek to the south, which are located approximately 1,800 feet from the existing bridge, and a senior citizens center to the southeast near Sam Hicks Memorial Park, which is located approximately 1,500 feet from the Page 3-36 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitisation Measures existing bridge. Accordingly, exterior noise levels would not exceed 60 dBA at the nearest residences. The senior citizens center is located several blocks from the bridge along 6th Street. Noise generated by construction activities at the bridge would not be audible at the senior citizens center due to the distance of separation and the numerous structures that serve as barriers between the two locations. Assuming that exterior noise levels would not exce2x160 dBA, L~q, at the nearest residences in any given hour, the L,~, which is generally equivalent to CNEL, at the nearest residences would be less than 65 dBA. As such, impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant. b. Exp~sure ~f pers~ns t~ ~r generati~n ~f excessive gr~undb~rne vibrati~n ~r gr~undb~rne n~ise levels ? Less Than Significant Impact. Groundbome noise and vibration may be noticeable during major' foundation work but are not expected to be at significant levels that would disrupt normal activity. c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. Roadway noise would not significantly change as a result of the project. The addition of multiple lanes would increase the capacity of the bridge to handle more cars at any given time; however, traffic flow would be improved on and around the bridge, resulting in shorter cuing and stacking times. Noise impacts at the business park on the northwest comer of the bridge would not be significant, as the northern portion of the widened bridge would be occupied by a wide shoulder and bicycle lane. For these reasons, long-term noise generated by the project would not be significant. d. .A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed under 3.11(a), noise impacts would not exceed thresholds identified in the City of Temecula General Plan nor would the project violate the City's Noise Ordinance. Although construction activities would generate periodic noise during construction, the increase in noise above ambient levels would not be substantial. Impacts would be less than significant. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-37 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 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? No Impact. Them are no airports located within two miles of the site, nor is the project located within airport land use plan boundaries; therefore, impacts regarding airport noise would not result. f. For a project within the vicinity of a p~ivate airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels ? No Impact. The project iq not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, impacts regarding airport-related noise would not result. 3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? No Impact. The widening of the Rancho California Road bridge would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the area. Although the project would improve access to the west side of Murrieta Creek from Interstate 15 and Old Town Temecula, this would not alter growth patterns or population projections in the area. Residential development consistent with the Old Town Specific Plan Area ,'W,, and Specific Plan would continue in the project vicinity regardless of the project. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere ? No Impact. The project would not displace any homes; therefore, impacts would not occur. c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere ? No Impact. The project would not displace any homes; therefore, impacts would not occur. Page 3-38 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES go Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision 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? · Police protection? · Schools? · Parks? · Otherpublicfacilities? No Impact. The project would have a long-term beneficial impact on public services, in that it would improve access between the west and east sides of Murrieta Creek near Old Town Temecula. This would improve emergency response times and any other public services that rely on vehicular access to and from opposite sides of the creek. The project would have no discernable effect on schools or parks aside from improved public access. 3.14 RECREATION 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? No Impact. The bridge widening project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project would improve the travel time to parks on the both sides of the creek (e.g., Rotary Park on the west side of the creek just south of the bridge) due to improved traffic circulation; however, adverse impacts to recreation facilities would not occur. b. 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? No Impact. The project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities; therefore, impacts would not occur. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-39 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 3.15 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: go 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)? Less Than Significant Impact. The bridge widening project would not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The project would result in minimal disturbance to the existing roadway network during construction. No detours would be required and lane closures would be brief and infrequent. The addition of three lanes to the bridge would help reduce the "bottle neck" effect along Rancho California Road between Front Street and 1-15, and would improve overall traffic flow north of the Old Town area. The project would not substantially increase the total number of cars that cross the Rancho California Road bridge; rather, the project would improve traffic circulation patterns in the vicinity of the bridge and allow for more efficient traffic flow. b. Exceed~eitherindividually~rcumulatively~alevel~fservicestandardestablishedbythec~unty congestion management agency for designated roads or highways ? No Impact. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is the congestion management agency for Riverside County. The RCTC is responsible for implementing the Riverside County Conge§tion Management Program (CMP) which was adopted in Stptember t991. As mentioned in 3.15(a), the project would reduce the "bottle neck" effect along Rancho California Road between Front Street and 1-15 and improve overall traffic flow north of the Old Town area. Accordingly, the project would not significantly increase traffic demand at any intersections nor would it cause a significant increase in the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio on a freeway segment or freeway on- or off-ramp. Because the project would generate fewer than 50 peak-hour trips during construction, short-term impacts to CMP monitoring stations are not anticipated. c. 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 risks ? No Impact. The project would have no effect on air traffic patterns. Page 3-40 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures d. Substantiallyincreasehazardst~adesignfeature(e.g.~sharpcurves~rdanger~usintersecti~ns) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. The project would improve vehicular access in the vicinity of the Rancho California Road bridge. In order to accommodate the widened bridge, a traffic signal would be removed and a new driveway would b~ constructed at the commercial site near the southwest side of the bridge (28751 Rancho California Road). In addition, a new driveway would be constructed to provide improved access to the business park on the northwest side of the bridge. The widening of the bridge and the associated roadway improvements would not increase hazards to a design feature or result in incompatible uses. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. No detours would occur during the bridge widening activities. Temporary lane closures may occur as a result of the proposed street improvements east of the bridge; however, these impacts would be short-term and would not significantly affect emergency access. Overall, the project would improve access between the west and east sides of Murrieta Creek near Old Town Temecula. The improved access to and from opposite sides of the creek would benefit all forms of vehicle travel in the area, including emergency-related vehicles. Accordingly, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access. f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 1.2 (Description of Projec0, staging of construction equipment~would occur only on previously cleared, graded, or paved areas (including streets) or level areas where grading and vegetation removal are not required. Although some street parking may be temporarily displaced by equipment staging and construction worker's vehicles during the nine-monih construction period, impacts would be less than significant. Most construction staging would be expected to occur off of the City streets in open areas, such as the large open lot just north of the bridge along the west side of Diaz Road. g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. During construction, a temporary sidewalk would be maint,~ined along the south side of the bridge to allow continued pedestrian and bicycle access across Murrieta Creek via Rancho California Road. Upon completion of the bridge widening project, the sidewalk would be Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-41 3.0 Impacts and Mitigation Measures reconstructed on the north side of the bridge. The project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. 3.16 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. No wastewater generation would occur as a result of the bridge widening project; therefore, the project would have no effect on wastewater treatment requirements. b. 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? No Impact. The project would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. As such, impacts related to wastewater treatment facilities would not occur. c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects ? No Impact. The widening of the Rancho California Road bridge would result in a minor increase in impervious surface area. Two existing storms drains on the east side of the bridge would be replaced and a new drain would be constructed on the southwest side of the widened bridge. These storm drains would replace existing drainage features and would accommodate the minor increase in runoff from the new bridge deck. The construction of the new facilities would not cause significant environmental effects. Mitigation measures are provided in Section 3.4 to address temporary and permanent impacts to biological resoumes from the project. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The bridge widening project would not require water supplies; therefore, impacts would not occur. Page 342 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 3.0 Impacts and Mitil~ation Measures 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 ? No Impact. The project would not generate any wastewater. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs ? Less Than Significant impact. The project would generate a minimal amount of solid waste during construction. Any debris or refuse resulting from bridge widening activities would be recycled or disposed of at nearby landfills. g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. The bridge widening project would comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The project would not generate substantial quantities of waste nor would it involve the disposal of hazardous materials. Waste generated by the project would be limited to typical construction debris, including the outer portions of the bridge removed during construction (guardrail, etc.). This debris would be recycled or properly disposed of at nearby landfills. 3.17 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to. degrade the quality of the environment, bubstantially 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 or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periocls of California history or prehistory ? Less Than Significant After Mitigation. The bridge widening project would not 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, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. As discussed in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, mitigation measures are provided to reduce impacts to wetlands and riparian plant communities. The project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California histoE~ or prehistory. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 3-43 3.0 Impacts and Miti[~ation Measures 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.) Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not result in significant cumulative impacts. The bridge widening project was designed as not to conflict with the ACOE and RCFC&WCD's Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project. To accommodate the proposed flood control project, the bridge supports and abutments were placed outside of the proposed unmaintained vegetated corridor and the existing freeboard clearance of the bridge was maintained. In addition, other projects in the area may occur at the same time as the proposed project; however, the incremental effect of this project would not be cumulatively considerable. c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Mitigation measures are provided in Sections 3.4 and 3.8 in order to reduce the project's effects on biological resources and hydrology/water quality, respectively, below the level of significance. No additional mitigation measures would be required. Page 3-44 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND 4.0 List of Preparers SECTION 4.0 LIST OF PREPARERS This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by EDAW, Inc. for the citY of Temeeula. DocUment preparation personnel included: Eric Wilson, Project Manager Madonna Marcelo, Environmental Specialist Jennifer Dean, Environmental Analyst Kimberlee'Myers, Environmental Analyst Kim Lanford, Biological Resources Kevin Derby, Biological Resources Paula Jacks, Biological Resources Kristin Kaiser, QualitY Assurance/QualitY Control Terry McLeese, QualitY Assurance/Quality Control Eric Coughlin, Geographic Information Systems Dan Brady, Graphics Monica Diaz, Word Processing Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND Page 4-1 4.0 List of Preparers This page lef~ intentionally blank. Page 4~2 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project ISfMND 5.0 References SECTION 5.0 REFERENCES Bolt, Beranek, and Newman 1971 Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances, U.S. Protection Agency. California Air Resources Board 1998 URBEMIS7G (Version 3.1). Prepared for the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999 Tuolumne Street, Fresno, CA 93271. Prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates, 2600 V Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95818. California Department of Conservation 1998 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ftp site. Riverside County 1998 farmland inventory, ArcView shape file. Ftp://ftp.conserv.ca.gov/Pub/fmmpJ 1998/ES RI_ArcShape/riverside 1998.shp. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology 1997 Special Publication 42, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California. 1996 Open File Report 96-01N, Los Angeles Quadrangle. California Integrated Waste Management Board 2000 http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/SWlS/SWlS Srch.htm Comett, C. Lawrence and Hint~ Charles E. 1979 Methods for Predicting Noise and Vibration Impacts, U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Center. Dudek, Inc. 1993 Delineation of Wetlands of the Murrieta Creek flood Control Project Riverside County, California. Sept. 18, 30pp. South Coast Air Quality Management District 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook April. Rancho California Road Bridge~Wideniag Project IS/MND Page 5-1 5.0 References U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2000 Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project Final EIS/EIR. September. Page 5-2 Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project IS/MND APPENDIX A SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PARTIAL) RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT 'A Site Assessment Report was prepared for the Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Project in compliance with ASTM standards. Only those portions of the Site Assessment Report pertaining to the immediate project area are included in the following appendix. Project Name/Ref #: 00139 Rancho California Road/Overland Drive Murdeta Creek Temecula, CA 92590 Latitude/Lonqitude: ( 33.607500, 117.160555 Eric Wilson KEA Environmental 350 S. Grand Avenue # 3920-A Los Angeles, CA 90071 0 0 I 0 I 0 0 9 8 0 0 0 .0 4 3 0 0 6 3 0 0 For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~ion Z 7 Page ti 0 1 2 I NOTES For more information calt VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 ~ 0 0.4 0.8 Catogo~: A B C D Subioct Sito Databasos $oamhod to: t 1/2 mi. 1 mi. 3/4 mi. $/8 mi. ~ Highways and Major Roads NPL, SPL, CERCLIS\ UST ERNS, ~ Roads CORRACTS NFRAP, GENERATORS ~ Railroads (TSD) TSD, LUST, SWLF SCL For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 ~ 767 - 0403 Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Page #3 0.2 0.4 '~ ' ~ ~1' Miles Catego~: A B C D Subj~t Site Databa~s Seamhed to: 1 1/2 mi. 1 mi. ~4 mi. 5/8 mi. ~ Highways and Major Roads NP~ SP~ CERCLIS~ UST ERNS, ~ Roads CORRACTS NFRAP, GENERATORS ~ Railroads ~SD) TSD, LUST, SWLF SCL For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403 Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Page #4 ~~ ' Miles ' ~.~ Highways and Maior Roads Subject Site ~ Roads '~r ~ Bailroads "'-...--'"'"-. Rivers or Water Bodies For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800'- 767 - 0403 Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Page #5 CA 92590 CA 92590 CA 92590 CA 92593 CA 92590 43136 RANCHO I'EMECULA CA 92590 RANCHO TRANSMISSION [EMECULA CA 92590 SUPERIOR AUTO REPAIR I'EMECULA CA 92590 28696 VIA MONTEZUMA #103 TEMECULA CA 92590 BIANCHI INTERNATIONAl INC 100 CALLE CORTEZ TEMECULA CA 92590 BIANCHI INTERNATIONAL IN 100 CALLE CORTEZ TEMECULA CA 923900000 BIANCHI INTERNATIONAL 100 CALLE CORTEZ o. z7, TEMECULA CA 92590 X = search criteria; · = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Reporl: ID: 899001901 Date or Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page #6 [EMECULA, CA 92590 MOBIL 28111 FRONT ST I-EMECULA, CA 92590 NARIN OIL CO 28111 FRONT TEMECULA, CA 92590 X = search c~iteria; - = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page #7 PM MINI MARKEr 5472 27691 YNEZ RD )'£MECULA, CA 92591 X = search criteria; · = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call ~ISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vernon 2, 7 Page/8 IARCO SERVICE STATION #301 20B 27641 YNEZ ' T£MECULA, CA 92591 US FAMILY CARE 21 27555 YNEZ RD STE 300 TEMECULA, CA 92591 CA HONDA OF TEMECULA 27500 JEFFERSON RD TEMECULA, CA 92590 HONDA OF TEMECULA'~ 27500 JEFFERSON AVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 UNOCAL STA'//65'19 28903 RANCHO CALIF RD TEMECULA, CA 92590 UNOCAL TEMECULA, CA 92590 UNOCAL #6519 28903 RANCHO CAUF TEMECULA, CA 92590 TEMECULA 76 6519 28903 RANCHO CAUFORNIA RD TEMECULA, CA 92590 X = search criteria; · = ~ag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Januar~ 17, 2001 Vefs/on 2, 7 Page ~9 CA CA X = search criteria; · = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901. Date of Report: Janual7 17, 2001 Ve~,~ion 2. 7 Page t10 CA X = search c~eria; ~ = tag-along (beyond search c~teda). For more information call VIST^ Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~on Z 7 Page/Ill No Records Found X = search criteria; · = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date oi= Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 WOLF WOLF ROAD TEMECUL~, CA 92592 RANCHO~ TEMECULA, CA 92591 GTE TEMECULA 41611 REAGAN AVE MURRIETA, CA 92562 GTE CALIFORNIA INCORPORATED CENT 32505 S HWY 79 TEMECULA, CA 92592 CIRCLE K 41010 CALIFORNIA OAKS RD MURRIETA, CA 92561 GTE MURRIETA PLANT YARD 32477 HUAN RD MURRIETA, CA 0 X = search c~iteria; · = tag-along (beyond search c~iteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc, at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~on Z 7 Page # I$ Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator:. RCRA Facilty ClassilicaUon(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: · Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator. TSD Indicator. Bumer/Blenderlndicator. Generator Status: 5AME AS ABOVE O9 HAND~ER IS NOI'A 'SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER AI' BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR. HANDLER IS NO~'A MEMBER OF~HE SUB~ECl' ~-0 CO£RECEVE AC~ION UNIVERS~ NOI'IFICARON DAl'A ~ CORE JOSEPH CUR~ENI' OWNER SMALL OUANI'II¥ GENERAI'OR UNVEfEFIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGULAI'ED Fields No~ Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: SAME AS ABOVE 09 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~J 17, 2001 Significan~ Non-Complier Indicator: RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator. TSD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: HANDLER I$ NOT A EGNIFICANT N~)N-COMPUER A T 8EGINNINGOF F~CAI YEAR HANDLER I$ NOT A MEMBER OF[HE 5UEJEC T TO CORREClTVE A C~70N UNIVERSe. NO17FICA170N DATA - CORE JOANIE W~J£F (Q09) 676-8009 CURRENT OWNER PfEVATE' KENNITH C 80WER (gO9) 676-8009 SMA~ QUANE~Y GENEP~TOR UNVEFffFIED NOTA I~D, UNVEFffFIED UNVEFffEIED Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: Other Transpo~taEon Ind~3to~'(l), Generator Status Descdp~on(1), Transporter Statu~ Oescd~don(l), ~D Status Desoip~ion(/), Burner/Blender Statu~ Off Rec~de~ RCRA Recjulato~y Status(1) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator: RCRA Faciity Classification(s): Notitication Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: AUTO CARE EXPERTS 43214 BLACKDEER LOOP 5TE 101 ~EMECUL~ CA 925~0 09 HANDLER IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOF F. GCAL )"EAR HANDLER 15 NOT A MEMBER OFTHE SUBJECT TO CORREC~VE ACTION UNIVERS~ NOEFICATION DATA - CORE GROSS MIKE (/14) 694~017 CUI,~ENT OWNER PRIVAXE MIKE GROSS (415) 555-1212 CUI~ENT OPERATOR · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vernon2.7 Page #15 Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: P~VA~E NOT REOUIPZD (415) 555-1212 SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. ~SD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Other YraruportaEon Indicator(r), Get.tot Statu~ Status ~(I), ~SD Sta~ ~n(l), ~nd~ ~at~ ~ R~ ~ R~t~ Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicator:. RCRA Faciity ClassiflcaUon(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: SAME AS ABOVE 09 HANDLER IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON~COMPLIER A T BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR. HAND[ER IS NOTA MEMBER OFTHE SUBJECr TO COP.~ECiTVEACEON UNIVE£~ NOTiFICAlION DATA * CORE HqLEY SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator: 8748 REPORTED 8Y FAClUiY SMA~ OUANN~Y GENERATOR ° VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403, Repo~ ID: 899001901 Date of Reporl:: Janua~7 17, 2001 Ve~on 2.7 Page ~6 Transporter Indicaton TSD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator status: UNVERIFIED NOTA TSD, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGUlAtED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: O# Recycler RCRA R~. ulatocy 5~atus(1) Agency Address: 'US 8ORDER PAIR01 INS ,13156 RANCHO WAY TEMECULA. CA Facility ID: 95544.00 Remediation Status: ClOSED/ACiTON COMFLETED Media Affected: SO~l ONI YIS IMPACTED Description / Comment: o .. ~onal~!)sT~,.~Reg onaJ~£6affing~Underground Storaoe~Tanl(¢/~ :~A_'oenc¥~ D:~J~I/A~.~:%~?..~'~'~<~' Agency Address: us BORDER PATROL INS Address: ~315B RANCHO WAY ca'J: ~EMECULA County: RIVERSIDE Case No: BUT$O8$ Zip: 92590 Stop Date: 6/~/1995 Status Desc: CA~ Sub Oesc: Case Type Desc: $o/l ONLY Lead Agency Desc: IOCAZ AGENCY(COUNtY) Local Agency Desc: ~VEESIDE Pr0~ram Desc: lOCAL OVE~IGHr P~G~M Fields Not Reported by the Source xs~reet(1), Substance O(y(l), Date 1(I), OateSa(1), DateSc(1), OateSr(~). OateT(1), Dateg(1), Prioflty(1), Enforcement ~(I), Enf~cment Date(l), Wdmum(1), Agency lot this S~e: Npd~num(1J, Agency Address: U580~DE~PA~ TEMECU~ CA 92390 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more in[ormation call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of' Report: January 1'/, 2001 Vernon Z 7 Page ~17 Street Numben SVeet Name: City: Zip: Region: CountT: 4.1136 RANCHO WA Y I'EMECULA 925~0 09 33 Case Number.' Case ~'ype: Lead Agency: Status: Substance: iAbatement Method: Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program: Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: I OCAL AGENCY CASE CL 05ED EXCA rAULAND DI$POSE AGENCY CODEO Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: C~o~ SWeet(l), County Cede(l), Cleanup Fund ID(I). Sell Qua#tier(l), M~BE in ~7(1), G~undwat~ Qua~(l), MTBE /n Grou~wat~(1), ~gram(1), ~y(l), Quan~ of ~m~ Su~a~e L~k~ S~(1), La~de(l), L~e(1). S~ma~(1), ~te Zeak Undraw(1), Date Post ~ial Ac~n Mo~ ~(I), Dam of Enforc~t Agency Address: Underground tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: I NS BUILDING 7'EMECULA, CA 92390 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information 5olutions, Inc. et 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report. ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2.7 Page Agency Address: EPA Region: Signirmant Non-Complier Indicaton RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator.- ~'ransporter Indicator: ISD Indicator:. Burner/Blend er 'Indicator: Generator Status: SAME AS ABOVE 09 HANDLER ~ NOY A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOE FSCAI YEAR HAND~ER IS NO r A MEMBER OF~NE SUBJECI lO COR£EC EVE A C EON UNIVERSE. NOEFICARON DATA - ~ORE EFRAIN EEL VA JR (909) 676-6569 CURRENT OWNER DON COOP (gO9) 676-1638 UNVE~FIED NOIA lSD, UNVEI~FIEO UNVEfEFIED RCRA REGULATED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Other lransportadon Indicator(I), Generator Status Descdp~on(1), Transf>o~er Status DescdpEon(l), ~SD Status De~cdpEon(1), Bumer/~ender Status De~oipEon(l), Transporter StatL~(1), TSD Status(l), Bumer/~ender Status(l), Used O# Recyder RCRA R~. u~ton/ Status(1) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator:. RCRA Faciity Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: 5AME AS ABOVE 09 HANDLER IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OFTHE SUBJECl lO CORRECTIVE ACRON UNIVERS~ NOEFICAEON DAlA - CORE SANllAGO 8ENI~EZ (909) 699-6077 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page Owner/Operator Indicator:, Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator. Transporter Indicator. TSD Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicator: Generator Status: CURRENT OWNER. P~VATE DONALD VY COOP (gO9) 676-3501 5MAI~ QUANEIY GENERAYOR UNVE~FIED NOTA ~SO. UNVEriFIED UNVEIEFIED RCRA REGULATED Fields Not Repolted by the Source Agency for this Site: Other ~ran~o~TaEon Indicator(1), Generator 5tatu~ DescdpSon(1), Transt~tter Statu~ De~cdpEon(~), ~$D Status Desc~pEon(1), Bumer/81ender Status Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant N0n-Complier Indicator:. RCEA Facilt~ Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicaton Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator:. RANCHO ~EMECUZA AUTO PAINING . 28696 [~A MONTEZUMA/103 ~4ECUL~ CA 92390 09 HANDLER ~ NOT A SIGN/F/CANT NON-COMPLIER A T SEGINNINGOF FISCAl P~VATE CURRENT OPERATOR NOT REQUIRED {415) 555-1212 SMAZI QUANTI~Y GENERATOR ° VISTA address includes enhanced, cit~ and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Repo~ ID: 899001901 Date of Reporl:: Januar7 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page Transporter Indicator. [SD Indicator. Bumer/Blender Indicator:., Generator Status: UNVERIFIED NOTA TSD, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGULATED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Agency Address: ~VANC~ INTERNAIIOIVAL INC 100 CAllE COR~'EZ i*EMECUL~ CA Facilit~ ID: Remediation status: REMED~4Z INVESTIGATION PHA~E Media Affected: AQUIFER CONTAMINATED ' Description / Comment: Agency Address: BIANCHI INTERNAllONAZ INC 100 CA~E CORTEZ TEMECUL~ CA 0 Site Name: B~4NCNI INTERNA1/ONAL INC Ad dress: ~oo CABLE CORTEZ City: ~EMECULA County: RIVERS/DE State: CA Case No: Zip: Stop Date: Status Desc: · Sub Desc: ,Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Program Desc: 9u~2961 92590 12/7/1993 PRELIM/NARy SI/E A,~E&$MENIT$ UNDERWAY W/~CH MA Y GASOLINE AOUIFER AFFEC~ED (MUNICIPA[USE) LOCAL AGENCY (COUNi3~ RIVERSIDE Fields Not Reported by the Source Substance 00(1), Date1(1), Dare3a(1), Oate5c(1), Oate5r(r), OateT(1), DateS(l), Dateg(l), P~odty(l), Abatement Method(l). Enforcement Typ~(l). Enforcement Agency for this Site: Date(1), Wdrnurn(l), Nl~de~nurn(~), £~e Dbpla. y(r), Abatement Method BeneEc~l Use De, c(?], Pri~ity Desc(1) Agency Address: 81ANCfllINT£RNAEONAL /NC 100 CABLE CORTEZ ~EMECULA, CA 925~0 Site Name: BIANCHI IN~-EI~NATIONA£ INC * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2.7 Page/21 Street Number: $~eet Name: city: zip: Region: County: Case Number:. Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance: Abatement Method: £nl'orcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUSI' was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: 9UT2961 ACQUIFIER lOCAL AGENCY PREUMINA£Y $1[E ASSE$$MEN~UNDERWA y GASOliNE AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODE0 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Agency Address: List Name: Site ID: SAME AS ABOVE lEAKING TANK 9ur296r * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISII'A Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Repot[ ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Agency Address: EPA Region: SJgniticant Non-CompEer Indicator: RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operatar Indicator. Owner/Operatar Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: BMINCHI IN~ERNAITONAL ?00 CAZLE COR~Z IEMECUI~4, CA 923~0 09 HANDLER I$ NOr A SIGNIFICAN i' NON-COMPLIER AT 8EGINNINGOF FL~CAL )~r~R. NOEFICA~ION DA~'A - CORE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER (714) 676-5521 JOHN DONNA 81ANCHI (415)555-1212 (415) 555o1212 SiC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator. Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicator: Generator Status: $199 REPORIED BY FAC. IL/P/ SMALL QUANIIP/ GENE~I-OR UNVERIFIED NOI-A i'SD, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency Ior this Site: SAME AS ABOVE 28690 LAS HAC/ENDA5 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report'lD: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 ve~ion Z 7 Page I ER~£~q:Jenc~1E6~b~e-"Ndtificati°n SYstem¢~-~sR~¢8 s ~,"<;','?;~'~:1A§encyJB; Agency Address: 5AME~OVE Spill DaLe: J~u~Y ~z 7993 ' Spill Location: 286~ ~ ~CIEND~ J Material Spilled: P~r~oDg Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicatoc RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type:, Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/OperaLor Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator IndicaLor: Transpmter Indicator: '/SD Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicaton Generator Status: BORG WARNER INDUSFEEA~ P~ODUCT 27942 FRONTST rEMECUL~ CA 923g0 09 HAND~ER ~ NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOF F~CAL YEAR. HANDLER I$ NOT A MEMBER OF~HE SUBJECT TO CORRECEVE ACTION UNIVERSe. NOEFK2AEON DATA - CORE EN~RONMENTA~ MANAGER (7?4) 676-5001 CURREN~'OWNER P[~VAIE (415) SBS-ZZZ2 SMAll QUANR~Y GENERATOR UNVE~FIED NOTA TSD, UNVE~FIED UNVE[EFIED RCI~4 REGULAI~D Agency Address: BORG WARNER INDU$1RtA1 PRODUCT EPA Region: 09 Significant Non-Compiler Indicator:. · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Repot[ ID: 899001901 Date.of RepoT[: Janua~ 17, 2001 Ve~ion 2. ? Page RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator.' Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicaton Transpmter Indicator: TSD Indicator: Bumer/Blendor Indicator:. Generator Status: HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OF[HE SUBJECf TO CORRECllVE ACIION UNIVERSE NOIIFICAI?ON DATA - CORE EN~RONMENTt~ MANAGER (714) CUP~ENT OWNER pRIVAE EU DUBROW (415) 555-1212 CUP~ENT OPERATOR PRIVATE NOT REQUIBED (415) 555-1212 SMAIZ QUANRFY GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA lSD, UNVE[~FIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGULATED Agency Address: EPA Region: Signific.ant Non-Compiler Indicator: RCRA Facilty ClassificaUon(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator I~dicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operater Name: Phone: Owner/Operater Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: BORG WARNER SECURI[Y CORP 2 794 ~ FRONT57 [EMECUD~ CA 92590 09 HANDLER I$ NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOF ~TSCAI YEAP~ HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OFTHE SUBJECT TO CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIVERE£ NOTIFICAEON DATA - CORE NEll REISMAN SIC Code: 3445 SiC Code Source: REPOR[EDBYFACIU1Y * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For moro information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800; 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: JanuapJ 17, 2001 Ve~ion 2.7 Page 125 Generator Indicator: 5MALL OUANTI[Y GENERATOR Transporter Indicator:. UNVEI~FIED ~SD Indicator: NOTA I~D, UNVERIFIED Burner/Blender Indicator:. UNVERIFIED Generator Status: RCRA REGUI~ITED ~G PJ~Sm Ge n ~'~RCP~S m all~G enerat or ~.=SR~/~I 5~ ~;~. ~. ?.~:. ~ency~lD:~:~,?~98~ 9~ 1 ~t~ ~ Agency Address:. B~G W~N~ ~CUg~ CORP EPA Region: 0~ ~gn~nt Non-Complier Indicaton ~ND~R ~ NOrA SIGNIFICANI NON-COMPLIER A r 8EGINNtNGOF F~C~ ~A RCRA Facilty Classification(s): HANDLER l$ NO T A MEMBER OF~HE SUBJECT TO CORREC ~ AC ~ION UNIVERSE. Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator. · Transporter Indicator: NO~TFICAllON DATA - CORE NEll REISMAN (312) 322*8597 CURRENi' OWNER P,~VATE UNVERIFIED TSD Indicator:. NOTA I~D, UNVERIFIED Bumer/Blender Indicato~. UNVE~FIED Generator Status: RCRA REGUC4TED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Other Transt~orta~bn I~,dicator(1) · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc, at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Agency Address: EPA ID: Site ID: EPA Region: USGS Hydrologic Unit Code: Ownership Type: Federal Facility Indicator.- NPL Status: Hazardous Waste Docket Flag: 80RG WARNER CORP 0903170 09 18070302 NOT ON ~H£ NPL NOT ON I~IE HAZARDOUS WASTEDOCKEi' Action: Action Lead: Scheduled Completion Date: Actual Completion Date: DISCOVERY $I'A~E,, FUND FINANCED DECEMBER 31, 1987 DECEMBER 1, 1987 Action: Action Qualifier. Action Lead: Scheduled Completion Date: Actual Completion Date: Operable Unit ID: Operable tinit Name: PREUMINARY ASSESSMENI. . NFRAP (NO FUI~IER REMED~4Z ACT/ON PLANNED STATE, FUND FINANCED MARCH $1, 1989 Alias ID: rot Alias Name: BORG-WARNER INDUST~4I PRODUCl. Fields Not Reported by the Source FinanciaI Management SJ~tem ID(l), ~ite Incident Categor2/ Desc~Eon(l), AcEon Oua/~Ee¢(1), Scheduled Start Date(Z), ActuaI Start Date(2). DescdpEon(1), Agency for this Site: Address(I) Agency Address: 80~ WARNERMEC~NICAL ~ 27941 F~N~ List Name: IE~ING TANK SRe ID: 9ur758 Agency Address: Agency ID: Facility Name: Facility Address: Facility City: Facility State: Facility Zip: BORG-WARNER CORPORA170N 27941 FRONT 5~RE~7 ~EMECULA, CA 92390 33360037 BORG-WARNER CORPORAllON 27941FRONTSTREEi' I.EMECULA CA 92390 Repor~ ID: 899001901 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Date of Repori:: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page #27 County: Status Date: Status: Status Desctiption: Alternate Address: Alternate City: Alternate State: Alternate Tip: Alternate Name: Completion Date: Gallons Removed: Completion Date: Gallons Removed: Completion Dat~: Gallons Eemoved: Completion Date: Gallons Removed: A~ienC~/ID: Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: NPL(I), rler(l), Fund(l), Cottese(l), Hazard Ranking 5core(l), Hazard Ranking Date(r), Groundwater(I), Type o£ActiviO/($), Comment Descdp~ion(4) Agency Address: EPA Region: i Signllicant Non-Compiler Indicator: RCRA Facilty ClassiticaUon(s): Nottiication Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: DUNCANS OUAUTY Cl NI~ 27911 FRONT SI' TEMECULA, CA 923g0 09 HANDLER I$ NOT A 51GNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER AT BE GINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OFTHE 5UB. IEC T TO CORRECTIVE ACTION UN/VERSE. NOTIFICATION DATA - CORE PRIVATE * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. al: 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Generator Indicator* Transporter Indicaton }'SD Indicator. Bumer/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: SMAll QUANliP/ GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA lsD, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGUL~IED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Othe~ Transportation Indicator(l), Ger~rator ~tatu~ ~pfion(l), Transporter Statu~ De~cdpEon(r), lSD Statu~ Descdpgon(1), Burner/Blender Status Descdp~on(1), Transporter 3tatus(l). lSd Status(l), Burner/8!ender Sta~us(l), Used 08 Recycler RCRA Re, qulatoq, Statu~(l) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-C0mplier Indicator: CRA Facilty Classification(s): otification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicator* Generator Status: Ali (AHAM TOP, INC) 27901FRONT ST RANCHO CAUFORNIA. CA 92390 09 HANDLER IS NOT A 51GNIFICANT NON-COMPUER A r BEGINNINGOF FISCAL HANDLER IS NO T A MEMEER OF[HE SUBJECt TO CORRECllVE ACliON UNIVERSL~ NO~IFICAliON DAI'A - CORE ENVIRONMENTAL (714) 676~'1151 CURRENT OWNER PRIVATE AHAM TO~ lNG DBA (Ali) (415) 555-1212 CURRENT OPER4TOR PRIVATE NOT REQUIRED (415) 555-1212 LARGE CIUANli~Y GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA TSD, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED RCRA REGUZATED * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. al: 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vef~on 2. 7 Page Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: 0il Recycler RCR.4 Req. ulatory ~h ~(1). Evaluation Coveraqe Area(l) Other ~rar~poltat~n Indicator(l), Generater Status De~c~p~on(1), Yrar~po~er I Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: SAMEASABOVE Agency Address: Site Name: Address: city: County: State: ~-EMECULA, CA 0 CA Case No; Zip: Stop Date: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Priority Desc Pro~lram Desc: 9U7758 92590 AQUIFER AFFEC~ED (MUNICIPAl. USE) REGIONAL 80,~D (RWQC8) RIVERSIDE HIGH PRIOPJP,~, WA~*ER RE~OURCE PROTECllON Fields Not Repot[ed by the Source x~treet(1), SubstanceOty(1), Date1(1), Oare3a(l), File Agency I'or this Site: ~A~E~l.~ST~!St~te~[eak nq'~Un~ler_qround ~oraqe~E~nl( 7~SR~16~,~ ~ EP.~/Anen¢¥~ID.,.'~, AgenCy Address: BORG WARNER MECHANICAL SEAl_ 27941FRONTS~ ~EMECULA, CA 92590 Site Name: 80RG WARNER MECHANICAL SEAL Street Number. 27941 ~eet Name: F~NT~T C~: TEMECU~ ~p: 925~ Re~ion: o9 ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 040~. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Case Number: Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance: Abatement Method: Enforcement Type: Funding: tow LUST was Discovered: ~ow LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: ACOUIFIER RWQCB ACI1VE ClUE CASE CLO~ED PUMP AND TREAT GROUND WA~ER TANK CLOSURE CLOSE TANK RB LEAD UNDERGROUND $70RAGE~ANK UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 2/22/2000 Relds Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Cross 5~reet(1), County C~de(l). Abatement Method(1), Cleanup Fund ID(l), $~7 Oual/Eer(?), M~BE ~ ~(I), ~ou~wat~ Qualifl~(l), M~BE /n ~oundwat~(l), Ouan~ of Nma~ ~tance leak~ (G)(1), S~d~(1), laEtude(l), $ub(1), Mr~ Date(l) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator:. RCEA Facilty Classitication(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: PICHEL INDUSTPJE$ /NC zaOOT FRONT ST rEMECUL4, CA 92390 O9 HANDLER I$ NOTA SIGN/F/CANT NON~COMPUER AT BEGINNINGOF FISCAL yE,4~ HANDLER 15 NOT A MEMBER OF~HE SUBJECT TO CORRECIIVE AC170N UN/VERSE. NOEFICATION DATA - CORE EN[ERONMENTAL MANAGER (714) 676-5721 CURRENT OWNER * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA In[ormation Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~J 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page #31 Owner/Operator Fype: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: SIC Code: SIC Code Source: PF~VATE MAP[OWE A PICHE1 (415) 555-1212 CUrrENT OPERA[OR P~VA[E NO[ EQUIP. ED (415) 555-IZ12 3444 R£POR[ED 8Y FACIUFY SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. 3832 REPOR[ED BY FACIUIY OUANEIY GENERATOR UNVERIFIED TSD Indieatoc NOTA lSD. UNVEfEFIED Bumer/Blender Indicator:. UNVERIFIED Generator Status: RCRA REGULATED Fields Not Repodod by the Source O~er [ranspoRat/on Indicator(1), Generator Status De~cdpdon(l), Trar~po~er Agency for this Site: Stat~ DeEc~pb~n(1). ~Z~ Sta~ DeEcfipfion(1). Bufner/B~nd~ Sta~s ~ R~yd~ ~ R~at~ ~a~(l], Evalua~n Cov~e Area(l) Agency Address: PICH~ INDUSTRIES Address: z~ooz FRONTST City: TEMECULA County: P[VEA~IDE State: CA Case No: 9url$o~ Zip: Stop Date: Sub Desc: NICK~Z Case Type Desc: s~l ONLY Lead Agency Desc: REGIONAL BOARD (RWOCS) Local Agency Desc: RIVERSIDE Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Xsfleet(1), Substance Or.y(1), DateSc(1), Oate8(l), Pdodty(1), Abatement Meth~d(l). Enforcement Date(r). Beneficial Use(1). Wdrnurn(r). N~de~num(l). Abatement Method Desc(1). Beneficial Use De, c(1). Pricey DeEc(l) · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Verdoa 2, 7 Page/32 Agency Address: Site Name: Sb'eet Number: Street Name: City: Zip: Region: County: Case Numbec Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance: Abatement Method Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Date Leak Confirmed Repo~ Date: leview Date: PICNEL INDUS~IES 28007 FRONF ~F ~EMECUL/c CA 92590 PICHEL INDUS~ES 28007 F~NT S~ AGENCY CODEO CLOSE ~ANK RB LEAD UNDERGROUND STORAGETANK UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 8/21/I~89 8/30/?989 2/15/2000 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Gross b*t~c~et(7), Coun(y Code(l), C~anup Fund ID(l). Soil Quaffer(l), MIBE ~ Sdl(1). ~oundwat~ 0~(1), M~ ~ ~o~dwat~(l). ~(1), Ouan~ of ~ma~ Su~e leak~ (G)(1). ~(1). BeStial U~(1). La.de(l). long. de(l). Summa~(1), Dare Pol~n Char~t~zadon ~an(1), Date Po~ R~l Actbn Mo~t~q ~(1~, Date of Enf~¢t Ac~n(1), M~E Date(1) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Ven~ion Z 7 Page #35 Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Abovegmund Tanks: Tanks Removed: Agency Address: Well ID: SAME A~ ABOVE 395042117095301 Use: UNUSED Depth: 358.0 Latitude: 33.511666886666 Longitude: - z l z 1647222222 Surface Elevation: Ioi 1. Static Water Level: 2~o6 Date Well Drilled: 01/01/1926 Count~ FIPS: 8o65 Agency Address: :;AMEASABOVE Fac Name: SUMMIT ENE£GY CORP Fac Address: 28111 FRONT ST Fac City: rEMECUL~ Fac St: CA Fac Zip: 9z5~o No Of Tanks: 8 Drg Id: DRG~0725 Fields Not Reported by the, Source FacAddre.~2(1) Agency for this Site: FRENCHY S AUTO CENTER 28093 FRONT ST TEMECUI~4, CA 92390 09 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vefs~n 2. 7 Page Significant Non-Compiler Indicator.' RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:, Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: HANDLER IS NO~' A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER AT 8EGINNINGOF FISCAl YEAR. (4'/5) 555-'/2'/2 SMALL OUANEI¥ GENERA~'OR UNVERIFIED NOI*A TSD, UNVERIFIED Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: O~er Transportadon Ind~tor('/), Generator Statu~ De~tion(1), Tra~er Descritpt/on(1), TratTsl~orter Status('/), ~SD ~tatL~(l), Burrer/Blender Etatus(1), Used OiI Recycler RCRA £~. ulatory Status(1) Agency Address: Well ID: SAME AS ABOVE 333049'/17094701 Use: UNUSED Latitude: 33.5'/36'/'/'/'/'/'/I'/ Longitude: - 1 '/7. '/63o555555 Surface ElevaUon: ;,orz Count~' FIPS: 6065 Agency Address: We D: SAME AS ABOVE 3330501 '/7094901 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 ve~ion 2. 7 Page ~'$5 Use: UNUSED Depth: z~.o Latitude: 33.513888888888 Lon~litude: - I ? 7.16361 Surface Elevation: 101z Date Well Drilled: Ol/Ol/1914 County FIPS: ,~65 Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicater: RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transperter Indicator. TSD Indicator. Bumer/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: 5AME AS ABOVE H~N~ ER I$ NOT A ~GNIFIC~NT NON*COMPUER A T SEGINNINOOF FISCAl YEAR HANDZER I$ NOr` A MEMBER OF[HE SUBJECt` l`O CORREC EVE A CEON UNIVERS£ O- CURRENT OWNER PI~VA1E EFREN (909) 6766433 SMALL OUANNIY GENERAl'OR UNVETffFIED lSD, UNVEMFIED UNVEMFIED RCRA REGUI~fED Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: Nofificagon r~pe(l), Corgact(~), r~le(l), Contact Address(1), Other l`ramt~tafion Indicator(l), Ge~at~ Sta~s D~on(l), Tra~ Sta~(2), ~O ~(2), B~d~ Sta~(2], US~ OE R~ ~ ReE~t~ ~a~(l) ,ID: 28111FRONTST TEMECUL~CA 90876.00 Remediation Status: C[O$£D/ACEON COMPLETED Media Affected: SOil ON1YIS IMPACTED · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of' Report: January 17, 2001 Desc~ptio~/Comment: o Agency Address: MOBIL '28111 FRONTST TEMECUb4. CA 0 Site Name: MOBIL Address: 2el 11 FRONT ST C~j; TEMECUL4 County: £1VER~IDE State: CA Case No: Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: - Local Agency Desc: Program Desc: 9UTIE06 92590 CASE CLOSED MISC. MOTOR VE~ClE £UEL$ SOIL ONLY lOCAL AGENCY (COUNI~ RIVERSIDE Fields Not Reported by the Source Substance (~y(I), How Obcovered(l), Groundwater Depth(l), Date 1 Agency for this Site: Date3b(l), Oate5c(l), DateSr(l), Oate7(l), DateS(l), Pfior~(l), Enforcement Date(1), Stop Date(l), Ba~n(I), Beneflc~l Use(l), Wdmum(l), Npdesnum(1), ~ 8eneflc~l Use Desc(l), How Dbcovered Desc(1); Priory Desc(1) Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Site Name: MOBIL Street Numbe~. Street Name: FRONTST City: TEMECUL4 ~jp: 92590 Region: 09 County: Case Number: Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance: Abatement Method Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: 9UT1806 SOIL LOCAL AGENCY CASE CLOSED MISC. MOTOR VEHICLE FUELS EXCA VA~E AND DISPOSE AGENCY CODE0 RESPONSIBIE PARIY AGENCY CODEO * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~on 2. 7 Page ~37 How LUST was Stopped: REPA/R PIPING Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Repod Date: 9/19/1~o Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Coun(y Code(l), Cleanup Fund ID(Y), 50# Oualifi~(t), M~SE in $o#(1). Groundwater QualiEer(1), M~E ~ Grou~,dwater[1), Program(Y), Pdotft]~l), Staff(1). Ouant~y of Fdrnar~' Substance Leaked (G)(1), 5uspeeded(1), 8as~n(1), Ben.fTc~al Us~(l). LaEtude(l), Long~rude(I), Surnmao~(l), Date leak Coni~7~d(t), Date Prelim#hao, ~te A~essment Began(Y), Date Pollution Characterization ~ogan(r). Date Remedia~on P~n Subm/tted(l), Date Remedial AcEon Uederway(l), Date Post Remedial Acbbn Moalto~g Beg[l), Date of Enforcement AcEon(t), M~E Agency Address: NA~/N OIL CO 28111 FRONT IEMECULa. CA 921260000 Ust Name: LEAK/IVG TANK Site ID: 9UT2937 Agency Address: DELTA DISCOUNT GA$ TEMECULA, CA Facilit7 ID: 8~tog~t. oo Remediation Status: PREDMINARY~ESSMENT Media Affected: AQUI£ERCONTAMINATED Description / Comment: o eq~o~'a~,.l~U~[-~Rea ona LeaEncl Underqf~bi~l~Stora_qe:Tank-~ ~ E ,P~Qenc~,JD,~., ~ N/A ,~;, .~. ~-~. ~ Agency Address: DELTA DI$COUNT GAE Site Name: DELTA DISCOUNT GAS Address: 28111 FRONT ~T City: TEMECULA Coullly: RIVERSIDE State: CA Case No: 9u~2937 ° VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janual7 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: I~'ogm m Desc: Fields Not Reported by the Source X~eet(l), Substance O~y(l), D~cover Date(l), How Dbcovered(l), How 3topped(1), C~oundwater Det~h(l), Date1(1), DateSb(l), Date5c(r), DeteSt(I), Agency lot this Site: DateT(1), DateS(1). Dateg(l), Priority(l), Abatement Method(l), Enforcetnent Date(l), Stop Date(1), Wdn~um(l), Npdesnum(1), Abatement Method Desc(l). HoW D~covefed Desc(1), HoW Stopped Desc(1), Pdofity Desc(l] Agency Address: 5AMEASABOVE Site Name: DELTA DISCOUNT GA$ Street Number: Zallr Street Name: FRONTS~ City: ~EMECULA Zip: Region: County: Case Number:. 9u~2937 Case Type: soil Lead Agency: ~OCAZ AGENCY Status: Abatement Method PRELIM/NARY SI~E ASSESZkfENI14/ORKPLAN SUBMITTED AGENCY CODEO Enforcement Type: AGENCY CODEO Funding: RESPONSIBLE PARiY How LUST was Discovered: AGENCY CODED Flow LUST was Stopped: AGENCYCODEO Program Leak Cause: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UNKNOWN Leak Source: UNKNOWN Report Date: Review Date: 1 !/29/1994 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Repor[ ID: 899001901 Date of Repo~: January 17, 2001 vecsion 2. 7 Page I Fields Not Reported by the Source Cross $~r~et(l), Count/Code[l), Substance(l), Cleanup Fund ID(1), So# Agency [or this Site: Quali~r(l), MTBE ~ 5o#(1), Groundwater Quail§er(1), MlBE in Groundwater(l), Program(l). Priority(1), OuanEO/ ofPdrnao/ $ub~tance Leaked (G)(I), Suspended(l). La,rude(1), Longitude(I), Summa(y(1), Date l~k Con~med(l), Date PrefiminaO, ~ite A~essment Began(l). Date Po#uO~n Chat actedzaEon Began(l), Date Remediafion Plan Subm~ed (l), Date [~ernedial AcObn Underway(l), Date Post Remedial AcEon Monitor~g Beg(l), Date the Case was Cloud(1), Date Leak was Dbcovered(1). Date of Enfcrcement AcEon(1), M/BE Date(Ii, stop Date(l) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicator. RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification type Contact Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator l'ype: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator. Transporter Indicator.- Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: 5AME AS ABOVE O9 HANDLER IS NOT A 51GNIFICANT NON-COMFUER AT BEGINNINGOF FlgCA~ YEAR. NOEFICAEON DA~A - CORE JOHN ~14) 699-7161 (~0) 337-1535 UNVERIFIED NOrA TSD. UNVEFJFIED UNVE~FIED RCRA REGULATED Relds Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Other Transpo~taEon Indicator(l), Generator Status DescdpEon(l), TranspoRer Statu~ De~cdl~on(1), iSD Status Descdl2tJon(1), Burner/Blender Status Oescdpbbn(l), Tfansp~ter Status(1), TSD Status(1), Burner/Blender Status(I), Used O~ Rec~cler RCRA Requlatoq/ Status(l) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Rel3ort: January 17, 2001 Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: ECONO lUBE N'IUNE t~i81 27685 JEF£EREON 1EMECUIA. CA 92390 Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicator:. RCRA Facilty ClassificaUon.(s): Notification Type Contact Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: OPTO 22 INC 43044 BUSINESS PAR~ DQ ~EMECUL4, CA 92390 09 ' HANDLER I$ NO I'A S/GNIFICANI' NON-COMFUE£ A T EEGINNINGO£ FISCAL YEAR.' H~5) 555-1212 SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator: Generator Status: 3679 REPORi'ED 8Y FAClUIY * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Verdon 2. 7 Page ~41 Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for th s Site: Other 7ranspoitadon Indicator(l), Generator 5?atu$ Descdp~on(1), 7rar~i~orter Of £ecyder RCRA I~, u~to~l Status(i) Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator:. RCRA Facilty Classification(s): CRYOC)UIP INC 43085 8USINES~ PARK DR UNITA ~EMECULI[ CA 92390 09 HANDLER I$ NO[ A StGNIFICAN[ NON-COMPI IER A[ BEGINNINGO£ £15CAI YEAI~ HANDLER lS NO[ A MEMBER Of THE SUBJECT 70 CORRECtiVE ACIION UNIVERSe. Nofitication Type Contact Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator:. Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator. TSD Indicator. Bumer/Blender Indicator. Generator Status: Fields Not Reported by the Source NORFICAITON DA[A - CORE EN~IRONMEN[AI MANAGER (774) 677-2060 CUI~EN7 OWNER PRIVATE R M SROWN · (415)555-7212 CURREN[ OPER~ITOR P~VATE NOT REI~UIt~D (~75) 555-r272 SMA!~ OUAN[I[Y GENERA[OR UNVEFdFIED NOTA [SD, UNVERIFIED Other 7[ansportaEon Indicator(I), .Ger~rator Status Descdp~on(l), [ra'nspoRer Agency I'or this Site: Status Desc~don(l). I~D Status Desc~it~bn(1), 8urner/81ender Status Desc~pEon(1), transporter Status(l), tSD Status(I), Bumer/81ender Status(U, Used O# Recyder RCRA R~. ulatoq, Status(1) · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at. 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date or Report: Januaff 17, 2001 SULEUF~C ACID 2~ Agency Address: Chemical Abstract Sewice Reqistry: ETHYLENE OXIDE 5AME AS ABOVE quantity Released: Agency Address: Well ID: SAME AS ABOVE 333056117093601 Latitude= 33,515555555555 Loncjitude: -i ix IB surface Elevationi r035. County FIPS: ~5 Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Compiler Indicator: RCRA Facilty Classification(s): Notification Type Contact Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: CHEVRON STATION 9 9917 ~EMECU~ CA 92390 O9 HANDLER I$ NO T A SIGN/F/CANT NON-COMPIlER AT BE GINNINGOF F~CAL YEAR. HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OFT/YE SUBJECT TO CORRECI1VE ACTION UNIVERS[ NOTIFICATION DATA - CORE JAMES 0- * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 89900'1901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page/43 Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicaton Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: PRIVAIE CHEVRON U S A PRODUCTS CO (310) $94-7452 SMALl OUANE~'Y GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA l~3D, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED Fields Not Reported by the Source O~er Transpiration Indicator(1), Generator ~tatus Descdpgon(;~), Transporter Status Oesclipgon(r), ~SD Status De~cfl:ofion(1), Burner/Blender 5~:atu$ Agency for this Site: oe~o~p,bn(z), l'far~f~rter ~tatu~(l), ho 5~atus(l), Burner/8~nder Status(1), Used ~ OE Recycle~ RCRA Re~l. ulatoq/5~aAis(l) Agency Address: CHEVRON JEFFEREON $~EEF 27550 JIEFFERSON Underground Tanks: '~ Aboveground Tanks: NOT£EPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPOITFED Agency Address: Site Name: Address: City: County: State: Case No: Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: J£FF£R50N $1REET CHEI/RON 27560 JEFFERSON AVE I~MECULA, CA 0 JEFFER$ON $1REET CHEVRON 27560 JEFFERSON A VE TEMECULA RIVERSIDE CA 9UT4071 92590 PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENlWORK PLAN HAS'SEEN GASOUNE AQUIFER AF£ECTED (MUNIClPALUSE) lOCAl AGENCY (COUNI~ RIVERSIDE * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403, RepoCc ID: 899001901 Date of Rej3o~: Janua~J 17, 2001 JFields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: Xs~eet(l). Program(?). Substance Oty(t). ~v~ Date(1). How ~v~ed(l). ~w 5top, d(1). L~k ~(1). L~k Ca~e(1). ~o~dwat~ ~p~(1). Date1(l). Dat~b(1). Oate5c(l). Date,(l). Date7(l). ~t~(l). Dateg(l). Date(l}. Stop Date(l]. Agency Address: CHEVRON JEFFERSON STREc'7 27560 JEFFERSON AVE TEMECULA. CA 92590 Fac Name: CHEVRON JEFFERSON STREET Fac Address: 27560 JEFFERSON A VE Fac City: rEMECUL, q Fac St: CA Fac Zip: 92590 No Of Tanks: 4 Drcj Id: D~G~O176 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Fac Address2(1) Agency Address: SAMEAS ABOV~ Site Name: JEFFERSON 5TREE~ CHEVRON Street Numben 27560 Street Name: JEFFERSON A VE Cit~: TEMECULA Zip: 9z5~o Region: 09 County: 33 Case Number:. 9u1'4071 Case Type: ACC)U/F/ER Lead Agency: lOCAl AGENCY Substance GASOLINE Abatement Method Enl'orcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODE0 AGENCY CODE0 AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODEO · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Januar~ 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page/45 Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: lOCAl OVERSIGHI' PROGRAM UST AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODE() 1/I/1996 7/20/2000 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: C[o~s 5~reet(1), County Code(1), Cleanup Fund ID(1), Intedm Remedial Act~n(1), M~BE in 5oi1(1), Operator(l), Program(1), Pdod~(l), Res~or~bie Party(l), Ouant[ty of Pdmaoz Substance leaked (G)(1), Latltude(1). longitude(l), Date leak Conflmed(l), Dale Pret~inao~ 5ire A~es~rn~t Began(I), Dale PolluEon CharactedzaEon Began(l), Dale RemediaEon Plan 5ubmitted(1), Dale Remedial Act~n UndefvcaJ/(1), Dare Post Remedial AcSon Mon~odng Beg(l). Date ~e Case was CJosed(1), Date leak was D~covered(l), Date of Enforcement Acdon(1), MIBE Dare(1), 5top Date(l) DOMESllC ~ FIPS: COPPER Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Complier Indicator: RCRA Faciity Classification(s): Notification Type Contact Phone: SOLID 5~ATE STAMPING 43350 BUStNES5 PARK D~IVE TEMECU~ CA 92390 O9 t~NDLER 15 NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER A T BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR. HANDLER IS NOTA MEMBER OFINE SUBJECT I'0 CORREC[IVEACrlON UNIVERS[ NOl'IFICA170N DAtA - CORE rOM NICHO15 (714) $76-6100 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ownor/Operetor Indicator,' Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: SIC Code: SIC Code Source: Generator Indicator:, Transporter Indicator:. TSD Indicator:. Burner/Blender Indicator:. Generator Status: CUP~ENT OWNER P~VATE SOLID STATE $1'A~fPING INC (415) 555-12r2 CUPJ~ENT OPEIZATOR PfEVA~E NOT REQUI~ED (415) 555-1212 3469 REPO£~ED 8Y FACllffY UNVE~FIED NOrA I~D, UNVEfEFIED Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Abovegreund Tanks: Tanks Removed: MESCAl DESIGN CONCEPT 43225 BU~NES5 PAPJ~ ~EM£CUL~ CA 92390 NOT REPOR~ED NOT REPOttED Agency Address: Fac Name: Fac Address: Fac City: Fac St: Fac Zip: No Of Tanks: Drg Id: S~E A~ ABOVE 5K5/NC 41951A VENIDA AL VAP..4DO TEMECULA CA 925~0 4 D£G~0704 For moro information call VISTA information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Repolt: JanuapJ 17, 2001 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Fac Addre532(1) Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: SAMEASABOVE 4 NOTREPOR~D NOTI~EPOR~D Agency Address: 5AMEA~ABOVE Fac Name: AMPMMINIMAt~Ei'5472 Fac Address: 27691 YN£Z RD Fac City: ~EM£CULA Fac St: cA Fac Zip: 92591 No O! Tanks: 4 Drg Id: DRG~O02$ Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Fac Address2(1) Agency Address: Alice 5£RVlCE STA,ON ~301 27641 YNEZ I'EM£CULA, CA ~t Name: ~KING ~ANK SEe ID: 9uTI031 Ag~cy Address: 27641 YN~ RD Facili~ ID: RemediaUoe Status: I~£M£DIAL AC~'ION Media Affected: AOUZF£fZ COIVI'AMINAI'ED Description / Comment: .0 I~ilonal&UST;~Reglonal~LeaEmg und~rgr~un~l~st~ragi~ATahk.,/:: 3:~:::'I:EPA-/Agenc¥.:ID: -:;I N/A!~ ~.~_:;~;,"?.? f:~:.:': ~ Agency Address: A~OS[A[/ONI30~2 SRO Name: ARCOS~AEON~3012 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information catl VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Sanuar~ 17, 2001 Address: 27641 YNE~ £D City: TEMECULA County: , RIVERSIDE State: CA Case No: Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: local Agency Desc: Pdority Desc Pro~ram Desc: 9UT1051 92590 POSl` REMED!AL ACTION UNDERWAY WHICH MONffORS THE £ M.~C. MOl'OR VEHICLE FUELS AOUIFER AFFECI`ED (MUNICIPALUSE) LOCAl AGENCY (COUNTY) RIVERSIDE HIGH PRIORITy, WATER RESOURCE PROTECI`ION Fields Not Reported by the Source xs~eet(1), Substance QO,(1), Discover Date(O, How Discovered(U, HoW Stopped(l), Leak ~ource(1), Leak Cause(O, ~atel(l), Date3a(l), Date5c(l), Agency for this Site: Date5r(l), Oateg(1), Stop Date(O, F#e Obpla. v(1), Abatement Method Desc(1), 8eneEcial U~e Oeec(l), How Discovered Oesc(1), How Stopt?ed Oesc(1), Leak Cause De. sC(I), Leak Source Dosc~I] ARCO STAITON 3012 Agency Address: 27641 YNEZ RD TEMECUL4, CA 925~0 Site Name: ARCO $l`ATION 3012 Street Number: 27641 Street Name: YNEZ£D C~y: I`EMECUZA ap: ~2s~o Region: 09 Count7: ss Case Number:. gUi`lO31 Case Type: ACQUIFIER Lead Agency: LocAl AGENCY Status: POS[REMEDIA1 ACITON MONffORING Substance' MISC. MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL~ Abatement Method AGENCY CODE(VEG1) Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program AGENCY CODE(H/DR) RESPONSIBLE PAR~Y AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODEO LOCAL OVERSIGHI` PROGRAM * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 ~ 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page #49 Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODE0 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Cross Street(I), Count~ Code(l), Cinanup Fund ID(l), Soil Oualilinr(l), M~SE in $0~(I), Groundwater Oua#fler(1), O(~erator(l), Program(1), Ouantit~ of Pl~nacy Substance Leaked (G)(1), Suspended(1), laEtude(1), long~ude(l), Date Leak Confirmed(I), Date PreSto ~te Assessment Workplan Sub(1), Date PoluEon Charactedza~on Began(I), Date Remndia~on Man 5ubmi~ed(l), Date the Case was Ck~sed(1~, Date Leak was Discovered(O, MrBE Date(l), Stop Date(l~ Agency Address: EPA Region: Significant Non-Comp er Ind catch. RCRA Faciity Classification(s): Notification Type Contact Phone: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Generator Indicator:. I'rausporter Indicator: ~Dlnd~a~n Bumer/Blender Indicator. Generator Status: 5AME AS ABOVE 09 HAND~ER IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPUER A ~' BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR. HANDLER IS NO~' A MEMBER OF[HE SUBJECT ro CORRECEVE AC~70N UNIVE~ NO~IFICA~ION DAI'A - CORE NORMAN PUllEN (909) 676-8853 CURRENT OWNER PRIVATE KEMPER REA1 ESTA~'E MGT CO (909) 676-5641 SMAll QUANIII¥ GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA ~D, UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janu.a~7 17, 2001 Agency Address: EAMEASABOVE Fac Name: INI'ERNA~iONAL REClrFIER NEXFEI' Fac Address: 41915 BUSINESS PK DR Fac 'City: ~EMECUL~ Fac St: CA Fac Zip: e25~0 No Of Tanks: a I~1 Id: DRG-O0414 Relds Not Reported by the Source Agency I'or this Site: Fac Address2(1) ~. A~ency Address: 5AME A~ ABOVE Chemical Abstract Sewice Regist~: AMMONIA quantity Released: 86.oo (POUNDS) HYDROCHLORIC ACID NIIRIC A CID PHOSPHORIC ACID ~55.00 (POUNDS) 7~,~ 255.00 (POUNDS) XYLENE (MIXED ISOMERS) 86859.00 (POUND5,~ Agency Address: Violation Number: Area of Violation: Violation Class: Prio~ty Indicator. Date Determined: HEXEE~ AMEIECA 4r915 BUSINESS PARK DR ~EMECUIA, CA 92590 CADgE1158545~O001 GENERATOR-All REQUIREMEN~ CLA~ 2 NOT REFORI-ED 11/09/1988 Fields Not Reported by the Source Date £~solved(1), 5chedu/edResponse Date(1) Agency for this Site: Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: INI'i-RNATIONAL RECTIFIER/HEXEET 41915 BUSINESS PARK rEMECUIA. CA 92300 9 NOT REPOR~ED NOT REPORTED ° VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page ~5 r Agency Address: Well ID: SAMEASABOVE 3551O3117094201 Use: DOMES17C Depth: 40.00 Latitude: $$.5175 Longitude: - 117.161E-~66666 Surface Elevation: io37. Static Water L~vel: 1o. oo Count)' FIPS: 0065 Agency Address: HONDA CA~S OF IEM£CIJUt 27500 JEFFERSON ~EMECUL4. CA 92390 Underground Tanks: z Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORIED Tanks Removed: NO~'I~EPORI'ED Agency Address: HONDA OF TEMECULA ZT~O0 JEFFERSON TEMECULA. CA 925900000 List Name: lEAKING TANK Site ID: 9UT3405 Agency Address: HONDA OF TEMECULA 27500 JEFFERSON AVE TEMECUL.4. CA Facility ID: ~0075.00 Remediation Status: £~ED~4Z INVESTIGATION PHASE Media Affected: AQU/FER CONTAMINATED Description / Comment: o Name: HONDA Of TEMECULA ' 27500 JEFFERSON AVE TEMECULA, CA 0 HONDA OF ~EMECULA ' ° VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page ,f52 Address: 275oo JEFFERSON A VE City: TEMECUZ~ County: R/VERS/DE State: CA Case No: Zip: Stop Date Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Priority Desc Program Desc: 9UT3405 92590 REMEI~AEON PLAN HAS BEEN 5UBMIITED WHICH EVAlUA~ GASOLINE AQUIFER AFFECTED (MUNICIPA~USE) LOCAZ AGENCY (COUNTY) RIVERSIDE MODERATE PRIORITY LOCAl OVERSIGHT P~OGRAM USr Fields Not Reported by the Source X~eet(U, Sub~ance Oty(1), Leak Cause(l), Datel(1), Oatq3b(l), Date5c(l), Date7(l), DateE(1), OateB(?), Interim(1). Abatement Method(1), Enforcement Agency for this Site: ~pe(l), Enforcement Date(l), Wdmurn(1), Npdesnum(1), Abatement Me. od Desc(l), 8eneEcial Use Desc(l), Leak Cause Desc(1} Agency Address: HONDA OF ~EMECUL4 27500 JEFFERSON A VE TEMECUL/~ CA 92590 Site Name: HONDA 0£ rEMECULA Street Number:. Z7500 Street Name: JE££ER$ONAVE CitT: ~MECUL~ ZJp: 9z5~o Region: 09 County: ~ Case Number:. Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance Abatement Method Eniercement Type: Funding: How LUS~ was Discovered: How LUS~ was Stopped: Program BU~3#05 AC~UIFIER IOCA~AGENCY REJ~fED~TION P~AN GASOUNE AGENCY CODEO CLEANUP AND AEATEMENT ORDERS RE~PONSI8IE PAR~Y TANK CI OSURE CLOSE TANK * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Januar~ 17, 2001 Ve~s/on 2. 7 Page Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: AGENCY CODEO lANK 7/29/1996 12/I 1/t999 Fields Not Reported by the Soume Agency for this Site: Cross Street(l), County Cede(1), Cleanup Fund ID(l), Intedm Remedial Acfion(l), 5o~ Oua#£~r(1), MIBE /n $o#(I), Frograrn(2), Quantity of Fdma~ Substance Leaked [G)(1), Suspended(l), Latitude(l), Longitude(I), Date Leak Confirmed(1). Date Prelirninao/ Site A~sessn7ent E~gan(l), Date Po#u~on Character~atlen Began(1), Date Remedial AcEon Underway(t), Date Post Remedial AcEon Mon~odng 8~, (1), Date the Case Wa5 Closed(1) Agency Address: Facili~ ID:. UNOCAL$[A~6519 28905P~NCHOCAUFRD [EMECUL~CA 8938Z00 Remedia~ion Status: REME[X~l ACI?ON Media' Affected: AQUIFER CONrAMIIVA[ED Description / Comment: 0 Agency Address: Site Name: Address: Cib/: County: State: UNOCAl $TAIION ~6519 28903 RANCHO CAUFORNIA RD [EMECUL~ CA 0 UNOCAL $~ATiON ~6519 28903 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD [EMECUIA RIVERSIDE CA Case No: Zip: Stop Dale Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Priority Desc Program Desc: 9UT1433 92590 3/21/1989 REMEDIAl ACI~ON UNDERWAY GASOLINE AQU/£ER A£FEC[ED (MUNIClPAIUSE) LOCAl AGENCY (COUND~ PJVERSIDE HIGH PRIORIrZ, WATER RESOURCE PROi'EC~?ON LOCAl OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UET · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Januar7 17, 2001 VemJon 2, 7 Page Fields Not Reported by the Source Substance Q(y(1), Date1(1), Date3a(1), Date5r(l). Date8(1), Dateg(l), Agency for this Site: Enforcement Date(l), Wdmurn(1), Npdesnum(1), £#e l~y(1), Abatement ~ ~ Mee~d parc(1) Agency Address: UNOCAl STAllON 6519 28g05 RANCHO CAUFORNIA RD YEMECULA, CA g25gO Site Name: UNOC~ ErAEON 6519 ~eet Numbe~ ~et Name: ~NCHO C~IFO~NIA RD C~: ~MECU~ ~p: 9~5~ Region: County: Case Numben Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance Abatement Method F-n~oreement Type: Funding: HOW LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: 9U~1435 ACCIUIFIER LOCAI AGENCY REMEDIAl ACTION GASOLINE AGENCY CODE(E~/E) AGENCY CODE0 ~ANK 3/21/1989 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: County Code(1), Cleanup Fund ID(1), ~ Qualifier(I), M~BE in Soil(l), Groundwater Ouali~er(1), Prograrn(l), Ouantity of PdrnaO, Substance Leaked (G)(1), Suspended(l), [a~tude(l), longitude(l), Date Leak Con£~Tned(1), Date Prelim 5~te Assessment Workplan Sub(l), Date Rernediabbn Plan 8ubm/~ted(1), Date Post Rerned/al Ac~on Monitoring 8ag(l), Date the Case was Ck)sed(1), Date of Enforcement Action(I), MIBE Date(l) ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: UNOCAZ ~6519 28g03 P~NCHO CAUF P~ANCHO CAIlF, CA 923g0 NOT~EPOR~ED NOT REPORTED Agency Address: Fac Name: Fac Address: Fac Cit~: Fac St: Fac Zip: No Of Tanks: ~A~EAS ABOVE ~EMECU~A 76 6519 28903 RANCHO CAUFORNIA RD IEMECULA CA 92590 $ Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source , for this Site: Fac Address2(?) UNOCAL SER~?CE STATION I6 28903 RANCHO CALIFORNIA TEMECUL~ CA 92390 lEAKING TANK Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA information Solutions, Inc. et I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: JanuarX 17, 2001 Agency Address: CHEVRONSERVICESTAI~ON9 289~0 RANCHO CALIFORNIA List Name: LEAKING TANK Site D: 9u[Io6 Agency Address: CNEVRON ~8900 RANCHO CAUFORNIA RD I'EMECUIA, CA 9~590 Fac Name: CHEVRON 181491870 Fac Address: 28900 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD Fac City: rgMECULA Fac St: CA Fac 7'ip: No Of Tanks: Dr(j Id: DRG~Or60 Fields Not RePorted by the Source ~,gency for this Site: ~,l~l~S~;+state;l:eak ng Underground~sto~a_qe~TankT/~SR~.16~l~ ;Agency Address: CHEVRON SERVICE $~A~ION 9- 7870 28900 tZANCNO CAU£ORNIA RD I'EMECULA, CA 92590 Site Name: CNEVf~ONSERV/CE$~'A~70Ng-1870 Street Numben zapco Street Name: IZANCNO CAUFORN/A RD City: rEMECULA Zip: ~z~o Region: o~ County: ~3 Case Number: Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance Abatement Method ACQUIFIER RWQC8 ACEVE CASE POSt REMEb~L ACliON MONII'OPJNG AGENCY CODE(FPVE) Enforcement T~,pe: CLEANUP AND ABAI-EMEN~ ORDERS Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: REPAIR PIPING Program RB LEAD UNDERGROUND STORAGETANK * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, lng. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Repor~ ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Vef~on 2, 7 Page ~57 Leak Cause: LOOSE FllTING Leak Source: P/PING Report Date: 5/zt/r~4 Review Date: 2/i5/2ooo Relds Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: County C~de(1), CJeanup Fund ID(?), ~oE Oua~Tier(l), MTBE in $d1(I), Quar~ of Pdmao~ Substance Leaked (G)(1), Suspended(1), LaEtude(l), Longitude(U. Date Leak Confirmed(I), Dare Prelim 5ire A~ses~ment Wcrkplan Sub(1), Dare the Ca~e was C!osed(l), 5top Date(l) Agency Address: Facility ID: CHEVRON ~9-1870 28900 P~4NCHO CAUF RD TEMECULA, CA 89158.00 Remediation Status: CLOSED/AClTON COMPLETED Media Affected: G~VIMPAC~D Description / Comment: 0 :eglonal;[UST:?.~Reg~onal~£e~aklng~UndergrouniJ~Storage;Tan~/~: ~ EPAZAg~ncy,ID:~,~-:!~ Agency Address: Site Name: Address: City: County: State: Case No: Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Priority Desc Pro~lram Desc: HIGH PRIORII~, WATER RESOURCE PROTEClION Fields Not Repmted by the Source A~enc)' for this Site: Substance Oty(1), Date1(1), Date3a(1), Dateg(1), Stop Date(1), Wdmum(1), £~e * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~on 2. 7 PaSTe ~58 Agency Address: SAMEASASOVE Well ID: 333032117085301 Depth: La~ude: 33.5086.E8868588 Lon~litude: - 1 lz 1480555555 Surface Elevation: 10~2. Date Well Drilled: 01/01/1927 Count~ FIPS: ~5 Agency Address: GtE R,4NCHO CALIFORNIA C 0 41963 MORENO I'EMECUI. A, CA 92390 Underground Tanks: 1 Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORIED Tanks Removed: NOr REPORi'ED Agency Address: Fac Name: Fac Address: Fac City: Fac St: Fac Zip: No O! Tanks: D~I Id: GTE CAUFORNIA INCORPORATED RANCHO CAUF 41963 MORENO RD I~MECULA, CA 92590 G~E CAliFORNIA INCORPORA1EDRANCHO CALIFORNIA CO 41~65 MORENO RD IEMECUZA CA 925~0 DRG-O0367 Relds Not Reported by the Source A~]ency for this Site: Fac Address2(1) Agency Address: Site Name: Address: City: County: 5AMS SUPER SHELL 28676 FRONTST I'EMECUL~ CA 0 SAMS SUPER SHEll ' VISTA address includes enhanced cit7 and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~J 17, 2001 Ve~Jon 2. 7 Page t59 State: Case No: Zip: Stop Date Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: I~o~ty Desc Program Desc: Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source ~ub~tence O~y(1), DateZ(1), Oate3b(l), DateSc(l), OateSr(1), DateT(1), Age~y for ~is SRe: Oateg(l), gnf~cem~ ry~(~), E~c~nt Date(l), Wdmum(1), Agency Address: 5AMEA~ABOVE Site Name: SAMS SUPER SHELL Street Number:. 2~z6 Street Name: FRONrSr Cit~: I~MECULA Tip: 9z5~o Region: 09 County: ~3 Case Number:. 9uT2367 Case Type: ACOUIE/ER Lead Agency: RWQCB ACIiVE CASE Status: PREUMINA~YS/I~A.~ESSMEN~/ORKPLAN SUBMfiTED Substance GAEOUNE Abatement Method REMOVE FREE PRODUCT Enforcement Type: AGENCY CODEO Funding: AGENCY CODEO How LUST was Discovered: lANK CLOSURE How LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: UNKNOWN Leak Source: UNKNOWN Report Date: 11/24/1992 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP, For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~ion 2. 7 PasTe t60 Review Date: Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Agency for this Site: County Code(l), Cleanup Fund ID(l), Ot;~ator(?), OuantiO/ of Pdnla~y Substance Leaked (G)(I), Sust~lded(?), lagZude(?), long~rude(l), Date Leak Confined(Ii, Date PreEminao~ Site A~e55ment Began(1). Dote Po#at, on Ch~actedzaObn Began(l), Date RernediaEon Plan Submitted(1), Date Remedial Action Underwa~(l), Dote Post Recnedial Act/on Monitoring Et=g(1), Date the Case was C~ed(l], Dote of EnfOrcemer~t Act~n(l) Agency Address: FORMER MO~L 28677 FRONT ST TEMECUL~ CA 0 Site Name: FORMER MOBIL Address: 28677 FRONTST City: ~EM£CULA Courl~: RIVEP, SIDE State: CA Case No: 9ur4o66 Zip: 92581 ,~/x~ t U S Desc: P~LIMINARY SITE AS~ESSM£Ni~/ORK PLAN HAS BEEN ~EQ Sub Desc: GASOUNE Case Type Desc: SOIL ON/Y Lead Agency Desc: REGIONAL BOARD (RWOCB) Local Agency Desc: RIVERSIDE Priorit~ Desc LowP~oRIn' Program Desc: £B lEAD UNDERGROUND SrORAGETANK Fields Not Reported by the Source x~treet(l), Substance Qty(1). Groundwater Depth(l), DOre I(I), DateSb(1), Dote5c(?), DateSr(l), OateT(1), DateS(l), Date~(l), Intern(I), Abatement Agency for this Site: Method(I), Enforcement Ty~e(1), £nforcement. Oate(l), 5~op Dote(l), Wdrnum(1), ] . Npdesnum(l),F#eDisplay(1),AbatementMethodDesc(1),B~ne§c~lU~eDesc(l] Agency Address: FOfZ~f£R MOBIL 28677 ~EMECUL4, CA 92591 Site Name: FO~M£~MO~ St#eet Number:. 28677 Street Name: Ff?ON~$~ C~: TEMECU~ ~p: Region: o9 County: 33 Case Number:. 9u~4066 Case Type: SOlt Lead Agency: RWQCBACITVECA$£ ~atus: PREIJMINARY SI~E ASSESSMENi~VORKP/AN EUBMIF[ED Substance GASODNE * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janaa~J 17, 2001 Vernon 2. 7 Page/61 Abatement Method Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: AGENCY CODEO AGENCY CODE £ESPONS/BLE OTHER MEANS CLOSE rANK Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: C/DsS 5~eet(l), County Code(U, Cleanup Fund ID(l). Interim Remedial Action(U, 5c~ Qua#Set(1), MrSE ~ 8o#(I), Groundwater Qua#Set(l), MTBE ~q Groundwater(l), Quandtj/ of Pfimz~/ Eubstance leaked (G)(1), laEtude(l), Longitude(D, Dare Leak Confrmed(1), Date Pre~mina~y Site Assessment Began(D, Date CharactedzaSon Began(1), Date Remediagon Plan _E~brni~ted(l), Date Remedial Acfio~ Underway(1), Dare Post Remedial Acfio~ Mor~todng 8~=g(I}, Date ~he Case wa5 CA~-~/(1), Date of Enforcement Acgon(l], Mi~E Date(I), 3top Date(1) Agency Address: Well ID: 333020117084g01 Use: UNUSED Depth: .~o. oo Latitude: $$.505555555855 Longitude: - i lz 1469444444 Surface Elevation: ro58. County FIPS: Agency Address: Well ID: 5AME AS ABOVE 332954117085801 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~ 17, 2001 Use: PUBHC SUPPLY Latitude: 33.498333333333 Lon~litude: -rtz 1484444444 Surface Elevation: lozz. Static Water Level: 8.oo County FIPS: 6065 Agency Address: Well ID: E, AME Ag ABOVE 333018117084301 Latitude: 33.505 Longitude: - I 17.1452777777 Surface Elevation: ~ooo. County FIPS: 6oo5 Agency Address: CDFSrA r2 28130 MERCEDE$ I'EMECULA CA 923~20000 List Name: LEAKING IrANK Site ID: 9U[2958 Remediation Status: PRELIMINARYA55E55MENT Media Affected: AQUIFER CON~'AMINAI'ED Description / Comment: o Agency Address: CDF$~'ATIONt'12 28330 MERCEDES ST Site Name: CDFSl'AITONf12 Address: 28330 MERCEDE$ $[ City: IEMECULA County: RIVERSIDE State: CA Case No: 9UT2959 Zip: 825~o Stop Date ~/2~/~4 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at. 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Page Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Program Desc: PRELIMINARY ~TE ASSESSMENTIS U NDERWA Y WHICH MA Y D~ESEL SOIL ONLY L OCAZ AGENCY (COUNIY) FflVERSlDE Fields Not Repo~ted by the Source Substance Q~/(1), C~oundwater Oepb~(l), Datel(1), Date3a(l), OateSc(1), Date5r(1), DateT(l), DateS(1), Oateg(l), Pr~Ct~l), Abatement Me,od(l), Agency for this Site: Enforcement ryl~e(1), Enforcement Date(l). Wdmurn(1), Nt~desnum(1), Abatement Method Desc(l], 8enef~al Use Desc(l), Priority Desc(1) Agency Address: COF SrA,ON 12 28330 MERCEDES Si' rEMECULA, CA 92590 Site Name: CDF SrA~ON 12 SUeet Number:. 28550 Street Name: ME£CEDESST City: I'EM£CUZA Zip: 92S~0 Region: o9 County: 35 Case Number:. Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance Abatement Method Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: 9uT2959 SOIL LOC. AZ AGENCY PREUMINARY SEE ASSES~MENTUNDERWA Y * VISTA address includes enhanced cibJ and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Reporl: ID: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Fields Not Reported by ~he Source Agency for th s Site: Count). Code(l). Cleanup Fund ID(l). 5o# OualiEer(1), MTB£ in 5o#(1), Groundwater Qualifier(1), MIBE in Groundwater(l), Program(I), Pdori~(l), Ouan~y of Pdmac/ Substance Leak~cl (G)(1). Su$1~ended(r), LaStude(1), Longitude(1), Dare Leak Confirmed(1), Date Prelim 5ire A=e~ment Work. an Sub(1). Date Pc~uEon CharactedzaEon Began(1). Date £ernediaEon P~an Submitted(1). Dare Remedial Acdon Undenvaj/(1). Date Poet Remedial AcEon Mceltodng Beg(1), Dare the Case was Cinsed(1). Dare of Enforcement AcEon(1). MTEE Date(1) Agency Address: SAMEASABOW Well ID: 332950117085901 Us~: FIRE Depth: 84.06 Latitude: 33. 497z~zzs~2z -I 1Z 1497222222 Surface Elevation: 1012. Static Water Level: 2z06 Date Well Drilled: 01/01/1849 FIPS: ~5 Agency Address: SAMEASA8OVE Well ID: 332947117090201 Use: UND5ED Depth: 16.06 Latitude: 33.496388888888 Loncjitude: - r I Z 1505555555 Surface Elevation: 1065. County FIPS: 6065 Agency Address: Well ID: $AME A$ ABOVE 333015117084101 Use: UNU5ED Depth: 53.06 La t~ude: 33.504166666666 Lon~litude: -1 IX 1447222222 Surface Elevation: 1060. Static Water Level: 44.00 County FIPS: 6o65 · VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For moro information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Repor[: Janua~ 17, 2001 Ve~ion 2.7 Page Agency Address: Well ID: SAME,aS,ABOVE 383015 r 17084 lO2 Use: UNUSED Latitude: Loncjitude: -r Surface Elevation: Static Water Level: z ~.~ Date Well ~lled: oz/oz/zezz Coun~ FIPS: SAME AS ABOVE 333014117083801 33.503888888888 -11Z1438888888 1070. ' FIPS: Agency Address: Well ID: Use: IP. RIGAIION Depth: 822.0 Latitude: 33.508888888888 Longitude: -117.1441686666 5u~ace ElevaUon: 10~8. Static Water Level: 41.00 Date Well Drilled: 01/01/7952 County FIPS: 6065 S,4MEASABOVE Well ID: 333030117083401 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report_ ID: 899001901 Date o¢ Report: January 17, 2001 Version 2. 7 Pago ~¢~8 Latitude: Loncjitude: Surface Elevation: County F PS: 33.508333333333 -IIZ 1427777777 1069. 6O65 Agency Address: SAM£ASASOV£ Well ID: 3331771~7094601 Use: DOMESTIC Depth: 120.0 Latitude: 33.521388888888 Longitude: -11z. 1627777777 Surface Elevation: 1o~5. Static Water Level: 13.oo County FIPS: ~065 Agency Address: 5AMEA~ASOVE Well ID: 333118117094401 Use: DOMESTIC Latitude: 33.5216655556~6 Longitude: -l~z 1622222222 Surface Elevation: io~5. Static ,Water Level: 15.oo Date Well Drilled: oI/o~/1962 County FIPS: 6o65 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 . Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Ve~on 2. 7 Page Agency Address: Solid Waste Inventory System ID: Facility Type: Facility In State Board Waste Discharger System: Chapter 15 Facility: NO Solid Waste Assessment Test Facility: NO Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Facility: NO RCRA Facility: NO Department of Del'eme'Facility: NO Open To Public: NO Number Of Waste Management Units: ~ Rank: Nor REPORi~ED Ent~orcements At Facility: ~s Violations At Facility: ~$ Agency Address: 5AMEASASOVE ~Vell ID: 333121117094601 I Use: IP,,~GA~ION Depth: · 5oo. o Latitude: 33.5zz5 Longitude: -llZ 1627777777 Surface Elevation: 10~a. County FIPS: 6065 Agency Address: Well ID: 5AME A$ ABOVE ,132939117091301 Depth:. Latitude: 33.494166666666 Surface Elevation: ~o08. Static Water Level: 26.00 Date Well Drilled: o~/ol/1954 FIPS: 6065 ° VISi'A address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~7 17, 2001 .[ Agency Address: SAMEASA8OVE Well ID: 332959117091101 Use: DOMESTIC Depth: roo. o Latitude: 33.494165566666 Lon~litude: - z 1 z 1530555555 Surface Elevation: 1oo9. Static Water Level: 28.o0 Date Well Drilled: o1/or/1928 Count~ FIPS: ~ ~ Agency Address: Well ID: 5AME AS ABOVE 332.938117091201 Use: DOMEStiC Depth: Latitude: 33. 493888888888 Longitude: -~ iz i533335333 Surface Elevation: Static Water Level: 49.00 County FIPS: ~65 Agency Address: SAM£AEABOV£ Well ID: 332938117o9riol Use: DOMESI'IC Depth: Latitude: Longitude: - r 1 z. 1530555555 Surface Elevation: 1Ol 1. Static Water Level: Date Well Ddlled: oi/ol/1921 County FIPS: 50~5 * VISTA address includes enhanced cry and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of Report: Janua~] 17, 2001 Ve~ion 2. 7 PaSTe ,~69 Agency Address: SAM£ASABOVE Well ID: $$295,~117o~oeol Use: DOME$11C Depth: ~z. oo Latitude: 33.495888888888 Lonc.~itude: -17Z1522222222 Su~ace Elevation: Static Water Level: Date Well Drilled: 01/01/1964 County FIPS: ,~065 Agency Address: Site Name: Street Number. Street Name: City: Zip: Region: County: Case Number:. Case Type: Lead Agency: Status: Substance Abatement Method Enforcement Type: Funding: How LUST was Discovered: How LUST was Stopped: Program CALIFORNM~ HIGh'WA Y PArROL 27685 COMMERCE CI'R ORA rEMECULA, CA 92590 AGENCY CODE0 * VISTA address includes enhanced cry and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 899001901 Date of'Report: January 17, 2001 Leak Cause: Leak Source: Report Date: Review Date: UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 3/74/2000 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency lot this Site: Cros~ Street(I), Coun~ Code(l), C~anup Fund ID(1), Intedm Remedial Action(1), Soil Qua#iler(l), M~BE in SoE(1), Groundwater Oualilier(1), MIBE k7 Groundwater(1), Program(I), C~antit~ of Pdma~y Substance Leaked (G)(1), la~ude(1), longitude(1), Dat& leak Con£~ned(1), Dare P~diminary Site Assessment B~Jan(l), Date Poilution Charactedza~on Began(r), Date Remediadon Plan Submitted(l), Date Remedial Action Under, varY(l), Dare Po~t Remedial Action Moaltodng Beg(r), Dare the Case was Ck~ed( l), Dare of Enforcement Action(1), MIBE Date(l), Stop Date(l) Agency Address: Site Name: Address: City: County: State: CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PAIROI 27685 COMMERCE C~R DR lA ~EMECUIA. CA 0 C~IlFORNIA HIGHWA Y PAIROL 27~85 COMMERCE C~R DR lA 7EMECULA RIVERSIDE CA Case No: Zip: Status Desc: Sub Desc: Case Type Desc: · Lead Agency Desc: Local Agency Desc: Priodty Desc Pro~lram Desc: Relds Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: X3treet(1), Substance Ot~/(1), Gfoundwate~ Depth(I), Date I(I), Date3b(1), Dat~c(l), Date~(1), Date7(1), ~t~(1), Date9(1), Intern(l), Enf~c~t ry~(l), Enf~e~nt Date(1), ~op Date(l). Wdmum(l), N~num(1), ~al Use ~c(U Agency Address: ~__~ID: Use: 5AME AE ABOVE DOMESEC ° VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 ~ 0403. Report iD: 899001901 Date of Report: January 17, 2001 Version z 7 Page/71 Depth: 55.00 Latitude: 33. 495~3333333 Lon,qitud e: - 117.1488998898 Surface Elevation: 1oo9. Static Water Level: 24,oo Date Well Drilled: County FIPS: Agency Address: 5AMEASABOVE Well ID: 332944117085701 Use: DOMES17C Depth: Latitude: 33. 495555585555 Lon~litude: -rrz r49166665~ Sud'ace Elevation: Date Well Drilled: ol/oI/1959 County FIPS: * VISi'A address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403. ReportJD: 899001901 Date of Report: Januar7 17, 2oo1 Vefdon Z 7 Page/I'72 ITEM 11 A P P R OV~,,~//~.~ CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAI'~rGE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/Cit~cil Debbie Ubnoskd-,, Director of Planning September 24, 2002 "Rancho Pueblo" Planned Development Overlay, Change of Zone (PA01-0522), and Rancho Community Church/School Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan (PA00-0470) PREPARED BY: Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION:. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1. ADOPTa resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00- 0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060- 001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. 2. READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 2002-__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 1 STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. 3. ADOPTa resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39- ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES; FIVE SPORTS FIELDS; A GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. 4. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROJECT WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500- SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300-SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 2 WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDINGS TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7,8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. BACKGROUND: The Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay and the Rancho Community Church and School projects are comprised of 54 acres located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 4,000 feet consisting of property known as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211. On the north side of SR-79 South, the City of Temecula's General Plan Land Use Map designates approximately 90 acres of property as Professional Office (PO). The General Plan Land Use Element designates these 90 acres with a Specific Plan Area Overlay (Z-1 and Z-2) for '~hose portions of the community, which because of size, location, and special development opportunities require a coordinated, comprehensive planning approach." Therefore as part of proposing to develop this property, the applicant was required to establish a set of comprehensive development standards. The first application, PA01-0522, is a proposal for a Zone Change to amend the zoning map designation from Professional Office (PO) to Planned Development Overlay-6 (PDO-6) for the 54-acre project site. In addition, the Development Code will be amended to include the PDO document, which contains specific development standards to guide the proposed and future development over this area. The second application, PA00-0470, is a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development Plan on the westerly 39 acres of the 54 acre site included in PDO-6. The CUP is proposed for the operation of a church and private school to accommodate 1,800 students, the use of seventeen (17) temporary modular classrooms, five sports fields, a gymnasium, and a two-story, four level parking structure. The associated Development Plan application is for the design and construction of a church and school campus. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500-seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a two story-four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 3 and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for kindergarten through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two-unit field house/residence buildings, lit athletic fields, and a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office building; located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet. Summary of Public Participation During the initial review of the applications, Planning staff recommended that the applicant contact their neighbors and inform them of their proposal in an effort to determine what may be of concern to the homeowners. The applicant initiated a neighborhood outreach program and made contact with most of the neighboring property owners within the Los Ranchitos community to the north and west of the project site. From the outreach effort, the applicant found that most homeowners had few objections and were in favor of the project. Lighting of the sports field was the only common concern. The homeowners did not oppose lighting the fields; they just wanted to limit how late they would be operated. To get a sense of the community's concerns, the City hosted a neighborhood meeting on June 20, 2002, and invited every property owner within a 600-foot radius of the site. That meeting was attended by about a dozen of the surrounding property owners. From that meeting staff was provided with some insight into potential issues which primarily focused on the duration of evening activities and the shielding of light on the sports fields. Additionally, a sub-committee comprised of Mayor Roberts, Planning Commission Chairman Chiniaeff, the City Manager, and Department Heads was established to assist in the review and discussion of possibly sensitive issues related to a project of this size. The sub-committee met with the applicant and staff in December, 2001 and March, 2002 to track the progress of the application review process. DISCUSSION Planning Commission Hearing and Issues At the Planning Commission hearing, three members of the public spoke in favor of the project (including a representative of the Los Ranchitos HCA) and one member of the public expressed concern about the air quality impacts of the project. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the following issues: Sports field lighting and hours of operation Modifications to the Use Matrix Park and Ride Facility On-site Modular buildings Air Quality Sports Field Liqhtinq While staff did not initially propose approval of the lighting until a detailed lighting study was submitted and reviewed, the Planning Commission received favorable comments from the R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 4 public indicating lighting within specified hours would be acceptable to them. The applicant proposed that on the eastern ball fields the night lighting be limited to 9:00 P.M. on a year-round basis, and that the westerly fields be lighted on Sundays through Thursdays until 9:00 P.M. and on Fridays and Saturdays until 10:00 P.M. Based on public testimony, the Planning Commission felt that these were reasonable hours and recommended approval upon staff acceptance of a detailed lighting study which demonstrated that there would not be excessive off-site spillage or glare on adjacent properties. The applicant provided the Planning Department with a lighting study that shows the locations of the lights and light intensity both on the sports fields and along all property lines. Staff has reviewed the lighting study and finds that the light levels along the property lines are predominantly at 1 to 2 foot candles or less. A foot candle is a unit of illuminance on a surface area produced by one candle from a distance of one foot. The study also shows, that light and glare from the fixtures can be controlled and shielded from the surrounding properties and along SR79 South, and will not create a nuisance to the neighbor or motorist on the highway. Use Matrix The Planning Commission recommended the following text changes to the Use Matrix in the PDO: · Bowling Alley · Caretaker residences · Mini-storage · Modular Classrooms/buildings · Schools, business and professional · Schools, private (Kindergarten through Grade 12) · Schools, religious (K-12; seminary) · Sports fields (with or without related school use) · Wedding chapels Not Permitted Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional These changes have been incorporated into the Errata Sheets for incorporation into the accompanying PDO document for the Council consideration. Park and Ride During the public hearing, a recommendation was made that the church's parking facility be utilized as a Park and Ride facility to help mitigate traffic congestion. The applicant indicated there would be no objections to a park and ride facility during the week if limited to a certain number of spaces. Without objection from the applicant the Planning Commission recommended the following condition: 'The applicant shall provide an on site "park and ride" facility in coordination with the Director of Public Works and to establish a mutually agreed upon number of parking spaces." Modular Buildinqs During the first phase of development of the school site, the applicant is proposing to use 17 modular classroom buildings that will be removed during subsequent phases as permanent classroom buildings are constructed. Staff had concerns about the extended use of modular R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 5 buildings in-lieu of permanent structures and had recommended a five-year time limit. Understanding the need to use modulars and to be sensitive to the community, the Planning Commission recommended that the applicant be permitted to request a time extension on the use of the modular buildings. The Commission's recommended condition of approval reads as follows: "Modular buildings shown on the approval plans shall be utilized for a period of time not to exceed five (5) years from the date of occupancy. Any other future proposed modular buildings shall require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The duration of use of the modular buildings may be extended upon submittal of a formal application for consideration at a public hearing before the Planning Commission." Air Quality South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) made staff aware of the use of an outdated table in the Air Quality assessment in the project's Initial Study. Following the public hearing, the consultant who prepared the original document was contacted by staff. The consultant provided the Planning Department with a response explaining that the data referenced was indeed from the old SCAQMD tables. However, the computer-modeling program used to calculate the emissions was based on a revised program provided by SCAQMD. This program used the correct factors and there is no need to amend the Air Quality assessment of the Initial Study. Summary The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve both projects: the Zone Change for PDO-6 (PA01-0522); and the Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for Rancho Community Church and School Campus (PA00-0470) with conditions of approval. FISCAL IMPACT: The majority of the project area (39 acres) is proposed to be developed by an organization having tax-exempt status. In accordance with the adopted Development Impact Fee Ordinance No. 97-09, building permits can be issued to those qualifying as a nonprofit organization without payment of DIF fees. The remaining 15 areas of the project area will develop with commercial/office uses that will be assessed Development Impact Fees based on the type of development proposed. ATFACHMENTS: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Draft Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan - Blue Page 7 Draft Ordinance approving Zone Change - Blue Page 8 Draft Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit - Blue Page 9 Draft Resolution approving Development Plan -Blue Page 10 Planning Commission Minutes - Blue Page 11 Adopted Planning Commission Resolutions - Blue Page 12 Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits - Blue Page 13 R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO.1 DRAFT RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Chumh\CC Staff Report.doc 7 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- __ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00- 0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060- 001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that:. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002, to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review at which time all person interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on those matters. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-22 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CEQA.DOC 1 interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca. 92589. The City Council reviewed the Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration. The Project and the Negative Declaration were discussed at regularly scheduled public meetings of the Commission held on July 31, 2002. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA. There is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan set for/h in the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with law. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project and approves the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination describing the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program by the City Council in the Office of the County Clerk for the county of Riverside in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CEQA.DOC 2 Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September, 2002 Ron Roberts, Mayor A'I-I'EST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02-. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CEQA. DOC 3 EXHIBIT A J City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Planned Development Overlay - 5 (Planning Application No. PA01- 0522) Rancho Community Church and School (PA00-0470) Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula,. CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner (909) 694-6400 Project Location Located on the north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedidiah Smith Road and continuing east for 3,400 feet. (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 950-080-001 thru -004 & 950-090-003 thru -006) Project Sponsor's Name and Address Rancho Community Church, 29141 Vallejo Ave., Temecula, CA 92592 General Plan Designation Professional Office (PO) with a Z-1 overlay Zoning Professional Office (PO) Description of Project Planning Applications Nos. PA01-0522 a Zone Change to establish a Planned Development Overlay proposal to modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 55 acres including a church, school and office/commercial uses. PA00-0470 is a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39- acre portion of the 55 acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious and 136,771 square feet of school facilities; a two story, 44,406 square foot, office building; and one four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet). The site will be developed in phases beginning with a 1,500 seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and a nursery; a two story 22,203 square foot administration building, 17 modular classroom buildings, a 9,695 square foot preschool, a 300 seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, two field house/residence buildings, and lighted athletic fields. Future phases include permanent first through twelfth grade classroom facilities, a gymnasium, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center and the parking structure. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting North: Very Low Density Residential (houses & vacant lots) East: Professional Office (vacant land) South: PDO-4 (vacant land) & Medium/Low Density Residential (houses) West: Very Low Density Residential (houses) Other public agencies ~hose approval None. is required R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 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. 1. Land Use Planning X 10. Noise 2. Population and Housing 11. Public Services X 3. Geologic and Soils 12. Utilities and Service Systems X 4. Water X 13. Aesthetics X 5. Air Quality X 14. Cultural Resources X 6. Transportation/Cimulation 15. Recreation 7. Biological Resources 16. Agricultural Resources 8. Energy and Mineral Resources X 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance 9. Hazards None Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared X 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 earlier 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 significant effect on the environment, because all potentially impacts (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) 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. Dante/ Associate Planner Title Thomas Thornsley Printed name R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 2' 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or X 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? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: .8. 1.5. The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The project site has been intended for development of office uses, with a zoning overlay to establish the development standards, as a buffer between State Route 79 South and the single-family residences to the north and west. The property to the east is vacant and is also intended for professional office use and subject to a similar zoning overlay. The south side of the street has two areas; the eastern area contains single-family homes, and the western area, known as PDO-4 is intended for development of 400 apartment units and approximately 125,000 square feet of commercial/retail development. The development of this site, as proposed, will be consistent with the intended use of the property and compatible with the surrounding properties. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project will not conflict with applicable General Plan designation, environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (PO) with a Zoning I (Z-l) overlay as well as the zoning of Professional Office (PO). Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan. Implementation of the proposed PDO-5 and the development of Rancho Community Church does not appear to have the potential to conflict with any agency plans or policies that have been adopted in order to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures approved with the EIR, such as development impact fees, will be applied to this project where necessary. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on this project, and it is anticipated that they will make the appropriate comments as to how this project relates to their specific environmental plans or policies. The project site has been previously graded and used for agricultural purposes and services were previously stubbed out to these properties. With the collection of Development Impact Fees and the mitigation measure applied in subsequent sections, there will be less than significant impacts on adopted environmental plans or policies. .O. The proposed project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. In the past the site has been graded, farmed, and continuously grubbed for weed abatement. This site is not within any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 3 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No ~mpact Incorporated Impact impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The proposed PDO-5 and future development will eventually result in the development of a church and school to serve current residents and the portion of the site proposed for other uses will cause some people to relocate to, or within Temecula to be closer to their place of employment. However, due to nature of the development of this property, it will not induce substantial growth beyond what is projected in the City's General Plan. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 2.b.c. The subject property is currently vacant and zoned for office development and therefore, the project will neither displace housing nor people necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No such impacts will occur as a result of this project. 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the X 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. (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Page 7-6) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-8) iv) Landslides? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-8) X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or X 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:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 4 d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1998), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: The Wildomar earthquake fault is plotted through this property on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. Because of the fault known to cross the property, the owner had a Fault Location Confirmation Investigation carried out by PETRA Geotechnical, Inc. and the results compiled in a report dated April 13, 2001. Based on the field evidence the Wildomar fault crosses the project site, as previously documented, and the fault offsets Holocene alluvium and is therefore, considered to be active (fault rupture in the last 11,000 years). As part of the project site's development the PETRA report recommend that "additional geologic mapping should be preformed during grading to further evaluate any fault related information which may become available due to additional exposures. The project has been designed to keep the placement of structures outside of the 100 foot fault zone (50 feet each side of the fault). A detailed description of the City's geology and soils is contained in Chapter 4.1 of the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). According to the GPEIR, the City of Temecula is in Groundshaking Zone II, which will experience moderate to intense groundshaking in the event of a major regional earthquake. Geologic mitigation measure 5 is identified in Section 4.1.3 of the GPEIR and it is deemed adequate to reduce potential groundshaking impacts to a level of non-significance. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and recommendations contained in this report are followed during construction. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. II1-1 Site development with be conducted in accordance with the Geotechnical/'Geological Engineering Study recommendations prepared by PETRA Geotechnical, Inc. April 13, 2001. There should be limited erosion due the site being relatively flat. Development of the project site will expose it to potential erosion and possibly downstream sedimentation. The General Plan requires mitigation for projects to control erosion. Further, specific requirements have been established under the statewide NPDES program that requires every project with ground disturbance greater than five acres to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction and over the long-term. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are identified in the SWPPP to control erosion on a site and any sedimentation generated by disturbing the site for development. Mitigation is required to control potential erosion and sedimentation. To avoid wind born and water soil erosion, graded but undeveloped area, those areas not proposed for development in the Phase I, will be required to be hydro-seeded and supplied with temporary irrigation as required in the City's Development Code. The following mitigation measure will be implemented. 111-2 The ewPPP prepared for this project will implement BMPs identified in the County's Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The required performance standard is to minimize erosion on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded sediment on the project site. 111-3 Upon completion of the initial mass grading and or precise grading, all areas not planned for development during each build phase shall be hydro-seeded and supplied with temporary irrigation as required in the City of Temecula's Development Code. Should any area within a developing phase be left undeveloped for 3 months, it too shall be hydro-seeded and supplied with temporary irrigation or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer capable of preventing wind erosion. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 5 There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking, ground failure, soil erosion or expansive soils. A review of the City's Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards in the General Plan (Figure 7-2) indicates that the project site is located within a zone of potential subsidence or liquefaction. Potentially significant impacts associated with the development of this site will be mitigated with the implementation of Mitigation Measure II1-1 at the time of grading and will be further mitigated during building construction, which is consistent with engineered and Uniform Building Code standards. In addition, preliminary soil reports will be submitted and reviewed as part of the application submittal and recommendations contained in this report will be used to determine appropriate conditions of approval prior to the issuance of grading and building permits. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will be utilized in the development of this site, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from liquefaction. After Mitigation Measure II1-1 is performed, no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project. According to the Fault Location Confirmation Investigation carried out by PETRA Geotechnical, Inc., April 13, 2001, preliminary tests indicate that the shrink/swell of potential of onsite soils is considered Iow. No change in the geotechnical recommendations is expected. Should subsequent soils reports, required prior to development, indicate possible expansive soil conditions the report will require improvements based on the report's findings prior to building permits being issued. There should be no impacts from soil expansion. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be required to hook up to the existing public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Suppo~ng Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quali~y standards or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X 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)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X 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? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 6 g. Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a l O0-year flood hazard area structures X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project and subsequent development will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. 4.b.f. The project will not 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. The project has no potential to adversely interfere with groundwater recharge. The proposed project does not .include any extraction of groundwater, so no adverse direct impact can result from implementing the proposed project. The GPEIR addresses water demand from development in the City of Temecula, including 772 acres of medium density residential uses and 520 acres professional office uses. The GPEIR concludes that cumulative water demand within the City can be met by the City's two purveyors without having a significant adverse impact on the environment, including depletion of the areas groundwater supplies. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property and thus is considered consistent with the GPEIR. Therefore, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant cumulative, indirect adverse impact on the area groundwater aquifers. The project will not have an affect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have an impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. .0* The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, nor alter the course of a stream or river. Erosion and siltation issues are addressed in previous discussions under geology and hydrology. Therefore, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant cumulative, indirect adverse impact. 4.d.e. Site development will require mitigation to prevent erosion and sedimentation run-off during construction and after occupancy. This project will be required to prepare a SWPPP plan to mitigate these conditions. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and driveways and would increase runoff as a result of the project. The grading and drainage of the site will convey the entire flow unattenuated in channels and pipes to the southwest corner of the site. From this point it is proposed that the flow will cross the southern portion of the neighboring lot (Lot 47~ in a new channel to a box culvert located at the northeast corner of Jedidiah Smith Road and SR-79. With the installation of this drainage system as a mitigation measure the impacts will be less that significant. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 7 4.g.h. 4,j, IV-1 A new channel of appropriate design and capacity shall be constructed to convey the onsite flow to the box culvert located at the northeast corner of Jedidiah Smith Road and SR-79 as approved by the Public Works Department. The project will have no impact on people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because the project site .is located outside of the 100-year floodway as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Figure 7-3). No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. According to Figure 7-4 the project site is located within a dam inundation flood hazard area downstream from Vail Lake. Rupture of the dam and release of flows could cause loss of life and property. The Office of Emergency Services is responsible for reviewing population control and evacuation procedures in areas designated as potential for loss of life in the event of a dam failure. Dams are over-designed to minimize potential failures, Typically within a city where a potential for dam inundation exists there are two measures implemented: 1. The City's Emergency Services agency develops and maintains dam failure evacuation plan. 2. The city prohibits critical and essential uses within the designated dam inundation areas. The City has implemented a multi-hazard functional plan pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act. The proposed project does not contain critical or essential facilities. No mitigation is required. Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and elevation, there is no potential for a tsunami. The project area is not located near a large surface water body and there is no potential for inundation by seiche or mudflow. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No ~mpact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ! X to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase Of any X criteria 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? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X of people? Comments: The project will not conflict with applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The project proposes a variety of use with a school being the most intense use on a daily basis. The school, church, and future development, are anticipated to be below the threshold for potentially R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.dcc 8 5.b.c. significant air quality impact established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District as depicted in SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Source 3) page 6-10, Table 6.2. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The greatest project-related air quality concern centers on the "new" vehicle trips (with emphasis on the school) that will be generated with the completion of Phase I. According the California Air Resources Board URB7G model analysis included in the Air Quality Impact Analysis, prepared by Giroux & Associates, dated August 14, 2000, Phase I of the project will exceed SCAQMD thresholds for nitrous oxide (Nox) by 4% while all other mobile source emissions will be below their respective significance thresholds. With the completion of final Phase of the project, all pollutants will be below their significance thresholds. However, Nox dropping to 99% will be the closest to creating a possibly significant air quality impact. As stated in Giroux's Analysis, "Because of the small degree of 'excess' at Phase I, minor emissions reductions associated with carpools, buses or bicycles accessing the site, especially the school, would be able to reduce the mobile source emissions burden to less than significant for the Phase I project." To offset the likelihood of mobile source emissions surpassing the SCAQMD thresholds, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures such as vanpools, carpooling, bus service, etc. will be required as mitigation measures and conditions of approval for the school project, in order to achieve the equivalent of no more than 1.6 vehicle trips per student. With these mitigations in place this project's impact could be reduced to less-than-significant levels and therefore, will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. v-1 Rancho Community Church and School shall offset the likelihood of mobile source emissions surpassing the SCAQMD thresholds through the implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures such as vanpools, carpooling, bus service, etc. will be required for the school project, in order to achieve the equivalent of no more than 1.6 vehicle trips per student. A written carpooling program with implementation procedures shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. When the project develops, sensitive recept~)rs will occupy the site (proposed school). The future development of the project will create minor pollutants during the grading and construction phase of the project emanating from fugitive dust and small quantities of construction equipment pollutants. These impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant because the project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402. These rules are conditions on the grading permit. The future church, school and commercial/office uses are not likely to generate significant volumes of pollutants or create substantial pollutant concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors that will occupy this site upon completion. Therefore, with the mitigation measures the impacts will be less than significant. v-2 The City will require contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%), and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations. V-3 All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities that will not be utilized within three days will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent to plastic, or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer, V-4 All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit, V-5 V-6 The contractor will require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to remove dirt that can be tracked onto adjacent roadways. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEOA Initial Study.doc 9 V-7 The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402 requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner acceptable to the City. All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. V-8 All engines will be properly operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced through the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records. V-9 All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and gasoline o powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes. V-10 The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible and where economically competitive. None of the proposed activities at the project site have a potential to generate significant odors or create substantial odor concentrations that could affecting a substantial number of people. During the development of the future for church, school and commercial/office uses, some objectionable odors may be produced during the grading and construction of buildings, however these impacts are anticipated to be of short duration and are 'mitigated under 5.d. and should have a less than significant impact. 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant NO Impact Incorporated Impact impact a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X 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? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? R:\P D O~001~01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.dcc 10 Comments: 6.a.b. The project site is currently zoned as Professional Office, which is also the land use assumed in the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by the traffic engineering firm of Linscott, Law and Greenspan, the proposed land uses within the proposed project will generate considerably less daily and AM/PM peak hour traffic than the current zoning. Since SR-79S is currently improved to its ultimate 6-lane width, the existing improvements in conjunction with some mitigation measures by the project should be able to adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the project. Mitigation measures for the project include installation of traffic signals on SR-79S, at the two (2) major full access driveways. In addition, the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) has required additional improvements including a raised median island along the entire property frontage in order to physically restrict the leff-turn movements at the uncontrolled driveways once the project site is operational. Although the Traffic Impact Analysis for the project indicates that the signalized access points to the site operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS), some delays could be expected due to the peaking characteristic of school related pedestrian and vehicular traffic at the build-out of the project. In order to minimize these delays, the applicant will be required to stagger the start time of the elementary, middle and high schools within the project. The project will also provide an adequate link to the adjacent property to the east for future connection to a roadway other than $R-79S to lessen the impacts to this highway by providing an alternate access to the site for local residents. It should also be noted that according to the Traffic Impact Study, the intersections of SR-79S at 1-15 northbound and southbound ramps, La Paz Road, Pala Road and Margarita Road will operate at an unacceptable level of service at the build-out of the project and with cumulative impacts from several other approved projects in the area. The consultant has established a fair share percentage contribution towards improvement of the impacted intersections as a mitigation measure for the project. The identified improvements should achieve a LOS "D" or better at these intersections. VI-1 Traffic signals shall be installed at the two (2) major full access driveways/access points onto SR- 79S. Signals shall be installed at each access point prior to the first building occupancy or at such time that the access is open as a public access. VI-2 At the time of development of this property the developer shall comply with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requirements regarding raised median island improvements, to physically restrict the left-turn movements at the uncontrolled driveways along SR-79. The extent of these improvements shall be made in accordance with the requirement imposed by Caltrans. VI-3 Prior to' occupancy of the first classrooms, the school operator shall establish and operate the school with staggered start times for the elementary, middle and high schools within the project until such time that an alternative access not linked to $R-79 South is provided. VI-4 VI-5 A fair share monetary percentage contribution towards the improvement of the impacted intersections outlined in the Traffic Impact Analysis shall be made at the time of Development and prior to occupancy. The contribution shall be based upon the fair share impact of the percentages outlined in Table 13 of Linscott, Lay & Greenspan's Traffic Impact Analysis, May 17, 2002. The project will also provide an adequate link, and if necessary, a recorded reciprocal access agreement, to the adjacent properties to the east for future connection to a roadway other than $R- 79S to lessen the impacts to this highway by providing an alternate access to the site for local residents. VI-6 All proposed driveway openings to Highway 79 South will be restricted to Right In/Right out unless otherwise designated and approved by the City and CalTrans for full turning movement. R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 11 VI-7 Reciprocal ingress and egress easement and reciprocal parking agreement shall be recorded across all existing and future lots. Neither the project or future development of this property will 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 risks. This site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight overlay district and therefore will have no impact on the project. The project will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed to current City standards for access to SR-79 and the onsite circulation, as designed, does not propose any hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or inadequate access to nearby uses. The project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. The project does not interfere with access to nearby uses and will allow through access to all development along SR-79. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The proposed church and school project are proposing adequate parking for their needs. Any future development will be designed to comply with the parking standard found in the City's Development Code. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project has been requested by RTA to provide a bus bay to be used as a transit stop. Parking spaces will are proposed for motorcycles and bicycles during project review. The proposed school will be required to provide additional bicycle spaces to meet the higher needs of students. No conflict or adverse impact to adopted alternative transportation policies, plans, or programs are forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. With conditions and compliance with the development standards for this and future projects the impact will be less than significant. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Pctenfially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Soumes Significant Mitigation Significant NO Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X 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? c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X 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? d. interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with estab shed nat ve resident or migratory wildlife corridors, I or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study,doc 12 e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: A General Biological Assessment prepared by Principe and Associates, dated October 26, 1999 indicated that the, "previous grading has removed all topographic features and irregularities, and continuous discing and agricultural uses have removed the majority of native vegetation and habitat." The entire 53 acre site is flat-lying, long and narrow and no longer possesses natural surface and biological characteristics. Due to the natur.e of the site limited wildlife is present. With no evidence of significant biological resources, the site has no habitat to protect and thus no impact. The site contains no riparian area although a few species of plant were found within the area of an old earthen reservoir. The size and condition of the plants indicates that containment of water for habitat has been limited and not formed by natural characteristics. Assessments were made to determine if the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly was present or could inhabit the site. Based on the Principe Report, "it appeared that the site was to disturbed to provide habitat for the butterfly. A staff member of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who has regularly passed by this site for several years also supports this conclusion. Therefore, no impacts can be associated with development of this site. 7.c. This site is dry and will have no impadt on federally protected wetlands. This site contains no waterways and is isolated from any open migratory wildlife corridors and therefore will not interfere with the movement or nesting of wildlife, therefore there are no impacts. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. Locally designated species are protected in the Old Town Temecula Specific Plan; however, they are not protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since there are no locally designated species on site, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentialty Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Suppor[ing Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 13 Comments: 8.a.b. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resoumes or in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or X acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X 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? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically intedere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: .8, The project is for the future development of church, school, and office buildings, on the lot created by this subdivision, in an office area. The streets leading to this subdivision are not transportation routes designated for commercial haulers who may be transporting hazardous materials. Because the property and the surrounding area are and will be used for school, church and office lots or buildings, R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 14 the future development should not include business that require the delivery of hazardous materials. When a application is made for future development proposals, a Statement of Operation and a Business Plan will be required that will be reviewed by the City's Fire Department so that they are not likely to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project limits the use of the property to uses that would not typically be associated with the need to use, store, or distribute hazardous materials. The request to develop a church and school would not create 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. Future more, with the development proposals of the undeveloped property, for office and commercial uses, will be assessed during development application processing. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The proposed development of the site will include a school which will places it within one-quarter mile of future uses that will develop on this and the neighboring site to the east. The operation of construction equipment and machinery during the grading of this site will emit some hazardous emissions. However, these emissions should be of limited quantities over a short duration of time and will occur before students occupy the site. During latter construction or during the operation of future facilities or business, it is not anticipated that there will be uses that emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. A minimal amount of hazardous emissions or material may be present during construction after the school is occupied and are should not pose a threat to the occupants of the school. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. This project site is not nor is it located near a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.e.f. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 9.g. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.h. This project site is in an area surrounded by existing single family homes and is not adjacent to any wildlands. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No ~mpact Incorporated Impact Impact a, Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of X 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 X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the . project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 15 without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X 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 private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the I project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: lO.a. According to the Noise Impact Analysis for Rancho Community Church & Retail Project, by Giroux & Associates, dated August lt, 2000, the primary source of noise on the project site is SH 79. Noise levels to 65 decibels (dB) outside, and 45 dB inside, are within the acceptable range for the proposed development as defined in the General Plans EIR. Typical construction methods with closed windows are capable of reducing the noise level by 20 dB. The area build out noise will increase noise levels to 71.7 dB at 100 feet from SR-79 which means that any buildings proposed will require construction methods capable of provide noise reduction to 45 dB at the interior. The worship center will be required to achieve 25 dB of noise reduction along its fa(;ade with SR-79. With standard constructions practices, this can be achieved by limiting the number and type of windows on that side of the building. Because the noise levels can be reduced through standard construction practices no mitigation is required and the impact will be less than sigpificant. 10.b. The uses conducted by the project are not activities that would expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Although there will be an increase in ground borne vibration and noise during grading and construction, these will be of a temporary and short duration. Due to the limited nature of this exposure and by maintaining compliance with the City Noise Ordinance there will be less than significant impacts. 10,c. Currently the site is vacant and any future development will bring potential noise producing sources closer to the residential units along the northern boundary line. Because this property has always been intended for development of office and commercial activities a certain level of noise can be expected. The Noise Impact Analysis determines that the maximum project traffic noise impact versus no project would be +1.4 dB, which is normally undetectable and therefore less than significant. However, over time the cumulative impact plus the project will increase the noise level by +3.2 dB, which is considered a significant change. Yet the ultimate noise level is 67.2 dB CNEL at 100 feet for SR-79. Since all planned development along the highway is of a commercial nature and commercial use standards are 70-75 dB, the project traffic noise impacts are therefore less than significant both individually and cumulatively. 10.d. Construction noise levels will be above background noise levels during daylight hours, but the City General Plan requires construction noise mitigation by restricting construction activities to daylight hours per the City's Code Section 8.32.020. To limit the other nuisance noises having the potential to affect the surrounding residences the developer shall be required to place operation and staging areas away from the homes. With the development of the school, there are likely to be periodic changes in the noise levels produced on site by student activities. However, these noise levels should be of short duration and at a substantial distance (over 300 feet) to the existing residences and should be relatively unnoticed. To assure that electronic amplifying devices that could be utilized in conjunction with the school and ball fields do not create a nuisance, conditions will be include with the Conditional Use Permit limiting the placement and broadcast direction of any devises to be installed. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 16 X-1 During construction operations, trailers, and vehicle staging areas will be located as far as is practicable from existing residential dwellings. X-2 X-3 The applicant will respond to any noise complaints received for this project by measuring noise levels at the affected receptor. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the receptor, the applicant will implement adequate measures to reduce no~se levels to the greatest extent feasible. In addition to ensuring compliance with the City of Temecula General Plan, noise ordinances, and other applicable regulations, the City will require noise standards specific to each business or activity in the proposed development, that operates in the evening (7 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and night- time hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), as a component of a Conditional Use Permit. These noise standards will ensure that noise levels at the nearest residences do not exceed 50 dBA at the exterior wall facing the commercial area, or is below the background noise level. X-4 Prior to the installation of external amplifying devices, the developer shall provide the City with a sound study which assures that the projected sound levels will not be a nuisance to the existing residential dwellings. 10.e-f. The project site is located five miles from the nearest airport or a private airstrip and has no potential to be exposed to significant airport operation noise impacts. 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: Potentially PotentiallySignificant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources SignificantMitigation Significant NO Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X 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? b. Fire protection? X c. Police protection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X Comments: 11.a.b.c.e. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some services. However, the project will contribute its fair share through City Development Impact Fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 11.d. The project itself does not create residences and will therefore, have no impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school facilities. Development of the parcels within the project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City. The cumulative effect from the project be mitigated through the payment of applicable School Fees at the time the parcels are developed. No impacts are anticipated with the subdividing of this property. R:\P D O~001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 17 11 .f. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered public facilities. The Rancho California Water District, in correspondence dated November 29, 2000, indicates that the project site is located within the boundaries of the District. Water and sewer service is available upon completion of financial arrangements. The Riverside Department of Environmental Health, in correspondence dated November 28, 2000, that indicates their Department has no objections, and anticipates 'M/ill Serve" letters will be provided to this project. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than issues and Supporling Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant NO Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X 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? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 12.a. The proposed project will deliver wastewater to the regional treatment wastewater reclamation plant in Temecula. The facility is operated by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and it has capacity to meet the demand from the proposed project within its authorized treatment capacity. This facility operates.within its waste discharge requirements. Therefore, the proposed project is not forecast to cause a violation of wastewater treatment requirements, either directly or indirectly. 12.b. According to the General Plan EIR, adequate capacity exists within the EMWD water supply and wastewater treatment systems to provide water and wastewater capacity for the proposed project. This conclusion is also supported by urban water master plan adopted by the EMWD. Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Moreover, the project will be conditioned to comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards that will be monitored by the Department of Public Works. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 18 12.c. 12.d. 12.e. 12.f. 12.g The site is flat and the future development will result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities. The development of this project area will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system currently in place along Stare Route 79 South. The design of the existing system downstream is sufficient to handle this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities as verified by the drainage report prepared by Jack P Norris, dated October 27, 2000. The construction of this storm drain on this site will only disturb area previously disturbed and will not cause significant environmental effects. Drainage fees are required by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to reimburse the county for the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. Future development of the project area will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the proposed project is generally consistent with the intent of the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Adequate wastewater treatment capacity has been identified by the EMWD to meet the City of Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also 12.b above. According to the General Plan and the County Solid Waste Management Plan adequate landfill disposal capacity exists within the regional landfills to meet current and future demands. Solid waste mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR (Measures 2 and 3) must be implemented by all projects in the City to meet the City's source reduction requirements. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by future development can be less than significant through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. By participating in the City's source reduction and recycling element, the proposed project will comply with all statutes and regulations for management of solid waste. The proposed chumh, school, and commercial projects do not pose any significant or unique management requirements. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Un[ess Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant NO Impact Incorporated Impact impact a, Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b, Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building within a state scenic highway? c. Sbbstantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 19 Comments: 13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in an area where there is a scenic vista. The City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.b. No major rock outcroppings, substantial trees, or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is not located on a scenic highway, but it will be required to meet design requirements along SH 79 to be consistent with existing development. No adverse environmental impact or mitigation is required. 13.c. The proposed project will be located adjacent to existing single-family units to the north of the project site. Per the City's General Plan the project site is subject for a special overlay requiring the development of the site to meet defined standards for the architecture compatible to the surrounding residential development and that all structures be limited to no more than two stories. With the preparation and adoption of standards in the Planned Development Overlay District, governing this site, the General Plan's conditions will be meet. Based on the City's requirement to meet these design guidelines, the proposed project has a less than significant potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and surroundings, which is comprised of a combined urban/suburban visual setting. 13.d. The project will require the development of parking lots that must be lit in accordance to City standards. The lighting of these lots must also meet the County's Ordinance 655 requirements for no conflict with the Mount Palomar Observatory. Due to proximity to residential uses, the project also has a potential to create significant light and glare impacts onsite or impacting the surrounding area and uses from the parking lots drive aisles and buildings. If lighting of the ball fields is approved as part of this project the applicant will be required to submit light studies that demonstrate that there wilt be no increase in the ambient light levels along adjacent properties. To minimize the impacts of lighting on surrounding development, the following mitigation measures will be implemented: Xlll-1 Xlllo2 With the exception of site security lighting, all parking lot lighting and building lights within the project area will be directed so that limited amounts of light or glare fall outside of the project site boundary and that these lights be shut off at 11 p.m. in compliance with the County's Ordinance 655 requirements. Lighting on the site shall be installed on independent operating systems so individual areas can be controlled independently and shut off when not necessary for evening activities. Xlll-3 Xlll-4 If ball field lights are approved light studies for the ball fields shall be submitted that demonstrate that there will be no increase in the ambient light levels along adjacent properties. All ball field lighting shall be directed so that minimal light or glare falls beyond the property boundary. The days and hours of operation for the lighting of the ball fields will be made a part of the Conditional Use Permit for the development of the church and school. Implementation of these measures will ensure that no light or glare sensitive areas are exposed to significant light and glare impacts, thereby reducing the impacts to a less than significant level. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEOA Initial Study.doc 20 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact rncoq~orated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57 c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 14.a.b. A Phase I cultural resources survey of the project site was conducted by RMW Paleo Associates, Inc. (July 2000). The results of the survey turned up historical and archaeological resources in the form of an old irrigation channel and several artifacts on the western end of the project site, however due to long term disturbance (plowing and discing) of this area, it is not known where the artifacts originated. Therefore, the Phase I report recommends, "that this area be subjected to controlled destruction to determine if a sub-surface artifactual deposit is present." The Eastern Information Center reports that 21 cultural resoume studies have been conducted within 1/2 mile of this project site and four of those sites have yielded a substantial number of artifacts. Eastern recommends the submission of a cultural resource management report following guidelines for Archaeological Resources Management Reports, that Phase II Testing be carried out, and that a professional archaeologist should monitor all earthmoving during construction. Due to the likelihood of subsurface (buried) cultural resources on the project site, a Phase II study will be required. If the Phase II report finds any subsurface cultural resources, the reports recommendation must be carried out as mitigation for the preservation or documentation of historical or archaeological resources pursuant to Section 1506.5. With mitigation measures in place and the projects conditions of approval the potential impact should be reduced to a level of insignificance. XIV-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Phase II Testing with controlled destruction, using as small scraper to remove thin lifts of soil from the site, shall be preformed to determine if a sub-surface artifact deposits are present. Upon completion of this testing a cultural resource management report shall be prepared and filed with the California Historical Resource Information Center. XIV-2 During initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified archaeologist will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. XlV-3 If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities, the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report these resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. XlV-4 The qualified cultural resources monitor will issue a second DPR523 site recordation form for Site CA-RIV-6499 after the completion of site monitoring. The report will include any additional site features detected during grading. 14,c. The cultural resources survey of the project site conducted by RMW Paleo Associates, Inc. (July 2000) indicates that the potential for buried paleontological resources has been high on neighboring sites and R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.dcc 21 14.d. the potential exists on this project site. Due to the potential for such resources to occur on the property, the following mitigation measure will be implemented: XlV-5 During excavation and cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report on these resources to ensure the values inherent in the resources are adequately characterized and preserved. As stated in RMW Paleo Associates, Inc., cultural resources survey, the project area is in close proximity to known archaeological remains and there is the possibility of additional remains being present. It is therefore recommend that a qualified archaeologist monitor the entire site during all ground disturbing activities. In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered on the project site, the mitigation measures presented in this section in addition to the following measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. XIV-6 If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the ! environment? Comments: 15.a.b. The project will have no impact on the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16. Agricultural Resources. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting ~ntormation Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X : Williamson Act contract? R:\P D O~.001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 22 Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location er nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? X Comments: 16a.c. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past has not ever formerly been used for agricultural purposes. In addition this property is not considered prime or unique of Farmland of statewide importance pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue. 16b. The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. As a consequence there are no impacts related to this issue. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X 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 restrict 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 X 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 X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: ' 17.a. This site has been previously farmed, disc, and graded and is surrounded by single-family homes, a future commercial and apartment development, and does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is an in-fill development and it does not 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 or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.b. The cumulative effects from the project are significant but they are being mitigated to less than significant levels because the subject site is being developed in conformance with the City of R;\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.dcc 23 17.c. Temecula's General Plan and Development Code. All cumulative effects for the various land uses of the subject site as well as the surrounding developments were analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Given the projects consistency with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impact related to the future development will not have a significant impact with the applied mitigation measures. The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The church, school, and commercial component are or will be designed and developed consistent with the Planned Development Overlay, the Development Code, and the General Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. i Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope , of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state I whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 18.a. 18.b. 18.c. There were no earlier analyses specifically related to this project site. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report and a number of special studies (listed under Sources) were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study There were no earlier impacts identified nor assessments made, therefore there was no documentation of impacts or mitigations to be used in the analysis of the current project. The mitigation measures are addressed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, which is attached. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 24 SOURCES (Available in the Temecula Planning Department) 1. City of Temecula General Plan, dated November 9, 1993. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, dated July 2, 1993. 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 4. Drainage Report Hydrology Study of Rancho Community Church Site, prepared by Jack P Norris, dated October 27, 2000. 5. Air Quality Impact Analysis, prepared by Giroux & Associates, dated August 14, 2000 & update 8/8/02. 6. Earth Technics Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 53 Acres, Highway 79 & Constance Street, project no. 99221-02, dated June 27, 1998. 7. Archaeology Cultural Resources Reconnaissance for the Rancho Community Chumh, prepared by RMW Paleo Associates, dated July 2000. 8. Paleontological Assessment for 53 Acres Adjacent to State Highway 79 (Tentative Tract No. 15211), prepared by RMW Paleo Associates, dated July 20, 2000. 9. General Biological Assessment for Tract 15211 Lots 1-10, by Principe and Associates, dated October 26, 1999. 10. Noise Impact Analysis for Rancho Community Church & Retail Project, by Giroux & Associates, dated August 11,2000. 11. Traffic Impact Analysis for Rancho Community Church Project, by Linscott Law & Greenspan, dated February 27,2002, and supplemental dated May 17, 2002. 12. Fault Location Confirmation Investigation, Portions of Lots 3-10 of Tract 15211, by Petra, dated April 13, 2001. R:\P D O~2001\01-0533 Rancho Community Church PDO-6\CEQA Initial Study.doc 25 .e E ATTACHMENT NO. 2 DRAFT ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONE CHANGE R:\C U P~000\00-04~0 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, GENERALLY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002, to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-22 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-23 recommended that the City Council approve of a Zone Change for the Project with the R:\C U P',2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso ZC.DOC 1 recommended amendments as described on the Errata Sheets are set forth in the document attached hereto as Exhibit B. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- Section 2. The City Council hereby amend the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as follows: Ao For the properties identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru - 005 and 959-070-001 thru -006, set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 4. The City Council hereby amend Chapter 17.22 of the Temecula Municipal Code by adding thereto the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-6) as Sections 17.22.160 through 17.22.178, inclusive, amendments as described on the Errata Sheets, of the Temecula Municipal Code, as said sections are set forth in the document attached hereto as Exhibit B to this Ordinance and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September, 2002 Ron Roberts, Mayor A'I-rEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso ZC.DOC 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular'meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso ZC.DOC 3 EXHIBIT "A" ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~ PDO-6 ~ ~~ PLANNING APPMCATION NO. 01-0522 (Zone Change) RANCHO PUEBLO PLANNED DEVELOMPMENT OVEFILAY MAP (PDO-6) CITY COUNCIL DATE - September 24, 2002 R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso ZC.DOC 4 EXHIBIT B Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay - 6 R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso ZC.DOC 5 Errata Sheet - Planning Commission Modifications Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Zone Change) Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay - 6 (PDO-6) The Planning Commission made the following recommendations to the City Council pertaining to Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay - 6 (PDO-6) at their meeting of July 31,2002. Amend the list of permitted uses in Table 17.22.166a as follows: · Bowling Alley · Caretaker residences · Mini-storage · Modular Classrooms/buildings · Schools, business and professional · Schools, private (Kindergarten through Grade 12) · Schools, religious (K-12; seminary) · Sports fields (with or without related school use) · Wedding chapels Not Permitted Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Conditional Table 17.22.166b Note number 3 on page 17 change to read: "Parking structures of thrcc two stories, ..." In Section 17.22.168 D, remove the reference to the "at the traffic circle" on page 20, paragraph 3. In Section 17.22.172: Inconsistent text and Figure references pertaining to wall and fence heights were modified for consistency. Page 24, paragraph 6, the screen wall height is listed as 4-6 feet in height and Figures 9, 16, and 17 list 2-4 feet, while figure 30 shows 6 feet. Amend the text and figures for consistency to include language that limits the overall height of wails and fences to a maximum of height of six (6) feet with the top of the walls, or fences being no higher than eight (8) feet above the adjacent street curb grade. In Section 17.22.172.A.4, Parking Areas (page 25), paragraph two, fourth line change "are not required" to read "may not be required." In Section 17.22.172.A.7, Temporary Ground Cover (page 26), add the following statement: "Such hydro-seeded areas should be provided with temporary irrigation until such time that the seed mix has germinated and established itself." 10. 11. .12. In Section 17.22.174, Infrastructure and Development Phasing (page 31), add text for Rancho Pueblo Road improvements as follows: "Initial development with the PDO Area shall include the installation of all improvement on both sides of Rancho Pueblo Road from its intersection with SR-79 South to its intersection with Chapel Lane. This includes curbs, sidewalks, and landscape planting design and installation on both sides of the street (for a minimum of 16 feet from the face of curb) and both corner entry statements of Rancho Pueblo at SR-79 South." In Section 17.22.172.B., Figure 15, amend to show the curb return and the curb along Highway 79 and change the height of the Sign Tower to 12 feet. In Section 17.22.176.E.1., paragraph one (page 39), to read as follows: "Site identification signs will comply with the requirements set forth herein and to the City Design Standards, and will be mounted on monument walls no greater than four (4) feet in height on either one or both sides of entrance roadways (see Figures 33 and 34). In Section 17.22.176.E.1., paragraph two (page 39), to read as follows: All free standing sign muse be the monument-type no taller than eight (8) feet with no more that six (6) equal sized tenant spaces with architectural elements at the top, base and sides, similar to Figure 34. In Section 17.22.176.E.2., paragraph two (page 39), to read as follows: "Tenants using an entire building will be allowed one freestanding monument sign similar to ef--the designs shown in Figure 34 but not to exceed a height of four (4) feet nor a copy area greater than 30 square feet." In Section 17.22.176.E, Figure 34 redraw Signs A, B, C, to reflect a sign(s) no taller than eight (8) feet with no more that six (6) equal sized tenant spaces. In Section 17.22.176.E, Figure 35, Sign F, amend to show the church sign tower height at 12 feet. Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITrED USES (con't) Bakery, goods distribution Bakery, retail P Bakery, wholesale Banks and financial institutions (without drive-thru lanes) P Banks (with drive-thru lanes) C Barber and beauty shops P Bed and Breakfast Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) Billiard parlor/pool hall Binding of books and similar publications P Blood bank P Blueprint and duplicating and copy services P Bookstores P 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. fl. - no outdoor storage Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) Candy/confectionery sales P Car wash, full service Carpet and rug cleaning Caretaker residences ¢ C Catering services Clothing sales P Coins, purchase and sales Cold storage facilities Communications and microwave installationI C Communications equipment sales P Community care facilities P Computer sales and servicing P Congregate care housing for the elderly~ P Construction equipment sales, service or rental Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Convenience market Costume rentals Crematoriums Cutlery September 24, 2002 11 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDOo6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMrI-rED USES (con't) ! Ice cream parlor P Impound yard Interior decorating service P J Junk or salvage yard K Kennel L Laboratories (film, medical, research or testing centers) C Laundromat Laundry service (commercial) Libraries, museums and galleries C Liquefied petroleum, sales and distribution Liquor stores Lithographic service Locksmith P M Machine shop Machinery storage yard Mail order businesses P Manufacturing of products similar to, but not limited to, the following: 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 that do not involve frequent truck traffic. Compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials and products that require frequent [mck 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 semi-refined products requiring further processing or manufacturing, and outside storage. Uses under 20,000 sq. fl. with no outside storage Massage Medical equipment sales/rental P Membership clubs, organizations, lodges C Mini-storage or Mini-warehouse facilities3 C Mobile home sales and service Modular Classrooms/buildings _C 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 C September 24, 2002 13 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (con~) S Scale, public Schools, business and professional ¢C Schools, private (kindergarten through Grade 12) ¢C Schools, religious (kindergarten through Grade 12; and, seminary) Scientific research and development offices and laboratories C Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care): P Solid waste disposal facility Sports ,,~,~ ........... *; ..... ~ c,,,,;];~;,~,, fields (with or without related school use) C Swap Meet, entirely inside a permanent building Swap Meet, outdoor Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales T Tailor shop P Taxi or limousine service Tile sales Tobacco shop Tool and die-casting Transfer, moving and storage Transportation terminals and stations Truck sales/rentals/service TV/VCR repair U Upholstery shop V Vending machine sales and service W Warehousing/distribution Watch repair P Wedding chapels -C Welding shop Welding supply and service (enclosed) Y Reserved Z Reserved Notes: 1. All antennas will be masked or incorporated into approved structures or other surfaces, subject to City Design Review and City Antenna Ordinance. 2. All congregate care and senior housing residential projects will use the development and performance standards for the High Density Residential zone and the provisions contained in City of Temecula Zoning Code Section 17.06,050.H. 3. See City of Temecula Zoning Code Section 17.080.050(R). special use regulations and standards for self-storage or mini-warehouse facilities. September 24, 2002 15 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166b RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITFED USES (con't) Interior side yard l 0 feet Rear yard 10 feet Accessory structure side/rear yard setback 5 feet Minimum building separation: One story 15 feet Two stories 20 feet Maximum building height: Two stories 40 feet~ Large meeting hall/auditorium structures (with high- 45 feett ceiling single story portions to their structures) Temporary modular buildings 15 feet Parking Structures 45 feet3 Maximum percent of lot coverage 50 percent Minimum required landscape open space (including 25 percent hardscape and walkways) Fence, hedge or wall - maximum height 6 feet Accessory building - maximum height 15 feet Notes: 1. All structures except Worship Center, Chapel, Family Life Center (containing high-ceiling, single story spaces) and Parking Structure. 2. For purposes of this PDO document, Worship Center, Chapel, Family Life Center (containing high-ceiling, single story spaces) and Parking Structure fall into this category. 3. Parking structures of ti:cee- two stories, with half-a-level below grade (four parking levels including roof level) are allowed. September 24, 2002 17 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) buildings along Highway 79 and will be developed as part of individual building sites, also allowing for connection between buildings via the shared landscape areas (see Figure 11 in Section 17.22.172.A.3). Pedestrian entry to the PDO Area from the sidewalk along Highway 79 may be provided at each vehicular traffic entry point and at suitable points in between. Additional pedestrian connections will be developed within and between adjacent land uses, and allow for future extension into the development immediately east of the PDO. Internal, site pedestrian pathways may only cross the main entry roadways at the interior intersection of Rancho Pueblo Road and Chapel Lane (at t!'~ ~raffic ci:'c!c~ and at the intersection I of Rancho Pueblo Road and the secondary rightdn/right-out access road at the eastern site boundary. Additional crossings at the intersection of these roads with Highway 79 and within the landscape buffer zone alongside Highway 79 are permissible, but no crossings are permitted in between the Highway 79 landscape buffer zone and the major internal road intersections. Textural and/or colored surface changes will identify all pedestrian roadway crossing points. The main pedestrian area in the PDO, the Church and School's central, gathering place, is designed with both hard-surface and soft-surface landscaping and fumiture elements, affording a variety of open and shaded pedestrian environments. Both larger informal outdoor gatherings, such as after Church services, and small, intimate settings for conversation and relaxation will be accommodate in the design; the anticipated future Sanctuary capacity of some 3,500 people must also be accommodated in this gathering place. Access to parking is fi.om Rancho Pueblo Road and secondary site internal roadways using a minimal number of entry points, promoting pedestrian movements along the street-side pedestrian pathways throughout the POD. E. PARKING Parking areas will be provided throughout the PDO reasonably close to the use that they serve, with opportunities for shared and reciprocal parking arrangements encouraged to lessen the total amount of land devoted to parking. Along the Highway 79 South frontage and at the rear of the site, where the site abuts existing residential areas, parking will be kept to a minimum. Standard and van-accessible handicapped-accessible parking and bicycle stands will be provided at convenient locations throughout the site, especially adjacent to the School buildings and Worship Center. Access to parking areas is directly from Rancho Pueblo Road, Chapel Lane or the secondary service driveways at points that minimize potential interference with cars traveling on Rancho Pueblo Road and Chapel Lane (see Figures 4 & 5). Entry roads from Highway 79 South will be designed with circulation and stacking distances in mind, avoiding any potential back-ups and other adverse impacts on the public highway. Internal parking area driveways will provide direct vehicular access in close and obvious proximity to the main building entries that they are serving. Sharing of parking driveways between adjacent land use is encouraged. September 24, 2002 20 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.172 LANDSCAPING Landscaping will be a coordinated design element integrated with, and complementary to, building design. Functioning on both experiential and esthetical levels, landscaping will experientially enhance pedestrian pathway usage by providing shade and a range of textures, patterns, and colors, and aesthetically enhance visual experiences from the interior and exterior ofbnth individual buildings and the entire PDO area. Major landscaping elements, such as trees and monuments, will highlight specific areas within the PDO, with accent trees similarly encouraged as visual clues to peoples' location within the PDO area. A mix of deciduous and evergreen plantings is encouraged to highlight seasonal changes while still maintaining year-rotmd beauty and accent, with attention paid to color, form and scent. All exterior boundaries of the PDO area will be landscaped with multi-storied plantings. Special attention will be given to the interface with the surrounding residential areas where plantings and landscape design will emphasize softening the visual impact of the PDO area from off-site. A. GENERAL SITE STANDARDS 1. Highway 79 Buffers along Highway 79 within the PDO area will continue the precedent patterns established by existing and proposed adjacent developments to the east of the PDO area along Highway 79 South. Namely, a 36-foot minimum landscape buffer, measuring 20 feet from the property line and 16 feet from the curb to the right-of-way line. Exceptions to this buffer will be for entry signage and monuments at points of access for vehicles and pedestrians, where the buffer incorporates a greater area and depth. Typically, the buffer includes a six-foot wide meandering sidewalk, not less than five feet from the face of the curb along Highway 79 except at and approaching comers (Figures 8 and 9). To address measurable highway and vehicular noise and to promote a quiet, restive ambiance within the Church and School's main areas, a variable two-to-four foot high, shallow-sloped berm (4-foot maximum height for berm) will be topped with an articulated four-to six foot high wall (6-foot maximum height for walls/fences along Highway 79 South), to deflect highway noise and screen parking lot views from Highway 79. The berm and wall relative heights are varied for visual interest when experienced from Highway 79 and the wall will have columns at sixty-foot intervals (see Figure 30). However, the combination of berm plus wall or fence height at any point along Highway 79 South shall not exceed eight (8) feet above adjacent street curb grade. Due to the variety and density of landscaping placed on the Highway side of the wall, most of the wall is eventually expected to be obscured from Highway views. September 24, 2002 24 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Over/ay (PDO-6) Elsewhere, the buffer will also contain any necessary acceleration and deceleration lanes, bus stops and their associated seating and shelters, as well as corridors for utility structures including, but not limited to, transformers, back-flow devices, and detector checks. Utility equipment placed in the buffer area will, whenever possible, be placed below grade in accordance with Section 17.22.168.F.5. 2. Rear (North) Property Line A nominal 20-foot buffer along the rear PDO area property line, adjacent to the residential area, will contain plantings and trees to help mitigate off-site visual impacts from parking and buildings in the PDO area (Figure 10). A proposed white, three-rail fence, with integrated chain-link, is placed along this property line for esthetic and safety reasons, due to the proximity of the proposed drainage channel. Plantings, in and around parking areas and adjacent to buildings, will further mitigate off-site views of parking and buildings. Additionally, a 12- foot wide Equestrian trail will be graded to the north of the property line with cooperation of the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association and the consent of the respective property owners. In areas where the cross-site drainage channel is located the buffer will be reduce in width to five feet, measured from the property line to the top of the channel slope. Plantings may be reduced in areas adjacent to playing fields where visual impacts are at a minimum. 3. Shared Mini-Plazas Where possible adjacent development parcels are encouraged to use coordinated designs to provide shared mini-plazas for common use between the sites. Buildings may be grouped closer together and open space combined to achieve these elements. Such mini-plazas will be in reasonable proximity to building entries and will be connected to the system of landscaped pedestrian pathways that traverse the PDO area. Plazas will have shade trees and seating for informal meetings (Figure 11). 4. Parking Areas Parking lots will include plantings and trees to provide shade and to soften their visual impact, with trees grouped at the end of parking rows, wherever feasible. Large-canopy shade trees will also be placed in planter islands at regular intervals within permanent parking lots in accordance with the city standards. Pedestrian pathways should be clearly identified with a variety of plantings, open and trellis-covered walkways (Figure 12), textures and enhanced surfaces. Plantings and features used to screen and soften permanent parking areas will be balanced with maintaining carefully framed building views into and out from the site. Temporary parking lots, to the extent that overall project landscaping requirements have already been met, are n'.;t may not be required to have landscaping within the lot proper. However, effort should be made to soften views of expansive, temporary parking areas by landscaping the perimeter of such lot(s). September 24, 2002 25 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 5. Storm Drain Channel A drainage channel, carrying cross-site drainage from areas noah of the PDO area to the southwest comer of the PDO area, is located in some areas along the rear and west property lines. Sides and bottom of the channel are covered with a grass mix, except at various important points (channel bends and culvert entries and exits) where rip-rap is used for erosion protection. The channel bottom also contains a concrete channel to control minor irrigation and nuisance (low-flow) mn-off. In sensitive locations, such as adjacent to the Church and Schools, an underground concrete culvert pipe replaces the channel. In areas where the channel exists, the rear buffer landscaping is modified to a five-foot strip measured from the property line to the top of the channel slope (Figure 10). 6. Water District Easement on West Property Line Surface of easement will be hydro-seeded with a non-irrigated grass mix to mitigate weed growth and potential dust impact. 7. Temporary Ground Cover Undeveloped site areas graded under previous phases and planned for future development will be hydro-seeded with a non-irrigated grass mix to mitigate weed growth and potential dust impact. Such hydro-seeded areas should be provided with temporary irrigation until such time that the seed mix has germinated and established itself. 8. Equipment and Service Areas Screening Above-ground placements of utility and mechanical equipment, and service areas, will be screened with walls, covers (where appropriate to avoid views down into enclosures), and landscaped in accordance with city standards. B. STREETSCAPES The design of streetscapes provides for clear patterns of ingress and egress, efficient vehicular travel and encourages the safe movement of pedestrian throughout the PDO area. Roadway design will allow for, and integrate, a pleasing pedestrian experience, incorporating both low-level plantings and trees alongside pathways. Landscaping will be used in a hierarchy of plantings to emphasize different locations and uses within the PDO. For instance, one type of street tree for the main thoroughfare, Rancho Pueblo Road, and another for Chapel Lane. Medians greater than a minimum 5 feet clear dimension will be planted with low-level plantings (see Figures 13 through 16 and 18 for street landscape details). Sep~mber24,2002 26 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.174 INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PHASING Development of Rancho Pueblo is expected to take place over a number of years, reflecting the congregational growth in the Church and market demand for professional and commercial facilities in the area. While each component of the Rancho Pueblo project may be developed separately, they will do so under the guidelines developed herein and, when needed, the City Wide Design Guidelines. Development may proceed sequentially or concurrently, with each portion contributing piece-by-piece to the overall vision, acting as a microcosm of the way in which a well-planned city develops. Construction of the planned first phase of buildings will begin immediately following initial site grading. The development schedule for the Church and School site is currently planned in five phases. The initial phase is the most extensive, including construction of the Family Life Center/Interim Sanctuary, Chapel, Preschool/Elementary school complex, the first phase of the Administration building, east and west Sports Fields with their associated western Field House and Storage building, and construction of two groupings of temporary, modular buildings ('A' and 'B') at the rear and front of the site, respectively. Phase Two, includes construction of the Adult Education building, the first phase of the Elementary School, the second phase of the Administration building, and the eastern Field House and an additional Storage building. The third phase of the Church and School site commences with the removal of the rear ('A'), temporary, modular buildings and progresses to the addition of the High School building, first phase of the Gymnasium, completion of the Elementary School and the final Storage building. Phase Four, begins with removal of the remaining, front-most ('B') temporary modular buildings and continues with the construction of the Middle School and completion of phase two of the Gymnasium. The fifth, and final, phase involves construction of the Worship Center and the necessary, associated, Parking Structure. A high degree of flexibility is designed into the Church project to allow for possible alternative building phasing if the need arises. Should funds be available or needs arise earlier than initially planned, later phases of the Church's development may be accelerated. It is expected that, in contrast to the Church and Schools site, the Professional Center area of the site will develop reasonably quickly in accordance with market dictates. The expected first phase will be construction of the self-storage facility at the rear of the site followed by Assisted Living and Senior Living facilities, with the final phase being the Medical Office building. Similar to the Church portion of Rancho Pueblo, these areas have a great deal of flexibility allowed in their design to incorporate the diversity of uses permitted. Initial development within the PDO Area shall include the installation of all improvements on both sides of Rancho Pueblo Road from its intersection with SR-79 South to its intersection with Chapel Lane. This includes curbs, sidewalks, and landscape planting design and installation on both sides of the street (for a minimum of 16 feet from the face of curb) and both comer entry statements of Rancho Pueblo at SR-79 South. September 24, 2002 31 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) I. Monument Site identification signs will comply with the requirements set forth herein and to the City Design Standards, and will be mounted on monument walls no greater than four (4) feet in height on either one or both sides of entrance roadways (see Figures 33 and 34). All freestanding signs must be the monument-type no taller than eight (8) feet with no more than six (6) equal sized tenant spaces with architectural elements at the top, base and sides, similar to Figure 34. Freestanding pole signs are not permitted. Place entry monument features, with integral signage identifying the site, at all appropriate vehicle and pedestrian entries. Employ a hierarchy of entry signage designs (Figure 34) to differentiate, clearly, the major entries, at Chapel Lane and Rancho Pueblo Road, from the secondary entries. The secondary entry at the east boundary of the PDO will receive proportionately less expansive design elements. Incorporate landscape and architectural features, blended with overall site landscape and architectural themes, into the design of the entry monuments. Light entry monuments externally, with low-level, low-pressure sodium, wall-wash lighting in accordance with the Mount Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance. Another variation on the overall PDO signage program relates to the Rancho Pueblo Sports Center. The signage, shown in Figure 34 Sign E, is designed to complement the park environment it features stacked ledgestone and stucco sign faces. 2. Building and Tenant Identification Owner and tenant identification signage, throughout the PDO area, will adhere to a common design theme and requirements, as delineated herein. Signage design will integrate with the architectural style of the buildings, through use of such elements as finishes, fasciae and moldings (Figures 34, 34a, and 36). Tenants using an entire building will be allowed one freestanding monument sign o~' similar to the designs shown in Figure 34 but not to exceed a height of four (4) feet nor a copy area greater than 30 square feet. Canopy signs will not be permitted due to the "pueblo" design theme. Under-canopy signs are permitted. All under-canopy signs for individual tenants will follow the shape in Figure 34b; this shape is also used for delivery signs. Address numbers must meet the Fire Department requirement of 6". All address numbers are to be located at the same height above curb as directed by the fire marshal. Restaurant menu signs are permitted only where needed at a drive-through restaurant. Changeable plaques, On Figure 34 Signs A, B & C, where used as a part of a sign, must be bronze and bolted in place with spacers to maintain a plumb line; sign shape will be the same as Figure 34a - Plaques. September 24, 2002 39 BERM AND WALL ALONG HWY 79 W/O PLANTING ELEVATION 2' - 4' MAX VAR, BERM BERM AND WALL ALONG HWY 79 W/PLANTING ELEVATION s c.,~r: ~.T~ HIGHWAY 79 ~UEFER PLAN VIEW sc~ 'r=z~' INTERIOR OF SITE -- 2' - 4' HIGH STAGGERED WALL W/18" COLUMNS BUFFER PLANTING STREETTREES ACCENTPLANTING 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK 5' MIN FROM CURB AND TO MEANDER WITH-IN R.O,W, HIGHWAY 79 CHAPEL LANE ENTRY PERSPECTIVE t~l_~').~-: .4-~-~ '~'c .~ ~':': L 7.. · . , ~ ACCENT ACCENT GROUND COVER- ACCENT CANOPY TREES ACCENT SHRUB PLANTING HIGHWAY 79 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK '12' X 12' X 21'5" HIGH TOWER W/ 5' X 9' ELECTRONIC SIGNAGE DECORATIVE ENTRY PAVING · 4' MEDIAN W/ ENHANCED CONCRETE PAVING CHAPEL LANE ENTRY PLAN VIEW sc.a~ MAIN SANCTUARY ACCENT PALM PLANTING 4&' WIDE STREET I G' 51DEWALK I CHAPEL LANE SEC'I'ION ~.~.~_.._/--MAIN SANCTUARY ACCENT PALM PLA,,N,_TING GROUND COVER- ACCENT SHF SCREEN SHRUBS COLUMNAR STREET' TREES CHAPEL LANE PLAN VIEW ~-HWY 79 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK -2'-4' MAX VAR BERM 2' -~-' VAR. STAGGERED WALL W/ 18" COLUMNS (WALL + I~EP~H -8' HAY.) RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH SIGN PERSPECTIVE sc~: N.¥.S --ACCENT TREE5 ENTRY 5iGNAGE ACCENT G~©UNDC©VE~ AND SHRUB PLAHT~NG RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH SIGN PLAN VIEW sr..~ INTERIOR OF SITE STAGGERED WALL W/18" COLUMNS WALL + BUFFER PLANTING ACCENT TREES STREET TREES ACCENTPLANTING SIGNAGE ACCENT GROUND COVER 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK 5' MtN FROM CURB AND TO MEANDER WtTH-IN R.O.W, HIGHWAY 79 lg' 0" 15" CONe. MOLOINEr PUEBLO: RANCHO CENTER Tenant Tenant lenant lenant T~NA Tenant Tenant % 135 ~ LP**LOOD~ Signs A, B, C 7" CONe. MOLDIN~ {NOT O? 4 TE. AL - PLAT ~5 ~ c¢¢ ~,oo~ Sign D I~-LO~4 ~-P-AD¢- &AN Sign E Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Signage Figures 34 ~oo~ ~,oooc~ Sign F Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Church Signage Tower With Electronic Signage Figure 35 RANCHO PUEBLO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-6) Prepared for CITY OF TEMECULA Department of Community Development Prepared by Malkoff and Associates 18456 Lincoln Circle Villa Park, CA 92861 (714) 288-6200 in collaboration with James Benedetti, ASLA Temecula Engineering Consultants Timeless Architecture September 24, 2002 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table of Contents 17.22.160 17.22.162 A. B. C. 17.22.164 A. B. 17.22.166 A. B. 17.22.168 A. B. C. D. E. F. 17.22.170 TITLE ........................................................................................................................ 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 5 General Plan Consistency .......................................................................................... 5 Vision ........................................................................................................................ 5 Project Area ............................................................................................................... 6 PLANNING AREAS ............................................................................................... 8 Rancho Community Church and Schools .................................................................. 8 Rancho Pueblo Professional Center .......................................................................... 9 LAND USES ............................................................................................................ 10 Use Matrix ............................................................................................................... 10 Development Standards ........................................................................................... 16 CIRCULATION PLAN ......................................................................................... 18 Access and Connections .......................................................................................... 18 Roadway Design and Cross-Sections ...................................................................... 19 Truck Access ........................................................................................................... 19 Pedestrian Access and Movement ........................................................................... 19 Parking ..................................................................................................................... 20 Service Facilities ...................................................................................................... 21 1. Service, Loading and Delivery Areas ............................................................ 21 2. Trash ............................................................................................................. 21 3. Storage .......................................................................................................... 21 4. Utility Equipment .......................................................................................... 21 5. Mechanical Equipment ................................................................................. 22 RECREATION FACILITIES ................................................................................ 23 A. Playing Fields .......................................................................................................... 23 B. Hard-Surface Play Areas .......................................................................................... 23 17.22.172 LANDSCAPING .................................................................................................... 24 A. General Site Standards ............................................................................................. 24 1. Highway 79 South ....................................................................................... 24 2. Rear Property Line ....................................................................................... 25 3. Shared Mini-Plazas ....................................................................................... 25 4. Parking Areas ............................................................................................... 25 5. Storm Drain Channel ................................................................................... 26 6. Water District Easement on West Property Line .......................................... 26. 7. Temporary Ground Cover ........................................................................... 26 8. Equipment and Service Areas Screening .................................................... 26 B. Streetscapes .............................................................................................................. 26 C. Entrance Features .................................................................................................... 27 D. Plaza Design and Elements ..................................................................................... 27 E. Pavement Finishes ................................................................................................... 27 F. City Standards .......................................................................................................... 27 G. Plant Palette .............................................................................................................. 28 September 24, 2002 2 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.174 INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PHASING ................................ 31 A. Utilities ..................................................................................................................... 32 B. Grading and Drainage ............................................................................................... 32 17.22.176 DESIGN GUIDELINES ........................................................................................ 33 A. Architectural Statement ........................................................................................... 33' 1. Form and Scale .............................................................................................. 33 2. Complexity and Unity .................................................................................... 34 3. Architectural Elements ................................................................................... 34 a) Building Entries ....................................................................................... 34 b) Building Elements .................................................................................... 34 c) Roofs ........................................................................................................ 35 d) Arcades, Colonnades, Balconies ............................................................. 35 e) Windows, Doors, Wall Openings ............................................................. 35 4. Materials and Finishes ................................................................................... 35 5. Parking Structures ......................................................................................... 35 6. Drive-Through ............................................................................................... 36 B. Accent Elements ....................................................................................................... 36 1. Paving, Plazas and Walkways ....................................................................... 36 2. Site Furniture ................................................................................................. 36 3. Fountains ....................................................................................................... 36 4. Raised Planters .............................................................................................. 36 C. Walls and Fences ...................................................................................................... 37 1. Masonry Stucco .............................................................................................. 37 2. Three-Rail ...................................................................................................... 37 3. Chain-Link ..................................................................................................... 37 D. Lighting ..................................................................................................................... 37 1. Streets and Parking Areas .............................................................................. 38 2. Pedestrian and Wail-Mounted ....................................................................... 38 3. Accent ............................................................................................................ 38 4. Sports Fields .......................................................... ~ ....................................... 38 E. Signage ...................................................................................................................... 38 1. Monument ...................................................................................................... 39 2. Building and Tenant Identification ................................................................ 39 3. Pedestrian-Oriented ....................................................................................... 40 4. Vehicular Directional Signage ........................................................... ; ........... 40 5. Specialty ........................................................................................................ 40 6. Sign Illumination ............................................................................................ 40 7. Commercial Wall Mounted ............................................................................ 40 a) Without Regionally Recognized Identity System (< 20,000 SF) .............. 41 b) With Regionally Recognized Identity System (> 20,000 SF) .................... 41 c) Tenant/Anchor (> 20,000 SF) .................................................................... 42 17.22.178 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES ....................................... : .......................... 43 A. Adoption of the PDO ................................................................................................ 43 B. Site Development Plan Review Process ................................................................... 43 C. Alternative Development Standards ......................................................................... 43 D. Amend'mg the PDO .................................................................................................. 44 E. Expansion of the PDO Area .................................................................................... 44 September 24, 2002 3 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay'(PDO-6) Figure LIST OF FIGURES Follows Page 1 Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................... 5 2 Study Area .............................................................................................................. 6 3 PDO Area Map ........................................................................................................ 6 4 Illustrative Land Use & Phasing Plan - Church and Schools ................................. 8 5 Illustrative Land Use Plan - Professional Center .................................................... 9 (5 Circulation Plan .................................................................................................... 18 7 Roadway Sections ................................................................................................ 19 8 Landscaping Illustrations - Key Map ................................................................... 24 9 Highway 79 Buffer ............................................................................................... 24 10 Rear Property Line / Drainage Channel Section .................................................. 25 11 Pedestrian Gathering Area Landscape Concept Plan ........................................... 25 12 Pedestrian Corridor at Parking Area - Section ...................... : ............................. 25 13 Rancho Pueblo Road Entry .................................................................................. 26 14 Rancho Pueblo Road Interior Site Section .......................................................... 26 15 Chapel Lane Entry ................................................................................................ 26 16 Chapel Lane Interior Site Section ..................................... i .................................. 26 17 Rancho Community Church Sign ......................................................................... 27 18 Rancho Pueblo Sports Center Entry -Perspective ............................................... 26 19 Church Campus Main Plaza Plan ......................................................................... 27 20 Grading Exhibit ............................................................................. : ...................... 32 21 Drainage Exhibit .................................................................................................. 32 22 Exterior Architectural Aesthetics (thru 22g) ........................................................ 33 23 Typical Entrance Details ...................................................................................... 34 24 Exterior Secondary Entry/Exit Covers (thru 24a) ................................................ 34 25 Exterior Secondary Entry/Exit Covers (thru 25a) ................................................. 34 26 Exterior Colonnade .............................................................................................. 35 27 Exterior Sloped Window Shade Covers (thru 27a) .............................................. 35 28 Typical Planter/Integrated Seat Detail (thru 28a) ................................................. 36 29 Typical Fountain Detail ........................................................................................ 36 30 Stucco Wall Detail ................. ' .............................................................................. 37 31 Three-Rail Fence Detail ....................................................................................... 37 32 Lighting Information (thru 32d) ........................................................................... 37 33 SignagcPlan .....: .................................................................................................. 38 34 Signage Details (thru 34b) .................................................................................... 38 35 Church Signage Tower With Electronic Signage .................................................. 39 36 Standard Commercial Wall Mounted Signage ...................................................... 38 LIST OF TABLES Table Page(s) 17.22.162 17.22.166a 17.22.166b 17.22.172 Statistical Areas Summary .................................................................... 7 Matrix of Permitted Uses ............................................................... 10-15 Development Standards ................................................................. 16-17 Plant Palette ................................................................................... 28-30 September 24, 2002 4 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.160 TITLE Within the City of Temecula's Zoning Code (Title 17), Sections 17.22.160 through 17.22.178 shall be known as "PDO-6" (Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay District). 17.22.162 PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) helps define a vision for the future development of Rancho Pueblo and serves as a guide to the implementation of that vision over time. This document directs future development to adhere, appropriately, to the overall PDO area vision, thereby ensuring that Rancho Pueblo fulfills its primary goal of positively adding to the collective image of the City of Temecula. Design excellence, coupled with efficient and safe, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, provides an environment with pedestrian-fi.iendly streetscapes and landscaped areas. Special attention will be given to providing architectural and landscape designs that are complementary to the adjacent residential areas. The Rancho Pueblo PDO project area is situated to the southeast of central Temecula, on the north side of Highway 79 South, midway between the intersection with Margarita Road and Jedediah Smith Road, approximately 1.5 miles east of the intersection with 1-15 (Figure 1). The PDO area is currently zoned Professional Office by the City of Temecula and falls within the Z1 Special Plan Overlay, as set forth in the City of Temecula General Plan. In accordance with the requirements for a Special Plan Overlay, Rancho Pueblo will be a comprehensively planned development with a complementary mix of uses. The underlying zoning for the PDO area will remain as Professional Office, except as specifically modified herein. In situations where the development guidelines herein do not specifically or completely address an issue, the Temecula City Wide Design Guidelines will apply, so the development guidelines herein are seen as an adjunct to, rather than a displacement of, the City Wide Design Guidelines. B. VISION The name for "Rancho Pueblo" evolved fi.om its origins in the Rancho Community Church and its desire to evoke the look and feel of a village through provision of a more traditionally based pedestrian-oriented environment, blended with the regional Spanish- American heritage. Just as churches provide valuable community models for balancing stability and growth to form the lasting cornerstones of our communities, Rancho Pueblo is to be a September 24, 2002 5 I Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Vicinity Map Figure 1. Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) model for a well-planned, well-executed and cohesive plan. The presence of Rancho Community Church on the project site will provide a guiding and stabilizing force to the entire development and will provide a new landmark, both literally and figuratively, for the City of Temecula and the entire Temecula Valley. The Project forms an attractive and complimentary addition to both the adjacent neighborhoods and the City of Temecula as a whole, by knitting together a tapest~ of architectural, landscape, and urban design elements, complementary to the City of Temecula's, City Wide Design Guidelines. The Rancho Pueblo PDO envisages a symbiotic assemblage of possible uses, including a church and its associated administrative and ministerial structures, church-based schools, community-accessible recreational facilities, professional offices, medical support services, and support retail; other uses may include, assisted-living and congregate care facilities, and self-storage facilities. There is a strong emphasis placed on ease of access and pedestrian-friendly circulation within the entire site. In general, parking lots are placed along the central backbone roadway system, with a network of sidewalks, walking paths, and pedestrian corridors designed to facilitate and encourage pedestrian movement, throughout the entire Rancho Pueblo PDO area. The network of pedestrian pathways also connects handicapped-accessible parking areas to the site buildings with additional external site linkages at appropriate points along Highway 79 South. C. PROJECT AREA The Project Area, shown in Figure 2, is defined as Tract Number 15211, Lots 1 through I0, totals approximately 53.62 acres and runs along the Highway 79 frontage for approximately 3,700 feet. Site depth varies between approximately 430 and 730 feet from the fight-of-way line. The Project Area, collectively known as Rancho Pueblo, will be governed by this Planned Development Overlay, subject to review and approval of the City of Temecula. It is to be a high-quality, regional development, positively enhancing the overall image of the City of Temecula. It consists of two significant and interrelated development areas, delineated as Planning Areas A and B in Figure 3. Planning Area A is the new home for the Rancho Community Church and School, anchoring the site in the westem portion of the PDO area, and Planning Area B is the Rancho Pueblo Professional Center, consisting of professional office,. support retail, retail, and other appropriate land uses, occupying the eastern portion of the PDO. A statistical summary of acreage for each of the proposed major development areas within the PDO is presented in Table 17.22.162. September 24, 2002 6 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.162 RANCHO PUEBLO STATISTICAL AREAS SUMMARY * Square Percentage Planning Area Acreage Footage A. Rancho Community Church and Schools Development Pad ** 4.61 ac 200,908 11.78 Landscaped Area, Hardscape and Walkways 12.08 ac 526,337 30.88 Public Slreets & Driveway (R.O.W. Only) 0.69 ac 30,152 1.77 Private Street/Driveway Easement 2.07 ac 90,260 5.29 Open Space (sports fields) 11.52 ac 501,904 29.44 Projected Parking Area (footprint onlyI 8.16 ac 355,353 20.84 Gross Acreage: 39.14 ac 1,704,914 100.00 Allowable Building square footage 852,457 sf Total Projected Parking Spaces 1,451 B. Rancho Pueblo Professional Center Development Pod ** 3.85 ac 167,812 26.60 Landscaped Area 4.72 ac 205,326 32.55 Public Streets & Driveways {R.O.W. Only) 2.00 ac 87,347 13.85 Projected Parking Area (footprint onlyl 3.91 ac 170,264 27.00 Gross Acreage: 14.48 ac 630,815 100.00 Allowable Building square footage 315,374 sf Total Projected Parking Spaces 392 Rancho Pueblo PDO - total gross acreage: 53.62 ac 2,335,729 Statistics shown, except those for gross acreage by site, am illustrative and subject to revision during subsequent Site Development Plan approvals. Additional 0.25 floor area ratio may be allowed based on enhanced landscape and/or architecture in the PO zone. FAR's are slightly higher for retail and retail-support areas. September 24, 2002 7 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.164 PLANNING AREAS Rancho Pueblo has two major components: Rancho Community Church and Schools, and the Rancho Pueblo Professional Center. The Church and Schools project contains worship, ministerial, meeting and educational facilities and associated recreational amenities. The Professional Center may consist of a combination of professional services, support retail, a sports club and possibly congregate care or self-storage facilities. While the following descriptions of the Church and School, and the Professional Center are illustrative of a potential mix of uses, the final complexion of the PDO area will be governed by the Matrix of Permitted Uses (see Table 17.22.166a) and subject to the City of Temecula Site Development Plan Review process. Planning Area A - RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH AND SCHOOLS Expected uses for the Rancho Community Church and Schools site include: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Religious worship spaces Church administration offices Church ministries and program areas Preschool Elementary school Junior High and High Schools Indoor recreation Recreational playing fields Outdoor hard-surface recreation areas Associated parking areas - structured and at-grade Caretaker residences The Church and its associated phased structures are organized, village-style, around a central gathering place, functioning both as a foreeourt for the Worship Center and as a place of respite and contemplation for its multiple associated users. The Worship Center, the major, central building of the Church complex, is situated directly on the main gathering place, towards the front of the site to help decrease potential visual impacts, of tiffs large footprint structure, on the residential areas to the rear of the site, and to increase the building's presence on Highway 79 South. The gathering place is further bounded by the Adult Education building, the Chapel and the Family Life Center; the Family Life Center also functions in the early years as the Interim Worship Center. These buildings, in turn, are bracketed by the Preschool, Elementary, Junior High and High School buildings, with the western and eastem ends of the site comaining recreational playing fields. Figure 4 illustrates a representative development plan for the site. The only buildings not directly associated with the central gathering place are the Administration building, located close to Highway 79 South, and the two Field Houses adjacent to the east and west sports fields. The Administration Building development pad extends from Chapel Lane to Highway 79 South, adjacent to the Rancho Pueblo Road main site entry, but it is September 24, 2002 8 ~o Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) accessed from within the Church and Schools site, via Chapel Lane. Depending on Chumh, office space requirements, this building may accommodate multi-tenant, non-Church related uses. Efficient use of land is maintained throughout the site by use of sharing of reciprocal parking between the Church and non-Church uses, with thc overriding and dominant peak demand being weekend worship services. Temporary modular units are allowed for interim school uses. Such units must have landscaping to soften views of the modulars from off-site areas, and must be phased out over time. Construction trailers are allowed, without landscaping. Planning Area B - RANCHO PUEBLO PROFESSIONAL CENTER The site may contain a well-coordinated mix of professional office and other use types, including: 2. 3. 4. Medical and Professional Office Self-storage facilities Assisted Living facilities Senior Living facilities The site is organized around the central main street, Ranch Pueblo Road, which traverses the middle of the site, fxom its western term'taus at Highway 79, shared with the Rancho Community Church and Schools site to the west, to its interim eastern terminus at the PDO eastern boundary; secondary access is also provided via the right-in right-out road connecting to Highway 79 at the eastern boundary of the site. In addition, a connection for Rancho Pueblo Road to the east is provided in Planning Area B. Development parcels are located along and accessed from Rancho Pueblo Road, which bisects the site in an east-west direction. Some access may also be provided, at a suitable distance from Highway 79, fi:om the right-in, right-out access road connecting to Highway 79, at the eastern end of the site. Parcels along Highway 79 have their front yards, with appropriate setbacks, designated along Highway 79, while the parcels to the rear of the site front onto Rancho Pueblo Road. Main entries of buildings, especially those along the Highway 79 frontage, will be oriented towards the interior of the site to keep the amount of parking on the exterior boundaries of the site to a minimm. Buildings fronting onto Highway 79 will be variably setback and spaced along the right-of-way line to provide a combination of visually interesting relationships with respect to access and movement of vehicles and pedestrians within the site. Whenever possible, cluster groups or pairs of buildings around shared, central courtyards to promote a more village-like atmosphere. Figure 5 illustrates a representative development pattern, while Figure 11 (see Section 17.22.172.A.3), illustrates how the shared landscaped areas can as pedestrian gathering places, serving adjacent buildings. September 24, 2002 9 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.166 LAND USES A. USE MATRIX The land uses listed in the following table will bc permitted in the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (RPPDO), only as indicated. Where indicated with a letter "P" thc use will be a permitted usc. A letter "C" indicates the usc will be conditionally permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Where indicated with thc symbol "-" the usc is prohibited within the Rancho Pueblo PDO Area. Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES A_dult business - subject to Chapter 5.08 of Tcmecula Mtmicipal Code Aerobics/dance/gymnastics/jazzercise/martial arts studios C (less than 5,000 sq. ft.) Aerobics/dance/gymnastics/jazzercise/martial arts studios C (greater than 5,000 sq. ft.) Affordable Housing C Airports Alcoholism or drag treatment facilities C Alcohol and drug txeatment (outpatient) P Alcoholic beverage sales Ambulance services - Animal hospital/shelter Antique restoration Antique sales Apparel and accessory shops Appliance sales and repairs (household and small appliances) Arcades (pinball and video games) Art supply stores Auction houses Auditoriums and conference facilities C Automobile dealers {new and used) Automobile sales (brokerage)-showroom only (new and used)mo outdoor display Automobile repair services Automobile rental - Automobile painting and body shop Automobile salvage yards/impound yards Automobile service stations with or without an automated car wash Automotive oil change/lube services with no major repairs Automotive parts-sales Automotive service stations selling beer and/or wine - with or without an automated car wash September 24, 2002 10 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (con't) Bakery, goods distribution Bakery, retail P Bakery, wholesale Banks and fmancial institutions (without drive-thru lanes) P Banks (with drive-thru lanes) C Barber and beauty shops P Bed and Breakfast Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) Billiard parlor/pool hall Binding of books and similar publications P Blood bank P Blueprint and duplicating and copy services P Bookstores P 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. fi. - no outdoor storage Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) Candy/confectionery sales P Car wash, full service Carpet and rug cleaning Caretaker residences P Catering sen, ices Clothing sales P Coins, purchase and sales Cold storage facilities - Communications and microwave installation~ C Communications equipment sales P Community care facilities P Computer sales and servicing P Congregate care housing for the elderly~ P Construction equipment sales, service or rental Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Convenience market Costume rentals Crematoriums Cutlery September 24, 2002 11 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (eon't) D Data processing cquipm~mt and systems P Day care centers P Delicatessen P Discount/department store Distribution facility Drag store/pharmacy P Dry cleaners P Dry cleaning plant E Emergency shelters C Equipment sales and rentals (no outdoor storage) Equipment sales and rentals (outdoor storage) F Feed and grain sales Financial, insurance, real estate offices P Fire and police stations P Floor covering sales Florist shop P Food processing Fomme telling, spiritualism, or similar activity 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. fi. Glass and mirrors, retail sales Governmental offices P Grocery store, retail Grocery store, wholesale Guns and firearm sales H Hardware stores Health and exercise clubs C Health food store C Healthcare facility P Heliports Home and business maintenance service Hospitals C September 24, 2002 12 Rancho Pueblo Planned Developmenl Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (con~) ! Ice cream parlor P Impound yard Interior decorating service P Junk or salvage yard K Kennel L Laboratories (film, medical, research or testing centers) C Laundromat Laundry service (commercial) Libraries, museums and galleries C Liquefied petroleum, sales and distribution Liquor stores Lithographic service Locksmith P M Machine shop Machinery storage yard Mail order businesses P Manufacturing of products similar to, but not limited to, the following: 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 that do not involve frequent track oat'tic. Compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials and products that require frequent oack activity or the transfer of henry 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 semi- refined products requiring further processing or manufacturing, and outside storage. Uses under 20,000 sq. ft. with no outside storage Massage Medical equipment sales/rental P Membership clubs, organizations, lodges C Mini-storage or Mini-warehouse facilities3 C Mobile home 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 C September 24, 2002 13 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Over/ay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMIT]ED USES (con't) O Office equipment/supplies, sales/services P Offices, professional services with less than 50,000 sq. ft., including, but P not limited to, business law, medical, dental, veterinarian, chiropractic, trchitectural, engineering, real estate, insurance P Paint and wallpaper stores Parcel delivery services Parking lots and parking structures C . Pawnshop Personal service shops P Pest control services Pet grooming/pet shop Photographic studio P Plumbing supply yard (enclosed or unenclosed) Postal distribution Postal services P Printing and publishing (newspapers, periodicals, books, etc.) C Private utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission) P Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting stu6ios, offices P Radio/television ~ansmitter Recreational vehicle parks ~.ecreational vehicle sales Recreational vehicle, trailer, and boat storage within an enclosed building C Recreational vehicle, trailer and boat storage - exterior yard Recycling collection facilities Recycling processing facilities Religious institution, without day care or private school C Religious institution, with a private school C Religious institution, with day care C Residential (one dwelling unit on the same parcel as a commemial or C industrial use for use of the proprietor of the business) Residential, multiple-family housing Restaurant, drive-in/fast food Restaurants and other eating establishments P Restaurants with lounge or live entertainment Retail support uses P Rooming and boarding houses September 24, 2002 14 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166a RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (con't) S Scale, public Schools, business and professional P Schools, private (kindergarten through Grade 12) P Schools, religious (kindergarten through Grade 12; and, seminary) P Scientific research and development offices and laboratories C Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care)t P Solid waste disposal facility Sports and recreational facilities C Swap Meet, entirely inside a permanent building Swap Meet, outdoor' Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales T Tailor shop P Taxi or limousine service Tile sales Tobacco shop Tool and die-casting Transfer, moving and storage Transportation terminals and stations - Track sales/rentals/service TV/VCR repair U Upholstery shop V Vending machine sales and service W Warehousing/distribution Watch repair P Wedding chapels Welding shop Welding supply and service (enclosed) Y Reserved Z Reserved Notes; 1. All antennas will be masked or incorporated into approved structures or other surfaces, subject to City Design Review and City Antenna Ordinance, 2. Ail congregate care and senior housing residential projects will use the development and per[ormance standards for the High Density Residential zone and the previsions contained in City of Temecula Zoning Code Section 17.06,050.H, 3. See City of Temecula Zoning Code Section 17.080.050(R), special use regulations and standards for self-storage or mini*warehouse facilities. September 24, 2002 15 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table 17.22.166b RANCHO PUEBLO PDO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Development Standard PDO-6 Minimum gross acreage per Planning Area 5 acres Target floor area ratio 0.25 Maximum floor area ratio (including bonuses) 0.50 Front yard adjacent to street: Highway 79 South 20 feet Rancho Pueblo Road 20 feet Chapel Lane 20 feet Other Service and Access Roads 10 feet Front Yard adjacent to residentially zoned property 25 feet Interior side yard 10 feet Rear yard 10 feet Accessory structure side/rear yard setback 5 feet Minimum building separation: One story 15 feet Two stories 20 feet Maximum building height: Two stories 40 feet~ Large meeting hall/auditorium structures (with high- 45 feet~ ceiling single story portions to their structures) Parking Structures 45 feet~ Temporary modular buildings 15 feet Maximum percent of lot coverage 50 percent Minimum required landscape open space (including 25 percent hardscape and walkways) Development Standard Development on single lot Minimum net lot area 40,000 square feet Target floor area ratio 0.50 Maximum floor area ratio (including bonuses) 1.00 Minimum width at required front setback area 80 feet Minimum depth 120 feet Minimum frontage on street 60 feet Front yard adjacent to street: · Highway 79 South 20 feet Rancho Pueblo Road ' 20 feet Chapel Lane 20 feet Other Service and Access Roads 10 feet Front Yard adjacent to residentially zoned property 25 feet September 24, 2002 16 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.166b RANCHO PUEBLO MATRIX OF PERMITTED USES (con't) Interior side yard 10 feet Rear yard 10 feet Accessory structure side/rear yard setback 5 feet Minimum building separation: One story 15 feet Two stories 20 feet Maximum building height: Two stories 40 feet~ Large meeting hall/auditorium structures (with high- 45 feett ceiling single story portions to their structures) Temporary modular buildings 15 feet Parking Structures 45 feet3 Maximum percent of lot coverage 50 pement Minimum required landscape open space (including 25 percent hardscape and walkways) Fence, hedge or wall - maximum height 6 feet Accessory building - maximum height 15 feet Notes: 1. All structures except Worship Center, Chapel, Family Life Center (containing high-ceiling, single story spaces) and Parking Structure. 2. For purposes of this PDO document, Worship Center, Chapel, Family Life Center (containing high-ceiling, single story spaces) and Parking Structure fall into this category. 3, Parking structures of three stories, with half-a-level below grade (four parking levels including roof level) are allowed. September 24, 2002 17 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.168 CIRCULATION PLAN A. ACCESS POINTS AND CONNECTIONS In total, there are four vehicular access points into the PDO along Highway 79, with a fifth (future) access point planned to the east, directly onto Margarita Road, through the easterly adjacent pamel, which is outside of this PDO (Figure 6). The major, centrally located, PDO entry point is at Rancho Pueblo Road, opposite Avenida De Missiones (presently known as Constance B), with a second access point, directly into the Church and Schools site at Chapel Lane, presently Constance A; both these intersections are planned to be full-movement and signalized. There are two additional secondary access points, limited to right-in/right-out movements only, at the eastern and western ends of the PDO, providing access directly to the Professional Center and the Rancho Pueblo Sports Center respectively; these intersections will not require traffic signals. Circulation for the PDO area centers along Rancho Pueblo Road, which acts as the symbolic thoroughfare for the development, forming a central element about which various building clusters are organized and fi.om which they are accessed. Access to all the development parcels is gained from this street, which runs from the main PDO entry at the intersection with Highway 79 South, opposite Avenida De Missiones, via an internal site traffic circle, to the easternmost boundary of the PDO area. Within the PDO Area, Rancho Pueblo Road terminates at this eastern boundary, but allows for its future extension through the property immediately to the east, and thence, via connection to Dartolo Road, through to Margarita Road north of its intersection with Highway 79 South. The property immediately to the east of the PDO eastem boundary also falls under the Z2 overlay designation and will be required, by the City of Temecula, to have similar development pattems as those established herein and to continue Rancho Pueblo Road to connect across to Dartolo Road. Rancho Pueblo Road then provides, in its fully completed form, a parallel reliever road to Highway 79, for site traffic wishing to enter and leave the site headed to and from Margarita Road and Redhawk Parkway. By far the most dominant element of the PDO is the Rancho Community Church and Schools site, which occupies the majority of acreage within the PDO. It is accessed via, and located along, Chapel Lane, which itself hms fi.om Highway 79 South at what is presently Constance A, to its intersection with Rancho Pueblo Road at the traffic circle within the PDO area. Chapel Lane then serves as a meandering backbone for the Church and Schools campus, connecting the main buildings and pedestrian spaces with their associated parking areas and site · entries. The street will be curvilinear, generally reducing vehicular speeds across the site, particularly adjacent to the school buildings and drop-off zones which are, in turn, appropriately separated and placed close to their respective schools. September 24, 2002 W W Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) A secondary internal site road extends northerly from Chapel Lane west of its intersection with Rancho Pueblo Road, along the northem site boundary, and terminates again on Chapel Lane to the west of the Campus buildings, providing access and service to the rear portion of the site. New internal site roads named within the Rancho Pueblo PDO are subject to City site plan reviews and approvals. B. ROADWAY DESIGN AND CROSS-SECTIONS Design of site roadways adequately accommodates anticipated associated traffic volumes in accordance with the recommendations of the Traffic Impact Analysis. Figure 7 shows the individual roadway sections, while Section 17.22.172.B describes sweet landscaping details. C. TRUCK ACCESS Trucks requiring access to the PDO predominantly consists of trash pick-up, service and delivery vehicles, with special event and moving vehicles entering on a less frequent basis. Truck access is via the main site entries along Highway 79, at both Rancho Pueblo Road and Chapel Lane, and then, in the case of the Church and Schools campus, fi.om these roads onto a rear service road that loops around the buildings along the northern property line (Figure 6). In the case of the non-Church development, individual development parcels and buildings are accessed and serviced from Rancho Pueblo Road through individual site driveways and parking aisles. D. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION Clearly defined pedestrian pathways will facilitate pedestrian movement across and throughout the PDO area. Situated along streets and connecting with building areas, these pathways will be a combinatiOn of naturally and architecturally shaded walkways, small intimate seating areas, building arcades and connections to building entries, all designed to promote and encourage pedestrian use. Small "gathering" and seating areas will be placed in conjunction with pedestrian pathways either at the intersection of pedestrian pathways with other pathways and roadways, or adjacent to buildings. Locate and design these "gathering" areas in a contemplative, "oasis" style, promoting a restive quality to their use (see Figure 11 in Section 17.22.172.A.3). Main pedestrian access pathways traverse the PDO area, parallel to, and adjoining, Rancho Pueblo Road, and connecting through the Church and School site along Chapel Lane, to the recreation areas to the west (see Pedestrian Path on Figure 6). A system of landscaped, pedestrian-friendly, feeder paths will connect the major east-west pathways with the Church and School's central gathering place and with all of the associated buildings, parking and recreation areas. They will also connect, through the parking areas, to the individual buildings or groups of September 24, 2002 19 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) buildings along Highway 79 and will be developed as part of individual building sites, also allowing for connection between buildings via the shared landscape areas (see Figure 11 in Section 17.22.172.A.3). Pedestrian entry to the PDO Area from the sidewalk along Highway 79 may be provided at each vehicular traffic entry point and at suitable points in between. Additional pedestrian connections will be developed within and between adjacent land uses, and allow for future extension into the development immediately east of the PDO. Internal, site pedestrian pathways may only cross the main entxy roadways at the interior intersection of Rancho Pueblo Road and Chapel Lane (at the traffic circle) and at the intersection of Rancho Pueblo Road and the secondary right-in/fight-out access road at the eastern site boundary. Additional crossings at the intersection of these roads with Highway 79 and within the landscape buffer zone alongside Highway 79 are permissible, but no crossings are permitted in between the Highway 79 landscape buffer zone and the major internal road intersections. Textural and/or colored surface changes will identify all pedestrian roadway crossing points. The main pedestrian area in the PDO, the Church and School's central, gathering place, is designed with both hard-surface and soft-surface landscaping and furniture elements, affording a variety of open and shaded pedestrian environments. Both larger informal outdoor gatherings, such as after Church services, and small, intimate settings for conversation and relaxation will be accommodate in the design; the anticipated future Sanctuary capacity of some 3,500 people must also be accommodated in this gathering place. Access to parking is from Rancho Pueblo Road and secondary site internal roadways using a minimal number of entry points, promoting pedestrian movements along the street-side pedestrian pathways throughout the POD. E. PARKING Parking areas will be provided throughout the PDO reasonably close to the use that they serve, with opportunities for shared and reciprocal parking arrangements encouraged to lessen the total amount of land devoted to parking. Along the Highway 79 South frontage and at the rear of the site, where the site abuts existing residential areas, parking will be kept to a minimum. Standard and van-accessible handicapped-accessible parking and bicycle stands will be provided at convenient locations throughout the site, especially adjacent to the School buildings and Worship Center. Access to parking areas is directly from Rancho Pueblo Road, Chapel Lane or the secondary service driveways at points that minimize potential interference with ears traveling on Rancho Pueblo Road and Chapel Lane (see Figures 4 & 5). Entry roads from Highway 79 South will be designed with circulation and stacking distances in mind, avoiding any potential back-ups and other adverse impacts on the public highway. Internal parking area driveways will provide direct vehicular access in close and obvious proximity to the main building entries that they are serving. Sharing of parking driveways between adjacent land use is encouraged. September 24, 2002 20 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Soften the impacts of parking areas through use of shade trees and appropriate ground plantings that are integrated with clearly delineated, landscaped, pedestrian pathways, providing people with direct links to the buildings (See Landscape Section 17.22.172.A.4). Parking structures up to two stories above-grade are permitted, provided they are architecturally integrated with the other site buildings, designed to minimize their visual impact, and meet the landscape requirements of the PDO design guidelines. There is no limitation on the number of parking levels allowable below-grade. Parking structure faces will be articulated to help reduce the visual impression of the structure. Landscape planter elements will be integrated directly into the architectural design. F. SERVICE FACILITIES 1. Service, Loading and Delivery Areas Location and orientation of service areas and other loading and delivery facilities will keep visual and noise impact to a minimum. They will be walled and screened from view from outside the site and fi-om major internal pedestrian routes and gathering places within the site. Plantings adjacent to the walls to deter defacement of the walls are encouraged. 2. Trash Location and orientation of t~ash collection facilities will keep visual and noise impact to a minimum. They will be walled and screened fi.om view from outside the site and fi.om major internal pedestrian routes and gathering places within the site. Walls will be masonry with additional structural elements, such as wooden trellises, used to block view over the walls. Place plantings adjacent to the walls to deter defacement of the walls. Use concrete stress pads in front of enclosures to decrease wear on pavement surfaces. 3. Storage Outdoor storage is permitted only in areas specifically designed for that use. Fully screen such areas in a manner consistent with service areas. No service, loading or delivery areas may be used for storage. 4. Utility Equipment Utility equipment will be placed in portions of buildings specifically designed for that purpose or placed underground. Where aboveground placement is unavoidable, place equipment in groupings and screen with walls and landscaping consistent with service areas (Landscape Section 17.22.172.A.8, below). September 24, 2002 21 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 5. Mechanical Equipment Place mechanical equipment only in areas within buildings specifically designed for that use. When unavoidably necessary to place equipment on roofs ensure screening of equipment fi.om off-site views by structures integrally designed to blend into the building design. September 24, 2002 22 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.170 RECREATION FACILITIES A. PLAYING FIELDS Layout and design of playing fields will conform to City of Temecula, Parks and Recreation Department standards. Field orientation will account for sun-angles, lighting patterns and keeping adjacent residential area impacts to a minimum (see Figure 4). B. HARD-SURFACE PLAY AREAS In recognition of the Schools' needs for both soft- and hard-surfaced play areas, a portion of various parking lots within the Church and Schools site may be utilized as hard-surface play areas. These areas will be coned-off or gated to exclude vehicles when in recreational use. Accordingly, parking areas designated to double as hard-surface play areas will meet special in- lot landscaping requirements allowing for larger, unbroken open areas to accommodate court markings. Additional plantings within island planters and peripheral landscape areas will instead be used to soften views of these hard-surface play areas. Conversely, some areas designated as hard-surface play areas will be alternately used for parking during peak parking periods when not required for recreational use (see Figure 4). September 24, 2002 23 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.172 LANDSCAPING Landscaping will be a coordinated design element integrated with, and complementary to, building design. Functioning on both experiential and esthetical levels, landscaping will experientially enhance pedestrian pathway usage by providing shade and a range of textures, patterns, and colors, and aesthetically enhance visual experiences from the interior and exterior of both individual buildings and the entire PDO area. Major landscaping elements, such as trees and monuments, will highlight specific areas within the PDO, with accent trees similarly encouraged as visual clues to peoples' location within the PDO area. A mix of deciduous and evergreen plantings is encouraged to highlight seasonal changes while still maintaining year-round beauty and accent, with attention paid to color, form and scent. All exterior boundaries of the PDO area will be landscaped with multi-storied plantings. Special attention will be given to the interface with the surrounding residential areas where plantings and landscape design will emphasize softening the visual impact of the PDO area from off-site. A. GENERAL SITE STANDARDS 1. ' Highway 79 Buffers along Highway 79 within the PDO area will continue the precedent patterns established by existing and proposed adjacent developments to the east of the PDO area along Highway 79 South. Namely, a 36-foot minimum landscape buffer, measuring 20 feet t~om the property line and 16 feet from the curb to the right-of-way line. Exceptions to this buffer will be for entry signage and monuments at points of access for vehicles and pedestrians, where the buffer incorporates a greater area and depth. Typically, the buffer includes a six-foot wide meandering sidewalk, not less than five feet from the face of the curb along Highway 79 except at and approaching corners (Figures 8 and 9). To address measurable highway and vehicular noise and to promote a quiet, restive ambiance within the Church and School's main areas, a variable two-to-four foot high, shallow-sloped berm will be topped with an articulated four-to six foot high wall, to deflect highway noise and screen parking lot views from Highway 79. The berm and wall relative heights are varied for visual interest when experienced from Highway 79 and the wall will have colunms at sixty-foot intervals (see Figure 30). Due to the variety and density of landscaping placed on the Highway side of the wall, most of the wall is eventually expected to be obscured from Highway views. September 24, 2002 24 · "187 ;~I~[:~C0LiJj~/'SPA~I~D ~ 60' O.C. .' ~ - 4.YAR. STAGGERED WALL BERM AND WALL ALONG HWY 79 W/O PLANTING ELEVATION -- 2' - 4' MAX VAR. BERM ~ , .... ~,:~. .... , ,. ,, ....... , · ~ ... ~ ~.,.,.: . ,~, . STREET TREES '- L.~,'~ " ~'~ ..... ~: ' ~ ' ' " .... "" : ' :: "' '" ~ 2' · %; · ~..~,~,;~... ~ >,' , ~ .... · :~ · · .,, ~.,'.~ . 4' STAGGERED WALL :' -~) COLUMNS ":.::' - REEN SHRUBS BERM AND WALL ALONG HWY 79 W/PLANTING ELEVATION sc~ ~T'¢ ......../.../ INTERIOR OF SITE 2' -4' HIGH STAGGERED WALL ~/ ~ W/18" COLUMNS " ,~- BUFFER PLANTING ~ .~ ~ ~.~ ACCENT PLANTING ~ 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK 5' MIN FROM CURB AND TO MEANDER WITH-IN R.O.W. -- HIGHWAY 79 HIGHWAY 79 BUFFER PLAN VIEW Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Elsewhere, the buffer will also contain any necessary acceleration and deceleration lanes, bus stops and their associated seating and shelters, as well as corridors for utility structures including, but not limited to, transformers, back-flow devices, and detector checks. Utility equipment placed in the buffer area will, whenever possible, be placed below grade in accordance with Section 17.22.168.F.5. 2. Rear (North) Property Line A nominal 20-foot buffer along the rear PDO area property line, adjacent to the residential area, will contain plantings and trees to help mitigate off-site visual impacts from parking and buildings in the PDO area (Figure 10). A proposed white, three-rail fence, with integrated chain-link, is placed along this property line for esthetic and safety reasons, due to the proximity of the proposed drainage channel. Plantings, in and around parking areas and adjacent to buildings, will further mitigate off-site views of parking and buildings. Additionally, a 12- foot wide Equestrian trail will be graded to the north of the property line with cooperation of the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association and the consent of the respective property owners. In areas where the cross-site drainage channel is located the buffer will be reduce in width to five feet, measured from the property line to the top of the channel slope. Plantings may be reduced in areas adjacent to playing fields where visual impacts are at a minimum. 3. Shared Mini-Plazas Where possible adjacent development parcels are encouraged to use coordinated designs to provide shared mini-plazas for common use between the sites. Buildings may be grouped closer together and open space combined to achieve these elements. Such mini-plazas will be in reasonable proximity to building entries and will be connected to the system of landscaped pedestrian pathways that traverse the PDO area. Plazas will have shade trees and seating for informal meetings (Figure 11). 4. Parking Areas Parking lots will include plantings and trees to provide shade and to soften their visual impact, with trees grouped at the end of parking rows, wherever feasible. Large-canopy shade trees will also be placed in planter islands at regular intervals within permanent parking lots in accordance with the city standards. Pedestrian pathways should be clearly identified with a variety of plantings, open and trellis-covered walkways (Figure 12), textures and enhanced surfaces. Plantings and features used to screen and soften permanent parking areas will be balanced with maintaining carefully flamed building views into and out fi.om the site. Temporary parking lots, to the extent that overall project landscaping requirements have already been met, are not required to have landscaping within the lot proper. However, effort should be made to sot'ten views of expansive, temporary parking areas by landscaping the perimeter of such lot(s). September 24, 2002 25 11413 0,.~ 0 <~ W WZ W..~ PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR ~ PARKING AREA SECTION ~,' HIGH ARDOR W/ .VINES PARKING ACCENT VINE ON TRELLIS &' HIGH TI~ELLIS W/ !2' .'50. COLUMNS WALKWAY MED~N W/ ENHANCED PAVING 12' MIN. TO FACE OF CURD PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR ~ PARKING AREA PLAN VIEW Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Storm Drain Channel A drainage channel, canting cross-site drainage from areas north of the PDO area to the southwest comer of the PDO area, is located in some areas along the rear and west property lines. Sides and bottom of the channel are covered with a grass mix, except at various important points (channel bends and culvert entries and exits) where rip-rap is used for erosion protection. The channel bottom also contains a concrete channel to control minor irrigation and nuisance (low-flow) nm-off. In sensitive locations, such as adjacent to the Church and Schools, an underground concrete culvert pipe replaces the channel. In areas where the channel exists, the rear buffer landscaping is modified to a five-foot strip measured fi.om the property line to the top of the channel slope (Figure 10). 6. Water District Easement on West Property Line Surface of easement will be hydro-seeded with a non-irrigated grass mix to mitigate weed growth and potential dust impact. 7. Temporary Ground Cover Undeveloped site areas graded under previous phases and planned for future development will be hydro-seeded with a non-irrigated grass mix to mitigate weed growth and potential dust impact.. 8. Equipment and Service Areas Screening Above-ground placements of utility and mechanical equipment, and service areas, will be screened with walls, covers (where appropriate to avoid views down into enclosures), and landscaped in accordance with city standards. B. STREETSCAPES The design of streetscapes provides for clear patterns of ingress and egress, efficient vehicular travel and encourages the safe movement of pedestrian throughout the PDO area. Roadway design will allow for, and integrate, a pleasing pedestrian experience, incorporating both low-level plantings and trees alongside pathways: Landscaping will be used in a hierarchy of plant'mgs to emphasize different locations and uses within the PDO. For instance, one type of street tree for the ma'tn thoroughfare, Rancho Pueblo Road, and another for Chapel Lane. Medians greater than a minimum 5 feet clear dimension will be planted with low-level plantings (see Figures 13 through 16 and 18 for street landscape details). September 24, 2002 26 RANCHO PUEBLO ROAD ENTRY PERSPECTIVE STREET 25' O.C. SPACING HIGHWAY 79 TURF-- ACCENT GROUND COVER ACCENT TREES RANCHO PUEBLO ROAD ENTRY PLAN VIB/V sc,~ t'--:~o' -6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK SIGNAGE 4' WIDE RAISED MEDIAN W/ ENHANCED PAVING RANCHO PUEBLO ROAD SECTION . sc~ mx 44' W~DE STREeT FOUNDATION PLANTING COLUMNAR STREET TREES 20' SETBACK 6' SIDEWALK SCREEN SHRUBS RANCHO PUEBLO ROAD STREET TREES @ 1 PER2$' PARKING LOT PI_AN VIEW sc.~'r--2o' ACCENT C, ANOFT TREE ~.Z' X 12' X Z~.'3' HIGH TOWER- 4' HEIXAN W/ W/ 5' X fl' ELECTI~ONIC EHHAHCED COHCRETE FAV1HG $1GHAGE ON 2 ,jAC, CEHT SHRUD AND C,~ OUNDC OVIZIR t~AHT~G5 ACCENT TURF CHAPEL LANE ENTRY PERSPECTIVE STREET TREES -- 25' O.C. SPACING ACCENT ACCENT GROUND COVER- ACCENT CANOPY TREES ACCENT SHRUB PLANTING G4' WIDE DRIVE ENTRY WITH 4' ENHANCED PAVING ON HEDtAN HIGHWAY 79 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK '12' X 12' X 2t'3" HIGH TOWER W/ 5' X 9' ELECTRONIC SIGNAGE DECORATIVE ENTRY PAVING · 4' MEDIAN W/ ENHANCED CONCRETE PAVING CHAPEL LANE ENTRY PLAN VIEW sc~ 'r=:~o' HAIN SANGTUART PLANTING .. WIDE STREET J CHAPEL LANE SECTION ~.~MAIN SANCTUARY / r AC~-NT ~ALM P~NT~N~ W/ 18" COLUMNS CHAPEL ~NE P~N VI~ ~ RANCHO PUEBLO SPORTS CENTER ENTRY PERSPECTIVE HIGHWAY TURF -- ACCENT GROUND ENTRANCE ACCENT TREES-- RANCHO PUEBLO SPORTS CENTER ENTRY PLAN VIEW' sc,~ ' MEANDERING SIDEWALK TUBULAR STEEL SWING GATES 'PAINTED GREEN' CURBED TRAFFIC ISLAND Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) C. ENTRY FEATURES Coordinate landscape design for site entries with architectural features such as lighting, signage, monuments and berm. Use easily identifiable sub-palettes to indicate the differing, hierarchical importance of the various entries, but include some elements that are commonly identifiable to the entire PDO area. Plant appropriate accent ground cover at the bases of all monuments and signage. (See Figures 13, 15, 17, and 18 for landscape entzy details). D. PLAZAS DESIGNS & ELEMENTS A hierarchy of pedestrian-oriented plazas will be used throughout the PDO area. Plaza areas will be designed at a scale proportionate to their potential capacity to avoid the appearance o~ barren, uninhibited spaces, using various elements such as trees, fountains and landscaped planters to creatively dissipate the large groups into smaller components. Use structural landscape elements such as seating, low walls, arbors and trellises, throughout the site at appropriate locations to encourage rest and contemplation. A valuable element will be the inclusion of shaded, seating areas to provide for outdoor, informal meetings and lunch venues, and, in the Church and School site, to encourage fellowship before and after both worship services and during the school day. Large plazas, such as the Church's central gathering place, will receive particular care and will be designed with both hard-surface and soft-surface areas accommodating activities such as resting, gathering, traversing and building ingress and egress. Additionally, such large plazas need to account for the gathering and movement of large groups of people, such as the projected 3,500 churchgoers attending services at the proposed Worship Center, which will implicitly necessitate the use of fairly substantial paved areas. Larger specimen trees will be the focus of the gathering place planted in conjunction with smaller scale plantings to highlight various users of the gathering place (Figure 19). E. PAVEMENT FINISHES Pavement finishes for similar uses will, whenever possible, be consistent and uniform throughout the PDO area. Employ site- and project-specific treatments only at site-specific locations such as mini-plazas, crosswalks and roadway entries as a means of highlighting the different site elements within the PDO. F. CITY STANDARDS Design and construction of all facilities within the PDO area will conform to the design guidelines contained in tiffs PDO. However, where not particularly specified herein, city standards will be used. September 24, 2002 27 RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH SIGN PERSPECTIVE sc~ NZS ACGENT GROUNDGOVER AND SHRUB PLANTING ~ ~ INTERIOR OF SITE ~~ ~-~ BUFFER PLANTIN~ ' ' ' '~~~ ACCENTTREES ~,~ STREET TREES ~~ ~ ~ ~ ACCENT PLANTING ==::=~:~=: 6' ME~DERING SIDEW~K 5' MIN FROM CURB ~D TO  M~NDER WITH*IN R.O.W. ~NCHO CO~UNI~ CHURCH 51CN ~ HIGHWAY79 P~N VIEW I~ancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) G. PLANT pALETTE A hierarchy of plants selected from the Rancho Pueblo Plant Palette (Table 17.22.172), as derived from the City Wide Design Guidelines, will be used to provide variety in conjunction with the varying usage of the different landscaped elements. Project-specific plant palettes must be integrated throughout the Rancho Pueblo PDO, but with allowances made to subtly distinguish one project from the next through changed emphases on grouped plantings. Table 17,22.172 RANCHO PUEBLO PLANT PALETTE Street Tree - Highway 79 Botanical Name Common Name Platanus acerifolia Schinus molle Plane Tree California Pepper Street Tree - Rancho Pueblo Drive, Chapel Lane Botanical Name Common Name Platanus acerifolia Major Entry Tree and Accent Tree Botanical Name Plane Tree Common Name Arbutus unedo Arecastmm romanzoffianum Jacaranda mimosifolia Phoenix dactylifera Parking Lot Canopy Tree Botanical Name Dwarf Strawberry Tree Queen Palm Jacaranda Date Palm Common Name Chitalpa 'Pink Dawn" Tipuana tipu Koelrueteria bipinnata Podocarpus gracilior Ulmus parvifolia Parking Lot Accent Tree Botanical Name Chitalpa Tipu Tree Chinese Flame Tree Fern Pine Evergreen Elm Common Name Koelrueteria bipinnata Jacaranda mimosifolia Magnolia grandiflora Prunus 'Krauter Vesuvius' Pyres Kawakamii Chinese Flame Tree Jacaranda Bull Bay Purple Leaf Plum Evergreen Pear September 24, 2002 28 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.172 RANCHO PUEBLO PLANT PALETTE (con 't) Plaza Tree Botanical Name Common Name Arecastrum romanzoffianum Cassia leptophylla Efiobotrya deflexa Jacaranda mimosifolia Phoenix dactylifera Pmnus 'Krauter Vesuvius' Pyres Kawakamii Washingtonia Robusta Background / Screen Tree Botanical Name Queen Palm Gold Medallion Tree Bronze Loquat Jacaranda Date Palm Purple Leaf Plum Evergreen Pear Mexican Fan Palm Common Name Podocarpus gracilior ' Laurus nobilis Screen Shrubs Botanical Name Fern Pine Sweet Bay Common Name Grevillia noellii Ligustrum j. 'Texanum' Phofium tenax Photinia fraseri Rhaphiolepis indica Virbumum suspensum Ornamental Shrubs Botanical Name Grevillia Texas Privet Flax Photinia Indian Hawthome Sandankwa Vibumum Common Name Abelia 'Edward Goucher' Arbutus 'compacta' Asplendium bulbiferum Abelia Dwarf Strawberry Tree Mother Fern Carissa species Clivia miniata Cotoneaster species Dietes bicolor Grevillia Noellii Heteromeles arbutifolia Natal Plum Kafir Lily Cotoneaster Fortnight lily Grevillia Toyon Ligustmm j. 'Texanum' Phorium tenax Phofmia fraseri Pittosporum species Rhaphiolepis indica Virbumum suspensum . Texas Privet Flax Photinia Tobira Indian Hawthorne Sandankwa Viburnum September 24, 2002 29 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Table 17.22.172 RANCHO PUEBLO PLANT PALE~I'TE (con 't) Groundcovers Vines Botanical Name Common Name Agapanthus africanus Delosprema 'Alba' Hemerocallis hybrids Myoporum species' Pelargonium pelatum Rosmarinus 'Prostratus' Trachelospremum jasiniodes Verbena peruviana Lily of the Nile White Ice Plant Day Lilies Prostrate Myoporum Ivy Geranium Prostrate Rosemary Star Jasmine Verbena Vines Botanical Name Common Name Disdictis buccinatoria Parthenocissis tricuspidata Hardenbergia violacea Blood Red Trumpet Vine Boston Ivy Happy Wanderer Turf Grass Common Name Dwarf Medalion Tall Fescue Blend Hybrid Bermuda Grass (GN-1 by Pacific Sod ComPany, or equal) Located at all non-sports field areas Located at all sports field areas September 24, 2002 30 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 17.22.174 INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PHASING Development of Rancho Pueblo is expected to take place over a number of years, reflecting the congregational growth in the Church and market demand for professional and commercial facilities in the area. While each component of the Rancho Pueblo project may be developed separately, they will do so under the guidelines developed herein and, when needed, the City Wide Design Guidelines. Development may proceed sequentially or concurrently, with each portion contributing piece-by-piece to the overall vision, acting as a microcosm of the way in which a well-planned city develops. Construction of the planned first phase of buildings will begin immediately following initial site grading. The development schedule for the Chumh and School site is currently planned in five phases. The initial phase is the most extensive, including construction of the Family Life Center/Interim Sanctuary, Chapel, Preschool/Elementary school complex, the first phase of the Administration building, east and west Sports Fields with their associated westem Field House and Storage building, and construction of two groupings of temporary, modular buildings ('A' and 'B') at the rear and front of the site, respectively. Phase Two, includes construction of the Adult Education building, the first phase of the Elementary School, the second phase of the Administration building, and the eastem Field House and an additional Storage building. The third phase of the Chumh and School site commences with the removal of the rear ('A'), temporary, modular buildings and progresses to the addition of the High School building, first phase of the Gynmasium, completion of the Elementary School and the final Storage building. Phase Four, begins with removal of the remaining, front-most ('B') temporary modular buildings and continues with the construction of the Middle School and completion of phase two of the Gynmasium. The fifth, and final, phase involves construction of the Worship Center and the necessary, associated, Parking Structure. A high degree of flexibility is designed into the Church project to allow for possible alternative building phasing if the need arises. Should funds be available or needs arise earlier than initially planned, later phases of the Church's development may be accelerated. It is expected that, in contrast to the Church and Schools site, the Professional Center area of the site will develop reasonably quickly in accordance with market dictates. The expected first phase will be construction of the self-storage facility at the rear of the site followed by Assisted Living and Senior Living facilities, with the final phase being the Medical Office building.' Similar to the Church portion of Rancho Pueblo, these areas have a great deal of flexibility allowed in their design to incorporate the diversity of uses permitted. September 24, 2002 31 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) A. UTILITIES Major infi:astmcture needs within the PDO area will be planned at one time and designed for construction in.a manner that will serve both initial and long-term build-out needs. Backbone corridors will be planned and set forth, within dedicated public streets or easements where appropriate, and delineated in concert with the appropriate utility district or other utility purveyor. B. GRADING AND DRAINAGE It is anticipated that, at the time of adoption of this PDO, site grading and associated drainage will occur in a single phase (Figures 20 and 21). Site grading is expected to be one percent minimum fall, with on-site and through-site drainage accommodated in a combination of street storm drains, culverts and overland channels. September 24, 2002 32 ,3 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Over/ay (PDO-6) 17.22.176 DESIGN GUIDELINES A. ARCHITECTURAL STATEMENT The Rancho Pueblo PDO architecture, reflecting its Spanish-American heritage, is characterized by understated elegance and simplicity incorporating the careful use of details to enhance its attractiveness and function. The challenge confronting designers is to develop an architectural design that captures the charm and quality of that heritage, while meeting the needs of enclosing a variety of uses. Design buildings as part of an overall site architectural esthetic, established throughout. the PDO, wherein the Church and Schools site to the west and the Professional Center to the east, are complimentary in design. The buildings will be primarily one-story and two-story stmctures to complement the residential scale of the surrounding areas. The Worship Center will be the primary feature of the site as well as for the surrounding area, becoming a feature symbol for the entire site and the neighborhood. Its derivative, Spanish-American heritage design will provide identity, a sense of character and also provide a positive visual enhancement to the image of the City of Temecula. It is a large-footprint building that employs architectural elements derived from a Spanish-American aesthetic, in conjunction with stepped sides, to minimize its volumetric impact. The City, as part of their review of development proposals, will consider these Rancho Pueblo PDO guidelines as examples in determining the acceptability of architectural plans and site plan review applications. The City will encourage innovation and imagination in architectural and site design while retaining a clear and defined connection to the fundamental elements of the overall Rancho Pueblo architectural style. All building structures within the PDO area will have, to varying degree, some or much of the architectural treatments and features illustrated on the pages that follow. In particular, the basic building design elements are illustrated in Figure 22 and 22a-c; the use of such architectural elements will be consistent with the architectural style of the building. Architectural designs will incorporate an appropriate variety of qualities including compatibility with adjoining buildings, intimacy of space, layering of views, accent landscaping, richness of materials, play of lights, and appropriateness of rooflines. Where feasible, entries will be oriented toward plazas, courtyards and not directly off parking lots. 1. Form and Scale To blend more closely with the adjacent residential neighborhood, design building masses with sufficient articulation to break up larger building volumes to promote a smaller, more human scale. Facades will be broken up with offsets, fenestration and other articulations to avoid long unbroken walls. No massive, box-type structures with unbroken facades and long continuous forms are permitted, excepting parking structures, which, by their nature are rigid in their design footprints and mass. In the case of parking structures significant efforts will be made to mitigate its form and size (see Section A.5 and Figures 22d-g). September 24, 2002 33 Parapet W/Precast Parapet W/Plant-On, -- 2 Step, Stucco Cornice -- Mission S TileRoof W/Plant-On 2 step, Stucco Fascia Column W/Plant-On 2 Step, Stucco Cap @ Primary Entries & Plant-On 2 Step, Stucco Bases Elseware Split face Veneer Aluminum Wainscoting Storefront Typ. Throughout W/Greylite 14 -- Segmental Arches Typ. l. Skip Trowel Stucco Throughout 2. Mission S Tile Terra Cotta Blend Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Architectural Aesthetics Figure 22 Vertical Architectural Massing , Recessed in Skip Trowel Stucco or Precast Conc. Segments Type Follows Segmental Arch 1. Skip Trowel Stucco Throughout 2. Mission S Tile Terra Cotta Blend Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Architectural Aesthetic Figure 22 a PF-EC. AST ~..ONC..P--E'TE. PLOOP-- BP, EAR 'ION OP I/,ItNPOIN 5IZE ¢ Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Architectural Aesthetics Figure 22b Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Architectural Aesthetics Figure 22c 2~~ Portions of Top Level set back 20' from lower levels on Hwy 79 Frontage Stair & Tower I ~ Elevati°n Bey°n~~ ~ ~i~ Illlllll[lllllllllllll[ll[llllllllll II~ ~ll/ll[l[lllilll Illll[lll!lli, llllllllllllllllll llll Typ. Planter I!, ,[ ~ ! -/I I t_~ -- Il lttll~l_ll--~I I I~--~ll[ [ I-~lll~l I~--[1[~[ I~ Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Architectural Aesthetics Figure 22d Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Parking Structure Perspective View Key Figure 22e Plan.ned Dew{~pment' Overlay PA01-0522 Parking Stru6tufe Perspective Figure 22f UJ m O.¥ m Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Parking Structure Perspective Figure 22g Rancho Pueblo Planned Developmen! Overlay (PDO-6) While all buildings in the Church and Schools project area arc limited to two stories, it is recognized that religious worship spaces, similar to concert performance halls, tend to be loftier structures with enhanced interior volume. Nevertheless, the Family Life Center, serving as the initial worship space, and the proposed future, new Worship Center, will not exceed 45 feet, which is well below the current Professional Office zoning height limit at this site of 75 feet. To the degree that is practically possible, and especially within the Church and School's site, buildings will be designed with a general scale and texture that compliments existing development both within the City in general, and, more specifically, within the surrounding residential areas. To further mitigate potential impacts of the larger footprint buildings, the other, mostly one- and two-story site buildings will be aesthetically designed to coordinate with the design of the Worship Center, with a hierarchy of building scales, stepping down fi.om the Worship Center to the perimeter of the site. 2. Complexity and Unity Within the context of an overall PDO area architectural theme, varying building forms and rooflines are encouraged, with facades variegated with returns, fenestration and other building elements, such as towers and building entries. Include, similar architectural elements, as outlined below, to unify further the building design across the PDO area. Tower structures and specific entry designs will be used to accent important features of the site. 3. Architectural Elements a) Building Entries Entries to buildings and lower floors will be of a scale that matches and encourages pedestrian movement and use. Differentiate primary and secondary entrances clearly as indicated in Figures 23, 24, 25 and 25a. Along lower portions of building facades, use of arcades designed integral to pedestrian pathways is encouraged (see also, landscape design illustrations in Section 17.22.172). b) Building elements (Parapets, cornices, stairs) Parapets and cornices will be designed in accordance with Figure 22 and 22a-c. Staircases will be integrated into the overall pedestrian traffic pattern and will be consistent in their mass and design with the buildings style. September 24, 2002 34 -LOGO. ~tINOOI~ TENANT ~4INDO~ PE. ATU~- Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Typical Entrance Detail Figure 23 Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Secondary Entry/Exit Cover A Figure 24 Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Secondary Entry/Exit Cover B Figure 24a -- Min. 4x4 Rough Sawn Members Sq. Cut Ends Double Supporting Beams -- 24" Overhang & Special Cut At Ends Splifface Veneel Wainscoting 'I~jp. Throughout. Aluminum Storefront -- l'recast Concrete W/Greylite 14 Modular Column Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Secondary Entry/Exit Covers Figure 25 Double Supporting Beams 24" Overhang & Special -- Cut At Ends Min. 4x4 Rough -- Sawn Members Sq. Cut Ends Storefront Splitface Veneer ~ ..... W/Greyhte 14 A Enhanced Pamng -- Precast Concrete Modular Column Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Secondary Entry/Exit Covers Figure 25 a Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) c) Roofs Varying rooflines and complete full roof structures are encouraged, although, where views do not extend onto roof surfaces, a mansard-type treatment may be used. Rooflines and roof materials will be appropriate to the architectural style, including the use wherever feasible of two-piece terra cotta tile, as indicated in Figure 22 and 22a-c. d) Arcades, Colonnades, Balconies Arcades are encouraged, in particular, due to their pedestrian function and association with the proposed predominant architectural style of the PDO. Figure 26, shows characteristic colonnade details. Balconies will be designed so that they are functional and located so that they do not infringe on the privacy of neighboring properties. e) Window, Doors, Wall Openings Window shape and detailing will be consistent with traditional Spanish-American heritage design. They will be proportionate to the wall mass, in which they are situated, and include appropriate material treatment that is consistent with the building style. Figure 27 illustrates window and entry covers, including sloped and flat exterior shade coverings; the latter are more characteristic of garden and plaza areas, and are well-scaled for secondary entrances (see also Figure 27a). Design doors to complement the architectural style, using wood, molding, hinges, doorknobs, and doorknockers appropriate to the Spanish-American heritage (see Figure 22c). 4. Materials and Finishes Appropriate materials to the architecture can include wrought iron, stucco or board-on- board. Material sample boards will be attached to individual site-specific plan applications. 5. Parking Structures Design parking structures to allow incorporation of building facades, tower elements, and other features that will promote a tie-in with the overall Spanish-American design theme; upper level decks to setback 20 feet along the Highway 79 fi'ontage (see Figure 22d). Exterior building finishes, false window and wall treatments will also reflect the architectural design treatments on adjacent stmctures. Place structures to minimize their intrusion in public views, especially from the Los Ranchitos residential areas north of the PDO Area. Graduated landscape screening materials will be used to soften the structure's overall appearance, with taller trees and planted materials serving to break up building lines. September 24, 2002 3~ -- Mission S Tile Roof W/Plant-On 2 step, Stucco Fascia 2 Step, Stucco Cap Plant-On 2 Step, Stucco Bases Split face Veneer Aluminum Segmental Arches Wainscoting Storefront Typ. Typ. Throughout W/Greylite 14 1. Skip Trowel Stucco Throughout 2. Mission S Tile Terra Cotta Blend Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Colonnade Figure 26 Double Supporting Beams -- 24" Overhang & Special Cut At Ends -- Min. 4x4 Rough Sawn Members Sq. Cut Ends Veneer Wainscoting Typ. Throughout Aluminum Precast Concrete Storefront Modular Column W/Greylite 14 Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Exterior Sloped Window Shade Covers Figure 27 TYPE 4 X HOOD TC, IM ~-LAZIN~- PEP-. SCHEDULE -- lN II'-IDOM PP--,AM E SET IN CONT. SEALANT -- 4- X MOOD X TP-IM ~ blOOD CANT DOUBLE PLATE -- 718" STUCCO HDF. PEP-- PP. AiVlIN~ PLAN AND SEALANT SHIM AS ~,EQUII~ED NAIL-ON lN INE)Ok, I INITH STOP-E?P--ONT PP-OPILE &. I. PLASHIN~' BULLNOSE MASONP-Y SILL COPING SET IN EPOXY ~¢OUT BACKEP-- AND SEALANT 7/8" STUCCO Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Window Detail Figure 27a Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) Consider trailing vines, climbing vines, and other exterior wall surface plantings, where practicable. 6. Drive-Thru Drive-thru establishments, as permitted in the Land Use Matrix for the PDO, will be designed in accordance with city standards. B. ACCENT ELEMENTS 1. Paving, Plazas and Walkways Plazas and connecting pedestrian walkways shall be designed as part of an overall PDO area network. Structural landscape elements such as seating, low walls, arbors and trellises will be incorporated throughout, at appropriate locations, to encourage rest and contemplation, as illustrated in Figure 11. 2. Site Furniture Design and place outdoor furniture, integrated with, and complimentary to, the architectural style, throughout the site, to encourage informal seating and gathering; be especially cognizant of the need for informal lunehtime eating areas. Coordinate placement with provision of landscaped and architecturally shaded areas. Examples of appropriate seating are illustrated in Figure 28. 3. Fountains Fountains of various sizes, and designed complimentary to the architectural style, are encouraged at various locations throughout the PDO area. Fountains will be used to highlight entries, help mask exterior site noise intrusion close to Highway 79, and to break-up larger paved and plaza areas. An example of an appropriate fountain is illustrated in Figure 29. 4. Raised Planters Use raised and curbed planters to protect plantings from foot traffic, where appropriate and where site grades lend themselves to such elements. In some cases elaborate and expand planters into seating areas as appropriate, and as illustrated in Figure 28. September 24, 2002 36 %EF_..T ION ELEV. 12' 1" THI~-K ~..LAY 4" PaTIo 10~'A HII~- MF_.¢H' '"% ~ /"~-~ 11/2" DIA. 40 I%'F~ I;~AIN ~,' O.(~. Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Typical Planter/Integrated Seat Figure 28 ~X n~u ZSE Rancho Pueblo Planned Developmenl Overlay (PDO-6) C. WALLS AND FENCES Integrate fences and walls into the overall PDO area thematic design, so that they provide a sense of definition and are consistent with the architectural style. 1. Masonry Stucco Use stucco-covered masonry walls atop the berm running within the Highway 79 buffer as detailed in Figure 30. 2. Three-Rail Along the rear and west property lines, use white, three-rail fencing with incorporated chain-link, as indicated and detailed in Figure 31. 3. Chain-Link Free-standing chain-link fencing is not permitted, except along the Water District and Southern California Edison easements on the west property line, if existing or as required by the respective agencies for safety purposes. All such fencing will have screening landscaping planted immediately adjacent along its entire length, except at necessary gate locations. D. LIGHTING Rancho Pueblo contains a wide range of land uses, necessitating use of varied lighting · types across the PDO area. These include streetlights, parking lot standards, walkway and low- level security lighting, wall wash and accent fixtures, and other specialty lighting. While recognizing the differing lighting requirements for the various uses, a common design theme, in keeping with the overall Spanish-American derivative style of the PDO, will provide for as much uniformity of lighting design as possible. Keep adverse impacts of lighting to a minimum, with especial care to the prevention of light spillage over adjacent properties and screening of visible bright light sources from view from adjacent residential areas and from Highway 79. Additionally, use selective sub-area switching to keep night lighting to the minimum required for any given set of uses. Specify lighting placements as part of Site Development Plan submittals. Where appropriate, manufacturer's samples, cut-sheets, or brochures will be included to illustrate equivalent style and forms. Provide photometrics for any lighting planned for light-sensitive areas, e.g., sports fields near residential use and highway-adjacent lighting next to State roadways. Typical lighting information and fixtures are shown in Figure 32a through 32d. September 24, 2002 37 Z W --! 0 o~ Design Features Housing: The heavy duty spun aluminum shroud is welded to the 8" diameter extruded aluminum thorax and sealed to prevent water entry The top cap seals ballast compartment and is removable for accessing ballast by three (3) stainless steel fasteners. Dome Cap: The rugged hydroformed aluminum cap with a hemispherical shape rests on the cast aluminum ring welded to the extruded thorax. Cap is gasketed to prevent water or insect entry. Door Assembly: Spun aluminum frame secures clear tempered glass lens. Frame is gasketed and secured to housing with tamper resistant stainless steel fasteners. Optical Assembly: Hydroformed reflector is secured in housing and provides and lES type III distribution. Mounting Bracket: Extruded aluminum arm assembly with decorative support is welded to luminaire dome cap. Assembly is secured to pole with stainless steel fasteners. Ballast/Lamp Assembly: Ballast are high power factor and suitable for -20°F operation. The ballast is mounted in the thorax and is secured with Nye (2) screws. Lamp socket shall be porcelain medium base pulse-rated and mounted to reflecto[ Finish: Polyester powder coating on all metal parts. Color to be specified. Listing: Luminaire is ETL listed for wet locations. Specification Guide 15 i/4" VK 11 S0w/ktPS = 05S 70w/HPS = 07S 00w/HPS = ] OS S0w?HPS = I SS 70w/MH = 0TH 00w/MH = I OH 75w/MH = 17H 120 208 240 277 48O I F = Single Fuse 2F = Double Fuse PH = Button Cell WM = Wall Mount 2A = Twin Arm 3A= Triple Arm WH = White SL = Silver CC = Custom Color Example: 100 Watt. Metal Halide, 120 Volts, Sing,e Fuse, Bronze [i'Jgllre 32~1 VK 1110H-1:70/1F/BZ Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Parking Lot & Driveway Lighting 902 aOLLARD LAMPS / BALLASTS Incandescent: 1 - 100W max (A-19). Fluorescent: 1 compact 26W (F26TTT), or 1 compact 42W (F42'ITI'). H.I.D.: 1- 50W or 70W metal haJide, or 1- 50W or 70W high pressure sodium. (ED17, medium base). Specify voltage, incandescent available 120V only. For H.I.D., ballasts are High Power Factor (HPF) thermally protected and outdoor-rated. For fluorescent, Electronic Ballasts (SSB) are standard. 4-pin lamps required. See "Ballasts" and "Lamps" in Section G. Lamps by others. See "User Guide" for information on starting temperatures of fluorescent fixtures. MATERIALS / FIXTURE LOCATION U.L. listed for wet location. Hood, support arms and post are solid copper. Fixture body and mounting base are Sand Cast Bronze. FINISHES Diffuser: Clear Glass, inside sanded. Base & Body: Sand Cast Bronze (weathers to a dark patina). Hood, Arms, Post: NCP - Natural Copper (weathers to a dark patina). VG - Verdi-Gris CC - Custom Color, Semi-Gloss MOUNTING Overall bollard height is 36" standard. Specify other, (ex: 28"OA). Post is wireway; wire is made up below removable head. Conduit enters at center of base plate. Anchor bolts and template are supplied with fixture. '~ (23 3V~"~ - Cast base is standard mounting, supplied with anchor bolts and template. ,~ 1~'0 j! J [ Figure 32b Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Walkway, Plaza & Parking Deck Lighting Design Features Housing: The heavy duty spun aluminum shroud is welded to a cast aluminum ring. Three 1/4" blue acrylic disks with luminous edges are machined to securely fit between each ring. Three rods bolt the cast rings and accent disks to the shroud with satin spacers and are capped with decorative stainless steel acorn nuts. Dome Cap: The rugged hydroformed aluminum cap with a hemispherical shape is secured to the cast aluminum ring with 3 stainless steel fasteners. Dome is gasketed to prevent water or insect entry. Enclosure: An 8" diameter seamless white "DR" acrylic enclosure is gasketed and secured to a cast ring welded in shroud with two thumb screws. Mounting Bracket: A 2" diameter extruded aluminum arm with 12" radius bend is welded to cast back plate, Arm slips over the tenon on cap and is secured with 3 stainless steel fasteners. A heavy duty steel zinc plated bracket mounts to the J-Box and wall surface and is attached to the inside of cast plate with two stainless steel fasteners. Dircet mount to pole is optional. "PM" Ballast/Lamp Assembly: All ballast shall be high power factor and suitable for -20o F operation. The ballast is mounted in the thorax and is secured with two screws. Lamp sockets shall be porcelain medium base pulse-rated and mounted to housing. Finish: Polyester p~)wder coating on all metal parts. Color to be specified. Listing: Luminaire is ETL listed for wet locations. Specification Guide 14" 20" VK-7 50w/HPS = 05S 70w/HPS = 07S 100w/HPS = 1 OS 70w/MH~07H 100w/MH = 1 OH 120 208 240 277 48O 1F = Single Fuse 2F =Double Fuse PH - But[on Cell PM - Pole Mount BZ - Bronze BK- B!ac~ WH ~ White SL- Silver CC=Custom Color Example: 100 Watt. Metal Halide. 120 Volts. Single Fu~ Rrnnz~ VK-710H-120/1F/BZ Planned Development Overlay PA01-0.522 Wall Mounted Li htin Figure 32c Light-Structure 2" Enhanced product, unprecedented 10-year warranty Light-Structure 2" builds on the success of Musco's Light-Structure System" making the industry leading sports-lighting system even better. And now with 10 Club Service. -- our comprehensive product assurance warranty -- Musco provides all parts and labor to maintain it for the next ten years. Building on proven product petl0rmance In 1991, Musco introduced the Light-Structure System';' the first complete sports-lighting system designed and manufactured from foundation-to-poletop in 5 Easy Pieces':' Engineered to be easy to buy, install and operate, the system provided major advantages in environmental light control, energy efficiency, durability, safety and cost-effectiveness. Even the best engineered laboratory test is not a substitute for the real world, so Musco's Product Performance Team travels the U.S. and Canada, ingpecting our sports-lighting systems on-site to ensure they are performing for our customers. To date, we've inspected close to 50% of all existing Light-Structure Systems. We're so coufident in Light-Structure 2's reliability, we'll maintain it for the next 10 years On-site inspections confirm the outstanding performance of our lighting system in the field, and helps us identify product enhancements to make Light-Structure 2 even more durable. In talldng with our customers, we've also learned that budget cuts and overbooked schedules make arranging for routine maintenance a challenge. To meet our customers' needs, we've developed 10 Club Service,, a comprehensive warranty and maintenance program -- providing all parts and labor, including a group lamp replacement --to maintain operation of your Light-Structure 2 system for the next 10 years, guaranteed. A program so sound, it's insured More than just a promise, Musco's 10 Club Service is underwritten by a top-rated insurance company. After an independent review of our outstanding product performance and service record, the Steadfast Insurance Company further insures Musco will provide comprehensive 10 Club Service for the full l0 years. You won't find this added assurance anyplace else in the sports-lighting marketplace.. Imagine, worry free lighting season after season -- for you, your facility, your community -- for the next 10 years. Musco's product and service assurance ... We Make It Happen. Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Sports Field Lighting Figure 32d 5 Easy Pieces" The Light-Structure 2 system is designed and manufactured from foundation-to-poletop to make your sports-lighting projects simple, safe, and cost-effective L:~~minaire Assembly Elecbical ,Components Enclosure Galvanized Steel~Pole Precast Concrete Base Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 1. Streets and Parking Areas Street and parking lot lighting will be the minimum feasible height, and in no case greater that twenty feet high. Provide fixtures with cut-off hoods to direct light only horizontally and downward, using fixtures as shown in Figure 32a. For parking structures, limit exterior wall-wash lighting, while providing outside lighting primarily for vehicular and pedestrian entrances (no wall packs), and low-level interior security lighting. Also, limit the height of lights on top level by using bollard-style fixtures, as shown in Figure 32b, and require glare shielding to confine light to top level and avoid light spillage off- site. 2. Pedestrian and Wall-Mounted A combination of bollard-style lighting (as shown in Figure 32b) and wall-mounted fixtures (as shown in Figure 32c) will be used throughout the site, for pedestrian areas. Higher, standard-type lighting may be used in lieu, in certain cases where low-level night, security and wall-wash lighting is not feasible. 3. Accent Use accent lighting and specialized techniques to enhance the after-dark image of the PDO area, particularly entry monuments, siguage and signature structures, such as the proposed Worship Center. All fixtures, except fixtures directed downwards unless under a canopy, will be low pressure sodium type meeting the requirements of the Mount Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance. 4. Sports Fields Recreational after-dark lighting is required for the playing fields to meet the needs of sports teams, casual play, and outdoor ministry activities, while recognizing standards set by the City of Temecula. Consider location, size, type, number of fixtures, and orientation to keep spillage and impacts to neighboring residential areas to a minimum. Pole-mounted fixtures, as shown in Figure 32d will be used. Data on photometrics, shielding and compliance with the Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance will be required for all proposed developments. Field users will be time-restricted in cooperation and in coordination with the Church and its neighbors, and possibly with the City of Temecula. E. SIGNAGE Provide signage throughout the PDO area as part of a well-coordinated, area-wide scheme, designed to match and blend with landscaping and building architecture (Figure 33, 34, 34a-b, 36). Integrate directional and identification signage for both vehicular and pedestrian purposes by incorporating unifying elements such as type, color, lettering, style and logo. Each tenant will submit a sign plan in accordance with these provisions, under individual site-specific plan submissions. September 24, 2002 38 HEDIUM TP_AL-PLAT T~qT 51~Na~ ON 12'X&O' f'ANF-L~ 135 I~c. LO~ &I~.,N::~ CAN 15' O" Signs A, B, C (NOT M I TF~V-~J>) Sign E Planned Development C/erlay PA01-0522 Signage Figures 34 Planter T Adhered Plaque- NO FONT 5UE, STrI'UTION OP. ALTERATION Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Signage Figure 34a Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Under Canopy Signage Figure 34b ]2'0" soo~ ~:e~°°vc~ Sign F Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Church Signage Tower With Electronic Signage Figure 35 Rencho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 1. Monument Site identification signs will comply with the requirements set forth herein and to the City Design Standards, and will be mounted on monument walls on either one or both sides of entrance roadways (see Figures 33 and 34). All freestanding signs must be the monument-type with architectural elements at the top, base and sides, similar to Figure 34. Freestanding pole signs are not permitted. Place entry monument features, with integral signage identifying the site, at all appropriate vehicle and pedestrian entries. Employ a hierarchy of entry signage designs (Figure 34) to differentiate, clearly, the major entries, at Chapel Lane and Rancho Pueblo Road, from the secondary entries. The secondary entry at the east boundary of the PDO will receive proportionately less expansive design elements. Incorporate landscape and architectural features, blended with overall site landscape and architectural themes, into the design of the entry monuments. Light entry monuments externally, with low-level, low-pressure sodium, wall-wash lighting in accordance with the Mount Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance. Another variation on the overall PDO signage program relates to the Rancho Pueblo Sports Center. The signage, shown in Figure 34 Sign E, is designed to complement the park environment it features stacked ledgestone and stucco sign faces. 2. Building and Tenant Identification Owner and tenant identification signage, throughout the PDO area, will adhere to a common design theme and requirements, as delineated herein. Signage design will integrate with the architectural style of the buildings, through use of such elements as fmishes, fasciae and moldings (Figures 34, 34a, and 36). Tenants using an entire building will be allowed one freestanding monument sign of the design shown in Figure 34. Canopy signs will not be permitted due to the "pueblo" design theme. Under-canopy signs are permitted. All under-canopy signs for individual tenants will follow the shape in Figure 34b; this shape is also used for delivery signs. Address numbers must meet the Fire Deptu ht~ent requirement of 6". All address numbers are to be located at the same height above curb as directed by the fire marshal. Restaurant menu signs are permitted only where needed at a drive-through restaurant. Changeable plaques, On Figure 34 Signs A, B & C, where used as a part of a sign, must be bronze and bolted in place with spacers to maintain a plumb line; sign shape will be the same as Figure 34a - Plaques. September 24, 2002 39 -IZ~.Al~EIZ. DOA~O (TI40 (;HUIZ<fA..I LO~'O (O~'f'OS'ITE (..01~.~ ANODIZED Sign F Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Church Signage Tower With Electronic Signage Figure 35 Un-interupted Wall Sur[ace 1.5 Sign Height ~28" "~CHMIDT & KLEIN5~ (3i 7; 10.5 urniture Importero,~ 14'-0" 16'-7 1/2' Planned Development Overlay PA01-0522 Commercial Wall Mounted Signage Figure 36 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 3. Pedestrian-Oriented Pay particular attention to provision of pedestrian-orientated, directional signage that acknowledges and encourages pedestrian movement and use throughout the PDO area. Pedestrian-oriented signage will be used within clusters of buildings and, when appropriate, is also encouraged within parking areas, directing pedestrians to the various site entities (see Figure 34a). Pedestrian directional signs will be integrated into raised planters (see Figure 28 -- Planters). Post and blade pedestrian signs are not allowed, except when required to meet ADA and Fire Lane signs requirements. 4. Vehicular Directional Signage Vehicular directional signs will follow the same shape and design as the freestanding monument signs - same texture and colors, maximum height 3'-0" (see Figure 34a). 5. Specialty Due to the changing and evolving nature of its school programs, thc Rancho Community Church and Schools project may employ an electronic signage feature at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Chapel Lane {Figure 35). The overall design of such sign will be integrated with the architectural style of the buildings, through use of such elements as finishes, fasciae, moldings and lighting. Specific illumination will be determined and addressed as part of the requisite sign permit; flashing or animated text is not permitted and any associated, fixed signage text will be integrally incorporated into the structure of this entry monument. Up to two reader boards on a single sign element are permitted, one each on adjacent or opposing faces, to facilitate bi-directional observation. 6. Sign Illumination Internal illumination of signs is prohibited. Conventional channel lettering and coated Styrofoam letters are not allowed. External lighting of signs must comply with the lighting requirements in Section 17.22.176.D and with the requirements of the Mount Palomar Light Pollution Ordinance. 7. Commercial Wall Mounted Tenant Signs The following requirements for commercial wall mounted signage are intended to create harmonious, controlled appearance to the Rancho Pueblo Development. These requirements are intended to allow commercial entities to use existing, recognizable identity systems and to provide a common visual format for commercial entities without existing, recognizable identity systems. The requirements are also intended to compliment the development's esthetic features while minimizing competition through visual gimmicla3' and garish color selection. September 24, 2002 40 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Ovettay (PDO-6) b) Guidelines for units with less than 20,000 square feet (without a regionally recognized identity system): All sign locations to be wall mounted, centered over unit's storefront and/or entry system below any fascia. Background wall surface must be 1.5 times the sign height. All signs are to be externally illuminated fi:om ab~)ve, with no more than 6 wall- mounted, hooded fixtures, directed against the wall, using white lumps (no color). Fixtures to be black and in kind with structure's design and details. Sign materials are 3/4" to 1" thick cast aluminum anodized black with matte finish, no substitutions. No plastic letters/graphics. Each sign to have a primary and secondary line. Primary line is tenant's name. Secondary line is description of services. Primary line is 14" Times New Roman all uppercase, as shown in Figure 36, maintain matched typefaces and surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. Secondary line is 7" Times New Roman upper and lowercase, as shown in Figure 36, maintain matched typefaces and surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. Rule is 1" tall 3/4" thick cast aluminum, as shown in Figure 36, maintain matched surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. 28" square logo, block, as shown in Figure 36, is optional for tenants who wish to display a graphics mark. The logo is to be cut (subtracted) fi:om the square. No applied graphics (cut vinyl, acrylic, paint...) Material is 3/4" aluminum cut and finished, maintain matched surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. All letters and graphic to be mounted with a standoff of 3/4" to 1" from wall, with combination stud with pad mounting hardware per sign manufacturer's specifications. NO FLUSH MOUNTING. All type and graphic FACE to be on the same plumbvertical plane. Standoffdistance may vary from 3/4" to 1". Guidelines for units with less than 20,000 square feet (with a regionally recognized identity system): All sign locations to be wall-mounted, centered over unit's storefront and/or entry system below any fascia. All signs are to be externally illuminated fi'om above, with no more than 5 wall- mounted, hooded fixtures, directed below the horizontal plane, using white lamps (no color). Fixtures to be black and in kind with structure's design and details. September 24, 2002 41 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) 3. Sign materials are 3/4" to 1" thick cast aluminum anodized black with matte finish, no substitutions. No applied graphics (cut vinyl, acrylic, paint). Material to be cut and finished, maintain matched surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. 4. Sign area must not exceed 38.8 square feet (calculate area using 8 sided polygon). 5. Sign width must not exceed 16'-7 1/2". Sign height must not exceed 6'. All letters and graphics to be mounted with a standoff of 3/4" to 1" from wall, with combination stud with pad mounting hardware per sign manufacturer's specification. NO FLUSH MOUNTING. All type and graphic FACE to be on the same plumb vertical plane. Standoff distance may vary from 3/4" to 1". c) Guidelines for commercial wall mounted tenant/anchor signage for units with more than 20,000 square feet: 1. All sign locations to be wall mounted below any fascia. All signs are to be externally illuminated from above, with wall mounted, hooded fixtures, directed below the horizontal plane, using white lamps (no color). Fixtures to be black and in kind with structure's design and details. Sign materials are 3/4" to 1" thick cast aluminum-anodized black with matte finish, no substitutions. No applied graphics (cut vinyl, acrylic, paint...) maintain matched surface finishes; no substitutions permitted. 4. Sign area must not exceed 60 square feet (calculate area using 8 sided polygon). 5. Sign width must not exceed 18' 0". Sign height must not exceed 6'. 6. All letters and graphics to be mounted with a stand off of 3/4" to 1" from wall, with combination stud with pad mounting hardware per sign manufacturer's specifications. NO FLUSH MOUNTING. All type and graphic FACE to be on the same plumb vertical plane. Standoff distance may vary from 3/4" to 1". September 24, 2002 4z Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Over/ay (PDO-6) 17.22.178 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Procedures set forth below, are guides to the implementation of the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development. A. ADOPTION OF THE PDO The Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay, once reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula Planning Commission and adopted by ordinance by the City Council, will satisfy the General Plan requirement for the Z1 overlay. The present zoning designation on the approximately 53 acres of the PDO area, Professional Office, remains unchanged, and development of the area is governed by the requirements set forth in the City of Temecula zoning code for Professional Office, except as modified herein. B. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW PROCESS A separate Site Development Plan Review Process (whether Conditional Use Permit or Site Plan) will be required for each development site within the Rancho Pueblo PDO Area. Under individual site plan review, precise site plan details including, for example, the number and mix of specific building usage, shall be required. In general, site development plans shall be processed in accordance with Temecula Municipal Code 17.05.010 - Development Plans. However, to the extent that a proposed use is permitted by the Rancho Pueblo Matrix of Uses, the Director of Planning may approve such plans, without limitation to the 10,000 square foot criterion of Code Section 17.05.010(D.2.). Uses requiring a CUP shall be processed through the Planning Commission. C. ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Through its adoption by the City of Temecula, the PDO will allow for minor variations fi:om the design and development standards depicted herein without necessitating further PDO submissions or amendments. Any proposed alternatives to the development standards contained herein will be subject to approval by the Director, Department of Community Development. However, the Director may determine that proposed alternative standards are beyond the scope intended under this subsection, and may require further review and approval by the Planning Commission and possibly the City Council. September 24, 2002 43 Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6) D. AMENDING THE PDO To the extent that project proposals fall outside the standards set forth in the PDO, a PDO Amendment will be required. Processing of such an amendment will require approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Examples of proposed changes that require a PDO Amendment include but are not limited to, development exceeding two stories, land uses not permitted within the Matrix of Permitted Uses (Table 17.22.166a, herein), alternative setbacks and alternative height limits. E. EXPANSION OF THE PDO AREA The Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay encompassed approximately 53 acres. Should the property owner(s) of the adjacent 28 acres to the east, which comprises Z2, elect to be added to this PDO, application of these development standards will apply. It is recognized that some additional details, e.g., on-site circulation and community-edge treatments, will have to be incorporated into development standards for a new planning area of this PDO. Expansion of the Rancho Pueblo PDO is subject to Planning Commission and City Council review and approval. September 24, 2002 44 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39- ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES; FIVE SPORTS FIELDS; A GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedidiah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property described as portions of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -004 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-22 recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-23 recommending that the City Council approve of a Zone Change for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-24 recommending that the City Council approve of a Conditional Use Permit for the Project. On September 24th, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Zone Change for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.04.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the underlying site plan for this project, the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Over/ay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. B. The proposed conditional uses are compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit, with conditions, is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. C. The site for the proposed conditional uses are adequate in size .and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the Planned Development Overlay, as well as the R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC 2 applicable sections of the Development Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning requirements for integration into the surrounding neighborhood. The nature of the proposed conditional uses are not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Provisions are made in the General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded with the operation of the church and school facilities. The project is consistent with these documents and will be conditioned to meet all applicable requirements. The decision to. conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. Section 3. The City Council of The City Of Temecula hereby approves Planning Application No. PA00-0470, a Conditional Use Permit, for the operation of a church on a 39- acre site establishing a 146,826 square foot church complex on a 39-acre site, including a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery; a 300 seat, 5,856 square foot chapel; a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center; a 9,695 square foot pre-school; the placement of seventeen (17) modular classroom buildings as temporary facilities; five sports fields; a gymnasium; and a two story-four level parking structure (with 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet), generally located on the north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet, for property described as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru - 006, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September, 2002 ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC 4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC 5 EXHIBIT B CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: Conditional Use Permit to operate a church and private school with 146,826 square feet of total religious building area, and 1,800 students and 136,771 square feet of total school building area; and to place seventeen (17) temporary modular classrooms; five sports fields; a gymnasium; and a two story-four level parking structure (with 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet), on a 39-acre site, generally located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 3,000 feet. DIF Category: Exempt Assessor Parcel No's: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 September 24, 2002 September 24, 2004 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) 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 shalt be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements 2. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso CUP.DOC this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant. 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 period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Planning Application No. PA00-0470, unless superseded by these conditions of approval. All these conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit. Modular buildings shown on the approval plans shall be utilized for a period of time not to exceed five (5) years from the date of occupancy. Any other future proposed modular buildings shall require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The duration of use of the modular buildings may be extended upon submittal of a formal application for consideration at a public hearing before the Planning Commission. (Amendment recommended by the Planning Commission on 7/31/02) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA01-0522 The hours for lighting of the ball fields shall be restricted to no later than 9:00 P.M., except that the westerly ball fields may be lit until 10:00 P.M. on Friday and Saturday. (Recommended addition by the Planning Commission on 7/31/02) By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the above-mentioned 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's Signature Date Name printed R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Re$o CUP.DOC 7 A'R'ACHMENT NO. 4 DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Repod.doc 10 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROPOSAL WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300-SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY, FOUR LEVEL, PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CLASSROOM FACILITIES CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDINGS TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: A. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedidiah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for properly described as portions of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959- 060-001 thru -004 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 1 The applications for the Projects were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002 to consider the applications for the Projects and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Projects, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-22, recommending approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project and recommended that the City Council approve of a Zone Change for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-23 recommending that the City Council approve of a Zone Change for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-24 recommending that the City Council approve of a Conditional Use Permit for the Project. GJ Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-25 recommending that the City Council approve of a Development Plan for the Project. On September 24th, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all pemons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Zone Change for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- On September 24, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved a Development Plan for the Project when it adopted Resolution No. 02- Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.05.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code: R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP,doc 2 The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop a church and school campus is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Office Professional and with the adoption of the Planned Development Overlay for this area, in as much as it sets development standards that permit schools and sets height limitations such as two story building heights. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The overall development of the land as conditioned, and designed protects the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the Planned Development Qverlay document and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines regarding safe site design that controlled and signalize access points, assigned student drop-off areas and structures that can be developed to meet building and safety codes. The aesthetics' of the site and structure will both compliment and enhance the surrounding homes and the community. The design of the site has all access points and most parking kept away from the adjacent homes. Provisions have been made to create a safe environment for people and to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the.applicable building and fire codes. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Application for a Development Plan (PA00-0470) for the design and construction of a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuarywith assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a two story, four level, parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for first through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,828 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two two-unit field house/residence buildings, a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office building; generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet, for property described as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru - 005 & 959-070-003 thru -006, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 3 Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September, 2002 Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 5 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Development Plan) Project Description: Development Plan to for the design and construction of a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, a two story-four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for first through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two-unit field house/residence buildings, a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office building; generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet. DIF Category: TBD Assessor Parcel No's: 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006 Approval Date: Expiration Date: September 24, 2002 September 24, 2004 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 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 One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($54.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 6 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 permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21187). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harm less the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant. 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 period 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 the Planning Application No. 01-0522 for PDO-6. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Construction plans shall provide enough details and dimensions to show the differences between planters, pavement and/or the plaza areas when reviewed during plan check. SITE PLAN: The berming as shown on the site and grading plans appears as a 2:1 slope along the entire site despite the description of varied sloped and heights mentioned in the PDO document. The requirement for varied slopes shall be shown on the precise grading plan. 8. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 7 The pilaster shall be enlarged to provide a greater offset of the walls continuous length. There should be locations where the wall is offset, not installed and/or the height appeam to be as little as two feet, 10. Provide greater meander or offsets to the wall in those locations where the wall does not have any offsets or undulation for over 300 feet along the highway. 11. The location of the site amenities noted in the PDO document shall be referenced on the site and landscape plans for review and approval during plan check. 12. Continue the sidewalk along SR-79 South into the ball field on the west side of the driveway and expand the entry area to accommodate the sidewalk. 13. Indicate the type of durable benches and tables to be provided for the occupants of the administration building. The Director of Planning shall be provided details of these amenities during plan check for approval. 14. The construction plans shall include design details of the paving, plaza, walkways, and site furniture consistent with the design standards in Section 8.B. (Accent Elements) of the PDO and subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. 15. During review of the construction documents those items not currently provided in detail for verified compliance with the PDO shall be requested and reviewed for consistency with the PDO standards and subject for to review and approval by the Director of Planning prior to issuance of the building permit. ELEVATIONS: 16. Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E and F" (Building Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division as amended by these changes: a. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be screened by building elements that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined to be necessary by the Director of Planning, the parapet shall be raised to provide for this screening. b. Landscape planter boxes shall be utilized on the other elevations of the parking structure to provide softening from the upper parking level as describe in PDO Section 4.E. (Circulation Plan - Parking). c. Relief shall be provided to the rear and side elevations of the field house to break up the bland wall areas, Elements such as windows on the second floor sides and columns on the rear similar to the front could provide the type of relief desired. 17. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with the 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 Director of Planning. Material Finish & Color R:\C U P~.000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 8 Windows, doors Stucco wall face Molder and columns Wainscot veneer Roofing Trellises Copper Penny green glazing Sandelwood #46 - Tan Pre-cast concrete Grey #3 Split-fact CMU veneer - tan Spanish "S' tile - California Mission Blend Copper Canyon LANDSCAPING: 18. The Landscaping Plan shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F' (Landscape Plan) and as amended by the following: a. Provide a landscape planter in all parking lots (used for permanent parking only) between every tenth parking stall and at the ends of each row. There must be one tree for every four parking spaces within the parking field. All planter islands must have a 12-inch courtesy curb and shall maintain a minimum of five feet of inside planting width. b, The planting areas around the buildings shall maintain at least 5 feet of internal space depth and width to sustain trees and shrubs. c. Increase the size of the five landscape fingers along the south side of the parking structure to the equivalent of three parking spaces or install a large (10 feet or more) landscape planter along the entire south side of the parking structure to offer the opportunity for large growth trees to be planted to provide an additional vertical element of landscape screening from the highway. d. Blend the 2:1 berm that creates the backdrop behind all entry points from the highway so they do not appear as sharp-engineered slopes. Blend the berms into something more natural and inviting such a bowl at these entry points. Be sure that the landscape plan and grading plans can express the finish appearance. e. A landscape Phasing Plan shall be prepared to coordinate the extent of the landscape installation proposed with each developing phase of the project. f. To the greatest extent possible, permanent landscape areas shall be installed around the modular campuses. g. Larger landscape buffers shall be provided around the modular campus and will be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. h. Several trees shall be installed around the perimeter of the temporary play yard of the modular classroom to aid in screening and to offer shade to the students. i. Prior to the preparation of construction landscape plans the streetscape design shall be reviewed for consistency with other development proposals along SR-79. j. Due to the scale of some elements of the landscape plan the applicant shall, prior to preparation of any construction plans, meet with the Planning Department for review of detail elements defined in the PDO document that are to be incorporated and shall be approved by the Director of Planning. LIGHTING: 19. All parking areas shall have lighting including those areas serving dual purposes as hard R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 9 surface play areas and overflow parking, to assure nighttime safety and security. 20. Lighting on the upper deck of the parking structure shall be on timers set to turn off the lights by 11:00 p.m. 21. Lighting sources on the parking structure will be verified for compliance with the PDO's description during plan check to verify that it is not visible from off-site. 22. Lighting of the ball fields shall not be permitted until such time as a lighting design and City Council ............. ~.~. .......... ~ ................ operation plan is approved by the ' - ,A,;,~ ,r.; .... ,..~.; .......... ~ ...~ ,..;, ~... ~ (Amendment recommended bythe Planning Commission 7/31/02) SIGNS: 23. The maximum height of the Rancho Pueblo Church and School reader board sign shall be 12 feet. A signage plan detailing operation of the reader board shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of the sign permit. (Amendment recommended by the Planning Commission 7/31/02) 24. The freestanding multi-tenant sign shall be limited to eight (8) feet in height with up to six tenant listings of equal size. 25. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring 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. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 26. 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 return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 27. 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. 28. If necessary the applicant shall revise the necessary Exhibits (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final Conditions of Approval and submit five (5) full size copies. 29. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit of the colored R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 10 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 prints. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 30. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 31. 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 "F", or as amended by these conditions. 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: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). e. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 32. 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 Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 33. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, 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 Director of Planning, the securities shall be released upon request by the applicant. 34. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 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, R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 35. 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: "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. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS General Requirements 36. 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 prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 37. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 38. 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 per Caltrans letters dated May 16, 2002 and May 22, 2002. 39. Approval from Metropolitan Water District shall be obtained for any work within their easement. 40. All improvement plans and grading 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. 41. All on-site drainage facilities shall be maintained by a private maintenance association or property owner. 42. The vehicular movement for Highway 79 South at the westerly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject t(~ approval by Caltrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. 43. The applicant shall provide an on site "park and ride" facility in coordination with the Director of Public Works and to establish a mutually agreed upon number of parking spaces. (Amendment recommended by the Planning Commission on 7/31/02) R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 12 Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. A Soil Report 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 report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 47. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 48. 49. 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 studyshall 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 facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be the responsibility of the Developer. The Developer must comply with the requirem'ents 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. 50. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: f. g. h. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Metropolitan Water District Caltrans Planning Department Fire Prevention Bureau Building and Safety Department Department of Public Works R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 13 51. 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. 52. The Developer shall obtain any necessary lettem of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 53. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 54. The Developer shall pay a mitigation fee in an amount acceptable to the Department of Public Works. Said fee shall reflect the percentage of impact at each intersection and shall be in accordance to the traffic impact analysis dated May 17, 2002. 55. Prior to the first building permit, a final map shall be recorded, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works. 56. Prior to the first building permit in Phase III, a fault hazard investigation shall be approved by Riverside County Geologist. 57. 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 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. Streetlights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. 58. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted, Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Chapel Lane. c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Rancho Pueblo Road R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 14 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. Roads shall be designed and constructed to meet City public road standards and remain privately maintained until a connection is made to a publicly maintained road to the east. The following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets as shown on the site plan: a. Chapel Lane - Entry (64 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Chapel Lane (48 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) c. Rancho Pueblo Road - Entry (88' R/W) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) d. Rancho Pueblo Road (66' R,NV) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) e. Sports Center - Entry (24 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) f. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department 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. Under grounding 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 Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 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 rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. The 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. R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 15 65. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 66. 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. Prior to Issuance of e Certificate of Occupancy 67. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy in Phase I, the traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Rancho Pueblo Road shall be installed and operational 68. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy in Phase II or before any access is provided, other than an emergency access, the traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Chapel Lane shall be installed and operational. 69. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works 70. 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. 71. 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 the Department of Public Works. BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT 72. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 73. 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 streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building end Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 74. 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. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP,doc 16 75. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 76. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 77. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 78. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 79. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 80. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 81. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 82. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 83. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 84. Provide electrical plan including Icad calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 85. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the trus's manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 86. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 87. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 88. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 89. Show all building setbacks. 90. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday: 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday: 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 17 FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Appreval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 91. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions ~vill be based on occupancy; use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in foree at the time of building plan submittal. 92. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 4850 GPM with a 4-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the appreval precess to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as appreved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as previded. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 93. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. Fire hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access reads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet frem any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available frem 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). 94. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an appreved route areund the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be previded. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 95. 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 Subdivision Ord 16.03.020) 96. 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) Each phase will have to stand-alone for purpose of access and water flow. 97. 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 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 98. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 18 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 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) The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) Prior to building construction, dead end roadways 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, and 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, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall give a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (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 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) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, based on an extra burden of protection a standpipe water delivery system will be installed in any multi story parking structures. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 19 109. 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. (CFC 902.4) 110. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 111. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 112. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: 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. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 113. 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) Special Conditions 114. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 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. 115. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 116. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 117. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The TCSD has reviewed the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and conditions the R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 2O project as follows: General Conditions 118. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 119. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 120. All perimeter landscaping, on-site lighting, interior medians, signage, pedestrian walkways, fencing and sports fields within this development, shall be maintained by the property owner. Prior to Building Permit 121. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees, based upon the City's Subdivision Ordinance for the field house residence buildings. 122. The developer shall pay the Park and Recreation, as well as, the Library component of DIF at the rate regularly collect by the City for the field house residence buildings. 123. Prior to issuance of Building permits or installation of arterial streetlights on 79S, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD along with the final Edison plans and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said streetlights into the TCSD maintenance pro. gram. OTHER AGENCIES 124. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Department of Transportation transmittal dated May 22, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 125. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated November 29, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 126. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated November 28, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 127. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Information Center transmittal dated December 4, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 128. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Fish and Wildlife Service transmittal dated February 12, 2001, a copy of which is attached. 129. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California transmittal dated January 16, 2001, a copy of which is attached. R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 21 130. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Department of the Army transmittal dated March 23, 2001, a copy of which is attached. 131. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Flood Control transmittal dated December 26, 2000, 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 Planning Commission approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date. R:\C U P'v?.000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Reso DP.doc 22 ~ STATE OF CAUFORNI/¥-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATI~,, AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMEHT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8 (~64W Fourth Street, 6~ Floor MS 726 an Bemardino, CA 92401-1400 HONE (909) 383-6327 FAX (909) 383-6890 GRAY DAVIS, May 22, 2001 08-Riv-79S-I 8.000/18.629 Mr..Thomas Thomsley Planning Department' City of Tem~cula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 MAY A 2ool lely. Dear Mr. Thomsley: · PA00-0470, Rancho Community Church, Malkoff & Associates, Applicant · We have completed a preliminary review of the information detailing the above referenced ' project, proposed for development~along the. north side of State Route 79-S0uth', between. Jedediah Smith Road and Ax~eoida de Mi.s~iones...'This project p.ropose~.development ora Four 9onstmctton phases are proposed to achmve to~ project bmld-0ut with'CompIeti0n to include: a 3;500rseat worship center; a,l,500-seat assembly hall; buildings for preschool, grades K-12 and adult education; a gymnasium; a four-story office building; a four-levelparking structure;and; several lighted ball fields. It is our understanding that approval for an alternative Phase 1 development plan consisting of a preschool, grades K-8 along with signalized access to SR 79 South, is set for consideration at : Public Hearing this evening. Because important supporting data was not included in the traffic impact analysis provided for review, a comprehensive evaluation of impacts to SR 79 South cannot be completed. Other issues affecting project impact to this facility were not fully addressed in the analysis prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, dated July 17, 2000. We ask that additional information addressing the concerns described below be provided for our consideration prior to approval of this proposed use: 1. Provide copies of Appendices A through D as cited in this report for more complete : · .evaluation of study conclusions and~recomanendations · - 2. LeVel'0f'Sei~ice analysis of rout6 irnp~ct~'bahAtt b6 adeepted as sha~/i,since'traffiC generatiot~_~soclated w~th other approved projectsm the area ~s not ~ncluded. Although 'i ':,':: .located. in:'uni~lcorpo_rat~:~C_o_unt y of Riwe~ide territory; tm_bric! Originating 'from th~se · "" developments ~vill'imp. act this: facility: ·Trip data associated with other.nearby projeCts is .'. necessary to identify intersection impacts related to through lane and turning movement impact,s, vehicle storage lengths and signal timing. Mr. Thomas Thomsley May 22, 2001 Page 2 3. Signal warrant analysis for Constance "A "and "B" was not provided in this traffic study. The justification for signal installation at these locations is therefore not verifiable. 4. Future strip commercial retail uses are described in the traffic study however, pertinent data regarding specific use and building size is not provided on plans. Build-out commercial impacts at Constance "B" cannot, be fully evaluated. 5. Information addressing potential highway impacts associated with lighted ball fields and future' league use is not provided in analysis. Weekend and/or evening peak hour demands to highway operations is unclear. 6. Issuance of a Caltrans encroachment permit will be required for ali construction proposed within SR 79 South R/W. Review and approval of highway improvement plans will be necessary prior to permit issuance. Plan design to be'consistent with Highway Design and Traffic Manuals, relevant construction policies and practices. Information regarding permit application and submittal requirements may be obtained at: Office of Permits California Department of Transportati.'on 464 West 4th Street, 6th Floor, MS-619 San Bemardino, CA 92401-1400 (909) 3834536 On a related subject, construction of an anticipated raised median with the Phase 2, Highway Improvement project is not yet complete. In light of the continuing growth in this area of the District, this construction is now viewed as an integral component of route operational integrity. Until all above issues affecting SR 79 South are addressed satisfactorily, we cannot support the conclusions and recommendations described in this analysis provided. Without necessary clarification of these issues, no permits for any work within State R/W will be i~ued. We thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions r~garding this letter, please contact Ms. Rosa F. Clark at (909) 383-6908 for assistance. .- ,. Sincerely, IJNDA GRIMES, Chief Office. of Forecasting/IGR-CEQA Review Transportation Planning Division $. Pagano, Highway Operations D. Allen, Electrical Operations N. Athuluru, Encroachment Pennits~Riv. Co. C:~lark~ Woflc~a's~Riv~79South\Tem\79S -IEM_PA00-0470.doe November 29, 2000 Thomas Thomsley, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 WATER AVAIl.ABILITY PORTION OF LOT NO. 3 AND LOTS NOs, 4, 5,. 6,.7, 8~ 9, 10 AND 11 OF TRACT NO. 15211 APN 950-080-001 THROUGH 950-080-004 AND APN 950.090~003 THROUGH 950-090-006 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00.0470 RANCHO COMMUNITY REFORMED CHURCH Dear Mr. Thomsley: Please .~.~dviSedl that the' a~-ce-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 and the construction of all required on-site and off-site water facilities. 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 that assi~ water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P~E~. · Development Engineering Manage~ '' 00~SB:a~240~F012-T6~FCF - CObNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTh SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH November 28, 2000 · City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas K. Thorusley RE: Case Number PA00-0470 Dear Mr. Thornsley: The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the proposed ehumh and school campus and has no objections. The project is to be served water and :sewer by Rancho California Wate/District and Eastern Municipal Water District respectively. Prior to any building approvals, detailed "will-serve" letters from the respective districts shall be required. Supereisor £0 0 4 ZOO0 Local F. aforcement Agenoj * PO. Box 1280, I~erside, CA 925024280 * (909) 955~982 * FAX {909) 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 Land IJ*e ami Water Engineering * P.O. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 9250'2-1206 * (909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Stme[ 2nd Floor, RNe~de, CA 92501 ~ALIFORNIA F.a~ern Imormauo. cen~e~ ~ISTORICAL oe~dm~ of Ar~hropok~ uni~mrdty af Car~nle I~ESOURCES R~,e~Ue, C,A ~NFORMATION  ~.,.,., phone (g09) 787*5'/45 ~YSTEM .. Fax (90g) 787-5409 December 4, 2000 TO: Thomas K. Thornsley City of Temecula Planning Department RE: Cultural Resource Review Case: PA 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit) Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System have been reviewed to determine if this project would adversely affect prehistoric or historic cultural resources: ~ The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to known cultural resource(s). A Phase I study ia recommended. Based upon existing data the proposed project erea hes the potential for containing cultural resources. A Phase I study Is recommended. I/ A Phase I cultural resource study (MF #87814883) identified one site designated CA-RIV-6499. ~ The project area contains, or has the possibility of containing, cultural resources, However, due to the nature of the project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on cultural resources is not anticipated. Further study Is not recommended. . . A Phase I cultural resoume study (MF # ) identified no cultural resources. Further study Is not recommended. There is a iow probebgity of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended. If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored by e professional archaeologist. ..... The submission of a cultural resource management report Is recommended foliowin.g guidelines for Arohaeclogioal Resource Management Reports prepared by the California Office of Hiatonc Preservation, Preservation Planning Bulletin 4fei, December 1989. Phase I Records search and field survey . · . , ~.~ Phase II Testing (Evaluate resource significance; propose mitigetion measures for significant s~es.I, Phase III Mitigation [Data r .ecovery by excavation, preservation In place, or e combination of the two4 Phase IV Monitor earthmowng activities · COMMENTS: The report (MF #4883) recommends that the site undergo an evaluation to determine its significance and, if neces:sary, appropriate mitigation measures. If you have any questions, please contact us. Eastern Information Center Ei~STTRAN,~IT United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsl~ad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenue West ~ Carlsbad, California 92008 Thonras K. Thomsley City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula,' California 92589-9033 FEB 1 2 2001 Re.' PA00-0470, Conditional'Use Permit, Portions of Lot 3 and Lots 4,5,6,7,8,9 and 10, Tract !5211, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Thornsley: · We have reviewed PA00-0470, Conditional Use Permit, located in the City of Temecula, ' Riverside County, California, received in our office on February 1, 2001. We offer the following comments and recommendations on the biological resources that could be affected by the · proposed' project based on our knowledge of sensitive and declining species'and habitat types in · -Riverside County. . . · .. ' · : =V~e are concerned about "take" of' federally listed species protected under the Endangered · ' Species Act of 1973 (Aci),' as mended. Section 9'ofthe~kct prohibits the take of any federally listed endangered species by any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Take includes "harass" and "harm", as defined by section 3 of the Act. Haras~ in the definition of take means "an intentional ..... ' or negligent act or omtss~on which creates the likelih6od of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns· which include, but are not limited to, br0xling, feeding, or sheltering," 'Harm in the definition · take in the Act means "an act which aetoally idlLq or injures wildlife. Such an act may include s!gn!.'ficant habitat m. odifieation or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by . slgmfieantly nnpairing esSential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering" · (see 50 CFR § 17.3). Take ineideatal to an otherwise lawful activity may be authorized under sections 7 or 10 of the Act. The proposed project is to design, construct, and OPerate a church and.school campus on a 3% acre site. The project site is located on the north side of State HighWay 79, southeast of Jedidiah Smith Road, and.west 0f Margarita Road. This area is known to support habitat for the federally . .endangered Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas cditha quino, "Quino"), least Bell's vireo (Vireo be.l[ii pusillus), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax tvaillii extimus); Nevin' s barberry'(Berberis neviniO} and fltreatened ~oastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica caiifornica, ~'CAGN"). Populations of these species have been documented within 1 ~ miles of the site,, including the southwestern willow flycatcher documented within the immediate vicinity of the prgposed site. Additional sensitive species known to occur on and around the proposed Thomas K. Thornsley site include, but are not limited to, the orange-throated whiptail (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus), southwestern pond turtle (clemmys marmorata pallida), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia)} Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), and golden eagle (.~quila chryXaetos). Furthermore, if habitat such as coastal sage scrub, vernal pools, or clay soils occurs on the proposed project site, then the site may support listed species. Therefore, we recommend that focused surveys be conducted by a permitted biologist within suitable habitat on site prior to final'project approval and any ground disturbing activities. If these wildlife species are present on the proposed project site, take authorization pursuant to the Act will be required before the project can proceed. This area is also known to support habitat for the federally'endangered StePhens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi, SKR). The proposed project occurs within the boundary of the SKR Habitat Conservation Plan for Western Riverside County. Compliance with the regional incidental take permit will be required Prior to any ground disturbing activities, Based on the Alternatives Development Document, distributed by Dudek (October 4, 2000) for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 0VISHCP), the site is near the proposed constrained linkage fl3at runs along the southern side of State Route 79, as defined by proposed Alternative 1. The proposed project may affect th~ design of a future MSHCP and ' should be evaluated for consistency with the ongoi~gMSHCP planning efforts. If wetlands.or Waters of the U.S. are affected by the proposed project, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers section 404 permit and/or California Department of Fish and Game 1600 permit may be required. We recommend that impacts to coastal sage scrub or any other sensitive resource be C°nddered cumulatively ~ignificant under the California Environmental Quality Act and · mitigated prior to any ground disturbing activities. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. If you have any .questions or comments please contact Dahlia Boyursky of.my staff at (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, .' ~"2 Jim A. Bartel Assistant Field Supervisor 2 11430-2001"CEQA- 13 $6.1 CC: Glenn Blacl~ (CDFO, Chino) Mci Malkoff ('Malkoff and Associates) Jerry Jolliffe (Riverside County) Richard Lashbrook (Riverside County) METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFOBNIA Office of the General Manager A'N··i8,2f101' ." '." i.' .'. ' ,..... · San Diego Pipeline No. 3 ~ Sra. 1561+00 to 1566+60 R/W Parcel No. SDA~P-4-1 Substr. Job No. 2029-00-021 City of Temecula Plannir~g Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecuia, CA 92589-9033 Dear Sir: Rancho Cornmurlity. Reform~ Church Thank You f~ yohr notice, which wc received on December 5, 2000, submitting prints of a Site Plan'(Sheets 1 through 3 of 3) and Phasing Map (Sheets 1 and 2 of 2) for the proposed · development of the Rancho Community Reformed Church property located north of State Route 79 and east of Jedcdiah Smith Road in thc City of Tcmecula. We have reviewed the submitted plans, and our comments and requirements are as follows: Thc locations of our 50-foot-wide permanent easement and 75-inch-inside-diameter prestressed concrete san Diego Pipeline No. 3, as shown on the submitted plans, are in general agreement with our records. · 2. The proposed storm drain channel that discharges onto our easement as shown on the plans is unacceptable to Metropolitan. We requke that any storm drain flows which are directed across our fight-of-way be conveyed in a lined open. channel or dosed conduit. Please request that the project proponent comply with this requirement. Metropolitan requires continuous access along our right-of-way at all times for routine patrolling and maintenance. We also require 16-foot-wide gates capable of accommodating Meh'opolitan's locks in any fencing that is proposed to cross our right-of-way. Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's easement shall be subject.to the paramount'right of Metropolitan to use the easement for the purpose for which it was acquired. If at any time Metropolitan-or its assigns should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary to remove any of the facilities from the easement, such removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner of the facility. 7'00 N. Alameda Slree~, Los A~geles, California 90012 · Mailing address- Box 54153, Los Angeles, Califomia 90054-0153 * Telephone (213) 217-6000 R~E MEMOPOUTA~ WAT~ ~/,~/CT OF S0~/E~N CAL/F~N/A City of Temecula Page 2 During construction, Metropolitan's field representative will make periodic inspections. We request that a stipulation be added to the plans or specifications to notify Mr. Gene Patficio of our Water System Operations Group, telephone (909) 926-1501, ext. 5809, at least two WOrking days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of our facilities. For any further correspondence with Metropolitan relating to this project, please make reference to the Substructures Job Number shown in the upper right-hand comer of the first page of this letter. Should you require any additional information, please contact Mr. Kieran Callanan, telephone (213) 217-7474. Vqry truly yours, itch M Lahouti, P E, L S //~ Senior Engineer General Design, Relocations and Substructures Manager KMC/SQA/km DOC'g: 2020thumb REPly TO A1TENTION OF: Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch Malkoff and Associates Attention: Mel Malkoff ' .18456 Lincoln Cirde Villa Park, Cal~forrd~ 92861 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGI=I I=$ D~STRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O BOX 532711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053-2325 March 23, 2001 .Dear Mr. Malkoff: It has come to our attention that you plan to build a church/school complex (Rancho Community Church) near an unnamed tributary to Temecula Creekin Temecula, Riverside County, California. This activity may requtre'a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. A Corps of Engineers permit is required for the discl~rg~ of dredged or fill material into, including any redeposit of dredsed material'within, ;~waters of the United States" and adjacent wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972. Examples include, but are not limited to, 3[. creating fills for residential or commercial development, placing bank protection, te~nporary or pe.rmanent stockpiling of excavated material, building road crossings,.backfiili~g for utility line:~:rossings and constructing outfall structures, dams, levees, groins, weirs, or other structures; 2. mechanized landclearing, grading which involves fill;r~g ~ow areas or land leveling, ditching, channelizing, and other excavation activities that would have the effect of destroying or degrading waters of the United States; 3. allowing runoff or overflow from a contained land or water disposal area to re-enter a water of the United States; 4. placing pilings when such Placement has or Would have the effect of a discharge o£ fill DAVID P. ZAPPE Gcn~'al Manager-Chief Engineer 'RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD COI~ AND WATER CONSERVATION DIS'I CRy o.f Te_mecula Planmng uepartment Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: '~'"/~ H ~l..~ k Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: 1995 MARKET sTREET R/VERSIDE, CA 92501 909/955-1200 '909/788-9965 FAX ?,q oo- o470 ~Th?~.Vis.~.ct~.._d~s~n_o,t__no=_m~a___ll_y r. _e~,__mm_Le_m~, .c,o.n.d. itio0, s for land divisiom..or_o, lher_la, nd use.c~_ses 'in i.ncqrporated ~?~.~ ,,?.n.,,~,u~. ~ uuu~ ],~t.pmn check a~y [ana use cases or provide b'tate uivision Ol e(eat Estate etters or · .om~.. r uoo~.nazar~., re .pcFts for.s.u~. ~.ses. D. isf~.-ct, comments/recomm' endations for such cases are normally tim ted '~:~an~ c~eC~ei'nt "~"' t to..b~, u,s~t..~. ,na~.ng District. Master Drainage Plan ~actlitles, other regional pmvl~lU.~u~ ra~u u~mnag~ r~an lees ~aevempmem mmge.on ;ees). in aeolian, mwn'nauon or a ger~al nature is ~/ This prolect would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan fadlities nor afe other faciltl/es of' ' reoioMIlntemst proposed: · ~ projec~ in.vol?'.e.$ ~..stric~_Ma...~.? Plan factlities. The District will accept ownemhip of such facilities on .wrnten..requ .~..t.o; me ~...l*acilmp.s mu$~ be constructed to Disbtat standards, and Dis~c~ plan check and .... re9 or a ~.K~J extension o~.th~ ~dapted · - · - ._ .... ~ L-~_.n ~_~w_h_lch .(~p.-na. pe Lees .n~_e ~ a.d.o~t~; apl~!ctt~e.tees..s~...a be pa~ by cashier's ~)e~vm comes ,~. tees to De pala snoula oe at ula r~e m effec~ at the time Of issuance of~Jb ac~ua ~ENERAL INFORMATION u]reme~[s an~ mNoula runner ulre mat me appl cant or)rain a Conditional Letter of'MaD I~ ' i I ~ . _ . .. .req .. ewson CLOMR. prior to gramng, recorclatlon or othe~ final approval' bf the project,- anda Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to Iofb~tu _mi .W'.d. te .r~__.u~q.._or__m. apped fl.o~, plai.n, is_impacted by this project, the City should require the applicant to · ~i" ~ r .etFl~' ~ me..u.~...army ~orps of .EngLn~rs. 9( .written COfTespondence from these a_qencies m~ c.a. gna ~ pm. Lest ~s.ex .emp~. _l[o~...me.se_req.u8mmems. ~ ~;i .e~..n wa[er Act Section 401 Water Quality Cat.cation ~eae~[e reqmre~ tram me focal ua nom;a ~(egional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 Very truly yours, Senior Civtl Engineer ATrACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report,doc 11 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 31, 2002 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting et 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, July 31, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Guerriero. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Agenda RECOMMENDATION: Commissioners Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chinieeff. None. Director of Planning Ubnoske, Assistant City Attorney Curley, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Development Services Administrator McCarthy, Senior Planner Hazen, Associate Planner Thornsley, and Minute Clerk Hansen. 1.1 Approve the Agenda of July 31,2002. 2 Appointment of Chairman and Vice Chairman It is noted that this item was pulled for separate consideration; see page 2. 3 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve Minutes from June 26, 2002. 4 Director's Hearin.q Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-2, and 4 (Consent Calendar Item No. 3 being pulled for separate consideration). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who abstained from Item No. 3.1. At this time Consent Calendar Item No. 3 was considered. 3 Appointment of Chairman and Vice Chairman MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to maintain the status quo, re-appointing Chairman Chiniaeff as Chairman of the Planning Commission, and himself as Vice Chairman. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voioe vote reflected unanimous approval. COMMISSION BUSINESS 5 Planning Application No. PA00-0507, for the desiqn and construction of a 70-room four story hotel buildinq on a 1.35-acre vacation parcel located on the south side of Zevo Drive, west of Diaz Road. - Michael McCoy, Project Planner II RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Continue tO August 7, 2002. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to continue this item to the August 21,2002 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 6 PROPOSALS: PA01-0522, a Zone Chanqe to establish a Planned Development Overlay and modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 55 acres includinq a church, school and office/commercial uses over property located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, be.qinninq 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuin.q east for 4,000 feet. PA00-0470, a Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit to operate a church and private school with 146,826 square feet of total reliqious buildinq area, and 18,000 students and 136,771 square feet of total school buildinq area; and to place seventeen (17) temporary modular classrooms on a 39-acre site, located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beqinninq 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuinq east for 3,000 feet. R:PlanCom m/rnin ut es/073102 2 PA00-0470, a Development Plan Development Plan to for the design and construction of a church and school camPus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of reliqious institution which includes: a 1,500-seatI 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education buildinq, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a two story-four level parkinq structure (with a 918 spaces totalinq 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for first through twelfth .qrade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildinqs, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot hiqh school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two-unit field house/ residence buildinqs, lit athletic fields, and a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office buildinq; located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuinq east for approximately 3,000 feet. LOCATION: On the north side of State Route 79 South beqinninq 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuinq east for 4,000 feet for property known as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -004 & 959-070-001 thru -006. Thomas Thornsle¥~ Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 022 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00-0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU - 004 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. 6.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 023 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -004 & 959-070- 001 THRU-006." 6.3 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39-ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500- SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; AND THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU - 004 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. 6.4 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROPOSAL WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500- SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300-SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY-FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRESCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/ RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, AND A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8~ 9~ & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU - 004 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. Staff and the applicant provided a project overview Via overheads, Associate Planner Thornsley provided an overview of the project plan (of record), highlighting the proposed Zone Change [which would establish a Planned Development Overlay (PDO)], the standards for this development area, the phasing, and the site plan; and per supplemental agenda material, specified the revisions for the documents for PA01-0522 and PA00-0470 regarding general changes, changes in the Resolution associated with Zoning, in the Resolution associated with the Conditional Use Permit (CUP), in the Resolution associated with the Development Plan, and in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, additionally noting that based on a letter staff received from AQMD, staff would be revising the mitigation measures. Mr. Mel Malkoff, representing the applicant, noted the modifications implemented into the project plan primarily due to the recommendations from City staff and the community; provided an overview of the design elements, the proposed permitted uses, the sports fields (including the applicant's desire to have lighted fields); for Chairman Chiniaeff, relayed that the applicant would be implementing buffering, as follows: that per discussions with the adjacent Homeowners Association (HOA), the applicant has offered to install a solid screen of trees along the Los Ranchitos portion of the project and to extend this screening to the edge of the PDO area, that the applicant would be installing a co~nbination earthen berm/meandering wall from Avenida de Missions to the western edge of the property, and trees and split fencing would be installed at the rear of the site; noted the applicant's offer to grade the Los Ranchitos HOA's horse trail (if the fencing is removed and the path is clear) when the mass grading is conducted for this particular project; advised that per discussions with Community Services Department staff, the proposed lighting at the ball fields (which staff was recommending not be approved by the Planning Commission at this time) was revised to reflect Musco lighting which was utilized by the City at its lighted parks; specified the revisions in the project to the architectural plan in response to staff's comments, highlighting the following: the architectural style whereas the buildings would appear as if master planned as a single unit, the plan to create a pedestrian friendly area (noting the requirement in the zoning document for off-road through connected pedestrian pathways), and the proposed 24- hour security .program; and specified the proposed off-site improvements, inclusive of addressing the drainage run-off of the adjacent community (which was graded above this property), and the two signalized intersections. For Commissioner Olhasso, Associate Planner Thornsley relayed that there were approximately 16-18 residential lots adjacent to this project. In response to Commissioner Telesio's queries, Mr. Malkoff noted that the adjacent horse trail would be contained entirely within the Los Ranchitos community, advising that the equestrian easements are specified in the grant deed of each property, and relaying that there were a few homeowners who have encroached upon a portion of that property. For Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Hazen noted that staff would add the ball field area in the Resolution which relates to the CUP, clarifying that staff recommended that there be no lighting approved at this time for the ball fields; advised that the CUP would include the church use, the interim use of modular structures, and the ball fields, Associate Planner Thornsley confirming that the gymnasium would also be added to the Resolution associated with the CUP. Providing additional information, for Commissioner Mathewson, Associate Planner Thornsley relayed that the administration building would not require a CUP; with respect to the reader board element (signage), noted staff's discussions with the applicant, providing direction that the message should not be changed every few minutes; advised that the reader board could be added under the CUP for added control; and specified that the landscape buffer along the ball fields was approximately five feet, and ten- twenty feet in alternate areas of the project, noting that to the best of his knowledge buffering was not a significant concern expressed by the community as it relates to this project. The applicant's representatives provide a proiect overview Pastor Stephon P. Struckmans, representing the applicant, provided an overview of the growth of the church over the last 33 years, the active pre-school program, the Christian school, and the numerous church and community-oriented programs; thanked City staff for their efforts regarding reviewing the project details, and providing guidance and input, in particular commending Director of Planning Ubnoske, Senior Planner Hazen, and Associate Planner Thornsley for their hard work with respect to this proposal; and relayed hopes that the Planning Commission would approve this development plan. Mr. Orley Weaver, a landowner within the 53-acre Planned Development Overlay (PDO), representing the applicant, specified the proposed mix of uses for the site; thanked staff and the Planning Commission for their careful review of the Ranch Pueblo PDO; and urged the Planning Commission to approve this PDO. Mr. Malkoff noted that the average depth of the buffers in the rear of the site was approximately 20 feet, the average depth along the front and the highway had an average depth of 36 feet; with respect to the approval process, noted that with respect to the proposed five-phase plan, it was the applicant's request that the Planning Commission approve the comprehensive proposal including all phases; specified two issues of disagreement with staff's recommendations, as follows: 1 ) that the applicant has had a continued expectation that the sports fields would be lighted on the church property, considering this element an integral part of the project, relaying that while staff would like the applicant to address this issue at a future point, it was the applicant's desire that the lighted ball fields be approved at this time, noting that the applicant has conducted studies and changed the type of proposed lighting, and 2) that the proposed mini-storage use should be permitted conditionally or on a permanent basis, rather than restricted (as recommended by staff). Ms. Joanne Rodriguez, representing the applicant, referenced a report documenting the Community Outreach Program of the applicant as it relates to this particular project (which was provided to staff but inadvertently had not been provided to the Planning Commission), noting the following: · That she had contacted each of the proximate homeowners denoted on the list (as per the documented report), offering to provide a full project presentation; · That 33 of these homeowners were deemed contactable all of whom received a project overview; · That of the 33 contactable homeowners, 29 approved of the project, 2 opposed the project, 2 offered no response, and that 16 of the 33 homeowners commented on the project all which were favorable with the exception of one family who expressed concern regarding their viewshed, and one indicating objection to the plethora of zoning changes in the community; · That several of the comments from the 16 homeowners were in favor of preserving the horse trail (which the applicant has responded to), that various remarks expressed concern regarding the hours of operation of the night lighting of the fields, while one resident was strongly opposed to any lighting, that two homeowners requested that adult softball be prohibited due to concerns regarding language and alcohol (noting that the church has provided assurance that this issue would not be a problem), that one homeowner requested provision of a sewer line to his property, and that one homeowner was concerned with respect to the modular classrooms being removed a after a reasonable amount of time(which has been addressed in the conditions), as well as concern regarding dust, noise, traffic, lighting, and construction hours (which has been addressed in the mitigation monitoring program); · That the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Associations (HOA) provided the applicant with a letter tentatively approving the project based on the conditions that it reviewed, specifying two concerns remaining, listed as follows: 1) the hours of operation of the lighting of the ball fields, and 2) concern regarding the church and its performance and ability to be accountable and responsive to the community, (advising that the applicant has recommended the creation of a Community Relations Committee comprised of a member of the HOA, the church, and a third party member); · That based on the Community Outreach Program, ultimately the applicant had two primary issues to address regarding the project, listed as follows: 1) the equestrian easement (which has been addressed), noting that permission to grade the easement had been signed by near all the associated homeowners, and 2) the HOA's concerns, as previously specified; · That there was greater community approval of the project if the ball field lighting were restricted; · That a petition in opposition to the project had been circulated which included misinformation regarding this particular project, advising that she had had the opportunity to meet with a few of these particular residents {of signature of the petition), one of whom relayed her desire to withdraw her signature from the petition. · That the church has been cooperative in its actions, noting the offer for a lot line adjustment (which cut into the church property) in order to accommodate the equestrian trail and to circumvent a building which was encroaching on the trail; and · Regarding permitted uses, relayed the following: with respect to mini-storage units being permitted (which staff had recommended be restricted), referenced comments from the adjacent property owners (which were included in the report), supporting the permitting of a mini-storage facility subject to the installation of a wall and landscaping, and noted opposition to the permitting of a bowling alley as a permitted use. For Chairman Chiniaeff, Ms. Rodriguez relayed that the letters (from the adjacent residents), which were previously referenced, had been submitted to staff via the document regarding the Public Outreach Program related to this particular project. The public was invited to comment The following individuals spoke in favor of the project: Ms. Niecee Thorne [] Mr. Ron Armstrong [] Mr. Larry Markham 30851 De Portola Road 30355 De Portola Road 30105 Cabrillo Avenue representing the Los Ranchlto$ HOA The above-mentioned individuals were in favor of the project, as proposed, for the following reasons: The applicant's offer to grade the Los Ranchitos HOA's equestrian trail which would provide trail connectivity; Urged the Planning Commission to approve all phases of this particular project in order for uncertainty to be diminished; That the pastor of this particular church served as a model for good pastoral behavior in the valley; · The representative of the Los Ranchitos HOA offered'the following comments: Thanked the chumh for the outstanding work with the HOA residents; Supported the proposed land use for this location; Noted that the HOA Board unanimously voted in favor of this particular project on July 30, 2002, which included support for the mini-storage facility as a permitted use, and opposition to a bowling alley being a permitted use, that with respect to the lighting at the ball fields, supported night lighting until 9:00 P.M., Mondays through Sundays, that there was a desire to review the light study, that there was strong support of a security program, and that there was a request that there be a requirement that any outdoor special event with amplified music be approved via a Temporary Use Permit; Specified that with respect to the Mitigation Monitoring Program (as denoted on page 7 of the Mitigating Monitoring Program Measures), that the quantitative items denoted in X-2 be additionally incorporated into X-4 rather than solely referenced as a nuisance; and Regarding the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee with the church to address concerns, noted support of this recommendation of the applicant. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Markham reiterated that it was the desire of the HOA that the lighting at the ball fields end at 9:00 P.M., confirming, for Commissioner Telesio, that the concerns regarding night lighting were related to the hours of operation; and for Commissioner Guerriero, specified that the concern regarding outdoor events being permitted via a Temporary Use Permit was specifically related to outdoor concerts. Mr. Raymond Johnson, 26785 Camino Seco, relayed his opposition to the project for the following reasons: That while this use would be an improvement compared to other permitted uses in terms of traffic impacts, that he was concerned with traffic impacts on Saturday nights; Reiterated that the AQMD tables were not the correct table to represent a proper analysis (which was previously noted by staff for revision); Concern regarding noise impacts; and Recommended that the church's parking facility be utilized as a Park and Ride facility during weekdays as a mitigation measure. The applicant provided rebuttal Mr. Malkoff, relayed the following comments of rebuttal: In response to the public comment referring to certainty regarding the entire proposal for the property, concurred that it was the applicant's desire to have all phases of the project approved at this time; Regarding the Los Ranchitos HOA's request that the ball filed lighting end at 9:00 P.M., noted that while the applicant would be agreeable to this proposal, that it was the applicant's suggestion that on the eastern ball fields the night lighting be limited to 9:00 P.M. on a year-round basis, and that the westerly fields (located further from the community) be lighted on Sundays through Thursdays until 9:00 P.M. and on Fridays and Saturdays until 10:00 P.M. with a preference for a 10:00 P.M. limit everyday for these western fields; With respect to the suggestion that there be a requirement for a Temporary Use Permit for outdoor concert events, relayed that the applicant would be agreeable to this requirement; · In response to Mr. Johnson's concerns, addressed the following issues: With respect to mitigation for traffic impacts, relayed that the applicant would be required to implement off-site improvements on the 1-15 freeway; With respect to grading, noting that AQMD standard conditions will be adhered to via the applicant's voluntary desire to comply; With respect to noise, advised that the project will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance; With respect to the suggestion that the church's parking lot be utilized as a Park and Ride facility during the week, relayed that the applicant would have no objection to this recommendation if limited to a certain number of spaces; and With respect to the AQMD letter received today by staff, noted the applicant's willingness to comply with the requests. For Commissioner Olhasso, Mr: Malkoff provided additional information regarding the project phasing; for Chairman Chiniaeff, relayed that staff has added a condition requiring the graded but temporarily undeveloped portion of the property to be hydroseeded and irrigated; with respect to the sign, relayed that there would be a view corridor to the signage which would be limited to 12 feet; and for Commissioner Telesio, relayed that the three rail ranch-type fencing would be comprised of a PVC material with black-coated chain link. At this time Chairman Chiniaeff closed the public hearing. R: PlanComm/rninut es/073102 10 The Planninq Commission offered closinq comments Noting that he had had a number of meetings with staff and the Subcommittee regarding this particular project over the past six to eight months, Chairman Chiniaeff noted the tremendous progress of the project, relaying that it had been a successful process; and advised that the major issues have been addressed, noting the work ahead for the applicant, in particular with Caltrans, as it relates to the median on Highway 79. Opining that this was a great project, Commissioner Guerriero noted the momentous strides the project has made in the past years, relaying gratitude to the Subcommittee Members and the applicant for their efforts regarding this particular project plan; with respect to lighting, noted that he could support a night lighting limit of 10:00 P.M. on Fridays and Saturdays; and with respect to the architecture and the landscaping, relayed that he was pleased with the proposal. Commissioner Mathewson expressed appreciation for the efforts of the Subcommittee, staff and the applicant regarding this project, concurring with Commissioner Guerriero's bomments with respect to the architecture and the landscaping; regarding the lighting issue (of the ball fields), concurred with staff to move forward with the lighting after the study was completed, noting the letter included in the Planning Commission material, expressing concern regarding the lighting with approximately 11 homeowners' signatures; with respect to allowing a mini-storage as a permitted use via a CUP, relayed that he could support this addition as well as restricting a bowling alley as a permitted use; and noted his support of the project. Commissioner Telesio noted his concurrence with postponing approval of the lighting until after the study was completed due to having no knowledge as to what the impacts would be; with respect to the reader board signage, queried the regulation process regarding the frequency of the message changing; with respect to the recommendation to require a Temporary Use Permit for outdoor concerts, relayed his concurrence, noting comfort that if there were alternate impacts associated with outdoor activities, these issues could be addressed with the applicant; concurred with the recommendation for the church parking lot to serve as a Park and Ride facility on weekdays, requesting staff to investigate this matter; and advised that he was pleased with the consistency proposed for the amhitecture of the buildings. Atter queries, Commissioner OIhasso obtained input from the Planning Commission that there was no concern related to the proposed signals for the project, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks specifying the signals which were part of the traffic control plan for this area; recommended that for the ball field area, that a Woodcrete material be utilized for the rail-type fencing due to safety issues and the proximity to Highway 79; with respect to allowing a mini-storage facility as a permitted use, advised that in light of the neighboring residents' comments she would not be opposed to allowing this use; with respect to the reader board sign, noted that while she was not completely comfortable with the location on Highway 79 South, that if the Planning Commission had no concerns she would not pursue a revision, in particular, since the sign was an improvement compared to the School District's signage for schools; regarding the lighting, advised that since the ball fields were not planned until Phase II, it would be prudent to wait until the study was conducted prior to approving the lights; and with respect to the limits on night lighting, noted that she could support a 10:00 P.M. restriction on Fridays and Saturdays and 9:00 P.M. on the remaining evenings. R;PlanComnVmln utes/073102 1 1 Chairman Chiniaeff suggested that the Planning Commission approve the lighting of the ball fields subject to the lighting study being reviewed and approved by Planning staff prior to the matter going to the City Council. Commissioner Mathewson advised that the feasibility study associated with the lighting was a critical element, relaying a preference to review the study. While concurring that the study was important, Commissioner Guerriero relayed that he would support Chairman Chiniaeff's recommendation in order to move the project forward. Commissioner Telesio advised that he would support a recommendation approving the lighting, relaying that he would be comfortable with subjecting the approval to staff reviewing the study and approving of the lighting prior to City Council review. Noting her desire to review the study, Commissioner Olhasso relayed that included in the Planning Commission material for this project was a letter in opposition to the lighting with the signatures of residents attached. For clarification, Director of Planning Ubnoske advised that Ms. Rodriguez had noted that the Planning Commission did not receive the Community Outreach Program document which provided additional information regarding community input with respect to lighting; and suggested that Condition No. 23 be amended stating, The lighting of the ball fields shall not be permitted until such time as a lighting design and operation plan is approved by the City Council; and for Commissioner Mathewson, confirmed that any resident opposed to the lighting could comment on the issue at the time of the City Council hearing. With respect to the Rancho Pueblo Matrix of Permitted Uses the Planning Commission recommended the following revisions: o With respect to the Caretaker residences, recommended that this use be permitted via a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); o With respect to the mini-storage or mini-warehouse facilities, concurred with leaving this use permitted vi~ a CUP, as is; o With respect to the school uses, recommended that all school uses be permitted via a CUP which would entail revising the following uses: Schools, business and Professional, Schools, private (kindergarten through grade 12), and Schools, religious to all be permitted via a CUP; and o With respect to Wedding chapels, recommended that this use be added as a permitted use. For informational purposes, Assistant City Attorney Curley noted that there were two methods of incorporating the Planning Commission recommendations, listed as follows: 1) forward the resolutions to the City Council, as is, with the Planning Commission comments forwarded separately as advisory recommendations which the Council would opt to adopt or not, or 2) the resolutions could be revised to reflect the Planning Commission's direction, and the project noticed accordingly. Director of Planning Ubnoske noting that most likely the City Council would prefer that the Planning Commission comments go forward as advisory and that the revisions to the resolutions be implemented after City Council action. For Associate Planner Thornsley, Assistant City Attorney Curley noted that it would be prudent to have resolutions prepared for Council with and without the recommended changes. Director of Planning Ubnoske recommended the following revisions to the Conditions of Approval associated with this project: o That outdoor concerts be permitted via a Temporary Use Permit; That Condition No. 24 of the Development Plan be amended to read as follows: the maximum height of the Rancho Pueblo Church and School reader board shall be 12 feet. A Signage plan detailing operation of the reader board shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to this issuance of the sign permit, and That a condition be added under the Development Plan denoting a Park and Ride facility, adding language that the number of spaces should be mutually agreed upon between the applicant and the Public Works Director. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske confirmed that although staff was adding a condition regarding the reader board that all remaining conditions relating to the signage would remain. Chairman Chiniaeff recommended that the condition related to the five-year term limit for the use of the modular structures be modified to state that the applicant could make a request for an extension, and that the request would go before the Planning Commission. For the record, Mr. Malkoff noted the applicant's concurrence with the recommended revisions to the conditions and the matrix of permitted uses. MOTION: Chairman Chiniaeff moved to approve the project and the associated resolutions, subject to the following revisions. Add- The revisions submitted by staff via the supplemental agenda material, specifically reflected in the document entitled, Changes to documents for PA01-0522 and PAO0-0470. Revisions based on the letter from the Air Quality Management District, dated July 31,2002; That the ball fields and the gymnasium be added to the Resolution associated with the Conditional Use Permit; That Condition No. 23 be amended stating, The lighting of the ball fields shall not be permitted until such time as a lighting design and operation plan is approved by the City Council; R:Plan Comm/rnir t ut es/073102 1 3 With respect to the Rancho Pueblo Matrix of Permitted Uses the Planning Commission that the following revisions be implemented: o With respect to the Caretaker residences, that this use be permitted via a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); o With respect to the mini-storage or mini-warehouse facilities, that this use be permitted via a CUP, as stated; o With respect to the school uses, that all school uses be permitted via a CUP which would entail revising the following uses: Schools, business and Professional, Schools, private (kindergarten through grade 12), and Schools, religious to all be permitted via a CUP; and o With respect to Wedding chapels, recommended that this use be added as a permitted use. That outdoor concerts be permitted via a Temporary Use Permit; That Condition No. 24 of the Development Plan be amended'to read as follows: The maximum height of the Rancho Pueblo Church and School reader board shall be 12 feet. A Signage plan detailing operation of the reader board shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to this issuance of the sign permit;, That a condition be added under the Development Plan denoting a Park and Ride facility, adding language that the number of spaces should be mutually agreed upon between the applicant and the Public Works Director; and That the Condition related to the five-year term limit for the use of the modular buildings be modified to state that the applicant could make a request for an extension, and that this request would be presented to the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS Commissioner Guerriero noted his regret at missing past Planning Commission meetings due to conflicts with his work schedule. For Commissioner Olhasso, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that staff would be sending a letter to the Council expressing concern regarding Code Enforcement issues in order to get further direction; noted that the furniture use proximate to the freeway would be leaving this facility soon; and advised that Senior Management Analyst Brown would come before the Planning Commission to provide additional information regarding the Code Enforcement process. Commissioners Telesio, Olhasso, and Chiniaeff relayed that although they are leaving their notebooks on the dais after Planning Commission meetings, they are not getting them back with their agenda packets. R: Plan Comm/minut es/073102 1 4 Chairman Chiniaeff thanked all the staff for their efforts associatedwith the church project (Agenda Item No. 6.) PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that with respect to the Rodpaugh Project, it may be necessary to schedule an additional Planning Commission meeting in September for presentation of the Roripaugh Project, advising that she would keep the Planning Commission updated. ADJOURNMENT At 8:20 P.M. Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next reoular meeting to be held on Wednesday, August 7~ 2002 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Ddve, Temecula. Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning ATDACHMENT NO. 6 ADOPTED PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report.doc 12 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-022 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01-0522 AND PA00- 0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property known as Lots 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002, to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. On July 31,2002, The Planning Commission of the City of Temecuia held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all person interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on those matters. On July 31st, 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project Section2. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CEQA rev PC.DOC 1 Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca. 92589. The Planning Commission reviewed the Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration. The Project and the Negative Declaration were discussed at regularly scheduled public meetings of the Commission held on July 31,2002. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA. There is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with law. Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project and approve the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Project. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 31 st day of July 2002. A'FI'EST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAl_] R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CEQA rev PC.DOC 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-022 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 31st day of July 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CEQA rev PC.DOC 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-023 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 6 (PDO-6), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-001 THRU -006." THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property known as Lots 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31, 2002, to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, on July 31st 2002, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-022 recommending City Council approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. On July 31, 2002, The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all person interested in the R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 1 Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on those matters. Section 2. following findings: The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby makes the The Project is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Project has been reviewed and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The Project does/will permit a comprehensive set of development standards to be applied to the future, planned orderly development of the site. Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council amend the Official Zoning Map for the City of Temecula as follows: For the properties identified Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-050-001 thru -005 and 959-070- 001 thru -006, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council amend Chapter 17.22 of the Temecula Municipal Code by adding thereto the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay District as Sections 17.22. through 17.22. , inclusive, of the Temecula Municipal Code, as said sections are set forth in the document attached hereto as Exhibit B to this Ordinance and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary prior to City Council review. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 31 st day of July 2002. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-023 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 31st day of July 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, OIhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\C U P',2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 3 EXHIBIT A RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ZONE CHANGE R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Zone Change) Project Description: Zone change to amend the City's Zoning Map designation from PO (Professional Office) to PDO-6 (Planned Development) and adopt the standards contained in the Planned Development document for a 54-acre site located on the north side of State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet past of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 4,000 feet. DIF Category: N/A Assessor Parcel No's: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 July 31, 2002 July 31, 2004 The following PDO text revisions shall be made prior to City Council review: The Planned Development Overlay title shall be changed to PDO-6. The list of uses shall be amended as follows: a. Bowling Alley Not Permitted b. Caretaker residences Conditional c. Mini-storage Conditional d. Modular Classrooms/buildings Conditional e. Schools, business and professional Conditional Schools, private (Kindergarten through Grade 12) Conditional Schools, religious (K-12; seminary) Conditional Sports fields (with or without related school use) Conditional Wedding chapels Conditional (Amended by the Planning Commission, 7/31/02) The footnote number 3 on page 17 shall be revised to read "...structures of two stories." Remove the reference to the '~raffic circle" on page 20, paragraph 3. Throughout the PDO document text on page 24, paragraph 6, the screen wall height is listed as 4-6 feet in height and figures 9, 16, and 17 have list 2-4 feet, while figure 30 R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC shows 6 feet. The text and figures shall be amended for consistency and shall include language that limits the overall height of walls and fences to a maximum of height of six (6) feet with the top of the walls or fences being no higher than eight (8) feet above the adjacent street curb grade. In Chapter 6(A). Section IV. Parking Areas, paragraph two, fourth line shall have "are not required" changed to read "may not be required." On page 26, paragraph three shall include the following: "Such hydro-seeded area should be provided with temporary irrigation until such time that the seed mix has germinated and established itself." Figure 15 needs to be amended to show the curb return and the curb along Highway 79 and the height of the High Tower shall be listed at 12 feet. The text on page 39, paragraph one shall be rewritten to read as follows: "Site identification signs will comply with the requirements set forth herein and to the City Design Standards, and will be mounted on monument walls no greater than four (4) feet in height on either one or both sides of entrance roadways (see Figures 33 and 34). 10. 11. The text on page 39, paragraph two shall be rewritten to read as follows: All free standing sign muse be the monument-type no taller than eight (8) feet with no more that six (6) equal sized tenant spaces with architectural elements at the top, base and sides, similar to Figure 34. Figure 34 Signs A, B, C, shall be redrawn to reflect a sign no taller than eight (8)'feet with no more that six (6) equal sized tenant spaces. 12. Page 39, paragraph six shall be amended to read as follows: "Tenants using an entire building will be allowed one freestanding monument sign similar to ef-the designs shown in Figure 34 but not to exceed a height of four (4) feet nor a copy area greater than 30 square feet," 13. Figure 35, Sign F, shall be amended to show the church signage tower with a height no greater than 12 feet. 14. Phase one development shall include the installation of all improvements on both sides of Rancho Pueblo. This includes curbs, sidewalks, and landscape planting design and installation on both sides of the street (for a minimum of 16 feet from the face of curb) and both corner entry statements of Rancho Pueblo at SR-79 South. (Added by the Planning Commission, 7/31/02) By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the above-mentioned 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's Signature R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Chumh\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 6 Date Name printed R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso ZC rev PC.DOC 7 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39-ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES; FIVE SPORTS FIELDS; A GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET), LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: Rancho Community Church, filed Planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use . Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property known as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbem 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on July 31,2002 Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, on July 31st 2002, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-022 recommending City Council approve a Mitigated Negative R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC.DOC 1 Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, on July 31st 2002, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-023 recommending City Council approve a Zone Change for the Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. On July 31st 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. On July 31st, 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula Recommended the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Project. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.04.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code: The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the underlying site plan for this project, the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The proposed conditional uses are compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit, with conditions, is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The site for the proposed conditional uses are adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the Planned Development Overlay, as well as the applicable sections of the Development Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning requirements for integration into the surrounding neighborhood. The nature of the proposed conditional uses are not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. R:\C U P\2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC.DOC 2 Provisions are made in the General Plan, the Planned Development Over/ay, and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety, and we/fare are safeguarded with the operation of the church and school facilities. The project is consistent with these documents and will be conditioned to meet all applicable requirements. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. The project has been completely reviewed, as a who/e, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. Section 3. The Planning Commission of The City Of Temecula hereby recommends the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA00-0470, a Conditional Use Permit, for the operation of a chumh on a 39-acre site establishing a 146,826 square foot church complex on a 39-acre site, including a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery; a 300 seat, 5,856 square foot chapel; a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center; a 9,695 square foot pre-school; the placement of seventeen (17) modular classroom buildings as temporary facilities; five ~ports fields; a gymnasium; and a two story;four level parking structure (with 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet), located on the north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet, for property known as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's ParCel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru .-006, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 31 st day of July 2002. A'FI'EST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC.DOC 3 I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No, 02-024 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 31st day of July 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff None None None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC.DOC 4 EXHIBIT A RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R:\C U P',2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Chumh\l~teso CUP rev PC.DOC 5 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: Conditional Use Permit to operate a .church and private school with 146,826 square feet of total religious building area, and 1,800 students and 136,771 square feet of total school building area; and to place seventeen (17) temporary modular classrooms; five sports fields; a gymnasium; and a two story-four level parking structure (with 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet), on a 39-acre site, located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 3,000 feet. DIF Category: Exempt Assessor Parcel No's: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-001 thru -006 July 31, 2002 July 31, 2004 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) 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 2. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the R:\C U FA2000\00~0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC,DOC 6 permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.' 3. 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 period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 4. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Planning Application No. PA00-0470, unless superseded by these conditions of approval. All these conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit. 5. This Conditional Use Permit ma~ be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. 6. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit. 7. Modular buildings shown on the approval plans shall be utilized for a period of time not~ to exceed five (5) years from the date of occupancy. Any other future proposed modular buildings shall require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The duration of use of the modular buildings may be extended upon submittal of a formal application for consideration at a public hearing before the Planning Commission. (Amended by the Planning Commission on 7/31/02) 8. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA01-0522 9. The hours for lighting of the ball fields shall be restricted to no later than 9:00 P.M., except that the westerly ball fields may be lit until 10:00 P.M. on Friday and Saturday. By placing my Signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the above-mentioned 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 t.o make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:\C U 1~2.000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso CUP rev PC.DOC 7 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROPOSAL WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300- SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY-FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CLASSROOM FACILITIES CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDINGS TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO-STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -005 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: Rancho Community Church, filed planning Application No. 01-0522 (Zone Change) and Planning Application No. 00-0470, Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan, for the property consisting of approximately 54 acres generally located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 4,000 feet, for property known as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006 ("Project"). The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. On July 31st 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC D= Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, on July 31st 2002, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-022 recommending City Council approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for the Project. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, on July 31st 2002, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-023 recommending City Council approve a Zone Change and Resolution No. 2002-024 recommending City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Development Plan for the Project. On July 31st 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula Recommended the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Project. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.05.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code: The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop a church and school campus is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Office Professional and with the adoption of the Planned Development Overlay for this area, in as much as it sets development standards that permit schools and sets height limitations such as two story building heights. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The overall development of the land as conditioned, and designed protects the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the Planned Development Overlay document and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines regarding safe site design that controlled and signalize access points, assigned student drop-off areas and structures that can be developed to meet building and safety codes. The aesthetics' of the site and structure will both compliment and enhance the surrounding homes and the community. The design of the site has all access points and most parking kept away from the adjacent homes. Provisions have been made to create a safe environment for people and to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council of the City of Temecula approve the Application for a Development Plan (PA00o0470) for the design and construction of a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church'vqeso DP rev PC,DOC 2 foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a two story-four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for first through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two two-unit field house/residence buildings, a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/ office building; located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet, for property known as a portion of lot 3 and lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959- 060-001 thru -005 & 959-070-003 thru -006, subject to the specific conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 5, Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND,ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 31 st day of July 2002. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 31 st day of July 2002. 4-De'nnis Chiniaeff, Chairperson ATTEST: [SEAL] · STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 'COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-025 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 31st day of July 200~, by the following vote: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC 3 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC ' 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Development Plan) Project Description: Development Plan to for the design and construction of a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, a two story-four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for first through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two-unit field house/residence buildings, a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office building; located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet. DIF Category: TBD Assessor Parcel No's: 959-060-001 thru -005 & 950-070-003 thru -006 Approval Date: July 31, 2002 Expiration Date: July 31,2004 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 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 One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC '5 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 permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harm less the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant. 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 period 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 the Planning Application No. 01-0522 for PDO-6. o The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Construction plans shall provide enough details and dimensions to show the differences between planters, pavement and/or the plaza areas when reviewed during plan check. SITE PLAN: The berming as shown on the site and grading plans appears as a 2:1 slope along the entire site desPite the description of varied sloped and heights mentioned in the PDO document. The requirement for varied slopes shall be shown on the precise grading plan. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. The pilaster shall be enlarged to provide a greater offset of the walls continuous length. There should be locations where the wall is offset, not installed and/or the height appears to be as little as two feet. R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC 6 10. Provide greater meander or offsets to the wall in those locations where the wall does not have any offsets or undulation for over 300 feet along the highway. 11. The location of the site amenities noted in the PDO document shall be referenced on the site and landscape plans for review and approval during plan check. 12. Continue the sidewalk along SR-79 South into the ball field on the west side of the driveway and expand the entry area to accommodate the sidewalk. 13. Indicate the type of durable benches and tables to be provided for the occupants of the administration building, The Director of Planning shall be provided details of these amenities during plan check for approval. 14. The construction plans shall include design details of the paving, plaza, walkways, and site furniture consistent with the design standards in Section 8.B. (Accent Elements) of the PDO and subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. 15. During review of the construction documents those items not currently provided in detail for verified compliance with the PDO shall be requested and reviewed for consistency with the PDO standards and subject for to review and approval by the Director of Planning prior to issuance of the building permit. ELEVATIONS: 16. Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E and F" (Building Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division as amended by these changes: a. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be screened by building elements that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined to be necessary by the Director of Planning, the parapet shall be raised to provide for this screening. b. Landscape planter boxes shall be utilized on the other elevations of the parking structure to provide softening from the upper parking level as describe in PDO Section 4.E. (Circulation Plan - Parking). c. Relief shall be provided to the rear and side elevations of the field house to break up the bland wall areas. Elements such as windows on the second floor sides and columns on the rear similar to the front could provide the type of relief desired. 17. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with the 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 Director of Planning. Material Windows, doors Stucco wall face Molder and columns Wainscot veneer Roofing Trellises Finish & Color Copper Penny green glazing Sandelwood #46 - Tan Pre-cast concrete Grey #3 Split-fact CMU veneer - tan Spanish "S" tile - California Mission Blend Copper Canyon R:\C U P~2000~00~0470 Rancho Community Church'~ieso DP rev PC.DOC 7 LANDSCAPING: 18. The Landscaping Plan shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F" (Landscape Plan) and as amended by the following: a. Provide a landscape planter in all parking lots (used for permanent parking only) between every tenth parking stall and at the ends of each row. There must be one tree for every four parking spaces within the parking field. All planter islands must have a 12-inch courtesy curb and shall maintain a minimum of five feet of inside planting width. b. The planting areas around the buildings shall maintain at least 5 feet of internal space depth and width to sustain trees and shrubs. c. Increase the size of the five landscape fingers along the south side of the parking structure to the equivalent of three parking spaces or install a large (10 feet or more) landscape planter along the entire south side of the parking structure to offer the opportunity for large growth trees to be planted to provide an additional vertical element of landscape screening from the highway. d. Blend the 2:1 berm that creates the backdrop behind all entry points from the highway so they do not appear as sharp-engineered slopes. Blend the berms into something more natural and inviting such a bowl at these entry points. Be sure that the landscape plan and grading plans can express the finish appearance. e. A landscape Phasing Plan shall be prepared to coordinate the extent of the landscape installation proposed with each developing phase of the project. f. To the greatest extent possible, permanent landscape areas shall be installed around the modular campuses. g. Larger landscape buffers shall be provided around the modular campus and will be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. h. Several trees shall be installed around the perimeter of the temporary play yard of the modular classroom to aid in screening and to offer shade to the students. i. Prior to the preparation of construction landscape plans the streetscape design shall be reviewed for consistency with other development proposals along SR-79. j. Due to the scale of some elements of the landscape plan the applicant shall, prior to preparation of any construction plans, meet with the Planning Department for review of detail elements defined in the PDO document that are to be incorporated and shall be approved by the Director of Planning. LIGHTING: 19. All parking areas shall have lighting including those areas serving dual purposes as hard surface play areas and overflow parking, to assure nighttime safety and security. 20. Lighting on the upper deck of the parking structure shall be on timers set to turn off the lights by 11:00 p.m. 21. Lighting sources on the parking structure will be verified for compliance with the PDO's description during plan check to verify that it is not visible from off-site. 22. Lighting of the ball fields shall not be permitted until such time as a lighting design and operation plan is approved by the City Council. ;;'!th th!c -'pp!!cct!cn cpprc';c~ end ::'i!! bo R:\C U P'~2000'~00-0470 Rancho Community Church",Reso DP rev PC.DOC 8 ~ (~anended by the Planning Commission 7/31/02) SIGNS: 23. The maximum height of the Rancho Pueblo Chumh and School reader board sign shall be 12 feet. A signage plan detailing operation of the reader board shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of the sign permit. (Amended by the Planning Commission 7/31/02) 24. The freestanding multi-tenant sign shall be limited to eight (8) feet in height with up to six tenant listings of equal size. 25. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring 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. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 26. 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 return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 27. 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. 28. If necesSary the applicant shall revise the necessary Exhibits (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final Conditions of Approval and submit five (5) full size copies. 29. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit of the colored architectural elevations to the Comm~Jnity Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 30. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 31. 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 "F", or as amended by these conditions. 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 R:\C U P~2000',00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC 9 the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. accompanied by the following items: a. b. ¢. eJ The plans shall be Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance' program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 32. 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 Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 33. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined I~y the Director of Planning, 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 . Director of Planning, the securities shall be released upon request by the applicant. 34. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 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: "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. 35. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. R:\C U P~000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC,DOC 10 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS General Requirements 36, 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 prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 37, An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 38. 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 per Caltrans letters dated May 16, 2002 and May 22, 2002. 39. Approval from Metropolitan Water District shall be obtained for any work within their easement. 40. All improvement plans and grading 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. 41. All on-site drainage facilities shall be maintained by a private maintenance association or property owner. 42. The vehicular movement for Highway 79 South at the westerly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. 43. The applicant shall provide an on site "park and ride" facility in coordination with the Director of Public Works and to establish a mutually agreed upon number of parking spaces. (Added by the Planning Commission on 7/31/02) Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 44. 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. 45, The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements ih conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 46. A Soil Report 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 report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 47, A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC 11 48. 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 facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be the responsibility of the Developer. 49. 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. 50. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: f. g. h. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Metropolitan Water District Caltrans Planning Department Fire Prevention Bureau Building and Safety Department Department of Public Works 51. 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. 52. 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. 53. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property, Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 54. The Developer shall pay a mitigation fee in an amount acceptable to the Department of Public Works. Said fee shall reflect the percentage of impact at each intersection and shall be in accordance to the traffic impact analysis dated May 17, 2002. 55. Prior to the first building permit, a final map shall be recorded, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works. 56. Prior to the first building permit in Phase Iii, a fault hazard investigation shall be approved by Riverside County Geologist. 57. 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. R:\C U P~.000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC 12 58. 59. 60. 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. Streetlights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Chapel Lane. c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Rancho Pueblo Road Roads shall be designed and constructed to meet City public road standards and remain privately maintained until a connection is made to a publicly maintained road to the east. The following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets as shown on the site plan: a. Chapel Lane - Entry (64 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Chapel Lane (48 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Rancho Pueblo Road - Entry (88' R/W) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) d. Rancho Pueblo Road (66' R/W) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) e. Sports Center - Entry (24 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) f. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. R:\C U FA2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PO.DOC 13 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 Storm drain facilities Sewer and domestic water systems Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines 61. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of 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. 62. 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. 63. All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 64. The 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. 65. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 66. 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 Temecuia Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 67. Prior to the fimt Certificate of Occupancy in Phase I, the traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Rancho Pueblo Road shall be installed and operational 68. Pdor to the first Certificate of Occupancy in Phase II or before any access is provided, other than an emergency access, the traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Chapel Lane shall be installed and operational. 69. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works 70. 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. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC 14 71. 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 the Department of Public Works. BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT 72. All design components shall comply with applicable previsions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 73. 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 streetlights 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. 74. 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. 75, Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 76. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 77. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cress slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 78. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 79. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 80. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 81. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 82. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the previsions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 83. ' Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 84. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 85. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. R:\C U P~000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC 15 86. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 87. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 88. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 89. Show all building setbacks. 90. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday: . 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday: 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays 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. 91. Final fire and life safety (~onditions 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. 92. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commemial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-I. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 4850 GPM with a 4-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) 93. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. Fire hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6"x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The raquirad 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 III-B). 94. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a Water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP'rev PC.DOC 16 95. 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 Subdivision Ord 16.03.020) 96. 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) Each phase will have to stand-alone for purpose of access and water flow. 97. 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 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 98. Prior to building final, all locations where structu, res 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 lbs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) 99. 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) 100. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) pement. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 101. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways 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) 102. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved bythe Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 103. 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, and 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 ) 104. 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) 105. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall give a minimum of six '(6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC,DOC 17 Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 106. 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) 107. 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) 108. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, based on an extra burden of protection a standpipe water delivery system will be installed in any multi story parking structures. 109. 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. (CFC 902.4) 110. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 111. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the i:ire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 112. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: 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. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 113. 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) Special Conditions 114. Prior to building permit issuance, a full techi~ical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, ail fire end life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 115. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Ar building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. '116. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Reso DP rev PC.DOC 18 These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 117. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The TCSD has reviewed the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and conditions the project as follows: General Conditions 118. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 119. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 120. All perimeter landscaping, on-site lighting, interior medians, signage, pedestrian walkways, fencing and sports fields within this development, shall be maintained bythe property owner. Prior to Building Permit 121. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees, based upon the Ci~s Subdivision Ordinance for the field house residence build!ngs. 122. The developer shall pay the Pa~:k and Recreation, as well as, the Library component of DIF at the rate regularly collect by the City for the field house residence buildings. 123. Prior to issuance of Building permits or installation of arterial streetlights on 79S, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application with the TCSD along with the final Edison plans and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said streetlights into the TCSD maintenance program. OTHER AGENCIES 124. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Department of Transportation transmittal dated May 22, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 125. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated November 29, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 126. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated November 28, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 127. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Information Center transmittal dated December 4, 2000, a copy of which is attached. R:\C U P~000~30-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC 19 128. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Fish and Wildlife Service transmittal dated February 12, 2001, a copy of which is attached. 129. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California transmittal dated January 16, 2001, a copy of which is attached. 130. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Department of the Army transmittal dated Mamh 23, 2001, a copy of which is attached. 131. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rivemide County Flood. Control transmittal dated December 26, 2000, 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 Planning Commission approval. Applicant's Signature Name pdnted Date. R:\C U P\2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church~Reso DP rev PC.DOC 2O STATE OF CALIFOFtNIA--~USINESS, TRANSPORTATI~., AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8 (~64W Fourth Street, 6~ Floor MS 726 an Bernardino, CA 92401-1400 HONE (909) 383-6327 FAX (909) 383-6890 GRAy DAVIS, Gq~emof May 22, 2001 08~Riv-79S~18.000/18.629 Mr. Thomas Thomsley Planning Department City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 MAY 4 2001 9y Dear Mr. Thomsley: · PA00-0470, Rancho Community Church, Malkoff & Associates, Applicant We have compl'eted a preliminary review of the information detailingthe ab°vereferenced'' project, proposed for·development along the, north side of State Route 79-SOuth,.between. Jedediah Smith Road and A,~erfida de Mi$$iones.. This. project proposes.development ora combinedchurch and~private school faci:lity.:over:a 39~0~acre site:: ' ' ,.': :~..~:.,.:.,. '.::' :. ,~..: Four'cohstrucfi6ii phas6~ ar6 proposed tO achieve tot:al pr6ject build-0fit with.cofi~Plefion to include: a 3 500-seat worship center; a 1,500-seat assembly hall; buildings for preschool, grades K-12 and adult education; a gymnasium; a four-story office building; a four-level parking structure, and; several lighted ball fields. It is our Understanding that approval for an altemative Phase 1 development plan consisting of a preschool, grades K-8 along with signalized access to SR 79 South, is set for consideration at Public Heating this evening. Because important supporting data was not included in the traffic impact analysis provided for review, a comprehensive evaluation of impacts to SR 79 South cannot be completed. Other issues affecting project impact to this facility were not fully addressed in the analysis prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, dated July 17, 2000. We ask that additional information addressing the concerns described below be provided for our consideration prior to approval of this proposed use: 1. Provide copies of Appendice~ A through D as cited in this report for more complete : evaluation of study conclusions and~recommendations . · , · · ~' 'LeVel ofSe~ice an~iiYsi~ of rout~ impa~t~'eahil0t b~ a~epted as shoWn,sihee'traffic:' c.:.generation: ~sociated with other approved projects in the area is not included. Although · ';-.: located, in:'uninc0rpo_m__t.e_d:__C.p_unty qf._Rive~ide territorY; traffic~ originating from these - '.developments ~ill'impact this' facility; Trip data associated with'other nearby projeCts is ., necessary to identify intersection impacts related to through lane and turning movement impacts, vehicle storage lengths and signal timing. Mr. Thomas Thomsley May 22, 2001 Page 2 3. Signal warrant analysis for Constance "A "and "B" was not provided in this traffic study. The justification for signal installation at these locations is therefore not verifiable. 4. Future strip commercial retail uses are described in the traffic study however, pertinent data regarding specific use and building size is not provided on plans. Build-out commercial impacts at Constance "B" cannot be fully evaluated. 5. Information addressing potential highway impacts associated with lighted ball fields and future league use is not provided in analysis. Weekend and/or evening peak hour demands to highway operations is unclear. 6. Issuance of a Caltrans encroachment permit will be required for all construction proposed within SR 79 South R/W. Review and approval of highway improvement plans will be necessary prior to permit issuance. Plan design to be consistent with Highway Design and Traffic Manuals, relevant construction policies and practices. Information regarding permit application and submittal requirements may be obtained at: Office of Permits California Department of Transportation 464 West 4th Street, 6th Floor, MS-619 San Bemardino, CA 92401-1400 (909) 3834536 On a related subject, construction of an anticipated raised median with the Phase 2, Highway Improvement project is not yet complete. In light of the continuing growth in this area of the District, this construction is now viewed as an integral component of route operational integrity. Until all above issues affecting SR 79 South are addressed satisfactorily, we cannot support the conclusions and recommendations described in this analysis provided. Without necessary clarification of these issues, no permits for any work within State P, JW will be i}sued. We thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions r~garding this letter, please contact Ms. Rosa F. Clark at (909) 383-6908 for assistance. Sincerely, LINDA GRIMES, Chief Office of Forecasting/IGR-CEQA Review Transportation Planning Division CC: J. Pagano, Highway Operations D. Allen, Electrical Operations N. Athuluru, Encroachment Permits-Rjr. Co. C:\Clark's Work~'~Riv~79South\Tem\79S-'I'EM_PA00-0470.doc ~r November 29, 2000 Thomas Thomsley, Case Planner City of Temeeula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PORTION OF LOT NO. 3 AND LOTS NOS, 4, 5, 6,7, 8, 9, 10 AND 11 OF TRACT NO. 15211 APN 950-080-001 TFIROUGH 950-080-4)04 AND APN 950-090~003 THROUGH 950~090-006 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00-0470 RANCHO COMMUNITY REFORMED CHURCH Dear Mr. Thomsley: Please .~ ~avised. mat the; ai~6~,e-refereneed 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 and the construction of all required on-site and off-site water facilities. 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 that assiEn~ water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. ) Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E~ Development Engineering Manage~ ' 00~SB:at240W012-TUqFCF DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH November 28, 2000 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas IC Thorusley RE: Case Number PA00-0470 DearMr. Thornsley: The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the proposed church and school campus and has no objections. The project is to be served water and sewer by Rancho California Water' District and Eastern Municipal Water District respectively. Prior to any building approvals, detailed "will-serve" letters from the respective districts shall be required. Supervisor Loc. al Enforcement Agencsff * PO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 95543982 * FAX (909} 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon ~ 9th Boor, Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use ~md Wat~ Engineering * F~O. Box 1206, lTNemide, CA 92502-1206 * (909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor, Rive'~de, CA 92501 DEC-8~-~ 1G: ~1 ~ALIFORNIA ~41STORICAL I~E$OURCES ~NFORMATION ~'~ ~YSTEM Phone (909) 787-5'745 Fa~ (909) 787.5409 December 4, 2000 TO: Thomas K. Thornsley City of Temecula Planning Department RE: Cultural Resource Review Case: PA 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit) Records at the Eastern Information Center of the Callfornia Historical Resources Information System have been reviewed to determine if this project would adversely affect prehistoric or historic cultural resources: The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to known cultural resource(s). A Phase I study is recommended. Based upon existing data the proposed project area has the potential for containing cultural resources. A Phase I study Is recommended. A Phase I cultural resource study [MF #878/4883) identified one site designated CA-RIV-6499. The project area contains, or has the possibility of containing, cultural resources. However, due to the nature of the project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on oultural resources Is not anticipated. Further study is not reoommended. A Phase I cultural resouma study (MF # ) identified no cultural resources. Further study is not recommended, There is a Iow probability of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended. If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored by a professional archaeologist. The submission of a cultural resource management report is renommended following guidelines for Arohaeologl~al Resource Management Reports prepared by the California Office of Historic Preservation, Preservation Planning Bulletin 4(al, December 1989. Phase I Records search and field su.rvey .  P hase II Testing [Evaluate resource s~gniflcance; propOSe mitigation measures for "significant sites.] Phase III Mitigation [Data recovery by excavation, preservation In place, or a combination of the two.] _ Phase IV Monitor earthmoving activities ' COMMENTS; The report (MF #4883) recommends that the site undergo an evaluation to determine its significance and, if necessary, appropriate mitigation measures, If you have any questions, please contact us. Eastern Information Center EIC~:R~S~TRN~IIT United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenuo West · Carlsbad, California 92008 Thomas K. Thomsley City Of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula,' California 92589-9033 FElt 1 2 2001 Re: PA00-0470, Conditional Use Permit, Portions.of Lot 3 and Lots 4,5,6,7,8,9 and 10, Tract !5211, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Thomsley: We have reviewed PA00-0470, Conditional Use Permit, located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, received in our office on February 1, 2001. We offer the following comments and recommendations on the biological resources that could be affected by the · proposed project based on our knowledge of sensitive and declining species and habitat types in - Riverside County. ' .~e are concerned about "take" o£ federally listed species protected under the Endangered' Species Act of 1973 (AcO, as amended. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the take of any federally listed endangered species by any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Take includes "harass" and "harm", as defined by section 3 of the Act. Harass in the definition of take means "an intentional or negligent act or omission which ~reates the likelih0od of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns. which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering," 'Harm in the definition 6f take in the Act means "an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act my include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering" · (see 50 CFR § 17.3). 'l~ake incidental to an otherwise lawful activity may be authorized under sections 7 or 10 of the Act. The proposed project is to design, construct, and operate a church and school campus on a 39- acre site. The project site is located on the north side of State Highway 79, southeast of Jedidlah Smith Road, and.west 0f Margarita Road. This area is known to support habitat for the federally ,endangered Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino, "Quino "), least Bell's virbo (Vireo be. lhi pusillus), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus); Nevin's barberry (Berberis neviniO} and threatened ~oastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica ~alifornica, "CAGN"). Populations of these species have been documented within 1 ½ miles of the site,, including the southwestern willow flycatcher documented within the immediate vicinity of the prqposed site. Additional sensitive species known to occur on and around the proposed Thomas K. Thornsley site include, but are not limited tO, the orange-throated whiptail (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus), southwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata pallida), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), and golden eagle (Aquila chry~aetos). Furthermore, if habitat such as coastal sage scrub, vernal pools, or clay soils occurs on the proposed project site, then the site may support listed species. Therefore, we recommend that focused surveys be conducted by a permitted biologist within suitable habitat on site prior to final project approval and any ground disturbing activities. If these wildlife species are present on the proposed project site, take authorization pursuant to the Act will be required before the project can proceed. This area is also known to support habitat for the federally endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi, SKR). The proposed project occurs within the boundary of the SKR Habitat Conservation Plan for Western Riverside County. Compliance with the regional incidental take permit will be required Prior to any ground disturbing activities, Based on the Alternatives Development Document, distributed by Dudek (October 4, 2000) for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the site is near the proposed constrained linkage that runs along the southern side of State Route 79, as defined by proposed Alternative 1. The proposed project may affect the design of a future MSHCP and should be evaluated for consistency with the ongoing MSHCP planning efforts. If wetlands.or Waters of the U.S. are affected by the proposed project, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers section 404 permit and/or California Department offish and Game 1600 permit may be required. We recommend that impacts to coastal Sage scrub or any other sensitive resource be considered cumulatively ~ignificant under the California Environmental Quality Act and · mitigated prior to any ground disturbing activities. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. If you have any questions or comments please contact Dahlia Boyursky of my staff at (760) 431-9440. Sincerely, ~'~ Jim A. Barrel Assistant Field Supervisor ! 1430-2001'CEQA-1386.1 Glenn Black (CDFG, Chino) Mel Malkoff (Malkoff and Associates) Jerry Jolliffe (Riverside County) Richard Lashbrook (Riverside County) METROPOLITAN WATER D/STRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFOBNIA Office of the General Manager 15 San Diego Pipeline No. 3 Sta. 1561+00 to 1566+60 R/W Parcel No. SDA-P-4-1 Substr. Job No. 2029-00-021 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecuia, CA 92589-9033 Dear Sir: Rancho Community..Reformed Church Thank you for your notice, which we received on December 5, 2000, submitting prints cfa Site Plan' (Sheets 1 through 3 of 3) and Phasing Map (Sheets 1 and 2 of 2) for the proposed development of the Rancho Community Reformed Church property located north of State Route 79 and east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula. We have reviewed the submitted plans, and our comments and requirements are as follows: . 2. The locations of our 50-foot-wide permanent easement and 75-inch-inside-diameter prestressed concrete San Diego Pipeline No. 3, as shown on the submitted plans, are in general agreement with our records. The proposed storm drain channel that discharges onto our easement as shown on the plans is unacceptable to Metropolitan. We require that any storm draln flows which are directed across our right-of-way be conveyed in a lined open channel or closed conduit. Please request that the project proponent comply with this requirement. Metropolitan requires continuous access along our right-of-way at all times for routine patrolling and maintenance. We also require 16-foot-wide gates capable of accommodating Metropolitan's locks in any fencing that is proposed to cross our right-of-way. Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's easement shall be subject to the paramount right of Metropolitan to use the easement for the purpose for which it was acquired. If at any time Metropolitatvor its assigns should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary to remove any of the facilities from the easement, such removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner of the facility. ?00 N. Alameda Sb'eet, Los Angeles, California 90012 · Mailing address: Box 54153, Los Angeles, California 90054-0153 · Telephone (213) 217-6000 City of Temecula Page 2 During construction, Metropolitan's field representative will make periodic inspections. We request that a stipulation be added to the plans or specifications to notify Mr. Gene Patricio of our Water System Operations Group, telephone (909) 926-1501, ext. 5809, at least two WOrking days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of our facilities. For any further correspondence with Metropolitan relating to this project, please make reference to the Substructures Job Number shown in the upper right-hand comer of the f~rst page of this letter. Should you require any additional information, please contact Mr. Kieran Callanan, telephone (213) 217-7474. Very truly yours, itch M Lahouti, P E, L S //~ Senior Engineer General Design, Relocations and Substructures Manager KMC/SQA/km DOC#: 2020church Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O BOX 5327'1'1 LOS ANGELES, CAUFORNIA 90053-~'~; March 23, 2001 Malkoff and Associates Attention: Mel Malkoff 18456 Lincoln Cirde Villa Park, California 92861 Dear Mr. Malkoff: It has come to our attention that you plan to build a church/school complex (Rancho Community Church) near an unnamed tributary to Temecula Creek in Temecula, Riverside County, California. This activity may require'a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. A Corps of Engineers permit is required for the discharg~ of dredged or fill material into, including any redeposit of dredged material within, 'hataters of the United States" and adjacent wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972. Examples include, but are not limited to, 1. creating fills for residential or commercial development, placing bank protection, temporary or pe!manent stockpiling of excavated material, building road crossings, backfilling for utility line crossings and constructing outfall structures, dams, levees, groins, weirs, or other structures; 2. mechanized landdearlng, grading which involves filling Jow areas or land leveling, ditching, channelizing and other excavation activities that would have the effect of destroying or degrading waters of the United States; 3. allowing runoff or overflow from a contained land or water disposal area to re-enter a water of the United States; . · 4. placing pilings When such placement has or Would have the effect of a discharge of fill DAVID P. ZAPPE General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CON! AND WATER CONSERVATION DIS2 City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 Attention: '~/--/~ Ladies and Gentlemen: 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909/955-1200 '909/788-9965 FAX '~/'/ORhJS~L~.y Re: Plot 0a- 0470 ~e Dis~ not no~lly m~mmend ~ndi~ons for and ~s o~ or o~er land use ~ses 'in ~mted ~ges..~9 uis~ ~so ~s not plan ~e~ ~ land use ~es, or pm~de S~te DMsion of Real Es~te leRem or 9~9r n~.~_ re~ tgr. su~ ~se~. uis~. ~mmen~r~mme~a~o~ for su~ ~ses am no~al~ m~ '~S o~ ~c pm~d~.ana ulsm~ ~a um~ge ~lan roes {aeve~mem m~ga=~' t~s). In add~on, I~o~on · ~=~_[~p~ u~sm~appm~a~ m enao~mem o~ me pm~ pmj~ ~ msp~ to fl~ h~, public H~UlUl a~u ~ ~ a~y 0~ 6U~ ISSUe: ~ ~ pmj~ w~ld not ~ im~ by D;s~ Master Drainage Plan ~ ~r am o~ fa~l~es of* ~ls pmje~ invokes Dis~ Ma~er Plan fa~liU~. ~e Dis~ ~11 a~pt owne~hip of su~ ~1~ on ~en.~u~t.of ~e Ci¥ Fa~li~es must be ~n~ to D s~ ~a~s and Dis~ plan ~ and msp~ ~;s p~je~ p~ ~nne]s, ~to~ ~min~ 36 in~ or la~ in di~eter, or o~er fa~liU~ ~t ~uld be ~ or mo~y ~m~r [nE [9 ~e rl~ .~n~ ul~ pool to i~a~ m =ui~djng or gma n~i~ ~ever ~s nm;. r~ to ~ pma s~uld ~ ~ ~e ~e ~n ~ at ~e time ~ issuan~ ~e a~a pe~it. GENE~L INFO~A~ON ~iW nas oete~m~ mgu~men~, a~ sn~l~ m~er .~u[m ~t me app[l~n[ ob~lo a ~ifi~al Le~ o[MqE Re,sion (CLOMR) prior to gramS, ~mauon or om~ 2o~n a ~gn ;~u;nuu~ ~gr~m~nt ~ me ualifom[a ue~ent of Fish and G~ a~ a Clean Water A~ ~ n~ Fe~ ~ ~. p.S. ~y uo~s of ~g(n~m ? ~en ~s~naen~ ~m ~se age,es ~no~u~ m~ p~[~ ~sgxgmpt ;om m~e [~u~mmems. ~ u~ean water ~ S~on 401 Water Quali~ CeYlon may ~ r~u;r~ ~m me ;~1 Calgomia Region~ W~er Quali~ ConSol Board prior to issuan~ ~ ~e C~s 4~ perm Very truly yours. T E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer Date:. ~-~-' ~c:~ '~ ATTACHMENT NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\CC Staff Report,doc 13 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION July 31, 2002 Planning Applications No. PA01-0522 (Zone Change) Planning Application No. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) Prepared By: Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward these projects to the City Council with a recommendation for approval: 1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANTTO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PA01- 0522 AND PA00-0470, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FoR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -004 & 959-070-001 THRU -006. 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY- 5 (PDO-5), AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND ADOPTING THE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PDO DOCUMENT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH R:\C U P~.000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 1 BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -004 & 959-070-001 THRU -006." 3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOR THE OPERATION OF A 146,826 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH COMPLEX ON A 39-ACRE SITE, INCLUDING A 1,500- SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY; A 300 SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL; A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER; A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRE-SCHOOL; AND THE PLACEMENT OF SEVENTEEN (17) MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -004 & 959-070-003 THRU -006. 4. ADOPTa Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND SCHOOL CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE 1,800 STUDENTS ON A 39-ACRE SITE. THE OVERALL PROPOSAL WILL INCLUDE 146,826 SQUARE FEET OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION WHICH INCLUDES: A 1,500-SEAT, 26,927 SQUARE FOOT, INTERIM SANCTUARY WITH ASSEMBLY ROOM AND NURSERY, A 300- SEAT, 5,856 SQUARE FOOT CHAPEL, A 11,860 SQUARE FOOT ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING, A 3,500 SEAT, 43,727 SQUARE FOOT WORSHIP CENTER, AND A TWO STORY-FOUR LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE (WITH 918 SPACES TOTALING 380,023 SQUARE FEET); AND 136,771 SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR FIRST THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE CONSISTING OF: AN INTERIM MODULAR SCHOOL CAMPUS R:\C U P~000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 2 WITH A TOTAL OF 17 MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING 64,156 SQUARE FEET, A 28,826 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE SCHOOL, A 17,900 SQUARE FOOT HIGH SCHOOL, A 9,695 SQUARE FOOT PRESCHOOL, TWO-UNIT FIELD HOUSE/ RESIDENCE BUILDINGS, AND A 16,194 SQUARE FOOT GYMNASIUM; AND A TWO STORY, 44,406 SQUARE FOOT ADMINISTRATION/OFFICE BUILDING, LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH BEGINNING 480 FEET EAST OF JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND CONTINUING EAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 FEET, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF LOT 3 AND LOTS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 OF TRACT NO. 15211; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-060-001 THRU -004 & 959- 070-003 THRU -006. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Rancho Community Chumh, 29141 Vallejo Ave., Temecula, CA 92592 PROPOSALS: LOCATION: PA01-0522, a Zone Change to establish a Planned Development Overlay and modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 55 acres including a church, school and office/commercial uses over property located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 4,000 feet. PA00-0470, a Conditional Use Permit to operate a church and private school with 146,826 square feet of total religious building area, and 1,800 students and 136,771 square feet of total school building area; and to place seventeen (17) temporary modular classrooms on a 39-acre site, located on the north side of the State Route 79 South, beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 3,000 feet. PA00-0470, a Development Plan Development Plan to for the design and construction of a church and school campus to accommodate 1,800 students on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 146,826 square feet of religious institution which includes: a 1,500-seat, 26,927 square foot, interim sanctuary with assembly room and nursery, a 300-seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, a 11,860 square foot adult education building, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a two story-four level parking structure (with a 918 spaces totaling 380,023 square feet); and 136,771 square feet of school facilities for Kindergarten through twelfth grade classroom facilities consisting of: two interim modular school campus with a total of 17 modular classroom buildings, two elementary school building totaling 64,156 square feet, a 28,826 square foot middle school, a 17,900 square foot high school, a 9,695 square foot preschool, two-unit field house/residence buildings, lit athletic fields, and a 16,194 square foot gymnasium; and a two story, 44,406 square foot administration/office building; located on north side of State Highway 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for approximately 3,000 feet. On the north side of State Route 79 South beginning 480 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road and continuing east for 4,000 feet for property known as Lots 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 of Tract No. 15211; also known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-060-001 thru -004 & 959-070-001 thru -006. R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 3' GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: PO (Professional Office) with Z-1 overlay PO (Professional Office) North: VL (Very Low Density Residential) South: PDO-4 and LM (Low Medium Density Residential) East: PO (Professional Office) West: VL (Very Low Density Residential) Vacant North: Single family detached homes South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Single family detached homes PROJECT STATISTICS-PHASEI AREA (SF) LOT HEIGHT OF PARKING PARKING SPACED BUILDING USE COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING ORDINANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED FAMILY LIFE CENTER/INTERIM SANCTUARY ASSEMBLY ROOM & NURSERY-SEAT. CAP. 1,500 29,927 (1.58%) 29,927 41' - 6" 1/3 SEATS 500 500 CHAPEL SEATING CAPACITY 300 5,856 (0.34%) 5,856 38' - 6" 1/3 SEATS 100 100 SUBTOTAL PARKING - CHURCH USE: 600 600 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING TWO STORY - OFFICES 11,102 (1.30%) 22,203 31' - 8" 1/300 SF 74 74 PRESCHOOL BUILDINGS 8 CLASSROOMS & 1/2 EMPLOYEES ADMINISTRATION 9,695 (0.57%) 9,695 26' - 8" + 1/5 CHILDREN 22 22 ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING 11,860 (0.70%) 11,860 26' o 8" 1/35 SF 339 339 SUBTOTAL PARKING - SCHOOL USE: 1,035 1,035 17 - MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS 24,480 (1.36%) 24,480 13' - 6" TOTALS: 921920 (5.85%) 104,021 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES 1,035 R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 4 PROJECT STATISTICS - PHASE II AREA (SF) LOT HEIGHT OF PARKING PARKING SPACED BUILDING USE COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING ORDINANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED ADMINISTRATION BUILDING T~NO STORY - OFFICES 22,203 (1.30%) 22,203 31' - 8" 1/300 SF 148 148 BUILDING #1 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TWO STORY 23,083 (1.35%) 46,256 37' - 7.5" 1.5/CLASSROOM 54 54 ADULT EDUCATION BUILDING 11,860 (0.70%) 11,860 26' - 8" 1/35 SF 339 339 2-FIELD HOUSE BUILDINGS - STORAGE / MAINTENANCE - 2 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 5,000 (0.29%) 10,000 23' - 1' 1/UNIT 4 4 SUBTOTAL PARKING - SCHOOL USE 545 545 2 of 3-STORAGE / MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS 4,050 (0.24%) 4050 14' - 7" TOTALS: 66,196 (3.88%) 94,369 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES: 545 PROJECT STATISTICS - PHASE III AREA (SF) LOT HEIGHT OF PARKING PARKING SPACED BUILDING USE COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING ORDINANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED BUILDING #2 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TWO STORY 8,950 (0.52%) 17,900 37' - 0~ 1.5/CLASSROOM 23 23 BUILDING #4 - HIGH SCHOOL TVVO STORY 8,960 (0.52%) 17,900 37' - 0" 8/CLASSROOM 120 120 BUILDING #5 - GYMNASIUM 16,194 (0.95%) 16,194 29' - 0~ 1/200 SF 81 81 SUBTOTAL PARKING - SCHOOL USE 224 224 3RD-STORAGE / MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS 4,050 (0.24%) 4050 14' - 7" 9- MODULAR CLASSROOM BUILDINGS (1,440)(0.08%) -24,480 13'- 6" TOTALS: 38,144 (2.31%) 31~564 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES: 224 R:\C U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 5 PROJECT STATISTICS - PHASE IV AREA (SF) LOT HEIGHT OF PARKING PARKING SPACED BUILDING USE COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING ORDINANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED 3UILDING #3 - MIDDLE SCHOOL 'I'~NO STORY 14,413 (0.85%) 28,826 37' - 7.5" 1.5/CLASSROOM 30 30 3UILDING #5 - GYMNASIUM 16,194 (0.95%) 16,194 29' - 0" 1/200 SF 81 81 TOTALS: 30,607 (1.80%) 45,020 111 111 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES: 111 PROJECT STATISTICS - PHASE V AREA (SF) LOT HEIGHT OF PARKING PARKING SPACED BUILDING USE COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING ORDINANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED NORSHIP CENTER ASSEMBLY :{OOM & CHOiR-SEAT. CAP. 3,500 43,727 (3.56%) 43,727 35' - 6" 1/3 SEATS 1,167 1,167 =ARKING STRUCTURE - 'I'VVO STORY (918 SPACES) 97,426 (5.71%) 380,023 47'- 6" TOTALS: 141,153(9.27%) 423,750 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES: 1,167 BACKGROUND The applicant submitted a formal application for a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan (PA00- 0470) on November 16, 2000. A Development Review Committee meeting was held on December 14, 2000, at which time the applicant was reminded of their need to process a Planned Development Overlay prior to the processing of any development proposals. On April 27, 2001, the first draft of the PDO was submitted and the formal application (PA01-0522) was filed October 23, 2001. The third and final set of revised plans for the chumh and school were submitted May 17, 2002, and all departments completed their reviews. Upon completing the review, the Initial Study was cimulated for public comment on July 1, 2002, and both applications were scheduled for hearing. A sub-committee comprised of Mayor Roberts, a Planning Commissioner Chairman Chiniaeff, the City Manager, and Department Heads was established to assist in the review and discussion of possibly sensitive issues related to a project of this size. The sub-committee first met with the applicant in December of 2001 and again in March of 2002. To get a sense of the community's concerns the City hosted a neighborhood meeting and invited every property owner within a 600-foot radius. From that meeting staff was provided with some insight into the potential issues. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Zone Chanqe/Planned Development Overlay The City of Temecula's General Plan Land Use Map designates approximately 90 acres of property on the north side of SR-79 South as Professional Office (PO). The General Plan Land Use Element designates this property as Specific Plan Area Overlay (Z-1 and Z-2) for 'those portions of the community, which because of size, location, and special development opportunities require a coordinated, Comprehensive planning approach." R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Cornrnunily Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 6 The applicant proposes to amend the zoning map designation from PO (professional Office) to PDO-5 (Planned Development Overlay) for a 54-acre site. In addition, a PDO document has been submitted which contains specific development standards to guide the proposed and future development of the site. The document inclu(~es detailed development standards for the two planning areas, consisting of a church/school campus and a professional/commercial center. The development standards in the PDO are similar to those in the Development Code for Professional Office, with the exception of maximum building heights. The Code permits a maximum building height of 75 feet in the PO Zone, however the General Plan Policy for the Z-1 overlay is one or two stories maximum. To achieve consistency with the General Plan, the PDO proposes a maximum building height of 40 feet and two stories, and 45 feet for large assembly buildings and parking structures. Design standards contained in the PDO describe a Spanish-American architecture style as "characterized by understated elegance and simplicity incorporating the careful use of details to enhance it attractiveness and function." Within the PDO document are conceptual site layouts depicting possible future development of the easterly portion of the site area designated for a professional/commercial center. Any future development of the property in this area will be subject to the City's application review process at the time a development proposal is requested. Conditional Use Permit The draft PDO lists "religious institutions with private schools" as requiring a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, a CUP is required to locate 17 modular classrooms on the site until such time that permanent structures are constructed. The modular buildings will be used as temporary classrooms until permanent classrooms are constructed during Phases II through IV. The placement of the modular units will occur at two locations, one near the eastern entrance to the site and once at the future site of the worship center. The church and school campus will encompass 39 acres on the westerly portion of the site. The campus will have approximately 3000 lineal feet of frontage along Highway 79, and include two signalized entries and one limited access entry. The church complex will ultimately have a maximum seating capacity of 3,500 people in the worship center, 300 people in the chapel, an 11,860 square foot adult education building, and a 44,000 square foot joint administration building. Development Plan Using the PDO document as a development guide, the Development Plan application includes the site layout and design of all structures on the westerly 39-acre portion of the 54-acre site. The applicant is proposing the design and development of a church and school campus on 39 acres along the north side of SR-79 South. This project has approximately 3,400 lineal along the highway and includes two major, signalized entries and one limited access entry. The eastern most access will be a new street that will align with Avenida de Missiones and the central access drive will align with the commercial and residential project to the south. On the western end of the property will be a limited access (right-in/right-out) entry point serving the sports fields and providing alternative access to the site. A new public street, Rancho Pueblo Road, will serve as the eastern access to the site, the church and school campus and the future commercial property. Turning west off of Rancho Pueblo will be Chapel Lane, a private drive that circulates through the campus and exits onto SR-79 South. Along R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 7 the north side of this drive will be the majority of the buildings making up the church and school campus. The only structures on the south side will be an office building and the future parking structure. The church and school are somewhat intertwined with a grouping of church facilities in the center the elementary and daycare building on the east side, and the junior and high school buildings on the west side. All buildings on this campus are designed as a derivative of Spanish-American architecture using colonnades (actual or relief) with tile roofs, tower elements at major entries, square and rectangular recessed windows, split face block wainscot and stucco wall finishes, and Spanish tile mansard roofs. Church: The core of the church facility is made up of the Worship Center, Family Life Center, the Chapel, and the Adult Education Building all fronting to a common plaza. At the center of the site, set for development in Phase I, is the Family Life Center: a 27,000 square foot multi-purpose building that will initially serve as the congregation's sanctuary and meeting hall and as a gymnasium for the school. This building is rectangular, lying east to west, with a forward projecting and vertical stepping tower on the south side of the building facing into a plaza. To the southwest of the Family Life Center will be the 5,800 square foot Chapel with seating for 300. Architecturally, it is very characteristic of the early California Mission style with the bell tower and heavy eave overhang of the pitched tile roof. This building will serve as a special facility for smaller gatherings in a more intimate setting. An adult education building of 11,850 square feet will be made up of assembly areas, classrooms and a kitchen. This facility will serve both the church and school operations and is central to the common plaza serving all the church buildings. At the intersection of SR-79 South and Rancho Pueblo Road, will be an administration building. This is a two-story 44,000 square foot building that will be built in two phases. The northern half is proposed in Phase I with the second half to be completed in Phase II. It will provide administrative office space for both the church and school operations and can be offered as commercial office spaces if not entirely utilized by the church and school. The Worship Center is the largest (43,727 square feet with a 3,500 seating capacity) structure on the site and is set for development in the final phase. This building utilizes the entire range of architectural elements found on the Family Life Center and is consistent with the PDO design standards set for this development area. The development of the Worship Center will increase the parking needs for the site beyond that which can be provide on the available land. To provide for the parking a four level, two-story parking structure is proposed. It will cover 97,426 square feet (380,023 square feet total) and measures 365 feet by 270 feet, making it the largest structure on the site. The tallest elements of the parking structure are the 47-foot high tower features, over the southwest and the northeast corners, while the bulk of the building will be 34 feet tall. To minimize the size of the building along the street elevation (south), a portion of the upper deck is recessed back 20 feet. Planter boxes are used in the mid-section of the south elevation to accommodate plant material that can cascade from each level and provide some vertical relief and screening for the upper three levels. School: The school facilities will consist of two elementary classroom buildings, a junior high and high school buildings, a gymnasium, preschool, two field houses, three storage/maintenance buildings, and two interim modular classrooms campus clusters. At build-out the permanent campus is anticipated to accommodate 1,800 students. R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7~31-02.doc 8 Initial operation of the school is intended to serve the school's current student enrollment of 600 to 700 students, with the assembly of the two modular campus sites made up of 17 modular units and the construction of a 9,695 square foot preschool. One modular is proposed along the north property line (Modular Campus A) near the eastern entry to the site at Rancho Pueblo and Chapel Lane. The other campus (Modular Campus B) is located on the future site of the Worship Center. The preschool will be a permanent structure and is designed with an internal court/play area and maintains the thematic architectural style with the use of two modest tower elements on the northwest and southwest corners of the building. All of the other permanent classroom buildings utilize the same amhitectural styling. The classroom buildings will be two-story rectangular structures with a large central element capped with a pitched tile roof and flanked by opposing wings with parapet walls topped with an accenting cornice. Inset mansard roof features and trellised entries are used to break up the length of these wings. The primary finish of the exterior walls will be stucco with a three-foot high wainscot at the base and a pre-cast concrete ledger use as a floor break between the first and second floors. These building will be constructed in Phase II through Phase IV with the elementary school's Building 1, at 46,256 square feet, with 36 classrooms including a library and administration offices, being the first permanent classroom building to be constructed. Other buildings to be constructed in subsequent phases include the elementary school's Building 2 at 17,900 square feet and offering 15 classrooms; the middle school at 28,826 square feet with 20 classrooms, a library, and administration offices; the high school at 17,900 square feet with 15 classrooms; the gymnasium (built in two phases) at 16,194 square feet with assemble rooms, kitchen, and training room. Additionally, two two-story field houses will be built. Each will be 5,000 square feet with storage and maintenance room, snack bar, and locker rooms downstairs and two studio style caretaker facilities upstairs. In conjunction with the construction of the school buildings, several ball fields will be built. On the east end of the site will be a small baseball and soccer field. ']'he western third of the site will have two baseball fields, a soccer field, and volleyball courts. The applicant is proposing to light these fields for evening play and other outdoor events. Phasinq: This project is intended for development over several years and consist of into five phases. The first phase of development will see the construction of the Family Life Center/Interim Sanctuary, the Chapel, pre-school, modular classrooms, the administration building, and the elementary play fields. Subsequent phases will initiate construction of permanent classroom buildings and other church facilities. In the final phase of development will be the Worship Center, which will have a 3,500-seat capacity. Parking needs for this building requires the construction of the four level parking structure. All the phases of development are separated in the Phasing breakdown provided earlier in this report. With the development of each phase will come additional site improvements both to accommodate the needs of the development and/or to meet project mitigation measures. It should be noted that there might be some deviation in the phased development due to actual space needs or budgetary constraints. Parkin~l: All the parking lots around the side and rear perimeters of the school campus will serve dual purposes as hard surface play areas and parking areas for church activities. These areas have forgone the typical landscape buffering and planter islands installed for shading and screening to maintain open unobstructed play areas for student activities. However, the parking areas along SR- 79 South have been designed with landscape buffers and planter islands. At the site of the future parking structure is a parking lot with 343 spaces with perimeter landscape buffering planters but R:\C U P~000'tO0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 9 without any internal planter islands. This area will be utilized as a parking area until such time that the parking structure is necessary. Landscaping Along SR-79 South will be an abundant 36 foot deep landscape buffer to enhance the stmetscape and to serve and a buffer to the church and school. This buffer will include Peppem and London Plane trees are the dominant tree and a variety of shrubs and grown covers. Internal to the site landscaping is used around all of the building and in raised plantem in the plaza. A single mw of Sweet Bay trees lines the rear of the property as a buffer to the residences. Overall the site has 21.3% landscaping and another 9.4% in patios and plazas utilizing 30.7% of the site without counting the sports fields. Siqns: Them are a number of signs being proposed along SR-79 South. Identifying the chumh will be a single monument sign 7'4" tall and 15' wide located midway between the two signalized intemections leading into the site. At the west signalize entry will be a 21' tall 12' wide tower sign with reader board for both Rancho Community Church and School. Proposed on the northwest corner of the east entry at Rancho Pueblo Road is a 12-foot tall by 12 foot wide multi-tenant sign with.10 inserts for use by the tenants in the administration building. Walls: Along SR-79 South will be a masonry wall between the two signalized entries and a three mil white fence with chain link insert from the west property line to the west signalized entry. The masonry wall can be up to six feet in height and will have pilaster breaks at 60-foot intervals providing the opportunity for wall offsets to break up its long lineal length. Both the wall and fence will be on top of an earthen berm of up to four feet in height with abundant landscaping to accent, buffer, and aid in screening the site. Along the rear of the site will be a rail white fence. ANALYSIS Environmental Determination Staff has prepared and cimulated an Initial Study and determined that the project could potentially result in significant environmental impacts, unless mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval. Based on those findings, staff has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan will satisfactorily comply with the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The impacts of primary significance are traffic, air quality, geology, and hydrology. Traffic concerns dealt with the need for traffic signals and ama. The increase in the A.M. peak trips generated by a school as compared to professional office uses will result in higher morning traffic generated by school use. Because schools let out before the heavier afternoon traffic houm there would be no P.M. traffic conflicts. it was determined that the overall A.M. peak trip count can be reduced through one of two methods: alternate access, staggered start times for the three school levels with some consideration for the use of carpooling or shuttle services, or secondary access to the east (Dartolo Road). To be sure this access is provided, the City is working on a General Plan Amendment that would require an internal east-west connection across all properties designated with the Z-1 and Z-2 overlay. Therefore, the project has been conditioned to stagger houm until such time the access is provided along the north side of SR-79 South. R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 10 Based on the air quality report provided for this project, the SCAQMD threshold for Nitrous Oxide would be exceeded by 4% while other mobile source emissions were below their respective significance thresholds. The study indicated that this excess could be easily reduced through carpooling at the present time, and would be further reduced over time by current vehicle emission standards. To achieve the reduction a mitigation measure has been imposed requiring the establishment of a carpooling program for the school. Geological this site has some stability issues, which will be over come with common building practices. The most significant issue is the fault that bisects the property. The development of the site recognized the fault line and complied with the requirements to keep structures out of the fault zone. Any potential impact will be mitigated as the site develops in compliance with the Geotechnical Report prepared for this site. Drainage from this site will increase and as a result a new drainage channel must be install across a neighboring parcel. The development of the project is required to complete this mitigation measure as part of construction. Zone Change/Planned Development Overlay The General Plan for this area under the Z-1 designation sets the following key objectives: 'q'o achieve a comprehensively planned mixed-use development with compatible/ complementary mixtures of office, support commercial, residential, and services. The project shall be limited in height to one or two stories and designated to be compatible with existing ranch style residential. The project should take advantage of the unique opportunity to incorporate open space resources into the design, scale, and orientation of the development. The City recognizes that given the site configuration and location that certain commercial recreation uses may be desirable including, but not limited to, bowling alley, driving ranges, and health clubs." The PDO document has established the development standards and permitted uses for the entire 54 acres under review. Additionally, this document includes detailed information about the two planning areas for the church/school campus and the professional/commercial center, circulation and roadway design standards, design guidelines, and other information providing examples of streetscape themes, plazas and courtyards, site orientation, and sign standards pertaining to the large-scale development required for this property. The combined collection of elements provides a comprehensive set of guidelines for the current and future development. Staff, therefore, believes that it meets the objectives of the General Plan and that the impact of the project as mitigated, will be no greater than with professional office development. Because the PDO establishes a design theme and development limits on the entire 54 acres, development is assured of being unified. The added benefit is that the church and school will help offer diversity of uses along a major commercial thoroughfare. The development of the remaining property under the PDO will be reviewed and assessed by the City to verify that those proposals will achieve the continuity of a well-planned development. Uses: Issues of concern to staff regarding the PDO relate to a few uses, some development standards, and some minor text and exhibit corrections to the document. Staff is recommending some modifications to the Use Matrix as follows: Bowling Alley Mini-storage Permitted Use Not Permitted R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 11 Modular Classrooms/buildings Conditional Use Sports fields (with or without related school use) Conditional Use · Bowling Alleys should be a permitted use for consistency with the General Plan Z-1 policies because of its thought of this property has the unique opportunity to offer commercial recreation uses. · Mini-storage, though a conditionally permitted use, should not be a permitted use because it is not a compatible land use adjacent to single family residences and is not an efficient use of prime retail space. · Modular Classrooms/buildings should be listed a conditionally permitted use due generally to their the temporary nature and aesthetics, so that time limits can be placed on their use, location, and appearance. · Sports fields (with or without related school use) should be listed as a conditionally permitted use because of the impact day or evening sporting events or other activities may have on the surrounding properties by having the ability to limit the hours and days of activities and the various operational aspects such as lighting. Si,qnage: The PDO describes the establishment of a hierarchy of signs within the project area. Although, the establishment of a PDO and a sign program allow for some variation from the City's Development Code standards, there are a few variations that do not generally conform with other signs in the City, therefore, staff is recommending the following modifications: · Entry wall signs ara not well defined in both text and exhibits, therefore staff is recommending limiting this type of sign mounting area to a height of four (4) feet · Tower with Electronic Signage should be limited to a height of 12 feet. The proposed 21 -foot tall reader board sign far exceeds the maximum height of a commercial center identification sign height of 12 feet. By co~nparison, the tallest signs approved in the past few years were the 18-foot high theater marquee signs at the Promenade Mall. Although reader board signs are not permitted by code, message boards are permitted, therefore staff is comfortable in permitting this sign with the condition that is not be used for flashing or constantly changing copy. · Multi-Tenant Signs should be limited to a height of eight (8) feet. Three signs are proposed at the maximum size typically used to identify tenants within a large shopping center. Sign regulations for multi-tenant buildings in the Professional Office District permits a freestanding sign that identifies the building only. As defined under the commercial standards, multi-tenant signs should have half of the sign area used for a single tenant. However, in the past, lower profile signs (8 feet) have been permitted, in shopping center sign programs, with up to six tenant listings of equal size. · Walls and fences shall be limited to a maximum of height of six (6) feet with the tops of walls or fences being no higher than eight (8) feet as measured from the adjacent street curb grade. Within the PDO document there are inconsistencies with the wall height. On page 24, paragraph 6, the screen wall height is listed as 4-5 feet in height and figures 9, 16, and 17 have list 2-4 feet, while figure 30 shows 6 feet. The text and figures shall be amended for consistency and shall include language that limits the overall height of the earthen berm and wall to an overall height of 8 feet from top of curb as measured from street grade. R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 12 Conditional Use Permit As part of the development review process staff, solicited comments from the surrounding neighbors/residences at a neighborhood meeting regarding the proposal to develop this property for a church and school. Most responses to this use were favorable because most people felt the property would otherwise develop into commemial uses, thereby generating continuous traffic and noise for the adjacent homeowner. What did arise out of the meeting were concerns about: the installation and use of lighting on the sports fields, the extent of their use (hours and days), and outdoor special events. Liqhtinq: Lighting of the sports field was not completely considered in the review because lighting studies were not prepared for review by city staff. Although lights are shown on the plans, no judgment can be made on the likely impact on the surrounding area with regard to light nuisance. Some requested to not have lit ball fields at all, while others felt they would be acceptable if they were not used past 9 or 10 P.M., nor used every night of the week. Many of these concerns were founded on the idea that the city would be involved with these fields and would arrange for league activities. The city has indicated that it is not interested in establishing a joint use arrangement with the school. Staff believes that if lights are to be used, there must be a complete assessment of their impact, and that this assessment should be in the form of an independent application for review and consideration by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. Staff has placed a condition to this effect upon the project. Beyond using the field for sports there were concerns raised at the meeting about their use for activities of a City-wide or regional nature. To assure that the field are not used by outside organizations, a condition has been included limiting the ball field use to church and school activities. In addition, there were concerns expressed about the specific events to be held on the site throughout the year. Staff has conditioned the project to permit only church and sponsored school events. Modular Campuses: The City understands the need for temporary facilities to be put in place until such time that permanent structures can be built. The use of modular classroom on this site is acceptable to staff but there are two concerns: the visibility of the modular units and the duration of their use. As located on the site, Campus "A" with it's eight modular units will be near the residences units along the north property line while the other nine units of Campus "B" will be at the heart of the site on what is the site of the future Worship Center. As depicted on the plans for the two modular campuses, there is a minimum of landscaping being provided to screen either campus from the surrounding areas. Some of this buffering may be accomplished by the early installation of perimeter landscaping or other onsite landscaping. Conditions have been added to provide additional landscaping buffers around the modular sites and for the preparation of a phased landscape plan that will accomplish the buffering requested. The other concern of the modular campuses is the duration of their use. Although Campus "A" (northern) is removed in Phase III and Campus "B" is to be removed in Phase IV, the timing cannot be definitively defined. Development progress on each phase, as described by the applicant should be about two years between each phase. The starting date of subsequent phases will be based on needs and finances and may be accelerated or delayed. If each phase began just two years after the subsequent phase it would be from four to six years and six to eight years before both campuses would be removed. Should anything delay the phases these time lines could be pushed out even R:\C U P~2000~0-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff reporl PC 7-31-02.doc 13 longer. As discussed by the applicant the modular campuses are only temporary and should not be needed beyond five years. A condition of approval has been added that sets a five-year limit on the use of modular units. The overall design of the modular buildings offers a consistent style that carries over common elements of the overall site. The school buildings all use a central tower with pitched roof while the church uses amhed .colonnades and towers at their entries. Development Plan Landscape: The landscape plan provides a variety of trees and shrubs along the highway, and staff believes it will enhance the area. At this time there are two major projects on the south side of the highway that are under development and review and staff wants to be sure that there is a coordination between all three of these project to create some streetscape continuity. Staff has added a condition allowing for minor modifications to the current plan if modifications should be necessary. Aesthetics: Of concern from the highway will be the public view of the developed site. Traveling east to west on SR-79 highway along the project site at build-out one would see a meandering sidewalk and parkway followed by a twenty foot deep landscape buffer that will include a four foot high landscaped berm and a masonry wall or white rail fence. Beyond the landscape buffer screen wall, at roughly 70 to 80 feet into the site, will be the administration building at the corner of Rancho Pueblo Road, followed by the 365-foot length of the parking structure. Continuing along the highway, setback 116 feet into the site will be the worship center with 240 feet of street exposure. The remaining buildings, more than 220 feet into the site and visible from the highway will be the chapel, the middle school, the gymnasium and high school buildings. The administration building has a fairly large landscape buffer to enhance its street-oriented elevations. However, the parking structure will rely on the thirty-six foot wide streetscape landscaping as the primary buffer. For additional screening there are five small finger islands at the base of the structure and landscape planters on the second, third, and fourth parking levels to provide additional buffering. To ensure that sufficient planting area provided, staff is recommending that the secondary backdrop of landscaping at the base of the structure be widened to the size of the five landscape fingers. A condition has also been included to install landscape planter boxes on the other elevations of the parking structure to provide additional softening from the upper parking level. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The development of this property requires compliance with the General Plan to establish special specific plan overlays to achieve a comprehensively planned mixed-use development along Highway 79 South. The prepared Planned Development Overlay (under PA01-0522) has accomplished this objective by creating a comprehensive document for the current proposal and future development. This project's approval requires a change to the City's Zoning Map and amendment to the Development Code creating zoning that is intended to be compatible with the surrounding land uses without impacting the community. The Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit (PA00-0470) for the church and school campus will be compatible and consistent with the surrounding area by way of the standards set contained in the Planned Development document. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 14 City Councils approval of PA01-0522 (Zoning Amendment) and PA00-0470 (Development Plan/ Conditional Use Permit) for a church and school campus. FINDINGS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Code Section 17.04.010E) 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the underlying site plan for this project, the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. 2. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that the proposed conditional use permit, with conditions, is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. 3. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Planning staff has reviewed the requirements of the performance standards delineated in the Planned Development Overlay, as well as the applicable sections of the Development Code. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed conditional use meets the zoning requirements for integration into the surrounding neighborhood. 4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Provisions are made in the General Plan, the Planned Development Overlay, and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded with the operation of the church and school facilities. The project is consistent with these documents and will be conditioned to meet all applicable requirements. 5. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. FINDINGS - DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop a church and school campus is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Office Professional and with the adoption of the Planned Development Overlay for this area, in as much as it sets development standards that permit schools and sets height limitations such as two story building heights. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 15 The overall development of the land as conditioned, and designed protects the public health, safety, and general we/fare. The development plan forthe site is consistent with the Planned Development Over/ay document and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines regarding safe site design, signalized access points, assigned student drop-off areas and structures that can be developed to meet building and safety codes. The aesthetics' of the site and structure will both compliment and enhance the surrounding homes and the community. Provisions have been made to create a safe environment for people and to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Attachments: 6. 7. 8. PC Resolution - CEQA - Blue Page 17 PC Resolution - Change of Zone - Blue Page 18 Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval PC Resolution - Conditional Use Permit - Blue Page 19 Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval PC Resolution - Development Plan - Blue Page 20 Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval Letters of Correspondence - Blue Page 21 PDO Document - Blue Page 22 Initial Study/Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 23 Exhibits - Blue Page 24 A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. General Plan D. Site Plan E. Site Plan (Detailed) F. Phasing Plan G. Modular Campuses H. Building Elevations and Floor · Chapel · Family Life Center · Preschool · Administration/Office Building · Elementary School · High School · Middle School · Gymnasium · Adult Education · Field House · Storage and Maintenance Building · Main Sanctuary · Parking Structure I. Landscape Plan J. Rendering R:\C U P~000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02,doc 16 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE R:~c U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 21 Mr. & Mrs. Donald J. Moreau, 30430 De Portola Road, Temecula, Ca 92592, July 16th, 2002 Attention: Mr. Thomas Thornsle¥ City of Temecula Planning Commission, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590. Gentlemen: Re: Rancho Community Church Project - SR 79 We live in the Los Runchitos area and we would like to go on re cord as opposing two aspects of the Rancho Community Church project on SR 79 South. First is the lighted sports rields and secondly, the parking structure. We have a quiet residential area and when-we.moved here eight-years ago it was semi rural. We know the City is growing and that is frae but we could not have foreseen lighted ball fields backing up to our houses. If the sports fields are allowed to be lighted, the noise from them and the glare from the lights will go on into the night making it difficult to enjoy our outdoor living and entertaining in the evening. We feel certain Commissioner Mathewson would understand our concerns as he and his community successfully fought the same problem. Why does the Church need two ball fields? Is the City planning on entering into an agreement with the Church to rent them out? If those fields are lighted, the Church will be renting out the fields to leagues and due to the shortage of sports fields, they will be filled every night. It is not our fault that there is a shortage and we should not have to suffer for it. As far as the parking saructure is concerned, the height- 37 feet going up to 41 feet for the towers - is higher than the two storeys promised by the Church as per the attached letter. The structure is not an attractive element of the project. We would appreciate your consideration of these concerns before approving the project as it stands. Thank you for your time. Yours very truly, City of Temecula Planning Commission, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 Gentlemen: RE: RANCHO COMMUNITY CHURCH PROJECT - SR-79 We, the undersigned, hereby wish to make the following comments: !. We are opposed to the lighted sports fields. 2. The current height of the parking structure should be reduced. As it is now, it is the same height as originally planned by the Church- four storeys. The Church agreed to reduce this height as per attached letter. 3. A time limit should be set to replace the 17 modular classroom buildings,which ATTACHMENT NO. 8 EXHIBITS R:\c U P~2000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 24 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522 (Zone Change) PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 31,2002 VICINITY MAP R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 34 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B DESIGNATION - PO (Professional Office) ZONING MAP EXHIBIT C GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - PO (Professional Office) PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0522 (Zone Change) PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 31,2002 R:\C U P\2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff repor~ PC 7-31-02.doc 35 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) EXHIBIT D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 31,2002 SITE PLAN R:\C U P~2000~00-0470 Rancho Community Church~Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 36 EXHIBIT 8E SITE PLAN (DETAILED) EXHIBIT 8F PHASING PLAN // !? 0 // ,! !Ii EXHIBIT 8G MODULAR CAMPUSES EXHIBIT 8H BUILDING ELAVATIONS AND FLOOR PLANS qoJnq~) ~ ~eun,,,wo:~ oqour>aJI ~ ~ ~'~ i~ ~ 0 0 qoJnq~) ~ ~ qoJnqo/qluntumo3 oqout)~l ~ qoJnq~)/,l!unwwoD oqouo~l t Ig :J 0 0 7]--- Z -¸11 qoJnq~/q!uncucuoooq~,uo~ ! ~ ~ 1 i J qc,~nq:::)/4!umumoD, oqouo~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-' i~ ~< 0 O '0 0 0 I! qoJnqo/q!unLut, uo:D oqouD~l ~: ,~ qo~nq~>/qlunw,,,o:> oqour)~ 0 Z /tilunu.a.uo~) oqoul:)~llt .~ /q. lun u~cuo3 o.o,.oam) ) ~3Jntlo ,~l!unu.l~o~) oqouDa j~ ~ ~ j .cO C LIoJnq:) ~ ~ XIBunmwo3oqouoal~ ~ ~ I } J qoJnq:) ~ < ~ ,~,unmmo:) oq:)u~alt ~ I i C ,~l!un~ucuoo oqouo~Jl~ J '( '0 0 0 l: oc:~ qojntlO/d,!un,,,'"oo oqouo~t ~ ~ ~ tlo~nq:3/,l!untutuo:D oqou~t:l i l~ /~ II I} I1 ~ q~nq~) A~.unLuu~o~) oqouo$ ~' ~*' 1~ ~ qo~nq~) Al!unLu'"o~) oqouo~l i ~, ,I · x I 4444J444~4 I~ ~.1 · I ~,? I I qoJnqo ~llunu. IuJOO oqouo~] ~¢ ~ ~-~ i~ · ! qo~n~jtl.tuntuu~o3 oqou~l ~ ~ f } > EXHIBIT 81 LANDSCAPE PLAN CITY OFTEMECULA Rancho Community Church & Schools Family Ufe Center, Temecula, CA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0470 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) EXHIBIT I~ PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 31,2002 RENDERING R:\C U P~000\00-0470 Rancho Community Church\Staff report PC 7-31-02.doc 26 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY D RECTOR OF CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manage r/C~i~j~ Debbie Ubnosl~, Director of Planning September 24, 2002 Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department in the month of August 2002. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 7._~0 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations and _9 applications for public hearings during the month of August. The new public hearing cases are as follows: Development Plan Lot Line Adjustment Massage Establishment Substantial Conformance Variance 4 1 1 2 1 Status of Maior Projects Staff is working with project applicants to address any remaining issues and prepare the following cases for public hearing before the Director of Planning or Planning Commission: Roripaugh Ranch Annexation - Specific Plan, Environmental Impact Report and Development Agreement. Staff is currently reviewing and finalizing all the documents for the project. The project is tentatively scheduled for the October 16, 2002, Planning Commission hearing. Staff is planning to provide the documents to the Planning Commission well in advance of the hearing. Villages of Old Town - Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Report have been submitted. Staff has stopped reviewing the project until the applicant provides staff with more information on how they intend to proceed with their project. Rancho Community Church - Application to design, construct and operate a church and school campus on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 292,745 square feet of religious and school facilities with two four level (two story) parking structure (162,600 square feet and R:~MONTHLY.RP'r~2002~August 2002 ReporLdoc 1 380,023 square feet). The site will be developed in a number of phases beginning with a 1,500 seat, 26,927 square foot interim sanctuary with assembly room and a nursery; a two story 226,777 square foot administration building, 17 modular classroom buildings, a 9,695 square foot preschool, a 300 seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, two field house buildings totaling 10,000 square feet and lighted athletic fields. Future phases include permanent first through twelfth grade classroom facilities, a gymnasium, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center and a parking structure. This project is located on the north side of State Highway 79 South east of Jedidiah Smith Road. At the Planning Commission hearing on July 31,2002 they unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the project. They also required that a lighting study be prepared and reviewed by staff and forwarded with the report for Council action. The application is scheduled for City Council review on September 24, 2002. Villages of Temecula - Development Plan proposal for a 160 unit multi-family apartment complex with a commercial retail/office center located on the south side of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Drive and east of the Moraga Road and Rancho California Road intersection. This project also includes a General Plan Amendment, change of zone (with a PDO) and a parcel map. The State Clearinghouse has circulated the initial study, and no comments were received A community meeting was held on January 14, 2002. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project on February 20th. Staff has met with adjacent property owners on two separate occasions and identified their concerns. The project is scheduled for City Council review on September 17, 2002. T.R. Properties -A Development Plan application to construct, design, and establish a 15,489 sq. ft. multi-tenant industrial building on the southeast corner of Winchester Road and Bostik Court. The project was submitted on April 15, 2002. Revised plans have been submitted to Planning and routed to all internal departments for comments and/or conditions of approval. Planning has had a number of design comments, which are being reviewed by the applicant. The applicant met with staff to consider design options, and will incorporate staff's requests. Linfield Christian School Master Plan - Submitted by Linfield Christian School; a Conditional Use Permit proposal to expand the existing facility with 154,397 square feet of additional classroom and accessory structures and a proposed 37,500 square feet of housing for a superintendent, caretaker and facility. This project is located on the north side of Pauba Road west of Margarita Road (behind Temecula Valley High School). Staff met with the applicant March 1, 2002, to discuss the need to process a PDO in order to establish development standards and uses desired. Staff is awaiting submittal of material. A community meeting for the project was held April 11,2002. This project is on hold pending the preparation of a Planned Development Overlay application. The applicant anticipates submittal near the end of September. Meadowview Golf Course - Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to design and construct a public golf course and driving range within the Meadowview Community. Staff has reviewed a third draft of Focused Environmental Impact Report. The developer is selecting a new environmental consultant to complete the draft EIR. Cingular Wireless Telecommunications & Sign Structure at Chaparral High Schoo~ - Conditional Use Permit to construct a 26 foot high, 14 foot x14 foot rectangular structure to house six wireless telecommunication antennas and equipment, and structure will include three sides with signage to consist of an 84 square foot non-illuminated sign with green letters and blue background to read "Chaparral High School", a 42 square foot electronic message marquee, and a 56 square foot blue and beige colored "C" letter with a black and green puma mascot R:'~MONTHLY.RPT~002~August 2002 Report.doc 2 illustration. Staff is reviewing the most recently submitted materials for completeness. The project was approved at the August 7, 2002 Planning Commission. The Commission's decision has since been appealed to the City Council. Overland Self Storage Facility - Conditional Use Permit to construct a 124,496 square foot, one story, self-storage mini warehousing facility with beige stucco and beige metal siding exterior walls and olive green color metal roofing on a two lot, 3.65-acres site, located south of Overland Drive and east of Commerce Center Drive. Future phase to include construction of a one-story 3,000 square foot office and caretaker's dwelling unit located at front of site. Staff held a Development Review Committee meeting on May 8, 2002. As a result, a number of issues have been identified and have been communicated to the owner and applicant. As of August 14, 2002, no plans have been resubmitted for continued review. Antenna Tower at Temecula Creek - is a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a 65 foot high cellular antenna, located at 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road (922-220-004); submitted by AT&T Wireless. The application was deemed incomplete on April 24, 2002. A DRC meeting was held on May 23, 2002. Applicant re-submitted plans on August 8, 2002. Staff reviewed resubmittal and determined that the project is still incomplete. A letter was sent to the applicant on August 21,2002, requesting items to make the application complete. Affirmed Housing Partners Tentative Tract Map No. 30604 - is a tract map for 17 single family dwelling units on 2.20-acres of land, located on the north and south side of sixth street (922-052- 004, 005,006, and 010); submitted by Affirmed Housing Partners. The application was deemed incomplete on April 27, 2002. Applicant resubmitted on May 17, 2002. Staff reviewed re- submittal and issued comments. The item was approved at the August 21, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. Wireless Telecommunication - is a Minor Conditional Use Permit to co-locate three sector antennas on an existing 57 foot high monopine and the installation of four equipment cabinets, located at 41520 Margarita Road (954-020-005); submitted by AT&T Wireless. The project was deemed incomplete on May 7, 2002. A DRC meeting was held on May 23, 2002, and staff is awaiting re-submittal by applicant. Cingular Wireless Antenna Facility - Minor Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and establish an unmanned telecommunications facility consisting of installing (6) antennas in two 35' high metal poles, replacing the existing poles that are being utilized to hold up netting, which prevents golf balls from entering into the public street. The project proposed was located on the northeast corner of Rancho California Road and Margarita Road in the Temeku Hills Golf Course. The Hearing Officer, after hearing all the facts of the case made a decision to deny the project at the May 30~h Director's Hearing meeting. An appeal was heard at the August 7, 2002 Planning Commission meeting in which staff recommended denial of the appeal. A number of homeowners attended the Hearing, voicing opposition to the project. The Planning Commission decided to continue the item to the September 4TM Planning Commission, requesting that the applicant provide a complete alternative Design Analysis and samples of the proposed steel poles. Hampton Inn Suites - Development Plan to construct and operate a 70-room 4-story hotel building at the northeast corner of Jefferson and Winchester. The project was continued to the October 2"d Planning Commission hearing. The applicant is preparing revised exhibits for staff review. R:'tMONTHLY.RPT~2002~,August 2002 Report.doc 3 Wolf Creek Tentative Tract Map - Tentative Tract Map No. 30264 for the southerly half of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan was submitted to Planning on June 26, 2002. The project was routed to all applicable departments and agencies for review. The application is scheduled for review at the October 2, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. Professional Golfers College - Conditional use permit to design, construct and operate a golf management school with a nine hole public practice course and driving range on a 22-acre site on the south side of Rancho Vista Road between Meadows Parkway and Margarita Road. The project was approved unanimously at the August 21 st Planning Commission hearing. BBK Performance - is a Development Plan request to build a 22,260 square foot two-story industrial/warehouse building on a 1.4-acre site. The subject property is located on the east side of Bostik Court, 170 feet south of Winchester Road. The applicant submitted additional information on September 9, 2002, which staff is now reviewing. Rainbow Canyon Retail Center Design Guidelines - Application for approval of architectural, landscaping and signage design guidelines for the Rainbow Canyon Retail Center. The subject property is located at the southeast and southwest corners of State Hwy. 79 South and Pala Road. Staff met the applicant on August 22, 2002, to discuss most recent document revisions. The applicant is now completing additional revisions. Crowne Hill Design Guidelines - is a Substantial Conformance request to modify the existing Design Guidelines for the Crowne Hill Subdivision submitted on July 5, 2002. These guidelines will establish the new design and development standards for the style of homes, fencing, entry monumentation, and landscaping for the remaining 803 lots. Crowne Hill is located on the southeast corner of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Roads. This application was filed by Pacific Century Homes and K.B. Homes. Comments from staff's first review were provided at a meeting held July 31,2002. This project is scheduled before the Planning Commission on September 18, 2002. The Slater Industrial Buildings - is a Development Plan request to build two 11,213 sq. ff. concrete tilt-up, office warehouse buildings on a 1.97 acre lot within the on the west side of Bostik Court south of Winchester Road. Growth Management Company filed this application. A DRC letter was sent to the applicant on August 19, 2002. Jefferson Avenue Office Building - A Development Plan to construct a 21,870 square foot two story office building on 1.67 acres of land, located at 27708 Jefferson Avenue (APN 921-400- 037-2); Submitted by Diamond Central Investors, LLC. The application was submitted on June 21,2002. A DRC meeting was held on August 8, 2002 and staff is awaiting re-submittal. Naren Pacific- A proposal for zone change from L-1 to L-2 on 31.93 Acres and Tentative Tract Map to subdivide into 33 residential lots and 2 open space lots. Staff has met with the applicant's representative to address several concerns. The TTM is contingent upon the ZC, therefore, this project is exempt from the Permit Streamlining Act. Staff is waiting for submittal of a constraints map and submittal of a proposed PDO. Caf~ Kerr- PA01-0587 - Administrative Development Plan to allow outdoor dining. Owner has apparently gone out of business and a new owner is now involved. Edge Nightclub- A Minor Conditional Use Permit to operate an entertainment facility to include a type 48 liquor license, live music, dancing, and other entertainment uses as outlined in the R:~vIONTHLY.RP'n2002~August 2002 Report.doc 4 submitted statement of. operations in a 4,860 square foot existing building, located at 28822 Old Town Front Street (APN 922-093-003); Submitted by Ronald Hannah. The application was submitted on July 5, 2002. An incomplete letter was mailed to the applicant on July 30, 2002. Roripaugh Estates (Pre-application) - Land Use Changes and Development Plan are a collection of four proposals, affecting property located on the northeast corner of Winchester and Nicolas Roads, to: amend the General Plan to convert 8.3 acres of a 20.2 acre Neighborhood Commercial site to Medium Density Residential; amend Roripaugh Specific Plan (same as the General Plan plus text amendments); process a Tentative Tract Map for 52 residential lots; and a Development Plan to build a shopping center on an 11.9 acre with 102,875 square feet of proposed floor space. Application was reviewed at DRC on August 29th. AT&T Wireless - A Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan to construct, operate and establish an unmanned wireless communication facility consisting of a 60'-0" mono-pine and a 8'x12' equipment area, located at the Rancho California Water District Water Reservoir Complex, east of Meadow Parkway. The project was submitted on June 21,2002. Although the project was deemed complete on July 19, 2002, the applicant was advised that staff could not support the proposal. Additionally, since the project was submitted, staff has received numerous phone calls and letters in opposition from the adjacent homeowners, however the applicant, Velocitel, inc. resubmitted revised plans. The applicant indicated that they would notify staff whether or not they wished to continue their application. As of August 13, 2002, the applicant has not indicated their intentions. Harveston Product Review - Four (4) Development Plan applications for subdivision home products for the Harveston SP, Planning Areas 3, 4 and 7. Each Development Plan Application requests a specific architect and each amhitect have provided a variety of architectural styles, colors, and materials. The product review was submitted on May 6, 2002. Staff met with the applicant, Lennar Homes, to discuss a number of architectural design issues. The applicant responded by revising the elevation drawings and resubmitted plans on July 19, 2002. The applications were reviewed at the September 4th Planning Commission meeting. Three of the applications were approved and one was continued to the September 18t~ Planning Commission meeting for design enhancement. Kevin Brown Executive Office Building - A Development Plan to construct, operate and establish an 11,642 square foot executive office building on 0.95 acres, located at 27247 Madison Avenue, west of Madison Avenue, north of Sanborn Avenue, submitted on July 26, 2002, by Herron & Rumansoff Architects. The project was reviewed at DRC on September 5th and staff is awaiting revisions. Coltrain Residence - A Variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet and a request for a Minor Modification to the front yard setback of 2 feet located at the end of the cul- de-sac on Avenida de San Pasqual (945-110-019) Submitted by Arthur Coltrain. The application was submitted on August 27, 2002 and departmental comments are due on September 17, 2002. Talon Sports Industrial Building - A Development Plan to construct, operate and establish an 18,243 sq. ft. Industrial Building on .99 acres, located at 42044 Winchester Road, west of Diaz Road, submitted August 28, 2002, by MeArdle & Associates Architects. The project is currently being reviewed for completeness. Grace Presbyterian Church - is a Conditional Use Permit to construct a church facility in two R:'tMONTHLY.RPT~2002~August 2002 Report.doc 5 phases. The site is located at the southwest corner of Calle Medusa and Nicholas Road. A DRC meeting was conducted on August 29, 2002. Staff is awaiting revised plans. Highland II Office Building - a Development Plan to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. office building. The subject property is located on the east side of County Center Drive, 740 ff. north of Ynez Road. A DRC meeting has been scheduled for September 12th. Small Business Assistance Penfold Building: Assisted sign contractor in developing a sign program for this new commercial building in Old Town Temecula in preparation for the August Old Town Local Review Board meeting where it was approved with some minor changes. · Lighthouse Thrift Building: Advised the new owner of this Old Town building regarding the City's Fagade Improvement Program for new paint, signs and construction for a new false front. Mad Madeline's/Texas Lil's: Met with the owners and tenants of this Old Town commercial complex regarding how the City's Fa(;ade Improvement Program could help them with new paint, signs and improvements. Premier Properties Building: Aided new owner of this Old Town building regarding a new sign program and outside paint under the Fa(;ade Improvement Program. Helped applicant prepare package for the August meeting of the Old Town Local Review Board where it was approved. · Butterfield Square: Met with representatives of this Old Town shopping complex to discuss options for new signs and land uses. · Chocolate Florist: At request of owner made an on-site visit to this Old Town business in order to help develop a new sign program and fa(~ade improvements. Flowserve: Assisted this local business in expediting occupancy changes to its existing building. Coordinated meeting with City staff at site in order to facilitate conditional use permit application. Lowe's: Worked with Operations Manager and developed a solution to his outside storage problems. They will be submitting an application for a substantial conformance in September. Also aiding this business in obtaining a release of their landscaping deposit. Special Event Permits · Old Town Latin Fiesta: City staff held a meeting with Mr. Paul Orozco who is planning this event for Old Town Temecula. Developed a new site plan for the proposed event which will take place in the Stampede parking lot on September 14th. · Boys and Girls Club: Continue assisting representatives of this group with the placement of a temporary commercial coach on there Pujol Street property. Tractor Race: Accepted application from and advised representatives of Southwest Events regarding their plan for a tractor race this fall at the Northwest Sports Complex. Scheduled a meeting with City staff and applicants in September to discuss the organization of this event. R:'ffvlONTHLY. RPT~2002~,ugust 2002 Report.doc 6 · Coolcat Collectables Car Show: Aided this new business with their application and issued a permit in early August for a car show at the Winchester Square Shopping Center. · Temecula On Stage: Held an meeting with the organizers of this event. Developed site plan and helped the Theater Foundation with the application for this Labor Day fundraising event. · Quaid Harley Davidson Grand Opening: Aided this new business with their application for this event, which took place August 25th. · Summer Nights: Helped organizer Melody Brunsting with the processing of this City-sponsored event, which ends in early October. Massage Establishment Permits · Massage Professionals & Skin Care: A massage establishment application for this existing Old Town business was submitted to the City. · Dubois Salon & Spa: A massage establishment permit application was submitted to the City for this business located at The Commons at The Promenade Mall. · Salon 29 Incorporated: An application for a massage establishment permit was submitted to the City by this business, located in the Temecula Town Center. · Trevi Partners I1: A massage establishment application for this new salon located in The Promenade Mall was submitted to the City. · J.C. Penney Salon: An application for a massage establishment permit was submitted to the City by this salon located in The Promenade Mall. Special Proiects& Lonq Range Planninq 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 State Department of Housing and Community Development has approved the approach in the revised Housing Element. The draft will now be scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission on September 18th and tentative to the City Council in October. Comprehensive General Plan Update - The CAC has completed its review of the draft goals and policies, and is currently considering alternative land uses. A joint Council-Planning Commission workshop has been scheduled for July 17th. Staff is presently working to set up another joint meeting to discuss land use resources. Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance - Final changes are being made prior to scheduling this item for a Planning Commission workshop. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. R:',,MONTHLY. RPT~2002~August 2002 Report.doc 7 Sudace Mining Ordinance - The staff and City Attorney had been making final changes based upon feedback from the State prior to submitting this item to the Council for their consideration. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. · Hillside Development Policy - The policies are being examined for integration into the draft- grading ordinance. This item is on hold pending additional staff resoumes. · Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance - Staff is currently revising the ordinance for the Commissioner's consideration. · Southside Specific Plan - Staff is reviewing the work that was previously done to possibly develop design guidelines for this area. Pechanga Parkway (formerly Pala Road) Widening & Sound Wall - Staff has revised the Preliminary Environmental Study Form (NEPA) per comments from reviewing agencies. Staff is reviewing the 70% sound wall design submittal and has provided comments on the landscape plans. Staff has concerns with the amhitectural treatment of the sound walls that have a design height of up to 16 feet. Rancho CA Road Bridge Widening - Staff has reviewed the Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration. Per staff direction, the consultant made changes to the Noise & Air Quality sections of the document. Public review is scheduled from August 13 to September 11, 2002. Scheduled for City Council on September 24, 2002. PA02-0260 Valley Christian Fellowship - Staff presented a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from VL to PO at the SWC of Margarita and De Portola Roads. The Negative Declaration was challenged and the Planning Commission continued this item to the November 20th meeting. · Overland Drive Extension - Staff has reviewed 2n~ submittal of the draft initial study / Mitigated Negative Declaration and has provided comments to Public Works. PA00-0421 and PA00-0422 Butterfield Stage LLC - General Plan Amendment and Zone Change at SEC of Butter[ield Stage Road and Hwy 79 South to change 20.33 acres from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial and Open Space. The applicant has new party interested in purchasing the site. Procedures to Implement CEQA - Staff initiated project to develop local guidelines for processing CEQA documents, including the adoption of local exemptions. The process will also conform to the 2002 CEQA Guidelines, and will create new templates for standard CEQA forms. · City- Project environmental reviews and permitting: Vail Ranch Middle School Basketball Court Lighting - Negative Declaration prepared, waiting for TCSD and TVUSD to reach an agreement regarding Use Before School to City Council. General Plan Amendments · Rancho Highlands Drive General Plan Amendment was approved by the City Council on August 27, 2002. R:~vlONTHLY.RPT~2002~August 2002 Report.doc 8 A request to reduce the size of Via Industrial (Western Bypass Corridor) north of Avenida Alvarado has been submitted and has been on hold pending the appmval of a revised Circulation Element. Eli Lilly General Plan Amendment and Zone Change - The applicant's proposal would involve changing the land use designations to Community Commemial. Staff recommends a Professional Office designation on one parcel. This item is scheduled for Planning Commission on October 16, 2002. Margarita Village Specific Plan - A General Plan Amendment for Parcel Map 22513, amending the land use from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial on 9.77 acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway (954-030-001); Submitted by Venture Point. In addition to the General Plan Amendment the applicant has also submitted a Specific Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan. The applications were submitted on May 23, 2002. A DRC meeting was held on August 8, 2002. Staff is awaiting re-submittal by applicant. Geoqraphic Information System (GIS) Activities · The equipment and computers for all front line fire emergency response units for the City's GIS based Fire Response Program are being prepared for installation. All units are now operational. GIS staff made a presentation of the City's GIS based Fire Response Program at the Inland Empire's GIS User's Group meeting at the City of Moreno Valley. Staff has received a sample deliverable of the Iow elevation digital ortho-photos from the Project Design Consultant's contract will ultimately include 1 foot per pixel photographs (imagery) and contours at 5 foot intervals for 150 square miles around the City and 6" inch per pixel imagery and contours at 2 foot intervals for the area within the city limits. · Staff continues to work with Public Works staff to map storm drain locations with the City's GPS unit. This is an ongoing project, which will take several months to complete. · Recent mapping products and data requests include: Map identifying all vacant properties and their land uses for Economic Development Vacant land in relation to vacant properties for Planning Various requests for mailing labels for the Planning Department Two maps for Old Town events for Planning Slurry seal and tree trimming maps for Public Works Santiago Road area map for Public Works Paloma del Sol vicinity map for Public Works Map of Japan for Japanese students from Sister City Nakayama Councilmember request for monorail, contour and Temecula location maps, Updated vacant land map for Planning Updated the Average Daily Trips map for Public Work Updates to the Fire Response Area map for Fire Vail Ranch parks map for TCSD Vicinity, zoning and land use exhibits prepared for Planning Additionally Staff conducted updates to the street centerline data, provided updated data to iS R:'~vIONTHLY. RP'I'~2002'~August 2002 Report.doc 9 and Fire staff for the Fire Response program and updated MapObjects data for Internet GIS Staff continues with ongoing data layer development and maintenance. R:~vlONTHLY.RP'i52002~August 2002 Report.doc 10 APPROVAL CITY ATIX)RNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~./~"" crrY MANAGER ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: September 24, 2002 SUBJECT: Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing cOOrdinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of August 2002. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of August, the City received 10 leads and 2 inquiries to the City. The leads consisted of the following: software consulting business, Coca Cola, expansion of a local manufacturing company, industrial user, Spa Utopia, auto dealer, a Roman style spa company from Canada, Wired Gaines Enterprises, motorcycle showroom and potential retail/restaurant users. City staff and representatives of the EDC and the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance met with Coca Cole Enterprises Bottling Company on August 8~. Due to the growth in their San Diego and Rancho Cucamonga facilities, the company is exploring an expansion possibility within Temecula. Coca-Cola pumhased 12.5 acres in Temecula and needed assistance gathering information regarding fast track, permit requirements, landscaping, workforce, and incentives. Their initial plans would be to construct a 40 - 50,000 sq. ff. facility for sales/operation and distribution. This could potentially bdng 100 jobs, which include upper level sales and blue-collar positions. On August 21st, Larry Conzemius of Village Commercial Properties in Escondido stopped by City Hall to get information on available properties and city information for his client. He is representing an industrial user from the San Fernando Valley who is looking for a 40,000 sq. f. ~ 50,000 sq. ft. building. The company employs up to 35. Staff provided information and will continue to follow-up with him. John Allen of Leveridge Systems Inc. in Arizona contacted staff. He is considering relocating his software consulting business to Temecula. Their primary clients include SprintPCS and Oman Oil and had annual revenues near $500,000.00. Staff sent him information to review and staff will follow-up with him. A local Temecula manufacturer is considering on adding a 200,000 sq. ft. facility to their site, The owner contacted staffto inquire about fault lines on their property. R:\Wolnic, kgkDEPT REPORTS~u~ust 2002.doc ] On August 15th, staff met with Mickey McQuire and Wally Arida from Wired Gaines Enterprises to discuss a possible location in Temecula and Temecula's development processes. Staff met with representatives of KTM motorcycles on August 27th. This is an Austrian company, and are one of the larger (worldwide) manufacturer's of off-read motorcycles. They have a manufacturing facility in Ohio, as well as one in El Cajon, but are hoping to make this facility their premier facility. It is still a relatively small operation (less than 50 employees to start and about 6 acres of land), but they are hoping to make this their premier facility for showing out*of area dealers and customers their product. The proposed location is at the west end of the Westside Business Park. An outdoor research/test track would be a component of the project. On August 26~, staff met with Jack Tarr, a landowner and potential developer, to discuss the Promenade Mall development plan. Potential users include: Krispy Kreme donuts, Islands Restaurant and Buca di Beppo Restaurant, as well as office and commercial users. Inquiries Staff was contacted by Phil Castillo of Legacy Fibers regarding bringing in a "buy back" recycling collection center to Temecula. Staff provided him with information and referred Mr. Castillo to the Economic Alliance for additional locations. On August 13th, staff met with Jim Lo Presfl of Swenson Advisors to introduce him to our industrial areas. In the month of July, the Southwest Riverside County Alliance responded to 6 leads. The Alliance received 2 inquiries from Expansion Management magazine, 2 leads from the Riverside County EDA and 4 leads from the EDC. Attached is a copy of their activity report. Media/Outreach Materials Staff wrote the City article for the Chamber Newsletter titled "SDG&E Valley-Rainbow Interconnect Project Opposition." The article conveyed the City's position and its partners on this project. The City's letter to Governor Davis expressing opposition to the Valley-Rainbow Interconnect Project was also included in the article. Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting on August 15th. There was discussion on a Strategic Planning Session. The Executive Committee will develop a draft plan. Nancy Randolph, Eastern Municipal Water District, was appointed as Director-at-Large. An update on the Measure A I Road Improvements was given which included the following projects: Newport Road Assessment Distdct is under construction. Scoff Road - 1-215 to Winchester. The funding appears to be in place for Hemet to Keller Road. Funding is not available for improvements south of Keller Road. Staff reported on the status of the G, eneral Plan update, new college project on Diaz Road, and a recap of the Development Rewew Process meetings held on July 16th with commercial brokers, and with the Coordinating Committee held on August 12t~. R:\Wolnickg~DEPT REPORTS~,August 2002.doc ~ On August 9~, staff attended the Temecula Valley Winegrowers Association breakfast with California Legislators. The breakfast with Legislators was a forum for the Temecula Winegrowers Association to thank the legislators and their staff over the years for their support in the fight against the Glassy Winged Sharpshooter. Legislators and aids from all levels of government including local, County, State, and Federal were present. The battle has not been entirely won but the money that has come down from these governmental agencies has allowed the Winegrowers to stay afloat and conduct research that will allow the winedes to remain healthy and beautiful In August, staff met with the property owner who owns the land facing Margarita, north of North General Kearny (north of Bel Villagio). There wes discussion on the overall development plan, project schedules and possible development issues. Staff held a meeting with the Coordinating Committee on August 12t~ to discuss the City's Development Review Process. The City is currently updating its process and trying to make the process easier and user-friendly. Staff met several times dudng the month of August with the EDC Strategic Planning Committee to develop a draft plan for the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County. Staff met several times in August with Guidant representatives regarding their expansion plans and Development Agreement. Kevin Waleh met with staff on August 28~ to discuss potential hospital plans. Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance meeting on August 28th. The Alliance marketing goals were discussed. Cutting Edge Marketing was selected as the Public Relations Agency to handle the website, advertising, and public relations for the Alliance. Cutting Edge met with the partners to discuss their scope of work and shared some ideas they had in marketing Southwest Riverside County. On August 29t~, staff met with members of SANDAG and WRCOG regarding the 1-15 Interreglonal Partnership. Results of a recent survey of Western Riverside County commuters and residents were presented. TOURISM Special Events Staff attended the Temecula Valley International Film & Music Festival Media Night on August 29th. The event consisted of a reception and screening. Media/Outreach Materials Staff worked with graphic designer Annie Howell on a new tourism ad for the North County San Diego Visitor and Meeting Planner Guide. On August 6t", staff met with graphic designer Mark Fisher and Lake Elsinore Outlets on developing a new ad for the Inland Empire Vlaitor and Meeting Planner Guide. The co-op partners for the City's ad include Lake Elsinore Outlets, Inn at Churon Winery and Sundse Balloons. Staff compiled and submitted local information and slides to the Inland Empire Tourism Council for their 2003 Inland Empire Visitor & Meeting Planner Guide. The Lake Elainore Outlet 2002 Go West Outlet Shopping Travel Planner was published and began distribution in August. The City received a half page complementary color ad in the R:\Wolnickg~DEPT REPORTS'~August 2002.doc 3 planner. Approximately 50,000 planners will be pdnted. The Travel Planner will assist tour operators, meeting planners and travel agents in planning and organizing their trips to the West. Distribution is targeted to domestic and international travel trade industry through major international and domestic travel trade shows and mailings. (See attached.) The City advertised in the August issue of the Old California Gazette. Staff worked with the publisher on the ad design and advertorial. Distribution includes over 1,000 retail and high-end hotel locations throughout Orange, San Diego, Riverside and Inland Empire counties. Also, distribution includes merchant shops in histodc quarters and exclusive expose to over 6 million visitors to Old Town San Diego. (See attached.) The summer edition of Preferred Destinations Magazine included a nice article on Temecula. Staff provided information and slides to Kathy Strong, a freelance travel wri[er. Staff also arranged her accommodations and itinerary for her visit to Temecula. This Orange County toudsm magazine is published quarterly, and has a clmulation of 75,000. The publication is complimentary to guests and visitors of 82 premier resorts and hotels in Orange County. (See attached.) Staff submitted Temecula event listings and Rod Run slides to Mary Forgey who writes the Out and About section in RV Journal. The major events will be published in their Fall issue. Staff provided Theresa Orourke of Premier Tourism Marketing in Illinois with a press kit and other tourism literature. An article on Temecula will appear in the September issue of Travel Tips magazine, Kate Campbell, Assistant Editor for the California Farm Bureau Federation, produced an article on Farmers' Markets in the July/August California Count~/magazine. A copy of this article was provided in the City's July Department Report. She also published the article in the August 21= AG Alert newspaper which is the weekly newspaper for California Agriculture. The Temecula Farmers' Market was highlighted (see attached). Ms. Campbell was one of the travel writers that attended the Chamber FAM Tour. The TemeculalMurrlata Community Directory was distributed to residents and businesses in August. Staff provided the City update for the directory (see attached.) Meetinge Staff attended the San Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau 2003 Sales & Marketing Opportunities Luncheon at the La Jolla Marriott on August 7r~. President Reint Reinders reported on last year's key accomplishments and Christine Shimasaki spoke on the key objectives for FY2003. Keynote speaker Peter Yesawich spoke on the topic, ~America in Transition: A Preview of Emerging Lifestyles & Travel Trends.' Yesewich described how Americans' attitudes have changed since 9/11 and how leisure travelers want "value, stress- free' vacations with quality time spent with family and visiting relatives. Staff was able to meet with various print media representatives (business and tourism) regarding possible marketing opportunities for Temecula. On August 12~, staff met with Group One Productions to review the video component of the Temecula Tourism CD. Later, staff met with the marketing partners individually to review the CD. Comments were then forwarded to Group One Productions for some minor revisions. On August 20t', staff met with Ruth Harring, wine columnist and reporter for the FallbrooldBonsell Village News and The Valley News. Staff will provide Ruth with press R:\Wolnick§~DEFT REPORTS~agust 2002.dec 4 releases and calendar of event information on a regular basis for possible inclusion in the newspapers. Staff held a meeting with Pat Marfinez, new Executive Director of the Temecula Valley Film Council, and Sheri Davis, Director of the Inland Empire Film Commission on August 21st. The purpose of the meeting was to make introductions and discuss roles and responsibilities of each organization and the most effective way to work together. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Activities Report - Apdl Advertising/Media Coverage R:\Wol nickg'tDEPT REPORTS~August 2002.doc 5 EDC September t3, 2002 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: Activity Summary - August 2002 Business Development Staff received eight business development leads for the month of August: · A phone inquiry from John Allen of Leveridge Systems in Chandler, AZ. Leveridge Systems is a soft'ware consulting firm with annual revenues of $500,000 and growing. Mr. Allen requested contact information to register as a California corporation and to file for a city business license. Staffcmailed Mr. Allen a detailed list of contacts to complete his relocation needs. Mr. Allen was referred by Grant Yates, City of Temecula (8/7) * A meeting with principles of a national company who were seeking information on a possible relocation. The company would expand their sales force and distribution department from their San Diego division. Other meeting attendees: Stevie Field, SWRC Economic Alliance, Aaron Adams and Rolfe Presidiente, City of Temecula, and a number of company representatives. Company principles will make their decision soon. (8/8) · A phone inquiry fi'om Scott Rose of a San Diego telecommunications campany with 10 plus employees. Mr. Rose was considering relocation to the region and requested information and assistance. Staff forwarded the request to Stevie Field, SWRC Economic Alliance. (8/7) · A meeting with Steven Bigelow, who was seeking information on employment opportunities as a project manager in a high-tech manufacturing environment. Mr. Bigelow currently works for Boeing Commercial Airplane Co. ia Tacoma~ WA, and holds a Master's ia Physics/Mathematics, a Bachelor's in Industrial Technology/Physics and an Associate Degree in Liberal Arts & Sciences. Staff provided Mr. Bigelow with contact information of leading employers in the region's. Conm~unieation and referrals are ongoing. (8/19) · A phone inquiry from Miehelle Selby, who was seeking information on funding opportunities and commercial sites for a small- to medium-sized, drop-in day care business. Staff provided Ms. Selby with possible sites, contacts of SBA lenders and feedback on the type ofbusiaess she would develop. (8/23) e A meeting with Bob Silvers, a sen~-retired, new Murrieta resident who was seeking employment opportunities. Staff provided Mr. Silvers with a tour of the Workforce Development Center and made introductions to EDD job counselors who could help him find employment. Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary- August 2002 Page 2 of 3 A phone inquiry from Debbie Benson of Mexieana Restaurant in Temeeula. Ms. Benson reqnested assistance with hiring new employees. Staff provided Ms. Benson with contacts to EDD eiiiployer/job counselors. (8/26) A meeting with Chris Binldey, a Murrieta resident who was seeking employment opportunities as a senior operating executive and other volunteer opportunities with the EDC. Staff provided a contact list of employers and offered Mr. Binkley an opportunity to help facilitate an economic development SWOT retreat that is planned for November 1. Mr. Binkley agreed to help facilitate the retreat. (8/30) Community Outreagh Staff attended the following meetings/events to promote or assist economic development efforts: · Murrieta-Temecula Group Meeting (8/2) · Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Golf Tournament Committee Meeting (8/9) · City of Temeeula Development Review Meeting (8/12) · United Way of the Inland Valley (8/12) - Staff is Chair of the 2002 United Way New Campalgn~. SWRC Manufacturem' Council Board of Dircctors Meeting (8/13) · Meeting with Lois HaH of Cai State San Marco (8/14) - Discussion of the EDC's role as a partner in a new business leadership prograrr~ More discussion will take place to develop the program. · Meeting with Ken Dodd of Final Touch Marketing (8/14) - Mr. Dodd discussed his views on the needs of the small business owner. He provided suggestions that thc EDC could implement to help small- to medium-sized manufacturing companies with networking and cost-sharing. Murrietn Chamber of Commeree Golf Tournament (8/23) - Staffvohnteered to work at the Murrieta Chamber's golf tournament. · Healthcare Business Council Workshop - Riverside Workforce Development Center (8/28) -- Staff attended a newly formed Healthcare Business Council created by the Riverside County Workforee Development Board. The Council's mission to resolve the healthcare worker shortage was unveiled. Educators, business owners and healthcare professionals formed the Council to offer education oppommities to the Riverside County workforce and to bring solutions to healthcare employers. · SANDAG lnterregionai Partnership Meeting (8/29) - Preliminary results of thc commuter survey were presented. The project will be finalized within 4 weeks. · Chamber of Commeree Day at Storm Stadium (8~29) - Staff represented the EDC and United Way at an evening Storm game, courtesy of United Way. Jim O'Grady City of Temeeula Activity Summary- August 2002 Page 3 of 3 Business Retention · Business Relations Committee Meeting (8/1) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. Administration/Omanization · EDC Board of Directors Meeting (8/15) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · EDC Strategic Planning Committee (8/26 & 8/30) - Committee members met to plan new EDC goals and obj~tives for new economic development opportunities. The Committee will f~ali~e the plarming sessions and provide feedback to the Board. Plans for a regional SWOT retreat are being developed. · Administration - Staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office; mailed EDC renewal letters and membership packages; responded to five requests for new EDC membership information; and installed a new office computer with updated sogware. This concludes the activity summary for August 2002. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 600-6064. Respectfully, Diane Sessions Executive Director DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MEETING Thursday, August 15, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA DRAFT BOARD MEMBERS Marlene Best, City of Lake EIsinore Frank Casciari, California Bank & Trust Scott Crane, Inland Valley Medical Center M~e Doblado, The Promenade in Temecula Stevie Field, SWRC Economic Alliance Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Doug Misemer, Temecula Valley Drywall/ Timberlake Painting Lori Moss, City of Murrieta Jim O'G-rady, City of Temecula Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce David Phares, D. L. Phares & Associates Greg Prudhomme, Kuebler, Pmdhomme & Co. Nancy Randolph, Eastern Municipal Water Dist. David Rosenthal, SWRC Manufacturers' Council Roger Zeimer, The Gas Company EDC STAFF Diane Sessions Liz Yuzcr MEMBERS AND GUESTS Michael Collin.% Mt. San Jacinto Community College Maryann Edwards, Temecula Valley Unified School District Paul Ramsey, Keeton Construction CALL TO ORDER * Board President Dennis Frank called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. MINUTES · The Board reviewed the minutes of the July 11, 2002 Board of Directors Meeting. Motion was made by David Rosenthal, seconded by Jim O'Grady and carded unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 11, 2002 Board of Directors Meeting as presented. FINANCIAL REPORT · The Board reviewed draft amendments to the 2002-03 Operating Budget and noted an increase of $720 in Personnel expenses. Diane Sessions reported that adjustments were made in Membership Cash of $500 and in Dues/Membership expenses of $120 to offset the increase in Personnel expenses. Motion was made by Scott Crane, seconded by David Rosenthal and carried unanimously to amend the 2002-03 Operating Budget as presented. · The Board reviewed the July 30, 2002 Financial Report that showed total monthly revenues of $3,331, total expenses of $2,535 and total cash-in-bank of $67,332. Greg Prudhommc noted that the Currem Period and Y-T-D totals were om of balance. Diane Sessions to make the correction. The Board discussed amending thc financials to reflect accrual reporting. Diane Session and Greg Pmdhomme would meet to set up the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting -August 15, 2002 Minutes - Page 2 of 3 new reporting format. Motion was made by Rex Oliver, seconded by Greg Pmdhomme and carried unanimously to approve the July 30, 2002 Financial Report as amended. NEW BUSINESS · Appointment of Director-at-Large: Dennis Frank reported that a Director-at-Large position was open due to the retirement of Ted Hating from Eastern Municipal Water District. He recommended that Nancy Randolph from Eastern Municipal Water District be appointed to fill the remaining term of this position. Motion was made by David Rosenthal, seconded by Jim O'Grady and carried unanimously to appoint Nancy Randolph to the Director-at-Large position through June 2003. · Discussion on Strategic Planning Session: Dennis Frank suggested that the EDC Board hold a strategic planning session to set goals for the coming year. Greg Pmdhomme recommended that the Executive Committee prepare the fiamework and present it to the Board. The Board agreed that this was the best plan of action. CONTINUING BUSINESS · Measure A/Road Improvements Update: David Phares reported on several road improvement projects. The Hwy 215/Newport Road interchange were completed and construction to extend Newport Road from Hwy 215 to Hwy 79/Winchester Road would begin in 2003 and take approximately 18 momhs, Plans to extend Scott Road from Hwy 215 to Hwy 79 were not ~nalized. Mr. Phares also reported that work to expand Hwy 79 between Domenigoni Road and Keller Road had been funded but the work from Keller Road to French Valley Airport were not yet funded. He pointed out that items included in Measure A would not be funded until 2009. Mr. Phares recommended the EDC Board look closely at Measure A to decide whether to support it. Marlen~ Best reported that a portion of Measure A funds are allocated to each city per capita to pay for infrastructure and other needed road improvements. · Temeeula General Plan Adviso~ Committee Update: Jim O'Grady reported on the growth of the Temecula area and the need to update the General Plan. A subcommittee was formed to review the Plan and make recommendations to the City Council. General policies that were reviewed and accepted included a focus on a diverse economic base with adequate infa~astm~e and emphasis on attracting high- tech businesses to the area. · Energy & Water lssnes Update: Roger Ziemer reported that little was known at this time about the cause of the recent explosion in Torrance. Nancy Randolph distributed a flyer about a number of upcoming "water wise" landscaping workshops sponsored by the Eastern Municipal Water District. · RCIP Update: The Board discussed the new housing developments and new schools that were proposed near the French Valley airport. David Phares reported that the EDC had resolved to support no rezoning of commercial property near the French Valley airport before the RCIP is adopted and suggested that there should be representation fi.om the EDC at future planning meetings. Dennis Frank recommended that a partnership be established with the County. David Rosenthal expressed concern about the balance between the state guidelines and what cities need to promote economic development. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - August 15, 2002 Minutes - Page 3 of 3 OPEN,DISCUSSION EDC Administrative Update: The Board reviewed the July 2002 Activity Summary submitted by Diane Sessions. Ms. Sessions reported on a leadership program sponsored by Cai State San Marcus. She also announced that the next quarterly luncheon would be held September 26 and the focus would he education. Representatives of area school districts would he invited to participate. · Business Relations Committee: Dennis Frank reported that the Committee would expand their outreach to professionals in the area as well as manufacturers. · Economic Alliance Update: Stevie Field reported the Alliance had signed a contract with an ad agency for their new marketing campaign; they were following up on several strong manufacturing leads; a new GIS launch will begin in September. · City, County and Chamber Updates: Citg of Lake Elslnore - Marlene Best reported that a number of new building projects were underway and the new fire station would open the end ofSeptemher. G-roundbreaking for improvements to Highway 74 between Lake Elsinore and Perris would be held September 12. City of Murrieta - Lori Moss reported that work on Kaimia Street was completed and that Warm Springs Middle School was ready to open; interviews were being held for a Department of Public Works manager and City Planning manager; the new Lowe's store would open the end of August, and Kohl's and Raiph's stores were under construction. City of Temeeula - Jim O'Grady reported that Mt. San Jaeinto Community College, Cai State San Marcos and UC Riverside were collaborating on the new higher- education center that would be located on Diaz Road. A small retail component may also be added to the facility that would also serve the nearby industrial area. Mike Doblado reported that the new wing of The Promenade mall with Macy's Department Store would open October 4 with an exciting charity event. Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - Rex Oliver reported that the Murrieta Chamber Golf Tournament would be held Friday, August 23. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. · SWRC Manufacturers' Council: David Rosenthai reported that beginning in October the Manufacturers' Council would plan monthly meetings that feature targeted breakout sessions and peer discussion. · UCR CONNECT: No report available. ADJOURNMENT At 10:30 a.m., motion was made by David Phares, seconded by David Rosenthal and carried unanimously to adjourn the board meeting. Respectively submitted by: Elizabeth Yuzer Phil Oherhansley Recording Secretary Board Secretary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, August 1, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Frank Casciari, California Bank and Trust Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Robin Greer, D & D Commercial Construction Michael Lewin, Mirau Edwards Cannon Hotter & Lewin Tony Renz, Diversified The Staffing Solution David Rosentlml, SWRC Manufacturers' Council Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Guesgs: Ron Nater, SWRC Economic Alliance Alva Dia% Wells Fargo Nancy Kohutek, Coldwell Banker Sandy Lurid, Coldwell Banker Joanna Quigley, Edward Jones Liz Yuzer, EDC Call To Order Committee Chair Michael Lewin called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. He welcomed guests to the meeting and lcd introductions. Follow-up Action Reports · Basics Etc., Inc. - Michael Lewin reported in July that the condemnation process affecting Basics Etc. was not imminent. He would postpone his call to them until later. Company Contact. Reports * Business Relations Committee Overview: Michael Lewin provided an overview of the work of the Business Relations Committee as there were a number of guests present. He pointed out that the EDC served Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Temecula. Business owners were visited or contacted by phone in order to determine the scope of the business and their issues. The goal of the Business Rclatious Committee was business retention and expansion. · Edge Development - Alice Sullivan reported that the survey had heen faxed to CEO Steve Prophet of Edge Development in Temecula~ She would continue to try to schedule a meeting with Mr. Prophet. Goal Progress Report · Michael Lewin announced that visits and phone interviews in the first month of the fiscal year were as follows: 27 visits ~ 3 points each + 33 phone interviews ~ 1 points each = 60 visits/calls G114 poims YTD VISIT PHONE pOINTS Goal 27 33 114 Actual 0 0 0 Variance -27 -33 - 114 New Committee Assignments · Michael Lewin reviewed the list of outstanding calls. Tony Renz reported that he had not been successful in contacting Electro Support and Superior Metal Polishing and suggested that those businesses be recycled. He selected Hydro Flow and Islander Pools for his next contacts. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes- August 1, 2002 Page 2 of 2 David Rosenthal invited any members or guests to accompany him on his calls. Robin Greer and Joanna Quigley expressed interest in making calls with Mr. Rosenthal. He also suggested that a handout of the new city of Temecula permit process be available during visits. EDC News and Other Information SWRC Manufacturers' Council - David Rosenthal reported that the Manufacturers' Council had several meetings to discuss their mission and focus. They planned to go forward with monthly meetings that feature targeted breakout sessions and peer discussion. · EDC Board Update - Dennis Frank reported that a strategic planning workshop would be held before the end of the year. An expanded focus for the EDC was planned. · City, County & Chamber News - City of Lake Elsinore - No report available. City of Murrieta -No report available. City of Temecula - No report available, galre Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce - Alice Sullivan reported that the Chamber Business Relations Committee was creating a new DVD - CD ROM of Temecula; the next Chamber Roundtable would be held August 2 and the program would be on trade show set-ups; the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors had taken a position of support for Measure A and went on record to request support for funding of Hwy. 79N. Ms. Sullivan also reported that she met with Ron Nater of the Economic Alliance to learn more about their respective programs and determine how the two organi?atinns might work together. · Economic Alliance Update - Ron Nater provided an overview of the work of the Economic Alliance. He reported that the Alliance was formed three years ago to bring new businesses to Lake Elsinore, Mm'rieta and Temeculm Their focus was on biotech, electronic, high tech and venture capital businesses that would bring higher paying jobs to the area. They would plan another three-day event such as the one held in June to bring new groups of prospective employers to the area. UCR CONNECT - Dennis Frank reported that plans for the higher-education center in Temecula were moving forward. One of the priorities for this center was to address the region's educational needs in high- tech industries. Ad|ournment - The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE September 6, 2002 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn, Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report as per our contract with the City of Temecula. Board of Directors Update: The Board of Directors will hold a special board meeting to discuss the Temecula Valley Unified School District "Resolution No. 2002-03/11, Support for Proposition 47 Kindergarten-University Public Education State Facilities Bond Act of 2002". TVCC Board has made a recommendation to support "Requesting CA Delegation to complete CALFED Legislative Effort-Support of S1768 and HR 3208. If CALFED is reauthorized and implemented this year, the Program will provide real benefits statewide. The Chamber has produced a newly designed "Temecula Today Newsletter" and we are looking at the best elements of all our communications to the membership. We will also be placing the newsletter on the Chamber website. The Business Resource Guide and Membership Directory is the front-line marketing tool for promoting the community and will be informative. 10,000 copies will be distributed throughout the community starting in January for the 2003 season. This is the month Of August at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights: In the month of August, 11 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business to Temecula. They receiyed a business packet, which includes a copy of the City of Temecula demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Committee Highlights: Tourism & Visitors Council: Chamber staff and committee members visited six Visitors Bureau & Convention Centers last month. Our goal is to develop into a Visitors & Convention Bureau in the newly designed Chamber building. Wilson Creek Winery hosted the Tourism & Visitor Council meeting in the month of September. Thirty-five tourism related businesses where in attendance. 27450 Ynez Road, Suite 124 · Temecula, CA 92591 Phone: (909) 676-5090 1, Fax: (909) 694-0201 www,temecula,org · e-mail: info@temecula.org Education Committee: The Education Committee is currently organizing a reception in honor of the newly named UC Riverside Chancellor France A. Cordova to be held on October 23, 2002 at 11:00 a.m. at Pechanga Resort & Casino. At the September meeting, the committee will be discussing organizing a Diversity Awareness Program for the local schools, as well as developing a program to further higher education for senior citizens in the community. Contributions are being made by Chamber members for the Teacher Recognition Program that, along with certificates, will be distributed to the teachers of the Temecula Valley. Ways & Means Committee: The Ways & Means Committee is busy planning the upcoming 11th Annual Monte Carlo Extravaganza! The event will take place Wednesday, September 18th at Wilson Creek Winery from 5:30-8:30pm. The event will include Las Vegas style gaming, midway games, food from local eateries as well as a chance for one lucky participant to win $1000 cash sponsored by The Promenade In Temecuta. Other sponsors include Community National Bank, Toyota of Temecula Valley, Bassett Furniture Direct, and Timmy d. Productions. The committee is also planning the 11th Annual Business Showcase, which will take place in the Temecula Town Center on Wednesday, October 16th from 5:30-8:00pm. All local businesses are encouraged to participate. Local Business Promotions Committee: The Local Business Promotion's is recruiting businesses to participate in the November 2002 Shop Temecula First Campaign. The Business Resoume Task Force is currently writing the script for the 2002 Business Resources DVD. The Businesses of the Month for September selected by the Ways & Means Committee are Rancho Physical Therapy and USA Federal Credit Union. Jackson Hewitt Tax Service was awarded the Chamber Spotlight, and Polycraft, Inc. is the Mystery Shopper winner for the month of September. Government Action Committee: John Standiford of the Riverside County Transportation Commission gave a presentation of the extension of Measure A to be on the ballot in November. The committee had concerns with Highway 79 not being included on the list of projects. The TVCC Board recommendation was to support Measure A with the understanding that funding for Hwy, 79 be addressed. Membership Committee: The Membership Committee is proud to announce a workshop for new and existing members who are interested in learning the etiquette of networking. The workshop will be titled "How To Manage and Operate Your Business Successfully". It will be held every first Tuesday of the month at 12:00 noon beginning September 3, 2002 at the Chamber conference room. The Membership Committee is also working on a Health Benefit program for the membership. · Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution) Activity Report: · 125 Temecula Brochures, 25 Visitor Guides, 55 Winery Brochures and 15 Relocation Brochures to Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Weekend Visitor Center. · 50 Winery Brochures and 4 Tourism Maps to The Rainbow Inn for distribution to guests. · 250 Temecula Brochures and 175 Winery Brochures to Temecula Valley Film Festival for distribution to visitors. · 200 Temecula Brochures and 200 Winery Brochures to Desert Hills Premium Outlets for distribution to customers. · 18 Visitor Guides, 50 Winery Brochures and 20 Tourism Maps to Jason Berger for guests. · 30 City Maps to Joyce Bezerra to distribute to visiting golfers. · 25 School Brochures, 50 Temecula Brochures, 50 Winery Brochures and 25 Pechanga Resort & Casino Brochures to Temeku Hills for distribution to visitors. 2 · 65 Tourism Maps, 20 Lake Skinner Brochures and 20 Santa Rosa Plateau Brochures to Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Weekend Visitor Center. · 15 City Maps, 25 Temecula Brochures, 25 Winery Brochures, 25 Pechanga Resort & Casino Brochures, 25 Lake Elsinore Outlets and 25 Oak Creek Manor Brochures to Tarbell Realtors for distribution to clients. Activity Report: · Tourism calls for the month of August- 1,764 · Phone calls for the month of August - 3,276 · Walk-ins for the month of August - 3,067 · Web Page User Sessions for the month of August - 5,183 · Website Tourism Survey - "How did you hear about Temecula" - 335 responses were received: · Article- 1% Friend - 31% · Link - 7% · Magazine - 2% · Other- 38% · Radio - 4% · Search - 11% · TV-6% Also, attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Ways & Means, Membership and Marketing, Local Business Promotions and Government Action committee. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (909) 676-5090. Thank you. Sincerely. cc: Mayor Ron Roberts Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone Councilman Jeff Come¢chero Councilman Mike Naggar Councilman Sam Pratt Shawn Nelson, City Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wornick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors ~ax: 1~06) 694-64,q0 Ten,,ecda, ~ ~(ZS~O ECONOMIC ALLIANCE TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Marlene Best Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula Lori Moss Assistant City Manager City of Murrieta Stevie Field Economic DevelopmentJMarketing Coordinator August14,2002 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Dear Partners: Please consider this an update on the marketing activities for the Alliance as required in the Southwest Riverside County Marketing for Business Attraction Agreement. Leads A total of eight leads were generated in the month of July. Two leads were from Expansion Management magazine, four leads were referrals from the EDC and two leads were referrals from the Riverside County EDA. A meeting with the City of Temecula was scheduled as a result of one lead. Coca-Cola purchased 12.5 acres in the City of Temecula and needed assistance gathering information regarding fast track, permit requirements, landscaping, workforce, incentives, etc. This meeting was held on Thursday, August 8th. Trade Shows On behalf of the Alliance, I have agreed to attend the following trade shows: Wescon, Anaheim, CA SepL22-24, 2002 Corenet, San Diego, CA Nov. 16-20, 2002 "Taste of Southwest Riverside County" event 2003 It was agreed upon at the last Alliance meeting that the second annual "Taste of Southwest Riverside County' would be held once a year, We will target April or May 2003. I have listed some dates below for consideration. These dates do not conflict with any holidays. Please let me know at your earliest convenience which dates work with your schedule. April 4-6 Apdl 11-13 May 2-4 As discussed, the next event will be held Fri. - Sun. and will include a tour of SWRC and some of our larger employers. Other components may include a panel breakfast, golf and a baseball game. We will work with the ad agency on various pre-event (approximately 4-6 months pdor to event)advertising to generate a stronger lead pool. It was agreed by all that the Alliance will no longer open this event up to sponsors. Ad AqencyRFP The ad agency proposals were received and graded by Teresa Gallavan and myself. After comparing grading sheets, it was decided that the contract would be awarded to Cutting Edge Marketing. Cutting Edge will attend our regular Alliance meeting in August from 4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m., to discuss our goals, thoughts, various advertising possibilities, etc. GIS Anatalio contacted me via email regarding additional GIS information needed. This email was forwarded to each partner's GIS specialist. The scheduled completion time is approximately the end of August or early September. Training will be provided once the site is complete. On an ongoing basis, I attend the following meetings: SWRC Manufacturer's Council Temecula/Murdeta Group Business Relations Committee SWRC EDC LE EDC Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest Riverside County region UCR Connect meetings If you need any additional information or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 600-6066. Sincerely, Stevie Field Manager, Business Development Copy: Brad Hudson Robin Zimpfer Belinda Graham Sarah Mundy Teresa Gallavan Mission Vineyards and Frontier History By KATHY STRONG Cradled on a plateau 1,400 lbet above sea level, Temecula boasts rolling' hills lined in vineyard plantings, both and sophisticated wineries, an antique shop-filled downtown with Old West flavor, charm- ing bed and breakfast inns and luxury resorts, and rainbow-splashed balloons that color the sky above. The diverse flavors of Temecula all mingle to create an unforgettable get away for romantics. Winemaking Temecula has demonstrated through the years that it is a perfect locale for growing over 28 varieties of wine grapes, hosting an enviable balance of geography, microclimate and well-drained soil. In fact, over 200 years ago winemaking made its debut in California at Mission San Juan Capistrano, just 18 miles west of Temecula. Mission vineyards were first planted in the area of Temecula in 1820. The winemaking tradi- tion flourishes today with over fifteen win- eries and more on the way. Fall may be the best time to sample the newest harvest here, but summer lends itself to leisurely tasting and picnicking while listening to jazz con- certs or even watching a vintage movie. The various wineries and tasting rooms offer an array of novel activities that combine great wine, food and entertak~nent. The Wineries The Temecula Valley Winegrowers Asso- ciation publishes a free brochure, available fi.om the Visitors Center or any of the win- eries, that maps the area's wine trail and major annual events. All of the wineries .56 · sur~MER 2002 Old Town Temecula offers visitors a step back in time. have tasting rooms and charge a nominal fee to taste an assortment of their finest vintages, and many host delicatessens or Full-service restaurants or cafes. You can't go wrong with a picnic, but, if you choose to dine, there is an assortment of top-notch bistros. Try Carol's at Bailey Winery for dining inside the castle-like restaurant or outside surrounded by vines and roses. The food is irresistible when paired with their wine choices. Another favorite is roman- tic Caf~ Champagne at Thornton Winery, known for its popular summer jazz festi- vals. You will need to reserve early for these events. Miramonte Winery (909- 506-5500), one of the newest in the area, has a classical movie series all'summer that includes a great oldie combined with wine and gourmet popcorn inside their tasting room. Falkner Winery (909-676-8231), along the trail, offers informal jazz concerts on Sunday afternoons and a special chef's creation as a Sunday luncheon offering. Old Town Temecula Of course, Tetnecula offers much more than winery touring and dining. The rapidly growing suburban areas of the city still lead to its origins in historic downtown Temecula along Front Street. Pick up a copy of the "Walking Tour Map," avail- able at downtown businesses or at the Visi- tors Centen This old town area was born in 1882 when the Santa Fe Railway came through the valley, and many of the origi- nal structures remain. The City of Temecula recently completed at $5.3 million streetscape improvement project here which included new boardwalks, lantern- style streetlights, Furniture, landscaping, a sound system, and ornate metal arches with Old West images that lead the way to the 120 shops in this six-block area. Wander through the original stores, churches and banks that are now home to antique shops, art galleries, cafes and collectible shops. Many special events are held in Old Town each year, but be sure to catch the Satur- day morning Farmers' Market, a great place to harvest fragrant bouquets of flowers, fresh- from- the- farm produce, and craft- style gifts. For a better feel for the area's Right Top: Colorful balloons dot the Temecula sky year round. Right: Performers at the Temecula Valley Museum. Far Right: Temecula's wine country in full bloom. PREFERRED DESTINATIONS MAGAZINE Country roads are a common sight in Temecula. CAROLtS RESTAURANT AT BALLY WINERY BEAUTIFUL TERRACE AND INDOOR SEATING Open for Lunch Tuesday - Friday · WINE TASTING 11:30-3:00 · GIFT SHOP Saturday · RESTAURANT 11:30 - 4:00 Sunday 11:30 - 4:00 33340 La Scrcna Way, Tem¢cula, California Tel: 909-676-9243 · Reservations Accepted 58 oSUHH£R2002 history, visit the Temecula Valley Museum, located at 28214 Mercedes Street at Sam Hicks Me- morial Park (909-676-0021). Flights of Fancy Several ballooning adventures are yours in Temecula, from sunrise champagne balloon flights over the vineyards to romantic sunset rides over the nearby coastline. One company even offers bi-plane ex- cursions, with the ultimate roman- tic evening in a Champagne Sonset Biplane Flight. Sm~rise Balloons, serving the area since 1976, special- izes in flights at sunrise or 90 min- utes before sunset. The narrated flights include gourmet snacks and champagne or non-alcoholic bev- erages, which may be enjoyed dur- hag or after the fl~ght. A Grape E,scape Balloon Adventure, also offeaSng sun- rise champagne balloon excursions over the Temecula wine country, offers a souvenir photo and conti- nental breakfast. Make it a Weekend Ballooning, wine tasting and Old Town wandering makes a longer stay than a day almost mandatory to Temecula. There are some ex- cellent choices to make your roman- tic getaway complete. The Temecula Creek Inn, a casual and quiet retreat drenched in green mil- lng hills and shady trees, offers championship golf, swimming, ten- nis, and jogging and bicycle trails in the countryside. The rooms are spacious and many overlook the flowing golf courses. The award- winning Temet Grill Restaurant of- fers gourmet cuisine with views of a rock waterfall and the golf course. The resort offers several appealing packages ranging from a"Romance Getaway" with a wine dinner at the restaurant, a round of golf for two, and deluxe accommodations with views of the golf course to a "Wine Country Getaway" which includes a picnic lunch and tour and tasting tickets to local wineries, as well as a wine dinner at the Temet Grill. The 22-room luxury Inn Churon Winery is the area s newest bed and breakfast offering. Set perfectly within a vineyard, each spacious one- or two-bedroom suite in the French-style chateau features a fireplace and Jacuzzi. A gourmet breakfast is served in the dining room of the inn or on your private balcony overlooking the gardens and vines~ An afternoon reception in the winery tasting room downstairs from the inn is held ex- clusively for inn guests. The Churon Winery specializes in Temecula premium wines, plus art- ists' editions. The grounds offer a pleasant picnic area and a deli for creating an al fresco meal. PREFERRED DESTINATIONS MAGAZINE 20 · OLD CALIFORNIA GAMT~:'LTI~ : entire family. Centered between Los Angeles and San Diego, Temecnla is the · To Recreation perfect place to e~cape, whether it's for just a day or an extended vacation. W'me tss~qg at IS wineries Shopping & dining in historic Old Town Hot air bailoon adventures Superb outdoor recr~fion Temecuts Valley Museum Special events every month of the y~r For accommodations, aUracfions and special event information, call (909) 676-~090 or visit us on the web at: w ww.dtytffiem'~l-~g A OALIFORNIA 4EWEL With a Mediten'ancan climate, its no wonder why Temeeula is a year-round getaway for Californians and home to hot-air ballooning, hiking, fighing, boating, cycling, golfing and a host of other outdoor activi6es. For those who like to take it a little eusier, strolling around theft historic quarter is mminiseont of thc golden west. You'll also find over 600 antique dealers, a history museum, a farmer's market (Sat) and a variety of restaurants to satisfy the hungriest hombre. I~own for their valley of wines, drive through rolling hills dot- ted with 15 award-winning wineries, fi'om a French Chateaux to a Hacienda that offers up wine-tastings, tours, unique restaurants (with innovative menus) and great places to picnic with the family. Don't miss Temecula On Stage, where top chefs and wineries from the area are featured along with a variety of performance arts including local musicians, vocalists, actors and dancers. Temecula On Stage will be promo~xl as the centerpiece of a host of Labor-Day weekend activities. (August 31, 6:00 to 11:00 pm · 909478-1456) Another event that's not to be missed is the International Film and Music Festival where the best in contemporary full-length features, shorts and films by emerging young filmmakers will be Showcased. Thousands of locals partake in the Hollywood-style revelry surrounding the film screenings, gala parties, post s~reen- ing parties, live entertainment, Viewer's Choice Competition and film making workshop series. (Sept. 18 to 22 · 909-699-6267) Keep watching the Gazette's monthly calendar for more ~x- eiimg events scheduled for this month and every month through- out the year! This charming city of old and young are really put- ting their best foot forward to impress you.., go cheek them out! AUGUST 10th - 18th As it still does, the first Nisei Week in 1934 brightened Little Tokyo for seven days and nights. A global war disrupted its unbroken sequence. Its Golden Anniversary would have been, not 1990, but George Orwell's fateful 1984. In the depth of the Great Depression, Nisei college graduates worked for Susumu Hasuike's 3-Star Produce chain for $80 dollars a month. Little Tokyo merchants catered mostly to Isseipatrons. Even then Little Tokyo was the hub of the largest Japanese American population on the U.S. mainland, but it was an unpromising retail area, stable but not expanding. The Issei controlled it completely, as they did the com- munity. We respected our elders, but their ideas were getting old. Exuberant Nisei came up with the idea of Nisei Week to lift the gray cloud of the Great Depression. They urged the Issei to cater to Nisei patron- age both in hiring and retail practice. That done, they would bring the customers, The idea was sold to leading Little Tokyo Issei merchants. Enough Issei merchants believed them to help fund the early effort. The Nisei went to work. They organized. It was a milestone in Little Tokyo community cooperation. Who were the Nisei? First general chairman of Nisei Week was ClamnceArima who was the Nisei manager of the Issei-owned Union Paper Supply Co. The first Nisei Week organizing team were more than 10 years older than most Nisei. Established in their vocations, they were a Little Tokyo Nisei leadership group. John Macho, who became ~halrman of the third Nisei Week, wrote in his program: 'q~he Nisei isa newAmeri- can. Racially of the Orient, he is frae and loyal citizen of the Unit- ed States, his native land. Young, ambitions, hopeful, though at times oppressed, he seeks to take his place in civic development and community progress." The message became a fixture. It was interspersed with the commercial market-ing thrust of Issei shopkeepers. Nisei Week became an instrument not only to revitalize Little Tokyo's economic base, but to expose the non-Japanese audience to the Nisei's message that the successors to the Issei were a genemfiun of Ameticans. That community outside Little Tokyo was not terribly receptive to Nisei offerings of their Japanese cultural inherit- ance: From the outset, the Nisei organizers planned their ath'ac- tions around the best they could offer in undo dancing, Japanese floral arrangements, tea cere- monies, martial arts, fashion shows, kimono-clad queen and attendants, calligraphy and art in the hope that the transpacific cultural bridge would sgme- how flower and bloom. In the ensuing half century, Nisei Week's format has undergone surprisingly little change from its basic orginal. The undo dance parade has continued to be a crowd drawing spectacle. "They gyrate in those pigedn-toed steps with the seriousness of cogitating jurists; when not lost in the contem- plation of the next dance step, they smile with the same genuine smile they use in busi- Were the founders, Issei and Nisei satisfied with the results? It is believed, they were. It has become a tourist institution, drawing visitors from around the globe. For more information about Nisei Week, please call (213) 687-7193 or visit their websfle at: www.niseiweek.urg Better .tomatoes through research weed- and pest-resistaut varieties of tomatoes. __ ~ $ Ranchers blast butterfly listing' ESA desigmfion~'.- ~-. could l~ impact on c~e grazi~, AUGUST 21,2002 Increased hay acreage could pressure prices See ALFALFA, Page 21 Sierra cattle ranchers stand their ground which have reduced grazing usage of U.S. Forest Service land has been NEWSPAPER Farm leaders urge revision in Medfly rule By Bch Krauter CFBF Cammtmkafions~Ne~ ~ See MEDFLY, Page 5 ~Inside News Briefs 4 Field Crops 7 Vegetables 13 Weather 18-19 Farm & Ranch 23 , ~Farmers' marke~ offer· traditiOn, diverSity and greatfood ~Every~ne wants a own doorstep. But if communities want them/ they have ~o be willing to support them." morains, ~ were Go West OUTLET SHOPPING TRAVEL PLANNER 2002-2003 Cabazon Outlets, Palm Springs, CA · Citadel Outlets, Los Angeles, CA · Lake ElsJnore Outlets, Inland Empi~ Woodbum 9o9-676-5o9o WWW.T~C, JLA.OeG ~.1m[¢ULA: 686-T~4[(ULA VA, V~V.ClTYOF'i~EOJ~ORG 10 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council APPROVAL ,,-,2,//~, ~-~--- CITY ATTORNEY ,~' II DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ II CITY MANAGER ii William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer September 24, 2002 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 August. 2002. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report August/September 2002 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: September 24, 2002 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. Margarita Road Widening, Phase I (Interim), Pauba Road to Plo Pico This project will widen Margarita Road on an interim bases between Pauba Road and Plo Pico. As a result, Margarita Road will have four lanes throughout City limits. The contractor, R.J. Noble, has completed the work. Notice of Completion is scheduled for the September 24, 2002, City Council Meeting. 2. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool A 25-yard x 25-meter pool will be built at Chaparral High School. The facility will include a smaller recreation pool component and a bathhouse with locker room facilities, restrooms and showers. Spray-type play equipment will be included as an element in the base construction bid. The contractor, California Commemial Pools has completed the work. Notice of Completion is scheduled for the September 24, 2002, City Council meeting. 3. Pechanga Parkway (formerly Pala Road) Improvements, Phase I - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from Pechanga Parkway Bridge to Wolf Valley) and Traffic Signals Modifications at Loma Linda, and at Wolf Valley Pechanga Parkway (formerly Pala Road) Improvements, Phase I, will give Pechanga Parkway two lanes in each direction (58 feet in width) from the Pechanga Parkway Bridge to the Pechanga Casino. It includes re-striping the entire length. In addition, the two traffic, signals at Loma Linda and at Wolf Valley will be modified to accommodate the road interim widening. This project is complete. The notice of completion is scheduled for the October 8th City Council meeting. 4. Slurry Seal Program - FY2001-02 This project will slurry seal and protect various streets throughout the City. Work was completed on time and under budget. Notice of Completion was presented to the City Council on September 17, 2002. 5. First Street Extension - Environmental Mitigation This project will create approximately 1.49 acres of wetlands along Murrieta Creek at First Street. It includes construction of landscaping and irrigation improvements, and maintenance of said improvements for a period of five (5) years in accordance with California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit requirements. Bids were opened June 6, 2002. Award is on hold pending RCFC/ACOE coordination with Murrieta Creek Improvement project. R:~dM°nthlyActivityRep°r t\C IP~2002~A ugust 'd °c 6. Pavement Rehabilitation Program - FY 2001/2002 This project will rehabilitate and reconstruct portions of Rancho California Road between Hope Way and Cosmic Drive. R.J. Noble Company is the contractor. The project is presently under construction and is approximately 50% complete. Construction is on schedule and it is anticipated to be complete by late October 2002. 7. Community Theatre - Mercantile Seismic Retrofit This project will create a community theatre at the old Mercantile building in downtown Temecula. 2H Construction began construction on Monday, September 16, 2002. Presently, the contractor is performing asbestos removal with demolition work of existing improvements to occur through the end of the month. Foundation placement is scheduled to begin the first of October. 8. Citywide A.C. Repairs - FY2001-02 This project will repair various road sections throughout the City. Bids were opened on 8/15/02. All American Asphalt is the lowest bidder. Construction is set to begin September 23, 2002. 9. Children's Museum This project will construct a 7,500 square foot children's museum. Bids were opened on September 5th. Lowest bidder was RE Flemming with a bid of $347,881. Contract was awarded at the September 17, 2002, City Council meeting. 10. Rancho Vista Road Drainage Improvements This project will improve the maintenance of the storm drain system on Rancho Vista Road immediately adjacent to the MWD easement. The award of the project is scheduled for the September 24, 2002, City Council meeting. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS None PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Pechanga Parkway (Formerly Pala Road) Improvements - Phase II (SR 79 South to Pechanga Road) This project will widen Pechanga Parkway (formeHy Pala Road) to its ultimate width from the Pechanga Parkway Bridge to Pechanga road. The Preliminary Environmental Document Classification (NEPA) of the project has been determined to be "Categorical Exclusion" with required technical studies (involving Federal action). The City is currently working with Caltrans' Local Assistance and City's Environmental Consultant to expedite the environmental approval process. The consultant submitted plans to RCFC & WCD for review and comment. Work is proceeding with the remainder of the design. 2 R:\M onthlyActivityReport\C lP~2002~August.doc 2. Pechanga Parkway (Formerly Pala Road) Sound Wall Improvements Under this project, sound walls will be designed and constructed on the southwest side of Pechanga Parkway, from Rainbow Canyon Road to the Pechanga casino and on the northeast side along the residences just north of Loma Linda. The City is currently reviewing the design plans (60%) submitted by the consultant. The plans were sent to all utilities and affected HOA's for review. Environmental issues have been identified and documents are being prepared. Work is being coordinated with the Pechanga Parkway Improvements - Phase I1. 3. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This project will widen Rancho California Road Bridge over Murrieta Creek to provide four additional traffic lanes. Staff is currently reviewing 100% drawings and specifications for completeness. Processing for right of way and environmental requirements are schedule for completion by September 2002. 4. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and services. A separate parcel has been created for the library for bond purposes. The application to the State was submitted on June 13, 2002. Utility services construction will be coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II Street Improvements. 5. Pauba Road Improvements - Phase II (Margarita Road to Showalter Road) This project ~will widen Pauba Road from Showalter to just west of Margarita Road to its ultimate width. The City has reviewed the 100% Design Plans submitted by the consultant. Specifications are being prepared. Plans were sent to all utilities and all utility issues are being addressed. Environmental issues were identified and the City Planning Dept is preparing the environmental documents. Work is being coordinated with the library project. 6. John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District - Hydrology Study Under this project a drainage study will be done to compliment the improvement plans being done by the property owners. Eventually the City will be the oversight agency for a property owners sponsored assessment district. The City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. to do a hydrology study and storm drain design at the June 11,2002 meeting. Draft Hydrology Study was received on 8/6/02. The scope of ERSCs work is being expanded due to the Hydrology Study findings. An agreement amendment will go to City Council on Sept 24, 2002. 7. Landscaping and Sidewalk On SR 79 South (Front Street to Pechanga Parkway) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewalk, landscaping, and irrigation along State Route 79 South between Pechanga Parkway and Old Town Front Street. Review of 1 st plan submittal is complete. However, the project scope was modified, the modifications were incorporated into 60% submittaJ, and the plans were re-submitted to Caltrans. California Sunset HOA has been given plans for review. 3 R:',M onthlyActivityRepor t~CIP~2002~Augus t.doc 8. Temecula Sports Complex A new 40+ Acres sports complex will be built at the corner of Pechanga Parkway and Deer Hollow Way. Preliminary design is underway, with council approval for the site layout scheduled for 2nd meeting in October. Utility companies have been notified to provide information on existing facilities in Pala Road and Deer Hollow Way. 9. Bridge Barrier Rail Upgrade, Rainbow Canyon Road over Pechanga Creek/Del Rio Road over Empire Creek This project will replace the existing barrier roils of the Rainbow Canyon Bridge over Pechanga Creek and the Del Rio Road Bridge over Empire Creek. Simon Wong Engineering (SWE) submitted the 90% Design documents. City reviewed and returned with minor comments to SWE. A gas line issue was identified and is being resolved. Final submittal should be ready by the end of September. 10. Fire Station - Wolf Creek Site A fire station will be built at the Wolf Creek Site. Building & Safety has reviewed second submittal and provided plan check comments. The architect is to complete final plan revisions and re-submit the plans for approval by the end of this month. Further progress is now dependent upon Wolf Creek development plans for southerly side of Wolf Valley Rd. 11. Pavement Management System Update The project will establish a pavement management program that will provide an ongoing schedule of needed repairs and provide data that will be. used to prepare budget estimates required to complete the scheduled work. GIS links, AutoCAD review, and updates to MicroPAVER are included in the total program. The consultant has completed his pavement survey and is now preparing the final pavement study. 12. Vail Ranch Park (Near Pauba Valley School) - Add Amenities This project will add amenities, including play equipment to the recently annexed Vail Ranch Park. The Community Services Commission approved the Vail Ranch Park Site "C" Master Plan on February 11,2002. ']'he Master Plan was approved by City Council at the March 26, 2002 meeting. RHA Landscape Architects/Planners Inc. is the design firm and the first submittal was made on May 3rd. The City reviewed these documents and returned them to the consultant for revisions. The City and RHA met on 7/31/02 to discuss these comments and revisions are being made. Soil samples were taken and results were provided to TCSD on 8/28/02. 13. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moroga Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. City staff is currently designing the project. Anticipated street and landscaping design completion is scheduled for September 2002. Right of Way and environmental processing are anticipated to be complete by November of 2002. 14. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. The design is 100% complete. To avoid construction during the holiday period, bidding will not begin until October with construction starting in January 4 R:hMonthlyAcfivityReport\ClP~2002~August.doc 2003. This project will be combined with PWO0-20. 15. Rancho California Road Widening at Ynez Road (Add right turn lane to westbound lanes) This project will add a right turn lane on westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Right of way acquisition at the northeast corner of Rancho California and Ynez is in process with Claim Jumper Restaurant and Swedish American Corporation signing the acquisition agreements. In- house design is 90% complete. To avoid construction during the holiday period, bidding will not begin until October with construction starting in January 2003. This project will be combined with PW00-02. 16. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson This project will widen Winchester road between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson Avenue. It will also add a right turn lane from Eastbound Winchester to Southbound Jefferson, starting at Enterprise Circle. Project layout was plotted and discussed with Traffic and the Director of Public Works. In- house design continues, with recent modifications to the design being implemented. 17. Rancho California Sports Park ADA Access and Shade Structure This project entails the design and construction of ADA compliant concrete walkways to the remaining ball fields, 3,4,5,7 & 8. It will also include the installation of two shade picnic/seating areas adjacent to the snack bar building. Design work is 60% complete and presently in the plan check phase. Consultant is to resubmit during the week of 9-16-02 for review. 18. Murrieta Creek Multi Purpose Trail This project will build portions of the equestrian and bike trails along Murrieta Creek within City limits. The City has received a federal grant of $1,214,000. Caltrans has given the City the "Authorization to Proceed with Preliminary Engineering". Request For Proposals will be sent out to design consultants by the end of September. PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGE 1. 1-15/SR 79 South Interchange - Project Study Report (PSR) This project will modify the I-15/SR 79 South Interchange to accommodate projected future traffic. The City received the final Value Engineering Analysis Report from Caltrans on May 8, 2002. All the proposed alignments presented bythe value analysis team were rejected. A meeting between City and Caltrans staff occurred on 9/11/02 to discuss the project. The Cit,/s consultant is to provide additional traffic data and proposed structural modifications to Caltrans in October. 2. French Valley Parkway Interchange, Project Report (PR), Plans Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) Preparation This project will construct an interchange between Winchester Road interchange and the I-15/I-215 split. Five Qualifications from consultants were submitted on September 5, 2002. Staff, City of Murrieta, and Caltrans are currently reviewing the Qualifications. Once the review process is complete, interviews will be conducted with prospective consultants. 5 R:XMonthiyActivityReport\CIP~2002~A ugust doc 3. Murrieta Creek Bridge - Overland Drive Extension to Diaz Road This project will entail alignment studies and the design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. The project includes the widening of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Commeme Center Drive, and the extension of Overland Drive across Murrieta Creek to Diaz Road. PDC has completed the alignment study and staff has reviewed copies of the preliminary plans. Staff has reviewed design costs for next year's fiscal funding. No funding until FY03-04 4. Alignment Study for Murrieta Creek Bridge Between Winchester Road and Temecula City Limits and Diaz Road Extension This study will determine the alignment and location of the Murrieta Creek crossing between Winchester Road to the northern City Limits. In addition, the study will be combined with the Diaz Road Extension alignment study and design. Coordination with the City of Murrieta, Riverside County Flood Control and Army Corps of Engineers is necessary. The Consultant and Staff met with Riverside County Flood Control to discuss possible alignments. The consultant is currently awaiting data from Riverside County Flood Control in order to complete the work on the first draft of the alignment study. Staff was informed this data could take up to a year to receive (from May 2002). 5. Pedestrian Crossing- SR 79 North at Nicolas Road City met with Caltrans and sent a letter at their request to initiate this project. Caltrans responded in a letter that the bridge does not meet their warrents and that they will not support nor will they allow its construction. The final feasibility report was received from the consultant. Staff is currently reviewing the options on the report and awaiting direction. PROJECTS THAT ARE SUSPENDED OR ON-HOLD 1. Santa Gertrudis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase II of the Southbound Auxiliary Lane project at the southbound exit ramp for Winchester Road. This project will widen the 1-15 southbound exit-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just north of Winchester Road. Staff is revisiting the merits of this project in light of the Project Study Report for French Valley Parkway Interchange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the new Interchange. This project is suspended indefinitely. 2. Margarita Road/Winchester Road Intersection Improvements Project is on hold. Under this project, an additional'left turn from eastbound Winchester to northbound Margarita will be added in order to accommodate increasing traffic volumes. Design is 50% complete. A developer will be doing this project. 6 R:~v~onthlyActivityReport\CIPX2002LAugust.doc 3. Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase II Project is on hold. This. project will complete the knuckle at the intersection of Sixth Street and Felix Valdez. The developer of a nearby property may be designing and constructing this project. 4. School Site ADA Improvements Project has been removed from this year's ClP. Design and construct ADA concrete walkways and hand railing to athletic facilities at Temecula Middle School, James L. Day Middle School and Margarita Middle School. TCSD re-allocated the funds. 5. City Hall Parking Lot Modifications Project is on-hold. Funding has been postponed until FY 2004/2005. Under this project, a security fence will be installed between the existing maintenance facility and the western side of City Hall to secure the parking lot west of the main building. The design of a security fence between the existing maintenance facility and the western side of City Hall will be performed in-house. A scoping meeting was held on November 12, 2001. Research on existing base maps for the proposed area and as-buiits for the existing security fence near the maintenance facility is complete. Design and review of the proposed layout is complete. The project is currently on hold waiting for further direction 7 R:kM onthlyA c tivityR epor t~CIP~2002XAugust.d~c LLI 1,1.1 IJ.I I- Z IJJ 0 I.- Z UJ Ul 0 o~ TO: FROM: DATE: MEMORANDUM Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent September 5, 2002 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - August, 2002 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of August, 2002: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 115 B. Total signs installed 3 C. Total signs repaired 57 I1. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 28 47192 33 69 Ill. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 15t100 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. 26 1,025 Vii. STENCILING A. 273 New and repainted legends B. 730 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping R:\MAIN TAIN\MOACTRP~J U LY 2002- JUNE 2003'~AUGUST.02.DOC Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 43 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 47 service order requests for the month of July, 2002. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 57 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 AuRust, 2002 was $ 23t846.00 compared to $16,200.00 for the month of July~ 2002. Account No. 5402 $ 14,592.00 Account No. 5401 $ 9,254.00 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) JerryAlegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) R:\MAINTAIN\MOACTRPT~J U LY 2002- JUNE 2003~AUGUST.02.DOC o, STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of August, 2002 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT Date: 08/02 CI-I'YWIDE R.O.W.'S WEED ABATEMENT, TRASH & DEBRIS REMOVAL IN CITY'S R.O.W. Cf 5402 TOTAL COST $ 10,000.00 CONTRACTOR: BECKER ENGINEERING Date: 08/07/02 MARGARITA NORTH OF INSTALLED PEDESTRIAN BARRICADE; WINCHESTER AND INSTALLED TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES Cf5402 SOLANA DEL REY ROAD PER TRAFFIC DIVISION TOTAL COST $ 4,592.00 Date: 08/21/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT REPAIRED RIBBON GUTTER IN BOTTOM BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD OF CHANNEL # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 9,254.00 CONTRACTOR: Date: TOTAL COST Date: TOTAL COST Date: TOTAL COST Date: TOTAL COST Date: TOTAL COST TOTAL COST ACCOUNT Cf5401 $ 9,254.09 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT Cf5402 $14,592.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 -0- R:',MAINTAII~MOACTRP-GJ U Ly 2002- JUNE 20O3'~AUGUST.02.DOC CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 08/01/02 28030 DEL RIO ROOT PRUNING 08/01/02 08/02/02 29690 DEAL COURT TREE TRIMMING 08/02/02 08/02/02 32313 BEAUREGARD CIRCLE TREE REPLACED 08/02/02 08/05/02 42954 AGENA TREE REPLACED 08/0§/02 08/05/02 31835 VIA TAFALLA TREE REPLACED 08/0§/02 08/05/02 32815 TERZICH DRIVE RAISED SIDEWALK 08/0§/02 08/06/02 30864 BALATA DRIVE OIL SPILL 08/06/02 08/06/02 34070 ABBEY ROAD R-1 MISSING 08106102 08/07/02 41531 AVENIDA DE LA REINA CATCH BASIN CLEANING 08107102 08/07/02 MARGARITA AT PAUBA TREE TRIMMING 08/07/02 08/07/02 30980 CALLE FUENTE DEBRIS PICK-UP 08/07/02 08/08/02 41825 CALLETON WAY OIL SPILL 08/08/02 08/08/02 27071 FALLING CREEK MAIL BOX POST REMOVAL 08/08/02 08/09/02 31174 CALLE ARAGON BUGS 1N TREES 08/09/02 08/13/02 30205 ROGAL CIRCLE TREE TRIMMING 08/13/02 08/13/02 33028 TULLEY RANCH ROAD STANDING WATER 08/13/02 08/13/02 30255 ROGUE CIRCLE TREE TRIMMING 08/13/02 08/15/02 31106 IRON CIRCLE SLIPPED ON PAINT 08/15/02 08/15/02 31919 CORTE POSITAS TREE TRIMMING 08/15/02 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 08/15/02 30340 COLINA VERDE STANDING WATER 08/16~02 08/15/02 30899 CALLE PII~/A COLADA TREE TRIMMING 08/15/02 08/16/02 42200 MAIN STREET, ifA-10 STANDING WATER 08/16/02 08/16/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT CITY LIMITS DEBRIS PICK-UP 08/16/02 08/19/02 WINCHESTER ROAD AT DIAZ ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 08/19/02 08/19/02 WINCHESTER AT MARGARITA STREET FLOODING 08/19~02 08/l 9/02 30255 ROGUE TREE TRIMMING 08/19/02 08/20/02 28860 FRONT STREET FENCE DOWN 08/20/02 08/20/02 43053 CORTE TOLOSA TREE TRIMMING 08/20/02 08/20/02 45521 CLASSIC WAY STORM DRAIN CLEANING 08/20/02 08/20/02 29923 LONGVAIL COURT STORM DRAIN CLEANING 08/20/02 08/21/02 41777 CARLETON WAY POTHOLE 08/21/02 08/21/02 30700 SAN PASCUAL A.C. REPAIR 08/21/02 08/22/02 OVERLAND BRIDGE DEBRIS REMOVAL 08/21102 08/22/02 35630 MUIRFIELD DRIVE TREE REPLACEMENT 08/22/02 08/23/02 45362 ZUMA DRIVE TREE TRIMMING 08/23/02 08/26/02 45278 TOURNAMENT LANE TREE REPLACEMENT 08/26/02 08/26/02 31348 HURON OIL SPILL 08/26/02 08/26/02 43176 SIENNA DRIVE TREE DYING 08/26/02 08/26/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MEADOWS DEBRIS PICK-UP 08/26[02 08/26/02 32290 CORTE SAN VICENTE S.N.S. DOWN 08/26/02 08/26/02 GUIDANT CATCH BASIN QUESTION 08/26/02 08/28/02 39537 OAK CLIFF DRIVE DEBRIS PICK-UP 08/28/02 08/28/02 29892 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL TREE TRIMMING 08130102 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 43 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/01/02 30745 MIRA LOMA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/02/02 27699 JEFFERSON TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 08/02/02 SOUTHERN HILLS DRIVE TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/02/02 HONORS TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 08/06/02 MUIRFIELD AT PECHANGA PARKWAY TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/07/02 AVENIDA SONOMA AT MARGARITA TRIMMED 2 R.O~W. TREES 08/08/02 PAUBA AT MARGARITA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/12/02 CALLE MEDUSA / MARGARITA TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 08/13/02 MARGARITA SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/14/02 VIA RAMI AT PAUBA TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 08/16/02 SALT RIVER COURT TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 08/22/02 30205 ROGUE CIRCLE TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/26/02 YNEZ AT PAUBA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 08/30/02 MARGARITA AT CIMA DEL SO. TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 28 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/01/02 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS REPAINTED 14 LEGENDS 08/02/02 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS REPA1NTED 18 LEGENDS 08/02/02 COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE INSTALLED 250 L.F. RED CURB 08/06/02 AREA #2 REPAINTED 22 LEGENDS 08/07/02 VIA RAMI AT PAUBA REPAINTED 36 LEGENDS 08/12/02 PAUBA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPAINTED 24 LEGENDS 08/13/02 CAMINO PIEDRA ROJO AT CHAOTE REPAINTED 26 LEGENDS 08/14/02 REGINA DRIVE AT VALENTINO WAY REPAINTED 25 LEGENDS 08/15/02 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY REPAINTED 29 LEGENDS 08/23/02 FRONT STREET NORTH OF HWY 79 SO. REPA1NTED 2 LEGENDS 08/23/02 PALA PARK REPA1NTED 160 L.F. RED CURB & YELLOW CURB 08/26/02 VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 320 L.F. RED CURB & YELLOW CURB 08/26/02 VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 31 LEGENDS 08/27/02 VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 16 LEGENDS 08/28/02 VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 20 LEGENDS 08/29/02 VAIL RANCH REPAINTED 10 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 272 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L,F. 730 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TOTAL TONS 08/01/02 SAN PASQUEL A.C. OVERLAY 309 2.5 08/02/02 SAN PASQUEL A.C. OVERLAY 648 3.5 08/13/02 SAN PASQUEL A.C. OVERLAY 556 2.5 08/14/02 SAN PASQUEL A.C. OVERLAY 856 2.5 08/15/02 SANTA GERTRUDIS BIKE TRAIL A.C. R & R 36 1.5 08/20/02 AVENIDA BUENA SUERTE AT AVENIDA CENTENARIO A.C. R & R 242 6 08/21/02 AVENIDA BUENA SUERTE AT AVENIDA CENTENARIO A.C. R & R 245 6.5 08/26/02 SAN PASQUAL A.C. OVERLAY 675 2.5 08/27/02 30584 VIA NORTE A.D. OVERLAY 165 1.5 08/28/02 AVENIDA BUENA SUERTE A.C. OVERLAY 351 2.5 08/29/02 30584 VIA NORTE A.C. OVERLAY 109 1.5 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 4,192 TOTAL TONS 33 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/02/02 27531 YN£Z P, EMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/02/02 27525 YNEZ REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/02/02 27473 YNEZ REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/02/02 27471 YNEZ REMOVED 201 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/02/02 28550 PUJOL REMOVED 226 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/02/02 28495 PUJOL REMOVED 25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/05/02 40520 WINCHESTER REMOVED 16 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/06/02 26463 YNEZ 3 LOCATIONS REMOVED 29 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/07/02 SOLANA / MARGARITA REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/07/02 BEDFORD COURT REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/08/02 MARGARITA PARK REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GP,~FFITI 08/12/02 MARGARITA N & S/O WINCHESTER 6 LOCATIONS REMOVED 21 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/13/02 MARGARITA AT GEORGETOWN REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GP,~FFITI 08/I4/02 McCABE WEST OF CAM]NO ALAGON REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/14/02 CITY YARD CR&R BIN REMOVED 86 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/15/02 41005 W]NCHESTER REMOVED 56 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/22/02 32544 SAN MARCO ROAD REMOVED 57 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/27/02 27423 YNEZ ROAD REMOVED 70 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 08/27/02 CORBIE AT TRIANO REMOVED 212 S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED S.F. OF GRAFFITI REMOVED S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 1~025 'TOTAL LOCATIONS 26 0 o Z CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/06/02 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 08/07/02 PASEO DEL SOL CLEANED & CHECKED 25 CATCH BASINS 08/08/02 PASEO DEL SOL CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 08/12/02 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 7 CATCH BASINS 08/15/02 WINCHESTER AT JEFFERSON CLEANED & CHECKED 2 CATCH BASINS 08/20/02 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 08/23/02 CLASSIC WAY AT MUIRFIELD & PREECE CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 08/26/02 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 5 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 69 R:X, MAINTAIN~WKC MPLETD/CATCHBASI01 02\ CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/02/02 SAN PASQUEL ABATED 100 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS 08/12/02 PECHANGA PARKWAYAT CUPENO ABATED 10,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS 08/22/02 LOMA LINDAAT PECHANGA PARKWAY ABATED 5,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 15,100 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF AUGUST, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 08/01/02 MARGARITA E/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED W.-41 08/02/02 NO. GENERAL KEARNEY WEST OF LA COLIMA REPAIRED 4 R-26-81 COMBOS 08/05/02 MARGARITA AT AVENIDA CIMA DEL SOL REPLACED R-7, K-MARKER 08/06/02 PALA ROAD / PECHANGA PARKWAY REPLACED 14 S.N.S. 08/06/02 PECHANGA PARKWAY REPLACED 2 R2 - 25 08/07/02 VIA BALDERAMA REPLACED 3 S.N.S. 08/07/02 LA SERENA AT MARGARITA ' REPLACED W-56, TYPE "N" 08/07/02 CUPE~O LANE AT PEcHANGA PARKWAY REPLACED 2 SNS, R-1 08/07/02 CALLE MEDUSA REPAIRED 11 SIGNS 08/08/02 NICOLAS ROAD REPLACED 5 CARSONITES 08/08/02 2ND STREET AT MERCEDES REPLACED W-57, TYPE "N" 08/08/02 CAMPANULA AT CAMINO DEL SUR REPLACED R-I-2, R-55 08/12/02 STANFORD AT CHANTEMAR INSTALLED R-1 08/12/02 CAI J.~ MEDUSA AT LA SERENA REPLACED R-20 B 08/12/02 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPAIRED 24 DELINEATORS 08/12/02 LA PAZ AT E. VALLEJO REPLACED S.N.S. 08/12/02 CALLE MEDUSA AT ENFIELD REPLACED R-1 08/12/02 YNEZ N/O MOTOR CAR PARKWAY REPLACED R2 - 45 08/13/02 MARGARITA AT GEORGETOWN REPAIRED 5 DELINEATORS 08/13/02 MARGARITA AT GOERGETOWN REPLACED R-7 08/13/02 MARGARITA N/O VERDES LANE REPAIRED 5 SIGNS 08/13/02 SERAPHINA N/O ANDREWS REPLACED 2 RED "N" MARKERS 08/13/02 CASERTA AT AVOLA COURT REPLACED R-l, S.N.S. IDATE LOCATION I WORK COMPLETED 08/14/02 WINCHESTER AT JEFFERSON REPLACED R-18 08/14/02 LOMA PORTOLA DRIVE REPLACED 6 CARSONITES 08/15/02 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPLACED DELINEATOR 08/15/02 MARGARITA AT RUSTIC GLEN REPLACED 3 DELINEATORS 08/15/02 MARGARITA AT RUSTIC GLEN REPAIRED 8 DELINEATORS 08/15/02 MARGARITA AT SANTA GERTRUDIS REPLACED 6 DELINEATORS 08/15/02 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REPLACED 6 DELINEATORS 08/16/02 YNEZ SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED R-2 45 08/16/02 MARGARITA S/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED R-2 45 08/19/02 VAIL RANCH REPLACED 11 SNS 08/21/02 VAIL RANCH REPLACED 4 SNS 08/21/02 DIAZ NORTH OF WINCHESTER REPLACED R-26 08/26/02 COSMIC AT AGENA REPLACED R-1 W-17 08/26/02 MARGARITA N/O RANCHO CALIFONRIA ROAD REPLACED R-26-81 COMBO 08/2702 CALLE RESACA AT CORTE SAN VICENTE REPLACED S.N.S. 08/27/02 AVENIDA DEL SOL AT DEL REY REPLACED W-17 08/28/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT I-15 FWY REPLACED R-34, R-7 08/28/02 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AT HWY 79 SO. REPLACED 12 DELINEATORS 08/29/02 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AT HWY 79 SO. REPLACED 10 DELINEATORS 08/30/02 AVENIDA CENTARIO AT AVENIDA ESTRADA INSTALLED W-45, W-80 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 115 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 3 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 57 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAI~E~"' CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim Domenoe, Chief of Polic~'-~ September 24, 2002 Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enforcement and miscellaneous activity occurring during August of 2002. During the month of August, the Temecula Police Department's Town Center Storefront served a total of 223 customers. Sixty-five sets of fingerprints were taken, 39 people filed police reports and 16 people had citations signed of. Crime Prevention Officer Lynn Fanene participated in a number of special events, neighborhood watch and community-oriented programs during the month. He also coordinated requests for patrol ride-alongs. Additionally, he continued to provide residential and business security surveys/visits and past crime follow-up. Officer Fanene also continued to process City Planning Department submissions of site plans/conditions. The POP Teams continued to work on the "Crime Free Multi-Housing" project during the month of August. Their efforts resulted in the re-certification of seven apartment complexes. The teams also continued their Warrant Apprehension Program during the month, which resulted in two felony arrests and three misdemeanor arrests. The POP Teams continued with their proactive patrol efforts and made five additional felony arrests and 12 misdemeanor arrests. POP Teams also continued with the homeless persons program, with the goal of assisting homeless in finding services and aid to help them. The Old Town Storefront serves as an office for the POP teams and a location to assist the public with police services. This has greatly increased their accessibility and their ability to serve the Old Town area. During August, the Old Town Storefront served 144 customers. Twenty-six sets of fingerprints were taken, 22 reports were written, and 12 citations were signed off. The traffic team reported that during the month of August there were 337 citations issued for hazardous violations, 99 citations were issued for non-hazardous violations and 99 parking citations were issued. During the month there were just eight injury traffic collisions, 94 non-injury collisions were reported and 15 drivers were arrested for DUI. The Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in six citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. The decrease in hazardous and NET citations issued for the month of August can be attributed to greater enforcement efforts and time Monthly Departmental Report Page 2 dedicated to the issuance of SLAP citations. The SLAP program (Stop Light Abuse Program) resulted in 265 citations being issued, with 113 additional SLAP citations issued on overtime. The total number of SLAP citations issued during the month of August was 378. This is a large increase over past months' SLAP totals. During the month of August, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Mall handled a total of 147 calls for service. The majority of these calls were for shoplifting investigations. During the month, calls and on-sight activity resulted in the criminal arrest and filings on four misdemeanors for various offenses. Officers McEIvain and Rupe continued to provide training to security staff during the month. The mall officers continued to work on vehicle theft and burglary programs. There were no vehicle burglaries or vehicles thefts that occurred during the month of August. The school resource officers were not active during August because the various schools were not in session. They conducted just two school presentations on "Stranger Danger" and "School Safety." A total of seven investigations/reports were conductedANdtten by the school resoume officers dudng August. The JOLT program (Juvenile Offender Law Enforcement Program) continues to be a success in part through its Youth Court program. Officer Michelle Medeiros conducted the 93rd Youth Court session. The JOLT officer assisted at other schools when needed and conducted follow-ups with parents of juveniles in the JOLT program. Officer Medeiros worked with "at risk" juveniles throughout the month and also conducted counseling sessions with their parents. She also assisted the District Attorney's Office and the Probation Department by providing training during home visits with incorrigible/at risk juveniles during the month of August. During the month of August, the Special Enforcement Team (SET Team) of Officers John Wade and Michelle Larson handled a total of 12 cases. These cases resulted in 13 misdemeanor and 10 felony arrests, primarily for narcotics violations. This team continues to work street level narcotics and specialty patrol within the city on a proactive basis. During this month, the team served one search warrant for narcotics violations, and recovered quantities of marijuana and methamphetamine. Volunteers from the community continue to be an integral part of the Temecula Police Department's staff. Under the guidance of volunteer coordinator Officer Bob Ridley and assistant coordinator Gayle Gerrish, the Police Department's volunteer staff contributed 441 hours of service in August. Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance and telephone answering duties. Community Action Patrol (CAI:)) Program volunteers have begun their activities, patrolling the city for graffiti, conducting vacation residential checks and assisting patrol with special logistical needs and special events. Other duties these volunteers will attend to are business checks and abandoned vehicles and traffic control. The goal of the program is high visibility, which prevents crime from occurring. CAP Team members contributed 223 hours of service to the community during the month of August. The reserve officer program and mounted posse are additional valuable volunteer resources available to the police department. The police department utilizes reserve officers to assist with patrol, traffic enforcement, crime prevention, off road vehicle enforcement and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 184 hours specifically on patrol in Temecula during the month of August.